ML043010438

New England Coalition'S Errata to Its Reply to NRC Staff and Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Answers to New England Coalition'S Request for a Hearing

ML043010438
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	10/19/2004
From:	Shadis R New England Coalition
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Byrdsong A T
References
50-271-OLA, ASLBP 04-832-02-OLA, RAS 8689
Download: ML043010438 (8)

Text

fZhiS g(09q October 19, 2004 DOCKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USNRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION October 19, 2004 (2:27PM)

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND In the Matter of ) ADJUDICATIONS STAFF

)

ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE,) Docket No. 50-271-OLA LLC and ENTERGY NUCLEAR)

OPERATIONS, INC. ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA

)

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)

NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S ERRATA TO ITS REPLY TO NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE ANSWERS TO NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S REQUEST FOR A HEARING New England Coalition hereby submits errata to its Reply to NRC Staff and Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee answers to New England coalition's request for a hearing. New England Coalition's Reply is dated October 11, 2004.

Corrections are as follows:

Page Line Correction 17 20 (last line) Insert footnote [1] after, The individual requirements... .are enumerated and titled for (purposes of discussion) below. Foonote

[1] see also, Declaration of Paul Bland, NEC Reply Exhibit 'A' attached, replying to criticism of Contentions 6 and 7.

Page Line Correction 40 10 Insert text note (see Paul Blanch, Exhibit 'A' attached) after, "This must not be permitted as it deprives the public of protections afforded by defense-in-depth."

Pag~e Line Correction 42 6 Insert text note (see Paul Blanch, Exhibit 'A' attached) after,

" Without accurate and complete records, no meaningful review of the proposed uprate in its entirety can take place."

_7'rnP1e- S6ta 03$7 5KY -oG

Resctfully submitted, Raymond Shadis Pro Se Representative New England Coalition Post Office Box 98 Edgecomb, Maine 04556 207-882-7801 Dated at Edgecomb, Maine This I th day of October 2004

October 19, 2004 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE) Docket No. 50-271-OLA LLC and ENTERGY NUCLEAR )

OPERATIONS, INC. ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA

)

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S ERRATA TO ITS REPLY TO NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE ANSWERS TO NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S REQUEST FOR A HEARING in the captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class; or as indicated by an asterisk (*), by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system; and by e-mail as indicated by a double asterisk (**), this I9'h day of October, 2004.

Alex S. Karlin, Chair** Dr. Anthony J. Baratta**

Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop T-3F23 Mail Stop T-3F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ask2(nrc.gov E-mail: ajb5(nrc.gov Lester S. Rubenstein** Office of the Secretary**

Administrative Judge ATTN: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop: 0-16CI Mail Stop T-3F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: HEARINGDOCKET(nrc.gov E-mail: lesrrrmmsn.com Office of Commission Appellate* John M. Fulton, Esq.

Adjudication Assistant General Counsel Mail Stop: 0-16CI Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601

Washington, DC 20555-0001 Jay E. Silberg, Esq.** Sarah Hofmann, Esq.**

Matias Travieso-Diaz, Esq. Special Counsel Shaw Pittman, LLP Department of Public Service 2300 N St., NW 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Washington, DC 20037-1128 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 E-mail: jay.silberg~shawpittman.com E-mail: sarah.hofmannestate.vt.us matias.travieso-diazgshawpittman.com Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.** Brooke Poole, Esq.**

National Legal Scholars Law Firm Robert Weisman, Esq.

84 East Thetford Rd. Marisa Higgins, Esq.

Lyme, NH 03768 Office of the General Counsel E-mail: aroismangvalley.net Mail Stop 0-15 D21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 bdpgnrc.gov, rmw~nrc.gov, mch5(nrc.gov Respectfully submitted, Raymond Shadis Pro Se Representative New England Coalition

D. New England Coalition Has Organizational Standing In This Matter.

All of the parties have conceded New England Coalition's representational and organizational standing to proceed as a party in this matter. New England Coalition rests on the declarations and argument provided in support of its standing in its initial submission.

11. New England Coalition's Contentions Are Admissible Contrary to the Applicant's assertions, New England Coalition's contentions meet all requirements for contentions as set forth in the Commission's Notice Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing, as issued June 25, 2004 (hereinafter "Notice of Opportunity for a Hearing". The foregoing statement is important to determining acceptance of New England Coalition's contentions because in those instances where the Applicant and NRC Staff have failed to take exception or claim that any of New England Coalition's contentions fail to meet any of the individual requirements listed in the Notice of Opportunity for a Hearing, then, insofar as that individual requirement is concerned, the contention is uncontested and must stand.'

T7he individual requirements, as contained in the Notice of Opportunity for a Hearing are enumerated and titled (for purposes of discussion) below:

I See also Dcclaration of Paul Blanch, NEC Reply Exhibit 'A' attached, replying to criticism of Contentions 6 and 7.

17

Relief - Applicant and NRC Staff - The answering parties are silent as to the question of relief. New England Coalition has identified remedies and a claim for relief at page 5 of its Request for a Hearing.

Contention Six - The proposed license amendment fails to preserve defense-in-depth. By placing dependence on maintaining containment pressure to secure Residual Heat Removal and Core Spray Pump suction under accident conditions, Entergy ignores single failure criteria and violates basic tenets of reactor safety.

This must not be permitted as it deprives the public of protections afforded by defense-in-depth, (see Paul Blanch Declaration, Exhibit 'A' attached).

Basis for Contention 6 New England Coalition relies upon the Declaration of Paul M. Blanch, under Failure to Preserve Defense in Depth [EXHIBIT E] and further testimony to be provided at hearing based upon his professional judgments and study and review of the LTP documents and related materials.

Issue of Law or Fact Contrary to the assertions of the Applicant and NRC Staff, New England Coalition raises an issue of fact, also raises by the State of Vermont in it's Petition for Leave to Intervene in this proceeding. Mr. Blanch is a thirty-five year veteran of the nuclear industry, who has spent much of the last year studying this issue with a particular focus on Vermnont Yankee.

40

Contention Seven - Entergy has failed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.71 (E), Maintenance of Records and Making of Reports. Observance of the rule is essential to provide reviewers with accurate information about plant status.

Records provide a measure upon which future activity can be predicated while maintaining safety. Without accurate and complete records, no meaningful review of the proposed uprate in its entirety can take place. (see Paul Blanch Declaration, Exhibit 'A' attached).

Issue of Law or Fact Contrary to the assertions of the Applicant and NRC Staff, New England Coalition raises an issue of fact and law. Mr. Blanch is a thirty-five year veteran of the nuclear industry, who has spent much of the last year studying this issue with a particular focus on Vermont Yankee.

Bases Mr. Blanch cites numerous documents and relies as well on his extensive training and experience to form a basis for his assertion regarding the loss of single-failure criteria.

Sources and Documents - As stated above Mr. Blanch references numerous documents, both those of the Applicant and those of NRC, but in particular points to the failure to orderly and timely update and maintain such vital plant documentation as the Final Safety Analysis Report.

42

October 19, 2004 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensin2 Board In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-271 ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT )

YANKEE, LLC and ENTERGY ) ASLB No. 04-832-02-OLA NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. )

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) )

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Dear Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.

Enclosed, Please find for filing in the above captioned matter an original and two copies of NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S ERRATA TO ITS REPLY TO NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE ANSWERS TO NEW ENGLAND COALITION'S REQUEST FOR A HEARING Thank you for your kind attention.

Sincerelv_

Raymond Shadis New England Coalition Post Office Box 98, Edgecomb, Maine 04556 207-882-7801 shadisgprexar.com