ML20128G520

Order Implementing 850509 Grant of Applicant Motion for Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.47 & Authorizing Issuance of Full Power OL Consistent W/Aslb Decisions Re Offsite Emergency Planning.Served on 850524

ML20128G520
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	05/24/1985
From:	Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	DEL-AWARE UNLIMITED, INC., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD), PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
CON-#285-139 81-465-07-OL, 81-465-7-OL, NUDOCS 8505300194
Download: ML20128G520 (6)

Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD MVED MY 241985 BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES:

Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson OgTED Dr. Richard F. Cole Dr. Jerry Harbour ,

5 MM 24 P2:49

) 0FFICE OF SECRt. Tarn In the Matter of Docket Nos. 'ChERvira.

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY )

) ASLBP No. 81-465-07 OL (Limerick Generating Station, )

Units 1 and 2) ) May 24, 1985

)

BOARD'S ORDER IMPLEMENTING ITS GRANT OF APPLICANT'S MOTION FOR EXEMPTION FROM REQUIREMENT.0F 10 CFR 6 50.47(a) AND (b) FOR A PERIOD OF TIME CONTENTIONS OF GRATERFORD INMATES ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD--

AUTHORIZATION FOR DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION TO ISSUE FULL POWER LICENSE On May 9, 1985 this Board granted Philadelphia Electric Company's (Applicant) Motion of February 7,1985 seeking exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR $ 50.47(a) and (b) as they relate to evacuation provisions of the emergency plan for'the State Correctional Institution at Graterford. The Board's grant of an exemption was based solely on the provisions of 10 CFR 9 50.47(c)(1).I 1

See this Board's Order of May 9,1985, page 4 in which we stated, "We need not look elsewhere in the regulations and indeed have not considered the use of 10 CFR 6 50.12.

8505300194 850524 hDR ADOCK 05000352 PDR Mot .

y -

w x, ,

?~

2

- 'After reaching its decision to grant the exemption, the Board did not issue an implementing order but requested parties to submit comments in view of the unusual posture of this case resulting from the Appeal Board's reinstatement of the Graterford inmates as a party with leave to file revised. contentions. The Board has received the following

• comments:

9 1. NRC Staff C'omments on the Licensing Board's May 9, 1985 Order Granting Applicant an Exemption dated May 20, 1985 (received by Board May 21, 1985). .

~

ws

2. Exceptions to the Board's Order granting the Applicant's Motion for Exemption from Requirement of.10 CFR 50.47(a) and (b) (Graterford Inmates Response dated May 17, 1985) (received by Board May 21',1985).

3. Applicant's Response to Comments of Other Parties Concerning the Board's Order Dated May 9, 1985 dated Mey 22, 1985 (received by Board May 22,1985).

4. Statement of Anthony /F0E In Opposition to Granting Applicant's Motion for' Exemption from 10 CFR 9 50.47(a) and (b) Re: Evacuation Plans

-for Inmates dated May 16, 1985 (received by Board May 20,1985).

2 L The Board has considered all the responses listed above. Further, we note that the inmates' contentions were filed with this Board on May 14, 1985.

2 The Board has received notification through the NRC Staff of FEMA Findings on Offsite Planning Preparedness at the Limerick (FootnoteContinued)

• • q

0 3

This exemption issue has been extensively briefed by all the parties. In addition to the comments listed above, the Board has also considered all other pleadings filed by the parties including:

.1.. Applicant's Motion For Exemption From The Requirements of 10 CFR 6.50.47(a) And (b)- As They Relate To The Necessity Of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Consideration Of Evacuation Provisions Of The Emergency Plans For The State Correctional Institution Of Graterford (February 7, 1985).

2. Graterford Inmates' Motion In Opposition To Applicant's Motion i i

For Exemption From The Requirements of 10 CFR % 50.47(a) and (b) As They .;

Relate To The Necessity Of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Consideration Of Evacuation Provisions Of The Emergency Plans For The State Correctional Institution of Graterford (March 13,1985).

3. Letter from Mr. Romano, Chairman, Air & Water Pollution Patrol, to the Licensing Board, dated March 15, 1985; Anthony /F0E Motion In Opposition to PEC0's Motion For Exemption From 10 CFR S 50.47 Provisions for Emergency and Evacuation Planning For Graterford Prisoners And Staff (March 15, 1985).

(Footnote Continued)

Generating Station, dated May 21, 1985. The Board's conditions in-the Third Partial Initial Decision on (1) traffic control issues FEMA found had been met in part on May 10, 1985 with review at State and Federal level continuing; and (2) FEMA had been satisfied on the Board's condition in reference to unmet municipal staffing-needs. See Letter to the Licensing Board May 22, 1985 with FEMA Memorandum from Richard W. Krimm--FEMA to Edward J.

Jordan-NRC/

Subject:

Finding on Offsite Planning and Preparedness

j. at the Limerick Generating Station.

p L..

4

4. NRC Staff Response To Applicant's Motion Dated February 7, 1985 For Exemption From the Requirements of 10 CFR 5 50.47(a) and (b) (March 18,1985).

5. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania Response To Applicant's Motion For Exemption From the Requirements of 10 CFR 5 50.47(a) and (b) As They Relate To The Necessity Of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Consideration Of Evacuation Provisions Of The Emergency Plans For The State Correctional Institution Of Graterford (March 18,1985).

~

6. Supplemental Motion Of The Graterford Inmates in Opposition To The Applicant's Request For An Exemption Under 10 CFR 9 50.12(a) and (b)

(March 26, 1985).

7. Additional Statement In Opposition To PECO's Motion To Exempt Graterford Prison From Requirements of 10 CFR Q 50.47 on Emergency Planning, by R. L. Anthony /F0E (March 27,1985).

8. Applicant's Reply In Support Of Its Request For Exemption From The Requirements of 10 CFR 5 50.47 (a) and (b) Relating To The Graterford Emergency Plan (April 1, 1985).

9. NRC Staff Additional Views On Applicant's Motion Dated February 7, 1985 For Exemption From The Requirements of 10 CFR 9 50.47(a) and (b)

(April 1, 1985).

The Commission recently observed that its " regulations specifically contemplated certain equitable exceptions, of a limited duration, from L

the requirements of 50.47(b)," and cited 50.47(c)(1) for this authority.

Statement of Policy on Emergency Planning Standard 10 CFR 50.47(b)(12)

May 16, 1935.

o D

5 In our Order of May 9,1985, the Board held that Applicant's request for an exemption from 10 CFR 9 50.47(a) and (b) with respect to the evacuation provisions of the emergency plan for the State Correctional Institution at Graterford, met the criteria of i 50.47(c)(1), and we granted the exemption for the limited period of time necessary to receive and litigate any contentions that might be propounded by the Graterford inmates pursuant to the authorization granted by the Appeal Board in ALAB-806. That exemption, in our view, removed as an impediment to authorization of issuance by the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of a full power license, the sole issue not resolved in our Third Partial Initial Decision. We allowed a period for comment before issuing such authorization solely because of the unusual posture of this case. The comments received reinforced our initial conclusion that the authorization should now be granted.

Further, we have concluded that the issuance of a full power t

license to the Applicant during the exemption will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Commission's regulations, and based on the findings.and conclusions set forth in the Third Partial Initial Decision on Offsite Emergency Planning,-the Board Order of May 9, 1985 and this Order, that the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is authorized to issue a full power operating license for the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, consistent with the Board's decisions in this

m 6

case and upon making requisite findings with respect to matters not embraced in the Third Partial Initial Decision on Offiste Emergency Planning.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSIt' BOARD Y/l/jhi - pV'Yr1 -

Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson f ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland ,

this 24th day of May 1985.

t

,p L_ -

1