ML20084J858

Testimony of Mc Cordaro,Ca Daverio & Wf Renz Re Phase II Emergency Planning Contention 33.Related Correspondence

ML20084J858
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	05/08/1984
From:	Cordaro M, Daverio C, Renz W LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20084J856	List: ML20084J854 ML20084J858 ML20084J865
References
OL-3, NUDOCS 8405110004
Download: ML20084J858 (9)

Text

--.

RELATED CORRESPONDENCQ 6

LILCO, May 8, 1984 00CMETED USHRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION , , ,

y, . ; 7

~~ .I'^bj' Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3

) (Emergency Planning Proceeding)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW C. CORDARO, CHARLES A. DAVERIO, AND WILLIAM F. RENZ ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ON PHASE II EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTION 33 Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535 707 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212 (804) 788-8200 8405110004 840508 -

PDR ADOCK 05000322 T PDR

co.

O LILCO, May 8, 1984 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board l In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3

) (Emergency Planning Proceeding)  ;

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) ) l TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW C. CORDARO, CHARLES A. DAVERIO, AND WILLIAM F. RENZ ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ON PHASE II EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTION 33 PURPOSE This testimony discusses Contention 33, which deals with communications between DOE-RAP monitoring teams and the EOC. The testimony demonstrates that there are direct tele-phone communications between the EOC and the DOE Brookhaven Area Office, and direct radio communications between the DOE Brookhaven Area Office and tbs DOE-RAP monitoring teams.

l 1

l

---

l

'o TESTIMONY

1. Q. Please state your name and business address.

A. [Cordaro] My name is Matthew C. Cordaro. My busi-ness address is Long Island Lighting Company, 175 l East Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.

[Daverio] My name is Charles A. Daverio. My busi-ness address is Long Island Lighting Company, 100 East Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.

[Renz) My name is William F. Renz. My business address is Long Island Lighting Company, 175 East Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.

2. Q. Please summarize your professional qualifications and your role in emergency planning for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. '

A. [Cordaro] I am Vice President, Engineering, for LILCo. My professional qualifications have been offered into evidence as part of the document enti-tied " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witness-es." I am sitting on this panel to provide the LILCO management perspective on emergency planning and to answer any questions pertinent to manage-ment. My role in emergency planning for Shoreham is to ensure that the needs and requirements of emergency planning are being met, and that the

technical direction and content of emergency plan-ning are being conveyed to corporate management.

[Daverio] I am Assistant Manager of the Local Emergency Response Implementing Organization for LILCO. My professional qualifications have been offered into evidence as part of the document enti-tied " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witness-es." My familiarity with the issues raised by these Contentions stems from my work in developing and implementing the LILCO Transition Plan.

[Renz) I am employed by the Long Island Lighting Company as Offsite Emergency Preparedness Coordinator in the Nuclear Operations Support De-partment and Manager of the Technical Support Divi-sion of the Local Emergency Response Implementing Organization (LERIO). My professional qualifica-tions have been offered into evidence as part of the document entitled " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witnesses." My familiarity with the is-sues raised by these Contentions stems from my work in developing and implementing the LILCO Transition Plan, particularly my work in developing the commu-nications system.

s

3. Q. What issue is raised by Contention 337 A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] Contention 33, as revised by in the Board's Order of April 20, 1984, states:

The LILCO plan fails to demonstrate that there are any direct communica-tions between DOE-RAP monitoring teams and the EOC.

4. Q. What communications are provided between DOE-RAP moni-toring teams and the Emergency Operations Center?  !

A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] The DOE-RAP monitoring teams are dispatched by the DOE Brookhaven Area Office.

There are direct communications between the EOC and the DOE Brookhaven Area Office by means of a dedicated i telephone line and commercial telephone. Back-up com-t' munications between the EOC and the Brookhaven Area Office are also provided by a Federal Telecommunications System (ETS) line from the Shoreham Control Room. The Shoreham Control Room can be con-tacted by the EOC by means of the RECS line, the LILCO Centrex System, commercial telephone, and the ESO radio frequency.

There are also direct communications between the DOE Brookhaven Area Office and the DOE-RAP radiological monitoring teams by means of multi-channel portable i

radios. These three channel radios can operate off of a portable repeater station through the use of paired 7

e

frequency channels, or support direct unit to unit communications through the use of a single frequency channel.

5. Q. Are there direct communications between the EOC and the DOE-RAP monitoring teams?

A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz) If " direct" is construed to mean communications between LERO personnel at the EOC and the personnel comprising the DOE-RAP monitoring teams while they are in the field, without any inter-mediate communications link, the answer is no. Unless the DOE Brookhaven Area Office personnel are located

, in space provided for them at the EJC, personnel at the EOC will communicate with DOE personnel at the Brookhaven Area Office to obtain information assimi-lated from reports by DOE-RAP monitoring teams.

6. Q. Must there be direct communications between LERO per-sonnel at the EOC and the personnel comprising the DOE-RAP monitoring teams while they are in the field?

A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz) No. Applicable regulations and guidelines do not require such direct communica-tions.

10 C.F.R. 9 50.47(b)(9) provides:

Adequate methods, systems, and equip-ment for assessing and monitoring ac-tual or potential offsite consequenc-es of a radiological emergency condition are in use.

10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix E, IV.E.9.c.

provides:

Provision for communications among the nuclear power reactor control room, the onsite technical support center, and the near-site emergency operations facility; and among the nuclear facility, the principal State and local emergency operations cen-ters, and the field assessment teams.

Such communications systems shall be tested annually.

NUREG-0654, II.F.1.d.

Each plan shall include:

d. provision for communications be-tween the nuclear facility and the licensee's near-site Emergency Op-erations Facility, State and local emergency operations centers, and ra-diological monitoring teams.

If these provisions are construed to require communi-cations between the offsite response organization at the EOC and the DOE-RAP monitoring teams, they do not require " direct" communications. The communications between the EOC and the DOE-RAP field monitoring teams, as described above, satisfy these provisions.

7. Q. Should the LILCO Transition Plan specify equipment for direct radio communications from the EOC to DOE-RAP monitoring teams?

A. (Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] No. Such direct radio com-munications are not required. Under the LILCO Transition Plan, the radio links will be between the DOE-RAP monitoring teams and the DOE Brookhaven Area Office. -The FEMA RAC review (at 26), in its discus-sion of 6 II.H.11 of NUREG-0654, commented that "Com-munications equipment. . . should include radio links between the field teams and the EOC." NUREG-0654, II.H.11 does not require direct radio links between the EOC and DOE-RAP field teams. The communications equipment linking the EOC and the DOE Brookhaven Area Office is specified in the LILCO Transition Plan. The radios to support field survey operations are provided by the DOE-RAP. The radios are part of the DOE-RAP response which is subsumed within the LILCO Tranaition Plan.

8. Does NUREG-0654, II.C.l.c, which was cited by the County.in its Supplemental Opposition to LILCO's Mo-tion for Summary Disposition, have any bearing on Con-tention 33?

A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz} No. NUREG-0654, II.C.1.c simply indicates that the plan should identify licens-ee, state and local resources available to support the federal response. It does not require direct communi-cations between the EOC and DOE-RAP monitoring teams.

In any event, the LILCO Transition Plan identifies communications links between the EOC and the DOE Brookhaven Area Office. The radios providing communi-cations between the DOE-RAP monitoring teams and the

. DOE Brockhaven Area Office are DOE-RAP's; they are not a resource provided by LILCO.

9. Q. Why does the LILCO Transition Plan, p. 3.5-2, appear to indicate that there might be radio communications between the EOC and the DOE-RAP monitoring team?

,, A. .Cordaro,

[ Daverio, Renz] The page referred to is a page from Revision 2 of the LILCO Transition Plan, which was not changed when LILCO issued Revision 3.

!? The LILCO Transition Plan originally contemplated that the coordination of field survey teams would be per-formed at the EOC, and therefore a radio frequency and 1

space within the EOC was provided to support this op-eration. Subsequently, DOE decided to conduct these operations from the Brookhaven Area Office using DOE-RAP radio equipment. It is presently contemplated that field survey information will be transmitted, via DOE-RAP radio equipment, to the Brookhaven Area Office where it will be assimilated and used in support of dose assessment functions. This information is to be transmitted to the EOC, as is the information provided by the licensee's emergency response organization.

Protective action recommendations are ultimately decided upon at the EOC.

9

.