ML20245J266
| ML20245J266 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 04/25/1989 |
| From: | Berry G NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#289-8522 LBP-89-09, LBP-89-9, OL-1, NUDOCS 8905040068 | |
| Download: ML20245J266 (7) | |
Text
45W j-4/25/89 ww u %.,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAD REGULATORY COMMISSION
~89 APR 26 P3 :28 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I((ck In the Matter of
)
i Docket Nos. 50-443 OL-01 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 0F 50-444 OL-01 NEWHAMPSHIRE,etal.
On-site Emergency Planning
)
and Safety Issues (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
INTRODUCTION On March 6, 1989, the Licensing Board issued an order granting in part and denying in part Applicants' motion for summary disposition of all emergency planning issues relating to the notification and warning of the populace in the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook emergency planning zone.
See Memorandum and Order (Summary Disposition), LBP-89-09, 29 NRC
, slip op. at 1 -(March 6,1989).
The Board denied summary dispostion on the issue "[w]hether sound levels in excess of 123 dBC cause enough discomfort so that the Board should not approve the use of sirens at a higher level of sound."
M. at 37.
The Board further directed the parties to brief the following legal question:
What standard should we apply to determine the possible relevance of discomfort?
M. The NRC Staff's position on this question is set forth herein.
DISCUSSION In determining "the possible relevance of discomfort" the Licensing Board should apply a standard which achieves the purposes of the applicable regulatory requirements.
In the context of alert notification systems, that standard should permit the use of sirens at a sound pressure gron8s BM!h pd7 g
level sufficient to provide early notification of an emergency but which does not pose a threat of hearing damage to the persons intended to be alerted.
It should be emphasized that the purpose of the VANS sirens is to notify persons in the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook EPZ of an emergency at the Seabrook Station.
As Applicants point out, "[t]o do this, [the sirens] must be sufficiently loud to get people's attention."
To be effective, the siren system must be loud enough to heard above the din.
In these circumstances, it is to be expected that the sound from the sirens may be irritating,
- annoying, or to put it another
- way, discomforting.
Thus, the salient question is not whether notification sirens cause discomfort, but whether the discomfort which may be experienced is outweighed by the benefit to be achieved.
A balance of these competing considerations weighs in favor of approving the VANS sirens Applicants propose to deploy.
With respect to alert notification sirens, NUREG-0654, a guidance document, states that the maximum sound levels received by any member of the public "should be lower than 123 db, the level which may cause discomfort to individuals." NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, Appendix 3 at 3-8.
The term " discomfort" is not defined in NUREG-0654.
In the view of Mr. Kenneth Eldred, the Staff's acoustical expert, the phrase "the level which may cause discomfort to individuals" in NUREG-0654 "is somewhat misleading because the choice of the ' level' was not predicated on consideration of any feelings or reactions of people when they are hearing the sound, but rather on consideration of its possible long term physical
{
effect." See Testimony of Kenneth Eldred at 1 AIS (filed April 25,1989).
l 1
l l
L______-_______________
)
Because the meaning of the term " discomfort" as used in NUREG-0654 is not clear and unambiguous, it is necessary to look to the materials from which l
the term, and the 123 dBC limit, were derived.
l The source of the 123 dBC sound pressure limit is CPG 1-17, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in March 1980.
The Staff agrees with Applicants that "the 123 db level discussed in CPG 1-17 was developed as a conservative estimate of the level of sound that, in order to avoid hearing damage, should not be exceeded when an individual is exposed on a daily basis, over a 10 year period, to a 1000 Hz tone for li minutes or less." Applicants Brief Regarding Relevance Of Discomfort at 3 (April 3, 1989) (footnote omitted).
The avoidance of " hearing damage," therefore, appears to be the purpose to be achieved by the 123 dBC limit suggested in NUREG-0654.
To give effect to this purpose, the Board should not approve the deployment of the VANS sirens at a level which may cause hearing damage.
As Mr. Eldred explains in his testimony, there is reasonable assurance that the deployment of the VANS sirens in the manner contemplated by Applicants will not pose a danger of hearing damage to the populace in the i
Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook EPZ.
See Testimony of Kenneth Eldred, supra.
CONCLUSION The Licensing Board should not approve the deployment of the VANS sirens at a level which may cause hearing damage.
However, there is reasonable assurance that the deployment of the VANS sirens in the manner
_____-___m___-
-4_
contemplated by Applicants will not pose a danger of hearing damage to the populace in the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook EPZ.
Rerp?c tfully submitted, rego y a
err Counsel for RC $
aff 1
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of April 1989 i
_m.____.._-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gg ppg 3 pg g BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 74 In the Matter of
)
M' Docket Nos. 50-443 OL-01" PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF 50-444 OL-01 NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al.
On-site Emergency Planning
)
and Safety Issues (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the "NRC STAFF BRIEF REGARDING RELEVANCE OF DISCOMFORT,"
" TESTIMONY 0F KENNETH M.
ELDRED REGARDING BASIS A.1 0F MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL'S AMENDED ALERT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM CONTENTION,"
and
" TESTIMONY OF FALK KANTOR REGARDING BASIS A.5 0F MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL'S AMENDED ALERT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM CONTENTION" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or as indicated by an asterisk, by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's internal mail system, or as ine'icated by double asterisks, by express mail, this 25th day of April 1989:
Peter B. Bloch, Chairman
- H. J. Flynn, Esq.
Administrative Judge Assistant General Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Federal Emergency Management Agency U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20472 Dr. Jerry Harbour
- Philip Ahrens, Esq.
Administrative Judge Assistant Attorney General Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State House Station Washington, DC E555 Augusta, ME 04333 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke**
John Traficonte, Esq.**
Administrative Judge Stephen A. Jonas, Esq.
4515 Willard Avenue Assistant Attorney General Chevy Chase, MD 20815 Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., Esq.**
Boston, MA 02108 Robert K. Gad, III, Esq.
l One International Place Geoffrey Huntington, Esq.
l Boston, MA 02110-2624 Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 25 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301 I
E-
l*
1
- Diane Curran, Esq.**
Mrs. Anne E. Goodman, Chainnan Harmon, Curran & Tousley Board of Selectmen 2001 S Street, NW 13-15 Newmarket Road Suite 430 Durham, NH 03824-Washington, DC 20009 Hon. Gordon J. Humphrey Calvin A. Canney United States Senate City Hall 531 Hart Senate Office Building 126 Daniel Street Washington, DC 20510 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Peter J. Matthews, Mayor Allen Lampert City Hall Civil Defense Director Newburyport, MN 01950 Town of Brentwood 20 Franklin Michael Santosuosso, Chairman Exeter, NH 03833 Board of Selectmen South Hampton, NH 03827 William Armstrong Civil Defense Director Ashod N. Amirian, Esq.
Town of Exeter Town Counsel for Merrimac 10 Front Street 145 South Main Street Exeter, NH 03833 P.O. Box 38 Bradford, MA 01835 Gary W. Holmes, Esq.
Holmes & Ellis Robert A. Backus, Esq.**
47 Winnacunnet Road Backus, Meyer & Solomon Hampton, NH 03842 116 Lowell Street Manchester, NH 03106 J. P. Nadeau Board of Selectmen Paul McEachern, Esq.
10 Central Street Shaines & McEachern Rye, NH 03870 25 Maplewood Avenue P.O. Box 360 Judith H. Mizner, Esq.
Pertsmouth, NH 03801 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Charles P. Graham, Esq.
McKay, Murphy & Graham Robert Carrigg, Chairman 100 Main Street Board of Selectmen Amesbury, MA 01913 Town Office Atlantic Avenue William S. Lord North Hampton, NH 03862 Board of Selectmen Town Hall - Friend Street Sandra Gavutis, Chairman Amesbury, MA 01913 Board of Selectman RFD #1, Box 1154 Kensington, NH 03827 R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esq.
Lagoulis, Clark, Hill-Whilton
& McGuire 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950
. Barbara J. Saint Andre, Esq.
Ms. Suzanne Breiseth Kepelman & Paige, P.C.
Board of Selectmen 77 Franklin Street Town of Hampton Falls Boston, MA 02110 Drinkwatter Road Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel (5)*
Docketing and Service Section*
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commi;Eion Office of the Secretary Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel (1)*
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 bdh h
Gregory Ala 1 T,e7 d r'
(
Counsel for NHu Slaff 1
l l
t