ML20234C094

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Summary Status Rept on Plant Emergency Planning & Preparedness Program in Support of Issuance of Low Power License.All Outstanding Onsite Emergency Plan Items Required for Fuel Load & Operation Up to 5% of Rated Power Resolved
ML20234C094
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/16/1987
From: Perrotti D
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Congel F, Matthews D, Varga S
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20234B686 List:
References
FOIA-87-346 NUDOCS 8709210170
Download: ML20234C094 (10)
v • d • e


Text

p- -

, , c j7:c., ;ry m

_f:- ' s ,

,. ..p: .

.: +e , ,

.j

, q

.p , .i H

'i f.;}G- [f c :j

'i I 1

'I i

NOTE T0: Distribution. . '[ 1 FROM- Dor.ald J. Perro PEPB hi

SUBJECT:

STATUS 0F SEABROOK EP '

.]

Enclo' sed is a summary status report on the:Seabrook . emergency planning 'and' .)

preparedness program in s,upport of. issuance of a': low' power license. 'l

. i l

I l' DISTRIBUTION: --!

3Rarga,.NRR FJCongel NRR DEMatthews, NRR CRVan Niel, NRR FKantor, h.R DJPerrotti, NRR RJBarrett. NRR SMLong,f M

.Vherses, NRR 4

STurk, 0GC-EChan.-0GC AAER-Bassion, NRR RPal sa, NF.R

.b.

l l'

l 8709210170 870916 1 PDR FOIA- t I I

. CONNER 87-346 PDR 1

n.u.a.- -.a y;

_3 a ,1 l

9

]

):

SEABROOK STATION I

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS BRANCH

SUMMARY

OF. STATUS OF EMERGENCY PLANNINGFORLOWPOWERLICENSEISSUANCE(APRIL 1987) q 1

1. EMERGENCY PLAN - All outstanding onsite emergency plan . items required: for.. I q

fuel load and operation up to ' 5% . of rated power h' ave been resolved. .

(SSER 4).

2. HEARING ON EMERGENCY PLANNING ISSUES - A hearing on onsite emergency pre-paredness issues before the ASLB was. held in August.1983.. 'On October:4,- 'l ce , 1 1985, the ASLB ordered the' staff to provide its' evaluation on certain on-site plan items identified by the Board, as well as copies of the. Appli-cant's submittals. SSER 4 addrossed all of the onsite plan' . items - (all . .

have been resolved)' identified by the Board. . A hearing on certain onsite -

emergency preparedness issues related to emergency action levels' was held September 20 - October 3, 1986. On October 7,c1986,.the ASLB authorized a fuel load and pre-criticality testing license and.on October. 17, 1986, that license was issued.' On March 25,~1987 ~ the Board issued a;; partial  !

initial decision authorizing NRR to issue ~ a low power license (up to 5%)'

subject to a condition related to' environmental qualification. 3 With regard to the hearing on offsite plans and preparedness, on July 11, 1986, the hearing on New Hamphire RERP, previously- scheduled for August 1986 was postponed by the Board at the request of FEMA. On February 18, l

i

-  ;, - m i'.

l l

i

. M. .

1987 (, subsequently- clarified)' the Board announced its' ruling on"each of

.the contentions on the New Hampshire. Radiological Emergency. Response' Plans.

(RERP) filed by eight parties to the proceeding. A total of' approximately 33 contentions, wholly or partiallyL were admitted' by the Board.-. June'1,

^

1987, has been set by the Board as the' new date for the start' of this hearing. See Section 7 for- information on FEMA's . review 5f offsite plans.

0n July 2,1986, the Commonwealth of ' Massachusetts petitioned the Board' 1 to revoke regulation 50.47(d) or alternatively to suspend. its application. I in the Seabrook licensing proceeding'on the basis of-non-participation'by1 ]

)

Massachusetts and local communities in ' emergency planning for Seebrook.  !

On July 30, 1986 the ASLB denied the petition. The Board Order was appealed by Massachusetts on the grounds that' State and . local plans must.-

be submitted.to the NRC before any license'is issued pursuant.to 50.33(g).- )

On November 20, 1986, the. Appeal Board issued a decision .(ACAB-853) in. 'i' favor of Applicants stating that' submission of such plans was notLa pre-condition to the granting - of a ' license authorizing only fuel load and-precriticality testing. The Commission decided to review y

the matter of submittal of State and local plans as a prerequisite for issuance of a license. The Commission Order of January 9; 1987, stayed .

the Director, NRR from authorizing low power operations until the .;

I

[_ . _ _ _ _ a _ -_ _ - _ D

)

i Commission's review is complete. (Note: ~ See Attachment L1- for fuhther information on ALAB-853).

3. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IMPLEMENTATION APPRAISALI- Initiatedoon ,

D j

December 9-13, 1985, and' documented in.IR 50-443/85-32. Followup inspec- ,

4 tions on appraisal open items were held on March 24-28,11985, June-9-13.- TI i

1986 and during the period July 1986 to March 1987.- Region I :will verify the completion of the remaining open items prior l to full ' power 1

]

operation:

1) Distribute final PI brochure
2) Complete training for State personnel i

, On October 17, 1986,- Seabrook was issued a license to load'fue1 Land con-duct precriticality testing. 4 j

l- 4. FULL PARTICIPATION EXERCISE - The- initial' full participation exercise-(New ' Hampshire. only) was held on - February 2 6 ~, . 1986 ' - and documented - in IR 50-443/86-10. There were no major onsite problems. On June 5,1986, . .. ;

FEMA reported that the State of New Hampshire and ten local communities-within the plume EPZ participated in the exercise, while seven communities L within the plume EPZ chose not to participate.- FEMA identified deficien- g e

4 cies* and areas requiring corrective action during the exercise. On September 8,1986, New Hampshire notified FEMA that it implemented correc-tive actions identified by FEMA as a result of the exercise and indicated that these changes were included in their September 1986 plan revision.

No date(s) have been set for a New Hampshire remedial exercise or a Mass-achusetts initial exercise, i

l 5. PROMPT ALERTING AND NOTIFICATION SYSTEM (ANS) - Several motions requesting that the record be reopened on onsite emergency planning based on alleged inadequacies in the sirens located in Merrimac, MA and East Kingston, NH, have been filed with the Board by MASS AG and SAPL. The Board has issued decisions on all the motions in favor of the applicants. In a separate matter, the Plaintiff, Town of Rye filed suit against the Applicants revoking the permits previously issued for erection of siren poles. The

  • Deficiencies are demonstrated and observed inadequacies that would cause a finding that offsite emergency preparedness was not adequate to provide rea-sonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken' to pro-tect health and safety of the public living in the vicinity of a nuclear power facility in the event of a radiological emergency. Because of the potential impact of deficiencies on emergercy preparedness, they are required to be promptly corrected through appropriate remedial actions including reme-dial exercises, drills or other actions. Areas requiring corrective actions are demonstrated and observed inadequacies of State and local government per-formance, and although their correcti.on is required during the next scheduled biennial exercise, they are not considered, by themselves, to adversely impact public health and safety.

l i

\ '- l I

1 I

i 1

l Town of Hampton Falls also intervened, seeking the removal of utility poles erected on state-maintained highways within Hampton Falls. The matter was heard in the Rockingham County Superior Court, and the Court l

l found for the Plaintiffs and ordered PSNH to remove the. poles. On Feb-ruary 13,1987, PSNH appealed the Superior Court decision and the case is l now before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

f i

The Applicant has designed and constructed an ANS that meets the require-ments of 10 CFR 50, Appendix E IV.D.3 (SSER #4). The system (sirens) has

~

i been undergoing testing. Region I has confirmed that the siren system has

(

been satisfactorily operability tested. The determinatiori of c'onformance ,

of the total ANS with the guidance criteria of Appendix 3 to NUREG-0654 will be verified by FEMA at a later date in the course of FEMA's review I and formal administrative approval of offsite emergency preparednt:ss under l 44 CFR Part 350 of FEMA's rules.

i i

6. PUBLIC INFORMATION BROCHURE - A PI brochure is under development by the Applicants. FEMA will evaluate the brochure during the course of its re-view of offsite plans. The Applicants have distributed an interim PI

, brochure and have agreed to distribute the final version prior to opera-tion above 5% power. Region I will confirm that the brochure is distrib-uted as agreed upon.

1

~. ,

j i

'1 i

i

- H i

7. FEMA REPORT ON OFFSITE PLANS - FEMA has reviewed drafts of. state end local.

L plans that were submitted by 'New Hampshire and Massachusetts for an in-formal technical review. New Hampshire formally submitted emergency plans to FEMA in December 1985 with the latest. revision (Rev. 2) submitted in September 1986. -On' December 12, 1986,' FEMA-forwarded its report on Rev. 2 '

of' the NH State and local plans to the State .of New Hampshire. The State

- has not responded to FEMA's December .12, 1986 report which identified approximately 30 inadequacies in the plan. FEMA review of the New Hamp-shire plans does not appear to be on the critical path for licensing. j Activities regarding 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' because he does not balieve adequate.

protective measures can be developed for that area. The Commonwealth indicated that it is reassessing emergency preparedness for Seabrook with regard to the Chernobyl accident.

On February 13, 1987, PSNH submitted the ingestion pathway emergency plan associated with Seabrook for the State of Maine.

On April 8, 1987, New Hampshire Yankee submitted to the NRC emergency.

response plans for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the six 1 1

Massachusetts communities within a 10-mile radius of the Seabrook Station,_ .

?

,y C'

k k t .

l i

The utility stated that the plans were . prepared by Massachusetts and had been reviewed earlier by FEMA. It.is not clear to the staff what~ standing

]

these plans have j given the refusal of Massachusetts'to submit or= implement- H such plans, or what impact the submittal of these ' plans will' have on

' licensing of Seabrook.

8. OFFSITE MEDICAL ISSUE - On January 29, 1986, the Applicants confirmed that h Li the . emergency plans 'of the involved offsite. response jurisdictions contain

"" ]

.i a list of local and regional hospitals' which are capable of handling con-taminated injured individuals. The existence of such a list in-the per- 1 tinent plans will be confirmed by FEMA. In addition, on March 12, 1986, j u

the Applicants committed to' fully comply with the Conunission's. response -

to further regulations or requirements relating to -10 CFR '50.47(b)(12).

(SSER4).

q

9. PSNH REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF 10-MILE EPZ RULE . - On December -.18i 1986, the' l Applicants filed with the NRC a petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.758 for. a j i

waiver of all applicable regulations [ principally 10 CFR L50.47(c)] that .j require the establishment' of a 10-mile plume exposure' EPZ for Seabrook.

l The petition is based on a number of technical analyses the Applicants have prepared to support their proposal for a one-mile EPZ for Seabrook'.'

The petition is currently being evaluated by the staff.

l t

o 1

e

'l l

1 1

I On February 18, 1987, The State of New Hampshire submitted to the NRC a signed agreement between the State - of New Hampshire and New . Hampshire Yankee relative to the company's continued support for emergency planning j i

for the full ten mile EPZ in New Hampshire.

i l

l l

i l 1 l I t i I

... j l

4 i

l l

l l

.. . i s- q

^

jf/u/esi l Chronology of ALAB-853: "At issue is whether as a matter of law or policy a i utility applicant should be required to submit an emergency plan (either a '

governmental plan orla utility plan) for the entire EP2 for the facility before  ;

any operating license may be issued "

j s

August 22, 1986 PSNH filed a motion for fuel load and pre-criticality testing license. l 1

September 3, 1986 HASS AG filed objection to the mot' ion.

October 7, 1986 1 ASLB issued N80 granting fuel load and pre-criticality testing license. . MASS AG (joined by SAPL) appealed the M&O based on 50.33(g).

October 17, 1986 Zero power license issued. i October 31, 1936 Oral arguments heard on this issue before the appeal board. ,

1 November 20, 1986 .

J ASLAB decision (ALAB-853) denied the MSS AG appeal.

January 9,1987 Commission decided to review ALAB-853 sua sponte and stayed the issuance of a 5% licensee (Commissioner Carr l disapproved). i

)

April 7, 1987 Applicants filed a

  • Suggestion of Mootness and Request .for I Vacation of Stay", based on an April 8,1987 submittal.

April 8,1987 Applicants submitted to the Docket a " utility plan" for Mass EPZ. hHY press release said it was not a "compensa-tory plan",

by FEMA.

but one that was developed by MASS and reviewed April 9,1987 MASS AG informed NRC that the " utility" plans for the Massachusetts EPZ submitted to the NRC are a sham 'nothing  ;

more than the draft state plans that have been rejected by '

the Commonwealth as inadequate and unworkable. ,

April 9,1987 Comission Order (CLI-87-02) January 9,1987 stay to '

remain in effect pending consideration of PSNH's "Sugges-tion of Mootness and Request for Vacation of Stay."

(Conrnissioners Roberts and Carr disapproved).

May 1, 1987 Staff answer due.

_ _____

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20234C094&oldid=3274430"