ML20198B973

Forwards FEMA to NRC Re Proposed Offsite Emergency Response Plan Exercise at Facility.Related Correspondence

ML20198B973
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	11/05/1985
From:	Bordenick B NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Edles G, Rosenthal A, Wilber H NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
CON-#485-075, CON-#485-75 OL-3, NUDOCS 8511070385
Download: ML20198B973 (3)

Text

' i

@ [ca;g['o,,

WWm -

g' y p UfJITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

QN~ Q, T  ; M WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 M .<

'v YO L.gg nc. ,

e\ ***** /

~~

L' kl November 5,1985 lL NOV-6 E35Mj1

& ccc c :s k EE5}fu ex .

u. ~ t - ..g

.Q /&

Q3

.e d'7'/%

Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman Howard A. Wilber Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Gary J. Edles, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322-0L-3 (Emergency Planning)

Dear Appeal Board Members:

I am enclosing for your information a copy of a letter dated October 29, 1985, from FEMA (Samuel W. Speck) to the NRC (William J. Dircks) concerning a proposed offsite emergency response plan exercise at Shoreham.

Any additional correspondence relating to this subject will also be forwarded to you for your information.

Sincerely, f & t% WMtb Bernard M. Bordenick Counsel for NRC Staff cc: w/ enclosure Donald P. Irwin, Esq.

Eugene R. Kelley, Esq.

Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.

8511070385 PDR 851105 0 ADOCK 05000322 PDR

~

\ SC7

~ OCT.30 885 69:51 FEr% PEGION II IEW YOR< 1 P.02 m, . OCT.29 'e5 21:25 rEr% wyiH FED CTR 3 P.03 9 -

Federal Emergency Management Agency

@i Mr. Willian J. Dirdts Washington, D.C. 2002 October 29, 1985 executive Director for operations U.S. Nucimer Mogulatory.consnission '

i tisahington, D.C. 20555:

Dear Mr. Dirchas This is in response to a menorandsn dated June 20, 1985, fram Edward L. Jordan to Ri&ard E Erlan in dich FIMA was requested to pro-osed with the con %ct of 'as fall an exercise......as is feasible to test offsita preparedness capabilities at the shocehas Nucisar Power Plant."

In rey October 8,1985 letter,which tranmitted the review of revision 5 4

of the LIICO local Emergency limsponse Organiention (1510) plan, I indicated we wre analysing the teeults of the plan review in the contant d the Septaber 17, 1985 letter from Chairman Palladino to Congressman Markey, and the variaas legal p.-wings related to Shorwhms in order to respond to the June 20 manerandurn within several weeks. Our analysis includes consideration of the Atcznic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board escision af october 18, 198".

The deticiencies identified in ny letter d October 8 do not preclude the conduct of an exercise of the LERO plan. However, the reluctance of ocunty and State dficials to participate in such an exercise and the related legal authority issues would place special partanters on the condact of e IJmo exercies. .

No have no indication at this time that offsite jurisdictions are willing to dirwetly participate in an enorciais in the short term. Thus, ag amercise will be dramatically different than is typical at other sites in the State'of New York. Any exercise withcut participation by State and loosi goverments wuld not allcw us mafficient demonstration to reach a finding of reasonable assurance. 'this conclusion is based on the current legal decision with roepeat to utility authority to perfots civil energency fmetions. However, that does not preclude the conduct of an exercise that would provide an indication to the Maclear Regalator as to utility onsite and offsita emergency onpabilities. y Coundesion Its believe such (NIC) e a report would have wlue in dooisions to contirue the licensing process or pessibly provide a basis on e ich the NRC could make predictive findime. - (bvicusly, the wlue of I process is a dotarnination sich ca.such n onlyan beexercise sede by in thethe IOC. licensing

, Given the nature of your June 20 request and asnsideration of a practical structure for an eneroise, we feel that, dile there are a nuter of variations possible, the basic gtions fbr anarcising in the near tenu are limited to tuoi .

Cotton 1 - This gtion would require that we est aside all Yunctions and exercise objectives related to issues of authority and State and local participation. 'Ihus, only the functions outlined for Litro would be exercised. Such

OCT.30 'E5 09:52 FD1A FIGIOi II FOJ YORK g P.03

^*

• SCT.29 'E5 2::26 FDT. W,SH FED CTR 3 P.h i

an suercise is possible but its usefulness would seen very limited. An exercise of this type would not address questions su& as those raised on pages 35 throu#139 of the October 18 decision of the Atmic Safety and Licensing Appsal Board and would be redundant to actions alro.# tahan by MRC.

Cotten 2 - 21s cetion would include all fmetions and noensi exercise objectivu. 21s wtion would exercise Revision 5 of the LEle plan. Exercise controllers uld simlete the roles of key 8 tate or local officials inable or urarilling to participate. It would be desirable that State and local government personnel actually play. newever, such a siana-lation sedanism would at least test the utility's ability to respond to ad hoc participation on the part of Stata and local governments.  :

'the ultimate purpose of an exercise is to supporh a finding by FEMA for use by the KaC in their licensing process. As we sentioned above, neither of these cptiors wmid allcat a finding by FINA on Cf feite preparednegg.

However, we recognize that Shoreham is in no way tarpical and that in the past in exercising its adjudicatory gowers the Comission and the varima Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards have rea&ed predictive findings.

Pursuant to your aane 20 request, we are initiating the groessa necessar,( l to eenduct an exerstaa of either eption. He are prepared to con tet suas  !

an exercise in wWtely 75 days. However, FEMA requires fwther  ;

clarification from NRC as to the scope of the exercise to be conducted.

FEMA will proceed with the initiating steps until Mr 15, at Wtidt I I

time we will need a definitive emeretse seqe from NRC in order to avoid pechibittw costs. If at that time we have roosived no direction frtsa the Nuclear Angulatory Comission we will suspend activities until a decision is nede. Given other dernands, we do feel that ary delay beyond

{ the current window would require an amoreise pestponement of at least 90 days beyond the mid,Tamary time fraus.

Sinancely,

%4 ,

W ,f y - -

(amel W. speek Associata Dirwatar State and Iccal Prograis and Apport I

1

)

-- -, . . - , . . , - - - - - - - . - - - - , - _ . - - - - - . - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -