ML080040286
| ML080040286 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/25/2008 |
| From: | Reyes L NRC/EDO |
| To: | Engel E, Hall J, Hinchey M, Lowey N US HR (House of Representatives) |
| Boska J, NRR/DORL, 301-415-2901 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML080040293 | List: |
| References | |
| G20070904, LTR-07-0835, SECY-2007-0587 | |
| Download: ML080040286 (9) | |
Text
January 25, 2008 The Honorable John Hall United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Hall:
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter dated December 21, 2007. You expressed concern with the NRCs decision to grant a revision of existing exemptions to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) for specific requirements of the Fire Protection Program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3. In particular, you suggested a lack of opportunity for public comment on this decision and a potential for weakening the fire protection requirements at Indian Point.
Let me assure you that NRC takes seriously its obligation to provide opportunities for public comment in our regulatory processes. The NRC process for exemptions to NRC regulations is consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act and judicial case law. The NRC handled the exemption request in accordance with the NRCs standard process for exemptions, as stated in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, Specific exemptions.
This process for exemptions does not include issuing Federal Register notices asking for public comment or provide the opportunity for the public to request a hearing. However, to ensure openness with the public, licensee requests for exemptions are publicly available from the time they are received by the NRC. In addition, the NRC publishes notices in the Federal Register with our environmental assessment of the exemption and the final exemption. As a result of our process, we received comments from interested stakeholders and the NRC has considered and will respond to all correspondence resulting from these notices.
With regard to your request to include this as an issue to be addressed within the context of the Indian Point license renewal application, our license renewal reviews focus on the aging of passive components and structures, and environmental issues pertinent to extended operation.
Current performance issues such as those associated with fire protection regulations are promptly reviewed and evaluated by the ongoing Reactor Oversight Process applicable to operating reactors -- a process which continues throughout reactor operation, i.e., before, during, and after license renewal. Accordingly, the exemption request would not be reviewed for license renewal. However, aging management of passive structures and components that are needed for meeting the fire protection regulations, are addressed in the license renewal reviews.
The NRC staff carefully reviewed the exemption request. The licensee requested that the NRC allow the continued use of the previously installed electrical cable fire wrap. In its letter dated September 28, 2007, the NRC determined that approval of the exemption request did not weaken the fire protection requirements at Indian Point, Unit 3, for the following reasons:
Recent NRC tests on non-plant-specific configurations of the Hemyc fire wrap, which is the fire wrap used at Indian Point 3, indicated that the fire wrap would not be effective for the full time, as required by the regulation under severe fire test conditions. However,
the NRC reviewed the use of Hemyc at Indian Point 3 and found that its use was restricted to specific fire zones where the fire hazards are not as severe as the fire test conditions.
These fire zones that contain the Hemyc fire wrap have additional fire protection features such as administrative controls which limit transient combustibles, automatic fire detection and either automatic fire suppression systems or installed noncombustible barriers.
The NRC evaluated the expected fire severity and the existing fire protection features at Indian Point, Unit 3, and determined that this exemption request does not adversely impact the ability of Indian Point, Unit 3, to achieve post-fire safe-shutdown and continues to maintain the public health and safety.
Finally, I would like to address your concerns about the safety of the Indian Point nuclear reactors. The NRC continues to provide close daily oversight of the licensees activities. The NRC also has allocated extra resources to the inspection effort at Indian Point. The NRCs standard for two-reactor sites is to provide a one senior resident inspector and a resident inspector for the site, supplemented by other inspectors from the NRCs regional offices. In the case of the two operating reactors at Indian Point, the NRC has assigned a senior resident inspector and a resident inspector to each reactor, twice the normal allotment. I can assure you that if our Reactor Oversight Process uncovers any significant deficiencies at Indian Point, we will not hesitate to take appropriate action, up to and including ordering a shutdown of the reactors if required.
If you need additional information concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call me or Chairman Klein.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Luis A. Reyes Executive Director for Operations
ML080040293 OFFICE LPL1-1/PM LPL1-1/LA Tech Editor LPL1-1/BC NAME JBoska SLittle HChang MKowal DATE 01/07/08 01/07/08 01/04/08 01/07/08 OFFICE DORL/D DLR/D DRA/D RI/D*
NAME CHaney (TMcGinty for)
PTKuo MCunningham SCollins DATE 01/07/08 01/15/08 01/16/08 01/07/08 OFFICE OGC NRR OCA EDO NAME STurk JDyer RSchmidt LReyes DATE 01/08/08 01/18/08 01/25/08 01/25 /08
January 25, 2008 The Honorable Nita M. Lowey United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Lowey:
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter dated December 21, 2007. You expressed concern with the NRCs decision to grant a revision of existing exemptions to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) for specific requirements of the Fire Protection Program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3. In particular, you suggested a lack of opportunity for public comment on this decision and a potential for weakening the fire protection requirements at Indian Point.
Let me assure you that NRC takes seriously its obligation to provide opportunities for public comment in our regulatory processes. The NRC process for exemptions to NRC regulations is consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act and judicial case law. The NRC handled the exemption request in accordance with the NRCs standard process for exemptions, as stated in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, Specific exemptions.
This process for exemptions does not include issuing Federal Register notices asking for public comment or provide the opportunity for the public to request a hearing. However, to ensure openness with the public, licensee requests for exemptions are publicly available from the time they are received by the NRC. In addition, the NRC publishes notices in the Federal Register with our environmental assessment of the exemption and the final exemption. As a result of our process, we received comments from interested stakeholders and the NRC has considered and will respond to all correspondence resulting from these notices.
With regard to your request to include this as an issue to be addressed within the context of the Indian Point license renewal application, our license renewal reviews focus on the aging of passive components and structures, and environmental issues pertinent to extended operation.
Current performance issues such as those associated with fire protection regulations are promptly reviewed and evaluated by the ongoing Reactor Oversight Process applicable to operating reactors -- a process which continues throughout reactor operation, i.e., before, during, and after license renewal. Accordingly, the exemption request would not be reviewed for license renewal. However, aging management of passive structures and components that are needed for meeting the fire protection regulations, are addressed in the license renewal reviews.
The NRC staff carefully reviewed the exemption request. The licensee requested that the NRC allow the continued use of the previously installed electrical cable fire wrap. In its letter dated September 28, 2007, the NRC determined that approval of the exemption request did not weaken the fire protection requirements at Indian Point, Unit 3, for the following reasons:
Recent NRC tests on non-plant-specific configurations of the Hemyc fire wrap, which is the fire wrap used at Indian Point 3, indicated that the fire wrap would not be effective for the full time, as required by the regulation under severe fire test conditions. However
The NRC reviewed the use of Hemyc at Indian Point 3 and found that its use was restricted to specific fire zones where the fire hazards are not as severe as the fire test conditions.
These fire zones that contain the Hemyc fire wrap have additional fire protection features such as administrative controls which limit transient combustibles, automatic fire detection and either automatic fire suppression systems or installed noncombustible barriers.
The NRC evaluated the expected fire severity and the existing fire protection features at Indian Point, Unit 3, and determined that this exemption request does not adversely impact the ability of Indian Point, Unit 3, to achieve post-fire safe-shutdown and continues to maintain the public health and safety.
Finally, I would like to address your concerns about the safety of the Indian Point nuclear reactors. The NRC continues to provide close daily oversight of the licensees activities. The NRC also has allocated extra resources to the inspection effort at Indian Point. The NRCs standard for two-reactor sites is to provide a one senior resident inspector and a resident inspector for the site, supplemented by other inspectors from the NRCs regional offices. In the case of the two operating reactors at Indian Point, the NRC has assigned a senior resident inspector and a resident inspector to each reactor, twice the normal allotment. I can assure you that if our Reactor Oversight Process uncovers any significant deficiencies at Indian Point, we will not hesitate to take appropriate action, up to and including ordering a shutdown of the reactors if required.
If you need additional information concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call me or Chairman Klein.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Luis A. Reyes Executive Director for Operations
January 25, 2008 The Honorable Eliot L. Engel United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Engel:
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter dated December 21, 2007. You expressed concern with the NRCs decision to grant a revision of existing exemptions to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) for specific requirements of the Fire Protection Program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3. In particular, you suggested a lack of opportunity for public comment on this decision and a potential for weakening the fire protection requirements at Indian Point.
Let me assure you that NRC takes seriously its obligation to provide opportunities for public comment in our regulatory processes. The NRC process for exemptions to NRC regulations is consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act and judicial case law. The NRC handled the exemption request in accordance with the NRCs standard process for exemptions, as stated in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, Specific exemptions.
This process for exemptions does not include issuing Federal Register notices asking for public comment or provide the opportunity for the public to request a hearing. However, to ensure openness with the public, licensee requests for exemptions are publicly available from the time they are received by the NRC. In addition, the NRC publishes notices in the Federal Register with our environmental assessment of the exemption and the final exemption. As a result of our process, we received comments from interested stakeholders and the NRC has considered and will respond to all correspondence resulting from these notices.
With regard to your request to include this as an issue to be addressed within the context of the Indian Point license renewal application, our license renewal reviews focus on the aging of passive components and structures, and environmental issues pertinent to extended operation.
Current performance issues such as those associated with fire protection regulations are promptly reviewed and evaluated by the ongoing Reactor Oversight Process applicable to operating reactors -- a process which continues throughout reactor operation, i.e., before, during, and after license renewal. Accordingly, the exemption request would not be reviewed for license renewal. However, aging management of passive structures and components that are needed for meeting the fire protection regulations, are addressed in the license renewal reviews.
The NRC staff carefully reviewed the exemption request. The licensee requested that the NRC allow the continued use of the previously installed electrical cable fire wrap. In its letter dated September 28, 2007, the NRC determined that approval of the exemption request did not weaken the fire protection requirements at Indian Point, Unit 3, for the following reasons:
Recent NRC tests on non-plant-specific configurations of the Hemyc fire wrap, which is the fire wrap used at Indian Point 3, indicated that the fire wrap would not be effective for the full time, as required by the regulation under severe fire test conditions. However,
The NRC reviewed the use of Hemyc at Indian Point 3 and found that its use was restricted to specific fire zones where the fire hazards are not as severe as the fire test conditions.
These fire zones that contain the Hemyc fire wrap have additional fire protection features such as administrative controls which limit transient combustibles, automatic fire detection and either automatic fire suppression systems or installed noncombustible barriers.
The NRC evaluated the expected fire severity and the existing fire protection features at Indian Point, Unit 3, and determined that this exemption request does not adversely impact the ability of Indian Point, Unit 3, to achieve post-fire safe-shutdown and continues to maintain the public health and safety.
Finally, I would like to address your concerns about the safety of the Indian Point nuclear reactors. The NRC continues to provide close daily oversight of the licensees activities. The NRC also has allocated extra resources to the inspection effort at Indian Point. The NRCs standard for two-reactor sites is to provide a one senior resident inspector and a resident inspector for the site, supplemented by other inspectors from the NRCs regional offices. In the case of the two operating reactors at Indian Point, the NRC has assigned a senior resident inspector and a resident inspector to each reactor, twice the normal allotment. I can assure you that if our Reactor Oversight Process uncovers any significant deficiencies at Indian Point, we will not hesitate to take appropriate action, up to and including ordering a shutdown of the reactors if required.
If you need additional information concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call me or Chairman Klein.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Luis A. Reyes Executive Director for Operations
January 25, 2008 The Honorable Maurice D. Hinchey United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Hinchey:
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter dated December 21, 2007. You expressed concern with the NRCs decision to grant a revision of existing exemptions to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) for specific requirements of the Fire Protection Program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3. In particular, you suggested a lack of opportunity for public comment on this decision and a potential for weakening the fire protection requirements at Indian Point.
Let me assure you that NRC takes seriously its obligation to provide opportunities for public comment in our regulatory processes. The NRC process for exemptions to NRC regulations is consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act and judicial case law. The NRC handled the exemption request in accordance with the NRCs standard process for exemptions, as stated in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, Specific exemptions.
This process for exemptions does not include issuing Federal Register notices asking for public comment or provide the opportunity for the public to request a hearing. However, to ensure openness with the public, licensee requests for exemptions are publicly available from the time they are received by the NRC. In addition, the NRC publishes notices in the Federal Register with our environmental assessment of the exemption and the final exemption. As a result of our process, we received comments from interested stakeholders and the NRC has considered and will respond to all correspondence resulting from these notices.
With regard to your request to include this as an issue to be addressed within the context of the Indian Point license renewal application, our license renewal reviews focus on the aging of passive components and structures, and environmental issues pertinent to extended operation.
Current performance issues such as those associated with fire protection regulations are promptly reviewed and evaluated by the ongoing Reactor Oversight Process applicable to operating reactors -- a process which continues throughout reactor operation, i.e., before, during, and after license renewal. Accordingly, the exemption request would not be reviewed for license renewal. However, aging management of passive structures and components that are needed for meeting the fire protection regulations, are addressed in the license renewal reviews.
The NRC staff carefully reviewed the exemption request. The licensee requested that the NRC allow the continued use of the previously installed electrical cable fire wrap. In its letter dated September 28, 2007, the NRC determined that approval of the exemption request did not weaken the fire protection requirements at Indian Point, Unit 3, for the following reasons:
Recent NRC tests on non-plant-specific configurations of the Hemyc fire wrap, which is the fire wrap used at Indian Point 3, indicated that the fire wrap would not be effective for the full time, as required by the regulation under severe fire test conditions. However,
The NRC reviewed the use of Hemyc at Indian Point 3 and found that its use was restricted to specific fire zones where the fire hazards are not as severe as the fire test conditions.
These fire zones that contain the Hemyc fire wrap have additional fire protection features such as administrative controls which limit transient combustibles, automatic fire detection and either automatic fire suppression systems or installed noncombustible barriers.
The NRC evaluated the expected fire severity and the existing fire protection features at Indian Point, Unit 3, and determined that this exemption request does not adversely impact the ability of Indian Point, Unit 3, to achieve post-fire safe-shutdown and continues to maintain the public health and safety.
Finally, I would like to address your concerns about the safety of the Indian Point nuclear reactors. The NRC continues to provide close daily oversight of the licensees activities. The NRC also has allocated extra resources to the inspection effort at Indian Point. The NRCs standard for two-reactor sites is to provide a one senior resident inspector and a resident inspector for the site, supplemented by other inspectors from the NRCs regional offices. In the case of the two operating reactors at Indian Point, the NRC has assigned a senior resident inspector and a resident inspector to each reactor, twice the normal allotment. I can assure you that if our Reactor Oversight Process uncovers any significant deficiencies at Indian Point, we will not hesitate to take appropriate action, up to and including ordering a shutdown of the reactors if required.
If you need additional information concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call me or Chairman Klein.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Luis A. Reyes Executive Director for Operation