ML20129D265
| ML20129D265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/10/1985 |
| From: | Christman J HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#385-796 OL-3, NUDOCS 8507160471 | |
| Download: ML20129D265 (16) | |
Text
gcp
~
1
, l
' ~
LILCO, July 10, 1985
\-
$$7M/8 UNITED STATES OF AMERIC.NS g 73 b '33 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before__the Atomic Safety and Licensing Bdard Ikh NT 1
4 In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning ;
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) Proceeding)
Unit 1) )
LILCO'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF. FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON REOPENED CONTENTION 24.0 (NASSAU COLISEUM)
The following are LILCO's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the issue heard at the evidentiary hear-ing June 25-26, namely the functional adequacy of the Nassau Coliseum as a reception center for evacuees from an accident at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station:
I. Procedural Background
'l. The procedural background of the reopening of Con-tention 24.0 is given in the Board's Memorandum and Order Ruling on Motion of Suffolk County and State of New York for Reconsideration and Other Relief, dated June 10, 1985. LILCO's earlier testimony on the relocation center issues had distin-guished between the " reception center" (a central location where registration,. monitoring, and, if necessary, 8507160471 850710
~
DR ADDCK 05000322 PDR
i decontamination are performed) and " congregate care" centers (where evacuees are provided food and shelter). See LILCO's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Offsite Emergency Planning, Oct. 5, 1984, at 249-50. At the time the record closed, LILCO still had not completed arrangements for any facility to serve as a reception center. After the record closed, however, the Company secured an agreement for use of the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum. On January 18, 1985, LILCO moved to reopen the evidentiary record on Contention 24.0, which asserts that the LILCO Plan fails to designate a relocation center for a significant portion of the anticipated evacuees. The record was reopened (over the objection of the Intervenors), and the issue to be heard was limited (also over their objection) to the question whether the Nassau Coliseum is functionally adequate to serve as a relocation center for the anticipated general evacuees.
- 2. Intervenors Suffolk Countyl/ and New York State submitted a variety of pieces of written testimony. The writ-ten testimony of Messrs. Campo, Kilduff, and Marsh, Dr.
Johnson, and 53. Meyland, offered by the Intervenors, was not considered by the Board to go to the issues contained in 1/ The Board is aware that there is an ongoing dispute over who represents "the. County" in this proceeding. We need not resolve this dispute for the purposes of this decision, because the County Attorney agreed that the firm of Kirkpatrick &
Lockhart could participate in the June 25-26 hearing, and the firm did participate, as it had participated in earlier pro-ceedings.
i 1.
Contention 24.0 and was therefore rejected. The written testi-mony of Dr. Radford and Mr. Roberts, also offcred by Suffolk County, was accepted only in part, and in a letter to the Board of June 21, 1985, the County withdrew that testimony.
- 3. The Board ruled, in an unpublished Memorandum and Order of February 12, 1985, that there was to be no discovery.
- 4. By motion dated May 21, 1985, the Long Island Co-alition for Safe Living petitioned the Board for leave to in-tervene in the reopened proceeding on Contention 24.0. The pe-tition was denied in the Board's Memorandum and Order (Ruling on Motion to Intervene) of June 14, 1985. Representatives of the Coalition appeared at the hearing, however, and were per-mitted to submit written statements, which were bound into the transcript, ff. Tr. 15,956.
- 5. A hearing on this issue was held June 25-26, 1985, in Hauppauge, New York. LILCO and FEMA presented testimony, while the State of New York and Suffolk County attempted to make their case by cross-examination alone. LILCO's written testimony consisted of an Affidavit of Elaine D. Robinson on Nassau Coliseum (hereinafter " Robinson Affidavit") with six at-tachments; FEMA's written testimony consisted of an Affidavit of Thomas E. Baldwin, Joseph H. Keller, Roger B. Kowieski, and Philip H. McIntire (" FEMA Affidavit").
- 6. For planning purposes, the planners use a conserva-tive estimate of 20% of the population of the EPZ, which in this case amounts to 32,000 people, as the maximum number who
will need shelter. See LILCO's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Offsite Emergency Planning, Oct. 5, 1984, at 252 5 529.
II. Findings of Fact A. General
- 7. The Nassau County Coliseum is a sports and en-tertainment/ exhibition complex designed to accomodate crowds of 15,000 to 17,000, depending on the event. The Coliseum is lo-cated in south-central Nassau County at the intersection of 1
Hempstead Turnpike and Meadowbrook Parkway. It is 43 miles from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station and 33 miles from the l'O-mile Emergency. Planning Zone (EPZ) boundary. Robinson Affi-davit, ff. Tr. 15,870, at 2.
B. Availability of the Coliseum
- 8. The Board finds that the availability of the Coli-seum to LILCO for use as a relocation center is clearly estab-lished by the Letter of Agreement, dated September 25, 1985, from Dr. William J. Catacosinos, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer for LILCO, to Mr. E. B. Sumerlin, Jr.,
the General Manager of the Nassau County Coliseum. Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 1. This Letter of Agreement specifically provides that the Hyatt Management Corporation of
. New. York, Inc., the lessee of the Coliseum, agrees to allow 4 - p g ,m-.g , ,,r,> - - >e.- , --- r - - - - - - ,
4 LILCO to use the Coliseum, consisting of the Coliseum building itself and all parking lots and immediately surrounding proper-ty, as a reception center for the general public in planning for and responding to a radiological emergency at Shoreham.
Id., at 1.
- 9. That the Coliseum will be available to LILCO in the event of a Shoreham emergency is further evidenced by a letter, dated October 1, 1984, to Mr. Sumerlin from Mr. Francis T.
Purcell, the County Executive for Nassau County. Robinson Af-fidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 2. In this letter, Mr. Purcell notes that he is aware of and approves the use of the Coliseum as a reception center for members of the public requiring as-sistance from LILCO's Local Emergency Response Organization (LERO) and/or the American Red Cross as a result of any acci-dent at Shoreham which results in the recommendation that the public evacuate from part or all of the Emergency Planning Zone around Shoreham. Id., at 1. In addition, Mr. Purcell has pledged the Nassau County government to " cooperate to the fullest" in making the Coliseum and other public facilities available in an emergency, id., Att. 6.
- 10. Furthermore, Mr. Purcell, as the Nassau County Ex-ecutive, has offered his assurance that in the event of an emergency at Shoreham, as at all times, the Nassau County Po-lice Department will be prepared to protect the public welfare of all those in Nassau County. The Department will, therefore, be available to provide assistance with security at the
Coliseum and to facilitate traffic flow and parking at the Col-iseum and its approaches. Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 2, at 2.
- 11. The Letter of Agreement between Hyatt Management and LILCO provides that LILCO will be given reasonable access 2/
to the Coliseum upon notification by LILCO to Hyatt or the County that a radiological emergency exists at Shoreham. Rob-inson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 1, at 2. LILCO would not need any permission from Hyatt Management before LERO personnel could arrive at the Coliseum and begin to set up. Tr.
15,924-25 (Robinson). In fact, it is entirely possible that LERO personnel would arrive at the Coliseum and be inside the building before notification was even made to Hyatt Management.
Tr. 15,925-26 (Robinson). This is an automatic process which gets itself going and which requires no decisionmaking over ac-cess at that point. Tr. 15,926 (Robinson). There is 24-hour security at the Coliseum to provide LERO with physical entry into the building. Tr. 15,925 (Robinson).
1 2/ " Reasonable" in this context does not naan that Hyatt Man-agement has discretion in deciding whether access'will be granted to LILCO, depending on the circumstances. The term
" reasonable" refers only to the time which Hyatt Management would need to clear the Coliseum parking lots in-the event that some activity was taking place at the Coliseum when an emergen-cy occured and could range from 15 minutes to an hour and a half. Tr. 15,924 (Robinson).
e -
- 12. Hyatt Management has advised that it would take no more than one-and-a-half hours to clear the Coliseum and its parking lot. Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, at 3. A LILCO consultant, conducting his own study, clocked the clear-ing of the parking lot following a hockey game at t'he Coliseum, which was attended by a capacity crowd of 15,000. The consul-tant found that the parking lot had emptied and the surrounding streets were cleared within approximately 45 minutes after peo-ple began to leave the game. Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr.
15,870, at 3; Tr. 15,916-17 (Robinson).
C. Functional Adequacy of the Coliseum
- 1. Generally
- 13. NUREG-0654 contains two criteria with regard to re-location centers, J.10.h and J.12. In emergency response plans the functions to be performed at a relocation center include registration, monitoring, and decontamination of evacuees, if required. FEMA Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,991, at 1. Generally, for a facility to be suitable as a reception center it should have parking areas, showers, and other amenities. FEMA Affida-vit, ff. Tr. 15,991, at 2. "Other amenities" include toilets, an area to register people, and an area for people to wait in inclement weather. Tr. 16,000-01 (McIntire, Keller). The FEMA witnesses concluded that the Coliseum " appears to be a suitable facility for LILCO to use as a reception center." FEMA
Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,991, at 2. All~of them have seen the Coliseum at one time or another. Tr. 16,001-03, 16,005-06, 16,038 (Baldwin, McIntire, Keller, Kowieski). FEMA findings constitute a " rebuttable presumption" on the questions of ade-quacy and implementation capacity. 10 C.F.R. 5 50.47(a)(2)
(1985). No direct evidence was presented by the Intervenors to show that the Coliseum is inadequate,3/ and they elicited no such evidence on cross-examination.
- 14. The Coliseum is a large facility with considerable
~
floor. space. It has a Receiving Area with 15,500 square feet, an Arena (17,000 square feet), an Exhibition Hall (59,000 square feet), and an arena lobby (5,750 square feet). Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, at 2. Since the Arena floor is in-use 60 percent of the time and the exhibition floor is not available 30 percent of the time, LILCO does not rely on these areas in its Plan.4/ Tr. 15,926 (Robinson).
- 2. Monitoring of Evacuees and Vehicles
- 15. Initial monitoring of evacuees would be done in the receiving area, which is a large, concrete-floored area. Tr.
3/ Counsel acting for Suffolk County attempted to introduce several documents, but they were ruled inadmissible.
4/ While the Plan provides that evacuees would have to walk around the arena floor following decontamination, Robinson Af-fidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 5, at 1, there is a corridor be-tween the Arena floor and the seats which is unobstructed and which would be available even in the middle of a hockey game, Tr. 15,915 (Robinson).
e , - - - - --
15,899 (Robinson). This would be a general monitoring to de-termine if an evacuee had any contamination at all, whether on his or her clothing, shoes, skin, or in the thyroid. Tr.
15,901 (Robinson). Evacuees who were not found to be contami-nated would be issued " clean" tags and instructed to proceed to the arena lobby. Tr. 15,897 (Robinson). Evacuees who were found to be contaminated would be instructed to proceed to the decontamination area. Tr. 15,898 (Robinson). Where necessary,-
the evacuee' flow pattern would be delineated by stanchions and yellow and magenta rope.
Tr. 15,897 (Robinson). In addition, a number of LILCO security personnel would ba stationed at any possible points of confusion or where contaminated and
-decontaminated evacuees might otherwise mingle. Tr. 15,897 (Robinson).
- 16. Additional monitoring would be conducted before evacuees,- already determined to be in need of decontamination, proceeded down a hallway towards the decontamination area.
Evacuees would be monitored to see if their shoes or feet were contaminated and, if so, would be issued shoe coverings to pre-vent contaminating the floor. Tr. 15,958 (Robinson).
- 17. Suitable arrangements for the monitoring of vehi-cles have been made as well. As cars from zones of concern ar-rived at the reception center, LERO monitoring personnel sta-tioned in the Coliseum parking lots-would scan with a radiation monitoring device along the vehicle top, radiator grill, and wheel well to determine if contamination was present. Tr.
15,960 (Robinson).
- 3. Decontamination of Evacuees and Vehicles
- 18. The Board finds that the Coliseum is suitably equipped with the facilities necessary for LILCO personnel to decontaminate evacuees. The Coliseum has four locker rooms (two for home teams and two for visitors' teams) and five dressing rooms, all of which are equipped with sanitary facili-ties, including showers. Tr. 15,895 (Robinson). There are a
. total of twelve showers in the visitors' locker rooms, as well as twenty-two additional showers in the home team locker rooms and the dressing rooms. Tr. 15,896 (Robinson).
- 19. While LILCO would have access to all four locker rooms and all five dressing rooms in the event of a Shoreham emergency, the LILCO Plan relies on using only the visitors' locker rooms. Tr. 15,895 (Robinson). During the preparation of the decontamination procedures it was decided that these would be adequate. Tr. 15,896 (Robinson).
- 20. Evacuees needing decontamination would first be asked to remove their outer clothing and then be remonitored before showering. Experience has shown that in the vas't major-ity of cases the contamination would.be on the clothing alone.
Tr. 15,901-02 (Robinson). Contaminated articles of clothing discarded in the decontamination process would be collected, wrapped, and transported as low-level solid waste back to Shoreham for processing. Tr. 15,907-08 (Robinson).
- 21. If, after remonitoring, contamination was still de-tected, the evacuee would be instructed to take a shower. Tr.
15,902 (Robinson). A FEMA witness verified that a normal type of shower is a typical decontamination method, Tr. 16,033 (Keller). The process would be repeated as many as four times if necessary. Tr. 15,902 (Robinson). If, after the process was completed, there still appeared to be skin contamination, an ambulance would be requested to take the person to a hospi-tal for decontamination. Tr. 15,902 (Robinson).
- 22. Any vehicles coming to the Coliseum that were found to be contaminated would be decontaminated by using disposable towels and spray bottles of a common cleaner to wipe off the radioactive particulates. Tr. 15,960 (Robinson). There is also a hydrant available off the concourse area between the Coliseum and the Marriott Hotel which could be used for washing down vehicles. Such a procedure is not LILCO's current plan, but the hydrant is available if an alternative method of vehi-cle decontamination is required. Tr. 15,922 (Robinson).
- 23. If it became apparent that many vehicles coming into the Coliseum parking lot were contaminated and that LILCO personnel could not get to them all immediately, they would be directed to designated parking lots for later decontamination.
Tr. 15,961 (Robinson).
o
- 4. Red Cross Role at the Coliseum
- 24. LILCO has made arrangements for the American Red Cross to be at the Coliseum in the event of a shoreham-related evacuation to provide its traditional emergency assistance to the evacuees who came to the reception center. Among its tasks, the Red Cross would coordinate with LILCO's monitoring and decontamination personnel to define a " clean" area from which the Red Cross would operate at the Coliseum. Robinson Affidavit, ff. Tr. 15,870, Att. 3, at 1. The specified area from which the Red Cross would operate is the arena lobby. Tr.
15,898 (Robinson). The Red Cross would provide what it normal-ly does in any emergency, according to its own procedures, which is basically anything that evacuees need for their physi-cal well-being. Tr._15,927 (Robinson). From the Coliseum the Red Cross would send evacuees needing public shelter to the congregate care centers. LILCO's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Offsite Emergency Planning, Oct. 5, 1984, at 249 V 525.
III. Conclusions of Law
- 25. Based on the uncontradicted evidence in the record, the Board concludes that the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum is available to LILCO for use as a reception center in the event of a radiological emergency at the Shoreham Nucleat Power Station.
e aqvs,-
O t
- 26. Further, the Board concludes that the Coliseum is functionally adequate to serve as a reception center for the anticipated general evacuees.
- 27. Therefore, the Board concludes that LILCO has sat-isfactorily carried its burden of proof on Contention 24.0, that there is no longer a " void in the record" on this. issue, that with respect to the availability and functional adequacy of the Coliseum the LILCO Transition Plan complies with 10 C.F.R. 9 50.47 and NUREG-0654 Criteria J.10.h and J.12, and that there is no inadequacy with respect to the designation of a reception center that would prevent the issuance of a full-power, full-term operating license for Shoreham.
Respectfully submitted, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Bi
^
d mes N.~ Chrisgman Hunton & Williams F
! P.O. Box 1535 707 East Main Street Richmond, VA 23219 1
DATED: July 10, 1985 l
l l
l l
l l
LILCO, July 10, 1985 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 PROPOSED FIND-INGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS'OF LAW ON REOPENED CONTENTION 24.0 (NASSAU COLISEUM) were served this date upon the following by first-class mail, postage prepaid or, as indicated by an aster-isk, by Federal Express:
Morton B. Margulies,* 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. Nuclear 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.*
Oreste Russ Pirfo, 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
o,
~
Donna Duer, 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 Mary-Gundrum, Esq.* James Dougherty, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General 3045 Porter Street 2 World Trade Center Washington, D.C. 20008 Room 4614-New York, New York 10047 Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.
New York State Department of
~ Herbert H. Brown, Esq.* Public Service, Staff Counsel Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq. Three Rockefeller Plaza Christopher McMurray, Esq. Albany, New York 12223 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 8th Floor Spence W. Perry, Esq.
1900 M Street, N.W. Associate General Counsel Washington, D.C. 20036 Federal Emergency Management Agency MHB Technical Associates 500 C Street, S.W.
1723 Hamilton Avenue Room 840 Suite K Washington, D.C. 20472 San Jose, California 95125 Ms. Nora Bredes Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Executive' Coordinator New York State Energy Office Shoreham Opponents' Coalition Agency Building'2 195 East Main Street Empire State Plaza Smithtown, New York 11787 Albany, New York 12223 -
0
3 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 e
Y James N. Chd istman Hunton & Williams k
707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: July 10, 1985 l
t r
l t
l l
l l
l
.. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . .