ML20245D581

Forwards 36th Quarterly Status Rept on Emergency Preparedness for Nuclear Power Plants Covering Apr-June 1988.Licensing Schedule Cannot Be Realistically Forecast Due to Unresolved Emergency Preparedness Issues

ML20245D581
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook, 05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	08/22/1988
From:	Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Breaux J SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
References
CCS, NUDOCS 8808260356
Download: ML20245D581 (4)

Text

.

q_-m-_

s ~,* s

• . /pulcoq'o -

_'g UNITED STATES

!" n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

{ $

.....$ August 22, 1988 j CHAIRMAN 1.

The Honorable John B. Breaux, Chairman p Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation f  ; lnmmittee on Environment and public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 l

Dear Mr. Chairman:

I am enclosing NRC's 36th quarterly status report on emergency preparedness for nuclear power plants, covering the period from April 1 to June 30, 1988.

This report has been coordinated with the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The Commiesion is unable to realistically forecast the licensing schedule for Shoreham and Seabrook because of the emergency preparedness issues that remain unresolved. In June, the New York State Governor and LILC0's Board of Directors signed an agreement fcr the State to purchase the Shoreham plant.

The agreement is subject to approval by certain State bodies and by the company shareholders. If the agreement is approved and the plant is sold, the plant would be closed and decommissioned. In the interim, LILC0 intends to continue licensing activities. In this connection, in July, the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board continued hearings related to discovery disputes.

Please notify us if you want additional information.

Sincerely, w w. L L1 Kenneth C. Rogers Acting Chairman

Enclosure:

NRC Quarterly Status Report cc: The Honorable Alan K. Simpson

- ^

CCS.2-

/g( y^l 0i 1(o3% Full. TEXT ASCil SCAN ,,

L / A -

NRC OtlARTERLY REPORT Shorehcm Only offsite emergency planning issues remain to be resolved prior to licensing the Shoreham plant. ,

The remanded issues, the legal authority (realism) issues, and the applicant's requitst for authorization to operate at a power level up to 25 percent of full power remain before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLP). Hearings on the school bus driver role conflict and the validation of hospital evacuation time estimates issues were completed on June 3,1988, and " Proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law" have been filed. The ASLB is also considering the remanded issue on the emergency broadcast system (EBS). LILC0 recently revised its EBS plan to provide that it will ask the State to use the State EBS in an actual emergency and, failing that, will contact the State EBS station itself. A motion to dismiss the EBS centention is pending.

On December 7, 1987 and February 1, 1988, the OL-5 Licensing Board filed its partial initial decision, finding that: ' 1) the scope of the exercise wi.s insufficient to allow a determination whether the plan "can and will" be implemented, and 2) the emergency exercise revealed " fundamental flaws" in the Choreham emergency plan. An appeal frcm this decision will be argued on September 14, 1988.

On January 7,1988, the ASLB ruled that LILCO could pursue its request for a 25 percent power license. That decision was affirmed by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board (ASLAB) in ALAB-88, dated March 4, 1988. On February 26, 1988, the ASLB appointed an alternate Board member to assist the ASLB in resolving whether emergency planning contentions presently before the Board are substantively relevant to the LILCO request. The staff is completing its evaluation of LILC0's request and will be issuing its report in the near future.

On May 9, 1988, the AS'.B issued a Partial Initial Decision on the suitability of reception centers. The ASLB found that the applicant's planning basis, traffic-plan, reception center locations, monitoring, registration and decon-temination procedures, staffing plans, and provisions for handling evacuees are adequate and satisfy the NRC's regulatory criteria. This determination has been appealed and will also be argued on September 14, 1988.

In a June 10, 1988 telephone conference call to the parties, the ASLB stated that it would either a) dismiss the realism contentions or b) find the interveners in default and rule on all realism contentions in LILCO's favor, because the State and County refused to comply with discovery oroers. The ,

Board's action was based upon the interveners' refusal to make various State and County of#icials available for depositions regarding the realism /best efforts issues and to produce documents.

The Board also held hearings between July 11 and July 19 on the possibility of '

further sanctions for the failure of interveners to comply with discovery orders since 1982.

i

A full participation exercise of LILCO's onsite and offsite emergency plans was conducted on June 7, 8, and 9, 1938. FEMA has committed to provide to the NRC its preliminary finding on the offsite portion of the exercise between 30 and 60 days after the exercise. New contentions are expected on that exercise.

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 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. Among them is the State legislature's approval of the agreement by mid-September. The legislature adjourned for National Party Conventions, but is expected to reconvene in September. In the interim, LILC0 indicated its intention and desire to continue the Shoreham licensing process.

C. .

Seabrook Low Power Several current issues need to be resolved in favor of the Applicant by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) before a low power license can be authorized. These issues include environmental qualification (EQ) of an electrical co-axial cable and the alert and notification system for the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook emergency planning zone (EPZ).

l No date has yet been set for the hearing on the environmental qualification of RG-58 coaxial electrical cables. On May 19, 1988, the applicants filed with the ASLB a " suggestion of mootness" in light of their plan to replace certain RG-58 cables with another cable type that has been tested as environmentally qualified. On June 23, 1988, the ASLB rejected the applicant's suggestion of mootness and decided to go forward with discovery. The ASLB established that discovery will be complete by August 15, 1988. On July 1, the Board issued an order on whether the coaxial cable ;ssue required resolution prior to low power operation.

In December 1987, a Federal appeal court denied Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) a restraining order to prevent the Town of West Newbury, a town within the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook emergency planning zone (EPZ), from removing their sirens.

After West Newbury and other comunities dismantied the original alert and notification system (sirens) in the Massachusetts portion of the EPZ, the applicants proposed a replacement. Interveners filed contentions on the replacement that have been admitted as an issue in controversy. Discovery on these contentions is to be completed by August 1, 1988.

Full Power Before a full power license can be authorized, the following events must occur:

an ACRS meeting on emergency planning, litigation of the Seabrook Plan for the Massachusetts Comunities (SPMC), the graded EP exercise, and an ASLB decision favorable to applicants on both the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Plan (NHRERP) and the plan for the Massachusetts Comunities. The NHRERP hearing record was closed on June 16 following litigation of the beach population sheltering issue.

The full-participation exercise of the onsite and offsite emergency plans for Seabrook was conducted on June 28 and 29, 1988. Litigation of the SPMC and of any new issues which may evolve from the graded exercise of the NHRERP and the SPMC have not yet been scheduled. The ACRS is expected to hold a meeting soon on emergency planning and to provide its recommendations in the form of a letter to be issued following the meeting.

_ - - _ _ _ _ _ _