ML20086U152
| ML20086U152 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/02/1984 |
| From: | Cordaro M, Daverio C, Nicholas Hobbs, Renz W LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086U072 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-3, NUDOCS 8403070178 | |
| Download: ML20086U152 (50) | |
Text
.
LILCO, March 2, 1984 e
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning Proceeding)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
Unit 1) )
t TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW C. CORDARO, CHARLES A. DAVERIO, NORMAN A. HOBBS, JR., AND WILLIAM F. RENZ ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ON PHASE II EMERGENCY _ PLANNING CONTENTIONS 28 THROUGH 32 AND 34 o
I
~
Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535
. 707 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212 (804) 788-8200 B403070178 840302 PDR ADOCK 05000322 T PDR
LILCO, March 2, 1984 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning Proceeding)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
Unit 1) )
TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW C. CORDARO, CHARLES A. DAVERIO, NORMA 14 A. HOBBS, JR., AND WILLIAM F. RENZ ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ON PHASE II EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTIONS 28 THROUGH 32 AND 34 PURPOSE This testimony treats Contentions 28 through 32 and Conten-tion 34, which deal with communications with the Local Emergency Response Organization. The purpose of this testimony is to demon-strate that the LILCO Transition Plan provides adequate and reli-able means of communications among principal response organiza-tions; backup communications links among principal response l organizations; adequate communications equipment for field person- I nel; prompt communications from Tisffic Guides and bus transfer points to the staging areas, and from staging areas to EOC re-sponse coordinatoes; and coordinated communications links with am-bulance dispatch stations and hospitals.
LILCO, March 2, 1984 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board i
In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning Proceeding)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
Unit 1) )
TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW C. CORDARO, CHARLES A. DAVERIO, NORMAN A. HOBBS, JR., AND WILLIAM F. RENZ ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ON PHASE II EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTIONS 28 THROUGH 32 AND 34 TESTIMONY
- 1. Q. Please state your name and business address.
A. [Cordaro] My name is Matthew C. Cordaro. My business ad-dress is Long Island Lighting Company, 175 East Old Coun-try Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.
[Daverio] My name is Charles A. Daverio. My business ad-dress is Long Island Lighting Company, 100 East Old Coun-try Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.
[Hobbs] My name is Norman A. Hobbs, Jr. My business ad-dress is HMM Associates, 336 Baker Avenue, Concord, Mas-sachusetts, 01742.
[Renz] My name is William F. Renz. My business address is Long Island Lighting Company, 175 East Old Country Road, Hicksville, New York, 11801.
1
l t
- 2. Q. Please summarize your professional qualifications and your role in emergency planning for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station.
A. [Cordaro] I am Vice President, Engineering, for LILCO.
My professional qualifications are being offered into evi-dence as part of the document entitled " Professional Qual-ifications of LILCO Witnesses." I am sitting on this panel to provide the LILCO management perspective on emer-gency planning and to answer any questions pertinent to management. My role in emergency planning for Shoreham is to ensure that the needs and requirements of emergency planning are being met, and that the technical direction and content of emergency planning are being conveyed to corporate management.
(Daverio) I am Assistant Manager of the Local Emergency Response Implementing Organization'for LILCO. My-profes-sional qualifications are being offered into evidence as part of the document entitled " Professional QL ifications of LILCO Witnesses." My familiarity with the issues.
raised by these Contentions stems from-my work in devel-oping and implementing the LILCO Transition Plan.
[Hobbs] I am an Emergency Plannning Consultant with HMM Associates. My professional qualifications are being of-fered into evidence as part of the document entitled " Pro-fessional Qualifications of-LILCO Witnesses." .My famil-iarity-with'the issues raised by these Contentions stems.
from my experience in emergency planning, communications systems design, and public information. l 1
I (Renz) I am employed by the Long Island Lighting Company as Offsite Emergency Preparedness Coordinator in the Nu-clear Operations Support Department and Manager of the Technical Support Division of the Local Emergency Response Implementing Organization (LERIO). My professional quali-fications are being offered into evidence as part of the document entitled " Professional Qualifications of LILCO Witnesces." My familiarity with the issues raised by these Contentions stems from my work in developing and im-plementing the LILCO Transition Plan, particularly my work in developing the communications system.
- 3. Q. Would you briefly summarize the purpose of this testimony?
A. (Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) The purpose of this tes-timony, filed in response to Contentions 28 through 32:and Contention 34, is to demonstrate that the LILCO Transition Plan provides communications links and equipment to assure prompt communication among principal emergency response organizations and among emergency response personnel.
- 4. Q. Would you summarize the conclusionc you have reached as to the basic issues raised by these Contentions?
A. (Cordaro, Daverio, Bobbs, Renz] .Yes. Most of these Con-tentions are refuted by provisions in the Plan and Proce-dures or by undisputed facts. The Plan and Procedures in
I i 1 I
fact provide for adequate and reliable communcations, in compliance with regulations and guidelines for an offsite
Contention 28 alleges that the LILCO Transit' ion Plan does not provide adequate and reliable means of communica-tions with federal emergency response organizations be-a cause there are no radio or dedicated telephone links to those organizations. In fact, no such links are required.
Reliable means of communications with federal emergency i
l response organizations are provided by a dedicated line to the DOE Brookhaven Area Office, commercial telephones, and a Federal Telecommunications System (FTS) line. In addi-tion, steps are now being taken to procure and install.a-marine-band radio in both the Customer Service Office in the Hicksville Operations Center and the Emergency Op-erations Center for use in communicating with the U. S.
Coast Guard during an emergency response.
Contention 29 asserts that the LILCO Transition Plan i
does not specify the number of personnel assigned respon-sibility for manning communications equipment and does not provide for capable and trained repair technicians. There is no requirement for an enumeration. Furthermore, the LILCO Transition Plan does contain provisions for adequate numbers of personnel, including..the availability of repair 4
technicians, to provide prompt communications among prin t
cipal response organizations and adequate communications
1 i
facilities,-in full ~ compliance with the regulations and guidelines.
Contention 30 alleges that, for various reasons, there will not be sufficient and adequate communications equip-ment to ensure communications among LILCO field emergency personnel. The LILCO Transition Plan does, however, pro-vide for communications with field personnel in the form of mobile radios.
Contention 31 asserts that there is no backup communi-cations system for the LILCO Emergency Radio System, that this System will not function properly for various rea-sons, and thus that command and control instructions may not be communicated to; field personnel and field personnel may not communicate the status of the emergency response to those in command and control. In fact, alternate means of communication are generally available and'th re is more than reasonable assurance that the system will. provide for prompt communications.
Contention 32 alleges that a lack of direct communica- I tions between Traffic Guides and bus transfer points, and-their respective EOC response coordinators will delay the-implementation of emergency actions. The LILCO Transition Plan, however, is devised in a manner best suited to en-sure prompt communication of information between:those who need the particular_information. Delay is-thereby mini-mized and overall' coordination is enhanced.
n - -
v 6
1 I
Finally, Contention 34 alleges that, for various rea-sons, commanications with hospitals and ambulance dispatch stations will not be adequate. The LILCO Transition Plan, however, specifically provides a coordinated communica-t I
tions link for fixed and mobile medical support facilities in accordance with the guidance set forth in NUREG-0654/ FEMA REP-1.
i i
Contention 28
- 5. Q. Would you first address Contention 28?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Contention 28 states:
1 Contention 28. No radio or dedicated {
telephone links to any Federal agencies are )
described in the LILCO Plan. Thus, the Plan fails to provide adequate and reliable means of communications with the Federal emergency response organizations relied upon.in the Plan (i.e., FEMA, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Federal Aviation Administration), as re-quired by NUREG 0654,Section II.F.1.c.
(See FEMA Report, at 5).
This contention was apparently derived from the FEMA report on the review of the LILCO Transition Plan, Rev. O.
- 6. Q. What regulations or guidelines are cited in Contention 28?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Contention 28 cites NUREG-0654,Section II.F.1.c which reads, with surrounding language, as follows:
NUREG-0654, SECTION II.F.1.c The communications plans for emergencies shall include organizational titles and alternates for both ends of the communica-tions links. .Each organization shall es-tablish reliable primary and backup means of communication for licensees, local-and State response organizations. Such
i systems should be selected to be compati-ble with.one another. Each plan shall in-4 clude:
- c. provision for communications as needed
- with Federal emergency response organiza-tions.
- 7. Q. Does NUREG-0654,Section II F.1.c require that the i LILCO Transition Plan provide for " radio or dedicated '
telephone links" to federal agencies?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) No. NUREG-0654 simply recommends " provision for communications as needed with l Federal emergency response orga~nizations"; it does not 4
1 l call for any specific type of communication links, such as radio or dedicated telephone lines.
i
- 8. Q. Does the LILCO Transition Plan meet the guidance of NUREG-0654,Section II.F.1.c?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Yes. The LILCO Transi-tion Plan provides for reliable means of communication with the federal response organizations referred to in Contention 28.
- 9. .Q. Describe the operative means of communication with the various federal response organizations, i
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] The means of communi-4 cation with the various federal response organizations I
are described in'the LILCO Transition Plan.at Figure
~
- 3.4.1. First, the LILCO Transition Plan providesLfor'a-dedicated telephone line'between the EOC and the DOE-j Brookhaven Arca Office. Second,.. commercial telephone lines serve as'a primary communications-mechanism withi the. Federal Emergency Management Agency'(FEMA), the
.p, .a - e - , . . , --. ., - . . - ---v,, .,. .n, . ,
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the U.S.
Coast Guard, and will s~erve as a backup means of commu-nication with DOE. Commercial telephone adheres to the guideline requiring provisions for communications with federal emergency response organizations. In addition, there is a Federal Telecommunications System (FTS) line located at the Shoreham Control Room. The FTS line provides communications between the Shoreham Control Room and the FAA, the Coast Guard, FEMA, the State of Connecticut, and the DOE-Brookhaven Area Office. (The FTS link to the Brookhaven area office is not shown on Figure 3.4.1 because it is neither the primary nor sec -
ondary communications link.) The Shoreham Control Room is easily accessible from the EOC by use of centrex, commercial telephone, the Radiological Emergency Commu-nications System, and the ESO frequency (Plan at 3.4-1 to 3.4-7). The FTS line will provide for backup commu-nications between the EOC and all of the federal agen-cies listed above via the Shoreham Control Room. Fi-nally, provisions have been made for the installation of a marine-band radio in the Hicksville Customer Ser-vice Office and in the Emergency Operations Center for communications between LERO and the United States Ccast Guard.
Thus, the express provisions of the LILCO Transition Plan establish that LILCO will meet the guidelines set forth in NUREG-0654,Section II.F.1.c.
Contention 29
- 10. Q. What is your response with respect to the issues raised in Contention 29 and your bases for that response?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Contention 29 states:
Contention 29. The LILCO Plan does not specify the number of emergency personnel that will be assigned responsibility for' manning communications equipment at the EOC, staging areas, transfer points, ambulance dispatch stations, or other communication posts. Further,-the Plan does not provide for trained repair technicians capable of keeping communications equipment operation-al. As a result, there is no assurance that LILCO's communications system can or will be operated in the event of an emergency.
The LILCO Transition Plan satisfies NRC regulations and NUREG-0654 by providing for prompt communications among principal response organizations and adequate emergency facilities and equipment (10 C.F.R. $ 50.47(b)(6)-and (b)(8); NUREG-0654 Section II.F.1).
The LILCO Transition Plan, at OPIP 2.1.1, in compliance.
with NUREG-0654,Section II.F.1, gives the.LILCO job ti-ties of the individuals designated to fill the "communica-tor" roles.
- 11. Q. Does the LILCO Transition Plan enumerate the emergency personnel referred to in Contention 29?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz]- First, it must be noted that it is unclear. in the , Contention exactly teho is re-ferred to in the first sentence. Under varying circum-stances, literally anyone in the EOC, regardless'of wheth-er they perform a function as a " communicator," may use a
I l commercial telephone as a means of communication. The first sentence of Contention 29, read literally, suggests that the LILCO Transition Plan must enumerate persons re-sponsible for manning communications equipment at various LERO facilities and "other communications posts." It is unclear from the Contention what is meant by "other commu-nication posts." There is no requirement in the regula-tions or guidelines that the LILCO Transition Plan contain an enumeration of emergency personnel manning communica-tions equipment.
However, for purposes of responding to this Contention, reference is made to Figure 2.1.1 of the LILCO Transition Plan which shows that there are 12 persons expressly des-ignated as " communicators" of various types. As shown in Attachment 1 to this testimony, two communicators have been added; this change will be reflected in future revi-sions of the Plan. Furthermore, the LERO titles or posi-tions of these persons, and the number of individuals serving in each such capacity, are enumerated in Attach-ment 1.
Additionally, there are 195 other persons, such as TrafficGuides,TransfeI'PointCoordinators, and Staging Area Support Staff, who will routinely use. communications equipment. The LERO titles of these persons, and the num-bers of individuals serving in each such capacity, also
~
are enumerated in Attachment 1.
r
. . - , - y -- - -- , , .
,.._7 -. ,_. _ , _ . _ _ , , , . ,~
l Experience obtained during numerous LERO drills involving the activation of the Emergency Operations Cen- ,
1
! ter and of the various staging areas has confirmed that the number of personnel designated to fill the various communicator roles within the EOC and the staging areas is
! wholly adequate.
- 12. Q. Does the LERO organizational structure include the job i category of Communications Repair Technician?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] No.
- 13. Q. Why not?
3 A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz) Neither 10 C.F.'R. Part 50 nor NUREG-0654 specify any requirement or recommendation that i' an offsite emergency response plan make provision for com-l munications repair technicians. The standards simply re-j quire that adequate communications equipment be provided and maintained. The.LILCO Transition Plan does provide j for the availability and maintenance of-communications equipment (See OPIP 3.4.1). Most elements of the emergen-1 cy communications system are tested every three months.
4
] Many elements are tested even more frequently in accor-dance with OPIP 3.4.1. The purpose of these periodic tests is to ensure'tha't all' communications equipment.is kept in good working order and that the communications
, equipment will be operational _in the event of an emergen-1 cy. Required maintenance and repairs are performed by -
, radio technicians from the LILCO Electric Systems Op-erations Department.
. _. _ _ _ _.. . . _ . , _ _ . - ~ . . . . - .
- 14. Q. Who is responsible for seeing to it that communications equipment is kept operational in the event of an emergen-cy?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] OPIP 2.1.1 provides that it is the responsibility of the Lead Communicator to identify and resolve "any problems associated with the communica-tions network established for LERO." This includes the responsibility to ensure that any necessary repairs to equipment are identified and are made either by Communica-tions Technicians of the LILCO Electric System Operations
-Department or by New York Telephone (NYNEX). The Lead Communicator's Emergency Caller Procedure includes the prone numbers of Communications Technicians who will be called out when the EOC is activiated; this will ensure the continuity of radio service.
- 15. Q. What are the qualifications of the technicians who will do the maintenance and repair work?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz) The qualifications for the LILCO Communications Technician position are set forth in the job vacancy notice attached as Attachment 2 to this Testi-mony. There are eight Communications _ Technicians in the Electric System Operations Department who_are intimately familiar with the workings and operation of_the radio equipment utilized by LERO. Further, LILCO has a letter of agreement with New York Telephone to ensure the conti-nuity of telephone service at the Brentwood EOC in an emergency (LILCO Transition Plan at App-B-28.).
- 16. Q. How will LILCO ensure that ambulance dispatch stations have operational communications equipment?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] Radios provided to ambulance companies for use during an emergency response are tested on a quarterly basis consistent with the testing program referred to above and outlined in OPIP 3.4.1.
- 17. Q. If the radio, for example, at an ambulance dispatch sta-tion or a staging area malfunctions, how will repairs be effected?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz] The radios in ambulance dispatch locations and staging areas used for communications be-tween those locations and the EOC are mobile radios that are plugged into a power supply and an installed antenna.
Should a radio malfunction in some way, another radio crystallized to that frequency can be sent to the ambu-lance dispatch location where it can be easily installed.
Additional radios crystallized to the appropriate frequen-cy are available at the staging areas.
Contention 30
- 18. Q. What is your conclusion with respect to Con-tention 3O?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio,_Hobbs, Renz) Contention 30 argues that there will be insufficient and inadequate communications equipment to insure effective communications among LERO field emergency personnel. Contention 30 states:
Contention 30. The LILCO Plan fails to demonstrate that there will be sufficient and adequate' communications equipment to ensure effective communications among
LILCO field emergency personnel, including those expected to perform security func-tions. The Plan provides that all field 4
personnel, or a member of each crew, and each staging area, bus transfer point, and ambulance dispatch station will be provid-ed with mobile radios. With mobile ra-dios, communication will only be possible if the field personnel are in their vehi-l cles. Moreover, mobile radios operate on
- battery power, and the vehicles must be running, or the ignition switched on, for the radios to operate. Batteries are ef-fective for only a limited time, but the Plan makes no provision for assuring that vehicle batteries are not rundown and re-main charged. Thus, there is no assurance that transmission and reception of radio messages will be possible. In addition, the LILCO Plan fails to take into account the fact that persons other than emergency
- response personnel (i.e., the public) will have access to the radio frequencies to be used by such personnal. Further, the LILCO Plan relies in part, upon simplex radio frequencies, which limit the range of the field radios. As a result, many emergency field personnel will be unable to hear other field personnel who attempt to communicate on the same frequency. It 4
is essential that field workers be able to communicate with co-workers having similar j or related functions. For example, LILCO's traffic guides must be able to communicate information to other traffic guides in order to coordinate traffic con-trol strategy and to be aware of what traffic conditions may be coming. LILCO's traffic guides, however, will'not have i that capability because they will not have adequate radio equipment or frequencies.
, The result of such attempted traffic con-trol without adequate means for
' coordination will result in increased rather than decreased traffic' congestion, and extended evacuation times. Other field workers who are unable to communi-cate information to co-workers performing similar cnc related functions will be simi-larly unable to. perform their assigned 1 roles effectively or properly.
E The asserted bases for this argument either are without merit or are refuted by the facts. The LILCO Transition Plan provides for prompt communications among principal response organizations (see CPIP 3.3.2) and from those organizations to emergency personnel as required by 10 C.F.R. S 50.47(b)(6). The regulation does not state that direct communications must be pro-vided among field personnel.
- 19. Q. Would you address that portion of Contention 30 relating to communications among field personnel?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] In support of the basic argument in Contention 30, that there will be in-adequate communication among field personnel, the Con-tention asserts that field personnel will be equipped with mobile radios and that adequate communications among field personnel cannot be assured by this means.
This assertion is incorrect.
The LILCO Transition Plan, by design, does not con-template the need for communications among field per-sonnel. The Plan does, however, contemplate the-flow of communcations from either the EOC directly to field l
personnel or from staging areas directly to field per-sonnel. There is no anticipated need for communica--
l l tions among field personnel unless authorized or di-I rected by the appropriate response coordinator.
1 I
)
l 1
)
- 20. Q. Would you address the assertion that communication via mobile radion is only possible if the field personnel are in their eehicles?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) That assertion is not accurate. Field personnel must, of course, be in their vehicles to transmit messages. They can hear messages, however, if they are within several feet of their vehi-cles. There is no reason to believe that field person-nel, such as Transfer Point Coordinators, Evacuation Route Spotters and Road Crews, would need to be far from their vehicles for long periods of time.
In comparison, some Traffic Guides may be away from their vehicle while guiding traffic in an intersection.
However, it is anticipated that the bulk of communica-tion from the staging area to a Traffic Guide in the field will be at times prior to the setup or after the dismantling of a traffic guide post when the Traffic Guide would be in his vehicle. Should problems arise in the field, the traffic guide has the mobile radio available for his use to report such problems back to the respective staging area.
- 21. Q. Would you comment on the assertion that vehicles must be running, or the ignition switched on, for mobile ra-dios to operate, and that vehicle batteries may run down thereby rendering the mobile radios inoperable?
A. (Hobbs, Renz] The assertion is incorrect for two rea-sons. First, this assertion is not consistent with ex-perience. Police, taxi companies, ambulance companies, utilities, and various other organizations rely upon
mobile radios to provide effective communications every day. Second, the drain on a battery is much less to receive a message than to transmit one. The mobile ra-dios used by LILCO require 12 volts and could remain in a receive mode for 10-16 hours on the power available from an average car battery without the moter running.
l Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that field emergency vehicles cannot be restarted to recharge or maintain batteries during transmission of messages.
- 22. Q. What about the assertion in the Contention that persons other than LERO emergency response personnel (i.e., the public) will have access to the radio frequencies to be used by such personnel?
A. [Hobbs, RenZ] Although it is conceivable that members of the general public, with the appropriate equipment, could monitor the radio frequencies discussed herein, it is doubtful that such a practice would impair LERO's response.
- 23. Q. What is the difference between frequencies and chan-nels?
A. (Hobbs, Renz] Channels are made up of those frequencies needed to effect communications from one geographic area to another. A channel-may be a singu-lar frequency or two frequencies. If it is a singular frequency or if transmission and reception are done on a single frequency it is referred to as a simplex chan-nel. If two frequencies are used, one for reception and one for transmission, it is referred to as a duplex channel.
- 24. Q. Would you address the assertion in the Contention that the LILCO Transition Plan relies in part upon simplex radio frequencies with limited range and that the range is too limited to provide effective coverage?
A. [Hobbs, Renz) The partial reliance upon simplex frequencies will not impede the transmission of needed information. The range of the simplex frequencies used by LERO is sufficient to allow for the necessary commu-nications within the appropriate areas. There are now three simplex frequencies designated for use by LERO.
The first is used by the Riverhead Staging Area in coordinating the efforts of Traffic Guides and bus transfer points within the jurisdiction of the Riverhead Staging Area. This frequency is transmitted and received by a base station located at tho Riverhead Staging Area, and is sufficient for communication with personnel within the jurisdiction of the Riverhead Staging Area. (See Attachment 3 showing the Riverhead l
Staging Area.) The second simplex frequency is used by the Emergency Operations Center personnel in coordinating the efforts of Evacuation Route Spotters and Road Crews. This frequency is presently trans-mitted from fixed locations in Hauppauge and South Riverhead. The third simplex frequency is used by.the EOC personnel in coordinating the efforts of the ambu-lance dispatch locations. This frequency is trans-mitted from fixed locations in Hauppague and Bellmore.
)
The fact that simplex radio frequencies used by LILCO provide coverage of the EPZ is confirmed by the fact that LILCO's transmission and distribution organi-zation utilizes many simplex frequencies during their normal operations on a daily basis throughout Long Is-land. In addition, all of the drills to date have con-firmed that the simplex frequencies used by LERO are effective.
- 25. Q. The intervenors also allege that simplex frequencies do not permit communications among emergency workers in the field. Would you concur?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) This is simply incor-rect. Unlike paired frequencies, which transmit and receive on different frequencies, simplex uses a singu-lar frequency for transmission and reception, thereby allowing communication between any two simplex radios crystallized to the same frequency. LERO field workers could communicate with one anothcr on a simplex fre-quency. However, under the current LILCO Transition Plan the appropriate staging area is the point for com-munications to and from field personnel.
- 26. Q. Would you address that portion of the Contention sug-gesting that field personnel, such as traffic guides, must be able to communicate with each other and, appar-ently, that they will not be able to do so because of frequencies with limited range or run-down batteries?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) As stated above, range limitations and vehicle batteries will not impede com-munications. Furthermore, the LILCO Transition Plan
a does not contemplate that there will be direct communi-cations between field workers performing similar or re-lated functions. To address the example used by the intervenors, Traffic Guides need not communicate di-L.
rectly with each other to insure coordinated informa-tion concerning traffic conditions. The Traffic Guides will have direct radio communications with their re-spective staging areas, where information concerning traffic conditions can be assessed and directions to Traffic Guides can be given. Each staging area, in turn, will communicate with the EOC Traffic Control Point Coordinator who will analyze traffic conditions on a large scale and give directions to the staging areas. A similar arrangement applies to the coordination of other elements of LERO. As a result, effective communications for a coordinated response by field workers is assured.
Contention 31
- 27. Q. Please summarize the issues raised by Contention 31.
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) Contention 31 alleges that the LILCO Transition Plan does not provide a back-up communication system for the Emergency Radio System,-
which is intended to provide communications between command and control personnel at the EOC and field emergency response-personnel, and that the lack of a backup communications system is in violation of 10 l
1
C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix E,Section IV.E.9 and NUREG-065'4,Section II.F.1. Contention 31 states:
l Contention 31. With the exception of dedicated telephone lines between the staging area coordinators and the EOC emer-gency response coordinators, there is no backup communications system for the LILCO Emergency Radio System, which is intended to provide communications between emergency re-sponse coordinators at the EOC and field emergency response personnel, including field survey teams, traffic guides,' road crew and evacuation route spottars, staging area coordinators, bus transfer point coordinators, and ambulance dispatch loca-tions. (See Plan, at 3.4-3). Although the LILCO Plan does not indicate the number of frequencies which comprise LILCO's Emergency Radio System, LILCO has advised Suffolk County that there are six frequencies and four radio channels available to LILCO. The amount of radio traffic anticipated for an emergency at Shoreham could not be adequate-ly handled by these six frequencies. Howev-er, the Plan has no provision for any backup frequencies to those six which comprise the Emergency Radio System, in violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.E.9 and NUREG 0654,Section II.F.1, Moreover, each category of field workers will be able to use only a single frequency or channel (two sets of frequencies are paired). According-ly, if problems develop on that one frequen-cy or channel, communications will be impos-sible for all workers in that category. In the absence of backup systems, there is no assurance that recommended and appropriate emergency actions can or will be imple-mented, since command and control instruc-tions'may not be communicated to personnel in the field, and the status of the emergen-cy response may not be communicated to those in command and control.
l
- 28. Q. What are the regulations and guidelines cited in Con-tention 31?
l A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] The regulations and
22 i
guidelines cited in Contention 31 are 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.E.9 and NUREG-0654, Section
, II.f.1.
- 29. Q. Would you explain how the Emergency Radio System is configured?
A. [Cordaro, Davezrio, Hobbs, Renz) The Emergency Radio System is comprised of five radio channels, each of j
which is assigned to one or more functional or geo-1 i graphic areas. One channel is assigned to each of the three staging areas for use in coordinating emergency
) response activities within the respective geographic
- area of the staging area (see Attachment 4). Each
! staging area is equipped with a radio to send and re-ceive on its assigned channel and each staging area serves as the control point for all activities for the geographic area within its jurisdiction. The EOC is equipped with all radio channels and serves as the com-mand and control point for the staging areas; hence, information frvm the field is to be communicated to the 4
EOC by the staging areas.
Information from field locations within a staging ra s jurisdiction is to be communicated to the staging area. The appropriate. Staging Area Coordinator might I- then decide to communicate that information, or a deci-sion or inquiry. based on that information, to another field location within the same jurisdiction. The
- staging area also could communicate the information
~ _ - - . _ -
i I
i from the field to the EOC. Based on that information, the appropriate EOC response coordinator can take ap-propriate action, which might include communicating the information, or a decision or inquiry based on that in-formation, to another etaging area. The staging area
! receiving the information can then relay the informa-tion or directive to a field location in that staging area. Thus, there is a coordinated flow of communica-tion from field personnel through staging areas to the 1
j command and control personnel at the EOC; such a system 1 '
permits command and control personnel at the EOC to have a complete and integrated picture of what is oc-
! eurring in the field areas covered by all three staging j
- areas. Such a system folicws the general practices f promulgated by FEMA with respect to EOC communications j as evidenced by CPG 1-18. The above configuration as-
! sures a coordinated and timely exchange of emergency information between one element of the emergency re-sponse organization and any other element of that orga-nization.
The fourth and fifth channel employed by LERO in the 1
Emergency Radio System provides for communication be-
. tween the EOC and ambulance-dispatch locations, evacua-tion route spotters, and' road crews. Unlike the three i
channels assigned to each of the three staging areas,.
these channels are designed to direct response ;
activities within the entire EPZ.
l
~
l
- 30. Q. Are there any safeguards or redundancies in the radio links to field personnel?
A. [Cordero, Daverio, Hobbs, Ren:] Yes. First, If a staging area radio were to fail, the EOC in Brentwood could provide an interim coordinating role by commu-nicating directly with field personnel in that staging a r's a . Each of the staging areas is represented in the EOC by a separate radio control panel. In the unlikely event that there were to be a simultaneous failure of radios at more than one staging area, the EOC still could easily maintain communication links with field personnel. It should be noted, however, that in the event of a radio outage at a etaging area, the outage would be of minimal duration due to the fact that re-placement equipment is available at each staging area.
The radio dispatcher at any staging area can quickly replace his radio with any of the mobile radio units stored at the staging area by simply plugging the mo-bile radio into the power supply and antenna connection he is using.
Second, backup for the communications on the radio channels used to communicate with ambulance dispatch locatione, evacuation route epotters and road crews is provided as follows: (1) in the cace of ambulance dis-patch locations, backup communication is provided by commercial telephone between the EOC and the ambulance dispatch locations; and (2) backup communications
.- . _ - . _ - _ _ - - . . . . _ . _ - .- - - _ . - .. -.____ =_ _- -
i available to evacuation route spotters and road crews
, include the use of public telephones. In addition, due i to the fact that the emergency activities of the evacu-l ation route spotters and road crews require them to drive throughout the EPZ, in the event that any one of
- their radios failed, they would have access to the ra-dios used at the traffic guides' posts.
- 31. Q. In Contention 31, the intervenors state that the LILCO Emergency Radio System cannot adequately handle the
- amount of radio traffic anticipated for an emergency at ;
Shoreham. Is this correct?
, A. [Hobbs, Ren ] In our opinion, the Emergency Radio Sys-tem will be adequate to handle the amount of radio traffic. The Emergency Radio System is now configured so that the road crews and evacuation route spotters will be in direct communication ^with the EOC on a dedi-l cated radio channel. Approximately 22. users will be on the channel used to communicate.with road crews'and evacuation route spotters. The ambulance dispatch lo-cations will communicate with the EOC on a separate 4
dedicated radio channel. There will be a maximum of
.approximately 16 users on the channel used to'communi-cate with ambulance dispatch locations.
- A channel will be available for each staging' area to provide communication between that staging area and the.
traffic guides and transfer point coordinators who have been dispatched from that. staging area. Therefore,
, only field personnel dispatched from the Riverhead
l l
staging area, for example, will be communicating with l that staging area over a channel. The maximum number of personnel assigned to any channel is approximately
- 60. Communications from the EOC to staging areas will be over dedicated telephone lines as a primary means of I communication. Backup communications from the EOC to the staging areas will be provided over the radio chan-nels dadicated to each staging area.
- 32. Q. Does the LILCO Transition Plan comply with the regula-tions and guidelines cited above in Contention 31?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renzj Yes. The LILCO Tran-sition Plan provides for prompt communications among principal respor.ve organizations and emergency person-nel, as well as primary and cackup means of communica-tion between the licensee and the offsite emergency re-sponse organization.
- 33. Q. Do the regulations and guidelines require inclusion of provision in the LILCO Transition Plan for backup means of communication with field personnel?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) No. The regulations and guidelines do not state that there should be a backup communications. system for the' field emergency response personnel listed by the intervenors in Conten-tion 31.
k
- 34. Q. Are backup means of communication _provided for the ra-diological monitoring teams?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Yes. The EOC has
three methods of communicating with DOE's Brookhaven Area Office from which DOE-RAP's field monitoring teams are dispatched. The primary method of communicating between the EOC and the Brookhaven Area Office is by dedicated telephone line. In addition, the EOC may communicate with DOE's Brookhaven Area Office by com-mercial telephone and by the Federal Telecommunications System located in the Shoreham Control Room. DOE's Orookhaven Area Office communicates directly with its field monitoring teams by radio.
- 35. Q. Contention 31 alleges that each category of field workers will be able to v.se o.11y a channel and that if problems develop on that channel communication will be impossible for all workers in that category. Is that correct?
A. [Hobbs, Renz] No, that is not completely accurate. As is explained above, the Emergency Radio System is configured with a channel dedicated to each staging area, a channel dedicated to ambulance dispatchers, and a channel dedicated to evacuation route spotters and road crews. Thus, the Radio System is not configured entirely along categories of workers.
- 36. Q. Is it likely that one of the channels would simply fail to operate?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Renz) It is highly unlikely that an entire channel would fail to operate. In LILCO's years of experience in operating radios, LILCO has never ex-perienced a failure of a specific channel using the type of equipment on which LERO relies. l
Of course when any one individual is communicating on a channel, his communication occupies that channel.
To avoid the problem of an accidental channel tie-up for an extended period of time, the mobile radios pro-t vided to LERO workers have a time-out feature which cuts off transmission after 60 seconds. To continue a l
message that has been cut off by the time-out, a new transmission must be initiated.
Contention 32
- 37. Q. Have you also analyzed Contention 32?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Yes.
2
- 38. Q. What is your conclusion, and your bases for that con-clusion, with respect to the assertions in Contention 32?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Contention 32 states:
4 Contention 32. Under the LILCO Plan, communications between traffic guides and bus transfer points and the EOC response coordinators will be-relayed through the
, LILCO staging areas; thus these field per-sonnel will be unable to communicate direct-l ly with their respective response coordinators at the EOC. (Plan, at S.4-3).
This lack of direct communications will re-sult in the delay of implementation of emer-gency actions. - -
The LILCO Transition Plan provides for coordinated and expeditious communication of information. The chain of command for the LERO organization is structured with the EOC as the command and control center and the three-staging areas as satellite field control points for t
. _ _ = _ = _ . - - . - . .
. . - . ~
communicating information to the EOC and for implementing decisions made at the EOC. (Attachment 5). This organi-cational structure was conceived in view of essentially three considerations: (1) the number of field personnel l
engaged in a particular activity; (2) the manageability of
'1 l
communications with field personnel; and (3) the type of information being communicated.
Traffic Guides and Bus Transfer Point Coordinators do communicate directly with their coordinators at their 4
staging areas. The type of information transmitted be-tween Traffic Guides and Bus Transfer Point Coordinators ,
f
, and the staging areas, on the one hand, and the staging areas and the EOC Response Coord' ~ stors, on the other, is different. Information from the field will be assessed and either acted upqn at the staging area or summarized and transmitted to the appropriate EOC response coordinator. The EOC Response Coordinator, in turn, will receive all this information and transmit any necessary i instructions to the staging areas, who then will instruct field personnel. A2 s result, each staging area, in ef-fect, performs field management functions that otherwise 4
would have to be parformed at the EOC -- for example, roll call of the Traffic Guides once they have reached their respective traffic control points. The EOC will be ad-vised of which points are manned, but does not necessarily need to know by which individual. Thus, the Contention l
miscontrues the functional responsibilities of the EOC Re-sponse Coordinators.
Because they are fewer in number and operate throughout the EPZ, Evacuation Route Spotters, Road Crewe, and Ambu-lance Dispatchers communicate directly with their respec-tive response coordinators at the EOC on their own dedi-cated channels.
- 39. Q. Would you describe in more detail how the LILCO Transition Plan structures communication links?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Rent] The field personnel listed in Contention 32 are the Traffic Guides and Bus Transfer Point Coordinators. These individuals ordinarily receive instruction from the Lead Traffic Guides and the Bus Dispatchers, respectively, at the staging areas. Al -
though the EOC response coordinator has the capability to do so, by desien, he does not routinely communicate di-rectly with traffic guides and bus transfer points. The staging area receives messages from, and instructs and manages, the traffic guides and bus transfer points.
The Lead Traffic Guide at each staging area communi-cates directly with and instructs the Traffic Guides in his area. The Traffic Control Point Coordinator at the EOC is the Traffic Guides' EOC response coordinator; he does not routinely instruct the Traffic Guides directly.-
The EOC Traffic Control Point Coordinator is responsible for overall implementation of traffic control within the l
[
i
EPZ. He communicates to the Lead Traffic Guides at the staging areas via dedicated line or commercial telephone, -
both of which are backed up by radio (See Plan at 3.4 3.4-4). Each Lead Traffic Guide is then responsible to instruct his Traffic Guides in the field.
There are approximately 50-75 Traffic Guides assigned to a Lead Traffic Guide, depending upcn the staging area.
The chain of command is established to ensure prompt im-plementation of emergency action.
- 40. Q. What about the bus dispatchers?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] The Bus Dispatcher at each staging area dispatches the Bus Drivers and instructs Transfer Point Coordinators. Each Bus Dispatcher in turn communicates information to, and receives direction from, the Bus Coordinator at the EOC. These communications are by dedicated line or commercial telephone backed up by radio. The Bus Coordinator at the EOC tells the Bus Dis-patchers at each staging area which bus routes to run.
Each Bus Dispatcher, in turn, instructs the Bus Drivers and Transfer Point Coordinators, allocates the fielo workers to the bus transfer points, and communicates with the Transfer Point Coordir.ators to ensure coordination of bus route service.
Over 350 bus drivers are involved in the effort to transport evacuees in need of transportation out of the EPZ. They are managed by their respective Bus Dispatchers or Transfer Point Coordinators.
- 41. Q. What, then, is one of the key reasons for organizing traf-fic and bus communications in this manner?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) In short, the type of in-formation transmAtted between the staging areas and the EOC, on the one hand, and the staging areas and field per-sonnel, on the other, is different. The staging areas as-sess and summarize detailed information from the field and transmit it to the EOC. The EOC coordinates response for the entire EPZ; major response decisions are made at, and emmanate from, the EOC.
- 42. Q. Does the LILCO Transition Plan then provide for expedi-tious communication of instructions and information to and from traffic guides and bus transfer points?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Ren ] Yes. By establishing an organizational structure with a chain of comma >M, emergen-cy action will be implemented without delay. The func-tions performed by the staging areas would have to be per-formed at tl s "OC if the staging areas were eliminated.
Using the st. areas as satellite control centers for implementatio..
- ailed emergency responses in the field should not delay, and in fact should expedite, the flow of information and instructions to and from Traffic Guides and transfer points.
- 43. Q. To the best of your knowledge and belief, does this orga-nizational structure conform to applicable regulations and guidelines?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Ren:] Yes. Neither the Code of Federal Regulations nor NUREG-0654 stipulates that there must be direct communication between the Er.' coordinators 1
and field personnel. They do require prompt implementation of emergency procedures, which the management of field personnel at each staging area and bus transfer point will accomplish.
Contention 34
- 44. Q. Please summarize the issues raised by Contention 34.
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Contention 34 alleges that the LILCO Transition Plan does not provide a "coordi-nat6d communication link for fixed and mobile medical sup-port facilities" between LILCO command and control person-nel, and ambulance vehicles or hospitals. Contention 34 states:
Content'en 34. The LILCC Plan relies on
~
existing ra5ios in hospitals and in private ambulance dispatch locations and vehicles for communications between LILCO command and control personnel and other LILCO emergency workers and these response organizations and their personnel. (Plan, at 3.4-3.) This proposal fails to ensure adequate communica-tions among response personnel because:
A. The LILCO Emergency Radio System will not be compatible with the radio communica-tions equipment used in day-to-day op-erations by hospitals and by ambulance vehi-
. cles. - -
4 B. The LILCO system will not have direct access to the radio frequencies used by hos-pitals and by ambulance vehicles.
C. LILOO has advised Suffolk County that-the.EOC will not be equipped with private ambulance vehicle, Emergency Medical Ser-vices, or hospital frequencies. Therefore, LILCO proposes to relay communications be-tween the EOC and ambulance vehicles and hospitals through private ambulance dispatch
locations. In this regard, the LILCO Plan provides that one of the LILCO Emergency Radio System frequencies is dedicated for radio communications between the EOC and private ambulance dispatch locations, road crews, and evacuation route spotters. (See Plan, at 3.4-3). Assuming dispatch loca-tions are in fact available to LILCO, LILCO's proposal precludes direct communica-tions between LILCO personnel and non-LILCO emergency response personnel in the field, which will delay the implementation of emer-gency actions. In addition, LILCO has ad-vised Suffolk County that fire / rescue orga-nizations (i.e., fire departments and fire / rescue vehicles) are not part of LERO, even though they are relied upon for "their normal response functions during an emergen-cy." (Plan at 2.2.-4). Thus, there is no assurance that "a coordinated communication link for fixed and mobile medical support facilities exists," as required by NUREG 0654,Section II.F.2.
- 45. Q. Contention 34.A. suggests that the LILCO Transition Plan is deficient because it does not provide for radio commu-nications with hospitals and private ambulance vehicles.
Does the Plan provide for such communications and if not, why not?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) The LILCO Transition Plan does not provide for direct radio communications between the EOC and hospitals or private ambulance vehicles. In compliance with the guidance provided'in NUREG-0654, Sec-tion II.F.2, the LILCO Transition Plan provides for a "co-ordinated communication link" between LERO command and control at the EOC, and the fixed and mobile medical sup-port facilities that will provide support in the EPZ. For ambulances, the coordinated communications link is radio communications between the ambulance coordinator at the EOC and the ambulance dispatchers amployed by the
respective private ambulance companies. The primary com-munications link to the ambulance dispatchers is by radio, and the backup communications link is by commercial tele-phone.
Communications between the EOC and hospitals will be effected in one of two ways. First, communications be-tween the ECC and hospitals within the EPZ regarding rec-ommended protective actions will be effected by means of EBS messages on tone alert radios and by commercial tele-phone. Second, communications between the EOC and hospi-tals outside the EPZ that will serve as reception centers will be through the ambulance companies transporting the person.
The ambulance companies, and their respective vehicles, will use the radio communications equipment by which they communicate with hospitals in the normal course of their business. In many instances, the ambulance vehicle will communicate directly with the hospital by radio; in other instances, the ambulance driver will relay the information to the hospital via his ambulance dispatcher.
- 46. Q. Subpart A of Contention 34 alleges that LILCO's communica-tions equipment is not compatible with communications equipment used by hospitals and private ambulance vehi-cles. Is this true?
A. (Hobbs, Renz] Yes, LERO's communications equipment has not been designed to-be compatible with communications equipment regularly used by hospitals and private ambulance vehicles.
- 47. Q. Is it necessary for LERO's communications equipment to be compatible with the equipment regularly used by hospitals and private ambulance vehicles?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] No. It is not necessary or desirable for LERO to communicate directly with hospi-tals and private ambulance vehicles on radio frequencies they use regularly. As stated above, the communications from the EOC for an individual ambulance is by means of the ambulance dispatcher. The method employed by LERO to communicate with ambulances and hospitals was purposefully designed in this manner to take advantage of the ambulance dispatcher's expertise in giving direction.to ambulance drivers with regard to the appropriate equipment needed, type of vehicle needed, proximity of vehicles, and so forth. This type of communication, from the EOC to the ambulance company to an individual ambulance vehicle, is a
" coordinated communication link."
- 48. Q. Paragraph B of Contention 34 addresses the issue of wheth-er LILCO will have direct access to the radio frequencies used by hospitals and by ambulance vehicles. Will LILCO have such direct access?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] No. As stated above, LERO will communicate with hospitals and ambulance-vehi-cles over a " coordinated communication link." :
- 49. Q. Is such direct access required under the applicable guidelines?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] No. NUREG-0654,Section II.F.2 requires that "a coordinated communication link for
fixed and mobile medical support facilities exists." The LILCO Transition Plan ensures that such a coordinated com-munications link exists as stated above.
- 50. Q. Contention 34.C. addresses the question of the timeliness of communications between LILCO command and control per-sonnel and various medical support vehicles and facili-ties. Are you satisfied that such communications can be effected in a timely manner?
A. (Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] Yes.
- 51. Q. Why?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz) Due to the fact that most of the persons requiring evacuation by ambulance or ambulette will be predetermined on annually updated lists compiled by LILCO from preregistre. tion cards sent out by LILCO prior to an emergency, it is not anticipated that there will be many communications between LILCO command and control personnel and the medical support facilities and vehicles. In those instances where such communica-tions are necessary, a coordinated link exists for imple-menting them. The LILCO Transition Plan provides that communications between the EOC and private ambulance dis-patch stations will be over one of LERO's Emergency Radio System channels. In turn, the ambulance dispatch stations are in contact with the ambulance vehicles by radio and with hospitals by radio or telephone.
- 52. Q. The Contention states that the radio frequency used by the EOC to communicate with ambulance dispatch stations will also be used to communicate with road crews and evacuation route spotters and the Contention implies that such a
configuration will delay implementation of emergency ac-tions. Will there be a problem with too many people trying to communicate on the same frequency?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] No. As stated previous-ly, it is not anticipated that there will be many communi-cations between the EOC and medical support facilities, considering that location of many of the stops to be made by ambulance or ambulette drivers will be preset by virtue of lists of persons needing special transportation com-piled from preregistration cards returned to, verified, and updated by LERO, as well as lists of special facilites (See OPIP 3.6.5). In addition, LILCO has recently placed ambulance dispatch stations on a separate radio channel.
Ambulance dispatch locations will be the only group of LERO field personnel on that channel.
- 53. Q. Approximately how many usere will be communicating on the channel used to communicate with ambulance dispatch loca-tions?
A. (Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] There will be a maximum of approximately 16 usere on the frequency used to communi-cate with ambulance dispatch locations.
- 54. Q. In Contention 34 intervenors apparently allege that the LILCO Transi-ion Plan should provide for communications with fire / rescue vehicles. Should the Plan contain such provisons?
A. [Cordaro, Daverio, Hobbs, Renz] As the County correctly notes, LILCO does not rely on fire / rescue vehicles to be part of the LERO organization or to provide ambulance ser-vices in support of the LERO organization. Therefore, the
l l
implication raised by the Contention, that the LILCO Tran-sition Plan should provide for a coordinated communica-tions link with fire /reacue vehicles, is without basis.
The LILCO Transition Plan provides for a coordinated com-munications link with the fixed and mobile medical support facilities upon which LERO does rely for support.
l l
i
(
l
_ - . . _ _ . _ . - . . . _ - . - _ - . - - - . . . = . _ . . - . - - . - - . _ . . . . -. . - - ... . - - . .
i i
i ATTACHMENTS
, ATTACHMENT 1 List of Titles and Numbers of LERO
- Personnel Manning Communications Equipment ;
i ATTACHMENT 2 Job Vacancy Notice for Communications ,
Technician i i
ATTACHMENT 3 Map of Riverhead Staging Area Zone
! ATTACHMENT 4 Map of SNPS Emergency Planning Zone, Including Staging Areas and Traffic j Guide Locations ATTACHMENT 5 Schematic.of Communications by Organizational Relationships Among LERO Facilities
,I i
i i
)
0-l c- , _ -.,,-w + w +, .e,- 3 ---w-m-, , - , g- ,rmor - ,y,- w, , , - .-gv e *,
ATTACHMENT 1
~
\
l ATTACHMENT 1 4
LERO PERSONNEL MANNING COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 1
Communicators:
Title Number Lead Communicator 1 RECS Communicator 1 Public Information Communicators 2 Emergency Medical /Public Services Communicators 2 Rad. Health Communicators 3 Traffic Control Communicators 3 Transportation Support Communicators 2 Other:
Title Number Traffic Guides 147 Transfer Point Coordinators 11 Administrative Support Staff at Staging Areas 9 Road Crews 15 Evacuation Route Spotters 6 Ambulance Coordinator 1 Public Schools Coordinator 1 Private Schools Coordinator 1 Health Facilities Coordinator 1 Home Coordinator 1 Bus Coordinators 2
[ _ .
I l
l l l
l l
ATTACEMENT 2
, . m m ~ ,a.eu su-o.n uom 3 ' # ****
- ATTACHMENT 2 LOCATION:
glectric Systeo Operations Deparencnt Protection Division Ricksv111a ,
CLt.SSIFICATION:
Coteunicaticas Technician - (2 Vacancies)
Location, hours and work week schedule to be detemined in accordanca with the follouing requiracents at each reporting headquarters:
I Hicksville Brentwood A. Hon. - Fri. 8 a.n. - 4:30 p.n. A. Hon. - Fri. 8 a.n. - 4: 30 p.m.
- 3. !!oc. - Fri. 3:30 p.m. - 12 cid. B. Mon. - Fri. 3:30 p.m. - 12 nid.
C. Ued. - Sun. 8 a.m. - 4:30 ,.a. C. Wed. - Stai. 8 a.n. - 4:30 p.n.
Jacancies which tmy occur as a result of this posting will be filled frou this psseing.
Present Cocasunications Technicians who desire a lateral transfer should indicate their order of preference for reportird hea.dquarters _and schedule of hours at each of the above reporting. headquarters.
Licensed applicants who ata not presently qualified as Cor:munications Technicians will be required to train on any of the above locations and schedulos for a ninicun period of 6 months prior to assignnent of their pemanent headquarters and schedule of hours.
WTIES:
Uarking independently or with a helper perforcing the highest type of work associated with repair, testing, naintenanco and installation of cor. plex con-nunication and electronic equipoent including two-cay radio, cicrowave, and video facilities.
citting written reports and tast data sheets.Perforn all necessary test and adjustuents on abo Being responsible for the installa-tion, operation and maintenance of all Conpany owned contunications systens.
luvectigate and nay handla andsuch correct audio, radio, video and nicrowave interfarence cooplaints complaints.
Being responsible for the installation, operation er.d osintenance gathering systecs. of space-radio or nicrowave remote controlled or infornation Perforning all types of work on cott:unications equipconts cnd other electronic equipuent involving vacuun tubc, solid-state and integrated circuit (IC) rechnoloff.as. Itaving a good workin5 knowledge of basic principles cf solid-state and vacuuo tube electronics and applying knowledge by working fren alcetronic and electrical diagrace end sketches in the installation of corcunications equipcent including nicrowave, radio, and audio systens. Having a First or Second Class Radio Telophone Operator's license and having sud naintaining a current knowL2dge of PCC rulos, regulations and practices as pertaining to federally liccused systors used by the Company. Recomicoding the purchese of catoriala .and mark =nt, and the establishment of spare parts' requirements.
dutics. Operate notar vehicles or aquipnent neccesary to perforn job Perfoming such other conparable duties as any be assigned. Coordinate cctivities with other departoonts or sections.
MALE OR OFSIDERED: PD! ALE APPLICANTS U!!O POSSESS THE FOLIDUI?:C OUALIFICATI0NS VILL B 5 years related experience, inclu_d.i_nA n a knowledge of basic electronics. Ilust passe _s,s_a velid second class Radi_o Talcohone Operator Licenes _iss_ued by tha Fedcral Corrunicetions Co-731ssion.
Applicants sciccted will be rcquired to satisfactorily coepicto a prescribed course of outside study.
NUMBER CLCSING DATE Local 1049 - 941 .
March 26, 1980 (NOTE: Only applications suboitted on Fom FC 3650.10-35 will be accepted.) I
\_
-- 2 .a> ,a. .. u - .a - _ a ,_J 1
F l
i
, ATTACHMENTS 3 AND 4 t
I i
)
i
Long Island Sound Shoreham Nuclear -
Power Station A WADI 4G ROANOKE RIVE l
.p e AlTING o8 CENTERVILLE Soy OLLOW G e l
e
'4 2 miles 8 p# 05 RIVERHEAD E Riverhead 1 Staging Area Roem 25 i H h
/
s mil.. -
Riverhead
/
- LVERTON MANORVIL E G go es 4g5 i
e SOUTH "
MANOR 4 N
. . So*'* q ,
1 i i $
- o 8 io mp i 2 .n..
3 l
[ LEGEND E '
y Staging Aree Boundary mammannum, EPZ Boundary j Riverhead Staging Area Zone
iDOCUMENT ~
~
. PAGE .
PULLED
~
f ANO^s43o-r .
/
I s
l NO. OF PAGES _
I REASON D PAst utssi ~
cr D ma cewraoc. von own_ ,
/ >____
D sann ccenioutsuooN _
~
meAsttooLAnsttonu 7 macewraoat con own_
D uwaonmeant cnonoWO
--__...---_-_..-_--.-.-ac==~~------**:
- f ATTACHMENT 5 e
Y
,: l n
>88> O Rz8 u a ld e
_ A r
s 1e F
g n
ig t
a S ,
d a .
e hr -
e' ,
i v
R s
, i e
~ t i
l
- i
, c a
- . F
, e d
I O R
WObc, Z
P E
L E
g
- \ n o
d xae r l
I e m
.r A s F A t.
d o . -
x g
n s o
l ig p t
w n
. - x t S
a i h
s e
B r
CO: .
- ji!
e o n o
C l
- t. .,
r e
i t
u O
E c
f f
e , - l a
E v .
.. J .-
e
.. / t r . R P
o ;
c- l
- a
./ -
c n
o
/ ,. '-
- i t
- l
.
- a
,. - z
- . . . i
.,., e 1
- c. n d
I .. -- a
.,, WOf Z
P c.c , t 1
O g
r aO E .
. d l .
a e i.
e i x
r F .
. e.
A"g . , c n" c. ,., .
ig s. .
a .
t S . ,. .. . .
e ,.. .
u g D .
o N h E c u c , G -
t P
a E
L gQ- -
j, I