ML20066A077
| ML20066A077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1990 |
| From: | Dignan T PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| CON-#191-11222 ALAB-941, OL, NUDOCS 9101030009 | |
| Download: ML20066A077 (9) | |
Text
__
. // p 2-t' turno USNRC
- N'lk['ElP2Z8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA r
I before the r
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
In the Matter of PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-443-OL OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, at 31 50-444-OL (Seabrook Station, Units 1 (Offsite Emergency and 2)-
Planning and Safety Issues)
LICENSEE 8' ANSWER TO INTERVENOR88 PETITION FOR REVIEW OF ALAB-941 Under date of December 10, 1990, certain of the Intervenors nerein filed a Petition for Review of certain portions of the decision issued by the Appeal Board in the above numbered proceeding denominatmd ALAB-941.1 In particular, the Intervenors take issue with'(1) the Appeal Board's affirmance of the Licensing Board decision excluding a contention designated SAPL EX-12 from litigation;.;2) the affirmance of the Licensing Board's decision to exclude Basis F of MASS AG Contention EX from litigation; and (3) the fact that the Appeal Board did not revoke.the outstanding operating license for Seabrook even though I Public Service Connany of New Hamoshirt (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-941, 32 NRC (Nov. 21, 1990) (hereafter cited as ALAB-941 and to the blip opinion).
menu.n 9101030009 9012D0
'y4 )
PDR ADDCK 05000443 '
0 O
Pon
=-
i, it held that the scope of the exercise was insufficient insofar as it did not encompass sufficient, in the Appeal Board's judgement, participation by school administrators.
We address each of these points seriatim below.
Rejection of SAPL Contention EX-12 SAPL Contention EX-12 sought to have admitted for litigation the issue of whether the exercise of 50% of the reception centers in New Hampshire was sufficient.2 The Intervenors state that the Appeal Board erred in holding thLt the requirement of anything less than 100% of such facilities ic forbidden by the " standard set forth in 10 CTR Part 50, App. E IV.T.1 as to whct constitutes a full participation exercise."
ER11Llan nt 4.
The standard is c
3 set out in footnote 4 to the text of the regulat3cn dnd is, as the Appeal Board noted, testing ".
. resources in sufficient DMmkcra to verify the capability to respond to the accident scenario."
The Intervenors' argument is frivolous.
MASS AG Contention EX-2, Basis F By Basis T of MASS AG Contention EX-2, the Attorney General of.The commonwealth of Massachusetts (MAG) sought to have 2In their petition, the Intervenors make much of the fact that the Appeal Board's decision as initially issued, indicated that Board's belief that the contention addressed the reception centers in Massachusetts.
Petition at 3-4.
Obviously, this was an inadvertence in composition, because on November 27, 1990, the Appeal Board issued a correction document wherein it changed the references to " Massachusetts" to "New Hampshire."
3Which is every much a part of the regulation as the body of the text.
Ionn___ Island Lichtina comoany (Shoreham Nuclear power Station-(Unit 1), 28 NRC 275, 292 (1988).. -.
l admitted for litigation whether there was a deficiency in the scope of the exercise because the congregate care centers in Massachusetts, which are to be staffed by the American Red Cross 1
1 (ARC) under the provisions of the Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities (SPMC), were not activated.
The Licensing Board excluded this contention on the grounds that such activity was not reasonably achievable because ARC in Massachusetts was refusing to participate at the request of the Governor of The Commonwealth who was, at that time, seeking to preclude Seabrook operation by any and every device available to him.
In light of the Licensing Board held that (1) there is a that fact, u
presumption that ARC would respond in a real energency, and (2) that due to its decision to obey the wishes of the Governor that it not participate in the exercise, activation of the congregate care centers was not ressonably achievabic.
The Appeal Board questioned' that ruling, but upheld the decision on tha ground that there would be little to be gained in litigating a scope contention founded solely en the declination of ARC to participate in a response role which it traditionally fulfills in light of this Commission's decision in the Shp.r. cham proceeding.'
The Appeal Board did net reject the ruling as Petitioners state in the Petition.
It questioned it and went on to say that the correctness was irrelevant for the other reason discussed in the text hereinafter.
$Lena Island Lichtina Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station),
CLI-87-S, 25 NRC 884, 887-88 (1987)..
i 4
Both the Licensing Board's and the Appeal Board's reasoning is sufficient to support the result reached.'
The Relief Afforded The Intervenors' last complaint is that the Appeal Board should have revokeu the outstanding Seabrook operating license in light of its reversal of the Licensing Board's determination that the exercise was adequate in scope insofar as participation by school administrators was concerned.
Such a holding, according to the Intervanors, dictated a revocation of the license.
However, as the Appeal Board itself held, the sole remedy for a minor _ scope deficiency, assuming one to exist, is to run a partial remedial exercise,I because in no circumstances can a lack of appropriate scope par as establish a fundamental flaw in
.the plan.s
'Intervenors argue at page 7 of their petition that the result-should be-reversed because allegedly a number of the congregate care centers in Massachusetts exceed what Intervenors characterize as the " standard" for numbers of persons to be cared for. -Prescinding from the mischaracterization of the matter, the fact is that that issue is not one that would have been litigated under this contention in any event.
IALML-lil at 26.
8ALAB-941 at 30 siting Lena Island Liahtino Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station), CLI-88-11, 28 NRC 603, 604 (1988).
5(
s
?.5 t-:
CONCLUSION t;
I The petition for review should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
!s i
TTf6Eas C. Digfiafi, Jr.
j George H. Lewald Kathryn Selleck Shen Jeffrey P. Trout Popes & Gray One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2624 (617) 951-7000 Counsel for Licensees
Num MM:0 conTiricATr or srg4tra g gg I, Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., one of the attorneys for the Licensees herein, hereby certify that on December 20, 1990s.I,,
r made service of the within document by depositing 1 copies.thereof with Federal Express, prepaid, for delivery to (or whereH' indicated, by depositing in the United States mail, first class postage paid, addressed to) the individuals listed below!
Kenneth M. Carr, Chairman Thomas M. Roberts,_ Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission one White Flint North One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Piko 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Rockville, MD 20852 Fortest J.
Remick, Commissioner James R. Curtiss, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission' Commission One White Flint North one White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Rockville, MD 20852 Kenneth C. Rogers, Commissioner William C.
Parler, Esquire U.S. Nuclear Regulatory General Counsel Commission office of the General Counsel One White Flint North one White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Rockville, MD 20852 G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman Mr. Howard A. Wilber Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Appeal Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission j
Fifth Floor Fifth Floor 1
4350 East-West Highway 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esquire Mr. Thomas S. Moore Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing i
Appeal Panel Appeal Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Fifth Floor Fifth Floor 4350 East-West Highway 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Dethesda, MD 20814
Administrative Jude.J Ivan Smith Administrative Judge Kenneth A.
Chairman, Atomic 8afety and McCollom Licensing Board 1107 West Knapp Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Stillwater, OK 74075 Commission East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Administrative Judge Richard F.
H. Joseph Flynn, Esquire Cole, Atomic Safety and Office of General Counsel j
Licensing Board Federal Emergency Management U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Agency j
Commission 500 C Street, S.W.
East West Towers Building Washington, DC 20472 4350 Eact West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Mr. Richard R.
Donovan Diane Curran, Esquire Federal Emergency Management Andrea C.
Forster, Esquire Agency Harmon, Curran & Toucley Federal Regional Center Suite 430 130 228th Street, S.W.
2001 S Street, N.W.
Bothell, WA 98021-9796 Washington, DC 20009 Robert R.
Pierce, Esquire John P. Arnold, Attorney General Atomic Safety and Licensing George Dana Bisbee, Associate Board Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office of the Attorney General Commission 25 Capitol Street East West Towers Building Concord, NH 03301-6397 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Adjudicatory File Mitzi A. Young, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Edwin J. Reis, Esquire Board Panel Docket (2 copies)
Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission East West Towers Building One White Flint North, 15th F1.
4350 East West Highway 11555 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20814 Rockville, MD 20852 1
l 1
1
?
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Robert A. Backus, Esquire Appeal Panel Backus, Meyer & Solomon s
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 116 Lowell Street i
commission P.O. Box 516 Mail Stop EWW-529 Manchester, NH 03105 i
Washington, DC 30555 1
Philip Ahrens, Esquire Suzanne P. Egan, City Solicitor 4
Assistant Attorney General Lagoulis, Hill-Whilton &
[
Department of the Attorney Rotondi General 79 State Street Augusta, ME 04333 Newburyport, MA 01950 Paul McEachern, Esquire Stephen A. Jonas, Esquire Shaines & McEachern Leslie Greer, Esquire Maplewood Avenue Matthew Brock, Esquire P.O.
Box 360 Massachusetts Attorney General Portsmouth, NH 03801 One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02100
- Senator Gordon J. Humphrey R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esquire U.S. Senate Lagoulis, Hill-Whilton &
Washington, DC 20510 Rotondi (Attn
' Tom Burack) 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950
- Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Barbara J. Eaint Andre, Esquire One Eagle Square, Suite 507 Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
Concord, NH 03301 101 Arch Street (Attn:
Herb Boynton)
Boston, MA 02110 f
Ashod N. Amirian, Esquire Judith H. Mizncr, Esquire 145 South Main Street 79 Stato Street, 2nd Floor P.O.-Box 38 Newburyport, MA 01950 Bradford, MA 01835 Gary W. Holmes, Esquire Marjorie Nordlinger, Esquire Holmes & Ells Offica of the General Counsel 47 Winnacunnet Road One White Flint North Hampton, NH 03842 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Jack Dolan Federal Emergency Management Agency - Region I J.W. McCormack Post Office &
Courthouse Building, Room 442 Boston, MA 02109 t
George Iverson, Director N.H. Office of Energency Management State House Office Park South 107 Pleasant Street Concord,- NH 03301 w~-
m.
,r.
4 4
s aus en
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _