ML20212G086
| ML20212G086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 02/27/1987 |
| From: | Perlis R NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212G091 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#187-2670 OL, NUDOCS 8703050261 | |
| Download: ML20212G086 (3) | |
Text
.
2[pY February 27, 1987 D0' [%,E D EI UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g7 l[q -4 All :28 BEFORE THE ATO? tic SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD.
'y In the Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-443 OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)
50-444 OL NEW HAf3PSHIRE, M.
)
Off-site Emergency Planning
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2
)
MEC STAFF INITIAL RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' PETITION FOR WAIVER
' On December 18, 1986, the Applicants in this proceeding filed, pursuant to 10 CFR 52.758, a petition for a waiver from those regulations that require the establishment of a ten-mile plume exposure emergency planning zone (EPZ) for the Seabrook facility.
Instead of a ten-mile zone, the Applicants specifically requested that a one-mile EPZ be established for Seabrook.
In support of their petition, Applicants submitted, inter alia, two probabilistic analyses performed by Pickard, Lowe a Garrick (PLG), numerous affidavits, and a legal memorandum to demonstrate that a one-mile EPZ for Seabrook would satisfy the standards i
of Section 2.758.
On January 28, 1987, the Staff filed its " Response in Accordance with the ~ Licensing Board's Order of.Ja'nuary 7,
1987 Concerning Applicants' Petition for a Waiver from Emergency Planning Regulations."
On February 3, 1987, the Licensing Board rejected the Staff response, but invited the Staff to file an additional response by February 27th if the Staff so desired.
On February 12, 1987, in response to a Staff motion for clarification of the Board's February 3rd Order, the Board l
DESIC!?ATED CRIGERnL 8703050261 870227 t
{DR ADOCK 0500 3
CertifiedByl\\
q
-A l
indicated that altilough it was clear to the Board that the Staff's final review would not be completed until late 1987, the Board was interested in any preliminary views the Staff might have on the issues rt41 sed in the waiver petition.
(Order of February 12, 1987 at 3).
In accordance with the Board's Order, the Staff provides the following update on the work that has been performed to date, and on the work that remains to be done.
As described in the attached Affidavit of Scott Newberry, in August of 1986, the Staff reonested Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) to review various aspects of the PLAG analyses.
Brookhaven issued a draft report in December; a copy of the report was provided to the parties to this proceeding on December 8,1986. II In his Affidavit, Mr. Newberry describes the tasks BNL was asked to perform,
summarizes the i
conclusions reached by BNL, and lists areas where further work is needed.
It should be emphasized that much of the work, and therefore many of the conclusions, are preliminary in nature and subject to change.
In addition, it must be clear that BNL's conclusions are not necessarily those of the Staff.
(
Brookhaven will be issuing a Final Report sometime in the very near future.
The Staff will make that report available to the Board and parties when it is issued.
In addition to the Final Brookhaven Report, the Staff will transmit in that package three additional documents mentioned in Mr. Newberry's Affidavit: the peer review comments of Dr.
-1/
Copies of the Draft Brookhaven report were transmitted to the Board by Staff counsel by letter dated January 30, 1927
~
Theofanous, and Staff memoranda on Induced Steam Generator Tube Rupture and Containment Isolation Failure. Finally, the Staff will provide the Board and parties with copies of the material it submits to the ACRS when the Staff appears before that body in April.
Respectfully submitted,
/
Robert G. Perlis Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 27th day of February,1987.
l I
l l
l l
l l
- -