ML20211N964
| ML20211N964 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1986 |
| From: | Curran D HARMON & WEISS, NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#386-917 OL, NUDOCS 8607110148 | |
| Download: ML20211N964 (7) | |
Text
-
QI O
July 8, 1986 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 00CKETED USNRC
)
In the Matter of
)
l@ Ji -9 21 :09
)
Public Service Company of
)
0FFICE rt u.. r.h New Hampshire, et al.
)
Docket Sk3ETMQW4f).,'<, h
)
Ege*A44 OL (Seabrook Station, Units 1 & 2)
)
)
Of fsite Emergency
)
Planning NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION'S RESPONSE TO' MOTION BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR CONTINUATION OF HEARINGS ON EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTIONS The Federal Emergency Management Agency (" FEMA") has moved the Board to postpone hearings on the New Hampshire state and local emergency plans until October 20, 1986.
FEMA states that it would be impractical and counterproductive to litigate the current set of plans, which are not " operative."
FEMA Motion at 4.
According to FEMA, the plans will be substantially altered" d
in response to the February exercise and RAC reviews, and will be resubmitted in August of this year.
Id.
The New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution ( *NECNP")
does not object to FEMA's motion.
There is no reason to waste the resources,of the parties and the Board by litigating emergency plans that the State of New Hampshire does not intend to be used during a radiological emergency at Seabrook.
- However, NECNP seeks clarification of certain issues, and asks the Board to place conditions on the litigation of the New Hampshire plans
that will assure the more efficient use of the Board's and the parties' resources, and thereby lead to the more thorough and ef-fective airing of safety issues in this case.
To date, NECNP has expended considerable time and resources on the litigation of several sets of New Hampshire emergency plans that were later abandoned or substantially revised, neces-sitating the re-evaluation of plans and the re-submission of con-tentions and discovery requests.
In 1983, NECNP filed conten-tions and discovery on a massive set of plans that were later abandoned.
In early 1986, NECNP reviewed another extensive set of plans and filed contentions.
Shortly after that, the State submitted another set of revisions to the plans and informed the parties at the March prehearing conference that still other parts of the plans would also be revised later.
On June 7,1986, NECNP received yet another set of revisions to the plans.
Now FEMA has stated in its motion that the plans will again be "substantially" revised.
Moreover, FEMA states that the current revision of the plans is the "first of several."
NECNP is now in the process of evaluating the extensive set of revisions to the New Hampshire emergency plans known as
" Revision 1."
It is not clear from FEMA's motion, however, For instance, NECNP's contention on the adequacy of planning for host communities was deferred by the Board af ter the State of New Hampshire stated at the March prehearing confer-ence that the designation of some host communities would change.
3.-
whether Revision 1 will ever be an " operative" part of the State's emergency response plan, or whether it will be entirely replaced by the revision that is expected in August.
Both the parties' and the Board's interest in conserving resources would be served by the avoidance of unnecessary litigation of Revision 1.
Therefore NECNP requests that.the Board obtain clarification from the State of New Hampshire as to whether Revision 1 should be considered an " operable" part of the New Hampshire emergency Plans for purposes of this litigation.
NECNP recognizes that emergency planning is an evolving process, and that plans may be subject to some changes during the course of litigation.
However, in this case the parties have twice been forced to expend considerable resources in the prema-ture litigation of fundamentally inadequate plans that have later been subject to substantial revisions.
Now, for the third, time, FEMA expects the State to submit a "substantially altered" set of plans -- and it concedes that this set will not be the last.
In order to assure that the parties' resources do not continue to be wasted in the repeated litigation of premature plans, NECNP re-quests this Board to order that before litigation of any further revisions to the plan commences, the Applicants and the State of New Hampshire must certify to the Board that the submitted plans substantially constitute the plans on which the Applicants and State intend to rely in support of the Seabrook operating license application.
Finally, NECNP requests that in any future litigation of the New Hampshire emergency plans, the Board discontinue the ex-
l pedited hearing schedule by which it has governed the last two emergency planning proceedings.
Vigorous litigation and public debate on the adequacy of emergency planning is vital to a determination of whether and how best the public health and safety can be protected in the event of an accident at Seabrook.
Through the use of expedited schedules in the 1983 and 1986 pro-ceedings, however, the public interest in a full and thorough airing of emergency planning safety issues at Seabrook has con-i sistently been subordinated to Applicants' timetable for complet-ing and operating the plant.
Now that FEMA has effectively halted Applicants' and the State's efforts to push through an in-adequate set of emergency plans, it is clear that the resulting sacrifice of thoroughness in the litigation process and the hardship which the expedited schedule imposed on intervenors were not warranted.
The Board should not further indulge Applicants' premature requests for expedited approval of the plans, but should instead base the hearing schedule on the amount of time needed for a full and fair hearing on the emergency plans.
In its motion, FEMA suggests that the Board postpone a hear-ing until at least October 20.
However, it is impossible to determine from currently available information whether it would be appropriate to conduct hearings in the fall on the same issues that are currently under litigation.
NECNP recommends that the Board defer establishing a litigation schedule until the next set of revisions to the emergency plans has been issued.
Then, the Board can determine whether to continue to litigate some or all t
w
of the issues now before it, or whether it would be more ap-propriate to order the refiling of contentions.
At that time, the Board should establish a hearing schedule that provides ample and sufficient time for the development of issues and the i
thorough litigation of emergency planning for Seabrook.
e Respectfully submitted, s
3 bk Diane Curran HARMON & WEISS 2001 S Street N.W.
Suite 430 Washington, D. C.
20009 i
4 e
e e
y 4
,o CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE o
I certify that on July 8,1986, copies or' NEW ENGLAND COALI-TION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION'S RESPONSE TO MOTION BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR CONTINUATION OF HEARINGS ON EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTIONS were served on the following by first-class mail or as otherwise indicated:
Helen F. Hoyt, Esq.
Rep. Roberta C. Pevear Chairperson Drinkwater Road Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Hampton Falls, NH 03844 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Phillip Ahrens, Esq.
Dr. Jerry Harbour Assistant Attorney General State House, Station # 6 Administrative Judge Augusta, ME 04333 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert A. Backus, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Backus, Meyer & Solomon 111 Lowell Street Dr. Emmeth A.
Lu ebk e Manchester, NH 03105 Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Thomas G. Dignan, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert K.
Gad, III, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Boston, MA 02110 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert G.
Perlis, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Sherwin E.
Tu r k, Es q.
Docketing and Service Of fice of the Ex(cutive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 Mrs. Anne E.
Goodman Mr. An g ie, Machiroc, Ch airman 13-15 Newmarket Road Board of Selectmen Durham, NH 03824 Newbury, MA 01950 Board of Selectmen 13-15 New Ma rket Road George Dana Bisbee, Esq.
Assistant At torney General Durhcm, NH 03824 State House Annex Concord, NH 03301 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Appeal Board Panel Allen Lampert U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Civil Defense Director Washington, D.C.
20555 Town of Br entwood Exeter, NH 03833 William S.
Lo r d, Selectman Town Hall -- Fr iend Street Alfred V.
Sa rgent, Ch airman Amesbury, MA 01913 Board of Selectmen Salisbury, MA 01950 W
Richard E. Sullivan, Mayor J.P.
Na deau, Es q.
. City' Hall Selectman, Town of Rye Newburyport, MA 01950 Rye, NH 03870 Carol S.
Sneider, Esq.
Sandra Gavutis Assistant Attorney General RFD 1 Box 1154 Department of the Attorney General East Kensington, NH 03827 One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Senator Gordon J.
Humphrey U. S. Se nate Jane Doughty Washington, D. C. 2 0510 SAPL
( At tn:
Tom Burack) 5 Market Street Portsmouth, NH 03801 Senator Cordon J.
Humphrey 1 Pillsbury Street Selectmen of Northampton Concord, NH 03301 Northampton, NH 03862 Michael Santusuosso, Chairman Richard A. Hampe, Es q.
Board of Selectmen Hampe and McNicholas Jewell Street, RFD # 2 35 Pleasant Street South Hampton, NH 03842 Concord, NH 03301 Matthew T. Br ock, Es q.
Gary W. Holmes, Esq.
Shaines & McEachern Holmes & Ellis P.O.
Box 3 60 47 Winnacunent Road Maplewood Ave.
Hampton, NH 03842 Portsmouth, NH 03801 William Armstrong Stanley W. Knowles, Chairman Civil Defense Director Board of Selectmen 10 Front Street P.O.
Bo x 710 Exeter, NH 03833 North Hampton, NH 03826 Calvin A Canney Edward A. Thomas City Maneger City Hall Federal Emergency Management Agency 126 Daniel St reet 442 J.W. McCormack (POCH)
Portsmouth, NH 03801 Boston, MA 02109 H. Joseph Flynn, Esq.
N Federal Emergency Management Agency
/
500 C Street, S.W.
L
/'*-
Washington, D. C.
20470 Diane Curran i
1 l
--