ML20234B979

Requests That Util 871218 Request for Full Participation Exercise Be Denied.Request Grossly Premature Since Many Inadequacies in Rev 8 to Plan Remain & Upcoming Rev 9 to Plan Requires Thorough Rac Review

ML20234B979
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	12/30/1987
From:	Lanpher L KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
CON-#188-5270 OL-3, OL-5, NUDOCS 8801060062
Download: ML20234B979 (6)

Text

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

L -S Z 7$

DOCKET NUMBER PROD. & UTIL FAC. .

~

d M-d KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART.

SOUTH LOBBY . 9TH floor - "g b EXCHANGE PLACE 1900 M STREET, N.W. $3 STATE N BOSTON, MA 029 WASHINGTON, D.C. 200 4 5891 em 22Mx10

'88 JAN -4 All 59 i4m m M1Aw, Pt 33131 TELEPHONE (202) 77&0000 .

(jos) 3744112 g i i t-' Ci 1100 OLNER SULLDINO TttacortER (202) 778 0100 ,y pp PTT758URCH. PA 15222 5379 LAWRENCE CoE LANPHER 912) 3m (202) 77&9011 December 30, 1987 ,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

. ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Request for Graded Offsite Exercise Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket Nos. 50-322; 50-322-OL-5 Gentlemen:

By letter dated December 18, 1987, LILCO requested that a full participation exercise be scheduled for Shoreham and that LILCO's request be forwarded to FEMA. Moreover, LILCO stated that it "looks forward to an early meeting in order to discuss this matter."

. The Governments request that any meetings with LILCO held by or involving NRC and/or FEMA personnel..and relating to any exer-cise for Shoreham, and'any meetings involving NRC and FEMA personnel and relating to any such exercise, be formally noticed so that the Governments receive reasonable, advance notice. The Governments also request that such meetings be transcribed so that an accurate record of any meeting is maintained. The Governments request, further, that they be served promptly with R

copies of all correspondence on this subject. And, the Govern-ments request that no substantive matter related to LILCO's latest exercise request be discussed with LILCO or FEMA represen-tatives by telephone unless the Governments have been given reasonable opportunity to participate in such conversations.

The foregoing assumes that the NRC might accede to LILCO's request. In fact, however, the NRC should decline to forward to FEMA LILCO's request for a new exercise. The request is grossly premature for several reasons, assuming arquendo that any further Shoreham exercise would ever be appropriate.1/

1/ Suffolk County reiterates its view that no exercise of LILCO's Plan would or could be appropriate. LILCO's Plan is  !

(footnote continued) i 8801060062 871230 A '

ADOCK 05000322 e PDR G PDR p{} /

4

KIRKPATRICK 6e LOCKHART U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk December 30, 1987 Page 2 First, the last FEMA RAC review of LILCO's Plan (Revision 8) was completed December 15, 1986, and was transmitted to. the. NRC on December 30, 1986. Quite aside from legal authority concerns, FEMA identified 14 inadequacies in LILCO's Plan, an increase more than doubling the 6 inadequacies identified during the prior full RAC review of LILCO's Plan, transmitted to the NRC on October 6, 1985. These 14 inadequacies remain uncorrected one year after the 1986 RAC review. It is improper to consider the scheduling of an exercise when so many Plan inadequacies remain outstanding and, apparently, unaddressed.

Second, LILCO has announced that it soon will file yet another revision of its Plan -- Revision 9. That Revision has not yet appeared or been submitted to the NRC, however. While it is not possible to predict precisely how extensive the changes in Revision 9 will be, it is reasonable to expect them to be major.

At a minimum, they appear likely to cover: LILCO's new proposal to create and use a Connecticut-based EBS system; LILCO's new single-wave school evacuation proposal; new hospital evacuation procedures and time estimates; numerous changes designed to address recent amendments to 10 CFR @ 50.47(c)(1);' changes designed to address the inadequacies identified in the last RAC review; and changes designed to address deficiencies identified in the Licensing Board's Partial Initial Decision of April 17, 1985, and its Concluding Partial Initial Decision of August 26, 1985. A full RAC review of these plan revisions will be required-before any exercise could even be considered, much less scheduled.

Third, any FEMA review of the apparently forthcoming Revision 9, or preparation for a new Shoreham exercise will likely involve consideration of draft NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, Supp. 1, which is presently subject to public comment prior to its finalization. See 52 Fed. Reg. 45866 (1987). It makes no

. sense for FEMA or the parties in the Shoreham proceeding to devote resources to plan reviews or preparing for or conducting an exercise when some of the very criteria relevant to review of these matters are subject to change.

Fourth, the Frye Licensing Board (OL-5) has not yet issued

.its second decision concerning LILCO's performance during and the results of the February 1986 Exercise. It makes no sense to (footnote continued from previous page) illegal. The courts have ruled that LILCO lacks legal authority to. implement the Plan. It is a waste of resources to conduct an exercise of an illegal plan.

KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk December 30, 1987 Page 3 l

l start structuring or preparing for the next exercise until the Board has ruled upon the results of the last one.

Fifth, a multitude of other issues involving the LILCO Plan remain outstanding and the subject of ongoing litigation, including those relating to reception centers, LILCO's ZBS scheme, school evacuation, " realism"/ legal authority, and hospi-tal evacuation. FEMA has made clear in the past that it does not favor further RAC reviews or exercises while so many issues remain in litigation. Thus, one year ago FEMA stated:

At present, there are a number of unresolved issues being considered or litigated in no less than three different NRC forums. There are planning and exercise issues before two licensing boards; numerous issues under consideration by the full Commission. In addition, the OL-3 Board has recently reopened the record on issues related to the Nassau Coliseum . . . .

In FEMA's view, the fluidity of this great number of issues renders it impractical, and an unwise use of limited resources, to continue to perform further reviews of LILCO plans or exercises under the current unsynchronized manner in which these issues are being adjudicated. This works to the detriment of effective treatment of the issues from a programmatic viewpoint.

Within the limits of sound management of resources, FEMA remains committed to providing testimony to assist in the resolution of the various issues before the NRC's licensing boards and to provide information which may be needed by the Commission to resolve issues being considered by them.

Letter from Dave McLoughlin, FEMA, to Victor Stello, NRC, December 30, 1986, p.2 (emphasis added). The situation is no different today than a year ago -- indeed, the number of open items, unreviewed items, and deficiencies in LILCO's Plan continues to grow.

In short, there are no good reasons to justify the commence-ment of preparations for, or the scheduling of, a Shoreham exer-

KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART U.S. Nuclear _ Regulatiory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk December 30, 1987 Page.4 cise at this time -- and LILCO has offered none. The Govern-ments, therefore, request that the 'NRC refuse LILCO's December 18 request.

The undersigned is authorized to state that the State of New York and the Town of Southampton agree with the views expressed herein.

Sine rely yours,

% Y-7 Lawrence Coe Lanpher  ;

i cc: Ronnie Lo/ Stewart Brown i William T. Russell. I Frank Crescenzo Service List (attached) i s

e l

l 1

l 1

p 2

Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman James P. Gleason, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Appeal Board 513 Gilmoure Drive U .' S . Nuclear Regulatory Commission Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 Washington, D.C. 20555 Howard A. Wilber John H. Frye, III, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing. Board Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing. Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chairman Comm. Kenneth C. Rogers U4S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W. 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Comm. Frederick M. Bernthal Comm. Kenneth M. Carr U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W. 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Comm. Thomas M. Roberts William C. Parler, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W. 10th Floor Washington, D.C. 20555. 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 William R. Cumming, Esq. Anthony F. Earley, Jr., Esq.

Spence W. Perry, Esq. General Counsel Office of General Counsel Long Island Lighting Company Federal Emergency Management Agency 175 East Old Country Road 500 C Street, S.W., Room 840 Hicksville, New York 11801 Washington, D.C. 20472 Elisabeth Taibbi, Clerk W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq. i Suffolk County Legislature Hunton & Williams .

I Suffolk County Legislature P.O. Box 1535 Office Building 707 East Main Street i Veterans Memorial Highway Richmond, Virginia 23212 l Hauppauge, New York 11788

t 4

Mr. L. F. Britt Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

Long Island Lighting Company Twomey, Latham & Shea Shoreham Nuclear Power Station 33 West Second Street North Country Road Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River, New York 11792 Ms. Nora Bredes Docketing and Service Section Executive Director Office of the Secretary' Shoreham Opponents Coalition U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

195 East Main Street 1717 H Street, N.W.

Smithtown, New York 11787 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mary M. Gundrum, Esq. Hon. Michael A. LoGrande New York State Department of Law Suffolk County Executive 120 Broadway, 3rd Floor H. Lee Dennison Building Room 3-116 Veterans Memorial Highway New York, New York 10271 Hauppaug6, New York 11788 l MHB Technical Associates Dr. Monroe Schneider 1723 Hamilton Avenue North Shore Committee Suite K P.O. Box 231 San Jose, California 95125 Wading River, New York 11792 Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq. Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.

Suffolk County Attorney Special Counsel to the Governor Bldg. 158 North County Complex Executive Chamber, Rm. 229 Veterans Memorial Highway State Capitol Hauppauge, New York 11788 Albany, New York 12224 Mr. Jay Dunkleburger Mr. Stuart Dianond New-York State Energy Office Business /F2nancial Agency Building 2 NEW YORK TIMES Empire State Plaza 229 W. 43rd Street Albany, New York 12223 New York, New York 10036 Mr. Philip McIntire Federal Emergency Management Agency Edwin J. Rein, Esq. 26 Federal Plaza George E. Johnson, Esq. New York, New York 10278 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel Washington, D.C. 20555 David A. Brownlee, Esq.

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 1500 Oliver Building Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222

- _ _- ____-___