ML20149F154
| ML20149F154 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1988 |
| From: | Cumming W Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#188-5566 OL-3, NUDOCS 8802120047 | |
| Download: ML20149F154 (15) | |
Text
- _ - _ _
f
[
DOCMETED USNRC February 5, 1988 (F'!CE Os F.C V ?!f v v0Wgj,Q', oM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board t
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
)
(Emergency Planning)
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
)
)
FEMA'S FIRST RESPONSE TO SUFFOLK COUN*Y'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO FEMA CONCERNING CONTENTION 25.C-ROLE CONFLICT OF SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS I.
FEMA hereby responds to the SUFFOLK COUNTY'S First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents served on January 5, 1988. All documents referenced in these answers are prov'ded with these responses to the extent that FEMA has no objection to their production.
II.
By responding to these Interrogatories, FEMA does not waive its objections (1) to the method of service; (2) to the fact that FEMA is called on to respond for other Federal agencies and their contractors; (3) to the fact that FEMA is not subject to formal discovery under the NRC rules and regulations and the FEMA-NRC Memorandum of Understanding dated April 18, 1985; and (4) to the fact that FEMA does not by responding indicate that discovery for all parties in this proceeding with respect to FEMA is not governed by Long Island Lighting Company (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1),
l AIAB-773,19 NRC 1333 (1984).
8802120047 880205 l PDR ADOCK 050003 2 o
l
III.
FEMA objects to any or all interrogatories addressed 'to on-site matters.
IV.
FEMA objects to any interrogatories that may be considered to request information protected by the attorney-client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine.
V.
FEMA objects to all interrogatories insofar as they purport to require information outside the possession, custody or control of FEMA or require FEMA to answer based on documents not prepared or requested by FEMA personnel or contractors, or not considered official records of FEMA.
VIII.
FEMA objects in general to the interrogatories as being overly broad, unduly burdensome, and designe1 to gain information not relevant and not material to this proceeding.
FEMA enters this objection for each and every interrogatory and will for economy not restate the objection in each answer.
IX.
FEMA Counsel has also instructed the Counsel for the Applicant that no documents prepared at the direction or request of FEMA officials, employees, or its contractors may be released without FEMA Counsel being given the right of review and inspection and the opportunity to enter appropriate objections.
X.
FEMA notes that many of its objections are premised on the need to protect in the discovery process its deliberative process based on the request dated January 27, 1988, by NRC for FEMA to review Revision 9 of the SNPS Local Offsite Radiological Emergency Response Plan (Copy furnished with these responses).... -,
w XI. - FEMA's response to the first interrogatories consists of (1) this general response by FEMA Counsel; (2) the numbered answers to the Interrogatories; (3) the Declaration of Margaret Law 12ss and (4) referenced documents not objected to by Counsel and (5) the appropriate service list.
Respectfully submitted,
/
William R. Cumming Counsel for FEMA Dated at Washington, D.C.
this 5th day of February,1988
Interrogatories and Document Requests 1.
Identify each person whom FEMA and/or the NRC Staff-expects to call as an expert or non-expert witness during the remand proceeding on Contention 25.C and state the subject matter on which each is expected to testify.
FEMA Response:
FEMA does not intend to provide a witness concerning the bus driver role conflict contention.
FEMA assumes that the bus drivers will be trained as emergency workers for which FEMA has already testified in this proceeding.
See FEMA's First Response to New York's First Request for Production of Documents and First Set of Interrogatories dated February 1,1988.
FEMA understands the school evacuation proposal to have been incorporated into Revision 9, which will be reviewed in accordance with FEMA procedures and a finding sent to NRC.
Anticipating that finding will be litigated, FEMA will provide witnesses to defend that finding.
2.
Describe the employment history, educational background, experience, and professional qualifications of each person identified in response to Interrogatory 1.
FEMA Response:
See answer to Interrogatory 1 above.
3.
Identify by date, location and proceeding, all prior testimony before any judicial, administrative, or legislative body, including deposition testiseny, concerning emergency preparedness, including the implementability of emergency preparedness plans and, in particular, protective actions for school children, given by each of the persons identified in response to Interrogatory 1.
FEMA desponse:
See answ9r to Interrogatory 1 above.
4.
Identify all NRC Staff or FEMA personnel, and all members of'the FEMA Regional Assistance Committee, including consultants thereto, who have reviewed or participated in any way in activities concerning LILCO's schools evacuation proposal (including, without limitation, preparation, review, negotiations or approval of LILCO's proposal; preparation or review of the rec ruitment, qualificatior.s or training of LILCO employees reliad upon by LILCO to implement its schools evacuation proposal; or discussions concerning LILCO's schools evacuation proposal), and with respect to each, describe such participation and activities.
FEMA Response:
FEMA was requested by NRC to review LILCO Revision 9 on January 27, 1988.
FEMA understands that NRC has distributed Revision 9 to all members of the RAC in FEMA Region II, but FEMA has not yet made a formal request of the RAC to review that document.
FEMA expects to make that request within the next 30 days.
5.
Identify all NRC Staff or FEMA personnel, and all members and Chairmen of the FEMA Regional Assistance Committee, including consultants thereto, who are expected to participate in the review of LILC0's schools evacuation proposal, and state when such review is to take place.
FEMA Response:
See answer to Interrogatory 4 above.
A list of all RAC members and consultants will be furnished within 10 days under separate cover.
4 6.
Identify every agency, organization, group, entity, institution, and individual, other than those identified in Interrogatory 4, who participated in, reviewed, discussed, or received correspondence or documents concerning LILCO's schools evacuation proposal. With respect to each organization identified, identify the person or persons affiliated with that organization who are knowledgeable concerning that organization's participation or activities, and describe such participation and activities. With respect to individuals identified, identify the organization or entity which they represent or of which they are members, and desc ibe their participation and activities.
FEMA Response:
FEMA has no knowledge of any such organizations.
7.
Provide copies of all documents, including correspondence and drafts:
(a) sent by or on behalf of the NRC Staff or FEMA to any person and relating to LILCO's schools evacuation proposal; and (b) received f rom any person concerning LILCO's schools evacuation proposal.
FEMA Response:
The only document that falls within (a) or (b) above is the January 27, 1988, request and a separate memorandum from Frank Congel to Richard Krimm identifying a point of contact for review of Revision 9.
Both documents have already been furnished to Suffolk County and the Applicant under separate cover so as not to delay document production.
8.
Provide copies of all correspondence to or from, and any other documents or information sent by or on behalf of the NRC Staff or FEMA, to, or received from, LILCO, or any federal agency, federal personnel, or contractor thereof, concerning LILCO's schocis evacuation proposal.
FEMA Response:
See answer to Interrogatory 7 above.
9.
Provide copies of any documents of any kind relating to LILCO's schools evacuation proposal and not previously produced, including, by way of example only, draf ts, notes, and correspondence, whether produced or generated by the NRC Staff, FEMA, LILCO, LERO, or others.
FEMA Response:
See answer to Interrogatory 7 above.
I These FEMA responses to L iv d = Interro tories have been made by me, Margaret Lawless.
I am employed by FEMA in its Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs of the SLPS Directorate.
In the performance of my duties, I am the liaison between the Office of General Counsel and FEMA Region II on the OL-3 proceeding.
I hereby affirm, subject to the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing responses are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
M Margaf t Lawles/
Emer(ency Management Specialist February 5,1988
UNITED STATES o
~g
[',
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
l WASHINGTON, D. c. 20655
.y.#
Janua ry 27, 1988 i
MEMORANDUM FOR: Richard W. Krimm Assistant Associate Director Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Federal Emergency Management Agency FRON:
Frank J. Congel, Director Division of Radiation Protection and Emergency Preparedness Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
FEMA SUPPORT FOR NRC LICENSING OF SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION i
Enclosed is a long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) letter transmitting the offsite plan for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (SNPS) which LILCO has provided to you separately. The plan, "SNPS Local Offsite Radiological Emergency Response Plan" Revision 9, is further described in the licensee's transmittal letter of January 22, 1988.
Under the provisions of the April 9,1985 NRC/ FEMA Memorandum of Understanding, we request that FEMA review the SNPS plan. As you are aware, the NRC and FEMA have jointly developed an interim-use document entitled: Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of s
Nuclear Power Plants (Criteria for Utility Offsite Planning and Preparedness). The document has been published as Supplement I to NUREG 0654/PEMA-REP-1 Rev.1. The guidance contained in this doi:ument is to be used for the development, review and evaluation of offsite utility radiological emergency planning and preparedness for accidents at commercial nucir.ar plants.
In reviewing and evaluating utility offsite plans and preparedness, FEMA should assune that in an actual rr.diological emergency, State and local officials that have declined to participate in emergency planning will:
(1) Exercise their best efforts to protect the health and safety of the public; (2) Cooperate with the utility and follow the utility offsite plan; and (3) Have the resources sufficient to implement those portions of the utility offsite plan where State and local response is necessary.
w y
j Richard W. Krimm.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.47(a), the NRC must make a finding on whethe I
state of emergency preparedness provides reasonable assurance that adeq
.y,, '
protective measures can and will be taken in the eve
,.J. !
@d
- S the interim criteria described above.
We understand that FEMA will provide its findings on a mutually agreeable schedule consistent with the hearing sched W.?
Shoreham.
A specific request as to the FEMA finding date will be coordinated 3E (<!
4 e'~
our staffs.
If you have any questions, please call me at 492-1088 M r' =
1 y$.
a ~(
h s
(Yh, Frank J. Congel. Director
- n
~2!
Division of Radiation Protection l
.g - 1 and Emergency Preparedness W
Office of Nuclear Reac*or Regulation
- P
Enclosure:
'N LILC0 Ltr. dtd. 1/22/88 14 yt E%
.4 w
Nl vi a
q 4
r F
F 1
I i
l l
1..
ENCLOSURE I
,I LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
/gg@
SMOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION
{
P.O. SQX Sie, NORTM COUNTRY MOAD e WADING MlVER, N.Y.11792 JOHN D. LEONAA0, JR.
v44 PnlaaerT.seucuAm CN44isoses g g ggg U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN:
Document Control Desk washington, DC 20555 Shoreham Offsite Emergency Plan Rev. 9 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322 Gentlemen:
1 Long Island Lighting Company hereby submits Revision 9 to LILCO's i
Local Offsite Radiological Emergency Response Plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station.
This letter describes the j
i principal changes set forth in Revision 9 of the LILCO Plan.
As with previous revisions to the Plan, Revision 9 changes are marked in the right hand margin:
vertical bars denote the addition or replacement of material in Revision 9; horizontal bars denote its deletion in Revision 9.
LILCO has reproduced all pages of the Plan and Implementing Procedures, not just Revision 9 pages.
This alleviates the tedious process of replacing each outdated page in the document with Revision 9 pages, and insures that each plan holder has an updated Plan.
Because there are so few of them, only replacement pages for Appendix A have been included.
Thus, while the Revision 9 package sent you includes all pages of the Plan and Implementing Procedures, plus Revision 9 pages for Appendix A, only pages marked "Rev. 9" in the bottom right corner with revision bars in the right margin have been changed.
Instructions for handling the Revision 9 package are included as Attachment I to this letter.
The principal areas of change in Revision 9 respond to NUREG-0 6 5 4, Rev. 1, Supp. I and the "best efforts" regulation; the Licensing Board's emergency planning decisions; the RAC comments on Revisions 7 and 8 of the Plan; FEMA Guidance Memorandum MS-1; and various ministerial updates to the Plan that are required from time to time.
These areas of change are described generally below and in some detail in Attachment II to this letter.
SNRC-l'420 Page 2 1.
NUREG 0654, Rev. 1, Supp. 1 (Nov. 1987) and "Best Efforts" h
Recul_ation, 10 C.F.R.
paragraph 50.47(c), 5 2_ F_e d. Rec. 42678
. IM'-j (Nov. 3,_1987).
Revision 9 reflects the regulatory w
g requirements of the new NRC "best efforts" regulations.
L legal authority sections of the plan have been revised toThe take into account the regulation; two Emergency Preparedness c;
Advisors have been added at the EOC to liaison with State and
>y County government representatives during an emergency, as q
required by NUREG 0654, Rev. 1, Supp. 1 (Nov. 1987); and
.;]h implementing procedures for coordination between LERO and
.. M government representatives during an emergency have been revised.
M Because certain governmental facilities have not
[Ij agreed to participate in planning, LILCO has relied upon governmental support in the Plan by naming certain entities that would provide support during an emergency.
i t
These entities are identified in sections 1.4 and 2.2 of the Plan as being relied upon pursuant to the "best offorts" regulation.
They include such facilities as,
- ) >f IRF the Nassau County Coliseum and Nassau County Communityfor example, Collego, which are identified in the Plan as school J
relocation centers.
entity named in the Plan reminding them of the existence ofL the Plan and their role in it, I
and to train them.
and offering to plan with them criteria in NUREG-0654, Supp. Attachment 11.1 lists the revised
....g for each included in Revision 9.1, and describes the response
[h 2.
Issue _s_previously litigated.
llg facility reception centers; Revision S identifies special drivers, and reception centers for school children; evacuation time estim eM evacuation time estimates for hospitals; and an EDS station,
, K.j and Concluding Partial Initial Decision on emergencyas
- 2Q planning.
_Long Island Lighting Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), LBP-85-12, 21 NRC 644 (1985); id.
@M LBP-85-31, 22 NRC 410 (1985).
These issues and tee Plan revisions responding to then are listed in Attachment II.2.
3 Region _al Assistance Committee (RAC) Comments.
The December
'4 15, 1987 FEMA RAC comments on Revisions 7 and 8 of the LILCO Plan identified inadequacies in the LILCO Plan.
All these items have been resolved in Revision 9.
The inadequacies identified by the RAC, and the LILCO responses in the Plan, are listed in Attachment II.3.
t j
4
_Ho pit _al_s for Contaminated Iniured Public.
FEMA Guidance Memorandum MS-1 requires identification of a primary and
'of the public. backup hospital for treatisent of contaminated injured membe
{
Revision 9 contains a letter of agreement between LILCO and Brunswick Hospital in Amityville for use as 5
the primary hospital during an emergency.
has identified Nassau County Medical Center and NorthIn addition, LILCO Veterans Administration Medical Center an harbm h-* port
~
SNRC-1420 Page 3 The Nastru County Medical Center, a government-operated facility, would be available during an amargency puranant to the "best efforts" rule and NUREG-0654, Rev.1, Supp.1 (Nov.
1987).
Northport Veterans Administration Medical Center (is available under the Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) and other Federal policies.
All three hospitals have Nuclear Medicine / Radiology Departments and are therefore qualified to treat contaminated injured individuals.
The identification of these three hospitals in Revision 9 satisfies the MS-1 requirements.
This revision is listed in Attachment II.4 to this letter.
5.
Mi_nisterial updates.
The remaining Revision 9 changes update Information about personnel, facilities, or equipment, including such items as updated farm listings.
These revisions are listed in Attachment II.4 to this letter.
Very truly yours, A N Y
John D. Leonard, Jr.
l Vice President - Nuclear Operations KEBMick l
l Attachment cc: R. Lo/S. Brown l
W. T. Russell F. Crescenzo Service List O
e
00CKE1E0 USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF Ei.CRt 1 At f 00CKEltHG & SEINICf.
BRANCH BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "FEMA RESPONSE TO SUFFOLK COUNTY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS" in the above-captioned proceedings have been served cn the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, this 5th day of February, 1988:
James P. Gleason, Chairman G. Palomino, Esq.
Shoreham OL-3 Proceeding Special Counsel to the Governor Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Executive Chamber U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State Capitol Washington, D.C.
20555 Albany, NY 12224 Oscar H. Paris W. Taylor Reveley III, Esq.
Administrative Judge Hunton & Williams Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 707 East Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 1535 Washington, D.C.
20555 Richmond, VA 23212 Frederick J. Shon Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.
Administrative Judge New York State Department of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Public Service U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Three Empire State Plaza Washington, D.C.
20555 Albany, NY 12223
.. John H. Frye, III, Chairman Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ceemission East-West Towers, Rm. 430 East-West Towers, Rm. 430 4350 East--West Hwy.
4350 East-West Hwy Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814 Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
John F. Shea, III, Esq.
Christopher M. McMurray, Esq.
Twomey, Latham & Shea lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Attorneys at Law David T. Case, Esq.
P.O. Box 398 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 33 West Second Street 1800 M Street, N.W.
Riverhead, NY 11901 South Lobby-9th Floor Washington, D.C.
20036-5891 Atomic Safety and Licensing board Panel Joel Blun, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Director, Utility Intervention Washington, D.C.
20555 NY State Consumer Protection Board Suite 1020 Atomic Safety and Licensing 99 Washington Avenue Appeal Board Panel Albany, NY 12210 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Monroe Schneider North Shore Committee P.O. Box 231 Docketing and Service Section Wading River, NY 11792 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission RAC Chairperson Washington, D.C.
20555 Federal Emergency Management Agency 26 Federal Plaza Spence Perry, Esq.
New York, New York 10278 General Counsel, Rm. 840 Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C.
20472 Robert Abrams, Esq.
Attorney General of the State Alfred L. Nardelli, Esq.
New York State Dept. of Law Attn:
Peter Bienstock, Esq.
120 Broadway Department of Law 3rd Floor, Room 3-118 New York, N.Y Two World Trade Center 10271 Room 46-14 New York, NY 10047 MHB Technical Associates General Counsel 1723 Hamilton Avenue j
Long Island Lighting Company Suite K 250 Old County Road San Jose, CA 95125 Mineola, NY 11501 i
l
. County Executive Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.
Suffolk County. Executive Suffolk County Attorney County Executive / Legislative Bl.dg.
H. Lee Dennison Building Veteran's Memorial Highway Veteran's Memorial Highway Nauppauge,_NY 11788 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Ms. Nora Bredes New York State Energy Office Shoreham Opponents Coalition Agency Building 2 195 East Main Street Empire State Plaza Smithtown, NY 11787 Albany, New York 12223 Ellen Blackler Mr. Robert Hoffmnan New York State Assembly Ms. Susan Rosenfeld Energy Committee Ms. Sharlene Sherwin 626 Legislative Office Building P.O. Box 1355 Albany, NY 12248 Massapequa, NY 11758 Brookhaven Town Attorney Richard Bachman, Esq.
475 E. Main Street George Johnson. Esq.
U.S Nuclear Regulatory Agency Patchogue, NY 11772 Office of General Counsel Washington, D.C. 20555
/
"William R. Cumming
[
g Federal Energency Management Agency Dated February 5,1988 Washington, D.C.
1 i
l l
L