ML20054L895
| ML20054L895 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1982 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8207090042 | |
| Download: ML20054L895 (146) | |
Text
.. __ __ _ __
- '3 D
J
[
NUCLIA.R RZmTORI COM!CSSICN 6 L-'
O ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD O
In t:he Mat:::s:: cf:
CONSOLIDATED EDISCN COMPANY OF NEW YORK : DOCKET NO. 50-247 SP (Indian Point Unit 2) :
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK : DOCKET NO. 50-286 SP, (Indian Point Unit 3) :
O DATE: July 7, 1982 PAGES: 2528 thru 2671 A':': White Plains, New York 1
& th W ,,ft u Mb Y ll D At 7
,6/d
$V
.unensos / 2aooama O r- Q 400 Virgd d a Ave . , S .W . W2 *h d r.g- , D . C . 20 02 4 O Talachc:a : (202) 554-2345 1-oa, x
,, c B.')(' W ( ' OO -
2528 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA j
{} 1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
3 BEFORE THE ATOE!C SAFETY AED LICENSING BOARD O 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 5 In the Matter of - a Docket Nos.:
6 CONSOLIDATED EDISON C0!PANY OF NEW YORK a (Indian Point Unit 2) : 50-247'SP 7 3 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK :
8 (Indian Point Unit 3) a 50-286 SP g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 10 Ceremonisl Courtroom Westchester County
, 11 Courthouse Grove Street 12 White Plains, N.Y. 10601 13 Wednesday, July 7, 1982
() 34 The hearing in this special investigative 15 proceeding was convened, pursuant to notice, at 9:04 a.m.
16 BEFOREa 17 LOUIS J. CARTER, Chairman Administrative Law Judge 18 OSCAR H. PARIS 39 Administrative Law Judge 20 FREDERICK J. SHON Administrative Lsv Judge 21 22 23
() 24 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 41RGINIA AVE., S W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 2
-n - - , ,.c- , - . - - - , - - - -- --
2529 t APPEARANCESs
{}
2 On behalf of Licensee, Consolidated Ed ison Company of New Yorks
(') 4 BRENT L. BRANDENBURG, Esq.
Assistant General Counsel S T EV EN SOHINKI 5 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
4 Irving Place 6 New York, N.Y. 10003 7 On behalf of Licensee, the Power Authority of the Stste of New Yorka 8
CHARLES MORGAN, JR., Esq.
9 PAUL F. COLARULLI, Esq.
JOSEPH J. LEVIN, Esq.
10 ,
1 organ Associates, Chartered 1899 L Street, N.W.
11 Washington, D.C. 20036 12 DAVID H. PIKIS, Esq.
RICHARD F. CZAJA, Esq.
13 Shes and Gould 14 On behalf of' the Nuclear Regulatory i Commission Staffs 15 JANICE MOORE, Esq .
DONALD HASSLE, Esq.
16 Washington, D.C.
17 On behalf of the Faderal Emergency Management i Agencys 18 STUART 3 LASS 19 SPENCE PERRY 20 On behalf of the Intervenors:
21 Council of the City of New Yorks 22 CREED KAPLAN, Esq.
23 Frienis of the Earth, Inc., and New York City Audobon Society
() 24 RICHARD HARTZMAN 25 v)
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024(202) 554 2345
2530 1 APPEARANCES: (Continaed) 2 Cn behalf of Interve,nors 3 New York Public Interest Research Group 4 AMANDA POTTERFIELD JOAN HOLT 5
New York State Attorney General's Office 6 EZRA BIALIK, Esq.
Environmental Protection Bureau 7 Two World Trade Center New York, N.Y. 10047 8
Ninth Legislative District of the State of New York, 9 Westchester County:
10 RICHARD BRODSKY, Esq.
White Plains, N.Y.
11 Parents Concerned About Indian Pointa 12 PAT PO5NER 13 P.O. Box 125 Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y. 10520 O 14 Rockisnd Citizens for Safe Energy:
15 JUDITH KESSLER 16 P.O. Box 74 New City, N.Y. 10956 17 County of Rockland 18 ERIC THORSEN, Esq.
19 11 New Hempstead Road New City, N.Y. 10003 Union of Con =arnad Scientists:
21 JEFFREY BLUM, Esq.
22 New York University of Law
'40 Washington Square South, Poom 423 23 New York, N.Y. 10011 ELLYN WEISS, Esq.
C) 24 Harmon & Weiss 25 1725 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 2531 1 APPEARANCE 3a (Continued) 2 On behalf of Intervenors:
3 West Branch Conservation Associations O 4 ZIPPORAH S. FLEISHER 443 Bueaa Vista Roal 5 New City, N.Y. 10956 6 Westchester County Executives 7 LAURA VETERE, Esq.
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 L
16 17 18 19 20 I
i l 21 i 22 23 1
- O 24 .
i 25 lO ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 l l
2532 1 CONTENTS CROSS 2 WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS BOARD ON BOARD
(])
3 Joseph Keller, Philip McIntire, 4 Igor W. Husor
(]} By Mr. Kaplan-resumed 2536 e 5 h
d 6 E
u 6 7 OPENING STATEMENT OF: PAGE a
j 8 Richard Brodsky, Esq. 2606 d Ninth Legislative District, Westchester County 6 9
$ Ellyn Weiss, Esq. 2613 g 10 General Counsel for the' Union of Concerned Scientists E
j 11 Judith Kessler, 2620
'S Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy j 12 y Zipporah Fleisher, , 2624 13 On behalf of West Branch Conservation Association l$ 14 Pat Posner, 2629 On behalf of Parents Concerned About Indian Point 2 15 5 Amanda Potterfield 2633 y 16 On behalf of New York Public Interest Research Group w
N I7 Richard Hartzman, 2638 5 On behalf of Friends of the Earth and New York City M 18 P Jeff Blum, 2641 19 h On behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists M
20 EXHIBITS 21 NUMBER IDENTIFIED RECEIVED PA-1 2591 23 24 RECESSES: Morning - 2587 - 2661 0 25 Noon - 2671 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
2533
([) 1 '
E_E_9_C_E_I_D_I_I_G_E 2 JUDGE CARTER : On the record.
3 Last night I received a communica tion, which I 4 confirmed this morning, that the Commission -- that is, 5 the U.S. NRC -- will meet Friday afternoon at 2400 p.m.
6 at 1717 H Street to consider five mattersa the UCS 7 action for reconsideration of interim operation;
- 8. secondly, the certification regarding the location of 9 hearings by the City of Buchanan; three, PASNY's request 10 for certification as to contention 4; PASNY 's appeal of 11 the intervention rulings; and five, PASNY's petition for 12 stay and dismissal. Now, if I said "PASNY" I should 13 have said " Licensees." You 'll forgive me, because that .
J
- 14 was just based on a telephone conversation from the 15 Office of General Counsel.
16 The Board would like to know by noon today as 17 to whether the parties wish to attend that meeting of I
18 the Commission, in which event we would be unable to
- 19 have meetings on Friday. If the parties will not be i 20 attending the meeting, we will then proceed with 21 hearings as usual.
22 1R. MOROANs The Power Authority will be 23 attending the meeting.
l () 24 MR.,BRANDENBURG4 Mr. Chairman, does the Board
! 25 have any present understanding as to whether the :
! C)
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, Dr 20024 (202) 554-2345
a 2534
() 1 Commission is included to accept otal argument now? Of 2 course, they usually do not.
3 JUDGE CARTER: No, no. This is just a meeting 4 of the Commission. It is not an oral argument. The 5 Commission will be meeting to discuss these matters.
6 You don't have to put it on the record at this 7 time, but let Ms. Miller know as to whether you will be 8 available for hearings here or whether you will expect 9 to be in Washington at that time. And we will make a 10 decision around noon toisy.
11 Mr. Morgan, you had a question concerning the 12 discovery order?
13 MR. MORGANs .Yes, sir. On page 3, the item 14 under Roman III, the item pertaining to July 23rd, "All 15 objections to interrogatories and reqcests for 16 production of documents or contentions relating to 17 Commission q uestions 1, 2, 5 snd 6 shall be delivered."
! 18 I'm not certain that I understand that. Does that mean 19 that the procedure will be at a hearing before the 20 Board, the objections will be voiced orally before the .
21 Board and on the record?
22 JUDGE CARTERS It preferably should ha ve said 23 that the oral objections and any answers to the l () 24 objections. As I explained it to Mr. Schinki yesterday j 25 morning, we are going to try to handle those things on O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINI A AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) $54 2345
2535
(} 1 2
an oral basis and determine them at that time. That would be in the absence of Friday afternoon -- the point 3 being that we don't want to delay witnesses while the V 4 lawyers engage in legal controversy.
4 5 Now, that is not to say that sometimes that 6 disputation might not affect what is happening with the 7 witness. But as a general proposition we want to let 8 the witnesses go and then we will discuss procedural
~
9 natters. ,
[
10 Now, if there is no other application or 11 motion before us, Mr. Kaplan --
12 MR. BRANDENBURG Mr. Chairman, I have one l
. 13 question. Could the Board enlighten us as to the 14 precise street address and the information of that sort 15 rela ting to the limited appearance session this 16 afternoon? I'm unaware of the Board 's order respecting 17 these limited appea rances.
18 JUDGE CARTER: I note that it is in Yorktown 19 Heights at the Community Cultural Hall.
20 JUDGE SHON: It is the Community Cultural 21 Center. It might be the Cultural Community Center, I'm l
l 22 not quite sure. But the address is 1974 Conway Street, I
! 23 Yorktown Heights, New York. And we are going to start ,
() 24 st 3:00 o': lock, 3:00 to 5:00 o ' clock, and then e vening 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> 7:00 to 9:00.
O ALCERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2536
() 1 JUDGE CARTER: Now, Mr. Kaplan, you are up 2 next. And as I said yesterday, it is the Board's view 3 that you should be able to finish your cross within 4 about 45 minutes.
5 MR. KAPLAN I'll certainly make every effort 6 to do so.
7 Whereupon, 8 JOSEPH H. KELLER e 9 PHILIP *McINTIRE ,
10 IGOR W. HUSAR, 11 the witnesses on the stand at the time of recess, 12 resumed the stand and, having previously been duly sworn 13 by the Chairman, were examined and testified further as t 14 follows:
15 CROSS-EXAMINATION -- RESUMED 16 BY MR. KAPLANs 17 0 Where we left off, members of the panel, there
- 18 was a question pending. I believe Mr. Keller had the 19 opportunity to review the manual on protective action 1
20 guides and protective actions f or nuclear j n-idents.
21 The question was whether or not members of the panel l
22 agreed with the statement in the guide that as the level 23 of preparedness increases the cost of maintaining and
() 24 preparing preparedness goes up, too. Is that something 25 members of the panel agree with?
()
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 I
e 2537
() 1 A (WITNESS KELLER) In general, that is a 2 correct statement.
< 3 Q Okay. If we can move on to another area, 4 then. Mr. Czaja in his cross-examination raised'a 5 question of the Ginna incident of last January. Members 6 of the panel, you are familiar with that incident; is 7 that correct?
8 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) Yes.
9 Q Mr. McIntire, let me direct your attentior"to 10 page 2215 of your transcript, your prior testimony. Do 11 you have that? I'd be glad to provide it to you, but I 12 only have one. .
13 (Pause.)
14 0 Actually, if you will take a look at 2213.
15 That*is the sequence there -- that is where I believe 16 the questions begin. But I am specifically referring to 17 2215. In a response to one of the questions by Mr.
18 Czaja, you discussed offsite emergency workers; is that 19 correct? Lines 20-21 on thht page.
20 MR. CZAJA4 Your Honor, I'm objecting to any l
l 21 examination by Mr. Kaplan regarding the Ginna incident.
22 Again, this is a situation raised by Mr. Schinki 23 yesterday, where Mr. Kaplan is straying far from the
() 24 concerns of his client, the New York City Council.
25 JUDGE CARIER: We will permit Mr. Kaplan some I
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2538 1 lee way in ge tting into the area. We don't know what the
[}
2 subject matter of the questioning is yet.
3 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming)
O 4 C Have you found that reference?
5 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) Yes, I have.
6 Q Do you know the number of people, when you 7 refer to offsite, primarily local officials, how many 8 people that we're talking about that you are referring 9 to on lines 20-21?
10 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) No, I do not. .
11 0 Do you know how many emergency workers were 12 sobilized at Ginna on the 25th of January, 1982?
13 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) No, I do not.
14 0 Do you know how many of the workars that were 15 mobilized performed adequa tely? -
16 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) We 6.ad no reports of .
17 inadequate perfonnance,by any emergency workers.
18 0 But by the same token, we don't know how many 19 emergency workers were observed, is that right?
20 MR. CZAJA Objection to the form of the 21 question. It's argumentative.
22 BY MP. KAPLAN (Resuming) 23 0 I'll withdraw the question and reframe it.
Do we know how many workers were observed ?
(]) 24
, 25 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) Not in specific number.
l ()
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) $54 2345
._.. _. .___._ __ . _ . _ ._. ~ ,. ._. _ _ _ _ -_
2539
(~T 1 However, our team that was on that site did observe a
\>
2 number of emergency workerr in EOC's and the EOC's in 3 their opinion were adequately staffed to respond to the O 4 incident.
5 Q Oksy. The general amargency at Ginna, using 6 the four-level standard us,ed by the NRC and FE.V A' f o r 7 gradino emergencies, what level of emergency was this?
8 A ( WIT N ESS McINTIRE) A site area emergency.
9 .0 A site area emergency. If you could quickly 10 review for us, there are four levels; what are those 11 four levels in order of seriousness, if you will?
12 A (WIINESE KELLER) In order not to mislead, in 13 0654 1.n the appendix they are listed Unusual event --
() 14 JUD;E CARTER: What is the page reference?
15 WITNESS KELLER This is in the a ppendix, 16 Appendix 1, starting on pages -- well, the four areas 17 are listei for the first time on 1-3.
18 BY MI. KAPLANs (Resuming) 19 Q Those are, am I correct in reading, the 20 notification of unusual event, alert, site area 21 emergency, and general emergency?
l 22 A (WITNESS KELLER) That is correct.
23 Q Okay.
i
() 24 MR. BRANDENBURGs The record might be clearer, 25 Mr. Chairman, if it reflected that the witness' answer O
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~
2540
(} 1 reported these four levels of emergency planning action 2 levels in an ascending order of seriousness.
3 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 4 0 That means the general emergency is the most 5 serious ani the notification of unusual event is the 6 leaset serious; is that correct?
7 A (WITNESS KELLER) That is correct.
8 0 Ihank you, Mr. Keller, so the record is 9 clear.
10 And the emergency at Ginn.; was a site area 11 emergency; is that correct?
12 A (WITNESS KELLER) That is correct.
13 0 It had been upgraded from an alert. It was 14 originally an alert; is tha t correct?
- 15 , A (WITNESS KELLER) I am not familiar with the
. 16 exact --
17 A (WIINESS McINTIRE) Yes, it did start as an 18 alert.
19 0 Were the sirens sounded at the Ginna f' 20 incident?
21 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) No, they were not..
22 0 Was the EBS used? ,
23 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) I believe so, although I'm '
\ +
() 24 not 100 percent sare. I am vir tually sur'e , tha t they 25 were. -
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-234d
2541
(} 1 0 If there had been a general emergency, would 2 normal preparedness or emergency procedures mandate the 3 sounding of the sirens?
g_
U 4 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) Yes.
5 JUDGE CARTER: Does that mean -- well, let me 6 rephrase that question. Where is the regulation 7 relating to what type of an emergency requires the 8 sounding of sirens and what requires the use of the 9 emergency broadcast system?
10 WITNESS HUSARs Your Honor, in the chart, 11 Appendix 1, if I could turn your attention to that, page 12 1-16 in the column " State and Local Offsite Authority 13 Actions," Item 2, " Activate immediate public
) 14 notification of emergency status and provide public with 15 periodic updates."
. 16 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you.
17 WITNESS HUSARs So in a general emergency 18 condition, the alert notification system must be N
19 activated.
20 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 21 O Is it correct --
~
22 JUDGE CARTER: Excuse me. ,
i 23 , MR. KAPLAN: I'm sorry.
() ,
24 ,_
JUDGE CARTER: That page to which you made 25 reference does not include a definition for the site i
~
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASrtlNGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
, w,
,p e .- , ,
2542
(} 1 area emergency. That is on page 1-12.
2 Continue, Mr. Kaplan.
3 BY MR. KAPlANs (Resuming)
O 4 0 For the site area emergency, then, there is no 5 general notifies tion; is that correct?
6 A (WITNESS HUSAR) There is no requirement, no.
7 Let 's go back a couple of steps. The NUREG prescribes 8 when the activation of the alert notification system 9 should take place. It is discretionary on the part of 10 the civil authority as to whether or not to activate it 11 or to have it in their p?.an for activation of that 12 system at a lower level of emergency.
13 0 So that in this case we had a site area .
14 emergency and the decisionmakers, the political 15 officials, the political leadership, chose not to 16 activate the cirens and the general alert system; is 17 that corre:t ?
18 A (MITNESS McINIIRE) Yes, that is correct.
19 JUDGE CARTER: Can I get some clarification on 20 wha t the word "a c ti't a t io n " means? I'm looking at page 21 112 -- excuse me,'1-12. In the right-hand column, 22 "Ctate and/or local offsite authority actions." Under 23 that, number 2 says in part: " Activate public
() 24 notificati,on system within at least two miles of the 25 plant," and then -- I will then ask you with regard to
)
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2543 Q 1 number 3, " Provide public within at least ten miles 2 periodic updates on emergency status." But it doesn't 3 say how.
4 Can you explain both of those?
5 WITNESS HUSAR: Yes, Your Honor. Activation 1
6 of alert notification system includes the audible 7 signal. The attention signal or audible signal in the 8 case of Giana and in the case of Indian Point are 9 exclusively in the form of sirens, which would then
~
10 prompt the resident to turn on his or her radio at the 11 appropriate emergency broadcast system, radio system.
12 JUDGE CARTER 4 Did you say it is usually in 13 the form of sirens?.
O 14 WITNESS HUSARs Yes, Your Honor. I say that 15 because the sirens are not the only means that can be 16 used to satisfy the criteria for the activation of the 17 prompt notification system. For example, tone alert 18 receivers could be used as an authorized substitute for 19 this purpose. Tone alert receivers are --
20 JUDGE CARTER: I'm sorry, what kind? I didn't 21 understand that. What kind of receivers?
22 WITNESS HUSAR: A radio. To put it in lay 23 language, a radio that has a fixed crystal. That is, it O is only programmable to --
V 24 25 JUDGE CARTER: I know, but I wanted to have O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 2544
() 1 that word correctly.
2 WITNESS HUSAR: Tone alert receiver.
3 JUDGE CARTER: Proceed.
4 WITNESS HUSARs Would you like me to explain 5 what a tone alert receiver is? A tone alert receiver is 6 a radio that is designed to turn on when a signal is 7 given from the civil authority, usually through the 8 emergency broadcast system.
9 And this signal, which is not audible to the 10 human ear, turns that radio on. And there is an a udible 11 sound that is heard so that the resident knows that this 12 radio has been turned on, at which point in time this 13 receiver will act as a normal radio, tuned to a 14 preselected radio station, and there is no external 15 adjustment that can be made as to which radio station 16 one can listen to. These are specific crystals tuned to 17 a specific frequency.
18 JUDGE CARTER: How many people in the Ginna 19 area had those kind of receivers?
l 20 WITNESS HUSAR: None, none, Your Honor.
{
21 JUDGE CARTER: So practically speaking, the 22 method of public notification is by siren?
23 WITNESS HUSAR: For Ginna and Indian Point.
l () 24 For Nine Mile-Fitzpatrick, there are several thousand of 25 the tone alert receivers in the homes of the residents 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2545
() 1 within the ten-aile emergency planning zone.
2 JUDGE CARTER: Whose duty is it to provide 3 those tone alert receivers?
4 WITNESS HUSAR: Licensee's.
5 JUDGE CARTER: Now, the th ird paragraph I 6 asked you about is the one that says, " Provide the 7 public within at least" --
repeating: "within about ten
~
8 miles periodic updates on emergency status.
9 What does that' mean as to how tha t message is 10 to be delivered?
11 WITNESS HUSAR: These are media advisories, 12 usually conducted via the emergency broadcast system, 13 which do not require the activation of the audible (S
x/ 14 signal.
15 JUDGE CARTER: If I recall your testimony 16 correctly, in response to Mr. Kaplan's question, you did 17 not use that system yet, the third step provided on a 18 site area emergency; that is wha t should be done?
19 WITNESS HUSAR: Well, activation of the system 20 is a two-stage process. One is the audible signal which i 21 indicates for practical purposes, for let's say Indian I
I 22 Point and Sinna, is the activation of the siren system, 23 followed by the broadcast of a message via the emergency
() 24 broadcast system.
25, In relation to the table on page 1-12, the i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2546 last column on the right, item 3, which you are alluding
/]}
1 2 to, this notation here says that advisories are to be 3 provided to the residents, but it does not mean that the Os 4 sirens have to be ac tiva ted .
5 JUDGE CARTER: All right. I would like the 6 te:ord to note, so Mr. Czaja get too upset, that we are 7 going through this to learn the methodology, and we 8 don't intend to go into a Ginna in-depth examination.
9 MR. CZAJA: I have no problem with that line, 10 of questions.
11 JUDGE CARTER: Proceed, Mr. Kaplan.
12 BY MR. KAPLAN (Resuming) 13 0 Would the number of emergency workers who were
/%
14 to be activated change if we vere talking about a site 15 area emergency or if we're talking about a general 16 alert, a general emergency?
17 A (WITNESS HUSAR) The answer to that question 18 is yes.
19 0 So in a genera 1 emergency there would be more l
20 emergency workers activated than there would be in a 1
21 site emergency?
l 22 A (WITNESS HUSAR) As a general rule, that is Y
23 co tgre ct .
l
() 24 (Pause.)
i 25 = 0 In Ginna, in the Ginna area, how does the
, t a
O ,
t t
t l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
25u7
{} 1 population density compare, if you know, to the 2 population density within the 50-mile radius around 3 Indian Point?
O 4 JUDGE CARTER: Could you revise that question 5 to 50 niles of Ginna and 50 miles of Indina Point?
6 WITNESS HUSAE Arcund Ginna it is less.
7 9Y MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 8 0 Si gnifica n tly ?
9 A (WITNESS HUSAR) If you ask me to recall 10 numbers, I can't quote that to you without lookinc in 11 the files. I'm not prepared to 'give you numbers at this 12 t i m e'.
13 0 Are you aware of the population of Bochester, 14 the largest city in the area of Ginna?
15 A (WITNESS HUSAR) I'm not prepared to give you' 16 numbers at this time. I think we're here to talk about -
17 Indian Point.-
18 0 I think we're here to talk about 19 pre pa redness.
20 MR. M3RGAN: There's obviously a misjoinder of 21 tho ugh ts.
22 JUDGE CARIER : Wa're here to ask questions and 23 answer questions. !
() 24 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 25 0 Are you f amiliar with the emergency O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2548
() 1 information and coordination center? Is that a term 2 f amiliar to you ?
3 A (WITNESS HUSAR) Yes.
4 0 What is that center?
5 A (WITNESS HUSAR) It is commonly referred to as 6 a joint media center, and this is -- this is the place 7 --
I should back up.
8 There is s joint media center which has the 9 purpose of providing public information officers of the 10 state and local governments a place to conduct their 11 business, which is putting out advisories to the public 12 regarding the status and conditions of emergencies on 13 site and a:tions being taken by the offsite civil O
14 authorities.
15 0 Whose of fice is it? Is it a FEMA office?
~18 A ( W ITN ES S HUSAR) No, it is not.
17 0 Who runs the office?
18 A (SITNESS HUSAR) This is a joint facility 19 chaired by the licensee public information personnel, as 20 well as the state or local, in the case of let's say 21 Indian Point it would be the county, public information 22 officers. This is a joint media center.
23 0 Mr. McIntire, since I think you have the
() 24 greatest familiarity with the Ginna inciden t, are you-25 sware of the after-sction report that was issued under ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 vtRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2549
() 1 the emergency information coordination center -- by the 2 r ,cgency information coordination center?
3 MR. PERRY: Your Honor, if ounsel is going to 4 be questioning from a document, I'd appreciate it if the 5 witness could be furnished copy.
6 MR. KAPLAN: I 'd be glad to. I just want to 7 know whether he's familiar with it. That's all I'm 8 asking.
9 WITNESS McINTIRE: Could I see it, please?
10 MR. KAPLAN Certainly.
11 (Pause.)
12 JUDGE CAPTER: Mr. Kaplan, do you want that 13 identified?
fi sJ 14 MR. KAPLAN Sir, for the record, I have shown 15 Mr. McIntire a document entitled " Emergency Information
. 16 Coordination Center, Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Incident 17 After-Action Report." Appended to it -- and I don't 18 know whether these a re af ter-appended pages -- are a i
19 number of pages entitled " Incident Report" on the FEMA l 20 letterhead.
l 21 JUDGE CARTER: Do you have any expectation 22 that you'll want to introduce it into evidence?
23 MR. KAPLAN: I don't think so.
() 24 MR. CZAJA: Judge, I would object to any 25 examination of these witnesses on this document.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 2550
/'g 1 Yesterday I attempted to examine the witnesses on a
(/
. 2 statement by Tr. Adler at the Three Mile Island restart 3 proceeding, a statement under oath, I zight add, and an O
'# 4 objection to that examination was sustained.
5 I fail to see why this document differs in any 6 way from th't. a .
7 JUDGE CARTER: Well, we don't have a question 8 yet. What is the question with regard to the document? !
9 "R. KAPLAN: I just want to know whether he's 10 ever seen these documents and is familiar with the -
11 document as a whole or pieces of it.
12 WITNESS McINTIPE: I may have seen that in 13 passing. But for the record we should point out that 14 that is put out by the emergency information and 15 coordination center of the Federal Emergency Management 16 Agency in Washington, D.C. Tha t is basically a standard 17 type of document that they produce with any type of 18 emergency action.
19 WITNESS HUSAB: And Mr. Kaplan, I may have 20 misspoken regarding what I perceived to be the 21 identification of the facility you were alluding to.
22 The joint media center as I have described it is not the 23 same as the facility you have described.
() 24 BY MB. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 25 0 What is this facility, the one I am O
ALDERSON R,EPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
1 2551
() 1 discussing?
2 A (WITNESS HUSAR) That facility -- and again, I
- 3 have not seen the document, but we have a joint I 4 information coordinating center at our national 5 headquarters in Washington.
6 0 So this is the FEMA center report?
7 A (WITNESS HUSAR) I don't know.
8 A (WITNESS McINTIRE) Yes, it is.
9 0 Okay. At one point in the report there is a 10 mention of a controlled release to the atmosphere.
11 Could you just tell us what that is?
12 MR. CZAJA: Judge, may I have a standing 13 objection to this line? .
14 JUDGE CARTER: So far we've just been 15 identifying places, and he's asking f or a d efinition 16 now. He hasn't attempted to impeach or in any other way 17 reflect --
18 MR. CZAJA: Judge, an objection to my line of 19 questioning was sustained when I attempted to establish 20 what Mr. Adler's present position was, and I think we've >
21 certainly gone'further to that with regard to this 22 document.
23 MR. PERRY: Your Honor, it would seem to me
() 24 that 'he Board would want at this point to sort of have 25 a better idea of maybe where Mr. Kaplan is going. We're O
ALDERSoN AEDoRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2552
() 1 now talking about i report on something tha t happened at 2 Ginna. ti o w , what relevance that can possibly have to 3 what we are trying to do here --
4 JUDGE CARTER: Well, I'm hoping Mr. Kaplan is 5 going to get to his question. We have only identified 6 the document and we have had a question about the
~
7 meaning of the term. Now, wha t use are you going to 8 make of this, Mr. Kaplsn? What is the purpose of this 9 line?
10 MR. KAPLANs Unless the Board wishes to strik e 11 prior questions by Er. Czaja -- Mr. Czada attempted to 12 elicit information on cross-examination which was 13 attempting to show that there are some similarities in O 14 wha t happened, what occurred at Ginna and wha t might 15 occur at Indian Point. That was the thrust of his 16 cross-examination in and around page 2215 of the 17 transcript.
18 I think therefore I'm entitled to point out 19 and try to find out the differences between Ginna and 20 Indian Point. I have not opened the door on this. I 21 had never any-intention when I originally started the 22 cross-examination to ask about Ginna. The door was 23 opened by the Licensee.
I () 24 MR. CZAJA: Judge, I agree he's free to 25 inquire about Ginna. The question is whether he can use O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2553
(} 1 this document. And when I attempted to use the document 2 from Three Mile Island at page 2299, the Board sustained 3 an objection because it was an inconsistent statement, O 4 but not the result of an agency determination nor a 5 learned treatise. I fail to see why that ruling doesn't 6 apply to this document.
7 MR. PERRY: I think, Your Honor, if I may, the 8 witnesses have indicated they have no familiarity with 9 this document, es sen tially. So how they'can discuss it 10 meaningfully is, I think, open to serious question. If 11 Mr. Kaplan would like to introduce this docunent in 12 connection with the presentation of his own case, that
. 13 is another matter. If he has matters to get into the 14 record that way, that is fine.
15 But these witnesses have indicated they have 16 no f amiliarity.
17 MR. KAPLAN: I at this point have not 18 attempted to impeach or to ask any document-specific 19 questions. I asked what a controlled release to the 20 atmosphere within technical specifications is. Now, 21 that is something that is not document-specific.
22 JUDGE CARTER: Is that in the document?
23 MR. KAPLAN Yes, it is.
() 24 JUDGE CARTER: May we see it?
25 MR. KAPLAN: Certainly. I'm not trying to O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2554 1 keep it a secret.
[
2 JUDGE CARTER: I will permit the question as 3 to what the meaning of the phrase is when it is used by O 4 the agency.
5 BY MP. KAPLAN (Resuming) 6 0 " Controlled release into the atmosphere wi thin 7 technical specifications"?
- 8 A (WITN ESS K ELLER) Within technical 9 specifications?
- 10 0 Bight.
11 A (WITNESS KELLER) "Co n trolled release to the 12 atmosphere" is a release of radioactivity to the 13 atmosphere which is under the control of the Licensee.
( 14 A valve is opened on purpose.
15 0 And radioactive material is released?
16 A (WITNESS KELLEB) That's right.
17 The Licensee has as part of his license 18 technical specifications which specify how much activity 19 can be released within any given time period. I am not 20 familiar with the exact numbers for Ginna, but that is 21 what the second part of the meaning within the technical 22 specifications is.
23 0 Fine. Is it true that within the Ginna
() 24 incident there were no offsite measurements taken, if 25 you know, regarding contamination of the surrounding O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
i r
, P 2555 g 1 area?
2 A (WITNESS KELLER) It is my understanding that 3 measurements were taken.
O 4 5 .
I 5-1 i
i 6 l 6
i 7 l
! [
! 8
$ 9 E
l i 10 J
11 12 ,
l ,
13 !
14 -
l l
15.
?
I
! 16 e t
l l I
! 17 18 !
1 b
19 -
i 20 :
I 21 j 22 ,
l 23 l
24 f
l 25 j l
O i; l
i l
l j ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY INC.
I' 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 '
i
=.-n.----.-.-, - . , . , . . - , - - . - _ . - . . . , - - . _ _ _
f
2556 1
0 In terms of emergency planning, was there, if 2 you know, at any time in the Ginna incident a g 3 consideration of evacuation?
U 4 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) It is my understanding 5 that it was one of the protective actions that was 6 considered that migh t be necessary if conditions 7 deteriorated.
8 0 Was there an emergency preparedness plan in 9 effect at Ginna at this time?
10 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes, there was, a draft 11 plan.
12 -
0 A draft plan. Did that plan make provision 13 for off-site housing -- I am sorry, housing outside of 14 the immediate contaminated area for people who might 15 live within the ten-mile EPZ and have to be evacuated?
16 A (WITNESS HUSAR) To set the record straight,.
17 there was a plan in place, and this plan was the formal 18 submission. It wasn't a draft plan. Certainly it was 19 not a plan approved by FEMA, because it had not 20 undergone a 350 process.
21 With respect to your question regarding 22 housing, again, we don't have the plan in front of us.
23 We were not prepared to talk about the Ginna plan or 24 preparedness here, but in this plan, as in all the plans 25 that have been submitted to us from New York State, O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2557
() 1 there are provisions made for reception centers and 2 congregate care facilities and an identification of such .
r3 3 similar to those identified in the Indian Point plans.
O 4 Are you swsre of the fact that Secretary 0
5 Pierce was in fact in a very low keyed way attempting to 6 locate housing units in the vicinity in and around 7 Ginna? Are you aware of that?
8 dR. CZAJA Objection to the form of the 9 question.
10 JUDGE CARTER: What is the purpose of the 11 question on Secretary Pierce?
12 MR. KAPLAN Secretary Pierce went or 13 *apparently was ready to go to the Rochester area to 14 locate FHA or housing in the area to house people who 15 might have to be evacuated, and the next question that 16 is going to follow up on that is whether or not that was 17 contemplated in the plan.
18 JUDGE CARTER: Now you are getting into a i 19 rather in-depth analysis of the Ginna plan.
20 SR. KAPLAN: I will withdraw the question.
21 JUDGE CARTER I am giving you credit, Mr.
l 22 Kaplan, for the questions I asked, and you have gone l
23 about a half-hour, so you might try to develop your case.
i
() 24 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Besuming)
I 25 0 I think we said before there were no off-site O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 L
2558
() I emergency actions required by the Ginna incident. Is 2 that true?
3 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) No.
4 0 3ff-site emergency actions were required?
5 A (WITNESS MC INTIBE) Yes.
6 0 What were they?
7 A (WITNESS HC INTIBE) ECC's were mobilized and 8 staffed. EBS was utilized. There was coordina tion and 9 information exchange among the various levels of 10 government.
11 0 It is the FEM A position , is it no t, then, tha t 12 there are certain lessons we could learn from Ginna as 13 it applies to Indian Boint. Is that true?
(3 14 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) You can learn lessons 15 from Ginna that would apply to Indian, Point and all 16 other sites.
17 0 I will nove on to a different area. FEMA is i
18 generally to deal with different kinds of emergencies, 19 not only radiological emergencies?
20 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) That is correct.
21 0 And you testified about hurricanes and things 22 like that, and you have testified here about experiences 23 that people have had in hurricane situations.
24 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes.
25 0 And among the things you look at are human O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., t,.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2559
() 1 responses to stress in emergency situations. Is th a t 2 right?
3 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes.
4 Q And you use these results, the results of 5- these inquiries, in evaluating planning for 6 eme rgencies. Is that correct?
7 A (WIINE55 MC INTIR E) In evaluating as well as 8 developing further planning information.
9 Q It is fair to say that we look then, in termt 10 of your evaluation techniques, we look at past behavior 11 in order to project fut ure beha vior. Is that correct?
12 A (WITNESS EC INTIRE) Yes. .
13 Q And is it f air to say that in FEM A's general O 14 approach you assume that radiological emergencies will 15 responded to in a fashion similar to the response to 16 other kinds of energencies?
17 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Could you be a little 18 more specific, in responding to?
l 19 Q I am talking about human response, this area 20 of human response. I am not talking about evacuation 21 techniques or specifi sheltering techniques. I am 22 talking about the personal response that your planning 23 assumes that individuals will respond to a radiological
() 24 emergeny in a fashion similar to the response, say, to a 25 hurricane.
(1)
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2560
() 1 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) If you mean react in the 2 sense that they will exercise the general behavior in 3 emergencies, then the answer is yes.
4 Q That is my question.
5 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) I prefer the word " react" 6 to " respond".
7 0 Fine. I will learn the terminology at some 8 point, maybe not in time to finish these hearings. Many 9 of'the large-scale situations you have talked about to were, I think yesterday you talked about a dam breaking, 11 dam breakage? Is that the right word?
12 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Failure. ,
13 0 Dam failure and hurricane situations. Is tha t 14 right?
15 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Regarding large-scale 16 ev a c ua tion s , yes.
17 0 And in both of those situations, there is a 18 considerable amount of lead time, is there not?
19 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) In the potential dam -
20 failure after the San Fernando earthquake, the officials 21 did not know whether they would have any time a t all.
22 The dam was so seriously damaged they felt it could go 23 at any moment. In the hurricane, I am speaking
( 24 particularly of Hurricane Bill in New Jersey in 1976, 25 the evacuation was ordered around 11400 o ' clock in the O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2561
() 1 morning or noontime. The hurricane passed up the New 2 Jersey coast around 10:00 o' clock in the evening.
fs 3 0 Even in the Hurricane Bill situation, it would b 4 be fair to say that people, even if the warning had not 5 been issued, people in the threatened area knew the 6 hurricane was on the way. Is that correct?
7 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) It was well reported in 8 the media, yes.
9 0 And that would be true, I think you testified, 10 with regard to Hurricane Carla, too. There was a couple 11 of hours, a long lead time.
12 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) I don't remember any 13 testimony on Hurricane Carla.
14 0 Ca rla .
15 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Camille. I mentioned 16 Camille.
17 Q All ri7ht. Generally, your testimony 18 mentioned a 12 to 24-hour lead time in hurricane 19 evacuation situations.
20 MR. BRANDENBURG: Mr. Chairman, I object to 21 that question. I am unaware these witnesses have made 22 any censral statenents about hurricanes that would be 23 applicable across the board to all such type events.
() 24 JUDGE CARTER: I will permit the question.
25 MR. KAPLANs Would you refer to Page 2146, Mr.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2562
() 1 Brandenburg?
2 'n'ITN ESS MC INTIRE 4 The N a tional 'a'ea ther 3 Service, through its hurricane center in Coral Cables, 4 Florida, endeavors to provide 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> of daylight 5 warning. Ihat is their objective. That has a serious 6 margin of error, and I believe it is about 150 miles.
7 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 8 0 Generally, does familiarity with the danger, 9 , f amilia rity with an impending energency increase one's 10 reaction capability? In other words, if I have gone 11 through one hurricane, will I be better able to react to 12 the next one?
13 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Net necessarily, because O 14 the experience that you gained.in one event may not be 15 the same in the second event. In other words, 16 specifically, if there was mass evacuation, and there 17 was little or no damage sustained, then people may be 18 more hesitant to evacuate a second time. 'That is well 19 documented in the studies.
20 0 It is. So would that be true if there were an 21 evacuation ordered in a nuclear facility, a pre-release 22 evacuation, and then there was no release? Would that 23 then follow that the second evacuation would be more 24 lifficult?
25 MB. BRANDENBUR3s Mr. Chairman, I am coing to r
U ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2563
() I have to object. Ihis question clearly calls for 2 speculation by the witnesses on subjects that are not 3 matters to which they have testified thus far, and there 4 has been no basis established by Mr. Kaplan that they 5 have any familiarity with the type of response under the 6 hypothetical situation posed by Mr. Kaplan's question.
7 MR. MDRGANs Your Honor, what Mr. Brandenburg 8 just stated is the best part of the objection. We 9 object to the continuing line of questions of counsel of 10 these witnesses. It has absolutely no relevance to 11 Indian Poiat. It is not site specific as to Indian 12 Point as these proceedings are required to be.
13 JUDGE CARTERa The Board has permitted a very O 14 broad examination of these witnesses and Mr. Urbanik 15 with regard te all aspects of these types of 16 emergencies. I util permit the question.
17 WITNESS MC INTIRE: Could you repeat t'he 18 q u es tion ?
19 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 20 0 3ased on your previous answer, I think it l
21 would be f air to paraphrase your answer, if there is an 22 evacuation it may be sometimes more difficult to have a i
23 second evacuation, if the danger that was being fled
) 24 from did not occur? What I am asking, in a radiological 25 situation, wouldn't the same problem exist,'that if O
i l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2564
() 1 there were a pre-release evacuation, no release, would 2 it be more difficult to.$o an evacuation at a subsequent 3 time?
4 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) I am not awa re of any 5 studies done on the subject, so I cannot answer that.
6 0 But there have been studies done on hurricane 7 situations, corce t, that you just alludei to?
8 A (WITNESS hC INTIRE) There have been studies 9 done on hurricane evacuations, yes.
10 0 And they showed the second evacuation is more 11 difficult than a prior one according to your prior 12 testimony. Is that correct? I will withdraw the 13 question.
l 14 In terms of our being able to project human l 15 responses, one of the things that you do, were any of 18 the members of the panel in New York City in July of i
17 '77?
l 18 A (WITNESS HC INTIRE) I was.
19 0 New York City had a blackout during tha t 20 month. Is that correct? .
21 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) That is correct.
22 0 And in fact you referred to it in your direct 23 testimony. That would be in Question 54, Page 28.
( 24 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes, I did.
25 0 In your answer to that question, you referred l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, ,
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2565 to individuals who volunteered to direct traffic and go
(]) 1 2 above and beyond the call of duty, correct?
3 A (WITNESS MC INTIPE) Yes, I observed that on 4 Ihird Avenue in Manhattan.
5 0 It was a personal observation?
6 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes, it was.
7 0 I went to sleep.
8 And you believe then tha t was indication of 9 what you dascribed, I think, in your testimony as 10 cooperative behavior that could be expected in an 11 emergency situation?
12 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) I say that is an example.
13 0 Right, an example. Now, regarding the July, O 14 '77, events, were you aware of the number of arrests 15 made during the blackout for looting and arson?
16 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes, I was.
17 0 Would you describe looting and arson as 18 coo pe ra tive behavior?
19 A (WITNESS MC INTIFE) No.
20 0 Do You know the amount of dollars lost due to 21 theft and destruction?
22 TR. CZAJA: Judge, I have to object again. We 23 are really getting far afield here, you kno w, going back l () 24 to 1977. ,
25 MR. BRANDENBURG: I do object.
l ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2566
() 1 MR. M3RGAN: A blackout might be relevant on 2 the question of economic impact and the need of New York 3 for the poder.
4 MR. KAPLAN I will withdraw the line of 5 questions.
6 MR. BRANDENBUR3: We understand that question 7 is going to be addressed in a la ter stage of the 8 proceedings.
9 JUDGE CARTER. Time is fleeting, Mr. Kaplan.
10 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 11 Q Is confidence in the population, confidence in 12 the plans, and confidence in their ability to be 13 executed an element which goes to making any sprt of 14 protective evacuation run smoothly? Is the population's 15 confidence -- I will repeat it -- in the plans, the 16 process, the individuals who are going to eff ectua te the 17 plans, a factor that you consider in your judgment about 18 whether a protective action will run smoothly ?
19 A (WITNESS MC INIIRE) It would be difficult for 20 us to measure confidence. We tend to look, as we said, 21 at schedules of training, public information activities, 22 certain things, you know, we can actually point to as 23 having been done to educate the public. Th eref ore , with 24 more education, we feel there will be a higher degree of 25 confidence in the plans, and an appropriate response ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2567
() 1 will be forthcoming.
2 0 Let me direct your attention to Page 16, 3 Question 23 of your testimony. Actually, the answer is 4 on the top of Page 16, and I will read from that. "The 5 most effective warning is one issued'to people who are 6 convinced in advance that they could be at risk, who 7 have given thought to how to take protective action, and 8 who are now given evidence to valida te the existence of 9 a current threat to their person and not just to the 10 community as a whole." Are you f amiliar with that 11 testimony?
12 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Page 16 you are reading 13 from? .
O 14 Q The top of Page 16.
15 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes.
16 0 Now, basically, it is fair to say that people 17 need to perceive a risk and know how to respond, and 18 tha t is what goes and makes smooth protective action.
19 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) That would certainly be a 20 significant factor.
21 0 Now, I believe you testified a couple of days 22 --
yesterJ y that in order for these plans to begin, in 23 order for there to be a beginning of protective action,
() 24 the Decision Maker, that is, capital D, capital M, has 25 to know from the plant, from the licensees themselves.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2568
() 1 Is that correct?
2 A (WITNESS HC INTIRE) Correct.
3 0 Would a ganaral lack of trust in the licencees
[}
4 have impact on the confidence of the population?
MR. CZAJA:
~
5 Objection.
6 MR. BRANDENBURO: I object, Your Honor,.also.- -s 7 Under the situation postulatai by Mr. Kaplan, as I
~
8 understand it, the instructions given to the general ' .
9 public are given by the Decision Makers, and Mr. ,-
10 Kaplan's followup question seems to relate to the c ,
11 utilities. I fail to see the relationship between the 12 two. -
~
13 JUDGE CARTER: Repeat the question.
O 14 MR. KAPLAN: I don't know if I can repea t 'it. ~
15 I can repeat the thrust of it. Is that satisfactory? '
.~
16 This is my last line, sir.
, 17 JUDGE CARTER: I want to be sure that-we hav,e _
18 before us the precise question. , ,
19 MR. KAPLAN: I think it was, and I~am sure Mr.
20 Brandenburg will correct me if I am wrong --
21 JUDGE Cl.RTER: You can restate your question.
22 any way you like.
23 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 24 Q A general lack of trust among tha population, 25 a lack of confidence in the licensees, the operators of ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2569
~
() 1 tha p 1'a n t , could have a negative impact on the public's 2 capability to respond appropriately to protective 3 actions ordered. That was my question, is that true,
\
4 given what you have said about confidence?
4 5 JUDGE CARTER: Answer the question.
6 WITNESS MC INTIRE: Could you be a little more 7 specific in the reasons for the lack of trust and the 8 lack of confidence?
9 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 10 0 I will be very specific. Are you faniliar 11 with the case of Food Town versus Consolidated Edison ?
12 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE, Is that a gourt case?
13 MR. MORGAN: Who?
14 MR. KAPLAN: Food Town. The cite is New York ,
15 167, 1951. .
16 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 17 0 Are you familiar with that?
18 A (WITNESS MC I'NTIRE) No, ! am not.
19 Q In that case -- I will f amiliarize you with 20 it. In that case, con Edison was held to be grossly 21 negligent for its causing the blackout of 1977 in New t
22 York City. That is general knowledge. Now, if the 23 population knew th a t , do you think that would increase
() 24 or decrease their desire, ability, and capability of i 25 responding to evacuation orders, the whole process l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2570
() 1 beginning with Con Edison notifying the political 2 officials?
3 MR. BRANDENBUR0s Mr. Chairman, this line of
[}
4 questioning is highly objectionable. The witnesses --
5 JUDGE CARTER: Objection sustained.
6 BY XR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 7 Q Let me go back to the original question then.
8 JUDGE CARTER: You made your question much too 9 speculative. You.were balancing the world on the head 10 of a pin in that question.
11 MR. KAPLAN - Let me go back to the original 12 question. -
13 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming)
O 14 0 In general, is it important for effective 15 emergency planning and implementation that the 16 population have confidence in the competence and 17 judgment of the licensees? .
18 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Since the warnings to the 19 public come from their elected officials, in my judgment 20 it would be much more important that they have 21 confidence in the judgment of their elected officials.
22 I don't think that very many members of the public know 23 that the original warning goes from the licensee to the
(~)h s 24 elected officials.
25 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. McIntire, try to answer the O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2571 l
(,s) 1 question you were asked. He didn't ask you about 2 elected officials. He asked you about the licensees.
3 The Board wants to hear the answer to the question.
)
4 WITNESS MC INTIRE: Could you repeat it, 5 please?
6 MR. KAPLAN: I think I will ask for it t,o be !
7 read back this time.
8 ( Whereu pon , the Reporter read back the
,9 previous question.)
10 WITNE3S MC INTIRE: That certainly could be a 11 factor in the confidence of some part of the 12 population. I am not able to answer with any degree of 13 certainty on what percentage of the population, but I a O 14 would say certain elements of the population.
15 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 16 O' Would the percentage of the population 17 increase from wherever you think it might start, 18 depending upon the knowledge the population has that the 19 ball must begin with the licensees as opposed to state 20 officials? .-
21 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) I think that would be a 22 fair statement.
23 C Ihank you. Since we --
() 24 MR. MORGAN Your Honor, when he refers to 25 state officials in that last question, this licensees,
! ()
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGIN!A AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2572
() 1 unlike Consolidated Edison, is a state agency. I assume 2 his question doesn't apply to us, or the answer. That 3 is why I would object. -
4 JUD3E CARIERs You can cover that in your 5 recross.
6 ?. R . KAPLAN: I haven't thought about that 7 question, but I think both of you have the same 8 responsibility in terms of notifying state and county 9 officials.
10 JUDGE CARTER: Gentlemen, please, ask the 11 witnesses questions.
12 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 13 0 You have testified tha t it was appropriate to 14 predict, or it is one of the methods you used to predi=t 15 future beha vior based on past behavior, correct, and 16 that is what you use in terms of planning, right?
17 A ( WITNESS MC INTIR E) Yes.
18 Q Is it appropriate to look at prior behavior of 19 the licensees in order to predict their future behavior?
20 MR. MORGAN: Object. Now, I am not quite 21 certain what he has in mind with respect to, A, the 22 licensees, and B, how you predict a corporate entity in 23 the case of Consoli1sted Edison or a state agency in the
() 24 sense of the Power Authority of the State of New York.
25 Is he running a survey? Is he going to have a survey?
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2573 1 JUDGE CARTER: Excuse me, Mr. Morgan. I
{}
2 understood the question to be a general one, not rela te d 3 to either of the licensees in this case. It is a O 4 general question. If you consider attitudes of the 5 populace, you consider attitudes, action, experience of 6 licensees. Am I correct?
7 MR. KAPLAN: That is correct.
8 JUDGE CARTER: A very general question.
9 WIINESS MC INTIRE: FEMA has virtually no 10 tesponsibilities for licensees' action.
11 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 12 0 Understand I am asking in terms of evaluatino 13 pla ns and evaluating human responses or reactions. You
['\
(/ 14 testified in terms of looking at population responses --
15 reactions, excuse me. You looked at prior behavior. I 16 am asking you whether FEMA considers -- withdrawn --
17 whether it is appropriate to consider in planning i
18 technique prior behavior of licensees in order to judge l
l 19 and evaluate future behavior.
20 MR. PERRY: Your Honor, we would really have 21 to object to this. FEMA's rela tionships don ' t run to 22 the licensees. NRC's do. We have virtually no contact 23 with licensees.
() 24 MR. KAPLAN: If I might, FEMA has no contact 25 and its relations run to the population, yet it uses ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
^
a 2574
() 1 prior population experience to predict human behavior, 2 and we --
3 MR. PERRY: That is your characterization, Mr.
4 Kaplan. I am trying to suggest to the Board who can 5 talk most intelligently about issues of conpetence 6 running to the licensee. We are not in a position to 7 make a judgnent.
8 JUE'E CARTER: Let ne ask a preliminary 9 question. Inasmuch as the NRC's regulation in 10 NUREG-0654 sets forth licensee actions to be taken, does 11 FEM A evalua te the licensee 's action in considering 12 compliance of the plans with NUREG-06547 13 WITNESS HUSAR Yes, we do, and perhaps I O 14 could explain how this coordination occurs.
15 JUDGE CARTER: Well, before you make a general 16 statement, let me proceed to ask, how do you evaluate
! 17 licensees' actions? That is, do you consider past 18 actions in regard to evaluating present compliance or 19 past non-actions? Whatever aspect in a hypothetical 20 sense if a licensee has a bad record of compliance with 21 the NRC regulations, would you consider that, or is that l
22 as a past matter separate and distinct from a current 23 evaluation? That is what I as trying to get to.
() 24 WITNESS HUSAR: I was hoping I could explain 25 the relationship and how we coordinate the review of l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2575
() 1 licensee s:tions and licensee planning. Perhaps this 2 will clarify your question and Mr. Kaplan's earlier 3 question.
4 We coordinate with the NBC counterpart, our 5 NRC counterpart in King of Prussia which is NRC Region 6 1. They review the site emergency plan. We review t'.. e 7 off-site energency plan, and we use the same criteria to 8 evaluate the adequacy of that plan, and we share this 9 information, and the bridge between them and us on a 10 functional level is, they have a representative on a 11 regional assistance committee, and this is the conduit 12 by which we execute this coordination.
13 So, collec tively, we review the licensee 14 planning, although that specific review function is the 15 province of the NRC, but we coordinate that, and that is 16 all folded into at a point in time in the consideration 17 of the NRC as to whether or not to issue the license in 18 the case of an applicant, or to continue the license in 19 the case of a utility that has a license, a t that point 20 in time when we submit our determinations and findings i
i 21 to the NBC.
JUDGE SHON: Mr. Husar, is one of the factors 22 23 that is considered either directly by you or indirectly
,() 24 by you sni NRC past be'isvior and compliance of the 25 licensee with regulations when you evaluate the l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 t
2576
() 1 licensee's emergency plans?
2 JITNESS HUSARs Yes. Through the NRC these 3 mattars are considered.
4 JUDGE SHON: Thank you.
5 JUDGE CARTER: Does that m ea n they give you 6 the information and you make the evaluation, or do you 7 accede to the NRC's view of the ma tter?
8 WITNESS HUSARs The latter. We accede to 9 their judgment on the past performance of the licensee.
10 JUDGE CARTER: Is it fair to say that past 11 errors and omissions indicate a propensity that the re 12 may be future errors and omissions?
13 MR. MORGAN Object, Your Honor. Are we 14 talking in a general manner now or specifically?
15 JUDGE CARTER: General. Is this a standard 16 that is used in evaluating plans?
17 WITNESS HUSAR: Well, it would be speculative 18 on my part, wha t the NRC may or may not do in specific 19 instances, but certainly the NRC has got the authority 20 to take whatever actions are necessary to ensure that 21 previous deficiencies are corrected, and this applies 22 across the board, whether or not they have a bad track 23 record with respect to performance, compliance with
() 24 regulations or standards that the NRC prescribes to the 25 license.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
t 2577
{} 1 JUDGE CARTER: Would a bad track record affect 2 your determination of a new plan? Is that a standard 3 that you are given to apply in evaluating a current
) 4 plan, in a hypothetical situation?
5 WITNESS MC INTIRE: 3o, it is not a standard, 6 but if we are made aware of a utility that had a bad 7 track record, we would make provision in the exercise to 8 evaluate that part of the interaction very carefully.
9 MR. KAPLAN: I will provide you with a' part of 10 the court decision.
11 JUDGE CARTER: Do you want to bring your exam 12 to a close?
13 MR. KAPLANs I just have a couple of specific 14 questions about sta tements made yesterday.
15 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 16 0 Yesterday we discussed and I asked you some r
17 questions about provisions of congregate care centers 18 outside of the EPZ and in New York City. Do you recall 19 that?
20 A (WITNESS HUSAR) Yes, I do.
21 Q And you said you were going to find out and 22 get some information for me. Now, let me try to 23 rephrase the question directly. Are there any hospitals
() 24 within New York City that would be receiving 25 contaminated individuals or that are projected to O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 j
2578
() 1 receive contaminated individuals from within the EPZ?
2 A ( WITNESS HUS AR) The plans identify hospitals 3 that are qualified to treat radiation casualities. None
[}
4 of those hospitals so identified in the plan are in New 5 York City.
6 0 Ihsnk you. Now, New York City is programmed 7 in the plan to receive individuals from other 8 facilities. Is that correct?
,9 A (WIINESS HUSAR) Correct.
10 Q These would be hospital patients or people who 11 would be mentally ill. Is thst right?
12 A (WITNESS HUSAR) The plan identifies 13 hospitals, nursing homes, and other convalescent care O 14 centers and special facilities generically. And the re 15 is a table in Procedure 10, ambulance and medical 16 procedure, Attachment 8, Page 8-1, which identifies in 17 chart form which patients from which facilities in the 18 EPZ of Indian Point would go to which facilities in New 19 York City, and there are a couple. -
20 0 Among the f acilities is Creedmoor Psychiatric 21 facility. Is that one of the facilities?
22 A (WITNESS HUSAR) If you will give me a moment, 23 I would lite to refresh my memory.
24 Q I can show you a page. Maybe that will help 25 you.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2579
() 1 A (MITNE33 HUSAR) Yes.
i 2 Q And Brower Psychiatric facility is also one of 3 those facilities. Is that right?
4 A (WITNESS HUSAR) Yes.
5 MR. CZAJA4 For the record, could we have an 6 identification of the page the witness is looking a t?
l 7 MR. FAPLANs The paper was given to the 8 witness to refresh his recollection. It need not be 9 id e n tif ied .
10 MR. CZAJAs I would request the Board to ask a
11 tha t it be identified.
12 MR. KAPLAN: It is PA-2.
13 MR. CZAJA4 Would you give se further 14 identification?
15 MR. KAPLAN4 It looks to be PA-2, SF1-7. PA-2 i
16 is your document. You introduced it yesterday.
17 MR. CZAJA: It is not mine.. Oh, Exhibit PA-2.
18 BY MR. KAPLANs (Resuming) 19 Q Does the plan incluie agreements between the 20 facilities in New' York City and the sending institutions 21 which would state th e receiving institutions' 22 obligations --
l 23 MR. CIAJA4 I am going to object to that
() 24 question. There has been no foundation tha t there is 25 any requirement for such agreement.
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2580 1
() 1 3Y MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 1 2 Q Is there a requirement for any referencing or '
3 inclusion in the plan of formal agreements between
)
4 sending institutions, in this case Helen Hayes Hospital, 5 Letworth Vilinge Developmental Center, two of the 6 institutions within the EPZ, and the receiving, 7 institutions?
8 A (WIINESS HUSAR) The NUREG requires that 9 agreements be executed where there are not clear 10 governmental channels of authority. In other words, 11 from one agency in one level of government to another 12 agency in another level of government. Or in the case 13 of one political jurisdiction with another, there is a 14 NUREG Criteria Element A3 which requires letters of 15 agreements to be executed where there is no clear 16 statutory or legal relationship between an entity that 17 needs a particular service and an entity that would 18 provide such a service or is being asked to provide such 19 a service.
20 0 Do such letters of agreement exist in the 21 plans that you provided?
22 A (WIINESS HUSAR) No, they do not, and I should 23 say this is one of our concerns and one of the things we
) 24 have already testified to in our prefiled testimony, 25 that there is an sbsence of letter agreements for l
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2501
/~' 1 various services to be performed.
\ =
2 0 If there were no agreements at all, could this 3 plan, should there be a radiological emergency, result O 4 in numbers of people arriving on the doorstep of New 5 York City hospitals?
6 MR. MORGAN Objection. That is repetitive.
7 That was asked yesterday.
8 MB. KAPLAN: Yesterday we were talking about 9 contaminated individuals. Now we are talking about --
10 MR. KORGAN: Uncontaminated individuals?
11 MR. KAPLAN: We are talking about people who 12 are unwell, and we a re talkin7 about ability, could or 13 could not that occur. Well, I guess there is a ruling 14 pending.
15 -
JUDGE CARTER: I thought the question was one 16 relating to responsibility in the absence of agreements.
17 MR. KAPLAN: Yes, that is what I am concerned 18 about, in the absence of an agreement for which there is 19 no record, there is no record of agreement. What I am 20 concerned about in the event of a radiological accident 21 that New York City would be inunda ted with people acting 22 pursuant to this plan, with no prior warning, with no 23 Drior provisions.
() 24 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Kaplan, there are many 25 hospitals. There are many situations. Hospitals dif fer O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) $54 2345
258'2
() 1 in terms of their own internal organization for handling 2 emergencies. Some are handled on a contract basis.
3 Some are handled by themselves. It seems to me that 4 question is really too broad to consider in terms of the 5 number of hospitals that would be involved. I won't 6 allow the question. Are you ready to close now?
7 MR. KAPLAN I think I have two more questions.
8 JUDGE CARTER: Okay.
9 BY MR. KAPLAN4 (Resuming) 10 0 Yesterday we had some discussion about a 11 letter that Mr. Perry made some objection to and 12 ultimately I was allowed to look at. This letter, I 13 think, represents the state responses and the state 14 schedule for re:tifying deficiencies that were pointed 15 out in the RAC review. Is that correct?
16 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Such a letter was 17 provided to you yesterday. Yes, sir.
18 0 And that letter was from whom to whom?
19 A (WITNESS MC INTISE) The letter was addressed 20 to Mr. Corevski of FEEA Region 2, and it was signed by l
l 21 Mr. Davidoff of New York.
l 22 0 And in the latter Mr. Davidoff attempted to 23 project, am I correct, when the state intended to
() 24 rectify certain deficiencies, is that correct, in the 25 RAC review, tha t were in the RAC review?
b ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2583 3R. PERRY: Your Honor, I would object to any
(]) 1 2 questioning on the contents of the letter, because the 3 contents of the letter are going to be part of the FEMA 4 finding. We vill have an opportunity to cross examine 5 on this ani other materials going into the FEMA finding 6 when that finding issues and we return to testify as to 7 the findin7 and its indices.
8 JUDGE. CARTER: Mr. Perry, Mr. Kaplan told us 9 yesterday, and there was no objection that this letter 10 had been made public to certain agencies, and that there
-11 was an agreement by you that there could be questions in 12 certain areas. Now, sre you in disagreement as to the 13 stipulation.
14 MR. PERRY: I did not agree that there would 15 be questions. I agree that Mr. Kaplan could see the 16 letter, and I have no objection to the fact that the 17 letter -- you know, the state has made the letter 18 public, so they having done so, there is obviously no 19 need for us to protect that letter per se as part of our 20 findings process, but these gentlemen are going to be 21 reviewing this letter. They are going' to be discussing 22 this letter with their state counterparts, and this is 23 all going into the evaluation that will result in a
() 24 finding on the 30th, and to ask them to characterize 25 this letter this morning, to discuss it, to evaluate O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
258u O ' it --
2 JUDGE CARTER: Excuse me. All that Mr. Kaplan 3 asked was shat that letter was about, saying, was this a 4 letter, if I recall correctly, concerning corrections or S changes in the plan. Is that the question?
6 MR. KAPLAN: That is right, and I will ask no 7 questions in Mr. Perry 's area of concern. I will not 8 characterize the letter.
9 JUDGE CARTER: All right. Was that the 10 subject matter of the letter?
11 WITNESS MC INTIRE: Yes.
12 BY MR. KAPLAN: (Resuming) 13 0 And in the letter the state pr.ojects when it 14 will have various plan deficiencies cured. Is that 15 correct?
16 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) Yes.
17 Q And those dates are primarily dates from 18 August 1, 1982, and October 1, 1982. Is that correct?
19 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) That is my recollection.
l 20 0 Now, is this the first schedule that the state 21 has submitted to FEMA as to when it was going to have 22 various deficiencies cured?
23 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) 'Are you referring to
() 24 Indian Point specifically?
l 25 Q Yes.
O l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRG.NIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2585
{} 1 A (WIINESS MC INTIRE) Yes, for the plan 2 deficiencies.
3 0 Are you familiar with an REPG, which I guess O 4 sta nds f or Badiological Emergency Planning Group, 5 document dsted 5/1/82, which deals with state programs 6 to rectify deficiencies or have complate revisions? Are 7 you familiar with this document?
8 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) May I see the document, 9 please?
10 (Whereupon, the witness looked at the 11 document.)
12 A (WITNESS .4C INTIRE) No, we have not seen that 13 before. .
14 0 Was it FEMA's intention to issue a report on 15 July 30th regarding the sta te having rectified 16 deficiencies in Indian Point?
17 A (WITNESS MC INTIRE) We had committed on July 18 30th to have formsl interim findings on Indian Point.
19 0 Yet the state has not committed to do anything 20 until August 1st or 10/1/82? Is that correct?
l 21 JUD3E CAPIER: August 1st is 8/1, but are you l
22 quibbling about July 30th or August 1st? Is that the 23 issue?
() 24 JUDGE SHON: I think his problem is that the 25 two dates nentioned for correction of deficiencies were O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C.20024 (202) 554-2345
2506
() 1 the 1st of August and the 1st of October, and they are 2 supposed to get out some sort of evaluation by the 30th 3 of July, and it looks like th e y won't have it in their 4 hands by the time the deficiency is projected. Is that 5 what you are talking about, Mr. Kaplan?
6 MR. KAPLAN Correct.
7 JUDGE SHON: Is that what you are projecting, 8 the discrepancy in d'at e s ?
9 WITNESS MC INTIRE: That is what is projected, 10 but this is one of the subjects of discussion Friday 11 morning with the state officials, and the importance of 12 getting information to us so it will be properly 13 reflected in the interim findings.
O 14 BY MR. KAPLAN4 (Resuming) 15 0 Have you attempted to contact the state in the 16 last number of months regarding their tardiness in 17 providing the information?
18 MR. BRANDENBURG: I object to the 19 characterization of tardiness.
20 BY MR. KAPLAN (Resuming) 21 0 their failure to provide the information.
22 MR. CZAJA: Judge, we have gone over this 23 repeatedly.
, () 24 JUDGE CARTER: Objection sustained.
25 MR. KAPLAN: I have nothing further.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2587 O
3uoce c^arra> we ~111 t xe e <1ve-=trute 2 recess.
3 MS. POTTERFIELDs Your Honor, in light of the 4 testimony that has just been given, I wonier if the 5 Intervenors could ask the Board to ask FEMA to let us i
( 6 know -- we haven't been permitted to go to the Friday l
l
- 7. morning meeting, and since it seems to us now that --
8 JUDGE CARTER: We will consider your request 9 after the recess. ,
10 MS. POTTERFIELD: Thank you.
11 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)
12 ,
13 O ,,
15 .
16 17 r
18 19 20 l
( 21 1
22 1
23 lO 24 25
,O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
i 2538 l
l l
1 JUD3E CARTER: Ms. Potterfield was goino to
. 2 make a petition for reconsideration of a decision the 3 Board made yesterday?
4 MS. POTIEFFIELD: Not at all, Your Honor. I 5 simply have an application that the Board ask FEMA to 6 report ~ back to the Board after they get some firm dates 7 about the New York State correction of deficiencias in 8 the plan. The reason I ask this is that I understood 9 from previous testimony that the interim report was 10 simply awaiting New York State's response to these -
11 deficiencies, and if New York State is not going to 12 cespond until after the interim report is due then it 13 might change the schedule that we all had in mind about
() 14 when we might get a definitive answer from FEMA about 15 when we might get these plans. .
16 MR. PERRY: Your Honor, we would respectfully 17 request that the Board not place such a burden on FEMA.
18 When we report back with our interim finding, that will 19 normally include proposed corrective actions, timetables 20 f or corrective actions, as finally negotiated and agreed 21 upon by the state.
22 The data you request, Ms. Potterfield, will be 23 available. But we will not be able to make it 24 available, because in fact it's part of the agency's
("}
25 finding process, until the 30th when the finding does O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (262) 554 2345
2589
(~s 1 emerge. At that time information will be included in d
2 the finding.
3 JUDOE CARTER: We would expect the Staff to 4 keep the Board advised as to the progress of the 5 intter. I think we all understand that this is an 6 important element in the matter and we will work out the 7 details of it as we progress. But I don't want to take 8 the time to do it now, and the Eoard will not make a 9 definite order requiring information until we give the to Staff and FEMA an opportunity in light of their 11 individual responsibilities in this matter.
12 MS. POTTERFIELDs Let me state my concern, 13 Your Honor, which is that the interim report will leave.
() 14 us in the same situation we are in now, but with dates 15 for getting better. And my application is to ask the 16 Board to help the Intervenors ask FEMA to m ak e th e 17 report something more than what we have now, but with 18 dates for getting better.
19 JUDGE CARTER: I think if I may suggest, Ms.
20 Potterfield, that by maintaining communications with the 21 sttorneys'for the Staff and FEMA -- I am certain they j 22 will cooperate in keeping you advised as to the progress 23 of the matter, and I am quite sure from all I've heard
{} 24 that FEMA officials are not going to delay the matter needlessly, and they as much as anyone want to conclude 25 l
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2590 I
1 this matter very promptly.
2 So let the process take its course and if you 3 run into any difficulties then come back to the Board.
O 4 In the meantime, we will place our confidence in the 5 officials and in the Staff attorneys and FEMA attorneys 6 to keep all persons advised who have an interest in the 7 progress of the matter. Should there be a problem that
~
8 develops later, then you can bring it to your 9 attention.
10 Mr. Perry or Mr. Hassle?
11 MR. GLASS: FEMA has no redirect, Your Honcr.
12 MR. HASSLE: Staff has no redirect, Your 13 Honor. ,
() 14 JUDGE CARTER: I think that will then preclude 15 any further examination of the witnesses.
16 MR. CZAJA: Judge, there is one open matter of 17 housekeeping. On page 2239 of the transcript, I offered 18 into evidence Exhibit PA ,1. At that time the Board 19 withheld a ruling on that until the other parties had 20 had an opportunity to examine the exhibit and had been 21 able to complete their cross-examination.
22 I transmitted copies of the exhibit to all 23 parties at the beginning of last week. The other parties have now completed their cross-examination.
f]) 24 I 25 would now ask that Exhibit PA-1 be received in O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VtRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2591 1 evidence.
2 JUDGE CARTER: Is there any objection?
3 (No response.)
4 JUDGE CARTER: I hear none. PA-1 is admitted.
5 into evidence.
6 (The document referred 7 to, previously marked for 8 identification as Exhibit 9 No. (A-1, was received in 10 evidence.)
11 MR. MORGAN A second matter, Your Honor. Th e 12 Power Authority moves to strike or otherwise exclude
. 13 from consideration all emergency planning testimony of
() 14 the FEMA witnesses that pertains to voluntary 15 participation by iunicipal, county and state governments 16 and governmental officials.
17 No such testimony can be relevant to any 18 finding or recommendation that may be made by this Board 19 or to any adjudicatory power of the Nuclear Regulatory 20 Commission. This motion is based upon the commerce 21 clause, the su prema cy claus e, and the Fifth Amendment of 22 the Constitution of the United States, the Atomic Energy 23 Act and related 3:ts of Congress.
() 24 To allow any license to be dependent upon the 25 cooperation of municipal, county or state governments or O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 1
2592 1 governmental officials is to denigrate the commerce 2 clause, the supremacy clause, and Congressionally 3 established national policy. It would subject federal A
V 4 law to municipal, county or state governmental veto, 5 which could be a Complished by a form of governmental, 6 local, state or county government, civil disobedience or 7 secession from the national plan.
8 Authority for this motion is to be found in 9 recent Supreme Court decisions, in FERC versus 10 Mississippi, 50 United States Law Week 4565, June 1, 11 1982. And I call to the Court's attention the Supreme 12 Court's granting of certiorari in Pacific Gas & Electric 13 Company versus State Energy Resources, Conservation and
() 14 Development Commission, 659 Federal 2d 903, Ninth 15 Circuit, 1981, cert. granted, 50 Unitel States Law Week 16 3994, June 21, 1982.
17 MR. KAPLANa Does the Court wish argument on 18 that?
l 19 JUDGE CARTERS I'll hear a brief response on 20 the motion. k'e we sid take any extended argument on i 21 Friday, if there is a meeting on Friday.
22 Mr. Bialek?
23 MR. BIALEK: Bialek of the State Attorney
() 24 "eneral's Office.
25 I think more than the Supreme Court's granting l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2593 1 cert. in tae Pacific Gas & Electric decision is the 2 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dissent in that case, 3 which directly contravenes everything in the motion.
4 The Ninth Circuit held thst the State of California had 5 the power to enact a moratorium on new nuclear power 6 plants and that to do so is not inconsistent with the 7 Act of Congress or the objectives of Congress.
8 I think the motion is frivolous.
9 MR. BLUMs Even more re, levant and more to the 10 point of the motion being f rivolous is that it deals 11 with a wholly different issue. It is talking about a 12 point gf law, whether this law could order shutdown of 13 the plant solely on the basis of Rockland County's
() 14 nonparticipation, rather than whether the fact of
. 15 Rockland County's nonparticipation is relevant to the 16 question of whether the plans and will be implemented.
17 And it certainly is relevant to that, and it 18 would be utterly absurd to exclude such evidence.
19 MR. KAPLAN Judge, very briefly, Mr. Morgan's 20 objection sade no mention of the Tenth Amendment and a 21 variety of recent Supreme Court cases indicating that 22 the Court dould look at the T? nth Amendment and the 23 relationship between state, local and municipal 24 governments and the federal government.
(])
25 And implicit in Mr. Morgan 's contention is a O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2594 1 particular view of preemptive doctrine and what states 2 can be compelled to do. Now, it seems to me -- well, 3 that is all I have to say.
4* I would also join' in the objections made by 5 Mr. Bialek and Mr. Blum.
l 6 JUDGE CARTER: The motion is denied at this 7 time as being premature.
8 Mr. Brodsky?
9 MR. BR3D5KY: Your Honor, would you be having 10 opening statements at this point? ,
11 JUDGE CARTER: I think that will be next. The
.12 testimony f or Intervenors -- excuse me. Judge Paris had 13 a question for the witnesses.
() 14 JUDGE PARIS Gentlemen, Commission question 3 15 stated in part: "An effort should be made to establish 16 what the minimum number of hours warning for an ,
17 effective evacuation of a ten-mile quadrant at Indian 18 Point would be. The FEMA position should be taken as a 19 rebuttal presumption for this estimate."
20 And my question is, has FEMA taken a position 21 yet with respect to what the minimum number of hours 22 warning for the effective evacuation of the ten-mile 23 quadrant at In diaa Point would be?
24 JITNE55 McINTIRE: The position we have taken
{}
25 is that we have reviewed the four evacuation studies O
t ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2595 1 prepared by the various firms and we find no reason to
)
2 doubt the accuracy of those findings. Therefore, we .
3 take those findings, those estimates, as the FEMA O 4 position.
5 JUDGE PARISa Tho se estima tes are estimates of 6 the amount of time that would be required to evacuate.
7 You are takin7 that as the minimum number of hours 8 warning for an effective evacuation?
9 WITNESS McINTIRE: Most of the studies speak 10 to warning time and evacuation time to come up with a 11 total time for the entire process.
12 JUDGE PARIS: And you accept those estimates 13 as reasonable?
) 14 JITNESS McINTIRE: Yes, we do.
15 JUDOE PARIS Thank you.
16 WITNESS HUSAR: J udge Paris, f or 17 clarification, I think we have two elements to this 18 question, this matter. One is warning and one is 19 evacuation. They are not the same. Warning and the 20 standard as far as it has to be applied with respect to 21 warning is sta ted in the NUREG, warning the public.
22 That was addressed in Appendix 3 of the NUR EG, what the 23 planning standard is with respect to warning the
(} 24 public.
25 So that we don't have a position in that because O
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPAN(,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) $54 2345
2596
~
that's already stated in the NUPEO.
{- 1 Ihst is the 2 standard that nust be applied to the ability of the -
i 3 state and local governments to meet that standard, and 4
- everything that Mr. McIntire has said with respect to 5 the actual evacuation and the time it will take to 6 evacuate taa EPZ is as ha statad. That is just a point 7 of clarifica tion. .
8 Warning the people is already in the NUPEG, so 9 we would not use any different criteria-for warning the 10 people or seasuring the ability of the state and local 11 governments to warn the people at Indian Point as if it 12 is any different than we would take it at Palisades or 13 Robinson or Zimmer or San Onof re or Diablo Canyon. ,
() 14 JUDGE CARIER: Judge Shon? ,
15 JUDGE SHON: I had a couple of minor 16 questions. We have established, I think, that the 17 exercise o'f March 3rd, although it exercised many 18 different facilities and many different things, did not 19 in fact involve the moving of any large number of people 20 cat of the area; is that corra:t?
! 21 WITNESS McINTIRE: That is correct.
22 JUDGE SHON: We have also established that 23 there have been 1srae numbers of people moved out of
() 24 actual areas in the face of hurricanes and floods and 25 dams breaking and that sort of thing. Do any of you l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l 400 VIRGINfA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2597 1 gentlemen know of a case where, as a matter of an
. 2 exarcise or a drill or in an emergency, peo ple were 3 removed from a substsntially sized town, removed out of O 4 an area under conditions sinulating radioactive 5 c on ta mina tio n , an accident involving nuclear materials 6 or anything like that?
'l 7 WITNESS McINTIRE The only think that we are 1
8 aware of were some voluntary evacuations after the Three 9 Mile Island incident.
10 JUDGE SHON: I see. I just thought Mr. Keller 11 has a background in INEL, that is Idaho National 12 Engineering Laboratory --
13 WITNESS KELLER: That is correct.
() 14 JUDGE SHON: It stuck in my head that the town 15 of Arco was subject to a practice evacuation some 15 16 years ago or so.
17 WITNESS KELLER: That is correct. But the 18 town of Arco is relatively small.
19 JUDGE SHON: Well, that is one of the things I 20 wanted to find outs How big is it and what happened?
21 WITNESS KELLERs It's something like 3,000 or 22 4,000 people, maximum. I don't think it really has a 23 great deal of relevsnce.
24 JUDGE SHON: Thank you. That's all I wanted
(
25 to find out.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C 20024 (202) 554 2345
2598 1 JUDGE CARTER: Getting to Judge Paris' 2 question sgsin, the Commission question 3 contains the 3 following: "An effort should be made to establish what O 4 the minimum number of hours vsening for an effective 5 evacuation of a ten-mile quadrant at Indian Point would 6 be."
7 Based on your studies, what is the answer to 8 that question?
9 WITNESS McINTIRE: To be absolutely sure, we 10 would have to consult the study. We can give an 11 estimate from recall if you wish.
12 JUDGE CARTER: We'll permit you to examine any 13 documents that yea have and give us the best answer tha t
( 14 you can.
15 In the seantime, Mr. Brandenburg, did you just 16 have something?
17 3R. BRAEDENBURG: I was just going to follow 18 up on Judge Shon's question, which I think related to 19 conditions simulating the relea se of radioactive 20 contaminants. I was just going to suggest that the 21 release of some certain kinds of chemicals that don't 22 have any sensory perception aspects to them migh t be the 23 simulation that was sought by Judge Shon's question. I
() 24 ,
notice the answer did not address that matter, thouch.
25 (Pause.)
O V
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2599 1 JUDGE PARIO: Tell us what document you are 2 referring to before you answer, plesse.
3 WITNESS HUCAP: Your Honor, we are examining 4 the evacuation time estimates tables, which are in the 5 plan, which cor.e from the study prepared by Parsons, 6 Brinkerhoff. That is the study that has been 7 incorporated, the results of which have been 8 incorporated in the plan.
- 9 We find that in an examination of these 10 evacuation time estimates, on average the minimum 11 evacuation time -- and this would be under optimum 12 conditions -- range on average from three hours and up.
13 , JUDGE PARIS: Up to what?
() 14 WITNESS HUSARs Up to ten hours -- correction, 15 eleven hours.
16 1R. CZAJA: Judge, could we have an 17 identifiestion of the particular scenario and page 18 number that the witnesses are referring to?
19 JUDGE CARTER: Would you answer that?
20 WITNESS HUSARs Yes. Appendix A of any of the 21 county plans. They all con tain the ssme time estimate 22 tables. And this can be found starting, for example, in 23 the Westchester plan, Appendix A, starting on page 24 A-73.
25 MR. CZAJA: I just want to make a point, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 I
2600 1 Judoe, that their witness was reading from one table out 2 of a number of tables covering a number of scenarios.
3 That 's the only poin t I wanted to make.
\"' 4 JUD3E CLRTER1 So the answer to the question, 5 ahat is the minimut number of hours warning for an 6 effective calculation of a ten-mile quadrant at Indian 7 Point, is three to eleven hours.
8 VITNESS HUSAR: Effective warning --
if we're 9 talking about warning, then it is not the same as what I 10 perceive to be part of my response. I was talking in 11 terms of the actual evacuation time to evacuate the 12 eme rgency planning zone.
13 JUDGE CARTER: Well, let me state the question
() 14 again: What is the minimum number of hours warning 15 needed for an effective evacuation of a ten-mile .
16 quadrant at Indian Point?
17 JUDGE PARIS: If it takes eleven hours to 18 :stry out an effe:tive evacuation, would the warning not 19 have to come eleven hours as the minimum?
20 JUDGE SHON Perhaps even more.
21 WITNESS HUSAR: I have a problem with the 22 warning, because is applied in the context of the NUREG 23 it is the time necessary to provide an advisor to the
{} 24 general public as to what protective action to take.
, 25 And I don't know if that is the same context that is l
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, i
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2601 1 used in the question 3.
2 JUDGE PARIS: Well, I don't think it is. I 3 think we hsve to take the Commission 's question at face 4 value, what the minimum number - "An estimate should be 5 made to establish what the minimum number o f hours 6 warning for an ef fective evacuation of a ten-mile 7 quadrant would be."
8 MR. PERRY Your Honor, if I might. I don 't 9 think that tNe panel was prepared to address the 10 question you asked from quite the perspective that you 11 are taking.
12 JUDGE PARIS: I realize that.
13 MR. PERRY And I would suggest,that perhaps
() 14 the way to obtain the answer you seek, to obtain a 15 res11y well-judged answer, would be for us to address 16 this when we return to discuss the finding. The Board 17 could propound its question to us and we could respond 18 to it when we come back with the FEM A finding and 19 discuss it at that time. It might result in a more 20 effective snswer.
21 JUDGE PARIS: I think that is an excellent 22 suggestion. Why don't you take Commission question 3 23 and prepara to give us an answer when you come back?
(} 24 JUDGE SHON: I think it is also possible that, 25 the Parsons, Brinkerhoff witnesses will be able to deal O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 i
2502 l
i l
1 with this or give us some ides.
2 3R. CZAJA: Yes, I think there will be a testimony from them on that subject, Judge.
4 JUDGE PARIS: The Bosrd, however, would ask 5 you to continue to sseertain the FEMA position.
6 JUDGE SHON: I think Mr. Brandenburg also 7 wanted us to ask you with regsri to evacusting people 8 under various circumstances --
and I thAnk the answer is 9 going to be yes -- whether you,'ve had experience and 10 studied cases in which people were evacuated, being i
11 threatened by something that is not readily apparent to 12 huign sensas, a ralesse of chemicals or something along 13 that, and how did those evacuations go? Can you answer .
() 14 that, and do you have experience in th a t ?
. 15 WITNESS McINTIRE: The experience we have from 16 the literature is the Minasagua incident of about two 17 and a half years ago, where approximately 250,000 people 18 were evacuated, if my recollection is correct. There 19 was a train accidant at night, tround midnight, and 20 because the train was carrying, I believe it was, j 21 chlorine and some other highly toxic naterials, the 22 officials dere fearful of a chemical reaction which 23 would release poisonous ma terials into the air.
() 24 So they did evacuata in sboat s 12-hour 25 period, if my recollection serves me, 250,000 people.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2603 1 JUDGE SHON: This was done without a prepared 2 evacuation plan of the sort that you find here in a 3 nuclear power plant, at least?
4 WITNESS McINTIRE: My understanding, there was 5 not this type of plan, certainly not the detailed 6 planning that is going into the Indian Point eff ort.
7 JUDGE SHON: And it was at night and it 8 involved a quarter of a million people?
9 WITNESS McINTIRE: That is my recollection, 10 yes. I can research that and b.e prepared to respond 11 when we return in full detail.
12 JUDGE SHON: Fine.
13 MR. BLUM.: Your Honor, we would like to
() 14 reserve our right of cross-examination on these points 15 for when the witnesses return. -
16 MR. MORGANs So would we. .
17 . JUDGE CARTER: I think that's proper for all 18 concerned. The witness hinself has stated he requires 19 more time to review the material for which he was giving 20 his opinion.
21 All right, then. I think that the witnesses 22 are excused temporarily. We look forward to their 23 return.
() 24 I must say that I was very hopeful that we 25 would have an answer for question 3, since that was the O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2604 1 Commission o question, therefore more important than any 2 question that anyone else had asked. And we look .
3 forward anxiously to the answers.
O 4 And in considering those answers, perhaps some 5 repetition might be in order as to whether the 6 Commission wanted your position on the warning time or a 7 position on other aspects of the planning. In any 8 event, you are excused now and we will now hear from the 9 Intervenor's witnesses.
10 (Witnesses temporarily excused.)
11 JUDGE CARTER: And Ms. Weiss is here from 12 Washington to give us her opening.
. 13 MR. M3R3AN: Your Honor, may we ask for a
() 14 procedural ruling on the statement of the Intervenors?
15 Are all Intervenors entitled to an opening statement or 16 only the lead Intervenor? And if only the lead 17 In ter ve no r, is that Intervenor required to a limitation 18 of time? And if so, are the other parties to the 19 proceedings entitled to opening statements, and are they 20 entitled to the same amount of time?
21 MR. ELUM: Your Honor, I think all Intervenors 22 have fairly self-imposed time limits.
23 MR. MORGAN Well, sir, we 've watched some of 24 those time limits through the examination and I wonder
("}
25 if we couldn't have a flat laid-down rule for all of us i
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) $54-2345
2605 that is equal and applied to everybody across the
{} 1 2 boa rd.
3 JUDGE CARTERz I never thought that was going O 4 to become a problem, because we never placed any 5 limitations on M h=tions or motions or arguments or 6 anything like that. I think that the opening statements 7 will be somewhere in the range, or not to exceed, ten 8 minutes. And I think we can spare ten minates for every 9 party, and we certainly want to give the licensees and 10 the Staff as much time as they need. If they require 11 somewhat more than ten minutes, they will certainly be 12 granted th a t .
13 MR. MOR3AN: And one other item. The motion I
() 14 filed, the next preceding motion to this moment in the 15 record, may I have that as a standing objection to throughout the proceedings to like or similar testimony, 17 so it n'eed not be made to disrupt the proceedings?
18 JUDGE CARTER: Let us try to meet that as it 19 comes. I anderstand your position and it is not a 20 matter that is free from doubt, and it is difficult.
21 But remember, this is an in vestiga tion. We are going to 22 be making a recommendation only. We are not going to 23 make a finding or issue an order which will have any
(} 24 immediate effect. So we hope you will keep that in 25 mind.
O V
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2606 1 But as the issues arise, we will understand if O 2 you want to make in objection on a motion at that time.
3 Th? resson I 'm saying this is there could be a 4 difference depending on who the witness is, what the 5 issue is and what the nature of the testimony is, on 6 thtt precise point. So I would rathat handle it as the 7 issue arises.
8 Mr. Plum, did you have something?
9 MR. BLUM: Yes, Your Honor. We would request 10 permission to have Legislator Brodsky go first for about 11 five minutes, because he has to go to a committee 12 meeting very soon, followed by Ms. Weiss, who would 13 speak on behalf of all Intervenors about the background
() 14 and purpose of these hearings and the history of it.
15 JUDGE CARTERS All right. Mr. Brodsky, five 16 minutes.
17 MR. BRODSKY Thank you.
18 OPENING STATEMENT OF RICHARD BRODSKY, ESO.
19 NINTH LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT, WESTCHESTEP COUNTY 20 . 1R. BRODSKY: For many persons, myself 21 included, the opening of these hearings is the 22 culminatica of several years of strug;1e to bring before l
l l 23 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the public several
(} 24 profound gaestions about the safety of Indian Point and 25 its manner of operation.
t O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRulNIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2507 1 These questions have included a feeling and a 2 position that Indian Point was unsafely located, wa s 3 unsafely engineered, was unsafely constructed, is 4 unsafely managed, and that an ovacuation plan cannot 5 render an otherwise unsafe plant into a safe one. 'J e 6 believe that several of these contentions are already a 7 matter of public record of which the Commission could 8 tak e notice.
9 For example, that Indian Point was unsafely 10 located is not disputed at this time by almost any 11 reasonable observer. That it is unsaf ely engineered is 12 now a subject of litigation between Con Edison and its 13 engineering and construction firm. That it is unsafely
() 14 managed is a matter of public record with respect to the 15 down time and the actions of the NRC with respect to 16 especially Indian Point 2 and to some extent Indian 17 Point 3.
18 So that from our point of view, or from my 19 point of view, we approach these hearings with a sense 20 of relief and to some extent gra titude that , after years 21 of sn a ttempt to bring these questions to the public, 22 they are being considered by this tribunal.
23 And we have done so in the face of assurances
() , 2<4 by the Licensees over time that the plant is safe.
25 Every time there has been an incident or an improvement l
()
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 1
2600 1 ordered by the NRC, we have again received assurances 2 from the Licensees that the plants are absolutely safe, 3 and then W3 go through another proceeding where there is 4 an 3dditional defect fcund, and again we're told it's 5 safe.
6 It need not be stated too clearly that, at 7 least from my point of view, we are unable to accept the 8 credibility of the Licensees on the grounds they wish to
- 9 present it. 'de are in the position of the -- well, 10 leave it be there.
11 JUDGE CARTER: Excuse me, Mr. Brodsky, if I 12 say. I view an opening statement as a summary of what 13 you eypect to prove. Now, do you expect to prove
() 14 matters involving the errors of management of each of 15 the two Licensees, for example?
16 MR. BRODSKY: With all respect, Your Honor, 17 one of the elements in proof of a case like this is the 18 credibility of the other adverse parts. And I'm 19 bri ngin g to the attention of the Board tha t tha t 20 credibility is something which you yourselves will have 21 to judge and weich. It will be challenged, as it has 22 been, on cross-examination through our witnesses. I 23 believe it is relevant to the weight to be given to
(} 24 testimony.
25 and I would only ask that you yourself, as you O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
3
{ 2509 l
i e
i 'I cross-examine the FEMA witnesses about track records, 1;
- 2 reslize that that track record bears.on tha case. '
3 O ,
5 ,
j i 6 i
- 7 I
1 i 8 I
9 4
10 '
! 11 l
j 12 a I 13 O i4 ;
t 25 16 1 ;
17 .
18 i
f i 19 i i
20 i l 21 l 4
I i 22 l 23 1
l 25 i i l
lO i 1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2610 1 JUDOE CARTER: I take it your answer is no.
2 MR. PRODSKYa I take it my answer for, in all 3 respect, will stand in the manner it was given.
4 With respect to the deficiencies of the plan 5 that was brought forward to us by the Licensees, we 6 would only ask that to the extent possible this tribunal 7 apply certain standards of common sense with respect to 8 the adequacy of those. It is difficult to understand, 9 for exampit, why having been ordered to make certain 10 engineering improvements at Indian Point 3 in order to 11 allow it to continue to operate , tha t Indian Point 2 12 should not be held to the same standard. It is -
13 difficult for us to understand how one goes about t
14 proving the response of people in a crisis situation, be 15 they parents of children in a school, or bus drivers or 16 others, and we only ask that in evaluating that you 17 apply to those problems and questions the standards of 18 common sense which we believe have been applied by 19 public officials and the public in the affectad areas.
20 Let me turn for a moment to our question about 21 the Intervenors, who exactly we are and why there has 22 been and I think will continue to be some difficulty in 23 presenting the smooth kind of presentation you would 24 lite.
(}
25 This is a group of people who are I think, six 1
(~)%
\_ .
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2611 1 months or a year ago would have not considered 2 themselves to be sitting in this room making the kind of 3 arguments that we are making. We are parents, 4 interested citizens, public interest lawyers, one or two 5 hackneyed politicians with a variety of interests and 6 political views and a variety of purposes. We are 7 attempting to present a factual, substantive case. We 8 have assembled witnesses to do that, and we beg the 9 Court's indulgence to the e,xtent that at times we are 10 unable to proceed in the way the Court has suggested.
11 But let me point out that we are faced with 12 gome of the most reputable, intelligent, honest leoal 13 talent that money can buy and we are in the position of .
() 14 having not only to fund ourselv'es in this proceeding as
. 15 public members, but through our electric bills and 16 otherwise to fund the opposition's lawyers, which is I 17 think unusual and perhaps a source of some tension for 18 those of us who sit on this side.
I 19 It is a great pleasure for me to listen to,
- 20 among others, Mr. Morgan, who I believe' would cite the 21 Constitution and the commerce clause if he were to 22 return overcooked food at a restaurant. We are not able 23 to do as much as the staff work as he and his minions 24 are able to do, but we believe that the case that we
[}
25 will presen t is factual and substantive.
\
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2612
{} 1 Let me conclude, Your Honor, by saying that 2 the jury in this -- you are both judge and jury, and 3 there is another jury in this case. It would be O 4 disingenuous of t3e Intervenors to say that we do not 5 believe that the public is watching very closely what 6 will happen here. That is not to say that we are in any 7 sense directing the presentation of our case to the 8 public. We are directing it to this tribunal under the 9 rules that govern it. But the questions of the safety 10 of Indian Point and the ability of an evacuation plan to 11 deal with that question are of grave public concern in -
12 this area, and the way in which those matters are 13 treated here will go a grea t way toward assuaging the
() 14 public's doubts or engendering further ones.
15 And I ask you only one thing in considering 16 the evidence that we will be presenting, and.that is 17 that you do as I believe you will do and as I think your i
18 rulings have indicated you will, to face squarely the 19 issues that are raised in the face of what is and what 20 will continue to be enormous pressure on behalf of the 21 Licensees, and if the evidence so requires, you will 22 state that the plant is unsafely operated or engineered 23 or that an evacustion plan cannot successf ully solve the
(} 24 problems of this area; that you make that recommendation 25 to the Commission without f ear or f a vo r.
l O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2613 l l
1 I am confident you will do that. I am 2 gesteful to this Commission for the chance af ter so.many 3 years to be heard on the evidence, and I look forward to 4 cooperating with the Court and adversary attorneys and 5 other Intervenors in making a record which once and for 6 all will, answer the fundamental questions about Ind ian 7 Point wht:1 have troubled so many of us.
8 Thank you.
9 JUDGE CARTER 4 Thank you, Mr. Brodsky.
10 Ms. Weiss.
11 MS. WEISS: M r. Chairman, Your Honors, my name 12 is Ellyn Weiss. I practice law in Washington, and I am
. 13 General Counsel for the Union of Concerned Scientists.
() 14 UCS is a coalition of scientists, engineers 15 and other professionals that began as a small group in 16 Cambridge in the mid '60s and has grown to a national 17 organization whose work is sponsored by the dona tions of 18 over 100,000 members around this country. We have done 19 research, writing and participation in a variety of 20 public forums, adjudicatory forums, congressional forums 21 on issues relating to nuclear safety, to nuclear arms 22 control, environmental control.
23 I would lika to briefly outline the history of 24 the case. The site for Indian Point Unit 1 was chosen
(}
25 in the mid-1950s when virtually no rules governed either O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2614 1
1 tha siting or design of nuclear plants, and any concern 2 over safety for the environment was overwhelmed by !
3 nuclear optimism. Serious people talked at that time O 4 about locating nuclear plants in the middle of Central 5 Park. So Indian Paint Unit 1, a relatively small 6 reactor, was sited 30 miles from New York City.
7 Units 2 and 3, which are both over three times 8 larger than the original plant, followed at the same 9 site. They were both ordered in the mid '60s, began 10 operation in 1972 and 1976 respectively.
11 During the 1970s concern did begin to surface 12 about the Indian Point site. I well remember a letter 13 from a resident of this area to the then Atomic-Energy
() 14 Commission -- the head of the staff on the safety side 15 was Joseph Hendrie at the time -- inquiring about what 18 assurance the Agency had that people in this area could 17 be p'rotected in the event of an accident. Mr. Hend rie 's 18 response was there is no need for concern because the 46 19 or 47 families who live within .6 mile can be 20 protected.
21 The fact is that the Indian Point units were 22 sited without ever considering the potential 23 consequences of a major accident at that site, and the Atomic Energy Commission and its successor Nuclear l
(]) 24 25 Regulatory Commission simply deemed such accidents to be l
()
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~
2615 1 incredible.
2 The foundations of this certainty were 3 sha ttered on March 28, 1979 by the TMI accident. TMI, 4 as you are all undoubtedly aware by now, was a sequence 5 of equipment failures and human errors considered 6 incredible by NRC and the nuclear industry, and the 7 amount of core damage suffered by that reactor was six 8 to ten times the saximum sssumed possible by NRC. It 9 suddenly became clear that the federal government and to the nuclear industry could no longer claim that serious 11 reactor accidents coud not happen.
12 Many developments followed the TMI accident, 13 but none were more revolutionary than that for the first
() 14 time in 25 years the Commission promulgated the 15 requirement that no nuclear plant shall be licensed to 16 ope rate until it can be proven that a plan for the 17 evacuation of the public within ten miles of that 18 facility both can and will be implemented. No license 19 shall issue if such a plan cannot or will not be 20 implemented.
21 And I remember that the Chairman of the 22 Nuclear Regulatory Commission testified before Congress 23 that TMI had taught the Agency'that emergency planning 24 is just as important as reactor design in assuring the 1
{}
25 safety of the public.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2616 fs 1 In the opinion of the Union of Concerned O
2 Scientists, TMI accident proved what we had believed for 3 many years, that it is folly to operate nuclear plants t )
4 in densely populated areas. In that sense, the UCS 5 petition on Indian Point grew directly out of the TMI 6 accident because Indian Point is unique in the problems 7 that its site poses. It has more people at 10, 30 and 8 50 miles than any other site in the country. At 50 9 miles, over 17 million people are encompassed in that 10 area. Ihat is over twice, far over twice the figures of 11 the next worst site. In fact, over 10 percent of the 12 population of the United States lives within 60 miles of 13 Indian Point. .
() 14 Our petition with the NRC, filed in September 15 of 1979, laid out these facts and a number of others 16 related to the design of Units 2 and 3. We noted that 17 the Agency's own Reactor Safety Study, the Rasmussen 18 Report, which used a hypothetical site far more 19 f avorable than Indian Point, had calculated that a major 20 accident could result in 40,000 deaths, 285,000 nonfatal 21 cancers, 5100 genetic defects in first generation, $14 l
22 billion in property damage.
23 We asked the NRC to do something which they
(} ,
24 had never done before, to reassess the risk to the 25 public from an operating reactor and to shut it down if O
I ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2617 1 that risk was, as we believe it is, intolerable, and the 2 Co3 mission agreed to undertake this investigation.
3 UCS bagsn this case, it has come this fsr only 4 because the people and many political leaders in this 5 srea have refused to let it be buried.
6 That is a brief statement of the genesis of 7 this proceeding.
8 It is now almost three years since the 9 petition was filed. I find it a startling fact to to reflect on that fully half of the operating life of Unit 11 3 and one-third of Unit 2 have passed while we have been 12 vaiting for these hearings.
13 , Now a word about our case. Most nuclear
() 14 licensing cases are a battle of experts on relatively 15 dry techni:al issues, and this case vill have its share 16 of experts, some of them among the most distinguished 17 social scientists in the country. We will also be 18 presenting experts trained to model the consequences of 19 nuclear accidents, and they will testify that under the 20 most optimistic assumptions, the toll in human loss and 21 property dsmage from a serious accident at Indian Point 22 would be very creat indeed.
23 But this case has something that is almost 24 unique in my experience. You will be hearing from the 25 real world, from the people who are supposed to take th e O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2618 1 words of these paper plans and translate them into 2 reality, and what you are going to hear from those 3 chiefs of police, town suparvisors, highway supervisors, f'} 4 school superintendents, teachers, principals, bus 5 d rivers , doctors, nurses and many, many parents, is that 6 it cannot be done. It simply won't work. And it is our 7 view that no paper plan can stand against this 8 testimony.
9 There is a paragon of the In t erve no rs '
o 10 testimony, I believe. It is a sta te men t that appears in 11 the testimony of the town supervisor of the Town of 12 Ossining, and he said it is above and beyond the 13 capacity of our department to respond to the kind of
() 14 emergency contemplated by the radiological emergency 15 response plan. Our entire on-duty police staff gets .
16 tiad up when a one-car accident occurs.
17 You will hear that theme embellished, extended 18 and detailad from many witnesses. You will hear from 19 the other side that there is no cause to worry because 20 the accidents that we are concerned about just won't 21 happen, and we know that because we've done computer 22 modeling and it tells us co.
23 These are the same people that told you that l
() 24 TMI couldn't happen. The computer modeling of absolute 25 accident probsbilities is in our view a fruitless ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2619 1 exercise. Even those who believe in the value of 2 probahilistic risk assessment concede that for the 3 serious accident of interest here, the error factor is 4 as high as a factor of 100, and that is for a good, 5 competent probabilistic risk assessment. So that when 6 you get to the bottom line of all of that expensive 7 computer modeling, the true probability might just as 8 well be 100 times more or less than your estimate. A 9 result Which carries that level of uncertainty is a 10 meaningless result.
11 Just last Friday I think the event was 12 u nd erlined when NRC released a study done in one of the -
13 national laboratories that for the first time analyzed
() 14 the operating data from U.S. nuclear plants, found 57 15 precursors of serious accidents, and calculated on the 16 basis of that real data that we can expect a serious 17 accident once in ten years in this country. That is a 18 frequency ten times greater than that predicted by 19 computer modeling, and I view that as a bulletin from 20 the real world which is intruding rudely on the world of 21 theoretics.
22 If we don't know for sure what the probability 23 is of a serious accident, there is something we do 24 know. We do know that the consequences would be
(])
25 catastrophic and we know in addition, as our testimony O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2620 1 would show, tha t the emergency plans that exist for 2 Indian Poin t do not protect the people who are its 3 neighbors. This is their case, and at this point, with 4 the Board's permission, I will turn the microphone over 5 to them.
6 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, "s. Weiss.
7 MS. KESSLER. Does this work well enough?
8 In 1977 the emergency plan for Indian Point 9 drawn up by Westchester , County listed 33 families and 10 businesses in the impact area of the plant who might 11 nead evacuation in tha case of an accident. A 1979 plan 1% by Con Edison showed the plant volunteer ambulance corps 13 and Con Edison's contract physicians to be the medical .
() 14 response capability who dealt with on-site contamination
. 15 of individual patients only. No families or businesses 16 to be evacaated were identified.
17 The current plan, if we may call it that, now 18 in its fifth draft, is at least more realistic in that 19 it is forced to racognize some of the numbers of people 20 who might be affected. What it does not do is take 21 these people and their situations into account when 22 planning f or their evacua tion. Any plan that claims to 23 be able to evacuate large segments of Rockland County in I
24 hours rather than in days in the possible presence of
(]}
25 radiation has to be a joke. Any plan that takes my O
1
( ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 l
2621 1 family over one of the most hazardous two-lane highways
{;
2 in. the county along with thousands of other families, 3 then sends us into the center of Manuette, has to be O 4 created by people at desks with roadmaps who do not know 5 the county.
6 The plan was created without people, or a 7 least with paper people. 4$ who live our lives in 8 Rockland know how absurd this plan is, and the fact that 9 we have to show how it does or does not comply with 10 another staffing paper, the faderal guidelines contained 11 in NUREG-0654 is not any better. The guidelines 12 themselves fail to take real people into account and are 13 grossly deficient in realism.
() 14 All of the experts in the world, if they come 15 up with these kinds of documents, cannot hold a candle 1B to our law enforcement and emergency service people in 17 Rockland County who know what can and cannot be done, 18 especially in the types of accidents that we are 19 addressing today.
20 The vitaessas who unknowingly I think came the 21 closest to Rockland County's situation are the FEMA 22 witnesses who said that " panic occurs only under special 23 circumstances, for example, when people are faced with a 24 highly visible and immediate threat to survival within
(])
25 an enclosed area and escape rou tes a re closed of f."
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2622
(} 1 We submit that a highly invisible threat in 2 radiation may be just as conducive to panic.
3 Furthermore, most of Rockland County's 260,000 people 4 are bordered by the Hudson River on the east, by 5 mountains on the north and west, and by densely 6 populated New Jersey o'n the south. Our only majot exit 7 routes are to the south, into traffic patterns that 8 nearly stand still on a normal Saturday or rush hour.
9 The logic or lack of it should be obvious.
10 Publi: information and our communications 11 systems are terribly deficient, as many have testified, 12 and even if they were perfect, we could have no 13 guirantee of prompt notification by facility operators,
) 14 even if they do recognize an accident's potential 15 immediately, a situation that :annot be guaranteed 16 either.
17 Finally, our two options for. protective action 18 are evacuation and sheltering. When rapid evacuation is 1C out of the question and sheltering in our homes will 20 give us from approximately.15 minutes to a maximum about 21 two hours protection. What really do we have?
22 It is not our contention, it is not the 1
23 contention of Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy that no
() 24 emergency plan will work under any circumstances. It is 25 our contention that rapid evacuation of Rockland County
(
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
1 1 -2623 i
1 1 for the types of accidents that we all know are possible 2 is impossible, ini that va have no other choices as long l
3 as Indian' Point remains open. '
O 4 Thank you.
5 6
7 8 .
r 9
10 l
l 11 12 13 14 I
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 O 2' 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 2624 1 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, Mrs. Kessler.
2 Mrs. Fleisher?
3 MS. FLEISHER: Can you hear me without the 4 mike?
l 5 JUDGE CARTER 4 I think it would be better if 6 you could use the mike.
7 OPENING STATEMENT OF ZIPPORAH FLEISHER ON BEHALF OF 8 WEST BRANCH CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION 9 MS. FLEISHER My name is Zipporah Fleisher 10 and I represent the West Branch Conservation Association 11 and I come from the same area that Mrs. Kessler does, 12 an$ everything that she has said is certainly endorsed 13 by our group. I think I can add a few items since we
() 14 each have such short times and she couldn't cover 15 everything.
16 Our personnel in Rockland County that are
~
17 faced with the use and make-use of the plan have 18 attempted at times to make suggestions and changes and -
19 they have found, when this Rev. 1 came, that nothing of 20 theirs was in it. They were very discouraged :-d i: hey 21 f on 't think the plan can wo rk , just as Mrs. Kessler 22 said, and it is upon them that we rely.
23 You had Chief Holland here. We expect to
() 24 bring other polica chiefs, the head of the highway l 25 department in Clarkstown, and witnesses like that who l
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2625 1 have to deal with this stuff daily and who are not
{}
2 making paper plans. I hope that they will convince you 3 that the people of Rockland feel very strongly that this O 4 plan cannot possibly work.
5 Now we have been getting a lot of flack, sort 6 of psychological pressure, here that we really haven't 7 rejected the plan and I cannot understand how anyone who 8 could read English could come to that conclusion if you 9 read our resolution number 320. The prohibitions ih it 10 and the resolved Clauses are very clear.
11 The fact that FEMA says that we once promised 12 that we would in an emergency use the present plan, that 13 .is -- first of all, we don't think the presen' plan is
() 14 any good, which is why we backed out of it. So using 15 the present plan is no solution. It may be that until 16 we have our own plan, which will not meet NUREG-0654, I 17 assure you, for the reasons that we-cannot afford to
, 18 meet NUREG-0654 financially and we cannot do it on the 1
19 present road network.
20 We will have a plan which will be an emergency 21 plan and it will only be the best that we can offer and 22 it will be an honest truthful plan and then we will 23 show -- and it is too bad we have to go throu;h this i
() 24 torture -- that we cannot promise and you cannot promise 25 that people can be safely removed from the area.
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINtA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2626 1 Even under the Parsons-Brinkerhoff plan there 2 is a whole triage scena rio. There are people who are 3 left behind because of their physical condition. There O 4 ara people who are left behind who have not yet been 5 tried in court who are either guilty or not guilty and 6 we do not know that. There are people who are being 7 left behind because we haven't got time to get them out 8 and it'is up to the Commissioner of Health, we are told, 9 to have to make that decision.
- 10 This is fantastic. Everyone has a right to be 11 safely t re a ted and certainly not at the mercy of some 12 one Commissioner and we think our Commissioner would 13 sake very good decisions. But, nevertheless, having to
() 14 cut people's lives off because somebody else could get 15 out faster is really a fantastic decision. It is like 16 wartime.
17 And what is it for? It is for making
, 18 electricity, not war. Our people are very brave and 1
19 they are very loyal. I assure you that if we had a wa r 20 threat or some worthwhile threat to us, they would be 21 just as patriotic and super as anybody else. But to do 22 this, just to wreck our whole sys*7m because somebody 23 wants to make electricity, which is available in another
() 24 form at some other location, I am sorry, sirs. We just 25 can't see it.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
1 l
2627 1 We, in addition, to not get any electricity
[}
2 from Con Ed or PASNY, so to ask us to put signs up in 3 our park saying this is EEPA number 67 and your way out O 4 is here, we don't want to nar our beautiful countryside 5 with junk like that. I am very happy to say -- well, I 6 just want to read you one thing which I think is 7 typical, if you will pardon me, of the problems we have 8 had.
9 The Secretary of our Legislature mailed a copy 10 of our resolution to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11 and the letter she got back was: "Because of the volume 12 of citizen mail expres, sing opinion on matters pending 13 before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, I regret we 14 are unable to acknoveldge your comments in a more 15 personal manner. On behalf of the Commission, however, 16 I thank you for your interest and for taking the time to 17 communicate with us. Your concerns have been noted."
18 Now this wonderful letter resulted in a 19 further resolution because some of us went before the 20 Legislature and said obviously they are not goino to pay 21 any attention to you unless you make a motion. We are 22 learning by going to these hearings that the way to get 23 attention is to make a motion.
() 24 So our Legislature passed a new resciution 25 which Mr. Thorsen hasn't introduced yet -- and he O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2628 1 will -- asking, indeed, for FILCO's order to shut the
)
2 plants down. Why FEMA needs any more assurance that we 3 mean what we mean, I do not know.
O 4 I wrote a letter to M r. Hennessey last night 5 and we have copies here. We sent him a telegram. We 6 asked that a delegation from this hearing be allowed to 7 come to his meeting on Friday morning and told him what 8 we think of it as another stone around the neck of that 9 plan, that they continue to have private meetings. We 10 went to some of them ourselves. There was one in.
11 Rockland County and we asked to be incinded and they 12 said no. .
13 So we went and asked at the end of the meeting 14 if they would listen to us, which they did. We went to 15 Albany one time, where a meeting was called, and it was -
16 closed, but they saw us there and after a while th e y let 17 us in. This kind of thing goes acainst the grain of 18 people in the United States and why this plan has to be 19 surrounded with that kind of hocus pocus I do not know.
20 But it is time we addressed it and I think 21 that this a wonderful forum. We are real pleased to be 22 here. We are happy at the quality of this forum and the 23 way the judges are operating it and we are very hopeful
() 24 that our views will crash through some of the 25 stonewalling that we have been faced with and that you O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE , S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2629
{} 2 1 people will listen to us and understand where it is at.
Thank you.
3 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, Mrs. Fleisher.
O 4 hrs. Posner?
5 OPENING STATEMENT OF PAT POSNEE ON BEHALF OF 6 PARENTS CONCERNED ABOUT INDIAN POINT 7 MS. POSNERs I am Pat Posner on behalf of 8 Parents Concerned About Indian Point.
9 Parents Concerned About Indian Point was born 10 after the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island when 11 residents around Indian Point became alerted to the 12 potential disaster in our own neighborhood. We 13 identified. painfully with the confusion and helplessness
() 14 of Pennsylvania parents who didn't know what to do or 15 who to believe as to how to protect their children from 16 the extremely unhealthy effects of radiation.
17 Irradiation effects are the bottom line for 18 parents. We want credible assurance that n uclear power 19 plants are foolproof. Specifically, we want to know 20 that Indian Point will never be the scene of a 21 catastrophic accident and we refuse to be palliated or 22 bought off with emergency planning that again calls on 23 us, on parents, on teachers, on nurses, doctors, bus 24 drivers, police, firefighters, social workers, anbulance l
(-)
25 volunteers, on the citizens and residents of the area to i )
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 l
2630 1 mobilize for protective action, notably an evacuation,
(}
2 sacrificing our resources -- and for " resources" please 3 resd money -- health, our health, our peare of mind, for O 4 the dubious value of continued operation of Indian 5 Point's Units 2 and 3.
6 Parents will present a case on behalf of the 7 " Pregnant Women With Baby Carriages," a group disparaged 8 by Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Carl Abraham, 9 as quoted in a July 5, 1982, article in the Citizen 10 Register. These mothers will have an especially hard 11 time in case of a nuclear emergency and their plight 12 would be very evident if we had only one hungry, tired, 13 frightened two-yest-old in this courtroom today. I
() 14 believe it is the policy of this court building to ask 15 mothers with unruly children to leave the premises, to
. 16 evacuate, if you will, to spare the rest of us who are 17 taking part in this legal' proceeding the discomfort of 18 the disruption of children.
19 The witnesses that are going to be presented 20 by Parents are the people who are the most intimately i 21 affected by emergency planning. They will testify about 1
22 their special problems. It will become clear that if 23 human error and merhanical failure were to combine to cause a disaster at Indian Polot today, we would have to
(]) 24 25 write off the weakest and most dependent members of our O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2631 1 society, the mentally retarded, the frail, elderly, the
(}
2 bedridden and disabled people because these people will 3 not be able to get out in time today.
O 4 We have been assured by experts f rom FEMA that 5 resources devoted to an educational campaign would 6 convince parents of the wisdom and necessity for leaving I
l 7 their children to be evaucated by school buses. Dr.
8 Barry Brazelton, one of America's leading pediatricians, 9 will testify on behalf'of Parents that it goes against to all parental training and instinct to leave a child to 11 the care of others in case of a dangerous emergency.
12 Furthermore, other witnesses will testify --
13 other witnesses presented by Parents will be precisely 14 those who are as intimately familiar with the plan as 15 any non-expert lay person is likely to be, and these.
16 witnesses are not convinced. In fact, it is very likely 17 that attempts to educate the citizenry about the 18 emergency planning process have undermined rather than 19 bolstered confidence.
20 Witnesses for Parents will show that the 21 directions given in the planning brochures and emergency 22 broadetst messages have not taken into consideration 23 audience response and therefore the educational efforts
() 24 are not likely to be successful. We have been reminded 25 that the plans are not final but part of an ongoing, O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2532 1 dynamic process of continual improvement and refinement.
{
2 Well, we, the citizens and residents and our 3 witnesses who would be required to implement the plans
('
4 in case of an emergency at In dian Point are well aware 5 of the continual refinements that would be required for 6 the plans to be kept current. Every time a new teacher, 7 bus driver, policeman, coun ty em ployee is hired, that 8 new employee will have to be trained and equipped for a 9 radiological emergency. Every time parents hire a 10 babysitter we must instruct him about radiological 11 emergency procedures. Real estate brokers should keep a 12 stack of emergency planning brochures to distribute to -
13 every newcomer into the ten-mile zone.
14 I could go on about the things that would be 15 required to keep these plans current, but I will finish 16 by saying that the residents of the ten-mile emergency 17 planning zone, our witnesses, do not have the time, the .
i 18 money and the psychic resources to live with the cause 19 ini the effect of radiological emergency planning.
20 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, Mrs. Posner.
21 Ms. Vetare, do you want to make a sta tement at 22 this time?
23 MS. VETERE: I have no statement at this l () 24 time. I would like to give my statement when we present 25 our witnesses.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2633
{} 1 JUDGE CARTER: Ms. Potterfield?
2 OPENING STATEMENT OF AMANDA POTTERFIELD ON BEHALF OF 3 NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP 4 MS. POTIERFIELD. I am Amanda Potterfield.
5 The New York Public Interest Research Group has fought 6 for and is participating in these hearings because of 7 the human problems created by the operation of the 8 Indian Point Nuclasr Power Plants.
9 The health,and safety of the great numbers of 10 residents who live near the plants, as well as the 11 people who just might happen to be there at the time of
. 12 an accident, is dependent upon adequate emergency 13 planning. Planning and preparedness are mandated by .
() 14 Federal and state law. Volumes of typewritten pages 15 have indeed been prepared by professional consultants 16 and paid for by the Licensees. It is this bulk of paper 17 that has been the subject of these proceedings to date.
18 The position of the New York Public Interest 19 Research Group is that the paper plans are certainly 20 significantly deficient in many important respects, as 21 has been testified by the Federal Emergency Management 22 Agency. Their testimony was presented by the Nuclear 23 Regulatory Commission S taf f . Certainly these
( 24 deficiencies have been allowed to continue in the 18 25 nonths that these plans have been under review by the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2634
{} 1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2 It has been six months since the deficiencies 3 were last brought to the attention of the New York State
( 4 and still they persist. Now we are told that New York 5 State is finally going to tell us when they may get 6 around to correcting deficiencies. We are still talking 7 about the paper plans. We are still talking about 8 violations of Nuclear Begulatory Commission regulations.
9 Of course, during all this time the plants 10 have been opera ting, .except for when they have been shut 11 down, as they regularly are. Apart from the very real
- 12 problems of the paper plans, however, the New York 13 Public Interest Research Group will show that the ,
( 14 evacuation plans are fundamentally unrealistic and 15 incapable of implementation. -
16 These evacuation plans are based on the
. 17 assumption that the residents and emergency workers who 18 will be required to participate in the evacuation and to 19 aid the evacuation efforts will conform to the behavior 20 expected of them in the paper plans. The witnesses to 21 be presented by Parents Concerned About Indian Point and 4
22 other Intervenor parties are the only real experts on 23 how the people who live here will respond to 1
() 24 radiological emergency and the expectation that they 25 will be able to evacuate.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2635
(^s 1 However, to back up those experts, witnesses
\]
2 presented by the New York Public Interest Research Group 3 will join issue with the Licensees' witnesses on the O 4 question of human response in the event of an evacuation 5 during a radiological emergency.
6 ,
Dr. Jerome Kagan, Professor of Human 7 Development at Harvard University, will talk about the 8 percentage of children of school age who are incredibly 9 vulnerable to high levels of anxiety when subjected to 10 unfamiliar events, such as an evacuation. He will talk 11 about important historical shifts in the attitudes of 12 adults and adolescents that should be taken into account o 13 when making evacultion tite estimates snd when preparing
() 14 evacuation plans.
15 Dr. Kai Erickson, Professor of Sociology and 16 Amercian Studies at Yale University, will talk about the 17 many unfounded assumptions in the Indian Point emergency 18 plans. He will talk about the fact that residents 19 within and outside the presently-defined emergency 20 planning zone are expected to follow instructions that l 21 emergency workers will report to their assioned posts
(
22 regardless of their family responsibilities.
23 He will talk about the difference between this
() 24 kind of emergency, where there is no clear beginning and 25 no clear end, and the emergencies that have been the O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2636 1 subject of other disaster literature and will be the
)
2 subject of the testimony of Licensees' witnesses.
3 Dr. Erickson will talk about the substantial 4 numbers of people who will overreact to an emeroency and 5 substantial numbers of people who will underreact and he ;
6 will talk about how the emergency plans for Indian Point 7 fail to tate those over and und errea ctions into account.
8 Dr. Robert J. Lipton, Foundation, Fund Research 9 Professor for Psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine, 10 vill testify. He vill testify about the difference 11 between disasters involving ionizing radiation f rom 12 natural catastrophes that make up the subject matter of 13 most of disaster literature.
() 14 Dr. Albert Solnet, the Sterling Professor of 15 Podiatrics and Psychiatry and Director of the Child is Study Center at Yale University, will tell you that 17 children should be evacuated with their parents and that
( 18 plans that provide for children to be evacuated 19 separatel'1 in school buses simply will not work.
l 20 Dr. Murray Melvin, Professor of Sociology at 21 Boston University, will talk about the very differences 22 of reacticas at nighttime for adults sni old people. He 23 will talk about any plan that has to be carried out at
() 24 nicht will have to figure to be carried out less effectively than during the day.
25 O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2637 l
1 Thus, it is the position of the New York 2 Public Interest Research Group that the emergency plans 3 not only fail to meet the requirements established by O 4 the NRC but that the evacuation time estimates not only 5 are based on theoretical computer models without takinc 6 into account th e real problems on the roads and the area 7 around Indian Point plants, but fundamentally that the 8 plans fail to consider the human beings involved and 9 their instinctive need to care f or their f a milies first.
10 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, Ms. Potterfield.
11 3r. Hartzman?
12 13 .
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2638 O
J 1 1R. HARr25AN: My name is Richard Hartzman, 2 and I represent Friends of the Earth and New York City 3 Audubon. Friends of the Earth and New York City Audubon O 4 stand by the problems concerning emergency planning 5 deficiencies and failures that are being presented in 6 the testimony of the other intervenors. However, we 7 entered this proceeding to bring before the Board and 8 the Commission and the public concerns which are not 9 usually addressed in hearings before the Nuclear 10 Regulatory Commission, but which we feel are vital, 11 important, and must be considered.
12 Emergency planning, even if it we re ad equa te 1 13 to deal with the short-term effects of a radiological
() 14 emergency, does not address at all the problems of 15 long-term contamination of water resources, agricultural 16 lands, and hence food supplies, or the long-term 17 contamination of buildings, other property, rec rea tional 18 lands, and the necessity of decontamination prior to 19 resumption of use.
20 So-called protective actions are incapable of 21 dealing with the problems of long-term contamination i
l 22 which will have s public health impact for an i
23 indeterminate period. Our testimony that will be
()
24 presented in this hearing involves several accident 25 scenarios concerning substantial releases of radio '
O l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2639 1 nuclides from one of the nuclear reactors at Indian 2 Point nuclear generating station in Buchanan. These 3 scenarios are by no means the most serious possible, but
' O 4 they do illustrste the expected long-term environmen tal 5 contamination which may require relocation of large 6 numbers of people, and here possibly large numbers of 7 people living in New York City.
8 They underscore the likelihood that rarge 9 steas of isnd could become unsysilable for agriculture, to and will show the possibility that the major source of 11 drinking water for New York City could be rendered 12 unusable for several years. Because of the nature,
, 13 extent, and duration of the contamination which can be
( 14 anticipate 1 in these scenarios, no feasible 15 decontamination procedures could be implemented to 16 mitigate these disasters.
17 Friends of the Earth, as I believe the Board 18 and Commission know, is also concerned about the risk of 19 the occurrence of such an accident, the probability that 20 it may occur. We will have expert testimony looking at 21 the Indian Point probabilistic saf ety study, and the 22 conclusion in that testimony will indicate that there 23 are major methodological flaws in that safety study,
() 24 that it is not reliable, that it is not adequate to 25 justify our reposing confidence in probabilistic f\
v ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2640 1 assessments made for Indian Point.
2 31ven that failure to come up with real 3 probabilities that we can rely on, thic is different O 4 really than the uncertainties that UC5 referred to 5 earlier, their arbitrariness, methodological flaws, so 6 we cannot even determine how broad that uncertainty may 7 be, and additional testimony will then further indicate 8 that when we are faced with such a decision problem, 9 where we do not have definite probabilities, that one 10 must look a t worst possible cases. One must mini-max.
11 This is the reasonable thing to do under the 12 circumstances, and to use the traditional approach of ,
13 cost-benefit analysis in weighing risks would be an I) 14 unreasonable approach.
15 It is on this basis that we will urge the 16 Board and the Commission to look carefully at the 17 scenarios of worst accidents, of agricultural 18 contamination, the possibility of New York City being 19 uninhabitable for many years, the possibility of New 20 York City not having water for many years, and we urge 21 that you look at this. We believe our case is 22 compelling. And this in itself is sufficient to warrant
! 23 the shutdown of Indian Point.
() 24 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Hartzman.
25 M r. Blum?
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) J4 2345
2641
{) 1 MR. BLUM: Yes. My name is Jeff Blum, and I 2 appear on behalf of the Union of Concerned Fcientists.
3 I am tryin7 to use the emergency plans --
O 4 MR. BRANDENBURG: Mr. Chairran, I am hesitant 5 to interrupt Mr. 31um's statement, but I understood the 8 Union of Concerned Scientists had already made their 7 statement.
8 1R. BLUM I am presenting a sumary, tying the 9 'shole case together. Ms. Fleisher gave the background 10 of the hearings.
11 JUDGE CARTER: How much time vill you need ?
12 MR. BLUM: About ten minutes, very brief. The 13 Intervenors' case on emergency planning-can be
() 14 understood as having two broad areas in a sense. One is 15 tha t this site f or these nuclear plants poses particular 16 dangers and poses grave dangers to the population. Even 17 if emergency planning were to be carried out as well as .
18 could be hoped, even if the plans had their deficiencies 19 corrected and were fully implemented, there would still 20 be grave dangers coming from the plant.
i l 21 That is one whole area of concern, but the 22 other area, which is in a different key, so rt o f , is 23 that the reality of emergency planning as oppored to the
() 24 hope is a kind of tragic farce. All the different 25 officials are busy in one way or another trying to close i
( ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2632 1 their eyes or pass the buck to the reality that these
{~}
2 emergency plans as they are now set up are woefully 3 incomplete, largely unimplemented, and are not going to O 4 give much protection at all.
5 Even through the strained squinting of the 6 FEMA witnesses who you can sort of tell listening to 7 them would really like everything to be okay and are 8 t ry ir.g to limit their vision in holding up NUREG-065 4 a s 9 a sheild from the, larger reality, even these witnesses 10 see the numerous deficiencies.
11 Now, going back to the first point about how 12 emergency planning, even if deficiencies are corrected, 13 if fully implemented, would not be adequate to protect
() 14 the population. We have the Parsons Brinkerhoff time 15 estimates on the one hand, which seem overall to be 16 quite optimistic in the sense that the low time estimate 17 as far as we can discern thus f ar in the hearings is a 18 measure of an ideal evacuation, but no limiting 19 constraints at all other than the basic width of the 20 road, the aamber of cars that could possibly get out 21 through those roads, and the idea of the reality of an 22 evacuation being that ideal does not seem incredible, 23 and then we have the high estimates for which an expert
/~) 24 has already testified there is no technical basis.
U 25 These are a rough off-hand approximation that will take O
l l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
26u3 1 into account inadequate planning, auto accidents, lack 2 of cooperation, and so forth, and more or less we will 3 add 30 percent, and then we get the high tine estimates.
O 4 The real high time estimates, as a large 5 section of witnesses are goinc to show, could be much, 6 much higher than what comes out of the computer model, 7 but then, on the other hand, taking the optimistic 8 Parsons Brinkerhoff estimates as given, we have the 9 testimony of Dr. Beyea and Mr. Palenik showing that even 10 under favorable wqather conditions the best that could 11 be hoped for in the event of a major release of a ?WR 2 12 type accident, a significant number of people in areas 13 close to the plant will receive early death doses of G
\, / 14 radiation.
15 That is even under tne best weather 16 conditions, and if we go to worst. weather conditions,
. 17 any kind of precipitation, rain or snow, for example, 18 then a very large number of people are going to get i
19 those early dea th doses, and that is with consideration 20 simply limited to the ten-mile emergency planning zone, 21 which brings us to another kind of problem in the plans.
22 There has been a general sert of agreement l
23 that we are going to draw a rine of ten miles, because that is pretty much all we can think about. To go
(]) 24 25 beyond that is burdensome. And we will assume outside O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2544 1 of the ten miles things are basically fine. And maybe 2 we are even going to argue it is not proper to consider 3 going beyond ten miles. I suppose if that got the 4 agreement of enough parties, we could withdraw 5 consideration of the area beyond ten miles from the 6
hearings. But there is one party that will not join in 7 that agreenent, and that is, the plume itself, the 8 gaseous cloud containing radioactivity does not 9 automatically disperse up to the heavens when it reaches 10 a sign saying, sorry, you have gone tan miles, that's it.
11 There is the area of eleven miles, twelve 12 miles, thirteen miles, fourteen miles, where people can 13 still receive early death doses, and there is no
() 14 evacuation plan for that area, none at all. As a matter 15 of fact, we are told there are a number of congrega te 16 =are centers, pla:es where people inside the ten-mile 17 zone will be transported to then sit and wait and very 18 likely receive major doses of radioactivity there if 19 they are in the wrong direction, if they are in the wind i 20 direction. .
1 21 Next, there is the problem of extreme 22 congestion. A relatively highly populated area with a 23 roadway that is not sufficient to get lots of people out
() 24 quickly. It is really not comparable to an area in 25 Texas where one has flat land and very broad freeways O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
I 2645
)
{} 1 2
leading out in lots of directions.
roads in these counties, in Rockland County and The narrow, windy 3 Westchestar County, for example, the rela ti vely small O 4 and old freeways that would he relied upon to be the 5 major evacuation routes -- I am sorry, they are not even 6 freeways, they are highways of a lesser sort, those are 7 likely to be tied up with all kinds of major traffic 8 congestion in a way that we will show the Parsons 9 Brinkerhoff estimates do not accurately predict or limit.
10 On top of it, we have the problem that the 11 whole Parsons Brinkerhoff study only considers primary 12 and secondary evacuation routes, the feeder routes, the 13 initial roads by ahich people get out of the towns
() 14 apparently are not even looked at. I suppose it is 15 hoped that, well, since we are not going to consider it, 16 things will go perfectly on these small roads in urban 17 areas, but again, we have various people coming in from 18 the counties to tell us in some detail what those roads 19 are like, what kinds of problems there can be.
20 And then on top of it, as if the problems of 21 traffic congestion within the ten miles were not enough, 22 we have the problem that there are a whole lot of people 23 beyond ten miles, ten, twenty, thirty miles, and if the 24 Three Mile Island accident is any experience, these
(]) ,
25 people are going to want to evacuate, too, no matter how O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 2646
{) 1 2
much they trust and believe in Con Edison and PASNY and so forth, which may not be much. They are probably not 3 going to feel real safe knowing that they are 12 miles
(:) 4 a wa y, and while the NPC has said that we are only going l
5 to look at ten miles for the plume, when they start to l 6 evacuate, this will be another major source of 7 congestion on the roads that will slow up any evacuation 8 outside of the ten-mile EPZ in ways that as far as we 9 know were not even considered by the Parsons Brinkerhoff 10 time estimate. -
11 Finally, we come to the worst, the possibility 12 that an accident at Indian Point could produce, if the 13 wind is blowing in the wrong way, which means to the ,
() 14 south, could produce the worst instance of land 15 :ontamination in the history of the world. That would 16 be, quite frankly, the loss of New York City. Well, let 17 me be more technically accurate. A swath seven miles 18 vide of New York City. Because that is sort of the 19 width to which the plume broadens out at a distance of
. 20 35 miles. Dr. Berea and Mr. Pslenik will present 21 evidence tha t at a distance of 35 miles, the expected 22 1snd contaminstion from the plume will be g rea t enough 23 to make New York City uninhabitable, or a seven-mile swa th uninhabitable for a long period of time, in the l
i
(]) 24 25 absence of successful decontamination.
l
()
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2647 1 Now, the tried and true decontamination 2 procedures are to plow up the topsoil for about two feet 3 and bury it underground. How one would plow up the O 4 topsoil of the Empire State Building is quite uncertain, 5 and in fact the possibility of successful 6 decontamination of New York City is very doubtful.
7 But now let's turn to the other focus of the 8 reality of emergency planning as opposed to the theory 9 of it. This is the kind of tragic farce of everyone 10 trying to say, well, we are going to create some paper 11 plans, they are these thick, and we are then going to do 12 some very limited studies and hope they come out 13 sdequa te, a nd when it turned out to be voefully 14 inadequate, even by those very limited studies, well, 15 then, I don't know what is going to come next, but there 16 is obviously sort of a problem for the time being.
17 The FEMA has, simply looking at the plans on 18 paper, with what they call their paper review, simply 19 against the standards of NUREG-0654, have found numerous 20 serious deficiencies. Secondly, they have identified 21 further significant deficiencies, very important ones, 22 in the drill, the rather small scale exercise that was 23 carried out, but we have to keep in mind that as
() 24 valuable as that exercise was f or uncovering more 25 deficiencies, it in no way resembles an actual
()
\
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2648 i i
1 evacuation. It is not a simulation of an evacuation at
{}
2 all. It is an exercise on a very small scale that 3 perhaps was designed to not even get into some of the O 4 major problems that the counties are talking about, but 5 even that small-scale exercise came up with plenty for 6 this hearing to review.
7 And then we have the larger question of the 8 enormous difficulties of implementing the plan. I 9 suppose if you had to come back to one basic thing, it 10 would be that the money is not there, that we are 11 engaged in this gigantic buck passing campaign where the 12 licensees have kicked in a little bit of money, as ther 13 have been compelled to by law, but nowhere near the
() 14 amount actually necessary to make successful emergency 15 planning.
16 And what has happened then is, the licensees 17 say it is not our business, it is the state and FEMA.
18 FEMA dees their review, and they say, well, we are not a 19 regulatory agency, it is not our job to force people to 20 do things. We simply identify certain kinds of 21 deficiencies. We have identified them. Then the buck 22 passes to the NRC with its regulations, and their 23 position is more or less, we defer to FEMA. They have
() 24 the expertise here.
25 rhen, finally, we have the state of New York, O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2649 1 who will be represented by Mr. Davidoff, I believe, and
[}
2 their position seems to be, well, until you read the 3 testimony.itself, it is in very general conclusory O 4 terms, and everything is fine, adequate, adequate, 5 sufficient, general compliance, and so forth.
6 I don 't know what to make of this position in 7 the face of all the numerous specific deficiencies that 8 have been coming out from FEMA and the counties. Maybe 9 the state's position is, we are not really responsible 10 for the emergency plan. We just sort of have to help 11 reassure the public. Well, I don't know whether it is 12 fool the public.
13 So, we are left with this gigantic bus passing
() 14 game, and the question of who is ultimately responsible, 15 who is going to say the buck stops here, we have to make 16 emergency olanning work, we will be responsible for it.
17 I am af raid , gentlemen , tha t by default it cones to you, 18 the Board. You are the entity of last resort that has 19 to take seriously the overall reality of making 20 emergency planning ' work, if you can. Without you, I 21 guess there is the picture on the wall behind you. That 22 is, there is really nothing beyond you.
l
- 23 I suppose in considering whether emergency planning is going to be made to work, you may well come
(]) 24 25 to the conclusion on the basis of the effort so far, the
)
i ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 L
2650 1 evidence presented, that it can't be made to work, that 2 for this specific site with its great population, its 3 limited roadway networs, the public simply cannoc be 4 adequately protected, even with good faith efforts.
5 With that, we would then come to the question 6 of shutdown, which would be the safest thing, and to 7 conclude with that, we note that there are many strong 8 arguments for shutdown having to do with the safety and 9 the desires of the people in the community, and so ,
10 forth. All of the arguwents against it can really be 11 lumped together in one word, which is the economics, 12 that it would cost presumably more money than would be 13 saved by shutting it down.
O We will, not in the emergency planning part of
(/ 14 1
15 the hearing, but in the following part that comes, be 16 showing that the economic case against shutdown is much 17 weaker than expected. It is a much closer question of 18 whether money is actually savel, particularly when you 19 take into account the major repairs that are coming up 20 soor., such as the replacement of steam generators.
21 Therefore, in conclusion, what we have is that 22 shutdown may not only be the popular and perhaps the 23 moral thing to do, it may be the technically and
() 24 economically sensible thing as well. We will also try 25 to show that in the hearings. Thank you.
O v
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~
2551 1 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you.
)
. 2 Any other Intervenors want to be heard?
3 (No response.)
4 JU DGE CAPTER : Do the Licensees wish to be 5 heard at this time?
6 MR. M3RGAN: We will reserve our openino 7 sta teme n ts, if any.
8 MR. PRANDENBURG: We too would like to-reserve 9 our opening statement, if any.
10 MR. MORGAN: What about the interested -
11 states? Are they going to do anything?
12 MR. KAPLAN: On behalf of the Council, the 23 13 members of the Council, I think you hea rd Mr. Blum 's
( 14 remarks on what happens to New York City. We would like 15 to reserve our opinion until we put a case on.
16 MS. VETERE: Westchester County would also 17 like to reserve the righ t to make their sta tement at the 18 time they present their witnesses.
19 MS. FLEISHER: Mr. Thorsen asked if he could 20 make his statement when we go to Rockland County to hear 21 the witnesses.
22 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Thorsen was to be here this 23 morning to advise us about the New City location for
() 24 h ea ring s.
25 MS. FLEISHER: He took the time off to look to O
, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2652
{) 1 2
make sure that the chairs and tables could be arranged.
I believe he's expectirg to get in touch with you.
3 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you.
O 4 tr. Bialik?
5 MR. BIALIK The Attorney General 's Of fice ' ha s .,
6 no opening statement. We are prepared, however, alono 7 with some of the Interrenors, to produce Dr. Beyea..as a
. 8 witness.
9 JUDGE CARTER: Thank you. ,
10 Does the Staff wish to make any statement at 11 this time? ,
12 MR. HASSLE. No, Your Honor. ;
i 13 JUDGE CARTER: Well, before- we get to Dr. .
() 14 Beyea, remember this morning I announced that the 15 Commission would be meeting on Frida,y a t 2: 00 to 16 consider several certiorari and appeal matters. I would i 17 lik e to know whether we will be able to continue with 18 hearings on Friday or whether most or all of you want to 19 be at the Commission meeting.
20 Mr. Brandenburg?
21 3R. BRANDENBURG Mr. Chairman, I have 22 discussed it with vsrious people working on this ca se 23 with Con Edison, and we would very much like to hear I
() 24, what the Commission has to say on Friday shout the 25 future course of this proceeding, its limits, its metes e
v ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,-
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASH NGToN, o C. 20024 (202; 554-2345
._ _ _ _ _ _ - _ , _ - - _ _ _ _ , . _ . - _ . _ . .m . _..
I 2653 and bounds. The very serious matters that they have set
(])- 1 2 forth on their aganda for Friday will very much affect 3 the future course of this proceeding, in our judgment, 4 and we believe that the interes t of all parties will be 5 served if we were permitted to attend that session on 6 Friday at the NRC offices in Washington.
7 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Morgan?
8 MR. MORGAN: We will be attending, Your 9 Honor. I don't think that there is any --
I think there 10 is a stronger reason not to have a hearing on Friday or 11 even on Thursday, and that is under the items as you 12 read them to us this morning there are several of them i 13 that dicectly affect the testimony of the succeeding 14 witnesses once we begin and the contentions to be heard 15 by the Board.
16 And I think that it would be prudent to 17 con tinue th e hearings with respect to the public 18 hearings this evening and to adjourn the proceedings l 19 until the following Monday.
i 20 MR. BLUM: Your Honor.
21 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Blum. -
22 MR. ELUM: We would prefer, if possible, to 23 keep going with these hearings through Thursday and
() 24 Friday. Part of the reason for this is there is a 25 problem with Dr. Beyea's availability. He had set aside t
O
! ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. o.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
l 2654 this week to be sysilable and has a number of other
(]) 1 2 pressing projects, which some of them have been 3 absolutely required of him, an ultimatum by his 4 employer. And we would like, if possible, to make him 5 available throug.5 all of tomorrow and all of Triday.
6 He will be able to return near the close of 7 the emergency planning case or around September the 8 25th, is the target date he has, if absolutely 9 necessary. But we'd like to get[as far as we can this 10 week.
11 I have one question of whether the telegram 12 was explicit about the Commission meeti.J being open.
13 Some members of the Staff had some uncerteint.' about 14 whether that would in fact be true.
15 JUDGE CARTER: The information that I received .
16 was that the entire question arose ber:ause a member of 17 the Staf f, that was not identified, wanted to be present 18 sni the Cosmission thought that the opportunity should 19 be given and the notice given to all others who might 20 van t to be present. That is the only information I have.
21 I would expect that it would be open, since 22 all prior discussions in relation to the case were 23 . pen.
() 24 3R. BLUMs Well, we would strongly urge that 25 Dr. Beyea go on tomorrow and begin his presentation.
O ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2655 And we would also favor having him be a vailable on
(]) 1 2 Friday and conceivably even Saturday.
3 I can understand why some people may want to 4 go down to Washington, and in fact there ma y be some 5 Intervenors who do, too. But the attorneys who are 6 presenting Dr. Beyea are prepared to go forward and do 7 that on Friday.
~
8 ER. M3RGAN: Your Honor, the attorneys 9 presenting Dt. Berea, of course, have his prepared.
10 testimony to introduce, plus cross-examination, who are 11 the attorneys sitting over here who will cross-examine 12 Dr. Beyea. And the convenience of witnesses, of course, -
13 is important to proceedings.
14 However, more important than the convenience 15 of any particular witness or even of counsel is the 16 expeditious handling of the proceeding. That goes 17 beyond contentions which are before this Board about 18 which Dr. Beyea will testif y. And it seems to me that 19 the most efficient thing is for the Board to conduct the 20 hearings that are presently scheduled for the public, of 21 course, and then discontinue.
22 JUDGE CARTER: I understand what you're 23 saying.
() 24 Mr. Bialik?
25 MR. BIALIK Mr. Chairman, the Commission has
(
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2656 not suspended these hearings, so I think we should go
{) 1 2 ahead with them. And for the Power Authority, it has 3 half a dozen or sate lawyers working on the case. They 4 could pretty well fill up the Commission's room in 5 Washington and still fill up the table here, Fr.
6 F. organ's firm and the New York law firm. There are 7 staff attorneys. So they could adequately cover both 8 ends of the proceeding.
9 JUDGE CARTER: Does,the Staff wish to be 10 heard?
11 MS. F00REa The Staff merely wishes to say 12 t h s,t it is willing to either go forward with the hearing 13 or to attend the Commission meeting, whichever the Board .
14 chooses.
. 15 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Brandenburg?
16 MR. BRANDENBURGa Mr. Chairman, I would urge 17 the Court, in considering what to do here in the 18 remaining two days, to pay specific attention to the 19 subject matter upon which the testimony of the 20 prospective witness is being offered. I'm referring of 21 course to the testimony of Mr. Palenik and Dr. Beyea.
22 And according to the Intervenors, that testimony is 23 being offered under four of the Board's contentions,
() 24 3 . 3 , 3. 6 , 4 .1, and 4.6.
25 And with the possible exception of contention O
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 2657 1
(} 1 3.3, which relates to the evacuation time estimates, I 2 think all of us who have looked at the Palenik-Beyea 3 testimony sill 1 <nowledge that that is a very minor
(
4 part of their testimony. But with the possible 5 exception of that contention, the entire remaining 6 subject matter which the Intervenors themselves state is 7 the grounds for the proposed testimony of Mr. Falenik 8 and Dr. Beyea is in the areas of Board contentions which 9 the Commission itself is going to be addressing on 10 Friday. .
11 I think it would be a bit presumptuous of all 12 of us to presume that the course of this proceeding may 13 vell not be affected by some redirection or some 14 focusing that might be forthcoming from the Commission 15 on Friday. And I think before we march forward with 16 what may be a frolic and detour here, I think it would 17 serve all of us if we did hear what the Commission had 18 to say on the future course of this procedure on 19 Friday.
20 JUDGE CARTER: Of course, as Mr. Bialik points l 21 out, if they did not issue a stay, though they have had l
22 all this information before them for quite some time and 23 presumably have considered that matter -- and they are l () 24 as much concerned wi th the efficiency of the management 25 of the Consission as we are -- they would have taken
(
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 l _ .
2658 some action.
{]}
1 2 Does any other party wish to be heard on thLs 3 point before the Board makes a decision? Mr.
O 4 Brandenburg?
5 MR. BRANDENBUR;a I was just going to say, I 6 would have ,no objection to the hearings going forward 7 tomorrow with some witnesses the subject matter of whose 8 testimony is not going to be addressed by the Commission 9 on Friday. I for one would have to make travel 10 arrangements some time early Friday morning, however, in 11 order to attend the Commission's session.
12 JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Sohinki, have you been able
+ 13 to resolve the problem that you brought to our attention 14 on Tuesday morning with regard to the discovery 15 matters? Have you and Mr. Blum been able to work that 18 out?
17 MR. SOHINKI: Mr. Chairman, as the Board is 18 aware, Mr. Blum has told us that Mr. Curran 's responses
, 19 to the question 6 interrogatory that I believe Mr.
20 Curran represents -- or Mr. Blum indicated would be 21 filed on July 13th, which I believe is next Tuesday.
22 And that I think is approximately three weeks after they 23 were due.
We are frankly very upset at the attitude that
(]) 24 25 certain Intervenors, including Mr. Curran, have been l
O l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
2659
() I taking with regard to discovery deadlines in this case.
2 Apparently it is their view that they can disregard
- 3 those deadlines with impunity.
4 JUDOE CARTER: The Board shares your concern 5 and anxiety over this lateness in filing responses, and 6 we are trying to design some method to prevent its 7 recurrence.
8 MR. SOHINKI: The problem is apparently th.e 9 Intervenors' belief is that they can disregard the 10 deadlines and then, when we seek a motion to compel and 11 the Board grants it, they have in effect received an 12 extension of time in which to file their responses.
13 Now, with regard to Mr. Blum's responses to 14 the questions 3 and 4 interroga tories, he tells us that 15 they were Federal Expressed on Thursday. The fact is 16 that that really was not in compliance with the Board's 17 order, which ass that those responses were supposed to l
18 be in our hands at 10:00 a.m. Thursday morning. Now, I 19 still have not seen those responses, and frankly, as of 20 yesterday they had not reached our office, according to 21 the pe rson that I talked to.
22 JUDGE CARTER: All right. Well, here's what 23 we're going to do. We're going to take a recess now for l
D)
(, 24 about ten ninutes, ten minutes, while the Board l
25 considers 'he t schedule. And during that time I want you l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 I
2660 1 and Mr. Blum to get together and cla rif y ab out the
)
. 2 delivery.
3 MR. BLUM May I be heard?
O 4 MR. SOHINKI The re was a third portion of our 5 motion of Tuesday mornino, Mr. Chairman, that had to do 6 with the question 1, the set of question 1 7 interrogatories that was propounded to UCS-NYPIPG, F0E, 8 and Parents Concerned About Indian Point. We have as 9 ret not received any responses to those 10 interrogatories. Some of those interrogatories deal 11 directly with matters contained in the Beyea-Palenik 12 testimony.
13 We have profounded formal interrogatories. We
() 14 think we are entitled to formal responses. And frankly, 15 some of the matters that were contained in responses to 16 those interroga tories may well have been used to assist 17 us in cross-examination of the witnesses.
i 18 MR. BLUM: Your Honor, may I be heard on I
19 that?
20 . JUDGE CARTER: We will hear you after we take 21 the break.
22 Will you two get together and see, determine 23 -- check with Federal Express as to whe ther they
() 24 delivered it or didn't deliver it.
, 25 MR. BLUM We have done that.
l l
l A1.DERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
J 2661 JUDGE CARTER: I have Q 1 We will discuss it.
2 nine minutas after 12:00. We will confer. We will i
3 reconvene at 20 after 12:00.
O 4 (Whereupon, at 12:09 p.m., the hearing was 5 recessed, to reconvene at 12:20 p.m.)
1 6
i i
7 8
j 9 i
10 f
I 11 12 i
13 ,
j 14 15 i 16 i
~
17 18 19 ,
20 21 22 23 0 24 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
1 1
2662 JUDGE CARTER: Are we ready to proceed?
(]) 1 2 On the record.
3 The Board has considered the question of 4 scheduling and has determined that whereas the 5 Commission has not issued a stay with regard to the 6 proceedings, that we shall continue to take testimony 7 tomorrow sad Friday all da y.
8 Further, with regard to the outstanding motion 9 of Mr. Schinki, we will lea ve time f or any argument that 10 is necessary if the matter is not resolved by Friday as 11 ve had originally decided.
12 - Is there anything further to etme before us?
13 If not, we will recess this hearing and 14 continue with limited appearances in the Village of 15 Yorktown Manner, and we will return here at 9:00 a.m. in -
16 the morning. .
17 Mr. Braudenburg?
18 MR. BRANDENBURG Mr. Chairman, what witness 19 will we be addressing tomorroa morning?
20 JUDGE CARTER: Dr. Beyea and Er. Palenik will 21 be here toiorrow at 9:00 o' clock.
22 MR. BRANDENBURG: Mr. Chairman, yesterda y 23 morning with respect to the Palenik-Beyea testimony, Mr.
() 24 Hartzman indicated to me a desire --
25 JUD3E CARTER: Excuse me. 'Je are still in O
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2563 t 1 order.
2 MR. BRANDENBURGs He indicated to me a desire 3 by one of the Intervenors, I believe it was Friends of O 4 the Earth, to cross examine Mr. Palenik and Dr. Beyea.
5 As has been our practice in the past, prior to the cross 6 examination of the Lirens,ees and the interested states 7 and the staff in this proceeding, might I be permitted 8 to inquire through the Board at this time what the cross 9 examination plans of this witness are by the other to Intervenors so we can plan our day and tomorrow?
11 JUDGE CARTER: I think you should plan to 12 commence your exanination and the Power Authority's 13 examination and then any other cross examination would
() 14 follow.
15 MR. HARIZMAN4 So is it the Licensees would 16 proceed first with cross examination, and then 17 subsequently any Intervenors that wish to ross examine?
18 ER.* LEVIN: Your Honor, that is not the 19 schedule that the Board set out the other day for the 20 testimony of witnesses offered by the Intervenors. This 21 issue came up, as I recall, with Chief Holland, and the 22 Board at that time said that the Licensees in order to
, 23 avoid, to assist in avoiding the problem of our l
() 24 inability to rectoss once additional Intervenors had 25 crossed, following our initial cross, that the Licensees ,
()
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2664 1 would ba the last in line to cross examine the
[}
2 Intervenor witnesses.
3 JUDGE CARTER: Oh, yes, now I do recall that.
O 4 We didn't issue that in a written order.
5 MR. LEVIN: It was reduced to writing in a 6 transcript, Your Honor. That of course would be the 7 case.
8 JUDGE CARTER: You don't heve the transcript 9 reference handy, do you?
10 MR. LEVIN: I'm sure we can find it by 11 tomorrow morning.
12 JUDGE CARTER: All right, you have refreshed 13 my reco,llection of that.
14 MR. HARIZHAN: Well, that was our 15 understanding, and Ms. Saltzman for Friends of the Earth
. 16 will be prepared to commence cross examination tomorrow 17 morning.
18 JUDGE CARTER: Do you have any idea how long?
19 MR. HARTZMAN: I believe it will be one to two 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br />, Your Honor.
21 dR. BRANDENBURG: And my question is whether 22 there will be others, Mr. Chairman.
23 JUDGE CARTER: Are there any other Intervenors
() 24 who will be cross examining tomorrow morning?
25 MS. KESSLERa? I will have very brief, O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2665 1 probably one or teo questions.
{])
.2 MR. KAPLAN: It is my understanding based on 3 what we have just done that the interested states would O 4 cross examine subsequent to the cross exar.ina tion of the 5 Licensees.
6 FR.'P. ORGAN: No.
7 JUDGE CARTER: Licensees will go last.
8 MS. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, the staff will go 9 last.
10 JUDGE CARTER: I beg your pardon, Licensees -
11 and then staff.
12 MR. KAPLAN: So it is the Board's pleasure 13 that the interested states be prepared to cross examine 14 tomorrow or Friday subsequent to the examination of the 15 Intervenors.
16 JUDGE CARTER : That's right.
17 MR. MORGAN: Your Honor, may I pose one 18 problem that just came up, and tha t is for FOE, Friends 19 of the Earth, it is my understanding that the witnesses 20 tomorrow come frot.the Audubon Society and FOE Audubon 21 Society are one, and I do not believe that they, 22 presenting the witness, thereafter have the right to 23 cross examine the witness.
() 24 MR. HARIZMAN: Your Honor, New York City 25 Audubon Society is a sponsor for the testimony of Dr.
O ALDERSON REPo,RTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345 i
2666
() 1 Bayea and Mr. Palenik. Friends of the Earth is not.
2 Friends of the Earth, when initially intervening, agreed 3 to participate to7 ether with New York City Audubon but 4 reserved the right to have independent spokespersons 5 with regard to specific issues. This will be the only 6 instance. Friends of the Earth does take a different 7 view of Dr. Beyea's testimony and Mr. Palenik's 8 testimony than New York City Audubon does. Because I am 9 representing both organizations, I am not cross 10 examining those witnesses. Ms. Saltzman, who is also a 11 representative for Friends of the Earth in this 12 proceeding, will be conducting that cross examina tion.
13 MR. MORGAN: Now, Your Honor, they are a joint .
p/
N- 14 Intervenor. They singly are represented here, and we 15 have a particular problem that this should be viewed in 16 the context of -- I'm not asking you to rule now, but I 17 think you should rule before tomorrow, and it would be 18 nice to let them know if they are not going to be able 19 to do it, but our problem is this. It has been 20 represented by Mr. Blum that these two witnesses must be 21 head because these two witnesses are such busy, busy 22 people that they just cannot get back until sometime in 23 September.
() 24 ,
Now, here is what is going to happen. They 25 are going to testify, and when they finish their cross ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2667
{} 1 examination and it finally works its way back down to us, these folks are going to be long gone. They are 2
3 going to say, well, folks, come on back later. We'll O 4 sea you later.
5 Why can't we get an order that the witnesses 6 stay here or at least sore reasonable limitation , a 7 linitation that would apply to all of us, us and the 8 other side, too, with respect to total side cross 9 examination or some sort of thing where we can get it 10 done?
11 MR. KAPLAN: Mr. Morgan is concerned about the 12 cross examination. We are prepared to go subsequent to 13 the Licensees in order to accommodate his concern.
() 14 MR. MORGANs Mr. Kaplan, I am convinced you 15 would be prepared to go in the year 1992 or 2019.
16 MR. KAPLAN: I think that is an error. Your 17 plants will be decommissioned by then.
18 MR. BLUM: Your Honor, I wholeheartedly l
19 support Mr. Morgan's suggestion of achieving reasonable
- 20 limits on total cross examination time applicable to l 21 both sides. I think the hearings are moving somewhat l
22 too slowly, and I think it would be a good idea.
23 JUDGE CARIER: Can we agree, then, that the
() 24 Intervenor and the participating states units will 25 conclude, complete their cross examination by tomorrow O
l i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGIN:A AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~- --
2660 1 morning, tha t is, before the luncheon recess, and the 2 other parties may proceed thereafter and have 3 approximately the same amount of time? Their interests, O 4 of course, are quite different, and I think that we 5 could properly say that they would be permitted to have 6 tomorrow af ternoon and Friday morning.
7 MR. BLUMs We would even be willing to let the 8 Lirensees plus the staf f ha ve tomorrow afternoon plus 9 all of Friday, and we would restrict the Intervenors 10 to --
11 3R. KAPLANs I am not sure I can agree with 12 that at this point, not having h ea rd wha tever statement
. 13 Dr. Beyea is going to open with.
( 14 MR. M3RGAN: Is he going to be allowed to make 15 any statement, having prefiled testimony?
16 MR. KAPLAN: The fact is I don't know how long 17 Ms. Saltzman will go and I don't know, maybe the City 18 Council -- I don't know whether City Council can limit 19 their cross examination to whatever Intervenors leave in 1
20 the mornin7 21 MR. MORGAN Well, Your Honor, why don't we 22 just have whatever cross examination anybody wants to 23 and you make inquiry of the witnesses as to their
() 24 earliest possible free dates so they can come back the 25 nex t week and get that done.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
i 2669 I
1 JUDGE CARTERa We will proceed with the cross 2 examination tomorrow by the Intervenors.
. 3 Mr. Kaplan, the testimony has been filed. You O 4 case into the case late, but there are only so many 5 grants of relief we can give to you on these things. It
- 6 is your job to have read the testimony.
7 l 8*
+
9 10 i
11 12 13 14 l
I 15
} 16 4
17 18 19 20 21 22 4
4 23 O 24 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
.,._, ~__ . ---.- - _, - - - _ . . - - - - - .
2570
() 1 MR. KAPLAN: I have read that testimony.
2 JUDGE CARTER: Then you should be prepared to 3 move forward, and you should know roughly how much time 4 you are coing to require on cross examination.
5 MR. KAPLANs I can't be very definite. I 6 certainly will need more than apparently what will be 7 left after Ms. Salzman's two hour plus examination, plus 8 Ms. Kessler's exanination.
9 MR. BRANDENBURG I seem to be, hearing, Mr.
10 Chairman, that even though under the most optimistic of 11 circumstances, we really have no realistic prospects for 12 completing the cross examination of this particular 13 panel of witnesses this week, and if they have to be 14 brought back at some later date the solution recommends 15 itself to se of bringing on a witness that we can get 18 finished with. I think we have heard eight or nine 17 witnesses in this proceeding, and we have only finished 18 with one or two.
19 JUDGE CARTERa- Thank you, Mr. Brandenburg.
20 The Board will reconvene tomorrow for taking testimony,
! 21 and we will commence with the cross examination of the 22 intervenors and any other non-licensee party should be 23 prepared to move forward at that time, and be prepared
() 24 to advise the Board as to the amount of time they will 25 require. The Board will determine tomorrow the extent O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l 400 VIRGINTA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
I 2671 l
1 and opportunities for examination and the period of time 2 that will be permitted.
3 Io date, it has only been when the Board has 4 set time limits that cross examination has been done in 5 a prompt and directed and well-focused manner. Please 6 cooperate with us and let us know in order that we can 7 con tinue' to move forward. We don't like to try 8 snybody's :sse for them, but these limits may become 9 necessary, so we will commence tomorrow morning at 9:00 10 o' clock. ,
11 Thank you very much. The hearing is adjourned.
12 . (Wher~eupon, at 12:31 p.m., the hearing was 13 recessed, to reconvene at 9:00 a.m. of the following O 44 der.)
15 .
16 ,
17 .
18 I
i 19 20 l
21 22 l
23 O
25 l
\
l O i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
O =cu n azau m aar ca.m:ss:cu l l
1 This is :: certify tha: the attached proceedings bef:re :he l
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD in the . matter cf: CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO OF NEW YORK (Indian Point Unit 2)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (Indian Point Unit 3)
? lace c f ?:*0ceeding : Wh.ite Plains, New York were held as herein appears, and cha: this is the criginal :.scsc.-ipt the: ec f for the file of the Cec =1ssion., ,
ALFRED H. WARD Cfficial Repor:er (Typed)
V' k ..
Official Reper:er (Signature)
O e
O O
1 O-1 s