ML20112J976

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention EPJ-4(c) Re Transportation of Students by Bus to Shelter Sites.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists & Applicants Entitled to Favorable Decision.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20112J976
Person / Time
Site: Harris Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 01/14/1985
From: Ridgway D
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO., NORTH CAROLINA MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCIES, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20112J843 List:
References
OL, NUDOCS 8501180437
Download: ML20112J976 (11)
v • d • e


Text

-_

s January 14, 1985 Crt<ETE3 tmc UNITED STATES OF AMERICA --

o3 d, 'l 1 7 P i 5 8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,q.g.

.; y,

'd In the Matter of )

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY )

and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

APPLICANTS' MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF EPJ-4(c)

Carolina Power & Light Company and North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency (" Applicants") hereby move the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Board"), pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

$ 2.749, for summary disposition in Applicants' favor of EPJ Contention 4(c). As discussed herein, there is no genuine issue as to any fact material to EPJ Contention 4(c), and Applicants are entitled to a decision in their favor on EPJ Contention 4(c) as a matter of law.

This motion is supported by:

1. " Applicants' Statement of Material Facts As To Which There Is No Genuine Issue To Be Heard on EPJ-4(c)";
2. " Affidavit of Jesse T. Pugh, III on EPJ-4(c)" ("Pugh Affidavit"); and
3. " Applicants' Memorandum of Law In Support of Motions For Summary Disposition of Emergency Planning Conten-tions," (filed October 8, 1984).

9501190437 8 4114 PDR ADOCK 0S000400 9- PDR

0

.b I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Emergency Planning Joint ("EPJ") Contention 4(c) was ini-tially advanced in " Wells Eddleman's Contentions on the Emer-gency Plan (2d Set)" (April 12, 1984) as Eddleman Contentions

-222 and 230, and in " contentions of Richard Wilson Concerning North Carolina Emergency Response Plan" (April 13, 1984) as part of Wilson Contention 8.

EPJ Contention 4(c) was admitted as a contention in this proceeding in the Board's August 3, 1984 " Memorandum and Order (Final Set of Rulings on Admissibility of Offsite Emergency Planning Contentions, Ruling on Petition For Waiver of Need For Power Rule, and Notice of Upcoming Telephone Conference Call),"

i LBP-84-29B, 20 N.R.C._389, 420-21. As admitted by the Board, EPJ-4(c) contends:

I Section E4d of State Procedures (p. 47) is deficient because --

In normal operation, each bus makes two runs each day. Thus, two round trips to the shelter sites would be required. (This factor was not con-

sidered in traffic control plans or evacuation time estimates). Students who do not normally ride buses will be an extra burden, requiring even more round trips.

CHANGE has been designated " lead intervenor" on EPJ-4. Id.

Applicants have served one set of interrogatories and re-quest for production of documents on the sponsors of EPJ-4(c) on the subject of EPJ-4(c). See " Applicants' Emergency i

Planning Interrogatories and Request for Production of Docu-ments to sponsors of EPJ-l (sic; EPJ-3] (CCNC), EPJ-4 (CHANGE),

and EPJ-5 (Wilson)" (October 5, 1984), at 16-17. " Response to Applicants' Emergr.ncy Planning Interrogatories to CHANGE (5 Oct. 1984)" was filed on November 9, 1984.

The sponsors of EPJ-4(c) served one set of interrogatories on Applicants on the subject of EPJ-4(c). See " Emergency Plan-ning Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to Applicants" (October 8, 1984) at 4-5. " Applicants' Response to

[ CHANGE] Emergency Planning Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents [On Contentions EPJ-1, EPJ-2 and

} EPJ-4]" was filed October 29, 1984. Mr. Eddleman has served i

one set of interrogatories on the NRC Staff and FEMA on the subject of EPJ-4(c). See " Wells Eddleman's Interrogatories to NRC Staff and FEMA (6th Set)" (August 31, 1984), at 1-4. " FEMA Response to Interrogatories Dated August 31, 1984 Propounded By

Wells Eddleman" was filed on September 28, 1994. The NRC Staff / FEMA filed no discovery requests on the subject of EPJ-4(c). The last date for filing discovery on the contention was October 8, 1984. Discovery on this contention is, there-fore, complete.

EPJ Contention 4(c) is classified as an emergency planning contention to be addressed in the hearings scheduled to com- ,

mence June 18, 1985. Written direct testimony on the conten-tion is scheduled to be filed June 3, 1985. Further, the Board l

r

f o

a and the parties have established January 14, 1985 as the last ,

day for filing summary disposition motions on this contention.

l Thus, the instant motion is timely, and EPJ Contention 4(c) is

! ripe for summary disposition.

I l

II. GOVERNING LEGAL STANDARDS i

A. Summary Disposition

" Applicants' Memorandum of Law In Support of Motions For Summary Disposition of Emergency Planning Contentions," filed October 8, 1984, is fully applicable to this Motion and is in- ,

corporated by reference herein.

l l- B. Substantive Law i The Commission's emergency planning regulations, at i

10 C.F.R. 5 50.47(b)(10), require, in relevant part, that
i

[a] range of protective ac-tions have been developed i for the plume exposure path-i way EPZ for * *

  • the pub-lic.

As noted in footnote 1 to 10 C.F.R. I 50.47, the standards

embodied in the emergency planning regulations are further 1
addressed by NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, " Criteria For Preparation .

i l and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and i

Preparedness In Support of Nuclear Power Plants" (Rev. 1, t November 1980). NUREG-0654 Criterion J.9 provides, in relevant .

. part: ,

l Each State and local organi-zation shall establish a ca- t pability for implementing ,

l protective measures * * *.

t l ,

i

Y Criterion J.10.g further provides:

The organization's plans te implement protective mea-sures for the plume exposure pathway shall. include:

g. Means of relocation; III. ARGUMENT Applying the Commission's summary disposition standards to the facts of this case, it is clear that the instant motion for summary disposition of EPJ-4(c) should be granted. The underlying premise of EPJ-4(c) -- that multiple "round trips to the shelter sites would be required" for school evacuation --

is simply invalid. To the contrary, state and local emergency planning authorities, in cooperation with appropriate school officials, have made a detailed assessment of both the need for and the availability of resources for the evacuation of the ten schools in the EPZ. As explained below, their plans ~ accomplish school evacuation in a single trip, using existing, readily 4

available transportation resources.

In the Wake. county public school system,.the Apex Atten-dance Area has a total of 48 buses available. Of these, only 30 would be used for school evacuation. ' Apex Elementary School would be evacuated using seven buses. A.V. Baucom Elementary School would be evacuated using eight buses. Apex Middle School would be evacuated using eleven buses. And, at Apex High School, four buses would be used to evacuate those 9

students who do not provide their own transpcrtation.1/ Pugh Affidavit, 13.

The Fuquay-Varina Attendance Area has a total of 38 buses available, of which 37 would be used for school evacuation.

Fuquay-Varina Elementary School would be evacuated using six buses. Lincoln Heights Elementary School would be evacuated using eight buses. Fuquay-Varina Middle School would be evacu-ated using 14 buses. And, at Fuquay-Varina High School, nine buses would be used to evacuate those students who do not pro-vide their own transportation. Pugh Affidavit, 1 4.

At Wake Chapel School, a K-8 private school in Fuquay-Varina, evacuation would be accomplished using one small bus, two larger school buses, and the personal vehicles of seven school staff members. Pugh Affidavit, 1 5. And Moncure Elementary School -- the only Chatham County school in the EPZ

-- would evacuate using five buses. Pugh Affidavit, 1 6.

The figures used to assess the need for resources for school evacuation reflect several conservatisms which may re-duce the number of buses needed. First, the calculations do not account for absenteeism, although school officials indicate 1/ At both the high schools within the EPZ, significant num-bers of students provide their own transportation. Pursu-ant to school policy, with prior written parental consent, these students would be released in the event of an evacu-ation, to take advantage of their available means of pri-vate transportation. Pugh Affidavit, 1 3 n.2, 1 4 n.4.

Ample bus capacity exists to accommodate contingencies such as, e.g., a day when fewer students than usual drive to school. Pugh Affidavit, 1 8.

s that daily absenteeism averages 5% to 10% of enrollment. Sec-ond, the calculated capacity of buses includes no provision for standees, which would increase the capacity of each large bus by approximately 10 students. Pugh Affidavit, % 7. See Consumers Power Co. (Big Rock Point Plant), LBP-83-44, 18 N.R.C. 201, 205-06 (1983) (approving both consideration of ab-senteeism in assessing resources for school evacuation and the use of school buses at 120% or more of rated capacity in an emergency). l In summary, based on contacts with authorities at all schools within the EPZ, and with appropriate Chatham and Wake County school officials, there is assurance that -- in an emer-gency -- evacuation of the schools within the EPZ would be ac-complished in a single trip to the school evacuation shelters.

Pugh Affidavit, 11 2, 9. The intervenor sponsors of EPJ-4(a) cannot avoid summary disposition on the basis of guesses or suspicions, or on the hope that at the hearing Applicants' evi-dence may be discredited or that "something may turn up." See Gulf States Utilities Co. (River Bend Station, Units 1 and 2),

LBP-75-10, 1 N.R.C. 246, 248 (1975). The intervenors here can-not distinguish this case from the body of NRC case law approv-ing similar plans for the evacuation of schools. See, e.g.,

Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2),

LBP-84-37, 20 N.R.C. 933, 995-96 (1984) (approving North Carolina plans for school evacuation); Kansas Gas & Electric e

Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1), LBP-84-26, 20 N.R.C. 53, 70, 98-99 (1984) (approving plans for evacuation of school children using both buses and the personal vehicles of teachers).

IV. CONCLUSION Because there is no genuine issue of material fact to be heard on the issue of the ability to evacuate the schools in the Harris EPZ without multiple "round trips to the shelter sites," Applicants' Motion For Summary Disposition of EPJ-4(c) should be granted.

Respectfully submitted, d MML Thom5s W. Baxt'et, ~ P.CQ G Delissa A. Ridgway SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000 Richard E. Jones Dale E. Hollar CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY P.O. Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 (919) 836-7707 Counsel for Applicants Dated: January 14, 1985 r

d i

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c;L ,j _ ,,Q !

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD'-

<!)V 17 p y ;g8

-!CE -

In the Matter of )

)

fjDC ;g[hTl 4 Ye

..'!! S' i -

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY )

and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Motion For Summary Disposition of EPJ-4(c)," " Applicants' Statement of Ma-terial Facts As To Which There Is No Genuine Issue To Be Heard on EPJ-4(c)," and " Affidavit of Jesse T. Pugh, III on EPJ-4(c)"

were served this 14th day of January, 1985, by deposit in the U.S. mail, first class, postage prepaid, upon the parties listed on the attached Service List.

$1 c A b. b:uN>r1 Delissk A. Rfdyway1 O Dated: January 14, 1985 5

t UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of . )

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY )

and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL MUNICITAL POWER AGENCY )

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

SERVICE LIST James L. Kelley, Esquire John D. Runkle, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board g U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 North Carolina 307 Granville Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety and Licensing Board M. Travis Payne, Esquire U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Edelstein and Payne Washington, D.C. 20555 Post Office Box 12607 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 Dr. James H. Carpenter Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Richard D. Wilson 729 Hunter Street Washington, D.C. 20555 Apex, North Carolina 27502 j Charles A. Barth, Esquire Janice E. Moore, Esquire Mr. Wells Eddleman l 718-A Iredell Street Durham, North Carolina 27705 f ice Exe e Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard E. Jones, Esquire Washington, D.C. 20555 Vice President and Senior Counsel Carolina Power & Light Company Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Daniel F. Read, President CHANGE Post Office Box 2151 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

Dr. Linda W. Little Governor's Waste Management Board 513 Albemarle Building 325 North Salisbury Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Bradley W. Jones, Esquire U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Steven F. Crockett, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Robert P. Gruber Executive Director Public Staff - NCUC Post Office Box 991 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Administrative Judge Harry Foreman Box 395 Mayo University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Spence W. Perry, Esquire Associate General Counsel FEMA 500 C Street, S.W., Suite 480 Washington, D.C. 20740 Steven Rochlis, Esq.

Regional Counsel FEMA 1371 Peachtree Street, N.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30309 l

l l

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20112J976&oldid=2811635"