ML20080B948

Revised Filing of Issues of Concern Per ASLB 840120 Memorandum & Order Confirming Rulings Made at Hearing.Stated Issues & Concerns Should Be Included in Scope of Instant Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20080B948
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	02/01/1984
From:	Smolen H PHILADELPHIA, PA
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20080B946	List: ML20080B945 ML20080B948
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8402070331
Download: ML20080B948 (13)

Text

.-___ _ _ _____

e 'i

( , ,

'.h' ,-

r.

00LKETE0n UNC' s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA il NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !

'84 FEB -6 All :33  ;

h ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD C m CE Cr SELM L-BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES 00CKEilM & SE M /

BRANCH t Lawrence Brenner, Chairman ,a Dr. Richard F. Cole ,

Dr. Peter A. Morris In the Matter of  : DocketNos.;50-354-OL ',

50-353-OL -

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY  : g (Limerick Generating Station,  : i Units 1 and 2)

FILING OF ISSUES OF CONCERN BY THE CITY , . _

0F PHILADELPHIA PURSUANT TO THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS JANUARY 20, 1984 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CONFIRMING RULINGS MADE AT HEARINGS (Revised)

I. INTRODUCTION AND BASES A. Applicable Regulations .,

s o

The applicable regulations governing emergency planning provide, inter alia, that the state of onsite and offsite emergency preparedness must " provide reasonable assurancas that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency." (10 CFR $50.47(a).) Moreover, guidelines for emergency onsite and offsite response plans (10 CFR;$50.47(b))

are specifically developed in NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1). Protective actionc Dr the ingestion exposure pathway emergency planning zone " appropriate to the locale" must be developed. (10 CFR $50.47(b)(10).) The plans for the ingestion pathway "shall focus on such actions as are appropriate to protect the

-food ingestion pathway." (10 CFR $50.47(c)(2)).

8402070331 840201 PDR ADOCK 05000352 9 PDR

'4 . .

clearly be set forth in the plans. ...The plans should make clear what is to be done in an emergency, how it is to be done and by whom." (NUREG-0654, SI, J. p.

29.)

NUREG-0654, $II, J, 9, p. 61, further provides that "[e]ach State...shall establish a capability for implementing protective measures based upon protective action guides and other criteria. This shall be consistent with the recommendations of...DHEW (DKHS/FDA regarding radioactive contamination of human food and animal feeds published in the Federal Register of December 15, 1978 (43 FR 58790))."

NUREG-0654, SII, J, 11, p. 64, provides that "each State shall specify the protective measures to be used for the ingestion pathway, including the methods for protecting the public from consumption of contaminated foodstuffs."

Among other things, "the plan shall identify procedures for detecting ,

contamination, for estimating the dose commitment consequences of uncontrolled ingestion, and for imposing protection procedures such as impoundment, decontamination, processing, decay, product diversion, and preservation."

Detailed and relevent maps as well as up-to-date lists of facilities which regularly process milk products and other large amounts of food or agricultural products orginating in the ingestion pathway EPZ, but located elsewhere, shall be maintained.

Pennsylvania Disaster Operations Plan, Annex E,is required to meet the foregoing mandates in order to provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken. 10 CFR 50.47. Appendix 17 of the plan purports that its purpose is "[tjo establish the means of protection of the

---

--- _ - - - - - -- )

g t .t',,

X.

1 l'

00LMETE01 UNC5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ji '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'84 FEB -6 :N1 :33 .

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I; CFF h 0F F L E IC BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES C0CnEllh3& SE N I Bi4ANCH  !

Lawrence Brenner, Chairman )

Dr. Richard F. Cole ,

Dr. Peter A. Morris ,

In the Matter of  : '

Docket Nos. 150-354-OL ,

50-353-OL -

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY  : ,

(Limerick Generating Station,  : i Units 1 and 2)

FILING OF ISSUES OF CONCERN BY THE CITY , , ,

OF PHILADELPHIA PURSUANT TO THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS JANUARY 20, 1984 MEMORANDUM AFD_0RDER CONFIRMING RULINGS MADE AT HEARINGS ***

(Revised)

I. INTRODUCTION AND BASES Applicable Regulations A. , . ,

3 The applicable regulations governing. emergency planning provide, inter alia, that the state of onsite and offsite emergency preparedness must " provide reasonable assurances that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency." (10 CFR $50.47(a).) Moreover, guidelines for emergency onsite and offsite response plans (10 CFR;$50.47(b))

are specifically developed in NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1). Protective actions for the ingestion exposure pathway emergency planning zone " appropriate to the locale" must be developed. (10 CFR $50.47(b)(10).) The plans for the ingestion pathway "shall focus on such actions as are appropriate to protect the food ingestion pathway." (10 CFR $50.47(c)(2)).

8402070331 840201 PDR ADOCK 05000352 O PDR

. . tY The principal exposure of immediate concern from the ingestion exposure pathway would be from ingestion of contaminated water or foods such as milk, fresh vegetables or aquatic foodstuffs. The duration of potential exposure could range in length from hours to months. Thus, the planning effort involves the identification of major exposure pathways from contaminated food and water and the associated control and interdiction points and methods.

Contamination in the ingestion exposure pathway exposure in general represents a longer term problem, although some early protectiv,e actions to minimize subsequent contamination of milk or other supplies should be initiated.

(NUREG-0654, SI, D, 1, b, p. 9-10.)

All emergency planning zones, both the plume and ingestion exposure pathways, are defined as the areas for which " planning is needed to assure that prompt and effective actions can he,taken to protect the public in the event of an accident." (NUREG-0654, SI, D, 2, p.'10.) "The NItC/ EPA Task Force Report on Emergency Planning (NUREG-0396, EPA 520/1-78-016) anticipates that State, rather ,

than local, response organizations will be principally responsible for the planning associated with the ingestion exposure pathway." (NUREG-0654, $I, D,

$2, p. 11.)

This plan must taste the form of specifying that range of predetermined responses appropriate to the locale required to protect the public. The response organizationr,should have "the autho.rity and capability to take immediate predetermined actions...." [ Emphasis supplied.] Moreover, the guidelines provide that "the means by which all planning criteria are met

E.

clearly be set forth in the plans. . . .The plans should make clear what is to be done in an emergency, how it is to be done and by whom." (NUREG-0654, HI, J, p.

29.)

NUREG-0654, $II, J, 9, p. 61, further provides that "[e]ach State...shall establish a capability for implementing protective measures based upon protective action guides and other criteria. This shall be consistent with the recommendations of...DHEW (DHHS/FDA regarding radioactive contamination of human food and animal feeds published in the Federal Register of December 15, 1978 (43 FR 58790))."

NUREG-0654, SII, J, 11, p. 64, provides that "each State shall specify the protective measures to be used for the ingestion pathway, including the methods for protecting the public from consumption of contaminated foodstuffs."

Among other things, "the plan shall~ identify procedures for detecting contamination, for estimating the dose commitment consequences of uncontrolled

~

ingestion, and for imposing protection procedures such as impoundment, decontamination, processing, decay, product diversion, and preservation."

Detailed and relevent maps as well as up-to-date lists of facilities which regularly process milk products and other large amounts of food or agricultural l

products orginating in the. ingestion pathway EPZ, but located elsewhere, shall l be maintained.

l l

Pennsylvania Disaster Operations Plan, Annex E,is required to meet the l foregoing mandates in order to provide reasonable assurance that adequate i

l L . protective. measures can and will be taken. 10 CFR 50.47. Appendix 17 of the l

plan purports that its purpose is "[t}o establish the means of protection of the l'

/

population around fixed nuclear sites from ingestion of radioactive contaminated food or water and to provide guidance to farmers for the protection of their livestock and harvested crops." (Appendix 17, SII, Purpose, p. E-17-1.) For the reasons stated below, it is submitted that the emergency plans for the City of Philadelphia ingestion exposure pathway EPZ do not provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures for the citizens of Philadelphia can and will be taken, and thus do not comply with the mandate of 10 CFR 50.47.

B. Ingestion Exposure Pathway - City of Philadelphia The ingesti n exposure pathway (IEP) for Limerick includes the City ,of ,.

• Philadelphia whose boundaries are as close as 21 miles from the Limerick plant.

(Limerick SER at p. 2-1.) The City's population of 1.688 million people (1980 Census), plus those suburbs between the City and the plant, are located in the area encompassing the SE and ESE directions from the Limerick plant. The most prevalent wind directions are ESE 16% of the time and SE 11% of the time (NUREG-0974, Supp. 1, Table.5.11e, p. 5-20.) If there is an accident 2at Limerick involving a release of radioactive material to the atmosphere, there is more than a 1 in 4 chance that conta.ainat' ion will reach parts of metropolitan Philadelphia. The overall metropolitan Philadelphia area has a population of over 4.7 million people. (SMSA value, 1980 Census.) The City area is also a major distribution center for local food. The City uses water drawn from the Schuylkill and Delaware Rivers which is held in surface reservoirs in order to supply the population's water needs. These are the only sources of water for the City of Philadelphia Water Department. Due to the large population, complex structures, geographical limitations, and difficulty of communications, the City L %. . .

L of Philadelphia locale presents unique and major planning requirements in order to achieve dose reductions and in order to implement recovery processes, if it were contaminated.

II. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA'S ISSUES OF PUBLIC CONCERN Existing emergency planning for the City of Philadelphia ingestion exposure pathway EPZ does not comply with the above-listed regulations and guidelines for the following reasons.

CITY-1 The plan calls for County Emergency Management Agency assistance for sampling, providing information, and providing assistance in control, ,,

of contaminated water or food products (

Reference:

Appendix 17, $

III.B.1), but does not provide sufficient guidance on how to effectuate these goals in Philadelphia. The plan does not specify the type, number or availability of personnel required to complete these functions. Without this demonstration the NRC/ FEMA cannot be reasonably assured that adequate protective measures can and-will be taken in the event of an radiological emergency as required by 10 CFR

. f50.47(a).

CITY-2 The plan assumes that each County Emergency Management Agency will assist the respective state agencies and " employ resources at its disposal to assist the State in implementing controls on foods, foodstuffs and water." (

Reference:

Appendix 17, SIV.E.) However, the plan does not specify what resources are or should be at the disposal of the State and County. Without this, it is impossible to ascertain whether the combined resources will be sufficient to meet

l

/

the needs appropriate to the Philadelphia locale, and thus there is no reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency as required by 10 CFR

$50.47(a), (b)(10) and (c)(2).

CITY-3 The plan provides for sampling and notification associated with water contamination (Appendix 17, 55III.A.2 and V.A), but does not make provisions nor provide guidance for (a) protecting existing supplies from contamination, (b) preventing the use of contaminated water, or (c) alternative sources of water the City of Philadelphia ingestion exposure pathway. Thus FEMA /NRC have no reasonable assurance that prompt and effective action can be taken to protect the publ,ic. 10 , ,,

CFR $50.47(a), (b), (c)(2); NUREG-0654, SI, D.

CITY-4 -The plan fails to include sampling, testing and reporting of possible contamination of aquatic life i,n the food chain. 10 CFR 50.47(a) ari

1. (c)(2); NUREG-0654,-$I, D', 1 and 2, p. 10-11.

CITY-5 The plan fails to consider pre-exposure medical or other p. otective measures to prevent ingestion exposure of the thyrcid, whole body, bone marrow. 10 CFR 50.47(a) and NUREG-0654, SI, D, 4, p. 14 and 17.

CITY-6 The plan fails to provide. reasonable or adequate guidelines, methods, and procedures for preventing the distribution and consumption of contaminated processed food. (

Reference:

Appendix 17, $$IV and VII.) .

10 CFR 50.47(a); NUREG-0654, SII, J, 9 and 11.

CITY-7 The plan at Annex E, Appendix 18, regarding recovery is inadequate.

Although PEMA is designated to be responsible for recovery, there are no criteria or even general guidance provided to indicate acceptable conditions for (a) relaxation of protective actions in the I.E.P.

(Appendix 18, SIII.A.2), (b) approaches to recovery in the

24 . .

metropolitan area, or (c) satisfactory completion of recovery operations in the ingestion exposure pathway. (Appendix 18, SI.C.).

Thus, the plan as presently presented is not sufficiently developed so as to assure compliance with NUREG-0654, $II, M, and FEMA " Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents" EPA-520/1-75-001, September 31 (as referenced on pp. 6 and 61 of NUREG-0654). Accordingly, the plan does not provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken as required by 10 CFR 50.47. '

CITY-8 The plan does not clearly provide for training of personnel, exercises and drills for all municipalities and localities within the ingestion , , ,,

exposure pathway. Thus, the plan does not provide assurance that the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ aspects of training, drills and exercises can and will be implemented as required by 10 CFR 50.47; 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, $F; and NUREG-0654, HII, N and O.

CITY-9 There is presently no agreement as required Between PECO and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania identifying "the emergency measures to be provided and the mutually acceptable criteria for their implementation" and specifying "the arrangement for exchange of info rma tion. " NUREG-0654, $1I, A, 3. Reference. Annex E, Appendix 21,Section I.D. Thus, there is no assurance that the plan can be implemented as required by 10 CFR 50.47(a) and 10 CFR 50.47(b)(3).

See also NUREG-0654, $$ II.B.9 and II.L.I.

CITY-10 PECO Emergency Plan, Implementing Procedure EP-318, does not define who is responsible to do the designated measurement and calculation.

Nor does the procedure call for informing people downstream of their potential dose. Similarly, in EP-319 (Fish Ingestion Pathway Dose),

, , . - . . _ . . _ . - . , , .-. , - - . - , + -- -.

J the responsibility is not specified for performing the calculation and for informing appropriate people downstream. The implementing procedures are not adequate and thus there is no assurance that they can and will be implemented as required in 10 CFR 50.47(a).

CITY-11 Implementing Procedure EP-287 calls for notifying the Philadelphia Water Department's pumping plants on the Schuylkill River but gives no information on the contamination level which warrants notification of downstream water users. Thus there can be no assurance that the public will be protected. 10 CFR 10.57(a).

CITY-12 The State Plan for the ingestion exposure pathway (Annex E, Appendix 17 and related appendices) does not provide reasonable assurance tha,t ,,

it can and will be implemented because there is no FEMA / EPA standarized protective action guidance for exposure from foodstuffs or water, nor is there protective action guidance for exposure from radioactive material deposited on property or equipment. Chapters 3 and 4 of FEMA " Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents", EPA-520/1-75-001, September 1975 (revised September 1981), as referenced in NUREG-0654 are not complete.

III. CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, the City of Philadelphia respectfully requests the following:

1. That the aforesaid issues and concerns be included within the scope of the instant proceeding; and

_-_____-_______-____________________._______-__-________________________~

2. That no operating license be granted until a revision of the emergency plans of the Philadelphia Electric Company and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is made so as to satisfy the aforesaid concerns; and

3. Such other action as this Honorable Board deems necessary and just to ensure the safety of the citizens of Philadelphia.

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA BARBARA MATHER City Solicitor TYLER E. WREN Divisional Deputy City Solicitor MARTHA W. BUSH

.. Deputy City Solicitor

' ' '~

HERBERT SMOLEN Deputy City Solicitor By:

HERBERT SMOLEN 4

e

., y . .

nnt wyy USMc CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ~6 All :33 GTFIcII$,I 00CX g g.g .gt, IherebycertifythattheforegoingFilingOfIssuesIlkuncernByThe City Of Philadelphia Pursuant To The Atomic Safety And Licensing Boards January 20, 1984 Memorandum and Order Confirming Rulings Made At Hearings, as revised was were served upon the following by first-class mail, postage prepaid, with service by Federal Express Mail to those on the attached service list beside whose names appears an astecisk (*):

~

ffARTilA W. BUSH Deputy City Solicitor

' Dated: February 1, 1984 ,

.e sy Adm. Law Judge Lawrence Brenner Robert L. Anthony

' Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 103 Vernon Lane U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Moyland, Pennsylvania 19065 Washington, D.C. 20555 Adm. Law Judge Richard F.' Cole Phyllis Zitzer Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Limerick Ecology Action

- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 761 W2chington, D.C. 20555 Pottstown, Pa. 19464

. Adm. Law Judge Peter A. Morris Zori G. Ferkin , , ,,

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Assistant Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Governor's Energy Council Washington, D.C. 20555 1625 North Front Street P.O. Box 8010 Harrisburg, Pa. 17125

.D:cketing & Service Section ' Frank R. Ronano Office of the Secretary 61 Forest Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ambler, Pennsylvania 19002 Wtshington, D.C. 20555 e_

' Benjamin H. Vogler Gregory Minor 0.E.L.D. MHB Technical Associates U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1723 Hamilton Avenue Washington, D.C. 20555 San Jose, CA 95125 Mark Wetterhahn, Esq. Eugene J. Bradley Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq. Philadelphia Electric Company Nils N. Nicholas, Esq. Associate General Counsel Conner and Wetterhahn 2301 Market Street 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 Wtshington, D.C. 20006

,qa -

' I}

,,l* ' u.

or . .. i,t ' -

s

.i .

Edward G. Bauer, Jr. Marvinf. Lewis .

Vice-President & General Counsel 6504 Bra'dford Terrace l

. Philadelphia Electric Company Philadel'hia,p Pa. 19149 t

2301 Market Street -

Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 i

Mr. Vincent Boyer Frederic M. Wentz S;nior Vice President County Solicitor Nuclear Operations County of Montgomery '

Philadelphia Electric Company  ; Courthouse  !

2301 Market Street '

Norristown, Pa. 19404 Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 i

Mr. J.T. Robb, N2-1 Angus Love, Esquire , , ,.

Philadelphia Electric Company 101 East Main Street 2301 Market Street Norristown, Pa. 19401 Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 -

H:n. Lawrence Coughlin ' Joseph H. White, III H:use of Representatives 8 North Warner Avenue Congress of the United States Bryn Mawr, Pa. 19010 Weshington, D.C. 20515 .

Frank Hippart, Director, Steven P. Hershey, Esq.

PInnsylvania Emergency Community Legal Services, Inc.

Mrnagement Agency, B-151 5219 Chestnut Street Transportation & Safety Building Philadelphia, Pa. 19139 Harrisburg, Pa. 17120 R ger B. Reynold, Jr., Esq. Robert L. Sugarman, Esq.

324 Swede Street Sugarman & Denworth Norristown, Pa. 19401 Suite 510, North American Building 121 S. Broad Street Philadelphia, Pa. 19107

. i's , " ,,

H. -

, ,1,e , *. e '4

+ -

l'

.!\

Ch rtes W. Elliot, Esq.

1101l Building <

Easton, Pa. 18042 f.;

I r

l

?

Jccqueline I. Ruttenberg Krystone Alliance 3700 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, Pa. 19104 Sp:nce W. Perry, Esquire ' ~

Associate General Counsel ' '

Federal Emergency Management Agency

• Room _840 . ..

5 00 C S t . , S . W.~ . . ,

WIshington, D.C. 20472 U.S.N.R.C. Regida r.

631 Park Avenue' King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 t

L l

Thomas Gerusky., Director Bureau of Radiation Protection Drpt. of Environmental Resources 5th Floor, Fulton Bank Bldg.

Third & Locust Streets Harrisburg, Pa. 17120

- Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,

Wrahington, D.C. 20555

_a 1

- , --. ,