ML043370403

Limited Appearance Statement of Massachusetts State Representative Stephen Kulik

ML043370403
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	11/15/2004
From:	Kulik S State of MA, House of Representatives
To:	NRC/SECY/RAS
Byrdsong A T
References
50-271-OLA, ASLBP 04-832-02-OLA, RAS 8903
Download: ML043370403 (2)

Text

RAS 8903 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Committees on:

STEPHEN KULIK Ways and Means REPRESENTATIVE Transportation 1ST FRANKLIN DISTRICT STATE HOUSE. ROOM 279 Natural Resources and Agriculture BOSTON. MA 02133-1054 DISTRICT OFFICE:

TEL. (617) 722-2210 330 MONTAGUE CITY ROAD FAX (617) 722-2821 SUITE 102 E-MAIL:

TURNERS FALLS. MA 01376 Rep.StephenKulik@hou.state.ma.us TEL. (413) 772-2727 FAX (413) 773-1821 November 15,2004 DOCKETED The Office of the Secretary, USNRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 November 24,2004 (10:13am)

Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff OFFICE OF SECRETARY hearingdocket@nrc.gov, RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATrONS STAFF RE: Entergy-VT Yankee Uprate Docket No. 50-271-0LA

Dear NRC Rulemakings & Adjudication Staff:

I am writing to express my deep concern about Entergy's request to increase power at the VT Yankee nuclear reactor. I am aware that similar uprates at other reactors of this type have caused costly shutdowns due to potentially dangerous steam dryer cracking and valve jamming. The accidental release of increased radioactive steam due to valves jamming open, should the structural integrity of the steam dryers fail, increases health risks to children in our schools and all our townspeople. The Entergy request to run the ENVY reactor at containment overpressure, a potentially dangerous, and operatioqally confusing condition, merits much greater examination, under full disclosure rights and under oath, to establish the whole truth about its safety implications.

Last Spring, a letter was sent to the VT Public Service Board by the Franklin County, MA legislative delegation asking them to require an independent safety inspection at the Entergy-VT Yankee nuclear power plant and to make their decision regarding a power uprate conditional upon a review of the plant similar to the one conducted at MaineYankee before its closure. Many state and federal officials ITomVermont and Massachusetts joined us in making this request to the NRC and the VT Public Service Board. NRC denied the request. We considered an independent and thorough safety assessment necessary for the full confidence of our constituents in the safe operation of the ENVY reactor at uprated conditions. The engineering assessment released on the NRC website recently does not begin to approach the level of analysis we requested for this aging facility, nor were our concerns about safety allay~d by recent events at the plant including fires (during which public notification procedures were NOT followed,

~ Prinl&d on Recycled Paper

apparent loss offuel rod segments, and failure of two out of nine operator teams to pass a January2004emergencyshutdownsimulationunder normal(as opposedto uprated)conditions, as reported on the ADAMS database before it was closed to public scrutiny.

It is my opinion that the EPU requested by Entergy is a significant change in the reactor license that should trigger an extensive and comprehensive safety inspection and evaluation. Intervenors representing the public interest must be allowed to contend Entergy Corporation's claims in a G-type hearing, with full adjudicatory hearing rights, with those giving testimony under oath. Due to NRC rules, timelines, withholding of technical reports, and refusal to conduct a full independent safety assessment, the public is at a great disadvantage in establishing standing and contentions on safety concerns. Therefore, intervenors for the public interest should be afforded every right to examine evidence and cross-examine Entergy testimony under oath, in order to establish as far as possible the whole truth regarding the safety implications of the requested changes in operating conditions and procedures.

I urge you to conduct an open, transparent, and thorough process of evaluating the new conditions involved in the uprate, the impact of the uprate on emissions, accident scenarios, and public safety, and resolution of the question of whether ENVY is even in compliance with its design basis now. I ask that in order to accomplish this, an open, public, G-type hearing be held, to establish a factual information base on which to evaluate the uprate.

I trust that your decision will be in the best interest of the public.

Sincerely,

~~~

STEPHEN KULIK IL4 State Representative cc: Alex S. Karlin, Chairman of the ASLB panel at:

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-3 F23, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 ask2@nrc.gov