|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20093G4541995-10-18018 October 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommissioning Procedures for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20058K7381993-12-0303 December 1993 Memorandum & Order CLI-93-25.* Commission Denies State of Nj Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Adjudicatory Hearing Filed on 931008.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931203 ML20058E0151993-11-14014 November 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Exemptions in Accident Insurance for Nuclear Power Plants Prematurely Shut Down ML20059B0301993-10-22022 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Commission Questions Posed W/Respect to State of New Jersey Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* Denies Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20059B1111993-10-20020 October 1993 Philadelphia Electric Co Response to NRC 931014 Order.* State Failed to Demonstrate Entitlement to Hearing to Challenge Util Amend to Permit Util to Receive Shoreham Fuel ML20059B0621993-10-20020 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Response to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Order of 931014.* Requests That NRC Reject State of Nj Filing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057G2141993-10-14014 October 1993 Order.* Requests for Simultaneous Responses,Not to Exceed 10 Pages to Be Filed by State,Peco & Lipa & Served on Other Specified Responders by 931020.NRC May File by 931022. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931014 ML20059A4581993-10-14014 October 1993 Order Requesting Answers to Two Questions Re State of Nj Request for Immediate Action by NRC or Alternatively, Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing. Operations Plans for Marine Transportation Withheld ML20059F0191993-10-0808 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Reply to New Jersey Filing of 931020.* Licensee Requests That NRC Deny State of Nj Intervention Petition.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057F2191993-09-30030 September 1993 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.54(q) Eliminating Licensee Requirement to Follow & Maintain in Effect Emergency Plans ML20059B1291993-09-14014 September 1993 Affidavit of Jh Freeman.* Discusses Transfer of Slightly Used Nuclear Fuel from Shoreham Nuclear Power Station to Limerick Generating Station.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20097C3241992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Joint Opposition to Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2911992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Dismisses 911203 Notice of Appeal W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees Due to Encl Settlement Agreement. W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2891992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeals.* Appeals Being Dismissed Due to Encl Settlement Agreement.Nrc Should Dismiss Appeals W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1361992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners by Counsel Move ASLB to Dismiss Petitioners as Petitioners for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing in Proceeding W/ Prejudice.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2631992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss.* NRC Should Issue Order Dismissing School District & Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc as Petitioners in Proceeding.W/ Settlement Agreement & Certificate of Svc ML20097C1081992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Petitioners Hereby Move to Dismiss 910628 Notice of Appeal in Matter W/Prejudice & W/Each Party to Bear Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20096A5921992-05-0707 May 1992 Motion to Withdraw Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Allow Withdrawal of Supplement for Good Cause Shown. W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5311992-05-0606 May 1992 Long Island Power Authority Comments on SECY-92-140 & Response to Petitioner Joint Opposition to Decommissioning Order.* Util Urges NRC to Adopt Recommendation in SECY-92-140 & Approve Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5071992-05-0505 May 1992 Suppl to Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Supplements Joint Opposition Prior to Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095K8991992-04-29029 April 1992 Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission to Reject NRC Staff Proposal in SECY-92-140.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095H5611992-04-28028 April 1992 Affidavit of Lm Hill.* Affidavit of Lm Hill Supporting Util Position That Circumstances Exist Warranting Prompt NRC Action on NRC Recommendation That Immediately Effective Order Be Issued Approving Decommissioning Plan ML20094G3971992-02-26026 February 1992 Notice of State Taxpayer Complaint & Correction.* NRC Should Stay Hand in Approving Application for License Transfer as Matter of Comity Pending Resolution of Question as Util Continued Existence in Ny State Courts.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094G2261992-02-25025 February 1992 Petitioner Notice of Lilco/Long Island Power Authority Exaggeration & of Commencement of State Court Action.* NRC Should Await Ny State Decision Re Matter within Special Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9021992-02-24024 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to Ltr Request for Dismissal of Pages.* Suggests That Transfer of License Inappropriate at Present Time.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9511992-02-21021 February 1992 Response of Lilco & Long Island Power Authority to Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for License Transfer Approval.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K8701992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioners Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Approval of License Transfer.* Urges Commission to Reject NRC Recommendation in SECY-92-041 & Remand Matter for Consideration in Normal Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2661992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Deny Staff Motion or Defer Action Until Petitioners Have Fully Developed Petitions & Supplied Detailed Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E4011992-02-18018 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions.* Util Urges NRC to Grant Motion & Dismiss Intervention Petitions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E3161992-02-13013 February 1992 Lilco Response to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions on Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions Be Struck & Petitioners Be Instructed of Possible Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092D2931992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer Denying Petitions for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing Re Decommissioning ML20091E2741992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to Intervention Petitions Concerning Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions for Leave & Requests for Hearing Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2941992-02-0606 February 1992 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Request for Hearing on Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Informs That Util Opposes Both Requests for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2831992-01-22022 January 1992 Shoreham-Wading River Central School District Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition for Leave Be Granted & Hearing Held. W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2811992-01-22022 January 1992 Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition Be Granted & Hearing Be Held.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20086T7231992-01-0303 January 1992 Motion of Long Island Power Authority for Leave to File Supplemental Matls.* Requests That Supplemental Memorandum & Supplemental Legislative History Matls Be Filed. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086T7541992-01-0303 January 1992 Memorandum of Long Island Power Authority Concerning Supplemental Legislative History Matls.* Supports Legislative History & Argues That License Not Subj to Termination Under Section 2828.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9171991-12-30030 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Request for Stay & Suggestion of Mootness.* Suggests That Stay Request & Suggestion of Mootness Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9281991-12-30030 December 1991 Opposition of Util to Motion for Stay of License Transfer & to Suggestion of Mootness.* Concluded That Relief Sought in Petitioner Motion & Suggestion Should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8261991-12-19019 December 1991 Suggestion of Mootness Due to Long Island Power Authority Imminent Demise.* Concludes That If Commission Were to Transfer Shoreham Licenses to Lipa,Nrc Could Find Itself W/Class 103 Facility W/O Licensee.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8661991-12-18018 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE2 Appeal from LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39. Concludes That Appeal Should Be Summarily Rejected or Be Denied on Merits.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086N1661991-12-17017 December 1991 Motion for Stay of License Transfer Pending Final Order on Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing & for Addl or Alternative Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086M0791991-12-16016 December 1991 Certificate of Svc.* Certifies Svc of Petitioner Notice of Appeal & Brief in Support of Appeal in Proceeding to Listed Individuals ML20086J6351991-12-0909 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Contentions on License Transfer Amend.* Concludes That License Transfer Amend Contentions Be Rejected & Petitioner Request to Intervene Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J3521991-12-0909 December 1991 Response of Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition.* Board Should Dismiss Petitions to Intervene for Lack of Standing & Reject All Contentions Proffered by Petitioners.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094E1041991-12-0909 December 1991 Response to Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition ML20091G2051991-12-0303 December 1991 Brief in Support of Appeal.* Commission Should Consider Appeal on Basis That Findings of Matl of Facts Clearly Erroneous.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091G1971991-12-0303 December 1991 Notice of Appeal.* Informs of Appeal of LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39 in Facility possession-only License Proceeding ML20086C5381991-11-18018 November 1991 Petitioner Joint Supplemental Petition.* Petition Includes List of Contentions to Be Litigated in Hearing Re License Transfer Application.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5471991-11-18018 November 1991 App to Joint Supplemental Petition of Shoreham-Wading River Central School District & Scientists/Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc.* 1995-10-18
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20059B0301993-10-22022 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Commission Questions Posed W/Respect to State of New Jersey Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* Denies Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20059B0621993-10-20020 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Response to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Order of 931014.* Requests That NRC Reject State of Nj Filing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059B1111993-10-20020 October 1993 Philadelphia Electric Co Response to NRC 931014 Order.* State Failed to Demonstrate Entitlement to Hearing to Challenge Util Amend to Permit Util to Receive Shoreham Fuel ML20059F0191993-10-0808 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Reply to New Jersey Filing of 931020.* Licensee Requests That NRC Deny State of Nj Intervention Petition.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2631992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss.* NRC Should Issue Order Dismissing School District & Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc as Petitioners in Proceeding.W/ Settlement Agreement & Certificate of Svc ML20097C2911992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Dismisses 911203 Notice of Appeal W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees Due to Encl Settlement Agreement. W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1361992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners by Counsel Move ASLB to Dismiss Petitioners as Petitioners for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing in Proceeding W/ Prejudice.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1081992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Petitioners Hereby Move to Dismiss 910628 Notice of Appeal in Matter W/Prejudice & W/Each Party to Bear Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20097C2891992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeals.* Appeals Being Dismissed Due to Encl Settlement Agreement.Nrc Should Dismiss Appeals W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C3241992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Joint Opposition to Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5921992-05-0707 May 1992 Motion to Withdraw Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Allow Withdrawal of Supplement for Good Cause Shown. W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5311992-05-0606 May 1992 Long Island Power Authority Comments on SECY-92-140 & Response to Petitioner Joint Opposition to Decommissioning Order.* Util Urges NRC to Adopt Recommendation in SECY-92-140 & Approve Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5071992-05-0505 May 1992 Suppl to Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Supplements Joint Opposition Prior to Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095K8991992-04-29029 April 1992 Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission to Reject NRC Staff Proposal in SECY-92-140.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094G2261992-02-25025 February 1992 Petitioner Notice of Lilco/Long Island Power Authority Exaggeration & of Commencement of State Court Action.* NRC Should Await Ny State Decision Re Matter within Special Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9021992-02-24024 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to Ltr Request for Dismissal of Pages.* Suggests That Transfer of License Inappropriate at Present Time.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9511992-02-21021 February 1992 Response of Lilco & Long Island Power Authority to Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for License Transfer Approval.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K8701992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioners Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Approval of License Transfer.* Urges Commission to Reject NRC Recommendation in SECY-92-041 & Remand Matter for Consideration in Normal Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2661992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Deny Staff Motion or Defer Action Until Petitioners Have Fully Developed Petitions & Supplied Detailed Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E4011992-02-18018 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions.* Util Urges NRC to Grant Motion & Dismiss Intervention Petitions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E3161992-02-13013 February 1992 Lilco Response to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions on Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions Be Struck & Petitioners Be Instructed of Possible Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2941992-02-0606 February 1992 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Request for Hearing on Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Informs That Util Opposes Both Requests for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2741992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to Intervention Petitions Concerning Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions for Leave & Requests for Hearing Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2811992-01-22022 January 1992 Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition Be Granted & Hearing Be Held.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2831992-01-22022 January 1992 Shoreham-Wading River Central School District Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition for Leave Be Granted & Hearing Held. W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20086T7231992-01-0303 January 1992 Motion of Long Island Power Authority for Leave to File Supplemental Matls.* Requests That Supplemental Memorandum & Supplemental Legislative History Matls Be Filed. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9281991-12-30030 December 1991 Opposition of Util to Motion for Stay of License Transfer & to Suggestion of Mootness.* Concluded That Relief Sought in Petitioner Motion & Suggestion Should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9171991-12-30030 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Request for Stay & Suggestion of Mootness.* Suggests That Stay Request & Suggestion of Mootness Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8261991-12-19019 December 1991 Suggestion of Mootness Due to Long Island Power Authority Imminent Demise.* Concludes That If Commission Were to Transfer Shoreham Licenses to Lipa,Nrc Could Find Itself W/Class 103 Facility W/O Licensee.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8661991-12-18018 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE2 Appeal from LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39. Concludes That Appeal Should Be Summarily Rejected or Be Denied on Merits.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086N1661991-12-17017 December 1991 Motion for Stay of License Transfer Pending Final Order on Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing & for Addl or Alternative Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J3521991-12-0909 December 1991 Response of Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition.* Board Should Dismiss Petitions to Intervene for Lack of Standing & Reject All Contentions Proffered by Petitioners.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J6351991-12-0909 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Contentions on License Transfer Amend.* Concludes That License Transfer Amend Contentions Be Rejected & Petitioner Request to Intervene Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091G2051991-12-0303 December 1991 Brief in Support of Appeal.* Commission Should Consider Appeal on Basis That Findings of Matl of Facts Clearly Erroneous.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5381991-11-18018 November 1991 Petitioner Joint Supplemental Petition.* Petition Includes List of Contentions to Be Litigated in Hearing Re License Transfer Application.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5471991-11-18018 November 1991 App to Joint Supplemental Petition of Shoreham-Wading River Central School District & Scientists/Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc.* ML20082G8971991-08-0909 August 1991 Lilco Responses to Petitioner Filings of 910805 & 06.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20082G8441991-08-0707 August 1991 Motion for Offical Notice to Correct Representation.* Moves Board to Take Official Notice of Encl NRC Records to Correct Representation Made at Prehearing Conference. W/Certificate of Svc ML20082G8571991-08-0707 August 1991 Petitioners Response to Lilco Re Physical Security Plan.* Petitioners Suggest That Util post-hearing Filing Does Not Dispose of Any Issue as to Util Compliance W/Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D0721991-07-22022 July 1991 Petitioners First Emergency Motion for Stay.* Movants Urge Commission,In Interest of Justice,To Enjoin Lilco from Taking Any Actions Under possession-only License Which Might Moot Renewed Application for Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D1541991-07-22022 July 1991 Lilco Response to Petitioner Emergency Motions.* Believes Petitioner Emergency Motions Should Be Denied to End Frivolous Pleadings & Burdens of Time & Resources of Nrc. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D0841991-07-21021 July 1991 Petitioners Second Emergency Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission,Ex Parte,To Enjoin Lilco,From Any & All Acts W/Respect to Shoreham Which Would Be Inconsistent W/Nrc Representation in Court.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D2071991-07-15015 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to Shoreham-Wading River Central School District (Swrcsd) Appeal from LBP-91-26.* Appeal Should Be Denied Due to Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D4051991-07-12012 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE-2s Contentions on Possession Only License Amend.* Concludes That Contentions Should Be Rejected & Request for Hearing on Possession Only License Amend Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D4001991-07-12012 July 1991 Movant-intervenors Motion for Change of Venue of Prehearing Conference.* Intervenors Request Change of Venue of 910730 Prehearing Conference from Hauppauge,Ny to Washington DC Area.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D3891991-07-10010 July 1991 Lilco Support of NRC Staff Motion for Reconsideration of LBP-91-26.* for Reasons Listed,Nrc 910625 Motion Should Be Granted & Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene in Amend Proceeding Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082B4311991-07-0303 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Contentions on Confirmatory Order,Physical Security Plan & Emergency Preparedeness License Amends.* Petitioner Contentions Should Be Rejected & License Amends Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082B3531991-07-0202 July 1991 Unopposed Motion for Variance in Svc Requirements.* Informs That Filing & Svc Requirements Presents No Obstacle to Filing W/Aslb or Svc Upon Any Parties.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 910702.Granted for Licensing Board on 910702 ML20082B2461991-06-28028 June 1991 Movant-Intervenor Brief in Support Accompany Notice of Appeal.* School District Urges Commission to Reverse & Remand Dismissal Order W/Appropriate Guidance.W/Ceritifcate of Svc ML20082B2571991-06-28028 June 1991 Unopposed Motion for Variance in Svc Requirements.* Petitioners Urge ASLB to Grant Variance in Svc Procedures Requested to Allow Svc of Judge Ferguson.W/Certificate of Svc 1993-10-08
[Table view] |
Text
s' FEB 101997
' 00CKETED USNP.C UNITED STATES OF AMEP.lCA -
NUCLEAR PEGULATORY COMMISSION '88 FEB 12 P3 :48 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD f C 0
]
DHANCM in the Matter of )
)
1.ONG ISLANE, LIGilTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Statien, )
Unit 1) )
NRC STAFF PFSPONSE TO LILCO MOTION FOP
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION OF CONTENTIONS c AND 9 (TOW TRllCKS AND FUEL, TRUCKS)
- 1. INTPOCUCTION LILCO's Motion for Summary Disposition of Contentions 4 and 9 (Tow Trucks and Fuel Trucks), filed December 18, 1907, seeks summary disposition el Contentions 4 and 9, which were remanded to the Licensing Peard for consideration of factual issues raised by LILCO's "realism" defense. CLl-86-13, 24 NRC 22, 30-33 (1986). Contention 4 asserts that LILCO lacks the leoal authority to remove obstructions from public roadways, including the towing of private vehicles. As a result, it is contended that LILCO cannet iry krent this aspect of the LILCO Plan.
Contention 9 asserts that LILCO is prohibited from dispensino fuel from its tank trucks to automcbiles which may run of out gas during an evacuation, and, as a result, L I LCO's Plan for doinn so cannot be Irip!eroen ted . See PID, 21 NPC 644, 960, 962 (1985).
In C LI-86-13, the Ccamist.lon assumed the factual premise of these contentions - i.e. , that LILCO lacked authority to perform the State or County roles in these areas. 24 NPC at 30-31. However, the Commission 8802170074 880210 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G PDR
F*
also assumed that in an actual radiological emergency, both _the State of New York and Suffolk County would exercise their authority to protect their citizens, and would use their "best effort s" to respond to an accident, using the LILCO Plan as the best source for emergency planning information and options . M. at 31. This assumption was reaffirmed by the Commission as a generic presumption in its recent amendment to 10 C.F.R. Section 50.47(c)(1), 52 Fed. Reg. b2006 (November 3, 1987). 1 As a result of both CLI-86-13 and Section 50.47(c)(1)(lii), the presumption that State and County authorities would generally follow the L!LCO Plan removed the defut of lack of legal authority. However, in Cl.1-06-13, the Commission directed the Licensing Board to examine -
whether, based on the lack of familiarity of State and County officials with the LILCO Pla n , or delays in alerting the public or in making decisions and recommendations on protective actions, whether the LILCO Plan with a presurrea best effort government response using that plan woulc' be adequate. 24 NRC at 11. The Licensing Board was directed to "use the existing evident!ary record to the maximum extent possible, but should take additional evidence where necessary." [Foetrote omitte d . ]
M. at 32.
1/ Section 50.47(c)(1)(lii) states, in part, that "it may be presumed that in the event of an actual radiological emergency state and local
~
officials [who had heretofore not participated in emergency planning) would generally follow the utility plan" unless that presumption was rebutted ' by, for exartple, a good faith and timely proffer of an adequate and feasible state and/or local radiological emergency plan that would in fact be relied upon in a radiological ervrgency." S2 Fed. Peg. 42086.
o Similarly, the new Section 50.47(c)(1)(ill) requires Licensing Boards, In. ruling on the adequacy of a utility-only plan , to determine the adequacy of the state and local government best efforts response, in combination with the utility's compensating measures, on a case-by-case basis, subject to the presuraption stated above, in its September 17, 1987 Memorandum and Order rejecting LILCO's
- previous c,mnibus motion for summary disposition of the legal authority contentions, the Licensing Board observed with respect to Contention 4:
. . . one cannot say from the present record how these obstructions would be removed, who would remove them, or how their removtl would be coordi-nateit with such other functions as guiding traffic and selectino alternate evacuation routes. It is not clear who would be in overall charge of a clear and well-planned response.
,l d,. at36. With respect to Contention 9, the Board regarded the subject of that contention to be a safety feature, as to which it was found to be "presently unclear how . . .[it) would function, or indeed, whether it would function at all." M.at39.
As discussed below, however, two overridino considerations provide ariswers to the questions raised by the Licensing Board, and, with one exception, to the questions on plan adequacy raised by the Commission.
F'irst, the licensing Board previously found the LILCO Plan adequate (apart from Icgal authority) insofar as it deals with removal of road cbstructions by LILCO tow trucks, or the provision of fuel by LILCO tank trucks along evacuation roadways. PID, 21 NRC at 797, 811, 812, 813, 815, 816. And second, the requirement to presume that government authorities will use their best efforts to attempt to implemert the LILCO Plan dispesos of the questions of who would be in charge, what actions
4 j
- c. l l
would be taken, and how those actions would be coordinated. Y!hile the rt. cent initial Decision, L B P-8 8-2 , precludes a finding that LERO internal communications ' are sufficient to assure adequate implementation of the l
functions covered by Contentions 4 and 9, there are no issues with respect to familiarity with the LILCO Plan , decisionmaking and recomraendations , or implernentation by the governments requiring evidentiary proceedings. Accordingly, all material facts with respect to thosc matters other than internal LERO communications should be deemed establishccl.
fl. DISCUSSION A. The Adequacy cf the LILCO Plan on Removing Road Obstacles and Dispensing Fuel,_ _ _
The adequacy of LILCO's plans for removal of road obstructions with i
l LILCO tow trucks, and for dispensing fuel to automobiles which had run out of gas along evacuation roadways was fully lltigated in this proceeding. See PID, 21 NRC at 795-797, 809-816. The Board found that "the number of vehicles involved in actual road blockage [because they had run out of gas] would be modest relative to the total evacuating traffic and that reasonable means of mitigation exist." M. at 797. The Board, moreover found that LILCO would have sufficient numbers of road crews to clear disabled vehicles from roadways. M . at 811. The Board found that the LILCO Plan adequately took into account possible delays in tow trucks reaching road obstructions. M. at 812. Finally, the Board found that although provision of fuel to evacuees who had run out of gas was not required, LlLCO's plan to provide such service was adequate.
M. at 816. Thus, Intervenors had an opportunity to litigate whether
r, O
LlLCO tow trucks could adequately remove vehicles ob'structing roadways and whether LILCO tank trucks would adequately dispense fuei to evacuees who - had run out of gas, and were unsuccessful. Thus the I.lLCO plan for implementing these protective measures is not now open for litigation. U Moreover, insofar as the exercise of police functions to facilitate traffic flow is concerned, the Board also rejected contentions claiming that the local police would nct perform normal security and other functions required to deal with an emergency. See Special Prehearing Conference Order, August 19, 1983, slip op, at 15, 20. Thus, it canrbt be success-fully contended on this remand that the Suffolk County police department would not be fully capable of dispensing fuel or calling in a tow truck to remove roac obstacles as needed. See Roberts, g g., ff. Tr. 2180, at
- C , Attachments 1-5 (Suffolk County Testimony on Contention EX40) . ;
B. Undcr Section 50.47(c)(1)(ill) and CLI-86-13, it is the LILCO Plan with Respect to Removal of Road Obstructions and Provision of Fuel
{hich will be implemented Under the presumption, created by the new emergency planning rule amendments and CLI-86-13, that in an actual emergency, the State and local authorities who had previously not participated in planning would respond on e best efforts basis generally following the utility plan, two I
2/ The recent initial Decision issued by the OL-5 Licensing Board found l
no fundartental flaw with respect to plans for removing road obstruc-l tions. LBP-88-2, slip op. at 27, 55. However, fundamental flaws l relating to communications for dealing with unexpected events and
! relating to training were fou nd . Id. at 53, 250-252. See
! discussion, infra, l'
i i
4 key facts must be deemed established. First, in an actual emergency, if the emergency situation required the police to respcnd to impediments to
- ' :- flow, whether caused by accidents or cars out of gas, the police woutcr attempt to respond. Second, in the absence of another timely proffered, adequate and feasible plar. which would be relled upon, it is the Lit.CO Plan, as approved by this Licensing Board, which would be implemented by the Suffolk County police. See 10 C.F.P.. Section 50.4~(c)(1)(lii). This means that in the absence of another such plan for removal of road obstructions and dispensing of fuel, local authorities -
here those authorities charged with traffic control responsibility, the police - would utilize on a best effort basis the information and options which the LILCO Plan provides them. Thus, the uncertainty expressed on September 17,1987 by the 1.icensing Board as to who would implement the plan, and how it would be implemented is' resolved by the new rule.
C. Whether Lack cf Famillarity with the Plan , Decisionmaking a r.d R ecommendations , or Fleid implementation by the Police Would Lead to, Delay in Response _,, __
The question rer.alns whether, given the acceptability of the LILCO Plan with respect to rerroval of road obstacles and provision of fuel, the presumption of a best efforts government response generally foltowing the LILCO Plan, and the established capat ility of the Suffolk County police to perform normal traffic contro! functions such as removal of road impediments on evacuation roadways, "there is reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency." 2 t4 NPC at 29, 10 C.F.R. Section 50.47(c)(1)(lii).
e e . - -. y y ,
O L
r I
In providing guidance to the Board as to making _ this determination, the Corrmission stated that the Board should "use the existing record to the maximum extent possible" to determine the familiarity of local officials with the LILCO - plan and possible delays in making. decisions or recommendations on protective action. CLi-86-13, 24 NRC 31-32, Tlie facts necessary to addrcss the Commission's cuestions concerning familiarity and the possibility of delay in decisionmaking and response are, with one exception, established in the record. The existing record establishes that high-ranking Suffolk County police officers are feraillar with the LILCO Plan in regard to traffic control strategics. S e, eg. Roberts et al., ff. Tr. 2180, at 16, 25, 31-32 and
,id, , ff. T r. 1134, at 14-18. The Suffolk County police's normal duties include the removcf of stalled vehicles and accidents from the roadway, and thus they know how to perforni these tasks. See Special Prehearing Conference Order, August 19, 1983, slip op. at 15, 20; Roberts et a! . ,
(f. Tr. 2180, at 2-8, Attachments 1-5; 20 NRC at 793. No issue exists as to whether the Ccunty police using their best efforts could deal with stalled vehicles.
With respect to timely decisionmaking, the record establishes that the LILCO Plan provides for coordination of LERO with the Suffolk County Police Department. OPIP 3.6.3, Attachment 15. In addition, there is a dedicated phone system, the Radiological Emergency Communications System (RECS) connecting the LERO EOC with the County police department. Admitted Facts 8, 10. See, Memorandum and Order, December 1, 1987, at 4 As a result, LERO should be able to link up
t
. with the County police communications network in the event of an emergency. See Admitted Facts 3, 4, 5.
The remaining' question is whether, once communications were so established, the LERO communications network would 'be sufficient to assure implementation of the 'necessary instructions between the LERO EOC and the LERO road crews. The OL-5 Initial Decision, L B P-88 -2, found a fundarr. ental flaw in the LERO internal communications structure.
,l d , at ' 53, 251. As a result, it cannot be determined on the current record that communications between tiie LERO EOC and LERO tow truck and tank truck crews would be adequate, and summary disposition as to th:s matter cannot be granted. U Nevertheless, while summary disposition of contentions 4 and 9 cannot be granted, no material facts are genuinely in dispute with r espect to (1) the adecuacy of the LILCO Plan for removal of road obstructions and dispensing of fuel to cars out of gas, (2) the ability of LERO to contact and coordinate with Suffolk County police, (3) the ability of the County policc to make timely decisions te implement the LILCO Plan on a best efforts basis, and (4) the ability of the police to implement the actions, Et issue in contentions 4 and 9. These facts should he deemed established, i
l
-3/ With rcspect to the performance of assigned functions by road crews and tank truck crews, the findings with respect te flaws in the i LERO training p rog rarr. did not go so far as to find that these i
functions could not be adequately performed. See, M., at 53, 55.
t-
m.
, ~lli. , CONC LUSION -
The Board'should find .that all facts material to summary- disposition of Contentions 4 and 9, except those facts concerning the adequacy _of internal LERO communications,'should be deemed established.
Respectfully. submitted
& CAL.; Q : .-
jc' (ftlL -
y/Ceorge E3 Johnson Counsel for NMC Staff Dated at Reckville, Maryland this 10th day of February,1988 .