ML20132B903

Forwards Monthly Status Rept for Aug 1985 Re Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness for OL Reviews.License Authorizing Operation of Facility at 5% Power Issued on 850703

ML20132B903
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	09/19/1985
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Palladino NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
NUDOCS 8509260340
Download: ML20132B903 (6)

Text

,

I O

/*% ^t* UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3

, .g WASHINGTON, D. C. 205S5 e

1 / SEP 19 MS MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Palladino FROM: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

MONTHLY STATUS REPORT ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Enclosed is the monthly report for August 1985 on the status of offsite emergency preparedness for operating license reviews. The licensing process for Shoreham continues to be impacted by offsite emergency preparedness issues.

A license authorizing operation of Shoreham at up to 5 percent power was issued on July 3,1985. Resolution of offsite emergency planning issues, including the performance of an emergency plan exercise, is required before operation of Shoreham above 5 percent power may be authorized. On June 20, 1985, the NRC staff requested FEMA's cooperation in scheduling as full an exercise of the LILC0 offsite plan for Shoreham as is feasible. On August 2, 1985, LILC0 submitted Revision 5 of this plan to the NRC, which in turn forwarded it to FEMA for review.

This revision responds to the remaining FEMA-identified inadequacies in the LILC0 offsite plan, except for the lack of LILCO's legal authority to implement the plan. A New York court ruled on February 20, 1985, that LILC0 did not have authority to implement its offsite plan without state or local government coopera-

~

tion. LILCO has filed a notice of appeal of that decision to higher New York State courts.

On April 17, 1985, the NRC Licensing Board considering emergency planning for Shoreham ruled on the basis of the existing New York State court decision, that although the LILC0 offsite plan is generally adequate, the plan could not be implemented under state law. Appeal of that decision was taken by LILCO, Suffolk County, and New York State to the NRC Appeal Board. On August 26, 1985, the Licensing Board issued a concluding partial initial decision finding that because of LILC0's inability to implement its offsite emergency response plan for Shoreham and because of the refusal of the state and county to cooperate, LILC0 may not be issued a license for Shoreham at this time.

On May 30, 1985, the Suffolk County Executive ordered the. county to review and evaluate LILC0's offsite emergency plan and to participate in an exercise of that plan with the Local Emergency Response Organization. On July 9, 1985, the New York Court of Appeals affirmed lower court determinations holding that the Suffolk County Executive had acted contrary to county law in instructing county police and other county officials to participate in an emergency planning exer-cise for Shoreham. On July 15, 1985, the County Executive issued a new order

Contact:

Rosemary T. Hogan, IE 492-4866 8509260340 850919 PER ADOCK 05000322 F , PDR,

b Chairman Palladino pyg directing that county agencies analyze, but not test, an emergency plan for Shoreham. New York State still refuses to participate in emergency planning for

! Shoreham. Following an exercise, additional delays may result based on hearings 1 of exercise-related issues.

On the basis of the above, a realistic forecast of the impact on the licensing process cannot be made at this time.

The Commission Decision and Start of Hearing dates shown in Table 1 of the enclosed report are consistent with the NRC monthly licensing report for August 1985.

Original signed by Victor Stellop 1

))VWilliam J. Dircks

' h Executive Director for Operations i

Enclosure:

Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness cc: Commissioner Roberts Note: About a year ago staff questioned the continued

. Commissioner Asselstine need for this monthly report to you in view of the

! Commissioner Bernthal fact that it is time-consuming to prepare and

! Commissioner Zech contains little that is new between quarterly i OPE reports to Congrc::s. At that time you asked l OGC that the report continue. I would like to SECY request again, for the same reasons as before,-

j that the report be discontinued.

WJD

DISTRIBUTION DC5e HLThompson, NRR RWKrimm, FEMA JGKeppler, RIII 1 NRC PDR RWilkerson, FEMA RDMartin, RIV JBMartin, RV EDO RF EChristenbury, ELD SASchwartz, IE RTHogan, IE EPB RF BPCotter, ASLBP DBMatthews, IE MWWeston, RM DEPER RF DPrestemon, ASLBP CRVanNiel, IE DMRohrer, IE WJDircks, EDO JMTaylor, IE FKantor, IE SBlack, NRR JWRoe, EDO RHVollmer, IE 85-37 KEPerkins, IE i

GCunningham, ELD ELJordan, IE TEMurley, RI HDenton, NRR JGPartlow, IE JNGrace, RII i

I

$ I R b 1mer 1h h eyTor ED0 1

%* WJD, tks 9/v/85 9/l /B5 i

9/g/85*See previous con (currence EP8:IE* EP8:IE*

• Tech.Ed *EPB:IE *DD:DEPER:IE *D:DEPER:IE

• ELD RTHogan:ww FKantor DGable DBMatthews SASchwartz ELJordan ESChristenbury 9/Q/85 9/g/85 9/5/85 9/g /85 9$/85 9/G /85 $/yv'85

August 31, 1985 Table 1

, Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness Operating License Reviews Date of Potential Estimated FEMA Offsite EP FEMA Finding Delay a Start of Commission Facility Finding 1 Needed- (Months) Hearings 4 Decision 5 Rivar Bend C C 0 C 10/85*

Shoreham 8 8 8 C t Perry C C 0 C7 10/85*

Watts Bar C C 0 None te Comanche Peak C C 0 C 8 Millstone 3 C C 0 None 11/85 Hope Creek 11/15/85* 11/15/85* 0 None 12/85 Clinton 11/15/85* 11/15/85* 0 None 01/86 Nine Mile 2 C C 0 None 02/86 Harris C* C* . O C 03/86-d Braidwood 11/01/85* 11/01/85* 0 10/07/85*10 04/86 Seabrook 03/15/86 03/15/86 11 0 06/86*

Vogtle 05/01/86 05/01/86 0 t 12/86*

South Texas 01/01/86 01/01/86 0 06/86 12/86 Beaver Valley 2 03/01/86 03/01/86 0 None 04/87 Total Potential Offsite Emergency Preparedness Delay: 8 Change from previous report.

t Not Scheduled.

i Notes:

1C = complete; i.e, FEMA Findings have been provided. Where a date is given in parentheses, supplemental information to FEMA Findings previously provided is expected on that date. FEMA Findings on offsite preparedness are not required to issue a license authorizing fuel loading and operation up to 5% of rated power.

2C = complete; i.e., FEMA' Findings have been provided. Where a date is given, it is the date by which the FEMA Findings must be provided so that the Commission can make its decision on the full power operating license for a plant.

3The delay is the difference between the date the FEMA Finding is needed and when it is required. This delay is in addition to any delays estimated in the report to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.

Table 1 Continued 4C = complete; i.e., a hearing has started.

sDates are consistent with those reported to the House Appropriations Subcom-mittee on Energy and Water Development and in the NRC Monthly Licensing Report.

For plants for which construction is complete, the dates shown are for full power licensing. For the other plants, the dates are those by which the NRC needs the information to act on authorization for fuel loading and low power operations.

60n Au~ gust 2, 1985, LILCO submitted Revision 5 of the offsite plan which incor-

• porated resolutions to the remaining FEMA-identified inadequacies, except the element regarding LILCO's legal authority to implement this plan. NRC forwarded this plan to FEMA for review. FEMA intends to respond to NRC by September 30, 1985. On May J0,1985, the Suffolk County Executive ordered the county to review and evaivate LILC0's offsite emergency plan and to participate in an exer-cise of that plan with the Local Emergency Response Organization. On July 9, 1985, the New York Court of Appeals affirmed lower court determinations holding that the Suffolk County Execut'"e had acted contrary to county law in instructing county police and other officials to participate in an emergency planning exer-cise for Shoreham. On July 15, 1985, the County _ Executive issued a new order directing county agencies to analyze, but not test, an emergency plan for 4

Shoreham. New York State still refuses to cooperate in emergency planning for -

Shoreham. On April 17, 1985, the Licensing Board for emergency planning ruled that, although LILCO's offsite emergency plan is generally adequate, LILCO does not have the legal authority to perform.many of the required emergency functions set out in that plan. Both LILC0 and the intervenors filed notices of appeal of the Licensing Board's partial initial decision. Oral argument on the legal authority issues was held on August 12, 1985. On August 26, 1985, the Board 4 issued a concluding partial initial decision finding that because of'LILC0's inability to implement its offsite emergency response plan and because of the refusal of the state and county to cooperate, a full power license may not be issued for Shoreham. On July 3, 1985, a license was issued authorizing opera-tion at up to 5% cf rated power. Resolution of the offsite emergency planning issue, including the performance of an emergency plan exercise, is required before operation above 5% power. The NRC staff, on June 20, 1985, requested the

. cooperation of FEMA in scheduling as full an exercise of the LILC0 offsite plan as is feasible. Following such an exercise, additional delays may result, based on a possible hearing of exercise related issues. On the basis of the above, a realistic forecast of the impact on the licensing process cannot be made at this time.

7The hearings on emergency planning contentions were completed in April 1985, and a Board decision is expected in September 1985.

8The applicant has not provided a current construction schedule.

9The licensee has not provided a current construction schedule, and the ASLB has not established a hearing schedule.

4 L 1

i t

i Table 1 Continued t l 10The Board has admitted certain contentions including one relating to emergency t- preparedness; a hearing has been scheduled to begin in October 7, 1985.

i

, 11 FEMA has been chairing regular coordination meetings over the past year with

• the utility, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and the NRC on an invitational basis.

FEMA has reviewed draft state and local plans for both states, which were sub- .

1 mitted for an informal technical review. FEMA's comments were transmitted to

New Hampshire and Massachusetts for their use in preparation for formal submittal of emergency plans. New Hampshire is expected to formally submit plans to FEMA 1

in the early fall 1985. FEMA is not able to accurately predict when Massachusetts will formally submit plans. Hearings on offsite emergency preparedness issues have yet to be held; the commencement of such hearings is awaiting the submissi'on of emergency plans.

1

[

l i

2 i

i i

l ~

l r i

i l

P i c .. .

i Chairman Palladino  :

directing that County agencies analyze, but not test, an emergency plan for Shoreham. New York State still refuses to participate in emergency planning for Shoreham. Following an exercise, additional delays may result based on hearings of exercise-related issues. .

.On the basis of the above, a realistic forecast of the impact on the licensing

. process cannot be made at this time.

The Commission Decision and Start of Hearing dates shown in Table 1 of the enclosed report are consistent with the NRC monthly licensing report for August 1985.

i .

/

William J. DircKs Executive Diredtor for Operations

Enclosure:

Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness cc: Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Asselstine Commissioner Bernthal I Commissioner Zech i OPE OGC SECY DISTRIBUTION '

l DCS 'HLThompson,.NRR RWKrimm, FEMA JGKeppler, RIII -

] NRC PDR RWilkerson, FEMA RDMartin, RIV JBMartin, RV

! EDO RF EChristenbury, ELD SASchwartz, IE RTHogan, IE 4 EPB RF BPCotter, ASLBP DBMattheh,IE MWWeston, RM l DEPER RF DPrestemon, ASLBP CRVanNiel ,\IE DMRohrer, IE WJDircks, EDO JMTaylor, IE FKantor,Ih SBlack, NRR j JWRoe, EDO RHVollmer, IE 85-37 KEPerkins, IE l GCunningham, ELD. ELJordan, IE TEMurley, RI J

HDenton, NRR JGPartlow, IE JNGrace, RII i

i

! DD:IE D:IE EDO l RHVollmer JMTaylor WJDircks ,

9/ /85

• See revious concurrence 9/ /85 9/ /85 ,

'I jfjj/

f

/ '

1. b EP EPBplE

• Tech.Ed E D  : 5t: E W RgR:IE ELD jA J an:ww FK6br DGable D artz rdan ESch stenbury

$9/h/85 9/G/85'9/5/85 9/6/85 atthews5 fp /85 /85 $/30/85 JO

-.-mm, - - . , - - - ,, , , . _ , - - - . . - . . - - _ - _ - - , , , , , . . _ . . . . , . , , _ - . < w , -- -- . - - - - - - , - - - -

_ . - . _ - . . - .