ML20151N955

Amended Contention of Atty General Jm Shannon on Notification Sys for Commonwealth of Ma.* Atty General Submits Listed Amended Contention W/Bases on Applicant Vehicular Alert & Notification Sys.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20151N955
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	04/15/1988
From:	Jonas S, Shannon J MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF
To:
References
CON-#288-6102 OL-1-R, NUDOCS 8804260052
Download: ML20151N955 (11)

Text

- _ _ _ _ - _ _ __

WOA oncMET NUMBER enoo.a urit rAc pqp m e ... ,..

y/ g - /

00CKETE0 USHRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 38 MW 19 P5 ;21 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD . .-

00CXEi,v . .. cce" Before Administrative Judges:

Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman crr!Cr.EH?!C 'a 57l E Emmeth A. Luebke Jerry Harbour

) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1-R IN THE MATTER OF ) 50-444-OL-1-R

)

! PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) (On-Site Emergency NEW;9AMPSHIRE ) Planning and Safety

) Issues)

(SEABROOK STATION, UNITS 1 and 2) )

) April 15, 1988 AMENDED CONTENTION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES M. SHANNON ON NOTIFICATION SYSTEM FOR MASSACHUSETTS Pursuant to this Board's order of March 25, 1988, ASLBP No.

88-558-01-OLR, and an allowed extension of time, the Mass AG submits the following amended contention with bases on the Applicants' Vehicular Alert and Notification System (VANS) and the backup airborne system for the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook EPZ.

The sole sources of information on the VANS system available to the Mass AG are a February 26, 1988 letter from George S. Thomas of New Hampshire Yankee to the NRC, NYN-88025, and an April 1, 1988 Response to Request for Additional Information on the Public Alert and Notification System, 8804260052 880415 PDR ADOCK 05000443 G PDR.

3

])50

O*

NYN-88042. The letters provide a general and, in many respects, incomplete description of the VANS system. For example, the staging areas and acoustic locations have not been identified. Moreover, testing of the system apparently will not be accomplished until April 30, 1988. The Mass AG submits the following amended contention based on the limited information provided by the Applicants to date on the VANS system. Should the Applicants provide additional information, the Mass AG will file appropriate revisions or additional contentions.

CONTENTION AND BASES CONTENTION: Applicants have failed to comply with the provisions of 10 C.F.R. S50.47(b)(5) and Part 50, Appendix E, IV, D(3). The means they claim to have established to provide -

early notification and clear instruction to the populace of the Towns of Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, Salisbury and West Newbury, Massachusetts and SGlisbury State Beach Reservation in Salisbury, Massachusetts a*e inadequate.

BASES:

A. VANS System And Overlapping Siren Coverage The Applicants have indicated in a February 26, 1988 submission to the NRC (NYN-88025) as amended by the April 1, 1988 submission (NYN-88042) that their alert and notification syr, tem for the six Massachusetts communities within the Seabrook EPZ consists of the VANS vehicles and equipment l

, - . . . , -.,e v n.-- . . - - - .-n. . , - - - , _ _ - - - . - -

-functioning as fixed sirens; fixed siren coverage from sirens located in New Hampshire; and a helicopter mounted siren system as a backup system. This system has numerous deficiencies rendering it inadequate and unable to meet the provisions 'f 10 C.F.R. S50.47(b)(5) and Part 50, Appendix E, IV, D(3).

1. The VANS and the New Hampshire fixed sirens because of their locations, height, acoustic range and number, do not provide tone or message coverage for essentially 100 percent of the population in the Massachusetts plume exposure pathway EPZ at the sound pressure levels required in NUREG-0654 and FEMA-REP-10.

2. The Applicants are legally prohibited under local ordinances from operating their six staging areas and their VANS vehicles at the pre-selected acoustic locations. The specific laws and ordinances can be identified when the Applicants disclose the acoustic locations and staging areas.

3. The fourteen VANS locations are physically inaccessible to the VANS equipment.

4. The VANS vehicles are inadequate for their intended ,

t use. The vehicles cannot withstand and will not operate '

i l properly with the weights, amount and nature of equipment intended to be carried by the vehicles. The weight distribution with the siren fully extended will cause the l

equipment to fall and/or the lifting mechanism to bend or break under heavy wind or precipitation conditions. Moreover, the

__ ~ ..

telescopic crane will not reliably 115t the siren to its fully extended position because of the weight of the siren and the capacity of the crane.

5. The time needed for driver alert, dispatch, route transit, setup and activation in accordance with NRC regulations will exceed 15 minutes for many of the VANS vehicles in optimum weather conditions. The reasons for this include the time required to get vehicles on the road (which itself includes the time required to notify the driver, have the driver proceed to the vehicle, check out the vehicle and equipment, atart the vehicle and leave the staging area, along with other vehicles at the staging area), the distance to be traveled, the traffic that will be encountered, the setup time and the need for both alert signal and message capability within the 15 minute period. In poor weather, heavy traffic, and nighttime conditions the times needed to accomplish these tasks will increase.

6. Snow, icy and extreme cold weather conditions will impede extension of the sirens to their operational position, rotation and oscillation of the sirens during the tone and message modes and operation of the sirens themselves.

7. At a sound level of 134 dBC anyone within 100 feet of l

the siren during its operation will suffer severe hearing damage.

8. Because of the large size of the intended dispersion angle (60 degree 5), sound irregularities will occur within the coverage angles including gaps in sound coverage for certain areas. Moreover, the oscillation of the speaker assembly will cause gaps in coverage when the siren is used in its tone alert mode.

9. Listeners in areas where there is an overlap in sound coverage from 2 or more sirens, whether both sirens are in Massachusetts or one is in Massachusetts and one is in New Hampshire, will experience severe echo conditions, rendering any voice message unintelligible.

10. The Applicants have not indicated when and under what circumstances the tone alert mode or tne message mode will be used.

11. Sufficient drivers and backup drivers will not be otationed at the six staging areas to ensure 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> availability of the system. Moreover, the system will work reliably, if at all, only when each vehicle is manned by at least two people.

12. The system will encounter a substantial failure rate because many drivers will be unwilling to accomplish the

! assigned tasks during a real radiological emergency. The

effect of this will be magnified in terms of system failure if l

only one person is assigned to each vehicle, l

t i .

l

[

0 *

13. The VANS system with its backup airborne system is extremely expensive. Funding of the system is not in the ordinary course of PSNH's business. Therefore, the bankruptcy court presiding over PSNH's bankruptcy must approve all expenditures by PSNH of its shace of these funds. It has not done so. Because the major issue in the bankruptcy is the future of the Seabrook plant, no decision will be made by the court on the expeaditure of funds for low-power testing until all parties are heard and the issues are fully analyzed and briefed. A decision on the issue, presently not scheduled for litigation, is at least many months off. No other joint owners have indicated that they will pay for PSNH's share of these funds. Therefore, the funds to pay for a full VANS and airborne backup system are not and will not in the near future be available.

14. The Applicants have not identified the equipment to be used for remote activation of the VANS sirens and, therefore, no conclusion can be reached concerning the reliability of the equipment. Moreover, the Applicants have not indicated whether the siren signals will be pre-recorded or broadcast to the remote locations and have not provided sufficient information to conclude

• hat in either event the equipment has adequate fidelity to ensure intelligibility.

I i

o .

B. Airborne Alerting System The Applicants have not identified the circumstances under which the backup airborne alerting system would be called into operation, the flight path it would take, whether tone or message mode would be used, the time necessary to complete a single operational run, or the areas the helicopter is intended to cover. This lack of information prevents this Board from making a finding that the airborne system meets NRC regulations and standards.

Based on the limited information provided, the system also has the following deficiencies:

1. One of the circumstances which might give rise to the need for a backup system, poor weather (and in particular high wind, heavy rain, snow, icy or. extreme cold conditions), is equally or more debilitating for the use of a helicopter.

2. The airborne system would not meet regulatory i

requirements for any sizable area in that it would not provide coverage within 15 minutes (because of the time needed for pilot alert, start-up, warmup, lift-off, travel to the predetermined route, and conducting an operational run), would not both sound a siren and issue a .nessage and would not sound the siren for the required 3 to 5 minutes.

3. A steady 3 to 5 0.inute tone alert capable of repetition cannot be accomplished with the airborne system for significant numbers of people even within the covered area because the l

4-speed necessary to provide that duration of a tone is too slow for extended operation of the aircraft.

4. Any attempted informational messages for the airborne siren will be garbled and unintelligible because of the strength and size of the speaker array and amplifier system, the height of the aircraft and the effect of the heJicopter's rotary blades.

5. The backup system will be subject to a substantial risk of failure because available pilots will be unwilling to accomplish their assigned tasks during a real radiological emergency.

JAMES M. SHANNON ATTORNEY GENERAL COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

/ h Stephen A./Conas Assistant Attorney General l Office of the Attorney G*ner&1 i

Public ?rotection Bureau i

One Ashburton Place l Boston, Massachusetts 02108 (617) 727-4378 l

l

i 00tKETC0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USNhc NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOA $ AR? 1 Before Administrative Judges:

Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman OFFICE N SE 2r IAf r Emmeth A. Luebke 00CKEimu a 3Eimci, Jerry Hrrbour BRANCH IN THE MATTER OF

) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1-R

)

50-444-OL-1-R

)

PUBLIC SERVICS COMPANY OF ) (On-Site Emergency NEW HAMPSHIRE ) Planning and Safety

) Issues)

(SEABROOK STATION, UNITS 1 and 2) )

) April 15, 1988 CERTIFTCATE OF SERVICE I, Stephen A. Jonas, hereby certify that on April 15, 1988, I made service of the within document, by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, by first class mail, to:

Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman Judge Emmeth A. Luebke A5.omic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Appeal Panel Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 5500 Friendship Boulevard Commission Apartment 1923N East West Towers Building Chevy Chase, MD 20815 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Dr. Jerry Harbour Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Thomas S. Moore Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Commission Appeal Panel East West Towers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4350 East West Highway Commission Bethesda, MD 20814 1

East West Towers Building

(

4350 East West Highway Howard A. Wilber Bethesda, MD 20814 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Administrative Judge Sheldon J. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Wolfe, Esquire, Chairman East West Towers Building l Atomic Safety and Licensing 4350 East West Highway i

Board Panel Bethesda, MD 20814 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Ed Thomas i

East West Towers Building FEMA, Region I 4350 East West Highway 442 John W. McCormack Post Office

Bethesda, MD 20814 Courthouse Post Office Square Boston, MA 02109 V .

i' Robert Carrigg, Chairman Senator Gordon J. Humphrey l Board of Selectmen U.S. Senate l Town Office Washington, DC 20510 l Atlantic Avenue Attention: Tom Burack l North Hampton, NH 03862 l Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Diane Curran, Esquire One Eagle Square, Suite 507 Andrea C. Ferster, Esquire Concord, NH 03301 Harmon & Weiss Attention: Herb Boynton

suite 430 2001 S Street, N.W. Mr. Thomas F. Powers, III Washington, DC 20009 Town Manager Town of Exeter Stephen E. Merrill, Esquire 10 Front Street Attorney General Exeter, NH 03833 George Dana Bisbee, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.

Office of the Attorney General Office of General Counsel 25 Capitol Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Concord, NH 03301-6397 One White Flint North, 15th Floor 11555 Rockville Pike Atomic Safety & Licensing Rockville, MD 20852 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Robert A. Backus, Esquire Commission Backus, Meyer & Solomon East West Towers Building 116 Lowell Street 4350 East West Highway P.O. Box 516 Bethesda, MD 20814 Manchester, NH 03105 Atomic Safety & Licensing Mr. J.P. Nadeau Appeal Board Panel Selectmen's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 10 Central Road Commission Rye, NH 03870 Washington, DC 20555 Thomas G. Dignan, Esquire Philip Ahrens, Esquire George H. Lewald Asssistant Attorney General Roper & Gray Department of the Attorney 225 Franklin Street General Boston, MA 02110 Augusta, ME 04333 Mr. Calvin A. Canney Paul McEachern, Esquire City Manager Matthew T. Brock, Esquire City Hall Shaines & McEachern 126 Daniel Street 25 Maplewood Avenue Portsmouth, NH 03801 P.O. Box 360 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Mr. Angie Machiros Chairman of the Board of Mrs. Sandra Gavutis Selectmen Chairman, Board of Selectmen Town of Newbury RFD 1 - Box 1154 Newbury, MA 01950 Route 107 Kensington, NH 03827

i 4

Mr. Peter S. Matthews Judith Mizner, Esquire Mayor Silverglate, Gertner, Baker, Fine, City Hall Good & Mizner Newburyport, MA 01950 88 Broad Street Boston, MA 02110 Mr. William S. Lord Board of-Selectmen Brentwood. Board of Selectmen Town Hall - Friend Street RFD Dalton Road Amesbury, MA 01913 Brentwood, NH 03833 H. Joseph Flynn, Esquire Richard A. Hampe, Esquire Office of General Counsel- Hampe and McNicholas Federal Emergency Management 35 Pleasant Street Agency Concord, NH 03301 500 C. Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20472 Charles P. Graham, Esquire McKay, Murphy and Graham Gary W. Holmes, Esquire 100 Main Street Holmes & Ells Amesbury, MA 01913 47 Winnacunnet Road Hampton, NH 03841 Docketing & Service U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 205 5 5

/G s

/ (2 f St'eph(n A. Jo6as Assistant Attorney General Deputy Chief Public Protecti^7 Bureau i DATED: April 15, 1988

.