ML20151P099
| ML20151P099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1988 |
| From: | Becton J Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151P103 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#288-6123 OL, NUDOCS 8804260087 | |
| Download: ML20151P099 (15) | |
Text
W - -
(st?3 (EuTED CORRESPO!(DYJdh .
0 01, e. .. . l. .t. i r USNhC April 15, 1988
- s APR 20 P6:43 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fffly g
BR A'lCH Mh BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD JUDGE IVAN W. SMITH, CHAIR.VRJ JUDGE JERRY HARBOUR JUDGE GUSTAVE A. LINENBERGER, JR.
t
)
In the Matter of )
) !
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire, ) Docket No. 50-443-OL [
et al. ) 50-444-OL
) Offsite Emergency j (Seabrook Station, Units 1 & 2) ) Planning Issues
)
)
l RESPONSE OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMDJT AGDJCY TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTICN OF DOCUMDJTS CCNTAINED IN INTERVDJORS' NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITIONS ,
Intervenors' Request No. 1:
Any and all documents relied upon by FEMA for its determination that the "rationale for the State's choice . . . is technically supportable." FEMA !
Testimony at p. 3.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 1: t The statement referred to in Request No. 13 relies on NRC guidance I
documents NUREG-1210 and NUREG-0396 and written material submitted to FEMA by ,
I the State of New Hampshire on February 11 and 19, 1988, copies of which havo already been provided to all parties, t
8804260007 ADOCK h43 PDR PDR l G
~9 9)
Inte rvenors ' Request No. 2:
Copies of all documents pertaining in any way to communications, including all notations, memoranda or other records of communications, occurring between NRC and/or its contractors and FEMA and/or its contractors f rom December,1987, through the present and concerning FEMA's or NRC's position on the sheltering contentions and/or the adequacy of protective actions for the beach population.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2:
The documents produced herewith fall into three categories: (1) a three l volume briefing book for the use of FEMA's witness, (2) files maintained at {
FEMA headquarters, and (3) files maintained in FEMA's Regional Office in i
Boston. Because of the great volume of material contained in the briefing i I
book, only one copy is being provided to the Intervenors and is being delivered to the offices of the Massachusetts Att eney General at One >
Ashburton Place, Boston, Massachusetts. An additional copy will be made ,t available for inspection at FEMA's Office of General Counsel if arrangements f I
are made reasonably in advance. The documents which respond to Request No. 2 f will be found in at various places throughout these sets of documents.
There are two one-page documents which respond to this request which are not produced under a claim of executive privilege or deliberative process f
privilege. See the attached Affidavit of Julius W. Becton, Jr. The documents are a typewritten "FEMA /NRC Agenda Jan. 19, 1988" and undated typewritten f "Talking Points for Stello Meeting" with handwritten notes.
Inte rvenors ' Request No. 3:
Copies of all documents pertaining in any way to contunications, including all notations, memoranda or other records of communications occurring between Applicants and FEMA and/or its contractors from December, 1987 through the present and concerning FEMA's or the Applicants' position on the sheltering contentions and/or the adequacy of protective actions for the ,
beach population. 1 FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVD10RS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 2.
~ , _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 3:
A search of FEMA's records was conducted at the request of and under the direction of H. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel, and no documents responding to Request No. 3 were discovered. Personal records of FEMA employees not under FEMA's control, not used in the conduct of FEMA's regular activities, and j maintained separate from FEMA's official records were not included in the search.
I Intervenors' Request No. 4:
Copies of all documents pertaining in any way to communications, 9 including all notations, memoranda or other records of communications, occurring between the State of New Hampshire and FEMA and/or its contractors i from December, 1987, through the present and concerning TEMA's or the State of New Hampshire's position on the sheltering contentions and/or the adequacy of i <
protective actions for the beach population. 1 FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 4:
A search of FEMA's records was conducted at the request of and under the direction of H. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel, and no documents responding to i Request No. 4 were discovered other than material submitted to FEMA by the State of New Hampshira on February 11 and 19,1988, copies of which have already been provided to all parties.
t Intervenors' Request No. 5:
1 Copier of all documents pertaining in any way to communications, including all notations, memoranda or other records of communications, occurring between the RAC and/or individual members thereof and FEMA and/or its contractors from December, 1987 through the presant and concerning FEMA's or the RAC's position on the adequacy of protective actions for the beach population.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 5:
See FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2.
FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 3.
Intervenors' Request No. 6:
Copies of all documents pertaining in any way to communications, including all notations, memoranda, or records of communications, occurring beuteen FWA and the White House or any person in the Executive Branch who is not employed by FWA or is not a member of the RAC, f rom J me, 1987, through the present, concerning the Seabrook Nuclear power plant and/or FEMA's position on the sheltering contentions, e
FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 6:
See FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2. '
e I
Intervenors' Request No. 7:
f Copies of the minutes of the February 29, 1988 RAC meeting and all other i notes or memoranda pertaining to that meeting. $
s FWA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 7:
I A transcription of the proceedings of the RAC or. February 29, 1988, have f previously been provided to all parties.
h Intervenors' Request No. 8: ,
d A list of all documents relevant to the NHRERP's treatment of the beach [
population that were distributed to the RAC for consideration at its February [
29, 1988 meeting and copies of all documents on that list not previously (
served on the parties. %
f PDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 8:
V The documents which were distributed to the RAC on February 29, 1988, o
i were made apart of the record of that meeting and have already been provided to all parties.
I e
Intervenors' Request No. 9: !
Any and all documents relied upon to support FDA's statement that g "unless a release of radioactive material is underway, there is little tir no E likelihood of having reliable predictive information needed to perform tose p.
projection calculations." FEMA Testimony at p. 9. is l
FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVDJORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 4.
l l _
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 9:
The statement referred to in Request No. 9 expresses the understanding of i
the witness, Joseph Keller, based on his accumulated knowledge and experience and does not rely on any specific document. ;; '
4 6
Inte rvenors ' Request No. 10:
'f Any and all documents or materials relied upon to support FEMA'u statement that "in severe accident sequences the ground-shine component is I most likely to be the major contributor to total dose if no protective actions '
I are taken." FEMA Testimony at p. 9.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 10:
r The statement referred to in Request No. 10 relies on NRC guidance j documents NUREG-1210 and NUREG-0396.
Intervenors' Request No. 11: . ,
Any and all documents relied upon to support TEMA's Str.tement, at p. 9, that "In those cases, if the dose reduction strategy is sheltering first followed by an evacuation after plume pascage, the total dose reduction would not be as great as that for the immediate evacuation strategy." i FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 11:
The statement referred to in Request No, 11 relies on NRC guidance e documents NUREG-1210 and NUREG-0396.
d Intervenors' Request No.12:
l Any and all documents relied upon to support FEMA's statement at p.10 of its Testimony that, "By implementation of the immediate evacuation strategy, l
dose reduction greater than those to be derived from a ' shelter first-evacuate
, later' concept can be obtained by movement of the population relatively short l distances even in the extremely unlikely case where the plume track and the evacuation routes coincide."
l l
i i i FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' s
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 5.
' Q%&Q o 4
I FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 12: i The statement referred to in Request No. 12 relies on NPC guidance i
documents NUREG-1210 and HUREG-0396. i i
1 Intervenors' Request No. 13:
Any and all documents reviewed by FEMA that are relevant to its position j that "there exists a technically appropriate basis for the choice made by the State of New Ilampshire not to shelter the summer beach population except in very limited circumstances." k FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 13:
The statement referred to in Request No. 13 relies on NRC guidance documents NUREG-1210 and NUREG-0396 and written material submitted to FEMA by i
the State of New llampshire or. February 11 and 19, 1988, copies of which have !
I already been provided to all parties, j t
Intorvenors' Request No. 14:
n k
Any and all documents reviewed by FEMA that are relevant to its position b that, "The requirement for a range of protective measurer has been satisfied I even though the State of New flampshire has chosen not to shelter the summer (
beach population except in very limited circumstances." FEMA Testimony at 9. [
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 14: .
i b
The statement referred to in Request No. 14 relies on NRC guidance "
documents NUREG-1210 and NUREG-0396 and written material submitted to FEMA by the State of New llampshire on February 11 and 19, 1988, copies of which have already been provided to all parties.
l p
li 4
0 m
i I
TEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 6.
Intervenors' Request No. 15:
Any and all site-specific documents FEMA has reviewed in re ching its position on the sheltering contentions and/or the adequacy of protective actions for the beach population. >
FFAA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 15: ,
FEMA's conclusions as to the appropriateness of the NHRERp as it pertains to the transient beach populations at the Seabrook and Hampton beaches do not rely on site-apecific information or analysis. To the extent that these e t
conclusions rely on documents, the pertinent documents are NUREG-1210 AND e t
NUREG-0396. FEMA has not made, either directly or througn contractors or l
consultants, a quantitative analysis of the dose savings to be achieved by p alternative protective action strategies for the Seabrook Emergency Planning k a
Zone, t
Intervenors' Request No. 16: l Any and all documents FEMA has reviewed that would in any way alter the factual basis for its conclusion, stated in FEMA's prefiled testimony dsted l September 11, 1987, at p. 60, that, "using the standard guidance for the initiation and duration of radiological releases, and the current New Hampshire RERP including ETE, it appears that thousands of people could be unable to leave during an accident at Seabrook involving a major release of radioacti/ity without adequate shelter for as much as the entire duration of '
that release."
FEMA Response to Intervonors' Request No. 16:
Written material submitted to FEMA by the State of New Hampshire on I
February 11 and 19, 1988, have already been provided to a11 parties. I l
I b
FD4A'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, page 7.
Intervenors' Request No.17:
Any and all documents PDA relies upon or may cely upon to support a conclusion that the NHRERP "adequately protect (s) the public health and safety by providing reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a radiological emergency" even though as stated at p. 60 of FWA's Profiled Testimony, dated September 11, 1987, "it appears that thousands of people could be unable to leave during an accident at Seabrook involving a major release of radioactivity without adequate shelter ,
for as much as the entire duration of that release."
FDA Response to Intervenors' Roquest No. 17: ! ,
f r The statement referred to in Request No. 17, that the NHRERP "adequately f
protect (s) the public health and safety by providing reasonable assurance that !
I appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a (
radiological emergency," relies on NRC guidance documents NUREG-1210, ;
i NUREG-0396, imREG-0654/FDA-REP 1, Rev. 1, and written material submitted to
{
FDA by the State of New Hampshire on February 11 and 19,1988, copies of f which have already been provided to all parties. ,
Intervenors' Request No. 18:
Any and all documents relied upon by FDA to support the statement on p.
3 of its Testimony that, "the Prefiled Testimony dated September 11, 1987, is outdated."
- t FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 18:
The statement referred to in Intervenors' Request No. 18 simply reflects d the fact that the Prefiled Testimony dated September 11, 1987, is, in part, no longer FDA's position. See FT % Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2.
Intervenors' Request No. 19: /
I All telephone logs and appointment calendars of each of the deponents g from June, 1987, through the present, e h
l o
FDA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 8. .
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 19: l The appointment calendars of those witnesses who have been deposed either have been produced already or are produced herewith.
Intervonors' Request No. 20:
Any and all documents pertaining to FEHA's decision not to use Edward .
Thomas as a witness. i FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 20: l 6
i A search of FEMA's records was conducted at the request of and under the <
direction of H. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel, and no documents responding to Request No. 20 were discovered other than two documents as to which I attorney-client and attorney work product privilege are asserted. The documents are a handwritten note dated March 2,1988, from Dick Krimm to l
I George Fatson and a typewritten not of the same date from George Watson to l Dick Krimm.
1 Intervenors' Request No. 21:
Any and all documents pertaining to FEMA's decision not to use Dave McLoughlin as a witness.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 21:
A search of PEMA's records was conducted at the request of and under the !
1 ,
! direction of H. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel, and no documents responding to !
J i ,
Request No. 21 were discovered.
Intervenors' Request No. 22:
li '
Any and all documents pertaining to FEMA's decision to use Joseph H. Il Keller as a witness, including copies of any contracts with Mr. Keller. ;
t<
i FD4A'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENQRS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 9. e
...-~-_.~.~m.. . . - ~
, s . . , , . . o, . . . .
}
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 22:
See FEMA's Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2. FEMA does not maintain any contract directly with Mr. Keller or his employer, Westinghouse i
Idaho Nuclear Company. The contract with Westinghouse Idaho Nuclear Company i t
is maintained by the U.S. Department of Energy. .
- v e
i Intervenors' Request No. 23:
fi; Any and all documents pertaining to FEMA's decision to use Dr. Joan llock '
as a witness.
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 23: S A search of FEMA's records was conducted at the request of and under the c e
direction of !!. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel, and no documents responding to Y'
Requeet No. 23 were discovered. p h
i >
! 5 Intervenors' Request _No. 24: $
4 Any and all documents pertinent to the evolution of FEMA's interim h position, set forth in FEMA's Supplemental Testimony, dated January 25, 1988. E k
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Request M L 24:
< r
- See FEMA's Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2., above. Not included ;
d among the documents produced herewith are drafts of the Supplemental 1v r
l Testimony, dated January 25, 1988, prepared by H. Joseph Flynn, FEMA counsel; 6 i
i j as to those drafts, FEMA asserts that they are attorney work product and h 4 therefore privileged.
3 Intervenors' Reguest No. 25: kp Any and all documents, including memoranda of law, pertaining to FEMA's l understanding of its role as lead agency in evaluating off-site emergency gi plans and interpreting off-site emergency planning criteria, y i
j FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' k
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 10. ,
l
. . . t l
1 l
t FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 25: l The documents which respond to Request No. 25 are listed among the I 1 documents cited on pages 3 through 7 of FWA's Testimony prefiled on March 14, 4 ;
1988. Copies of these documents are part of the record of this litigation or ;
are contained in the briefing books produced herewith or both. t
(
Intervenors' Request No. 26: '
l l
Any and all documents, including memoranda of law, pertaining to PDW's j
~
interpretation of the term "range of protective actions."
l' FWA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 26:
The documents which respond to Request No. 26 are listed among the 6
[
! l ;
documents cited on pages 3 through 7 of FD%'s Testimony profiled on Mrch 14, l
! 1988. Copies of these documents are part of the record of this litigation or are contained in the briefing books produced herewith or both, i
! Intervenors' Request No. 27: i i
Any and all documents which in whole or in part assess, evaluate, p' describe or consider the dose savings to the beach population attributable to l l
evacuation, assuming a quickly developing accident occurring on a peak summer 3
weekend.
FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 27: ,
1 l FDm's conclusions as to the appropriateness of the NHRERP as it pertains I l(f to the transient beach populations at the Seabrook and Hampton beaches do not i I,f rely on site-specific information or analysis. To the extent that these conclusions rely on documents, the pertinent documents are NUREG-1210 AND l NUREG-V396. FWA has not made, either directly or through contractors or consultants, a quantitative analysis of the dose savings to be achieved by ,
I i
i alternative protective action strategies for the Seabrook Emergency Planning !
l I
'l Zone. ,
FD4A'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' ;
RFOUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, page 11. ! t i
1
Intervenors' Request No. 28:
Any and all documents which in whole or in part assess, evaluate, describe or consider the dose savings to the beach population attributable to early beach closing, assuming a quickly developing accident occurring on a peak suceer weekend.
FEMA Resp _onse to Intervenors' Request No. 28: ,
FEMA's ennelusions as to the appropriateness of the NHRERP as it pertains to the transient beach populations at the Seabrook and Hampton beaches do not [
ir rely on site-specific information or analysis. To the extent that these l conclusions rely on documents, the pertinent documents are NUREG-1210 AND y 2
6 NUREG-0396. FD% has not made, either directly or through contractors or consultants, a quantitative analysis of the dose savings to be achieved by l
alternative protective action strategies for the Seabrook Emergency Planning Zone.
6 Intervenors' Request No. 29:
Any and all documents which in whole or in part assess, evaluate, describe or consider the health consequences ascociated with a quickly developing accident occurring on a peak summer weekend should an evacuation be ordered, oither with or without early beach closing. @
PEMA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 29:
r TEMA's conclusions as to the appropriateness of the 13IRERP as it pertains
{
to the transient beach pooulations at the Seabrook and Hampton beaches do not rely on site-specific inforn.ation or analysis. To the extent that these conclusions rely on documents, the pertinent documents are NUREG-1210 AND P NUREG-0396. FD% has not made, either directly or through contractors or consultants, a quantitative analysis of the dose savings to be achieved by alternative protective action strategies for the Seabrook Drergency Planning Zone.
t p
FD%'S RESPONSE TO IlfrERVDJORS' REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 12.
Intervenors' Request No. 30:
Any and all documents, including all agency guidance, opinions, and memoranda, regarding the roles of FWA and the NRC in evaluating emergency planning and preparedness for nuclear power plants.
FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 30:
The documents which FWA has relied on in its internal discussions of the y roles of FWA and the NRC in evaluating emergency planning and preparedness $
i for nuclear power plants are 10 C.F.R., Part 50, 44 C.F.R., Parts 350 and 351, p I
n and NUREG-0654/FWA-REP 1, Rev. 1.
e C
[5 Intervenors' Raquest No. 31: a Any and all documents which relate to, or which FWA relies upon for, its .?
interpretation of its regulations as set forth at page 7 of FEMA's j Supplemental Testimony, wherein it states: "FWA interprets its regulations -
to mean that it must detertnine first whether radiological emergency response :
plans comply with NUREG 0654/FDA REP 1. Rev.1 (44 C.F.R. S350.5(a)) and y secondly whether such plans ' adequately protect the pub 17.c health and safety g by providing reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be p taken offsite in the event of a iadiological emergency' (44 C.F.R. 5350.5(b))."
FEMA Response to Intervenors' Roquest No. 31:
See FDA Response to Intervenors' Request No. 2. ;
(
Respectfully submitted,
-m/ ^ ( j, - n . -
s ~~
h H. JOSEPH'FLYNN Assistant General Counsel Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20472 (202) 646-4102
( h$
i k
ie R
p FWA'S RESPONSE TO INTERVDJCRS' RL% TESTS FOR PRODUCTION, Page 13.
m April 15, 1988 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR RLl'LATORY COMMISSION BEFORE TIIE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICDJSING BOARD JUDGE IVAN W '"4ITH, CHAIRMRJ JUDGE JERRY HARBOUR JUDGE GUSTAVE A. LINENBERGER, JR.
)
In the Matter of )
)
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire, ) Docket No. 50-443-OL et al. ) 50-444-OL h
) Offsite Dr.ergency i (Seabrook Station, Units 1 & 2) ) Plaaning Issues
)
)
DECLARATION OF JULIUS W. BECTON, JR.,
I DIRECTOR OF TifE FEDERAL __E_ME_RG__D_I_CY._MANAGEMDJT AGDJCY I, JULIUS W. BECTON, JR., do declare under penalty of perjury:
- 1. I am the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
i
?, . I havs personally examired two documents which are the subject of a Request for Production of Documents bf the Intervenors in the above-captioned case, namely, a typewritten "FEMAh!RC Agenda Jan. 19, 1988" and typewritten .
"Talking Points for Stello Meeting" with handwritten notes.
L 6
9
r-
. . o
- 3. It is my belief that the disclosure of these two documents would have the effect of inhibiting the free (low of discussion and the exchange of ideas within FEMA and between FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. For g this reason I assert a claim of Executive Privilege or Deliberative Process ?,
Privilege.
I 1
._ B "ULIUS J W. BDC40N, JR.
Director Federal Emergency Management Agency }
Dated: April 15, 1988, at Washington, D.C. h]
t f
I L
i i
l t
l 6
i L
t
. ,