ML101330422
| ML101330422 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/22/2010 |
| From: | Vanderdoes P - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Diane Screnci Office of Public Affairs |
| Shared Package | |
| ML101440229 | List: |
| References | |
| G20100295, LTR-10-0216, SECY-2010-0265 | |
| Download: ML101330422 (5) | |
Text
t EDO Principal Correspondence Control FROM:
DUE: 06/03/10 EDO CONTROL: G20100295 DOC DT: 04/22/10 FINAL REPLY:
Peter Van der Does Brattleboro, Vermont TO:
- Screnci, OPA FOR SIGNATURE OF :
GRN CRC NO: 10-0216
- Leeds, NRR DESC:
ROUTING:
Safety Concerns at Vermont Yankee (EDATS: SECY-2010-0265)
DATE: 05/12/10 Borchardt Virgilio Mallett Ash Mamish Burns/Rothschild
- Collins, RI Burns, OGC
- Kotzalas, OEDO ASSIGNED TO:
NRR CONTACT:
Leeds SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
-Tk4 xie, ; ecýj, -o f -ý E-OND
EDATS Number: SECY-2010-0265 Source: SECY GeerlInfraio Assigned To: NRR Other Assignees:
Subject:
Safety Concerns at Vermont Yankde
==
Description:==
OEDO Due Date: 6/3/2010 11:00 PM SECY Due Date: NONE CC Routing: Regionl;'OGC ADAMS Accession Numbers - Incoming: NONE Response/Package: NONE a
OhrIfr aionl Cross Reference Number: G20100295, LTR-10-0216 Related Task:
File Routing: EDATS Staff Initiated: NO Recurring Item: NO Agency Lesson Learned: NO OEDO Monthly Report Item: NO I' Proes Inomtn I
Action Type: Letter Signature Level: NRR Approval Level: No Approval Required OEDO Concurrence: NO OCM Concurrence: NO OCA Concurrence: NO Special Instructions:
Priority: Medium Sensitivity: None Urgency: NO Docmen Inoraion Originator Name: Peter Van der Does Originating Organization: Citizens Addressee: Diane Screnci, OPA Incoming Task Received: Letter Date of Incoming: 4/22/2010 Document Received by SECY Date: 5/12/2010 Date Response Requested by Originator: NONE Page 1 of I
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET Date Printed: May 11, 2010 10:28 PAPER NUMBER:
ACTION OFFICE:
LTR-10-0216 EDO LOGGING DATE: 05/11/2010 AUTHOR:
AFFILIATION:
ADDRESSEE:
SUBJECT:
ACTION:
DISTRIBUTION:
LETTER DATE:
ACKNOWLEDGED SPECIAL HANDLING:
Mr. Peter Van der Does VT Screnci Diane Safety concerns at Vermont Yankee Appropriate Chairman, Comrs 04/22/2010 No NOTES:
FILE LOCATION:
ADAMS DATE DUE:
DATE SIGNED:
EDO -- G20100295
Peter Van der Does box 523 Brattleboro, Vermont 05302 tel. 802 376 5939 April 2 2nd 2010 Diane Screnci Senior Public Affairs Officer Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dear ms. Screnci Thank you for getting back to me on the phone so quickly. Contrary to the general feeling at the public meeting in Brattleboro I know the NRC will give straight answers.
In the NUREG 1437 supplement 30 appendix G...I am assuming that the upgrades for safety purposes discussed were at the discretion of the licensee. There were 3 upgrades that the licensee wds willing to implement mentioned in bold face type on pages G-26 and G-27.
It occurred to me that the apparent willingness to implement these safety items would reflect positively on ENVY's application.
Did they in fact accomplish any of these 3 upgrades like they said they would ?
>1. Control containment venting within a narrow band of pressure to reduce probability of operator failing to vent and remove guaranteed failure of core spray and LPCI.
>2. Defeat low reactor pressure interlocks to open LPCI or core spray injection valves
,,,during transients, with stuck open SRVs or during loss of coolant accidents in which random
. failures prevent all low pressure. injection valves from opening
>3, ECCS low pressure interlock hardware modification Install a bypass.switch to bypass the low reactor pressure interlocks of LPCI or core spray injection valves.
Another question has occurred to me. Since the majority of routine NRC inspections rely upon reading scheduled maintenance reports done by the licensee how does the NRC know if Entergy is doing an adequate job of reporting their scheduled maintenance when they are so lax in e ormin their scheduled. maintenance.
An adequate preventative maintenance program would have avoided the 2 story transformer fire,, the cooling tower collapse., the crane accident,. and the radioactive effluent leaks.
Letter of Tuesday April 2 0th 2010 Page 2 cont.
Vermont Yankee has a history of non-compliance with NRC regulations beginning in 1973 when they placed two control rods next to each other in such a way as to be in direct violation with safety standards win 1980 Vermont Yankee was shut down for non-compliance and then re-opened without making the necessary adjustments for safety standards.
$-In 1988 the NRC cited V.Y. for deficiencies in electrical terminations.
wIn 1992 a Vermont Yankee whistleblower revealed serious maintenance deficiencies.
)-In 1994 Vermont Yankee was fined a total of 237,500$ for degraded safety systems.
D-In 1995 Vermont Yankee was fined an additional 50,000$ for ignoring the NRC's directive to check safety valves in the core spray cooling system.
- In 1996 NRC administrator Herbert Miller pointed out that Vermont Yankee failed to analyze the core cooling system, a situation which existed for 22 years.
wIn 1998 the NRC imposed 55,000$ worth of fines constituting a level 3 problem including failure to address design deficiences.
'In October 2001 the NRC labeled security concerns at one level below the maximum level of concern.
wIn March 2003 the NRC cited Vermont Yankee for tardy corrective measures affecting instrumentation.
B-Since then we have had the 2 story transformer fire, the cooling tower collapse, and the radioactive leaks all because lax preventive maintenance.
NThe independent safety analysis found 81 items of concern at Vermont Yankee.
Please pass this letter on to appropriate commissioners who might actually read this and decommission it.
Thank you.