ML20205T411

Response Opposing Applicant 860520 Motions for Summary Disposition of South Hampton (Sh) Contentions 1 & 3 & for Partial Disposition of Sh Contention 8.Genuine Issues of Matl Facts Exist.Certificate of Svc & Svc List Encl

ML20205T411
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	06/09/1986
From:	Backus R BACKUS, MEYER & SOLOMON, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20205T415	List: ML20205T411 ML20205T424 ML20205T429 ML20205T444
References
CON-#286-544 OL, NUDOCS 8606130202
Download: ML20205T411 (8)

Text

-~

Filed: June 9, 1986 ,I'Mi t .

U Q'}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ( 'JUN10193F)" G NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONNISSION -

gga .,m y , swic;: q=r j;:

Before the /j "'^( ,

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF Docket Nos. 50-443 OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al 50-444 OL TOWN OF SOUTH HAMPTON'S RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' MOTION FOR SUNNARY DISPOSITION OF SOUTH HAMPTON CONTENTIONS 1 AND 3 AND MOTION FOR PARTI AL SUNNARY DISPOSITION OF SOUTH HAMPTON CONTENTION 8 On May 20, 1986, Applicants moved for summary disposition of South Hampton Contentions 1 and 3 and moved for partial summary disposition of South Hampton 8. The Town of South Hampton opposes these motions for the specific factual reasons cet forth below.

Summary Disposition Standards The Commission's Rules of Practice provide for summary disposition of any matter involved in a 1icensing proceeding "if the filings in the proceeding, depositions, answers to Interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the s tatements of the par t ies and affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that moving party is entitled to a decision as a matter of law." 10 CFR 62.749(d).

t TSo3

~

~

', , . 4 The burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact, however, is upon the moving party, and the record will be viewed in the light most f avorable to the par ty opposing the motion, Cleveland Eleegle Illuminating Co., et al (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2) ALAB-443, 6 NRC 741, 753-54 (1977). The party opposing a motion for summary disposition may not rest upon mere allegations or denials of his answer but must show by setting forth specific facts that there is a genuine issue of fact. 10 CFR 02.749(b).

SAPL disputes the Applicants' so-called undisputed facts, and for the specific f actual reasons set forth below, opposes Applicants' motions for summary disposition of Contentions 5, 7 and 17, and partial summary disposition of Contentions 18 and 25.

I t

I e

s

• * ~

1 j

l Reasons'for_ Denying Summary Disposition ofg South Hampton 1 and 3 s

South Hampton 1 reads: '

The RERP for . S,o u t h Hampton fails to provide " reasonable assurdace" -because, contrary to NUREG-0654 A.3, the plan includes no written agreements referring to the concept of operat ions or signatures offlocal agencies. j South Hampton 3 reads:

The RERP f or South Hampton f ails to provide reasonable assurance because, : cont rary to NUREG-0654 C.4, it contains no letters of agreements from voluntary police officers, voluntary firemen, other emergency workers, school teachers, t ranspor tat ion companies and bus drivers. it also contains no agreements from Midway Excavators and personnel at the Tewksbury Pond Campground.

Applicants oppose South Hampton-1 because Applican'ts assert that no , local agencies have responsibilities u n d e r,. r t h e local plan for South Hampton other than town officials. In so asserting, the Applicants are in effect helping to point to at least one major deficiency in the plans that is ra' cured by the Strome Affidavit; i.e.,-that there are no wr:1'on . ;reement s or signatures either referring to or validating a concept of operations to be foJ1 owed by-town officals.

The Board in its April 29, 1986 Order stated that this contentihn "be" admitted but limited to local agencies which have an emergency response role within the EPZ." South Hamptoh's emergency response will rely upon a volunteer fire depar tment, a volunteer police f orce, a civil defense officer, a road agent, a town clerk,'a road plowing i

contractor, a Board ofiSelectman, a school, a campground and day

~ ^

care prcviders. All of these local agents or agencies must perform or there will not be the requisite reasonable assurance that an adequate radiological emergency' response can be carried out. For these reasons, the Strome Affidavit hardly begins to address the genuine issues of material fact disputed by South flampton 1.

Applicants oppose South Hampton-3 by again referring to the S t rome - Af f idavi t and by claiming that letters of agreement with transportation companies represent the availability of 600 buses.

The RAC review of the February 1986 submission by New Hampshire of Volume 5 of the NHRERP states that letters from certain of the bus companies are missing and that for the eleven letters that are in force, there are several discrepancies between the numbers of vehicles, numbers of drivers available and numbers called for in the State plan for each company.

Applicants claims that no agreement is necessary for Midway Excavators because the Strome Affidavit supports Applicants' assertion that back-up resources are available from the State if Midway does not respond. The RAC review mentioned above comments, "There are no let ters of agreement wi th speci fic towing companies."

It is clearly imprudent not to make advance arrangements that are supported by let ters of agreement. To do otherwise would be to rely upon the State's "back-up resources" as the primary resources. This would be patently bad planning procedure.

_4_

South Hampton would also question Director Strome's qualifications to assert what are and are not adequate provisions I for responding to a radiological e.ne r g e n cy .

For all of these reasons, South Hampton opposes summary !

disposition of its Contentions 1 and 3.

L Genuine Issues of Material Fact Raised By South Hampton 1 and 3.

1) There are no wr i t ten agreements or s ig'..a tures ei ther ref er r ing to or validating a concept of operations to be followed by Town of South Hampton of f'icials or local agencies having an emergency response role in the EPZ.

2) Letters of agreement in Volume 5 of the NHRERP fail to support the availability of adequate transportat ion resources. The RAC Review of the letters of agreement submi t ted in February,19 86 notes discrepancies in letters from bus companies in numbers of vehicles and drivers available and discrepancies with the numbers called for i :. the State plan for each company.

3) The RAC review of the letters of agreement notes that the letter f rom the New Hampshire Towing Association is unsigned and lacks I

any commitment of speci fic numbers of vehicles or drivers. The RAC review notes that there are no letters of agreement with specific towing companies.

i i

l l

l

Reasons for Denying Partial Summary Disposition of South Hampton-8.

The Town o f Sou th Hampton, in answer to Applicants' motion for partial summary disposition of South Hampton-8, incorporates by ref erence the response made by SAPL to Applicants' motion f or partial summary dispos i t ion of SAPL Content ions 18 and 25. Also incorporated by ref erence are Af fidavi t of Freder ick H. Anderson, Jr. and SAPL's statement of material facts concerning the genuine issues still extant as to identification of those with special needs.

Respectfully submitted, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE By Its Attorney June 9, 1986 I W d48 Robert A. Backus <

~'

I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing have been sent to all persons on the at tached service lis t, by firs t class, pos tage prepaid mail and by Federal Express as indicated by an *.

\ \

Robert A. Backusi XLL USf, h[],

l CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND SERVICE LIST Jone Aust.Gn.Cnsl. Helen Hoyt. Chm.

• Thomas Dignan, Esq.*

Fed.ph Flynndgmt.

Emerg, Agcy. Admn. Judge Ropes & Gray 500 C.St. So. West Atomic Safety & Lic Brd. 225 Franklin St.

Washington, DC 20472 USNRC Boston, MA 02110 Washington, DC 20555 Office of Selectmen Dr. Jerry Harbour

• Docketing & Serv. Sec.

• Town of Hampton Falls Admin. Judge Office of the Secretary Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Atomic Safety & Lic Brd. USNRC USNRC Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 emin E. M, Eq.

• Office of Exec. Legl. Dr. Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke

• Jane Doughty Admin Judge SAPL USNRC Atomic Safety & Lic. Brd. 5 Market Street Wahsington, DC 20555 USNRC Portsmouth, NH 03801 Washington,~DC 20555 Phillip Ahrens, Esq. Paul McEachern, Esq. George Dana Bisbee, Esq.

Asst. Atty. General Matthew Brock, Esq. Attorney General's OFF.

State House, Sta. #6 25 Maplewood Ave. State of New Hampshire Augusta, ME 04333 P.O. Box 360 Concord, NH 03301 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Carol Sneider, Esq., Asst.AG Diane Curran, Esq. William S. Lord One Ashburton Place, Harmon, Weiss Board of Selectmen 19th Floor 20001 S Street NW Suite 430 Town Hall-Friend St.

Boston, MA 02108 Washingcon, DC 20009 Amesbury, MA 01913 Richard A. Hampe, Esq.. Maynard Young, G airman Sandra Gauvutis New Hampshire Civil Defense Board of Selectmen Town of Kingston Agency 10 Central Road Box 1154 Hanpe & McNicholas Rye, NH 03870 East Kensington, NH 03827 35 Pleasant St.

. Concord, NI 03301 Edward Thomas

• Mr. Robert Harrison FEMA Pres. & Gief Exec. Officer 442 J.W. McComnck (POCH) PSOO Boston, MA 02109 P.O. Box 330 Manchester, NH 03105 Roberta Pevear State Rep.-Town of Hanpt Falls Drinkwater Road Hanpton Falls, NH 03844 1

L-