ML20087M762

Suppl to Motion for Summary Disposition of Contentions 24.B,33,45,46 & 49.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists & Util Entitled to Favorable Decision.W/Certificate of Svc. Related Correspondence

ML20087M762
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	03/27/1984
From:	Mccleskey K HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8403300277
Download: ML20087M762 (11)

Text

.

• LILCO, March 27, 1984

, ,g DOCHETED 1Ls t,.

muc UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '84 MAR 30 20.03

~

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION vF'" r cr 3 ;; --

- > , hi s . ,

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boahd" In the Matter of )

)

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

) (Emergency Planning (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) Proceeding)

Unit 1) )

SUPPLEMENT TO LILCO'S MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION ON CONTENTIONS 24.B, 33, 45, 46, AND 49 JRADIATION HEALTH COORDINATOR AND DOE)

By letter dated March 19, 1984, Suffolk County requested an opportunity to supplement its response to LILCO's summary disposition motions on Contentions 24.B, 33, 45, 46, and 49 to include information contained in FEMA's RAC review report re--

leased on March 15, 1984. On March 20, 1984, the Board orally granted all parties the opportunity to supplement filings re-

! garding the summary disposition motions,pending on these con-

! tentions with any information they wished to discuss from the I

i FEMA report. LILCO has addressed below items in the FEMA re-o port pertaining to each of its five motions for summary dispo-sition filed on DOE-related contentions.

8403300277 840327 -

PDR ADOCK 05000322 g PDR 1

I. Contention 24.B (Letters of Agreement with

- the Department of Energy and 4

the Radiation Health Coordinatorl l First, at page 3 of the FEMA report, FEMA indicates that

}

'there is potential confusion in the Plan regarding whether the position of Radiation Health Coordinator will be filled by DOE personnel or persons from an outside consulting firm. The re-port states that "[c]larification should be provided in the l

plan as to the role of the 'outside consultants' on performing i the accident assessment function." Report at 3. The role of the outside consultants is clarified in LILCO's motion for sum-mary disposition of Contention 24.B, in the letter of agreement I

between IMPELL Corporation and LILCO (Attachment 2 to the mo-tion). That letter clearly indicates that IMPELL Corporation, not DOE, will provide personnel to fill the position of Radia-i tion Health Coordinator. To the extent that FEMA's finding on page 3 relates to Contention 24.B, it has been addressed in-LILCO's motion for summary disposition and'therefore that mo-

' . tion should be granted.

4 Second, on page 9-of the FEMA report, FEMA states that the letter.of agreement from DOE does not clearly state DOE's role in the LILCO Plan. While it is true that the letter of.

{ . agreement between DOE and'LILCO does not state in detail the t

specific tasks that DOE-will perform in an emergency,'the'let-ter does say that "the Department of Energy (DOE) will respond to requests for radiological assistance from: licensees" and f

L 2 +c w www- e , ,-v ,-w , t

4 that DOE's role is to provide " advice and emergency action es-sential for the control of the immediate hazards to health and safety." The LILCO Transition Plan and Procedures, including those portions of the Plan and Procedures discussed in the mo-tions for summary disposition on Contentions 45, 46, and 49 and in the affidavits of David Schweller, Manager of the Department of Energy Brookhaven Area Office, filed in support of those mo-tions, show that DOE is aware of the details of the Plan and that DOE has agreed to provide dose assessment teams as de-scribed in the Plan. In light of this information, requiring a change to the letter elevates form over substance. The purpose of the letter is to indicate agreement, not to detail every procedure in a multi-volume plan.

In addition, the findings of " adequate" in response to item C.l.b (page 12 of the FEMA report), item C.3 (page 13 of the FEMA report), item H.7 (page 25 of the FEMA report), items H.12 and I.7 (page 27 of the FEMA report), and item I.ll (page 30 of the FEMA report) all indicate that the Plan adequately details the functions to be performed by DOE and support LILCO's view, detailed in its motions.for summary disposition, that the County has raised no litigable issue of fact.

Finally, the FEMA-report states at page 10 that a letter.

of agreement could not be located in the Plan for the outside consultant who will fill the position of Radiation Health Coordinator. As described in LILCO's motion for summary dispo-sition on Contention 24.B, th,e agreement between IMPELL and I

l l

_c.

L -

LILCO (Attachment 2 to that motion) provides personnel to fill that position. The agreement will be included in Appendix B of j the LILCO Plan in future revisions. Consequently, this finding in the FEMA report has already been addressed in LILCO's motion for summary disposition on Contention 24.B. Nothing in the FEMA report precludes granting LILCO's summary disposition mo-tion on that contention.

II. Contention 33 (DOE-RAP Monitoring Teams Communication)

In Contention 33, the intervenors challenge the communi-cations link between the DOE-RAP field teams and the EOC, a claiming that direct radio communications between field moni-

' toring teams and the EOC are required by NUREG-0654,Section II.F.1.d. As stated in LILCO's motion for summary disposition 4

on Contention 33, a dedicated telephone line between-the EOC and the Brookhaven National Laboratory Command Center, plus radio communications between the Command Center and field teams, as provided in the LILCO Plan, meets the guidelines of l NUREG-0654 Section II.F.1.d. The FEMA report states on_pages 18-19 that II.F.1.d is adequately addressed in the LILCO Plan.

Consequently, LILCO is entitled to summary disposition on Con-tention 33.

i It is true that on page 26'of the FEMA report, FEMA

( ' states that " communications equipment on page 4.1-4 should in-t clude radio" links between the field teams and EOC," but this l

u

did not prevent FEMA from finding NUREG-0654 element H.ll to be l adequately met in the LILCO Plan. If, after discussing this item with LILCO, FEMA still finds the description on page 4.1-4 to be unclear, LILCO will clarify the Plan to describe the com-munications link in more detail. But this does not raise a ma-terial issue of triable fact.

III. Contention 45 (Designation of DOE Personnel)

Contention 45 alleges that LILCO has not adequately identified the names, titles, and qualifications of DOE person-nel and the personnel who will fill the position of Radiation Health Coordinator. The FEMA findings on NUREG-0654 elements I.7 (page 27 of the FEMA report) and I.11 (page 30 of the FEMA report) that "the capabilities, mobilization, response time, and equipment" of the DOE-RAP resources identified in the Plan are adequate, support LILCO's motion for summary disposition on Contention 45.

On page 28 of the FEMA report, FEMA notes that "the Plan does not specify whether LERO has accident assessment personnel who can weigh the plant status Crom an operational view in de-veloping protective action recommendations," and finds NUREG-0654 element I.8 inadequate due to this alleged deficien-cy. This finding is not within the scope of Contention 45, which alleges in'part that the " qualifications of the DOE-RAF or other outside consultant personnel" are not described in the

~- _ _ _

Plan. In short, the contention says that LILCO did not list names, titles, and qualifications of the DOE personnel and the Radiation Health Coordinator relied on in the Plan; the FEMA finding is that the Plan needs to identify a person who can perform a function not now discussed in the Plan. The two ideas are entirely different. Therefore, that portion of the FEMA report should not affect LILCO's motion for summary dispo-sition on Contention 45. Further, that portion of the FEMA re-port is not within the scope of any of the other DOE-related contentions that are the subject of LILCO's motions for summary disposition.

! TV. Contention 46 (Continued Availability of DOE-RAP Resources) i The County contends in Contention 46 that LILCO does not comply with NUREG-0654 Sections II.A.4 and C.1.b relating to continuity of resources. The FEMA report at pages 11-12 sup-ports LILCO's motion for summary disposition on Contention 46, ..

giving a rating of " adequate" to NUREG-0654 elements A.4 and C.1.b. The report states that "the LERO Director of Local Re-sponse is responsible for ensuring the continuity of emergency resources for 24-hour operations over a protracted period" 1 (page 11) and that "the DOE-RAP is specified to' provide ra-diological monitoring assistance and expected times.for arrival are provided" (page 12). Thus LILCO's motion for summary dis-position of Contention.46 should be granted.

V. Contention 49 (Dose Assessment Methods)

The FEMA report findings of " adequate" on NUREG-0654 el-ements I.7 (page 27 of the report) and I.11 (page 30 of the re-J port), discussing the capabilities of the DOE-RAP resources to locate and track the plume, support LILCO's motion for summary disposition on Contention 49. Therefore, LILCO's motion should be granted for the reasons stated in the motion.

VI. Pages 29 and 53 of the FEMA Report In its March 19, 1984 letter to the Board requesting the Opportunity to supplement its response to LILCO's summary dis-position motions, the County indicated that pages 3, 9, 10, 12,.

i 13, 26, 28, 29, and 53 of the FEMA report were, in its view,

" relevant to the pending summary disposition motions." Pages 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 26, and 28 (as well as pages containing cer-tain favorable findings not mentioned by the County) have been

{ addressed above. The findings on pages 29 and 53 of the FEMA l report are not relevant to Contentions 24.B, 3 3 ', 45, 46, and-i 49. The finding on page 29 discusses the capability of.the DOE f Brookhaven Area Office to provide support to LILCO for airborne l

o radiciodine sampling and analysis to concentrations as: low as I

5x10E-08 using the procedure outlined in OPIP 3.5.1, pursuant to NUREG-0654 Section II.I.9. This discrete-issue is not' raised in any of the intervenors' contentions. In addition, the finding on page 53 of the report, suggesting that LILCO

9 clarify the Plan to state whether DOE-RAP personnel will par-ticipate in radiological monitoring exercises and finding that the Plan adequately addresses NUREG-0654 Section II.N.2.d, is not relevant to Contentions 24.B, 33, 45, 46, and 49. There-fore, the findings on pages 29 and 53 do not affect LILCO's summary disposition motions.

VI. Conclusion For the reasons stated in LILCO's motions for summary disposition on Contentions 24.B, 33, 45, 46, and 49, in LILCO's memorandum of law in support of those motions, and in the sup-plemcnt to those motions (above), LILCO's motions for summary disposition on Contentions 24.B, 33, 45, 46, and 49 should be granted.

Respectfully submitted, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY BY [ .

//~ ~ ~ ~

Jakes'$. Christdan Kathy E. B. McCleskey l

Hunton & Williams l

P.O. Box 1535 l 707 East Main Street

! Richmond, VA 23219 l

DATED: March 27, 1984 l

t

-

• t , ,

LILCO, March 27, 1984 l CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 I hereby certify that copies of LILCO'S SUPPLEMENT TO LILCO'S MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION ON CONTENTIONS 24.B, 33, 45, 46, AND 49 (RADIATION HEALTH COORDINATOR AND DOE) were served this date upon the following by first-class mail, post-age prepaid or, as indicated by an asterisk, by Federal Ex-press, or, as indicated by two asterisks, by hand:

James A. Laurenson,** Secretary of the Commission Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission

Board Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing East-West Tower, Rm. 402A Appeal Board Panel

4350 East-West Hwy. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Bethesda, MD 20814 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555' Dr. Jerry R. Kline**

Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Board Panel U.S. Nucle : Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission East-West Tower, Rm. 427 Washington, D.C. 20555 4350 East-West Hwy.

Bethesda, MD 20814 Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.**

David A. Repka, Esq.

Mr. Frederick J. Shon** Edwin J. Reis, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 7735 Old Georgetown Road Commission (to mailroom)

East-West Tower, Rm. 430 Bethesda, MD 20814 4350 East-West Hwy.

Bethesda, MD 20814

Eleanor L. Frucci, Esq.** Stewart M. Glass, Esq.*

Attorney Regional Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing Federal Emergency Management Board Panel Agency U. S. Nuclear Regulatory 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1349 Commission New York, New York 10278 East-West Tower, North Tower 4350 East-West Highway Stephen B. Latham, Esq.*

Bethesda, MD 20814 Twomey, Latham & Shea 33 West Second Street ,

Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.* P.O. Box 398 Special Counsel to the Riverhead, New York 11901 Governor Executive Chamber Ralph Shapiro, Esq.*

Room 229 Cammer & Shapiro, P.C.

State Capitol 9 East 40th Street Albany, New York 12224 New York, New York 10016 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.** James Dougherty, Esq.*

Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq. 3045 Porter Street Christopher McMurray, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20008 Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill Christopher & Phillips Howard L. Blau 8th Floor 217 Newbridge Road 1900 M Street, N.W. Hicksville, New York 11801 Washington, D.C. 20036 Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.

Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith New York State Energy Research Group Department of Public Service 4001 Totten Pond Road .Three Empire State Plaza Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Albany, New York 12223 MHB Technical Associates Spence W. Perry, Esq.

1723 Hamilton Avenue Associate General Counsel-Suite K .

Federal Emergency Management San Jose, California 95125 Agency 500 C Street, S.W.

Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Room 840 New York State Energy Office Washington, D.C. - 20472 Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Ms. Nora Bredes-Albany, New York 12223 Executive-Coordinator Shoreham_ Opponents' Coalition-195 East Main Street Smithtown, New York 11787 ,

l q

- . . - . .w-.- ., ,- ..

Gerald C. Crotty, Esq. Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.

Counsel to the Governor Suffolk County Attorney Executive Chamber H. Lee Dennison Building State Capitol Veterans Memorial Highway Albany, New York 12224 Hauppauge, New York 11788 Kithy $. B. McCleskey Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: March 27, 1984

)

l

'*_m--.- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ . _ _ _ . _ -