ML20155G953

Order CLI-88-08.* Commission Vacates Portion of ASLAP Memorandum & Order in ALAB-883 Which Holds That Adequate Sys for Prompt Notification in Event of Accident Prequisite for Authorizing Low Power Operation.Served on 881007

ML20155G953
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/07/1988
From:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To:
References
CON-#488-7230 ALAB-883, CLI-88-08, CLI-88-8, OL, OL-1, NUDOCS 8810180158
Download: ML20155G953 (3)

Text

.. ~ -

~/ 2. 3 0

. Y.k u i:

Nt UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NULCEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'88 OCT -7 All '42 C0m!SSIONERS: 4FFn: "

00Cru.ia b + O vid.

Lando W. Zech, Jr. , Chairman N Thomas M. Roberts Kenneth M. Carr Kenneth C. Rogers $ERVED OCT -71988 In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-443-OL 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF (OffsiteEmergencyPlanning)

NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al.,

- ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1 50-443-OL-1 (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) (Onsite Emergency Planning) and Safety Issues)

ORD E,R, CLI-88 08 On February 3,1988, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board held that issues relating to the means in an emergency for promptly notifying the offsite public were required to be resolved favorably to the applicants before low-power testing operations at Seabrook could proceed. Public Service Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station Units 1 and 2), ALAB 883, 27 NRC 43 (1988).

The applicants sought Comission review of that decision by petition dated February 18, 1988, and in due course the Comission received the views of the parties. The matter remains before us, and we dispose of it today by this order in which we vacate those portions of ALAB-883 which require a finding on prompt offsite notification systems before lew-power operation.

Related to its deliberations in Seabrook and in the interval between issuance of ALAB-883 and this order, the Comission conducted a rulemaking in

$$kO]Dgc] 80 g ])g N O

. i which, among other things, it reexamined whether there was a safety basis for reouiring prompt public notification as a prerequisite to low-power testing ,

operations. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 53 Fed. Reg. 16436 (1988). In  :

the preamble for the final rule, the Comission reaffirmed its earlier view that the risks at low power were significantly less than at full power and  !

therefore concluded that such a system was not needed. The Comission clearly established by rule that it was discontinuing the practice of reviewing offsite public notification systems as part of the applicants' onsite plan which needed to be in place before low power testing began. Findings on only those offsite standards specified in 10 C.F.R. I 50.47(d), as amended, are to be prerequisite '

a to low power testing. The rule becomes effective on October 24 and is applicable to this proceeding.

In light of the foregoing, the Comission vacates that portion of the ,

Appeal Board's memorandum and order in ALAB-883 which holds that an adequate system for prompt public notification in the event of an accident is a prerequisite to authorizing low power operation. The Comission specifically l

vacates the Appeal Board's order that authorization of low-power operation may not be given effect until the contested issues about such a system are resolved favorably for Seabrook.1 The.Comission believes that no useful purpose would be served in discussing whether the Appeal Board was correct in interpreting the regulations as they stood at the time ALAB-883 was issued. Accordingly, no l further consideration of ALAB-883 is warranted.

I This is not to say that such authorization is now appropriate. The l Comission has required that applicants demonstrate reasonable assurance that '

i there will be available funding for decomissioning in the event that low 'cer I testing occurs and a full power license is not granted. See Comission 0. der, l CL1-88-7,(September 22,1988).  :

i I

~

c. .

Finally, the Comission directs the Chainnan of the Atomic Safety and l

Licensing roard Panel in consultation with the Seabrook "onsite" and "offsite" Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards to detennine which of those Licensing Boards should try the prompt notification issues. The Commission expresses no view on the question.

It is so ORDERED.

W Meu )

$e h

o.p, Fo i the Com i- ision 2 3 o f '

k . ..

4' 9 8[ -

...h SANUEL J. CMILK k 'b%

c.,,,, Secretary of t he Ccmission '

Dated at Rockville, MD this 7 day of october , 1988.

b

[

l 2

Comissioner Roberts was on official government travel and was unavailable to participate on this order. l i

. . . - . - - - - - - - ---.