Letter Sequence Other |
---|
|
|
MONTHYEARML0513701822005-05-0303 May 2005 G20050360 - Raymond Shadis Ltr. Re 2.206 - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Project stage: Request ML0516100422005-06-15015 June 2005 G20050360 - Raymond Shadis Ltr 2.206 - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0527701302005-10-11011 October 2005 G20050360 - Proposed Director'S Decision - Shadis/Kansler Ltrs. Requesting Comments on Proposed Director'S Decision for Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0527700992005-10-11011 October 2005 G20050360 - Michael Kansler Ltr Re. Requesting Comments on Proposed Director'S Decision for Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0527700552005-10-11011 October 2005 G20050360 - Raymond Shadis Ltr Re. Requesting Comments on Proposed Director'S Decision for Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0535000072005-12-23023 December 2005 G20050360 - Federal Register Notice Final Director'S Decision - Raymond Shadis 2.206 Petition - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0535000052005-12-23023 December 2005 G20050360 - Raymond Shadis Ltr. 2.206 Petition - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other ML0535000122005-12-23023 December 2005 G20050360 - Director'S Decision Raymond Shadis 2.206 Petition - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Project stage: Other 2005-12-23
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:2.206 Director Decision
MONTHYEARML16054A7312016-03-29029 March 2016 OEDO-15-00251 - Final Director'S Decision 2.206 - Ultrasonic Inspection Test or Best Available Flaw Detection Technology for USA Reactor Plants Similar to the Thousands of Cracks Discovered in Belgium Nuclear Power Plants ML16054A6912016-03-29029 March 2016 OEDO-15-00251 - Letter to Petitioner for Final Director'S Decision 2.206 - Ultrasonic Inspection Test or Best Available Flaw Detection Technology for USA Reactor Plants Similar to the Thousands of Cracks Discovered in Belgium Nuclear Power ML15286A2352016-01-20020 January 2016 OEDO-15-00251: Petitioner'S Letter 2.206 - Emergency Ultrasonic Inspection Test or Best Available Flaw Detection Technology for USA Reactor Plants Similar to the Thousands of Cracks Discovered in Belgium Nuclear Power Plants ML15286A2652016-01-20020 January 2016 OEDO-15-00251: Letter to Vermont Yankee 2.206 - Emergency Ultrasonic Inspection Test or Best Available Flaw Detection Technology for USA Reactor Plants Similar to the Thousands of Cracks Discovered in Belgium Nuclear Power Plants ML15286A2722016-01-12012 January 2016 OEDO-15-00251: Proposed Director'S Decision 2.206 - Emergency Ultrasonic Inspection Test or Best Available Flaw Detection Technology for USA Reactor Plants Similar to the Thousands of Cracks Discovered in Belgium Nuclear Power Plants ML15253A5812015-10-27027 October 2015 Regarding NRC Enforcement Proceeding No. 2013-0192 ML15265A0622015-09-18018 September 2015 LTR-15-0470 Charlie Donaldson, Assistant Attorney General, State of New York, Letter Concerns About NRC Enforcement Proceeding No. 2013-0192 Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206, Dockets 50-333, 50-271, and 50-293 ML15162A7632015-08-27027 August 2015 G20130211 - Final Director'S Decision ML15162A6902015-08-27027 August 2015 G20130211 - Transmittal Letter to Petitioner Judson Regarding Final Director'S Decision for James A. FitzPatrick Power Plant, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station and Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ML12215A3142015-04-17017 April 2015 Proposed Director'S Decision - 2.206 Petition Re Boiling Water Reactors with Mark I and Mark II Containment Designs ML15040A1612015-03-27027 March 2015 G20130211 - Proposed Director'S Decision ML14337A2432015-01-15015 January 2015 G20110262 - Final Director'S Decision - Paul Gunter and Kevin Kamps Letter 2.206 - Immediately Suspend the Operating License of General Electric Boiling Water Reactors Mark I Units ML14335A6302015-01-15015 January 2015 G20110262 - Final Response to Paul Gunter and Kevin Kamps Letter 2.206 - Immediately Suspend the Operating License of General Electric Boiling Water Reactors Mark I Units ML13338A6122014-03-26026 March 2014 G20130229 - 2.206 Petition Closure Letter Re Revoke Operating License for General Electric Mark I and Mark II Boiling Water Reactors ML1128705422011-11-0808 November 2011 G20090487/EDATS: OEDO-2009-0517 - FRN: General Notice, Final Director'S Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 to Sherwood Martinelli ML1128705332011-11-0808 November 2011 G20090487/EDATS: OEDO-2009-0517 - Letter to Sherwood Martinelli Entergy Decommissioning Funding ML1122408772011-09-0909 September 2011 G20110043/EDATS: OEDO-2011-0058 - Response Letter to Saporito 2.206 Petition Enclosing the Director'S Decision and Federal Register Notice Regarding Safe Operation of Vermont Yankee ML1122409602011-09-0909 September 2011 G20110043/EDATS: OEDO-2011-0058 - Final Director'S Decision to Saporito'S 2.206 Regarding Safe Operation of Vermont Yankee ML1011006072011-09-0808 September 2011 G20090487/EDATS: OEDO-2009-0517 - Proposed Director'S Decision for Martinelli'S 2.206 Petition - Entergy/Decommissioning Funds CY-92-223, G20110523/LTR-11-0411/EDATS: SECY-2011-0411 - Ltr. from Rep. E.J. Markey to Chairman Jaczko NRC Safety Requirements for Reactors Granted Construction Permits Prior to 19712011-07-14014 July 2011 G20110523/LTR-11-0411/EDATS: SECY-2011-0411 - Ltr. from Rep. E.J. Markey to Chairman Jaczko NRC Safety Requirements for Reactors Granted Construction Permits Prior to 1971 ML1117103982011-07-14014 July 2011 G20110043/EDATS: OEDO-2011-0058 - 2.206 Petition Vermont Yankee Safety Concerns ML1105405582011-03-11011 March 2011 G20100027/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022/G20100074/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087/G20100098/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0145 - Final Director'S Decision NRC-2011-0060, G20100027/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022/G20100074/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087/G20100098/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0145 - Final Director'S Decision2011-03-11011 March 2011 G20100027/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022/G20100074/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087/G20100098/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0145 - Final Director'S Decision ML1033505532011-01-20020 January 2011 G20100027/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022, G20100074/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087, G20100098/LTR-10-0069/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0145: Ltr to Entergy Nuclear Operations in Response to Letters on Tritium Leaks at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ML0810504562008-04-28028 April 2008 G20070597/LTR-07-0568 - Final Director'S Decision Raymond Shadis 2.206 Petition Regarding Unreported Conditions Leading to a Degradation of Public Safety Margin at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ML0803600882008-02-29029 February 2008 G20070597/LRR-07-0568 - Proposed Director'S Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 R. Shadis Request for Expedited NRC Action to Address Unreported Conditions Leading to a Degradation of Public Safety Margin at Vermont Yankee ML0603402462006-03-0404 March 2006 G20050706 - Federal Register Notice Jonathan M. Block, 2.206 Petition ML0603403262006-03-0404 March 2006 G20050706 - Jonathan M. Block Director'S Decision October 11, 2005 Petition Filed with the Executive Director of Operations Pursuant to Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 2.206) ML0533903112006-01-0909 January 2006 G20050379 - Mr. Paul Gunter Ltr. Re. 2.206 - Inoperable Hemyc/Mt Fire Protection Systems ML0535000122005-12-23023 December 2005 G20050360 - Director'S Decision Raymond Shadis 2.206 Petition - Degraded Fire Protection Systems at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee ML0528601072005-11-0707 November 2005 G20040831 - Director'S Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206, Regarding Vermont Yankee ML0527701302005-10-11011 October 2005 G20050360 - Proposed Director'S Decision - Shadis/Kansler Ltrs. Requesting Comments on Proposed Director'S Decision for Vermont Yankee ML0521702062005-08-16016 August 2005 G20050008 - Final Director'S Decision Paul Blanch and Arnold Gundersen 2.206 Petition - Vermont Yankee - Clarification of Design Basis Conformance ML0512201032005-05-24024 May 2005 Proposed Director'S Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 ML0511003702005-01-0707 January 2005 G20050008 - Proposed Director'S Decision Re 2.206 - Vermont Yankee - Clarification of Design Basis Conformance 2016-03-29
[Table view] |
Text
DD-05-XX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION J. E. Dyer, Director In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-271
)
ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE, LLC ) License No. DPR-28 and )
ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. )
)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station )
PROPOSED DIRECTORS DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 I. INTRODUCTION By letter dated May 3, 2005, Mr. Raymond Shadis of the New England Coalition (NEC or the Petitioner) filed a petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
Section 2.206, with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission). NRC Information Notice 2005-07, Results of Hemyc Electrical Raceway Fire Barrier System
[ERFBS] Full Scale Fire Testing, dated April 1, 2005, informed the operators of nuclear power plants that the Hemyc ERFBS did not perform for one hour as designed. The NRC listed Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee) among the sites that had installed Hemyc ERFBS. The NEC petition requested that the NRC promptly restore reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety with regard to the fire barriers in electrical cable protection systems at Vermont Yankee, or otherwise to order a derate of Vermont Yankee until such time as the operability of the fire barriers can be assured.
Specifically, the petition requested that the Commission take the following actions: (1) promptly conduct a review at Vermont Yankee to determine the extent of condition (e.g., the extent to PROPOSED
which Hemyc is used at Vermont Yankee), including a full inventory of the type, amount, application, and placement of Hemyc, and an assessment of the safety significance of each application; (2) require Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee (ENVY or the licensee) to promptly provide justification for operation in nonconformance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R; and (3) upon finding that Vermont Yankee is operating in an unanalyzed condition and/or that assurance of public health and safety is degraded, promptly order a power reduction (derate) of Vermont Yankee until such time as it can be demonstrated that ENVY is operating in conformance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, and all other applicable regulations.
Mr. Raymond Shadis, in his capacity as the Petitioners Staff Technical Advisor, participated in a telephone conference call with the NRCs Petition Review Board (PRB) on May 17, 2005, to discuss the petition. The teleconference was transcribed and the transcription was treated as a supplement to the petition. In the conference call, the Petitioner modified the first request because it did not constitute a request for enforcement action consistent with the 10 CFR 2.206 process. The request was modified to require the licensee, rather than the NRC, to conduct the review to determine the extent of condition. During the conference call, the Petitioner also requested that the licensee review fire barriers beyond the Hemyc ERFBS.
After the conference call, the PRB discussed the request to promptly order a derate of Vermont Yankee and to review fire barriers beyond Hemyc. The NRC had already determined that immediate action was not necessary. When the Hemyc test results became available, the NRC staff examined whether there was an immediate and significant risk to safety. Because fire detection, prevention, and suppression measures were already in place to minimize both the probability of occurrence and consequences of a fire that could prevent the performance of safe shutdown functions, the staff concluded that continued plant operation while corrective actions were implemented did not pose an undue risk to public health and safety. In addition, PROPOSED
the NRC staff confirmed that fire watches were implemented at Vermont Yankee as a compensatory measure until the corrective actions were completed (i.e., replacement of the Hemyc ERFBS). As for the request that the licensee review fire barriers beyond the Hemyc ERFBS, the Petitioner did not provide adequate information to justify expanding the scope of the review. On June 13, 2005, the NRC staff notified the Petitioner that, based on the recommendations of the PRB, the request for immediate action and the request to expand the scope to cover additional fire barriers were denied.
In an acknowledgment letter dated June 15, 2005, the NRC informed the Petitioner that the petition was accepted, in part, for review under 10 CFR 2.206 and had been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for appropriate action.
Copies of the petition, transcript, and acknowledgment letter are available for inspection at the Commissions Public Document Room (PDR) at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland and from the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under ADAMS Accession No. ML051610117. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who have problems in accessing the documents in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
II. DISCUSSION As a basis for the requested actions, the Petitioners primary concern was the quality of the Vermont Yankee fire barriers, including Hemyc, and the effect on compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R. However, in its inspections of fire protection at Vermont Yankee, which included the review of numerous fire barriers and penetrations, the NRC did not identify any safety concerns other than the unresolved item related to Hemyc PROPOSED
ERFBS (NRC Inspection Report 05000271/2001-003, July 27, 2001, ADAMS Accession No. ML012080293). Furthermore, by letter dated August 17, 2005, ENVY stated that on July 28, 2005, they completed replacement of Hemyc on systems that are credited in the Vermont Yankee safe shutdown capability analysis. This is the analysis that supports compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R. Therefore, the staff concludes that the Petitioners concerns have been adequately addressed by the licensees corrective actions.
III. CONCLUSION The NRC staff has reviewed the basis for the Petitioners requested actions. Based on the information provided in Section II, the staff concludes that the concerns regarding the use of Hemyc at Vermont Yankee have been adequately resolved such that no further action is needed. The licensee has replaced the Hemyc on all equipment that is relied upon for compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R. Based on these conclusions, the NRC in effect granted the petitioners request by resolving the petitioners primary concern of the quality of the Hemyc fire barriers at Vermont Yankee.
As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Directors Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission to review. As provided for by this regulation, the Decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the Decision unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the Decision within that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this ______ day of ____________ 2005.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PROPOSED