ML20151X215

Applicant Response to Amended Contention of Atty General for Commonwealth of Ma on Notification Sys for Commonwealth of Massachusetts.* Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20151X215
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	04/25/1988
From:	Selleck K PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#288-6178 OL-1, NUDOCS 8805040085
Download: ML20151X215 (8)

Text

/,/7[ _

D0C KE TEr-uwc

'm APR 28 A10:5epril 25, 1988 UNITED STATES OF h g C h Qf{

p t. N N NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOADn

)

In the Matter of )

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1 NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) 50-444-OL-1

) Onsite Emergency (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) Planning and Safety

) Issues APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO AMENDED CONTENTION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ON NOTIFICATION SYSTEM FOR MASSACHUSETTS On April 15, 1988, the Attorney Gener71 for The Commonwealth of Massachusetts ("Mass AG") submitted an amended contention on the Applicants' Vehicular Alert and Notification Systcm (VANS). Pending before the Nuclear  ;

Regulatory Commission is Applicants' Petition for review of the decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board handed down on February 3, 1988, denominated ALAB-883, in which the Appeal Boaid granted Mass AG's motion to reopen the evidentiary record in this proceeding with regard to Applicants' public notification system, alternative to the previous in-place system dismantled by reason of the actions and inaction of The Cormonwealth. Should the Commission BBOSO400g Ogbo 43!

PDR ADO pga , g o

])50 )

J

O 9

determine that the actions of The Commonwealth and its political subdivisions and agencies in contributing to the dismantling of the prior system ostop Mass AG from obtaining the reopening he requested, his proferred contention will not be allowed. For prtsent purposes Applicants assume that their Petition will be denied and herein respond to Mass AG's amended contentien.

Applicants do not object to the admission of Mass AG's amenced contention. The Order admitting the amended contention, however, should specifically note that certain of the preferred basis statements do not raise cognizable issues and should be rejected.

Basis "B" Mass AG split the basis statement into two parts: "A" for VANS and "B" for the backup airborne alerting system.

The entire part "B" should be rejected as lacking regulatory basis. The unnumbered first paragraph under Basis "B" states Mass AG's erroneous premise that "lack of information (about the backup system) prevents this Board from making a finding chat the airborne system meets NRC regulations and standards." Amended contention at unnumbered page 7. No such finding is needed. "NUREG-0654 does not require that backup procedures (in the event a siren should fail to operate) be set forth in emergency plans." Kansas Gas &

Electric Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1), LBP 26, 20 NRC 53, 67 (1984).

Specific paragraphs under Basis "B" fail for related L reasons. "If no such procedures are needed, a fortiori, no standard time limit need be met . . . Thore is no requirement that the (backup) alerting system function in 15 minutes."

Lona Island Lichtina Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), LBP-85-12, 21 NRC 644, 759 (1985), sf. Lena Island Lichtina Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), LBP-88-2, __ NRC , CCH Nuclear Regulatory Reporter 1 31046 at 32389 (February 1, 1988) ("(T]here is no requirement that backup route alerting be completed within 45 minutes . . . ").

There is no regulatory requirement that the airborne backup system "both sound a liren and issue a message" as Mass AG has it. Paragraph 5 seeks to relitigate a human behavior issue, the willingness of emergency workers to fulfill their emergency roles, that has been fully litigated before the "offsite" Board in the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Responso Plan phase of the offsite hearings. Mass AG should not be permitted to relitigate this issue in the guise of a remanded contention on the issue of the Applicants' alternative notification system.

Basis "A" In paragraph 2 under Basis "A", Mass AG misapprehends ,

the reqwirement of basis for contentions. Mass AG admits he does not know the locations of staging areas and the pre-selected acoustic locations, yet contends that "Applicants are legally prohibited under local ordinances from operating l

o

their six staging areas and their VANS vehicles at the pre-selected acoustic locations." Amended Contention at unnumbered page 3. Equally unaccountably, Mass AG puts forward as fact that "The fourteen VANS locations are physically inaccessible to the VANS equipment." 1d2 While contention statements are no longer required to be made under oath, they still should have some foundation in fact.

Paragraphs 2 and 3 should be rejected.

Paragraph 10 under Basis "A" does not allege any deficiency; the regulations and guidance do not require indication of "when and under what circumstances . . . the message mode will be used" since the regulations do not require the message mode on the sirens to be used at all.

This paragraph should be rejected. For the same reason, paragraph 9 should also be rejected.

The unsupported general assertion in Paragraph 11 that "the system will work reliably, if at all, only when each vehicle is manned by at least two people" should be rejected.

l As with paragraph 5 of Basis "B", paragraph 12 of Basis i

i "A" seeks to relitigate a human behavior issue, the l

wil3ingness of emergency workers to fulfill their emergency roles, that has been fully litigated before the "Offsite" Board in the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan phase of the offsite hearings. The paragraphs should be l rejected, i

Paragraph 13 constitutes an impermissible attack on l i

Commission regulations expressly disallowed by 10 CFR 52.758(a). An inquiry into the availability of funds to the Applicants would require waiver of the financial qualification rule, a waiver the Mass AG currently seeks in another forum. The paragraph should be rejected as an unwarranted at':empt to litigate financial qualifications.

By their attorneys, Thoias G. Dignan, Jr.

Kathryn A. Selleck Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110 (617) 423-6100 l

l l

l l

l l

?

l 1

I i f

t twm UWNC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

'88 Ant 28 N0 54 I, Kathryn L. Selleck, one of the attorneys for the Applicants herein,1 hereby certify that on April 25, 19 g ,, I, , , p, 7 rade service of the within document by depositing copf M gff q, w thereof with Federal Express, prepaid, for delivery to oGR ANCH where indicated, by depositing in the United States mail, first class postage paid, addressed to) the individuals listed balov.

Administrative Judge Sheldon J. Robert Carrigg, Chairman Wolfe, Esq., Chairman, Atomic Board of Selectmen Safety and Licensing Board Panel Town Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atlantic Avenue Commission North Hampton, NH 03862 East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Judge Emmeth A. Luebke Diane Curran, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Andrea C. Ferster, Esquire Board Panel Harmon & Weiss 5500 Friendship Boulevard Suite 430 Apartment 1923N 2001 S Street, N.W.

Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815 Washington, DC 20009 Dr. Jerry Harbour Stephen E. Merrill Atomic Safety and Licensing Attorney General Board Panel George Dana Bisbee U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Assistant Attorney General Commission Office of the Attorney General East West Towers Building 25 Capitol Street l 4350 East West Highway Concord, NH 03301-6397 l Bethesda, MD 20814 Adjudicatory File Sherwin E. Turk, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of General Counsel Board Panel Docket (2 copies) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission One White Flint North, 15th F1.

East West Towers Building 11555 Rockville Pike 4350 East West Highway Rockville, MD 20852 Bethesda, MD 20814

• Atomic Safety and Licensing Robert A. Backus, Esquire Appeal Board Panel Backus, Meyer & Solomon U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 116 Lowell Street Commission P.O. Box 516 Washington, DC 20555 Manchester, NH 03105 ,

l .- _ - _ _ . _

4 Philip Ahrena, Esquire Mr. J. P. Nadeau Assistant Attorney General Selectren's Office Department of the Attorney 10 Central Road General Rye, NH 03870 Augusta, ME 04333 Paul McEachern, Esquire Carol S. Sneider, Esquire Matthew T. Brock, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Shainen & McEachern Department of the Attorney General 25 Maplewood Avenue One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor P.O. Box 360 Boston, MA 02108 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Mrs. Sandra Gavutis Mr. Calvin A. Canney Chairman, Board of Selectmen City Manager RFD 1 - Box 1154 City Htsll Route 107 126 Daniel Street Kensington, NH 03827 Portsmouth, NH 03801

• Senator Gordon J. Humphrey R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esquire U.S. Senate Lagoulis, Clark, Hill-Whilton &

Washington, DC 20510 McQuire (Attn: Tom Burack) 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950

• Senator Gordon J. numphrey Mr. Peter J. Mattnews One Eagle Square, Suite 507 Mayor Concord, NH 03301 City Hall (Attn: Herb Boynton) Newburyport, MA 01950 Mr. Thomas F. Powers, III Mr. William S. Lord Town Manager Board of Selectmen Town of Exeter Town Hall - Friend Street 10 Front Street Amasbury, MA 01913 Exeter, NH 03833 H. Joseph Flynn, Esquire Brentwood Board of Selectmen Office of General Counsel RFD Dalton Road Federal Emergency Management Brentwood, NH 03833 Agency 500 C Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20472 Gary W. Holmes, Esquire Richard A. Hampe, Esquire Holmes & Ells Hampe and McNicholas 47 Winnacunnet Road 35 Pleasant Street Hampton, NH 03841 Concord, NH 03301 Q

Mr. Ed Thomas Judith H. Mizner, Esquire FEMA, Region I 79 State Street '

442 John W. McCormack Post Second Floor Office and Court House Newburyport, MA 01950 Post Office Square ,

Boston, hA 02109

• Charles P. Graham, Esquire Murphy and Graham 33 Low Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Fgtih n 'K. Se:3eck i

'l i

a I

r 5

f I

t b

-.