ML20209H966
| ML20209H966 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1986 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO., COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO SHEARON HARRIS, EDDLEMAN, W. |
| References | |
| CON-#386-671 OL, NUDOCS 8609160092 | |
| Download: ML20209H966 (4) | |
Text
m',
4 67/
00CW.ETED USHEC
'86 SEP 12 M106
"~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF 5ECedW 00CKETtH3 & 3ERVICI-BR A NC!'
COMMISSIONERS:
Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chaiman Thomas M. Roberts James K. Asselstine SERVED SEP 121986 Frederick M. Bernthal Kenneth H. Carr In the Matter of CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN Docket No. 50-400 OL ir*
MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY
)
(ShearonHarrisNuclearPowerPlant)
ORDER On March 4,1986 applicant Carolina Power & Light (CP&L) requested an exemption from the requirement that a full-scale emergency preparedness exercise be conducted "within 1 year before the issuance of the operating license for full power and prior to operation above 5% of rated power of the first reactor...."
10 C.F.R. Part 50, App. E,
'l IV.F.1.
On April 3, 1986, Wells Eddleman, an intervenor in the Shearon Harris operating license proceeding, requested a hearing on this exemp-l tion request. On August 5, 1986, Eddleman, joined this time by the Coalition for Alternatives to Shearon Harris (CASH), again requested a hearing on the exemption request. Both CP&L and the NRC staff opposed the hearing requests.
i l
8609160092 860912
[fd Z
$DR ADOCK 05000400 PDR
cr W
?
2 The Comission has decided not to reach at this time the question of whether under Section 189a of the Atomic Enc, gy Act this exemption request grants interested persons hearing rights. Rather, the Comission has decided first to determine whether there are any material issues of fact to litigate at a hearing.
If there are material issues of fact, then the Comission will decide whether a hearing should be held.
If there are no material issues of fact, then no purpose would be served by initiating a hearing.
1 The Comission accordingly requests Mr. Eddleman and CASH to file awrittenbrief,tobeservedonCP&LandNRCstaffbyexpressmailandh to be in the hands of the Secretary of the Comission by 5:00 p.m.
.I September 1986, identifying what material issues of fact they believe warrant a hearing. Applicant CP&L should file a response with D
the Secretary of the Comission by 5:00 p.m. October G, 1986. The NRCD staff is to file a response with the Secretary by 5:00 p.m. October 9,-
1986. The staff in its brief should advise the Comission of its views regarding whether the exemption request should be granted.
The pleadings should address whether there are any material issues of fact regarding whether the standards of 10 C.F.R. 50.1E(a)(1) and (2) for granting an exemption have been met. Mr. Eddleman and CASH should indicate what contentions they seek to litigate, what the specific 1The Comission in this order is not addressing whether CASH's hearing request was timely, or whether CASH, which is not an intervenor in the operating license proceeding, has any rights to participate in any hearing. The Comission reserves those questions until after it desides whether there are any material issues of fact.
^%
i t
3 disputed material facts are for which they believe a hearing must be held, what position they take on such issues, and the factual basis for such position. These matters should be addressed with reasonable specificity, but submission of admissable evidence, as such, is not v u necessary. They should also explain Yhy these' issues are material to a determination under 10 C.F.R. 50J12, and.should set forth their rationale for believing an oral kpari,ng is needed'for a full and true
~
a
_o discussion of the facts on these issues. The NRC staff and CP&L should
- ... n specifically respond to each issue raised by Mr. Eddleman and CASH.
The Comission is particularly interested in whether there have been any significant changes in the emergency plan since the last full-scale exercise was conducted, and whether any such changes create material issues of fact regarding whether the standards of 10 C.F.R. 50.12(a)(1)and(2)aremet.
The Comission is similarly interested in whether the steps taken subsequent to the exercise to maintain an 2To the extent relevant, the Comission intends to apply the
" fundamental flaw" criteria set forth by the Licensing Board in this proceedino and by the Comission in the Shoreham proceedino. See CLI-86-11, 23 NRC 577, 581 (1986); LBP-85-49, 22 NRC 899, 908-TD--(1985).
Under that standard the Comission will consider allegations of deficiencies in emergency preparedness only where the basis for the allegation, if shown to be true, would demonstrate a fundamental flaw in preparedness.
i' I
l adequate level of preparedness create any material issues of fact regarding whether the standards of 10 C.F.R. 50.12 are met.
Commissioner Asselstine disapproved this Order.
It is so ORDERED.
A For the Commission,*
[
(
Y
[4 gg LJ Cli i
4 g
Secretary of e Commission Dated at Washington, D.C.
this
~ day of September, 1986 l
l Commissioner Asselstine was absent for the affirmation of this order, if he had been present he would have disapproved.
l l
l