ML20204J756

Response to Intervenors Supplemental Answer to Util Petition for Review of ALAB-832 & Motion for Leave to File Same. Intervenors Request Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20204J756
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	08/04/1986
From:	Christman J HUNTON & WILLIAMS
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
CON-#386-261 ALAB-832, CLI-86-13, OL-3, NUDOCS 8608110182
Download: ML20204J756 (8)

Text

4 / LILCO, August 40 1986 e

p g\

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SNhD NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~

'6 A10,gg Before the Commission

((C g.

BRA f WE In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3

) (Emergency Planning)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

LILCO'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER TO LILCO'S PETITION FOR REVIEW OF ALAB-832 AND THEIR MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SAME On July 22,1986, the Intervenors in this proceeding (Suffolk County, the State of New York, and the Town of Southampton) filed a "Suffolk County, State of New York, and Town of Southampton Supplemental Answer to LILCO's Petition for Review of ALAB-832" and an accompanying "Suffolk County, State of New York, and Town of Southampton Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Answer to LILCO's Petition for Review of ALAB-832." The " Supplemental Answer" asks that LILCO's Petition for Re-view of ALAB-832 be denied because the Nassau County Board of Supervisors has re-cently declared that the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum, until now relied on by LILCO as its reception center for evacuees, will not be available for use in the Shoreham emergency plan without its prior approval. The Intervenors say that this means there is a " void in the record."

LILCO responds to these claims as follows.

2 hOkbo G

eo I. LILCO's Answer to the Motion for Leave to File the Intervenors' Supplemental Answer LILCO does not object to the Intervenors' filing, nor to the Commission's consid-ering, the Supplemental Answer, since it was prompted by an undeniably new develop-ment. The conclusion that the Intervenors would have the Commission reach upon reading that Supplemental Answer, however, is completely unfounded, for reasons set out below. -

II. LILCO's Reply to the Intervenors' Supplemental Answer The present situation is this: The Shoreham offsite emergency plan designates the Nassau County Veterans Coliseum as the reception center where evacuees may come to be monitored and, if necessary, decontaminated and to be directed to tempo-rary housing facilities (called " congregate care centers"). The Appeal Board, in ALAB-832, remanded to the Licensing Board a number of issues about the suitability of the Coliseum as a reception center.M LILCO asked the Commission to review the

( 1/ The relocation center issues that the Appeal Board remanded to the ASLB in ALAB-832 are these:

1. Whether the Coliseum complies with state law requirements for water discharge permits and environmental impact statements.

, 2. Whether more people than planned would seek a relocation center because l of the " shadow phenomenon."

3. Whether contaminated people would suffer too much radiation exposure i because of the distance of the Coliseum.

4. Whether traffic congestion and the absence of traffic guides, fuel trucks, and tow trucks outside the EPZ would delay people.

5. Whether the Coliseum's parking capacity is inadequate.

6. Whether wash water from decontamination of people would contaminate the groundwater.

An additional reception center issue is LILCO's challenge to the ASLB's conclusion that (footnote continued)

i 4

Appeal Board's decision on this point, and the Commission deferred the remand in CLI-86-11 until further order. The issue remains before the Commission. Meanwhile, the Nassau County Board of Supervisors, af ter intense lobbying by both Suffolk County and anti-Shoreham citizens' groups, has now resolved not to permit inclusion of the Coliseum in the Shoreham emergency plan without its prior approval. The basic ques-tion is whether LILCO's appeal has essentially been mooted by the action of the Nassau County Board of Supervisors.

In a real emergency, of course, the Coliseum would be available. The " realism" 1

l principle - that people will do all they can to help other people when lives or health is I

at stake - is as true in Nassau County as in Suffolk County. Hence, " realism," as recog-i nized in CLI-86-13, provides a perfectly sound basis for concluding that LILCO's plan for use of the Nassau County Coliseum is acceptable even in light of the recent Nassau i

t County resolutions.

Nevertheless, LILCO is preparing an alternative to the use of the Nassau Colise-l um as a reception center. The alternative, which will designate facilities other than the Collseum, should be ready in about two weeks and will be publi..hed as a part of Re-l l vision 8 to the Shoreham emergency plan (which revision was forthcoming in any event to deal with corrective actions for minor problems noticed by FEMA in the graded ex-ercise in February). The alternative will ensure that the Nassau Coliseum need not be l relied on.

l (footnote continued) l l LILCO must estimate and plan for the number of evacuees who are likely to come to I

the reception center for radiological monitoring and possible decontamination, but not l for sheltering. This issue has been briefed and argued to the Appeal Board, which de-ferred decision on it in ALAB-832. LILCO asked the Commission to review this issue, in light of the Appeal Board's declining to decide it. LILCO's Petition for Review of ALAB-832, at 2 n.4,3,13-14. The Appeal Board has asked, in an Order of July 28,1986, for the parties' views on the effect, as to this issue, of the Nassau County resolutions voiding the designation of the Coliseum as LILCO's relocation center. The parties' views are due on August 11, with replies due August 18. .

_ - -- - __ _ - _ . -_ ~ _ - _ . - _ - -- _ - _ . _ _

_4_

However, the fact that LILCO will be replacing the Nassau Coliseum with other facilities does not moot the important, and not uniquely facility-specific, matters raised by LILCO's petition to review the Nassau Coliseum portion of ALAB-832. If the Licensing Board was correct in excluding them initially (as LILCO contends), it would be correct in excluding them again; and there is certainly no point in compelling par- -

ties to litigate issues which do not need to be litigated. Yet absent Commission action the parties will be condemned to exactly that fate: the Licensing Board, having been previously reversed by the Appeal Board for excluding these issues, will no doubt feel i

bound by the Appeal Board's rulings in ALAB-832.

.4 Under these circumstances the Commission has, in LILCO's view, two choices.

First, it could keep jurisdiction of these issues and, when LILCO submits its plan amendment, including its replacement for the Coliseum, request the parties' views as to l whether the issues raised by LILCO on appeal still exist in cognate form for the re-placement facilities. If so, the Commission could require the parties to submit them 4

I for expedited briefing and argument.

As an alternative, though one that is likely to be less effective in producing an l expeditious decision, the Commission could vacate that portion of ALAB-832, de-stroying its precedential effect, and remand the issue to the Licensing Board with in-structions to consider the issue afresh. In that fashion the Licensing Board could make initial determinations, and conceivably any party aggrieved by its decision on the ad-

~

l missibility of ALAB-832 issues now before the Commission on LILCO's appeal could seek l

l Commission review at that time by certification.

l i

}

III. Conclusion In short, the Commission can grant the Intervenors' Motion for Leave to File Their Supplemental Answer without objection by LILCO. However, the Intervenors' re-quest that the Commission deny LILCO's Petition for Review of ALAB-832 should be denied.

Respectfully submitted, Donald P. Id vin James N. Cthstman Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: August 4,1986

LILCO, August 4,1986 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY  :

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 I hereby certify that copies of LILCO'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' SUPPLE-MENTAL ANSWER TO LILCO'S PETITION FOR REVIEW OF ALAB-832 AND THEIR MO-TION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SAME were served this date upon the following by Federal Express, as indicated by an asterisk, or by first-class mail, postage prepaid.

Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chairman

• Gary J. Edles, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing 1717 H Street, N.W. Appeal Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Fif th Floor Commissioner Thomas M. Roberts * (N. Tower) East-West Towers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4350 East-West Highway 1717 H Street, N.W. Bethesda, MD 20814 Washington, DC 20555 Dr. Howard A. Wilber Commissioner James K. Asselstine

• Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisison Appeal Board 1717 H Street, N.W. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, DC 20555 Commission Fif th Floor (North. Tower)

Commissioner Frederick M. Bernthal

• East-West Towers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4350 East-West Highway 1717 H Street, N.W. Bethesda, MD 20814

Washington, DC 20555 l Morton B. Margulies, William C. Parler, Esq.

• Chairman General Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Board 1717 H Street, N.W. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, DC 20555 Commission East-West Towers, Rm. 407 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., 4350 East-West Hwy.

Chairman Bethesda,P s 20814 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Dr. Jerry R. Kline U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Fif th Floor (North Tower) Board East-West Towers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4350 East-West Highway Commission Bethesda, MD 20814 East-West Towers, Rm. 427 4350 East-West Hwy.

Bethesda, MD 20814

,,,.-- . . . - - - . . - - , , - - ,-,,,, _ --- p n,,, n-r_- -,----n--- e - --

---

w- ,,--- -,---- a --------w- , - - - ~ - - - - - -

5 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Mary Gundrum, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Assistant Attorney General Board 2 World Trade Center U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Room 4614 Commission New York, New York 10047 East-West Towers, Rm. 430 4350 East-West Hwy. Spence W. Perry, Esq.

Bethesda, MD 20814 General Counsel Federal Emergency Secretary of the Commission Management Agency Attention Docketing and Service 501 C Street, S.W., Room 840 Section Washington, DC 20472 .

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Jay Dunkleberger 1717 H Street, N.W. New York State Energy Office Washington, DC 20555 Agency Building 2

^

Empire State Plaza Atomic Safety and Licensing Albany, New York 12223 Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Stewart M. Glass, Esq.

Commission Regional Counsel Washington, DC 20555 Federal Emergency Management Agency Atomic Safety and Licensing 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1349.

Board Panel New York, New York 10278 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

• Washington, DC 20555 Twomey, Latham & Shea 33 West Second Street Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.

• P.O. Box 298 Oreste Russ Pirfo, Esq. -

Riverhead, New York 11901 Edwin J. Reis, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.

Commission New York State Department of 7735 Old Georgetown Road Public Service, Staff Counsel i

(to mailroom) Three Rockefeller Plaza Bethesda, MD 20814 Albany, New York 12223 Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.

• William E. Cumming, Esq.

Karla J. Letsche, Esq. Associate General Counsel Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Federal Emergency Management Eighth F'oor Agency 1900 M Street, N.W. 500 C Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20036 Room 840 Washington, DC 20472 Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.

• Special Counsel to the Ms. Nora Bredes Governor Executive Coordinator Executive Chamber Shoreham Opponents' Coalition Room 229 195 East Main Street State Capitol Smithtown, New York 11787 Albany, New York 12224 l

l _

- - . , . - _ - . . _ - ~ _ _

t Gerald C. Crotty, Esq. Dr. Monroe Schneider Counsel to the Governor North Shore Committee Executive Chamber P.O. Box 231 State Capitol Wading River, NY 11792 Albany, New York 12224 Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.

Eugene R. Kelly, Esq.

Suffolk County Attorney H. Lee Dennison Building Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 d W#M James N. Chr(tman Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: August 4,1986 l

I i

l