ML20235W212

Forwards Tables of Contents for Prefiled Testimony Re Nuclear Regulatory Hearings in Concord,Nh.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20235W212
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/08/1987
From:	Sneider C MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
CON-#487-4587 OL, NUDOCS 8710160069
Download: ML20235W212 (14)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

4)((--7 HLLAILo com&uyuc r5y5 ~ " " ' [' ~1 y y,yy t,y

^

. , . . n

$'h THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS kki DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (,g( q q,.

JOHN W. McCoRMACK STATE oFriCE BUILDING oNE ASHBURToN PLACE, BOSTON 021o8-1698

%';9 -

1r1 OCT -9 P4:18 JAMES M. SHANNON atioRNEY CENER AL Elbk Cf didF KET4*g#*

E Sf.M's.N cf.

October 8, 1987 Docketing and Service U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street Washington, DC 20555

) Re: Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et al.

] (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosed for filing please find original and two copies of Tables of Contents for Pre-Filed Testimony concerning the .

Nuclear Regulatory Hearings in Concord, New Hampshire.

Very truly yours, 4Ls M $ hk h C \

Carol S. Sneider Assistant Attorney General Nuclear Safety Unit I

CSS /BT 1 Enclosures 1

8710160069 871000 PDR ADOCK 05000443 0 PDR q-,

J

- - -___- -___--___. )

I

{ m L [Adler ETE Testimony]

1 l

TABLE OF CONTENTS I i

Page

{

)

I. IDENTIFICATION OF WITNESS ............................. 1 l A. Educational Background ........................ .. 2 B. Professional Experience ........................ 2-3 C. Nature Of Current Work

1. Activities at Resource Systems Group (RSG) ............................... 3-4

2. Other principals at RSG ................... 4-5

3. Other staff at RSG .......................... 6 i

II. OVERVIEW OF THE TESTIMONY ............................. 6 A. Scope Of Work Performed For Attorney j General .......................................... 6 i

B. Description Of How RSG Approached Work ......... 6-8 l

i C. Summary Of The Most Important Results

1. The ETEs in the NHRERP are unreliable, i especially for the summer scenarios ......... B

2. Many beach-goers will be unable to get off the beach strip (Rt. lA) for 8-10 hours .................................. 9

3. KLD Associates significantly underes-timated actual summer weekend ETEs, which are at least 96% longer than KLD's estimate ............................. 10

4. The complete set of ETEs can and should be re-done .......................... 10

5. Comparison of ETEs just to get people out of the beach areas (off Rt. lA):

RSG vs. KLD ............................. 11-13

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ ~

i Page i

! D. WhylB6a- 3,reas." Appear".To Empty-LIn Less .:ne On -Busy Beach Days Than L The Time /It'Would Actually Take During An Evacuation.....'............................ 13-14 E. Description OfEAn Evacuation Trip From Hampton Beach. State park'....................-15-16a c F.; .Why A Full Beach-Area. Vehicular c Evacuation May.Not Be Possible Or Even Likely ................................... 16,,17-18 G. 'R'SG Analyses Were. Conducted Using The

, Same Computer'Model and Inputs Used-By'KLD ....................................... 18-19 III.. ANALYSIS'OF THE CONTENTIONS

')G KLD.Had Inadequate Data On Actual Parking Utilization During.Truly Peak Periods,To Accurately Infer The Area's L Parking Capacity--TOH III/ Basis A SAPL/31 Basis 20 ............................. 20-21' i B. Roadway Capacities Were Mis-Estimated--

TOH'III/ Bases B And C; SAPL 31/ Bases 72 9,-15 And 18 ..................................... 23 l 1. Traffic capacity'is an important factor'in determining ETEs .................. 23

2. The procedure used by KLD in pre-paring capacity estimates .............. 23-24

3. What RSG did to review KLD's traffic capacities ...................... 24-25 4 '. Actual achievable capacities of the evacuation network are lower than the capacities used to calculate the NHRERP's ETEs .............................. 25 (a) The actual road network has geometric restrictions not recognized /modeled by KLD .......... 26-27 i.

l

Page i

(b) The I-DYNEV model appears to apply incorrectly the 15%

reduction factor for congested flow conditions on critical freeway ramps ...................... 27-28 (c) The effects at intersections of considerabic traffic flows caused by commuters returning home is not modeled ................ 28-31 (d) The effects of disabled vehicles '

have not been explicitly con-sidered ............................ 31-34 j (e) The effects of inclement weather have not been adequately rep-resented ........................... 34-37 C. The ETE Computations Provided By KLD Are Biased On The Low Side By As Much As 25 Minutes Because Of A Conceptional Error In The Interpolation Method They Used-- 4 SAPL 31; TOH III ............................. 37-39 D. The Significant Growth Projected (by Dr.

Luloff), For The New Hampshire Portion Of The EPZ, Will Cause Increasingly Longer ETEs Unless Appropriate Highway Improve-ments Are Put Into Place--TOH III/ Basis E and SAPL 31/ Basis,_3 ......................... 39-41 E. The Estimate Of 2.6 People Per Evacuating Vehicle, Used By KLD In Computing ETEs, Is Unrealistic--SAPL 31/ Basis 6 And 19 ...... 42-43 F. A Number Of Unfounded Assumptions About The Traffic Management Plan Were Made By KLD In Computing ETES For the NHRERP--SAPL 31/ Basis 4; TOH III/ Bases (c) (2) and (f) ....... 43

1. That all traffic Control Posts (TCPs) will be staffed immediately .............. 44-46

2. That all evacuees will follow their designated evacuation routes ............ 46-49 l 3. That optimal traffic flow control l

will occur at intersections .............. 49-51 l

' I 4

- iii - .

-e p ..

Page

-IV. WHEN THESE DEFICIENCIES AND UNFOUNDED ASSUMPTIONS-IN THE NHRERP's ETE STUDY ARE CORRECTED, IDYNEV GENERATES MUCH LONGER ETEs ....................... ... 51 4

A. Correcting Five (5) Factors Together--

1. ETEs for a summer weekday with rain increased from 9:45 to 12:15 ............... 51

2. ETEs for a summer weekend with good weather increased from 6:15 to a time which IDYNEV could not calculate but which exceeds 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> ..................... 52 B. Description Of Other Sensitivity Runs ...... 52, 52a C. Inconsistencies Between What KLD Modeled And What Was Reported In The NHRERP ............. 52,'54 V. THE NHRERP'S' TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS UNWORKABLE ........................................... 54 i

A. There Is No Assurance That Returning i Commuters, Buses And Emergency Vehicles Will Be.Able To Pass Quickly And Safely Through Access control And Traffic Control Posts--TOH III/ Basis (c); SAPL 31/ Basis 7; And SAPL 37 ......................... 54

1. Identification checks and lane re-strictions at Access Control Posts will cause substantial delays and long queues for returning commuters ..... 55-57

2. These long queues of cars and lane restrictions will interfere signifi-cantly with the movement of emergency buses and vehicles into the EPZ ............ 57 l

3. The placement of cones and barricades will impede all returning vehicles ...... 57-58

4. Ambiguity and contradictions in the  ;

descriptions of traffic control j strategies in the plans may generate  :

head-on conflicts ....................... 58-59 l

-iv-i

a; l

I Page i

VI. THE NHRERP'S PROVISIONS FOR TRANSIT-DEPENDENT INDIVIDUALS IS INADEQUATE --

SAPL 31/ BASES 6, 12, 13, 17; SAPL 37 ................. 60 A. KLD Mis-Applied An Adjustment Factor For Out-Of-Service Vehicles ..................... 61 i

3. KLD's Assumption That 50% Of Those Not '

Having Access To A Car Will Carpool Is Not Reliable ................................ 62-63 C. The Use Of Either The First Market Research survey Or The June 1986 NHCDA Survey Is An Un-reliable Method For Estimating The Size Of The Transit Dependent Population .......... 63-64 D. The Bus Mobilization Times Study conducted By Applicants Is Unreliable .................. 64-65 E. The Likelihood Of Achieving An Evacuation Of The Transit-Dependent In The Times Assumed In The NHRERP Is Remote ................ 66 i

VII. FINAL OBSERVATIONS A. Why KLD's " Sensitivity Tests" Show Only Small Effects In ETEs ........................... 66 B. The ETE Study Contained In Volume 6 Of The NHRERP Does Not Meet All The Requirements Of Appendix 4 to NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 ........................................ 68-73 C. Many Additional Aspects Of The KLD ETE Study Were Not Capable Of Our Review Because Documentation We Requested Was Either Refused Or Reported To Be Discarded .................................... 73-75 D. This ETE Study Is Inadequate And Should Not Be Relied Upon To Protect The Public ..... 75-77 1

- v-

.___.____________-_________-__O

p, i

.[ Testimony of High, Adler, and Befort) '

TABLE OF CONTENTS Identification of Witnesses ............................... 1 Summary of the Testimony .................................. 3 Testimony ................................................. 6

l 4

l i

i

[ Ceder ETE Testimony]

TABLE OF CONTENTS Identification of Witness ................................. 1 Background For Testimony .................................. 3 Contentions Addressed ..................................... 6 i i

Method of Review of I-DYNEV ............................... 7 l

I-DYNEV's Behavioral Assumptions ......................... 10 j Technical Traffic Engineering Concerns ................... 16 Likelihood of Disorderly Traffic Incidents ............... 22 i

I

l i

1 i

1 l

1 l

l l

l

\

l l  ;

l l

l 1 l

I 1

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _- - - - - - - - - ^ ^ - - - - - _ _l

\'i 9-

[ Testimony of Zeigler, Johnson and Cole)

TABLE OF CONTENTS Identification of Witnesses .............................,, 1 Overview of Testimony ................................,,,,, 4 i

Testimony ....................................,,,,,,,,,,,,, s A. The Shadow Evacuation Phenomenon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 B, Role Conflict and Abandonment ................... 36 l I

l l

l 1

I, l

l l

l l

l l

u__________

o l

j

[ Testimony of Sholly, Beyea, Thompson.and Leaning]-

i TABLE OF CONTENTS i

Identification of Witnesses ............................... 1 E

Contentions .............................................. 10

' Overview'................................................. 12 Synopsis of-WASH-1400 Surry Analysis ..................... 15 l Use of WASH-1400 Results in NUREG-0396 ................... 18 Use'offWASH-1400 Insights in Setting EPZ Distances ....... 24 Conclusion'Regarding the Technical Bases for Emergency Planning ............................... 27 Radiation Releases From. Accidents within the Planning Spectrum ............................................ 29 Radiation Doses From Accidents within the Planning Spectrum ............................................. 56

.PWR-1 Releases ........................................... 75 Health Effects From Radiation. Doses From Accidents within the Planning Spectrum ......................... 77

)

.1 I

l l

1 i

l s.

l 1

[ Testimony of Goble, Renn, Eckert and'Evdokimoff on Sheltering]

TABLE OF CONTENTS Identification of Witnesses ............................... 1-Overview of Testimony ...................................... 5 Testimony .................................................. 7

d r

[Luloff Testimony]

TABLE OF CONTENTS d Identification of Witness .....,........................... 1 TOH III and SAPL 34 -- Population Growth .................. 2 SAPL 31/ BASIS 2 -- Overnight Accommodations and Campgrounds ....................................... 8 Various ETE and Sheltering Contentions --

Unsupported Behavioral Assumptions in the Plan ........ 9 l

l I

1 1

1 1

1 i

- . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - - - -- N

l k-DBLKEiED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U5NRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO%7 OCI -9 P4 :19 CFFICE OF 5.Clit tar f K' Kf fiWi4 WAV10E BRA 80H S

)

In the Matter of )

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEN ) Docket No.(s) 50-443/444-OL HAMPSHIRE, ET AL. )

(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) )

)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Carol S. Sneider, hereby :ertify that on October 8, 1987, I made service of the within Tabler of Contents, by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, by first class mail, or as indicated by an asterisk, by Federal Express, to:

• Ivan Smith, Chairman *Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission East West Towers Building East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814

• Dr. Jerry Harbour *3herwin E. Turk, Esq.

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Office of the Executive Legal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Director Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission East West Towers Building Tenth Floor 4350 East West Highway 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814

• H. Joseph Flynn, Esq.

• Stephen E. Merrill Assistant General Counsel Attorney General Office of General Counsel George Dana Bisbee Federal Emergency Management Assistant Attorney General Agency Office of the Attorney General 500 C Street, S.W. 25 Capitol Street Washington, DC 20472 Concord, NH 03301

h

• Docketing and Service Robert A. Backus, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Backus, Meyer & Solomon Commission 116 Lowell Street Washington, DC. 20555 P.O. Box 516 Manchester, NH 03106 Atomic Safety & Licensing Jane Doughty Appeal Board Panel Seacoast Anti-Pollution League U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 5 Market Street Commission Portsmouth, NH 03801 Washington, DC 20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Paul McEachern, Esq Board Panel Matthew T. Brock, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Shaines & McEachern Commission 25 Maplewood Avenue Washington, DC 20555 P.O. Box 360 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Sandra Gavutis, Chairperson Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Board of Selectmen U.S. Senate RFD 1, Box 1154 Washington, DC 20510 Rte. 107 (Attn: Tom Burack)

E. Kingston, NH 03827 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey William Lord 1 Eagle Square, Suite 507 Board of Selectmen Concord, NH 03301 Town Hall (Attn: Herb Boynton) Friend Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Diane Curran, Esq.

• Thomas G. Dignan, Esq.

Harmon & Weiss R.K Gadd III, Esq.,

Suite 430 Ropes & Gray 2001 S Street, N.N. 225 Franklin Street dashington, DC 20009 Boston, MA 02110 Edward A. Thomas Federal Emergency Management Agency 442 J.W. McCormack (POCH)

Boston, MA 02109 6t S .

Sneider L iQ 1 Carol S. l Assistant Attorney General )

Nuclear Safety Unit I Department of the Attorney General l One Ashburton Place i l

Boston, MA 02108-1698 i (617) 727-2265 J

\

I Dated: October 8, 1987 )

l

!