ML100680299
| ML100680299 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/03/2010 |
| From: | Division of Operating Reactor Licensing |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 2.206, NRC-102 | |
| Download: ML100680299 (32) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
2.206 Petition RE Vermont Yankee and Raymond Shadis Docket Number:
50-271 Location:
(telephone conference)
Date:
Wednesday, March 3, 2010 Work Order No.:
NRC-102 Pages 1-30 QR GNALI 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
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PETITION REVIEW BOARD DISCUSSION WITH PETITIONER
x IN THE MATTER OF:
10 CFR 2.206 PETITION
- Docket No.
OF RAYMOND SHADIS
- 50-271 WITH RESPECT TO VERMONT YANKEE x
Wednesday, March 3, 2010 The above-entitled matter was convened via teleconference, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m.
Eastern Standard Time.
BEFORE:
TOM BLOUNT, Petition Review Board Chairman Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
2 1
ALSO PRESENT:
2 JAMES KIM, Petition Manager, NRR 3
DAVID ALLEY, NRC 4
BOB AUDETTE, Brattleboro Reformer 5
STEVE BAGGEG, NRC 6
MOLLY BARKMAN, OGC 7
NATALIE BLAIS, Congressman John Olver's Office 8
PAUL BLANCH, New England Coalition 9
GREG BOWMAN, NRC 10 JOHN CONNOR, Vermont Department of Public Service 11 EUGENE DACUS, NRC 12 STEVEN GARRY, NRC 13 SARAH HOFMAN, Vermont Department of Public Service 14 DON JACKSON, Region 1, DPR 15 PATRICK JEFFERSON, NRC 16 HEATHER JONES, Vermont Yankee 17 ROBERT KUNTZ, NRC 18 TANYA MENSAH, NRR 19 SCOTT RUTENKROGER, Vermont Yankee 20 NANCY SALGADO, NRR 21 TOM SETZER, Region 1, DPR 22 RAYMOND SHADIS, Petitioner 23 SUSAN SMALLHEER, Rutland Herald 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.c om
3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TABLE OF CONTENTS Opening Remarks, James Kim
Introductions
Statement by Tom Blount, Chair Statement of Raymond Shadis, Petitioner Statement of Paul Blanch Adjourn NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 4
4 8
13 27 30 www.nealrgross.com
4 1
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2
10:30 A.M.
3 MR.
KIM:
We will start the proceedings.
4 Good morning.
I'd like to thank everyone for 5
attending this meeting.
My name is James Kim and I am 6
the Project Manager.
We are here today to allow the 7
Petitioner, Mr. Raymond Shadis to address the Petition 8
Review Board regarding 2.206 petition dated February 9
8, 2010.
10 The Petition Review Board Chairman is Tom 11 Blount.
12 As part of the Petition Review Board, a
13 review of this petition, Mr.
Raymond Shadis has 14 requested this opportunity to address the PRB.
15 This meeting is scheduled from 10:30 a.m.
16 to 11:30 a.m.
The meeting is being recorded by the 17 NRC Operations Center and will be transcribed by a 18 court reporter.
The transcript will be a supplement 19 to the petition.
The transcript will also be publicly 20 available.
21 I'd like to open this meeting with 22 introductions.
As you go around the room, please 23 clearly state your name, your position, and the office 24 that you work for within the NRC for the record.
25 I'll start off.
This is James Kim in the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing in NRR.
J-A-M-E-S K-I-M.
CHAIR BLOUNT:
This is Tom Blount.
- Thomas, T-H-O-M-A-S,
- Blount, B-L-O-U-N-T.
I'm the Deputy Director for the Division of Policy and Rulemaking in
MS.
BARKMAN:
I'm Molly Barkman.
I'm an attorney in the Office of the General Counsel.
M-O-L-L-Y B-A-R-K-M-A-N.
MR.
BOWMAN:
Greg
- Bowman, Senior Enforcement Specialist in the Office of Enforcement.
G-R-E-G B-O-W-M-A-N.
MR.
DACUS:
Office of Public Affairs.
E-U-G-E-N-E D-A-C-U-S.
MR. ALLEY:
David Alley, Senior Materials Engineer, Division of Component Integrity, D-A-V-I-D, A-L-L-E-Y.
MR. JEFFERSON:
Patrick Jefferson, Senior Special
- Agent, Operations
- Officer, Office of Investigations.
P-A-T-R-I-C-K J-E-F-F-E-R-S-O-N.
MR.
GARRY:
Steven Garry, Senior Health Physicist with the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
S-T-E-V-E-N G-A-R-R-Y.
MR.
BAGGEG:
The name is Steve Baggeg.
I work in the Office of Executive Director of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
6 1
Operations.
S-T-E-V-E-N B as boy, A-G-G-E-G.
2 MR.
KIM:
At this time are there any NRC 3
staff from the Headquarters on the line?
4 MS.
SALGADO:
- Yes, Jim.
This is Nancy 5
Salgado.
I'm the Branch Chief in the Division of 6
Operator Reactor Licensing.
The spelling of my name 7
is N-A-N-C-Y.
Salgado, S-A-L-G-A-D-O.
8 MS.
MENSAH:
This is Tanya Mensah.
The 9
spelling of my name is T-A-N-Y-A M-E-N-S-A-H.
I'm a 10 2.206 coordinator in the Office of NRR.
11 MR.
KUNTZ:
This is Robert Kuntz.
R-O-B-12 E-R-T K-U-N-T-Z.
I'm a Senior Project Manager in the 13 Division of License Renewal, NRR.
14 MR. KIM:
Are there any NRC staff from the 15 regional office on the line?
16 MR.
SETZER:
Hi, Jim.
Good morning.
This 17 is Tom Setzer.
That's T-O-M.
Setzer, S-E-T-Z-E-R.
18 I work at NRC Region 1. I'm a Senior Project Engineer 19 in the Division of Reactor Projects.
20 MR.
JACKSON:
This is Don Jackson calling 21 from the site.
I'm the Branch Chief, Projects Branch 22 5,
DRP Region 1. And that's D-O-N J-A-C-K-S-O-N.
23 MR.
RUTENKROGER:
Scott Rutenkroger, the 24 Acting Senior Resident Inspector at Vermont Yankee.
25 S-C-O-T-T.
Rutenkroger is spelled R-U-T-E-N-K-R-O-G-NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
7 1
E-R.
2 MS.
JONES:
This is Heather Jones, the 3
Resident Inspector at Vermont Yankee.
My first name 4
is spelled H-E-A-T-H-E-R.
And my last name, Jones, is 5
spelled J-O-N-E-S.
6 MR.
KIM:
- Okay, are there any 7
representatives from the license on the phone?
8 (No audible response.)
9 Mr.
- Shadis, will you please introduce 10 yourself for the record.
11 MR.
SHADIS:
Thank you, yes.
My name is 12 Raymond Shadis, S-H-A-D-I-S.
And I am with the New 13 England Coalition which is a
nonprofit advocacy 14 organization headquartered in Brattleboro, Vermont.
15 MR.
KIM:
Are there any members of the 16 public on the phone?
17 MS.
HOFMAN:
Yes, this is Sarah Hofman and 18 John Connor.
We're attorneys for the Department of 19 Public Service in Vermont.
20 MR.
AUDETTE:
Bob Audette, A-U-D-E-T-T-E, 21 Brattleboro Reformer, in Brattleboro, Vermont.
22 MR.
BLANCH:
This is Paul Branch, energy 23 consultant to New England Coalition, temporarily.
My 24 name is spelled P-A-U-L B-L-A-N-C-H.
25 MR.
KIM:
Is there anybody else?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
8 1
MS.
BLAIS:
My name is Natalie Blais.
I'm 2
calling from Congressman John Olver's office in 3
Holyoke, Massachusetts.
My name is Natalie, N-A-T-A-4 L-I-E, Blais, B as in boy, L-A-I-S.
5 MS.
SMALLHEER:
This is Susan Smallheer, 6
a reporter with the Rutland Herald in Vermont.
S-U-S-7 A-N S-M-A-L-L-H-E-E-R.
8 MR.
KIM:
Do we have everybody?
- Okay, I'd 9
like to emphasize that we each need to speak clearly 10 and loudly to make sure that the court reporter can 11 accurately transcribe this meeting.
12 If you have something that you'd like to 13 say, please first state your name for the record.
At 14 this time, I will turn it over to the PRR Chairman Tom 15 Blount.
16 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Good morning and welcome to 17 the meeting regarding the 2.206 Petition submitted by 18 Mr.
Shadis.
19 I would like to share some background on 20 our process.
Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of 21 Federal Regulations as the petition process, the 22 primary mechanism for the public to request 23 enforcement action by the NRC in a public process.
24 This process permits anyone to petition 25 NRC to take enforcement-type action related to NRC NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
9 1
licenses or license activities.
Depending upon the 2
results of this evaluation, NRC could modify, suspend, 3
or revoke an NRC issued license or take any other 4
appropriate enforcement action to resolve the problem.
5 The staff guidance for the disposition of 6
a 2.206 Petition request is Management Directive 8.11 7
which is publicly available.
8 The purpose of today's meeting is to give 9
the Petitioner, Mr. Shadis, an opportunity to provide 10 any additional explanation or support for the petition 11 before the Petition Review Board's initial 12 consideration and recommendation.
This meeting is not 13 a hearing, nor is it an opportunity for the Petitioner 14 to question or examine the PRB on the merits or the 15 issues presented in the petition request.
16 Decisions regarding the merits of this 17 petition will be made at this meeting.
18 If everyone could put their phone on mute 19 to eliminate any background information.
20 (Off the record comment.)
21 Following this
- meeting, the Petition 22 Review Board will conduct its internal deliberations.
23 The outcome of this internal meeting will be discussed 24 with the Petitioner.
The Petition Review Board 25 typically consists of a chairman, usually a manager at NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
10 1
the Senior Executive Service level at the NRC.
It has 2
a petition manager and a PRB coordinator.
Other 3
members of the board are determined by the NRC staff 4
based on the contents of the information and the 5
petition request.
6 At this time, I'd like to introduce the 7
Board.
I'm Tom Blount, the Petition Review Board 8
chairman.
James Kim is the Petition Manager for the 9
petition under discussion today.
Tanya Mensah is the 10 Office's PRB Coordinator.
Our technical staff 11 includes Steve Garry from NRC's Health Physics and 12 Human Performance Branch; Dave Alley from the NRC 13 Division of Component Integrity; Robert Kuntz from the 14 NRC's Division of License Renewal; Tom Setzer from 15 NRC's Region 1
Division of Reactor Projects; Ray 16 Bowman from the Office of Enforcement.
We also obtain 17 advice from our Office of General Counsel represented 18 by Molly Barkman.
19 As described in our process, the NRC staff 20 may ask clarifying questions in order to better 21 understand the Petitioner's presentation and to reach 22 a reasoned decision whether to accept or reject the 23 Petitioner's request for review under the 2.206 24 process.
25 I would like to summarize the scope of the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
11 1
petition under consideration in the NRC's activities 2
today.
On February 8,
- 2010, Mr. Shadis, on behalf of 3
New England Coalition submitted a petition to the NRC 4
under 2.206 regarding a degradation of public safety 5
margin due to a tritium leak at Vermont Yankee Nuclear 6
Power Station.
In this petition
- request, you 7
requested that:
(1) the NRC to require Vermont Yankee 8
to go into cold shutdown and depressurize all systems 9
in order to slow or stop the leak; (2)
NRC to act 10 promptly to stop or mitigate the leak, not waiting 11 until all issues raised by New England Coalition are 12 resolved; (3)
NRC to require Vermont Yankee 13 reestablish is licensing basis by physically tracing 14 records and details of all plant systems that would be 15 within scope as buried pipes and tanks in NUREG 1801 16 and under requirements of 10 CFR 50.54; NRC to 17 investigate and determine by Entergy was allowed to 18 operate VY since 2002 without a working knowledge of 19 all the plant systems and why NRC's reactor oversight 20 process and license renewal amendment review process 21 let this dereliction go unnoticed; (5)
NRC to take 22 notice of VY's many maintenance and management 23 failures 2002 to 2010 and the OLP's failure to get 24 ahead of them and to undertake a full diagnostic 25 evaluation team inspection or NRC inspection procedure NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
12 1
95003; (6)
NRC to require Entergy Vermont Yankee to 2
apply for an amendment to its license renewal that 3
would address both aging analysis and an aging 4
management for all buried piping carrying or with the 5
potential to carry radionuclides and/or the potential 6
to interact with any safety or safety-related system.
7 Allow me to discuss the NRC activities to 8
date.
The PRB met on February 17 and denied your 9
request for immediate action to cold shutdown and 10 depressurize all systems in order to slow or stop the 11 leak because the PRB did not identify any immediate 12 safety concerns that would warrant an immediate 13 shutdown.
14 On February 19th you were informed of the 15 PRB's decision on the immediate action and you 16 requested an opportunity to address the PRB prior to 17 this initial meeting provide supplemental information 18 for the Board's consideration.
19 Currently there are two other 2.206 20 petitions against Vermont Yankee from Mr. Mulligan and 21 Mr.
Saporito that are under PRB review and with the 22 concurrence of senior NRR office management, the PRB 23 has decided to consolidate your petition with the 24 other two petitions, along with any future petitions 25 that may be submitted which meet the following NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
13 1
criteria per Management Directive 811.
2 I'm quoting from the Management Directive.
3 "Generally, all requests submitted by different 4
individuals will be treated and evaluated separately.
5 When two or more petitions request action against the 6
same
- licensee, specifically essentially the same 7
basis, provide adequate supporting information and are 8
submitted at about the same time, PRB will consider 9
the benefits of consolidating the petition against the 10 potential of diluting the importance of any petition 11 and recommend whether or not consolidation is 12 appropriate.
The assigned office director will 13 determine whether or not to consolidate the petition."
14 As a reminder to the phone participants, 15 please identify yourself if you make any remarks as 16 this will help us in the preparation of the meeting 17 transcript that will be made publicly available.
18 Thank you.
19 Mr.
- Shadis, I'll turn it over to you to 20 allow you to provide any information you believe the 21 PRB should consider as part of this petition.
You'll 22 have approximately 30 minutes to provide additional 23 information to the PRB.
24 Mr.
Shadis.
25 MR.
SHADIS:
Thank you.
This is Ray NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
14 1
- Shadis, good morning, everyone.
There are several 2
things that occurred since we filed that 24206 back on 3
February 8th.
4 One is the filing of the two petitions 5
mentioned, one from Thomas Saporito and one from 6
Michael Mulligan.
We have no objection to combining 7
these petitions for consideration.
- However, I think 8
I need to distinguish New England Coalition's petition 9
from the other two.
Both Mr. Saporito's petition and 10 Mr. Mulligan's petition focus entirely on the tritium 11 leak and the impacts of that leak.
Both of them take 12 note of potential health, public health and safety 13 impacts.
14 New England Coalition's petition goes to 15 oversight and operations concerns.
Our view is that 16 the tritium leak is indicative of deeper issues at the 17 Vermont Yankee plant.
And we are concerned that the 18 Petition Review Board not be drawn into focusing on 19 what the tritium health standards, protective 20 standards may be, that the Review Board not assign any 21 sort of value to the NEC petition based on the fact 22 that the releases at Vermont Yankee may be within 23 design levels and may be acceptable in terms of 24 radiation protection.
That is not our issue.
25 I will note parenthetically that we do not NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
15 1
believe that the standards applied and the release 2
levels that are applied, the maximum concentration 3
limits that are applied truly reflect the hazards of 4
- However, we fully recognize that if that 5
were the issue, we should be filing a rulemaking 6
petition or an allegation or some other form of 7
involvement.
8 Our concern with the tritium spill 9
primarily is that it is an indicator that 10 decommissioning costs will be driven up because of the 11 costs of site radiological examination that will be 12 driven up, and because of the costs of soil 13 remediation that will be driven up.
And we make note 14 that the recent samples have indicated that there are 15 also other radionuclides present.
16 This is particularly concerning when the 17 licensee is only marginally able to meet NRC's 18 expectations in terms of accumulating decommissioning 19 funds.
They are adding, if you will, to the deficit 20 every single minute that that leak continues.
And 21 because of that, primarily, we had asked that the 22 systems be depressurized and that as a matter of 23 expedience that they then be tested individually.
24 Since the off gas treatment system was the primary 25 suspect, the elimination of other potential sources of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
16 1
this contamination would have been set aside right at 2
the onset of this process.
And it's our view that 3
what has now taken two months of probing and digging 4
and analyzing would have been accomplished in a matter 5
of a few weeks.
That's my comment on that section, if 6
you will, the tritium section of our petition.
7 The remainder of the petition really goes 8
what this leak indicates and the chairman of this 9
Petition Review Board did a very good job of laying 10 what it is that New England Coalition would like to 11 have happen in response to what this tritium leak 12 indicates.
13 All right, during the tenure of Entergy 14 Corporation at Vermont Yankee, we have had several 15 high profile events.
We had, for example, in 2004 we 16 had transformer fire.
In the root cause analysis on 17 the transformer
- fire, we find that the expansion 18 joints on the isophase bus ducts were not examined, 19 that that maintenance item was deferred and this 20 demonstrated that Entergy was not paying attention and 21 learning from industry experience.
The warnings had 22 been out there about the degradation of that 23 particular item for some 10 or 12 years prior to the 24 incident.
But
- Entergy, despite pumping some 40 25 percent more air through it because of preparations NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
17 1
for power uprate still decided to ignore it.
2 The cooling tower collapse incident should 3
have been informed by the incident at Prairie Island, 4
but it was not; Entergy, again, deferring maintenance, 5
failing to pay attention to lessons from the industry.
6 The other items that are a recurring theme 7
in the many incidents that we had at Vermont Yankee 8
and there is not time to enumerate them all, but the 9
recurring themes are failures of communication between 10 departments; maintenance failures for deferred 11 maintenance, failure to take up industry lessons 12 learned, and then largely threading through all this 13 is failure to quality control.
14 Vermont Yankee pioneered, I
think, the 15 concept of incorporating quality control within the 16 individual departments so that engineering has its own 17 quality control
- person, maintenance has its own 18 quality control person and so on, as opposed to the 19 requirement and regulation that there be a stand-20 alone, independent, quality control department.
And 21 NRC bought into this and we think it was a mistake.
22 And we think that that mistake is demonstrated by the 23 many failures in quality control.
24 In 2004, NRC conducted an engineering team 25 inspection of the Vermont Yankee plant, 900 inspection NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
18 1
- hours, and in that time they found 14 items of 2
concern.
Our view is that more than half of those 3
items related directly to poor quality control.
4
- Here, we have now found in the last few 5
days that the leak at Vermont Yankee may be the result 6
of poor work practices.
It has been discovered that 7
where a drain pipe enters into a drainage system, the 8
outer concrete casing, the outer PVC casing are both 9
cracked and possibly disjointed.
There's no natural 10 phenomenon we can think of that would have caused that 11 damage.
12 In the immediate location there are signs 13 of repair that was done somewhere early in the license 14 term and the logical conclusion here is that the 15 damage was done when those repairs were made.
So 16 we're at a point where the work of looking at all of 17 the incidents that have occurred since Entergy assumed 18 management of Vermont Yankee is more than we can 19 handle, but we think there's adequate indicator here 20 to stimulate NRC to do a historical review.
21 One of the problems with the reactor 22 oversight process is that it seems to have good short-23 term memory, but really poor long-term memory.
In 24 other words, identifying chronic conditions at a 25
- plant, chronic operation conditions or physical NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
19 1
conditions at a plant seems to fall by the wayside as 2
well as identifying negative trends because the 3
consideration doesn't carry more than a few years.
If 4
it carried five or six years, we could see, for 5
example, that Entergy's maintenance program is not up 6
to snuff.
We could see that the quality assurance 7
program repeatedly fails.
8 We could see that communication between 9
departments, between engineering and maintenance, for 10 example, or engineering and operations is consistently 11 poor over the long stretch.
And the end result of 12 that is that we have either structural or mechanical 13 failures or human performance failures repeating 14 themselves in one location or another over time.
15 The nextrresult, in our view, is that the 16 ROP and even supplemental inspections have failed to 17 pick up on the full extent of operational or 18 maintenance failures at Vermont Yankee.
19 If you'll bear with me one minute, I think 20 that I've actually completed my list of notes.
I need 21 to mention in addition in terms of things that have 22 happened since we filed that petition on February 8th 23 is that the Commission has now issued a demand for 24 information going back five years.
This goes a long 25 way to addressing our concerns.
That demand for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
20 1
information requests that Entergy review all of their 2
submissions to NRC that were signed off on by the 3
several discharged, reprimanded or placed on leave 4
individuals that were involved in miscommunication in 5
the State of Vermont.
That time frame covers both the 6
license renewal application period and the extended 7
power uprate period at least in terms of the 8
adjudication before the Atomic Safety and Licensing 9
Board in which both instances New England Coalition 10 was the primary intervenor.
And so we have a very 11 strong interest in those iný the review of those 12 proceedings.
13 And in particular, at this point with 14 respect to this particular leak, our understanding is 15 that the NRC is already reviewing the license renewal 16 application documents to determine if the piping, 17 buried piping was adequately scoped and if the aging 18 management programs that are proposed will be adequate 19 to protect that piping over the term of extended 20 operation.
Our sense is that the leak at this point 21 is proof positive that the aging management program 22 that is proposed will not be adequate to protect 23 against further leaks, primarily because the aging 24 management program that is proposed, depends on a 10-25 year interval of surveillance and such opportunistic NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
21 1
inspections as may occur when there is excavation 2
going on for other purposes.
3 Entergy represented that a
complete 4
inspection was performed in 2003 and here we are six 5
and a half years down the road and we find that we 6
have a leak and so to us it is transparent that the 7
aging management program is not adequate.
And I think 8
largely that is about all I really wish to add at this 9
point in terms of our petition, but open to questions.
10 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Thank you, Mr.
Shadis.
11 This is Tom Blount.
Thank you for that discussion.
12 What I'd like to do now is ask staff at 13 headquarters if they have questions for Mr.
Shadis.
14 The staff that's on the phone line from headquarters, 15 any questions for Mr. Shadis.
16 MS.
SALGADO:
This is Nancy Salgado.
I 17 have no questions.
18 MS.
MENSAH:
No questions from Tanya 19 Mensah.
20 MR.
SETZER:
This is Tom Setzer from the 21 region.
No questions, thank you.
22 MR.
KUNTZ:
This is Rob Kuntz from 23 headquarters.
I don't have any questions either.
24 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Thank you.
The other 25 regional participants, do you have any questions for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
22 1
Mr.
Shadis?
2 MR.
JACKSON:
This is Don Jackson up at 3
Vermont Yankee.
I have no questions.
4 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Just a
point of 5
clarification, Mr. Shadis, this is Tom Blount again.
6 In your earlier comments you indicated that you wished 7
that the PRB would focus our attention not so much on 8
the tritium aspect of this petition but really on the 9
operational aspect.
Is that correct?
10 MR.
SHADIS:
That's correct.
- Even, sir, 11 when you introduced it, you introduced our petition as 12 relating in the title to tritium and it ain't in 13 there, so I just --
our concern in times past with 14 Petition Review Boards is that they tended to focus on 15 the specific areas and ignore others.
And we are 16 concerned that all of our issues that we've brought 17 forward be addressed point by point.
18 Just by way of example, in 2005, I believe 19 it
- was, we filed a petition with respect to fire 20 protection pipe wrap at Vermont Yankee and in that 21 petition, we pointed out that the company had done, 22 burned through temperature tests on that pipe wrap.
23 It's not pipe wrap, excuse me, it's cable wrap, 24 electrical cable wrap.
But they had done tests on it 25 and the cable wrap failed those tests.
And the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
23 1
company, Vermont Yankee, did not inform NRC of those 2
failures and proceeded to install the cable wrap.
3 When the Petition Review Board addressed 4
our 2.206, they queried the company about where they 5
had used the cable wrap, what their plan was for 6
remedy, where they going to double wrap, remove it, 7
whatever, but they never addressed the question of why 8
the company had not reported this fire-test failure to 9
NRC.
10 More recently, we filed a petition when 11 the union at Vermont Yankee wrote a public letter 12 stating that the workers were concerned about 13 declining safety margins at the plant.
Petition 14 Review Board got very I
don't know what 15 legalistic about it, and basically said since we did 16 not identify a specific safety issue, they need not --
17 NRC need not look any further.
So again, we're 18 concerned that this Petition Review Board break with 19 that precedent and look at each item that we have 20 brought forward.
They are all of importance to us and 21 we believe they all ultimately have an impact on 22 safety.
23 MR.
GARRY:
Mr., Shadis, this is Steve 24 Garry.
Are you aware of any maintenance or 25 operational issues specifically related to let's call
.NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
24 1
it the more important equipment at the plant such as 2
the safety-related equipment or the equipment that's 3
designated as important to safety?
4 MR.
SHADIS:
The equipment that wherein 5
the failure can affect safety-related equipment, for 6
example, our experts in reviewing materials related to 7
the extended power uprate disagree heartily that the 8
indications on the steam dryer at Vermont Yankee are' 9
not significant and do not require some remedial 10 action.
11 The question whether or not the condition 12 of the condenser poses a safety issue in the event of 13 an accident is something that we dispute.
The idea at 14 Vermont Yankee is if the main steam line isolation 15 valves fail, which they have, of course, repeatedly 16 leaked.
And every tests have been on a declining 17 margin there.
If the MSIVs fail, Entergy is content 18 to say that any escaping material will be captured at 19 the condenser.
20
- However, and they go further.
They say 21 that even if the condenser is breached because of all 22 the metal surface and the cold temperatures, you know, 23 that significant radionuclides are going to plate out.
24 They're going to be captured in the water and so on.
25 And hence, it's not an issue.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
25 1
I think at River Bend, or one of their 2
other
- plants, they had a
condenser implode 3
catastrophically.
I guess it depends on what the size 4
of the opening is, but we very much think that that 5
response is nonconservative and we take issue with it.
6 With respect to the cooling towers, as you 7
know, two of the cooling tower cells at VY are safety 8
related.
The design of the overhead piping is such 9
that NRC assumes that and the company --
that there 10 is no way that piping can separate and allow the fan 11 deck on those two towers to become flooded.
The 12 flooding of the fan deck was one of the causes 13 identified by Entergy as the failure of the cooling 14 tower cells that did fail.
But we don't see anyreal 15 analysis as to the effect of flooding on the safety-16 related cells, nor do we see any analysis in terms of 17 whether or not the failure of adjacent cells could 18 impact the safety-related cells.
The only analysis 19 there is in terms of tension, whether failing cells 20 adjacent could pull down the safety-related cells.
21
- However, if the thrust is against the 22 safety-related cells and not away from them, we don't 23 know.
The list goes on.
And currently, there is a
24 question, a wide open question, about the integrity of 25 the augmented, off-gas system.
Having that system NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
26 1
open to the environment at some level raises the 2
question under accident conditions, if that system is 3
not isolated then we have a
pathway to the 4
environment.
I guess the list goes on and it really 5
very much probably depends on one's assessment, one's 6
viewpoint and as I
- said, this is all very much 7
contested.
So yes, I hope that answers your question.
8 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Thank you, Mr. Shadis.
We 9
appreciate that clarification.
10 Anyone else have any questions here at 11 headquarters?
Are there any follow-up questions from 12 any of the NRC staff?
13 (Pause.)
14 Hearing
- none, before I
conclude the 15 meeting, members of the public may provide comments 16 regarding the petition.
- However, as stated at the 17 opening, the purpose of this meeting is not to provide 18 an opportunity for the Petitioner or the public to 19 question or examine the PRB regarding the merits of 20 the petition request.
21 Are there any questions from members of 22 the public?
23 MR.
SHADIS:
May I interject?
I very much 24 would appreciate it if the Board could hear a comment 25 from Mr. Blanch.
We've had many discussions about the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com.
27 1
situation at Vermont Yankee and I believe he can 2
contribute significantly.
3 CHAIR BLOUNT:
This is Tom Blount again.
4 Thank you very much.
I assume that was Mr.
Shadis?
5 MR.
SHADIS:
Yes, I'm sorry.
Ray Shadis.
6 CHAIR BLOUNT:
And this is the time for 7
Mr. Blanch to have his say.
So please, Mr. Blanch.
8 MR.
BLANCH:
Good morning.
This is Paul 9
Blanch.
I reside in West Hartford, Connecticut.
I 10 have about 45 years of nuclear experience working for 11 various utilities and the United States Navy.
12 I am a registered professional engineer 13 and while I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone else 14 but New England Coalition and myself, I am an expert 15 on licens e renewal requirements, 10 CFR 54 and 16 especially 54.21.
And I'm aware of the license 17 renewal application for Vermont Yankee.
I've looked 18 at a diagram and one of the things that I immediately 19 identified through my previous work is this buried 20 pipe or not?
Buried pipe is not defined in the 21 regulations and again, that's just a comment.
It's 22 not a petition to do anything, but to me, buried pipe 23 is any pipe is inaccessible, but again, that's my 24 personal viewpoint.
25 My major comment here relates to Mr.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
28 1
Shadis' request for an immediate shutdown and I have 2
seen responses, I'm not sure from whom they came, but 3
it was certainly from Entergy and likely theNRC, and 4
the statements again from the media were along the 5
lines we must keep the plant operating in order to 6
assist in identifying the leak from wherever this leak 7
is coming from.
8 One thing I can say from my engineering 9
system and operations background is that if the plant 10 were shut down the leak may or may not stop, but I 11 think I can say with a lot of certainty is that the 12 leak would be, the leak rate would be significantly 13 reduced.
14 As far as the claim that we need to 15 continue operating to identify the leak, that has no 16 engineering basis whatsoever.;
If anyone is familiar 17 with leak testing in nuclear power plants or other 18 containing devices, there are many other methods that 19 are much more sensitive to identification and location 20 of leaks, be it in pipes.
One of the methods is a
21 helium leak test which can these pipes, these 22 trenches can certainly be pressurized with a plant 23 shutdown, so my comment is primarily about the need to 24 continue to operate in order to identify the leak.
I 25 think that is an exaggeration.
It's to me, sounds NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS.
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
29 1
more like an excuse to get to the finish line, or the 2
beginning of their outage coming up shortly and that 3
pretty much concludes my comments on the topic.
4 CHAIR BLOUNT:
This is Tom Blount.
Thank 5
you, Mr.
Blanch.
6 I would like to clarify something.
I 7
think you --
there was some attribution to the NRC 8
relative to that, statement of keeping the plant 9
operating and I would only offer that I am not aware 10 personally of an NRC statement to that effect, but I 11 would appreciate if anyone has that information where 12 NRC has made that it could be provided for the 13 Board's review.
14 MR.
BLANCH:
This is Paul Blanch again.
15 I didn't absolutely say the NRC said it.
I have seen 16 media reports and claims by some party, whether it was 17 the NRC or whether it was Entergy, but statements 18 along the line that it was necessary to keep the plant 19 operating in order to identify the leak.
And that's 20 as far as I --
that's the extent of my knowledge on 21 that statement.
Maybe the licensee could provide some 22 clarification.
I've seen it somewhere.
Thank you.
23 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Thank you, Mr. Blanch.
Any 24 other comments or questions from the members of the 25 public?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
30 1
(Pause.)
2 Hearing none, Mr.
- Shadis, thank you for 3
taking the time to provide the NRC staff with 4
clarifying information on the petition that you 5
submitted.
Before we close, does the court reporter 6
need any additional information for the meeting 7
transcript?
8 COURT REPORTER:
This is the court 9
reporter.
No, this is fine.
Thank you.
10 CHAIR BLOUNT:
Thank you.. With that, this 11 meeting is concluded and we'll be terminating the 12 phone connections.
13 (Whereupon, at 11:24 a.m.,
the 14 teleconference was concluded.)
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 www.nealrgross.com
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of:
Vermont Yankee Name of Proceeding:
Docket Number:
Location:
10 CFR 2.206 Petition of Raymond Shadis 50-271 (teleconference) were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
Official reporter Neal R. Gross & Co.,
Inc.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 www.nealrgross.com