ML20214H194
| ML20214H194 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook, Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1986 |
| From: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Simpson A SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8611260319 | |
| Download: ML20214H194 (7) | |
Text
e
~e'
[
jo,,
UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
8
,I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$66 s.,.....,/
November 19, 1986 CHAI M N
~
The Honorable Alan K. Simpson, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The NRC quarterly status report on emergency preparedness for nuclear power plants is enclosed. The report, our 29th, covers the period from July 1 to September 30, 1986.
In the Shoreham and Seabrook cases, the Commission is unable to realistically forecast the licensing schedule because of the emergency preparedness issues.
Minor revisions, as noted in Table 1, have occurred in other operating license review schedule dates since our last report to Congress; but none of these revi-sions are projected to result in any delays in the licensing process.
Please notify us if you desire additional information.
Sincerely, f
OM W-N-
Lando W. Zec Jr.
Enclosure:
NRC Quarterly Status Report cc: The Honorable Gary Hart nu260M
e t
Y
~
NRC QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT
- TO CONGRESS ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS July 1, 1986 to September 30, 1986 The 29th NRC status report to Congress on emergency preparedness for nuclear
~
power plants covers the period from July I to September 30, 1986.
' Tables-1 and 2 provide the status of offsite and onsite emergency planning, respectively, for applicants for an operating. license.
Commission decision dates are consistent with those reported to the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.
L.
r A
P' INDEX OF MATERIAL SUPPLIED BY NRC Table 1 -
Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness Operating License Reviews
. Table 2 -
Status of Onsite Emergency Preparedness Operating License Reviews i-t i
l f
l
September 30, 1986 Table 1 Status of Offsite Emergency Preparedness Operating License Reviews Date of Potential Estimated FEMA OffsigeEP FEMA Finding Delay Start of Commissign 3
4 Facility Finding Needed (Months)
Hearings Decision
~
Shoreham 6
6 6
C Nine Mile 2 C
C 0
None 10/86*
Shearon Harris C
C 0
C 10/86*7 Perry.
C C
0 C
11/86*
Seabrook 04/06/87*
04/06/87*
9 11/86*
8 Braidwood C
C 0
C 12/86*
Clinton C
C 0
None 12/86*
Vogtle C*
C*
0 C
12/86 Beaver Valley 2 12/01/86 12/01/86 0
None 04/87 South Texas 01/01/87 01/01/87 0
C 06/87 Watts Bar C
C 0
None
.10 Comanche Peak C
C 0
C
.11 Total Potential Offsite
-6' 9 Emergency Preparedness Delay:
Change from previous report.
Not scheduled.
Notes:
I C = complete; i.e., FEMA Findings have been provided. Where a date is given in parentheses, supplemental information to FEMA Findings previously provided is expected on that date. FEMA Findings on offsite emergency preparedness are not required to issue a license authorizing fuel loading and operation up to 5 percent of rated power.
2C = complete; i.e., FEMA Findings have been provided. Where a date is given, it is the date by which the FEMA Findings must be provided to meet the proposed Coninission Decision date.
3The delay is caused by offsite emergency preparedness issues. This delay is in addition to any delays estimated in the report to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.
4C = complete; i.e., a hearing has started.
=
Table 1 (Continued) - 5 Dates are consistent with those reported to the House Appropriations Subcom-mittee on Energy and Water Development and in the NRR Monthly Report except for Perry whose date has slipped to that shown here.
For plants for which construction is complete, the dates shown are for full-power licensing. For the other plants, the dates are those by which the NRC needs the information to act on authorization for fuel loading and low-power operations.
0 0n April 17, 1985, the Licensing Board for emergency planning for Shoreham ruled that, although LILCO's offsite emergency plan is generally adequate, LILC0 does not have,the legal authority to perform many of the required emer-gency functions set out in that plan. On August 26, 1985, the Board issued a concluding partial initial decision finding that because of LILC0's inability to implement its offsite emergency response plan and because of the refusal of the State and county to cooperate, a full-power license may not be issued for Shoreham. Appeals of the April and August emergency planning decisions were filed with the Appeal Board by LILC0 and the intervenors. On October 18, 1985, the Appeal Board upheld the Licensing Board's decision that LILCO does not have the legal authority to implement its offsite emergency plan. On March 26, 1986, the Appeal Board issued a decision that reversed the Licensing Board's datermination in part and remanded the proceeding for further hearings, but ordered the Board not to proceed until ordered to do so by the Comission. On July 24, 1986, the Comission ordered further hearings on the adequacy of emer-gency planning at Shoreham, presuming that the State and county would actually participate in a real emergency. An exercise of the LILC0 emergency plan was conducted on February 13, 1986. NRC Region I, in an exercise report, stated that the licensee adequately demonstrated its onsite emergency response capabil-FEMA. evaluation of the offsite exercise identified five deficiencies ities.
s and several areas requiring corrective actions.
LILC0 has submitted Revisions 7 and 8 to the offsite plan primarily in response to the FEMA exercise assess-ment. On June 6,1986, the Comission directed the Licensing Board to immediately initiate a hearing on exercise-related contentions and directed the continued deferral of the issues remanded by the Appeal Board. Contentions related to the exercise were submitted and a pre-hearing conference was held on September 24, 1986. A hearing date will be established when the admission of contentions has been ruled upon. On September 19, 1986, the Commission decided that only three issues remanded by the Appeal Board merit Commission review, and that the deferral of the remaining issues is lifted. On the basis of the above, a realistic fore-cast of the impact on the licensing process cannot be made at this time.
70n August 15, 1986, the Governor of Ohio informed the NRC of the withdrawal of his support for evacuation plans for Perry and Davis-Besse because of safety concerns related to the Chernobyl accident and the earthquake near Perry.
i The Governor has appointed a team to review the evacuation plans in light of these two incidents. On November 7, 1986 the Commission authorized the full power license and on November 13, 1986 a full power license was issued for the Perry Nuclear Power plant.
m Table ~1-(Continued) 8The Board admitted certain contbntions including one relating to emergency' preparednes's. A decision-is scheduled to be issued in late December 1986.
IFEMA has reviewed drafts of State and local plans that were submitted by New Hampshire and Massachusetts for an informal technical review. New Hampshire.
formally submitted emergency plans to FEMA in December 1985 with the latest..
revision submitted in September-1986. These plans have been forwarded to the' FEMA Radiological Assistance Committee for review. Hearings on the New Hampshire
_ plans, scheduled to start in August 1986, have been postponed at the request of
-FEMA and have not been rescheduled. An exercise involving the applicant and New Hampshire was conducted on February-26, 1986. New Hampshire is implementing corrective actions identified by FEMA as a result of the exercise and continuing to revise its emergency plans. These activities regarding the New Hampshire plan do not appear to be on the critical path for licensing. Activities re-garding'the emergency response plans for Massachusetts are on the critical path for licensing. On September 20, 1986, the Governor of Massachusetts announced that he will not submit emergency plans for that part of the EPZ in Massachusetts since'he does not believe adequate protective measures can be developed for that.
area. The staff believes that resolution of offsite emergency planning issues will delay issuance of a full-power license although the length of the delay
~
cannot realistically be forecast at this time.
10 Watts Bar is expected to be ready for fuel load in the spring of 1987.
11 The ASLB deferred hearings at the request of the applicant and the NRC staff until the. applicant can respond to outstanding technical issues on construction and design. The' applicants have indicated that their schedule for.mid-1987 operation is no longer achievable; no Comission decision date has been detennined. -
/,
4 s
ti September 30, 1986 Table 2 Status of Onsite Emergency Preparedness.
Operating License Reviews 1
2 Comissign States Within Onsite Facility 10 Mile EPZ.
Appraisal Exercise Decision g
- Shoreham Nh C
C4 Nine. Mile 2 NY C
C 10/86*
Shearon Harris.
NC C
C 10/86*
Perry OH C'
C 11/86*
Seabrook.
.NH, MA' C
5 11/86*
Braidwood IL C
C 12/86*
Clinton IL C
C 12/86*
' Vogtle -
GA, SC C
C 12/86 Beaver Valley.2 PA, WV, OH C
04/87 South Texas TX 11/86 02/87 06/87 Watts Bar TN C
C Comanche Peak TX C
C Change from previous report to Congress.
Not scheduled.
Notes:
IStart date-for 2-week onsite Emergency Preparedness Appraisal.
2Full-participation exercise of applicant, State, and supporting local govern-ment to demonstrate preparedness.
3 Dates are consistent with those reported to the House Appropriations Sub-committee on Energy and Water Development except for Perry.
4Exercise of applicant's onsite and offsite plans.
5Exercise of applicant's onsite plan and offsite plan for New Hampshire only; remedial. exercise to be scheduled, and exercise of Massachusetts' plans will be'necessary.