ML20212P508
| ML20212P508 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 08/29/1986 |
| From: | Backus R BACKUS, MEYER & SOLOMON, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#386-550 OL-1, NUDOCS 8609030162 | |
| Download: ML20212P508 (8) | |
Text
,
550 August #gg l
Filed:
UNITED STATES OF AMERIC%6 SEP -2 2157 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMVIISSION GFFICE OF SELP I*
before the 00CKETpjtj EPVICf.
or,1n ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF Docket Nos. 50-443-OL !
NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL 5 0- 4 4 4-OL- /
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
On-Site Emergency Planning & Safety Issues.
SAPL'S AND NECNP'S RESPONSE AND OBJECTION TO APPLICANTS' MOTION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE LICENSE TO CONDUCT FUEL LOAD AND PRECRITICALITY TESTING The Seacoast Anti-Pollution League and New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution obj ect to Applicants' Motion for Authorization to Issue License to Conduct Fuel Load and Precriticality Testing at Seabrook Station filed by Applicants on August 22, 1986 and as grounds for this objection state as follows:
I.
THE BOARD MAY NOT ISSUE A LICENSE UNTIL HEARINGS ON ALL ISSUES RELEVANT TO FULL POWER OPRATION HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
Applicants seek a license to load fuel into and conduct l
preer i t icali ty tes t ing at Seabrook Stat ion under 10 C.F.R. 450.57(c).
NECNP and SAPL contend that any interpretation of 10 C.F.R. 950.57(e)
I which would allow issuance of a'
license permitting any licensed l
l activity would violate said parties' rights to a full operating license hearing pursuant to Section 189 (a)(1) of the Atomic Energy I
e609030162 860029 PDR ADOCK 05000443 PDR G
QSo3
O t
Act.
Under the Act, all issues that are material to the full power operation of a nuclear power plant must be considered relevant to issuance of a license for any level of operation, including the suberitical operation proposed by Applicants in their motion.
SAPL and NECNP hold that all arguments made heretofore by NECNP in its July 2, 1986 opposi t ion to Applicants' Mot ion f or issuance of part ial initial decision authorizing low power operationi apply equally to this instant motion by the Applicants to load the core and conduct preer i t ical i ty t es t ing.2 SAPL and NECNP incorporate those. arguments amended to apply to any licensed activity, by reference herein.
I1.
THERE ARE NEW ISSUES RAISED BY DRAFT LICENSE FOR SEABROOK STATION, UNIT 1, DATED AUGUST 20, 19 86 WITH RESPECT TO MATTERS SPECIFIED IN 10 C.F.R. 550.57(a).
10 C.F.R. 650.57(c) states that:
Prior to taking any action on such motion which any party opposes,.the presiding of ficer shall make findings on the matters specified in paragraph (a) of this section as to which there is a controversy, in the form of an initial decision with respect to the contested activity sought to be authorized.
10 C.F.R. 050.57(a) sets forth the following 6 matters upon which t he Commi s s ion mus t ma ke its findings prior to issuing an operating license:
l 1.
New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution's Opposition to Applicants' Motion for issuance of Partial Initial Decision Authorizing Low Power Operation, July 2, 1986, at 5-16.
2.
SAPL also filed an objection to Applicants' Motion to low power test the facility, but did not address the legality of 10 C.F.R. 650.57(c) therein.
l l 1
i 5
(1)
Construction of the f acililty has been substantially completed, in conformity with the construction permit and the applicantion as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; and (2)
The facility will operate in conformity with the application as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; and (3)
There is reasonble assurance (i) that the activities authorized by the operating license can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the regulations in this chapter; and (4)
The applicant is technically and financially qualified to engage in the activities authorized by the operating license in accordance with the regulations in this chapter.
- However, no finding of financial qualification is necessary for an electric utility applicant for an operating license for a utilization facility of the type described in 050.21(b) or $50.22.
(5)
The applicable provisions of Part 140 of this chapter have been satisfied; and (6)
The issuance of the license will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
SAPL and NECNP hold that these are new controversial issues raised by the provisions in this new draf t license which were not in the June 20, 1986 version of the license.
At page 3 of the Draft License ref erenced in the capt ion above, at 8, i t s tates as f ollows:
"PSNH is hereby exempted from the provisions of 10 C.F.R.
Section 70.24 insofar as this section applies to materials held under this license."
10 C.F.R. 070.24 deals with criticality accident requirements and it requires that each licensee authorized to possess special nuclear materials maintain a monitoring system in each area in which such materials are handled, used or stored that, using either gamma-l or neutron sensitive radiation detectors, will cause audible alarm
( l
systems to energize if an accidental criticality occurs.
SAPL and NECNP would hold that the Commission's regulations as described at 10 C.F.R. 950.57(a)(2) are not met at Seabrook Stat ion without this criticality monitoring equipment.
This exemption issue is germane to the Appl i es.n t s ' proposed activity.
Applicants claim that by keeping water in the reactor coolant system borated at 2000 ppm, there will be no possibility of an accidental criticality.
- However, given this proposed exemption, it is not clear that Applicants would be required to have the appropriate instrumentation in operation to give warning should such a criticality occur and this could inhibit Applicants' ability to take prompt corrective measures.
SAPL and NECNP find this set of circumstances unacceptable and contrary to the requirements set out at 050.57(a). Addi t ionally, the new vers ion of the Draf t License requires that PSNH submit its results of leakage rat e measurement s to demons t ra t e that its leakage reduction program has been implemented successfully prfor to proceeding above 5% of rated power.
Leakage in the reactor coolant system could have an effect upon PSNH's ability to maintain boron concentration at the level specified in its motion since water would need to be added to the system.
Affidavit of Vincent J. Esposito simply accepts PSNH's commitment to maintain boron concentration.
Affidavit of George S.
Thomas states that makeup water supply will be analyzed at least once per shift to verify that boron concentration is 2000 ppm and tha t makeup water will be anlayzed every time it is added to preclude boron dilution.
Nonborated water sources are to be isolated from the reactor coolant system by keeping valves closed with chains and padlocks.
SAPL and NECNP would hold that, though the probabililty
_4_
i 5
of accidental dilution under these circumstances is small, it is by no means nil.
For example, analytical errors can be made by those responsible for monitoring boron concentration.
III. THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE APPLICANTS TO LOAD THE CORE AND INITI ATE PRECRITICALITY TESTING AT THIS flME.
There is no compelling reason for the Applicants to load fuel into the core and begin precriticality testing at this time.
A full power license cannot possibly issue until the Commission has made its findings and determinations concerning the state of onsite and offsite radiological emergency response preparedness pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 450.47 and its subsections.
Such a finding is many months away since no "operat i ve3 plans are now in the possession of the parties to this proceeding.
There is therefore no good reason why hearings and a partial initial decision on the so-called onsite issues cannot be concluded prior to any determination that Applicants should be allowed to pursue the course of action outlined in their August 22, 1986 motion.
IV.
SAPL SUPP. 6 IS RELEVANT TO THE ACTIVITY TO BE AUTHORIZED.
10 C.F.R. 650.57(c) provides inter alla that:
" Action on such a Motion by the presiding of ficer shall be taken with due regard to the righ ts of the par t ies to the proceeding, including the right of any party to be heard to the extent that his contentions are relevent to the activity to be authorized."
SAPL Supp. 6 is relevant to the proposed activity in that it I
involves the control room and certain of the issues such as human engineering discrepancies that SAPL holds ought to be resolved before j
any level of operation, including suberitical operation. The loading 3.
See Motion by the Federal Emergency Agency for Continuation of l
Ilearing on Emergency Planning Contentions at 4. l
of fuel into the reactor and suberiticality testing of the reactors will absolutely require that the control room be manned (see Final Draf t Technical Speci ficat ions at 6.2) and that certain controls be activated. The Applicants in their Motion state that since no control room operation is needed to assure bcron concentration of 2000 ppm, the issues raised by SAPL Supp. 6 are irrelevant.
I f the Applicants are simply proposing to put borated water into the reactor coolant system, SAPL would not object.
It is the cocommitant placing of fuel into the core to which SAPL objects.
This is an activity that M relevant to SAPL Supp. 6.
SAPL notes that there is no affidavit supplied by Applicants which asserts that SAPL Supp. 6 is not relevant.
V.
MOTION SHOULD BE DENIED FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN.
10.
C.F.R.
950.57 refers back to 050.56, which provides as follows:
Upon completion of the construction or alteration of a facility, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the construction permit and subject to any necessary testing of the f acility for health or saf ety purposes, the Commission will, in the absence of good cause shown to the contrary issue a license of the class for which the construct ion permit was issued or an appropriate amendment of the license, as the case may be.
(Emphasis added)
SAPL and NECNP hold that all of the reasons set forth above jointly and severally constitute good cause sufficient to have this Board deny Applicants' Motion. - _.
b Respectfully submitted, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE By Its Attorneys, BACKUS, MEYER & SOLOMON N-O Rpbert A. Backus y P'.,0.
Box 516 M(nchester, N!!
(603)668-7272 I hereby cert if y that copies of the above have been sent first-class postage prepaid.to all parties on the service list.
ll
\\%
~ Robert A.
Backus'
{./
I i i
' ~ * ~'
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND SERVICE LIST Jose Asst.Gn.Cnsl.
Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chrm."
Thomas Dignan, Esq.4 Fcd. ph Flynndgmt. Agcy.
Admn. Judge Ropes & Gray Emerg.
500 C.Sc. So. West Atomic Safety & Lic Brd.
225 Franklin St.
Washington, DC 20472 USNRC Boston, MA 02110 Washington, DC 20555 Office of Selectmen Dr. Jerry Harbour *'
Docketing & Serv. Sec.
Town of Hampton Falls Admin. Judge Office of the Secretary Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Atomic Safety & Lic Brd'.
USNRC l'SNRC Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 emin E. M, Bq.
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke
- Jane Doughty Office of Exec. Legl. Dr.
Admin Judge SAPL USNRC Atomic Safety & Lic. Brd.
5 Market Street Wahsington, DC 20500 USNRC Portsmouth, NH 03801 Washington, DC 20555 Phillip Ahrens, Esq.
Paul McEachern, Esq.
George Dara Bisbee, Esq.
Asst. Atty. General Matthew Brock, Esq.
Attorney General's OFF.
State House, Sta. #6 25 Mapleucod Ave.
State of New Hampshire Augusta, ME 04333 P.O. Box 360 Concord, NH 03301 Fortsmouth, NH 03801 Carol Sneider, Esq., Asst.AG Diane Curran, Esq.
William S. Lord One Ashburton Place, Harmon, Weiss Board of Selectmen 19th Floor 20001 S Street NW Suite 430 Town Hall-Friend St.
Boston, MA 02108 Washington, DC 20009 Amesbury, MA 01913 Richard A. Hampe, Esq.
Maynard Young, Chairann Sandra Gauvutis New Hampshire Civil Defense Board of Selectmen Town of Kingston Agency 10 Central Road Box 1154 Hanpe & McNicholas Rye, NH 03870 East Kensulgton, h3 03827 35 Pleasant St.
Concord, NH 03301 Echard Thomas Mr. Pobert Harrison FBIA Pres, & Olief Exec. Officer 442 J.W. McConnack (POCH)
PSCO Boston, MA 02109 P.O. Box 330 Manchester, NH 03105 Roberta Pevear State Rep.-Town of Hanpt Falls Drinkwater Road Hanpton Falls, h3 03844
- Federal Expressed I
_