ML20236D476

Forwards NRC 38th Quarterly Status Rept on Emergency Preparedness for Nuclear Power Plants for Oct-Dec 1988

ML20236D476
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook, 05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	03/09/1989
From:	Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Breaux J SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
References
NUDOCS 8903230120
Download: ML20236D476 (5)

Text

-

I a

4 'o UNITED STATES

. . #,  : /s9 f, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{ $ W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20565

/ ,

CHAIRMAN E '

l The Honorable John B. Breaux, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate '

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

I am enclosing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) l 38th quarterly ciatus report on emergency preparedness for nuclear power plants, covering the period from October.1 to-December 31, 1988. This report has been coordinated with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The Commission'is unable to forecast the licensing. schedule for Seabrook because of the emergency preparedness issues that remain unresolved. In Seabrook the Commission, on December l 21, 1988, determined that a TW , power. license may be issued for '

Seabrook Unit I upon satisfaction of the following conditions:

1) that the applicants provide reasonable assurance that funds are available for decommissioning and 2) that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board resolve additional on-site emergency plannir.g litigation issues.

On March 3, 1989, subsequent to preparation of the attached report, the Cammission dismissed the Shoreham interveners from the Shoreham icensing proceedings'for misconduct during the proceedings. This action terminated all Commission adjudicatory i '

proceedings on Shoreham. Following staff presentations to the Commission on relevant issues including emergency planning, the Commission will make a determination on authorizing a full power license for Shoreham.

Sincerely, LV. .

Lando W. Zec , Jr

Enclosure:

l NRC Quarterly Status Re p rt I to Congress

, cc: The Honorable Alan K. Simpson f0 8903230120 890309 PDH COMMS NRCC n\\

CORRESPONDENCE PNV

m

).

, NRC OUARTERLY REPORT l

Shoreham Only the off-site emergency planning issues remain to be resolved prior to full power licensing of the Shoreham plant.

{

I On September 23, 1988, the OL-3 Licensing Board filed its concluding i initial decision on emergency planning. In that decision, the Board found i for the licensee on the emergency broadcast system (EBS), school bus driver j and hospital evacuation time estimate (ETE) issues, and held the intervenor l State / local governments in willful default of Board Orders on discovery ]

relating to the emergency plan " realism" contentions. As a sanction for i

' defaulting, the Board dismissed the interveners from the entire proceeding-- 1 that is, both the OL-3 proceeding and the OL-5 proceeding on the resu'ts of 1 the 1986 and 1988 emergency exercises. In dictum, the Board noted that it 1 would have found for the licensee on the merits of the " realism" contentions j

, had it not dismissed the interveners. It therefore authorized the NRC i l staff to issue a full power operating license to the applicant. Judge l Shon filed a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. j The decision was appealed by the interveners on jurisdictional and sub-  !

stantive grounds. , j On October 7, 1988, in ALAB-902, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board  !

ruled on the jurisdictional issues and reversed that part of the Licensing i Board's September 23, 1988 decision that dismissed interveners from aspects of the overall proceeding pending before other Licensing Boards, principally the OL-5 proceeding relating to the adequacy of the 1988 emergency exercise.

It therefore vacated the Licensing Board's authorization of a full power license. On November 9, 1988, the Commission determined to review the Licensing Board's decision dismissing interveners from the proceeding I

because of their conduct before the OL-3 Licensing Board.

On November 29, 1988, the Appeal Board in ALAB-905 reversed, in part, the Licensing Board's findings on reception centers and remanded the issues of the monitoring planning basis and the effect of a local zoning ordinance upon one reception center to the Licensing Board for further consideration.

LILCO has petitioned for Comission review of this determination.

l

' A second full participation exercise of the Long Island Lighting Company's (LILCO's) on-site and off-site emergency plan was conducted on June 7, 8, l and 9, 1988. On September 9, 1988, FEMA provided the NRC with its finding of reasonable assurance on the off-site portion of the exercise. On September 13, 1988, the interveners filed a motion with the Appeal Board asking that it appoint a licensing board to hear issues related to the June 1988 exercise. In a decision issued September 20, 1988 (ALAB-901), the Appeal Board concluded that it had jurisdiction over new exercise-related issues and remanded the matter to the OL-5 Board, subject to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Chairman's authority to reconstitute that

2 board. On September 22,1988, the OL-5 Licensing Board set a schedule calling for the submission of contentions on this exercise by October 17, 1988, and a prehearing conference on November 16, 1988. Contentions were filed by the interveners on October 24, 1988. To ensure expedited litiga-tion of the June 1988 emergency exercise, the Commission, on December 1, 1988, set a proceedings schedule for the OL-5 Licensing Board (CLI-88-9).

Contentions on the 1988 exercise were admitted on January 3, 1989.

Litigation of this exercise should be completed in mid-1989.

On October 21,1988, LILC0 asked the OL-3 Licensing Board to authorize issuance of a license permitting operation up to 25 percent of full power.

On November 21,1988, the OL-3 Licensing Board granted LILC0's motions for authorization to operate up to 25 percent of full power (LBP-88-30). On December 9, 1988 the Appeal Board, in ALAB-908, certified to the Commission the OL-3 Licensing Board's decision to authorize operation up to 25 percent of full power. This issue is now also before the Commission.

During the week of June 12, 1988, the New York State Governor and LILCO's Board of Directors signed an agreement in principle for the State to purchase the Shoreham plant. Once sold, the plant would be closed and decommissioned. Although the agreement in principle has been signed, LILCO, in its June 1,1988 letter to the NRC, noted that a number of contingencies still have to be resolved prior to completion of the sale.

In the interim, LILC0 indicated its intention and desire to continue the Shoreham licensing process. Subsequently, the New York State legislature failed to endorse this agreement as stipulated. The future of any modifi-cation or extension of this agreement is uncertain.

On December 5,1988, a jury of the U. S. District Court for the Eastern

' District of New York found LILC0 guilty of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. This resulted in a judgment of $22.8 million dollars against LILCO. On February 11, 1989, U.

S. District Court Judge J. Weinstein set aside the judgment. Judge Weinstein ruled that the RICO Act did not apply in the case brought against LILCO. However, on February 13, 1989, Judge Weinstein allowed the class action portion of the RIC0 suit to be admitted. On February 14, 1989, i LILCO agreed to pay $400 million dollars, over 10 years, to settle this suit.

3 Seabrook Low Power

.)

1 Before a low power license could be issued, two issues needed to be 1 addressed. The status of these issues is as follows: )

i

1) Resolution-was needed on a non conforming materials issue raised in NRC Bulletin 88-05. A report describing the applicants' evaluation of this issue was received on August 26, 1988. The staff reviewed the report and asked the applicant to provide additional information. The applicant submitted the requested information on October 17, 1988, and-  !

the staff completed its review and issued a safety evaluation on {

December 15, 1988. The staff concluded that the identification 'and  ;

testing programs and the results of the applicants' analytical proce- (

dures usej to qualify the non-conforming parts provide an adequate i basis for resolving the concerns expressed in NRC Bulletin 88-05 with I respect to demonstrating adequate service.

2) On December 21, 1988, in CLI-88-10, the Commission decided that a low power license may be issued on satisfaction of two conditions: 1) that the applicants must prcvide reasonable assurance that $72.1 million dollars will be available to decommission Seabrook in the event that a commercial operating license is not granted after low power testing has been done, and 2) that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board resolve the pending motion to litigate additional i

on-site emergency exercise issues. Upon satisfaction of those conditions, the applicants will be permitted no'more than 0.75 effective full power hours of operation without additional Commission approval.

L j

l i

.I

l 6

4 l 1 Full Power  !

On December 30, 1988, the Licensing Board issued its Partial Initial' I Decision on the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency kesponse Plan (NHRERP). The Board concluded that the NHRERP, subject to modifications of certain portions of that plan proposed by the State of New Hampshire or )

imposed by the Board, satisfied the Commission's regulatory requirements and criteria and provided reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken within the New Hampshire portion of.the

- Seabrook EPZ in the event of a radiological emergency at Seabrook.

However, the Board retains jurisdiction of the evacuation time estimate issue to permit further consultation with the parties regarding subsequent refinements in the Applicants' evacuation time estimates.

The following items need to be addressed before issuance of a full power license:

i i

1) Litigation of the Seabrook Plan for the Massachusetts Communities and i litigation of the full participation graded oxercise must be completed and a decision rendered by the Licensing Board. The hearing is scheduled to begin on March 21, 1989.

2) The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety must review emergency planning.

1

3) The Licensing Board must render a decision on the applicants' motions  !

for summary disposition of the MASS AG public alert and notification l system contention (filed September 17,1986).

l l

l l

l l

l l

<