ML032790353
| ML032790353 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/2003 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Skay D, NRR/DLPM, 415-1322 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ml032790380 | List: |
| References | |
| %dam200610, 2.206 | |
| Download: ML032790353 (35) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Petition Review Board Business Meeting Docket Number: (not applicable)
Location: Rockville, Maryland Date: Tuesday, September 17, 2003 Work Order No.: NRC-1085 Pages 1-24 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + +
4 PETITION REVIEW BOARD 5 BUSINESS MEETING 6 + + + + +
7 TUESDAY, 8 SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 9 + + + + +
10 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 11 + + + + +
12 The meeting came to order at 3:00 p.m. in Room 13 06B2 of One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland, 14 Eric Leeds, Chairman, presiding.
15 Present:
16 Eric Leeds, PRB Chairman 17 Mel Field, Petition Manager 18 Herb Berkow, NRR 19 Antonio Ferndanez, Esq., OGC 20 Jon Hopkins, Project Manager 21 Christine Lipa, Region 3 22 Monte Phyllis, Region 3 23 William Ruland, Division of Licensing Project 24 Management 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
2 1 Also Present:
2 Kevin Astroski, First Energy 3 Paul Gunter, Nuclear Information and Resource Service 4 Dave Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists 5 Jim Riccio, Greenpeace 6 Angela Thornbill, Esq., Representing First Energy 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
3 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 Open Statement, Eric Leeds, Chairman . . . . . . 4 3 Statement of Jim Riccio, Greenpeace . . . . . . . 7 4 Statement of Dave Lochbaum, Union of 5 Concerned Scientists . . . . . . . . . . 13 6 Adjourn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
4 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 3:09 p.m.
3 MR. FIELDS: Lets go ahead and begin. My 4 name is Mel Fields. Ive been assigned to be the 5 Petition Manager for this particular request by 6 Greenpeace on behalf of UCS and also the NIRS. Were 7 transcribing the meeting, as you can tell and it would 8 help if anybody is making a statement to first 9 introduce themselves, just give Eric a hand, make sure 10 that hes able to connect the statement with the right 11 person.
12 The transcript will be a supplement to the 13 petition and we will note that in our process.
14 And with that I will turn it over to the 15 Chairman of the PRB who is Eric Leeds.
16 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Thank you, Mel. Perhaps 17 we should turn off our cells phones.
18 MS. LIPA: This is Christine Lipa from 19 Division 3. We can barely hear you. If you could 20 find a microphone and move a little bit closer, wed 21 appreciate it, thank you.
22 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Well try to speak up.
23 Again, my name is Eric Leeds. Im the Petition 24 Chairman for this petition. My normal job is Im the 25 Deputy Director in the Division of Licensing Project NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
5 1 Management in the Office of Nuclear Reactor 2 Regulation. The subject of this meeting is a 2206 3 petition submitted by Greenpeace on behalf of the 4 Nuclear Information and Resources Service and the 5 Union of Concerned Scientists.
6 Collectively, well refer to you all as 7 the Petitioners and the petition was submitted on 8 August 25, 2003.
9 The purpose of this meeting is to allow 10 the Petitioners to address the Petition Review Board.
11 This is an opportunity for the Petitioners to provide 12 additional explanations or support for their petition.
13 This is also an opportunity for the staff and licensee 14 to ask any clarifying questions.
15 The purpose of this meeting is not to 16 debate the merits of the petition nor whether we agree 17 or disagree with the contents of the petition.
18 The Petitioners have requested that the 19 NRC take enforcement actions against First Energy 20 Nuclear Operating Company, the licensee for Davis-21 Besse Nuclear Power Station in Oak Harbor, Ohio and 22 the Petitioners also requested that the NRC suspend 23 the Davis-Besse license and preclude plant restart 24 until certain conditions have been met.
25 With that as an introduction, Id like to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
6 1 get into the heart of the meeting and seek to 2 understand your petition fully and hear any clarifying 3 information you have for us.
4 We should introduce ourselves. If we can, 5 Herb?
6 MR. BERKOW: Herb Berko, NRR.
7 MR. FERNANDEZ: Antonio Fernandez, OTC.
8 MR. GUNTER: Paul Gunter, Nuclear 9 Information and Resource Service.
10 MR. RICCIO: Jim Riccio, Greenpeace.
11 MR. LOCHBAUM: David Lochbaum, Union of 12 Concerned Scientists.
13 MR. RULAND: Bill Ruland, NRC, Division of 14 Licensing Project Management and Im also the Vice 15 Chairman of the Davis-Besse 0350 Panel.
16 MR. HOPKINS: John Hopkins, NRC Project 17 Manager assigned to Davis-Besse.
18 MR. NELSON: Dave Nelson, NRC Office of 19 Enforcement.
20 MS. SKAY: Donna Skay, NRR.
21 MS. RALLEIGH: Kim Ralleigh, License 22 Information Service.
23 MR. HUSTON: Roger Huston, Licensing 24 Support Services.
25 MR. GOLDBERG: Jack Goldberg, NRC OGC.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
7 1 MR. HORNER: Dan Horner, McGraw-Hill 2 Nuclear Publications.
3 MR. BENNEY: Brian Benney, NRR.
4 MR. BOOTHE: Don Boothe, NRC.
5 MS. BUPP: Molly, OGC.
6 MR. FIELDS: And from Region 2, we have?
7 MS. LIPA: Christine Lipa.
8 MR. FIELDS: And from the Davis-Besse 9 licensee?
10 MR. ASTROSKI: Kevin Astroski.
11 MS. THORNHILL: Angela Thornhill with 12 Morgan & Wood.
13 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Anyway, why dont we get 14 started.
15 MR. RICCIO: The petition is relatively 16 straight-forward. Were asking for an enforcement 17 action taken against First Energy for failure to 18 comply with the requirements of the 50.54(f) Letter 19 from 1997.
20 There have been repeated instances and 21 NRCs own inspection reports which have identified as 22 many as one thousand deficiencies in the design 23 licensing basis of Davis-Besse. That inspection 24 report was the premise for denying Congressman 25 Kusinichs petition despite the fact that the NRC does NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
8 1 not have, at least at this point the information in 2 hand which would basically provide backup for that 3 finding.
4 When we realized that we filed this other 5 petition in order to address those concerns and 6 address the fact that First Energy has repeatedly 7 missed opportunities to bring themselves back into 8 compliance with their design licensing basis. Were 9 asking that the NRC fine First Energy. Were also 10 asking them for the numerous licensee event reports 11 that theyve filed identifying design based 12 deficiencies dating back to the date of licensure that 13 they be held accountable for those failures. And in 14 that process you fine them based upon the days that 15 theyve been out of compliance.
16 We are still seeking information from the 17 Agency. I have a Freedom of Information Act request 18 thats in to the NRC on this topic and Ive only 19 gotten two cursory responses.
20 Additionally, Ive spoken with both Jack 21 Grobe and -- Im sorry, Im forgetting the gentlemans 22 name. Its Darryl from Sam Collins office.
23 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Darryl Roberts.
24 MR. RICCIO: Yes, seeking the information 25 to back up what was in your inspection reports. They NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
9 1 have been unable to provide us with that information.
2 Im sure its now entangled with the FOIA.
3 Our other concerns, basically revolve 4 around the fact that absent compliance with the design 5 licensing basis, it is impossible for this Agency to 6 determine whether or not the operation of that reactor 7 poses an undue threat to the public health and safety.
8 We are still seeking -- there were four 9 bullet points that came out of a meeting at Davis-10 Besse that talked about how they -- first of all, they 11 were supposedly going to establish a time line for 12 identifying those deficiencies as a thousand design 13 based deficiencies; identify why their previous effort 14 to correct those problems have been unsuccessful; 15 confirm that the previous ones were adequate; and 16 again evaluate why the design basis clarification 17 program had failed to resolve those issues previously.
18 Again, Ive not received any of that information.
19 Again, that was the premise for denying 20 Mr. Kucinichs petition, your system health reviews.
21 And so our concern is that again repeatedly, the NRC 22 has missed opportunities to enforce other requirements 23 about the design basis at First Energy dating back 24 from the 1985 event that they had. They were supposed 25 to go back in and check the design basis. Obviously, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
10 1 didnt cover it.
2 Again, after 1997, after the wake of the 3 Millstone debacle, they went back in and the thing 4 thats truly of concern is that the very system that 5 they inspected during the 1997 time frame is the one 6 thats causing them such a headache now which is the 7 high pressure injection.
8 And I fail to see how two different 9 inspections can reach completely opposite conclusions 10 on the operability of that system. I would guess that 11 the inoperability determination that was the last one 12 that the NRC has made is probably the correct one.
13 Im at a loss as to understanding how the 14 NRC could have missed it the first time or actually 15 how a licensee could have missed and how NRC could 16 have basically approved it.
17 MR. FIELDS: A couple of times you 18 mentioned a thousand deficiencies.
19 MR. RICCIO: Right, that comes from the 20 NRCs own inspection report.
21 MR. FIELDS: And the inspection reports 22 says at the close of the inspection, 200 had not been 23 corrected.
24 MR. RICCIO: Right.
25 MR. FIELDS: So are you concerned about NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
11 1 the thousand or are you concerned about the 200?
2 MR. RICCIO: Given the fact that NRC had 3 previously determined that the high pressure injection 4 was sound and that it turns out not to be the case, 5 were concerned about how all one thousand were 6 dispositioned.
7 And given the fact that were finding that 8 the ones that purportedly have been repaired have not 9 been repaired, thats what gives us concern that 10 perhaps the resolution of the 800 other items was 11 equally as weak.
12 MR. RULAND: You referred to a meeting, I 13 thought you had referred to a meeting that maybe this 14 inspection report would turn to. Do you remember when 15 that meeting occurred? Or did I miss something?
16 MR. RICCIO: Im sorry, where --
17 MR. RULAND: It was just when you were 18 going over, talking about this inspection report, it 19 sounded like you were referring to a meeting.
20 MR. RICCIO: It wasnt a meeting. I had 21 a discussion with -- once I stumbled across this by 22 comparing different inspection reports, I had 23 conversations with Region 3 and with Headquarters, 24 seeking answers and when I couldnt get answers, 25 thats when I filed the FOIA. When I didnt get the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
12 1 FOIA information, thats when I filed the petition.
2 MR. RULAND: Okay, I understand.
3 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: But the questions that 4 you had asked Region 3 and of Headquarters, those are 5 the same questions that youre asking here in the 6 petition?
7 MR. RICCIO: When I couldnt get the 8 answers from the Region 3 and from Headquarters, 9 thats what actually made me decide to file this 10 petition because if they didnt have the -- actually, 11 I discussed this with Christine, if she remembers. I 12 found it really problematic that the NRC had denied 13 the Congressmans petition and actually having the 14 documentation in hand that was the basis for that 15 denial.
16 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Right, and that certainly 17 is documented here in your petition.
18 MR. RICCIO: Additionally, we had asked --
19 in those conversations I was looking for -- and the 20 meeting youre referring to was the meeting that NRC 21 held out at Oak Harbor and thats where I pulled the 22 information about the degraded, but operable. Thats 23 one of the tag lines on the -- apparently, the NRC had 24 asked First Energy how many systems they were having 25 degraded, but operable condition at restart and they NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
13 1 were supposed to get back with Christine on that and 2 at least my last phone conversation with Christine, 3 they had failed to.
4 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: And that was your number 5 5 here, suspend the license and prohibit restart.
6 MR. RICCIO: Yes.
7 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Of Davis-Besse with any 8 systems in a degraded, but operable condition.
9 MR. RICCIO: Yes, and our perspective on 10 that is after being down for this extended period of 11 time, I see no reason why the NRC should allow this 12 reactor to start with any systems that are degraded.
13 MR. LOCKBAUM: The only thing I would add 14 to what Jim said is our concern about the enforcement 15 action for the incomplete or inaccurate response to 16 the 5054 F letter is that NRC needs to send a message 17 to the industry that the responses to 5054 F letters 18 and the maintenance of design base adequacies is 19 important. If the licensee doesnt do a better job, 20 either by intent or by incompetence, whatever the 21 reason for it, NRC shouldnt treat that with 22 ambivalence. The NRC needs to send a message that 23 thats unacceptable.
24 Its not simply a matter of collecting 25 money because you dont get it, we dont get it, the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
14 1 Treasury gets it. Were not concerned about that, but 2 in license renewal space, 10 CFR part 54, the NRC 3 changed its regulations on license renewal from the 4 licensees showing that the current licensing basis, or 5 could demonstrate that the current licensing basis is 6 met to acknowledge that the presumption going into 7 license renewal that plants meet the current licensing 8 basis. If the licensees know that they can send in a 9 bogus answer or dont have to do a very good job to 10 ensure that its a good answer, that assumption, that 11 presumption for license renewal space is very suspect.
12 Dont be surprised if you dont see that raised again 13 in license renewal space at this plant and elsewhere.
14 We havent seen the NRC either discipline 15 or elsewhere when there are signs that design basis of 16 those 5054 F responses were inadequate doing much 17 other than say just fix a few things that youve been 18 caught on. That doesnt seem to be doing very good.
19 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: To make sure I 20 understand, let me repeat back to you and its 21 interesting that you tie it to part 54 because it does 22 assume, part 54 does assume that the licensing basis 23 is met.
24 MR. LOCKBAUM: It didnt use to. It was 25 revised.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
15 1 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Right, it was revised.
2 I remember when that happened. And the issue here is 3 and I think the words that you used were sending a 4 message to the industry that the industry needs to 5 understand that they have to meet their design basis 6 and meet the requirements of the 5054 letter that we 7 sent on design basis. And that anything else is not 8 acceptable.
9 MR. LOCKBAUM: Absent that, the 10 presumption in 10 CFR 54 is the NRC doesnt have much 11 grounds to do that. Its when you send out the 5054 12 F and you do other inspections and the licensees know 13 they can take it seriously or not take it seriously 14 with no difference, no impunity, then --
15 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Its undermining part 54.
16 MR. LOCKBAUM: Exactly.
17 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Thats not the way we 18 want the industry to operate.
19 MR. LOCKBAUM: Or even throughout the part 20 54 --
21 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Right, even without part 22 54. We understand.
23 MR. RULAND: You referred to it as the 24 part 52 here. Is it 52 or 54? Does anybody remember?
25 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: No, part 54 is license NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
16 1 renewal.
2 MR. RULAND: Okay, so thats a correction 3 to the letter.
4 MR. FIELDS: You itemize five specific 5 requests.
6 MR. RICCIO: Correct.
7 MR. FIELDS: And I pretty much understand 8 the basis for at least four of them. The fourth one 9 you say suspend the license and prohibit restart until 10 First Energy has updated the PRA to reflect the flaws 11 in its design and licensing basis.
12 I got the impression that you want them to 13 correct the flaws in their design basis before the 14 restart, but now youre saying dont let them restart 15 until they have a PRA that reflects the flaws. Whats 16 the tie there? I dont understand.
17 MR. LOCKBAUM: Today, the PRA reflect 18 operator errors, equipment failures and other things 19 that happen. The PRA at Davis-Besse doesnt reflect 20 design errors, configuration management errors of the 21 kind that are typified by the list of LARs that were 22 cited in the petition.
23 Its unrealistic to assume that all of 24 those have been identified. There are no other design 25 errors existing at that plant. The PRA should reflect NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
17 1 that fact.
2 MR. FIELDS: They can reflect the ones 3 that they found, but how could they -- if youre 4 saying there are ones they havent found, how could 5 they be reflected in the PRA.
6 MR. LOCKBAUM: Same way they handle 7 operator errors and equipment failures. You dont 8 assume that a valve failure will only affect valves in 9 that system any more. You look at whats the rate of 10 equipment failures. Whats the rate of coolant 11 performance problems and you apply that in your PRAs.
12 If you look at design errors, whats the 13 duration and frequency of having design errors that 14 compromise equipment operability. You then apply that 15 in your PRAs. Its not going to be a huge number, 16 hopefully, but its not zero either as it is now.
17 The PRA should reflect the reality that 18 theyre reporting.
19 MR. FIELDS: So if the flaws in the design 20 and licensing basis are indeed corrected, you still 21 would like to see those flaws reflected in their PRA?
22 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: No --
23 MR. FIELDS: Yes, thats what hes saying.
24 Thats the part I was a little confused about.
25 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Then Im sorry, Im NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
18 1 confused.
2 MR. LOCKBAUM: If you look today, if an 3 operator makes an error or equipment breaks at a 4 plant, you still have to fix that. You dont get to 5 say well, my PRA covers it so no big deal. So the 6 corrective action program is required under that 10 7 CFR part -- appendix B requires those things to be 8 fixed. Design are the same way. If they happen, you 9 have to fix the design error that youve identified, 10 but the PRA should reflect that there can be other 11 ones out there.
12 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: There can be other ones, 13 maybe not specifically the ones that theyve 14 identified, corrected, those are fixed. But what I 15 heard you say was that there should be some rate of 16 design errors assumed in the PRA, just like you would 17 for operator error. Just like you would for an 18 equipment failure. Assume that theres a slightly 19 different --
20 MR. RICCIO: Its slightly different than 21 the way we would have worded it.
22 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: So how do you want that 23 one identified? Theres a request to have a PRA and 24 probably not just a Davis-Besse PRA, but PRAs to have 25 in it a component that would reflect the design NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
19 1 errors. Or do you want this specific request and then 2 the question is well, what is to be used for? Is it 3 a historical look? For this particular PRA to have 4 the flaws, the purpose of that PRA would be --
5 MR. LOCKBAUM: Well, first of all, what 6 were asking for is that the PRA be reflected, be 7 revised to reflect the fact that design and licensing 8 flaws exist in the past and are likely to exist in the 9 future that havent yet been identified and corrected.
10 So theres still some uncorrected design errors at the 11 plant. The PRAs need to reflect that reality as they 12 do the reality of operator error and equipment 13 failures.
14 The reason its important going forward is 15 that the PRAs continue to be used to justify NOEDs, 16 STBs, significance and a lot of other risk informed 17 decisions, regulatory decisions that this Agency 18 makes.
19 If the PRAs are flawed due to any reason, 20 then the value of those regulatory decisions is 21 impaired. So we want to upgrade the value of those 22 regulatory decisions by improving the quality of the 23 PRA or removing some of the poor quality of the PRA, 24 however you want to characterize it.
25 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Interesting. All right, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
20 1 thank you.
2 MR. LOCKBAUM: Is that rewording --
3 MR. RICCIO: Its a little bit of 4 rewording, but it works.
5 MR. RICCIO: I appreciate you asking the 6 question because we thought it was clear, but in 7 hindsight we see that it didnt convey what we really 8 wanted, so I appreciate it.
9 MR. RULAND: Do you know of any example 10 where something like this is attempted, either in the 11 nuclear industry or elsewhere?
12 MR. RICCIO: No, weve been kind of 13 harping on the fact that the industry needs to redo 14 their PRAs for quite some time. I dont -- we dont 15 know that its been done yet and this is why we raised 16 it, routinely raised it.
17 MR. RULAND: And this is really kind of a 18 derivative of that. Its a piece of the PRA quality.
19 Its not the total PRA quality question, right, its 20 just a piece of it, right?
21 MR. LOCKBAUM: Thats correct.
22 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Thank you. Other things 23 we should know about?
24 MR. RICCIO: Thats basically it. Like I 25 said I wish I had more information for you to add to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
21 1 this, but my FOIA request has not been thoroughly --
2 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Responded to.
3 MR. RICCIO: Responded to and I suspect 4 that Ill be having more stuff come in.
5 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Okay.
6 MR. BERKO: When your FOIA request is 7 responded to, do you anticipate submitting a 8 supplement?
9 MR. RICCIO: In the conversation we had 10 yesterday, I said I want to at least hold that off.
11 It may be a possibility, given what Ive seen so far.
12 MR. FIELDS: Our process allows for it, of 13 course.
14 MR. RICCIO: Yes.
15 MR. FIELDS: A couple of process kind of 16 questions --
17 MR. RULAND: Could I ask a question before 18 you ask those. I think you said something about, Jim, 19 a cursory response to your FOIA?
20 MR. RICCIO: Its a partial response.
21 MR. RULAND: Okay. Its not that you have 22 a problem with the way it was responded to --
23 MR. RICCIO: Oh no, no, no. FOIA branch 24 is one of the best parts of the Agency.
25 MR. RULAND: Ill make sure to pass that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
22 1 along. Weve got it on the record.
2 MR. RICCIO: Theyve been wonderful.
3 Its just that Ive only gotten a partial response.
4 MR. RULAND: I just wanted to -- thanks.
5 MR. FIELDS: As we send out 6 communications, providing you the status, it can be --
7 PRB decides to treat this as a 2.2 petition, we like 8 to maintain routine communications. Shall I treat you 9 as a point of contact and you would disseminate the 10 information to the other two interested parties or do 11 you want me to contact all three?
12 MR. RICCIO: Why dont we, just because 13 Im going to be out of town quite often in the next 14 couple of months, so why dont we put all three, no 15 offense guys.
16 MR. FIELDS: Well start with that and it 17 becomes cumbersome, you guys can adjust it. Hows 18 that?
19 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Does anyone else have any 20 questions?
21 MR. RULAND: How about the licensee? Does 22 the licensee have any questions?
23 MR. ASTROSKI: No questions or comments.
24 MR. RULAND: Region 3?
25 MS. LIPA: Nothing here, thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
23 1 MR. RICCIO: Christine, have you gotten a 2 response yet from First Energy.
3 MS. LIPA: Let me tell you what I know, 4 Jim. You had asked about the list to prevent degrade 5 had been put on hold?
6 MR. RICCIO: Right.
7 MS. LIPA: I didnt have it in hand, but 8 the senior resident has been provided that list.
9 Subsequently, I do have a list and the changes as they 10 work things off the list. So thats the current 11 status of that.
12 Does that answer your question?
13 MR. RICCIO: I suppose. Is NRC going to 14 allow them to restart in a degraded condition?
15 MS. LIPA: Thats going to be determined.
16 MR. RICCIO: I tried.
17 MR. FIELDS: The PRB will meet on the PRA, 18 but -- and first paper trail is the acknowledgement 19 letter and the goal is within 5 weeks of the date of 20 the petition and we hope to meet that or be close to 21 it.
22 MR. RULAND: Whens that date?
23 MR. FIELDS: early October.
24 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Any other questions, 25 comments, requests?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
24 1 MR. BERKO: So I guess we can establish 2 that all three want to be on the service?
3 MR. FIELDS: Communications on the 4 petition itself, but we usually add Petitioners and of 5 course, were assuming its Petitioners to the 6 distribution for all communications we have with the 7 licensee.
8 MR. RICCIO: Daves already on it. I 9 would like to added to that list. All three.
10 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: All right, if you have 11 nothing further. I think the business portion of the 12 meeting has been concluded.
13 Anything else for the business portion?
14 Thank you, gentlemen, thank you very much for coming.
15 MR. HOPKINS: Weve concluded the business 16 portion of the meeting, so were going to hang up now.
17 Okay?
18 CHAIRMAN LEEDS: Were off the record.
19 (Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the meeting was 20 concluded.)
21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433