ML103120216
| ML103120216 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/2010 |
| From: | NRC/FSME |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 2.206, NRC-517 | |
| Download: ML103120216 (19) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
10 CFR 2.206 Petition Review Board TMI Decommissioning Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
(telephone conference)
Date:
Tuesday, October 19, 2010 Work Order No.:
NRC-517 Pages 1-18 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
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
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD (PRB) 4 CONFERENCE CALL 5
RE 6
PETITION OF ERIC EPSTEIN 7
CHAIRMAN, TMI-ALERT, INC.
8 RE THREE MILE ISLAND DECOMMISSIONING 9
+ + + + +
10 TUESDAY 11 OCTOBER 19, 2010 12
+ + + + +
13 The conference call was held, Keith I.
14 McConnell, Chairperson of the Petition Review Board, 15 presiding.
16 17 PETITIONER: ERIC EPSTEIN, Chairman, TMI-Alert, Inc.
18 19 NRC HEADQUARTERS STAFF:
20 KEITH I. McCONNELL, Deputy Division Director, 21 Division of Waste Management and Environmental 22 Protection 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 2
NRC HEADQUARTERS STAFF (continued) 1 KRISTINA L. BANOVAC 2
JOHN T. BUCKLEY, JR., Petition Manager 3
MICHELE L. BURGESS 4
LYDIA W. CHANG 5
MICHAEL A. DUSANIWSKYJ 6
SHAWN W. HARWELL 7
PATRICIA A. JEHLE, OGC 8
9 FIRSTENERGY STAFF:
10 MIKE BEITING 11 JIM EMLEY 12 DAVE JENKINS 13 TOM LENTZ 14 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 3
P R O C E E D I N G S 1
(time not provided) 2 MR. EPSTEIN: Hello.
3 MR. EMLEY: Hello.
4 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes.
5 MR. EMLEY: This is Jim Emley from 6
FirstEnergy.
7 MR. EPSTEIN: Hi, Jim. This is Eric 8
Epstein. How are you?
9 MR. EMLEY: Hey, Eric, how are you?
10 MR. EPSTEIN: I'm in touch with my 11 feminine side. Are we the only ones on right now?
12 MR. JENKINS: No, Jim, this is David 13 Jenkins in Palm West for FirstEnergy as well.
14 MR. EPSTEIN: Hi guys, how are you doing?
15 MR. JENKINS: Just fine, doing good.
16 (Pause) 17 MR. McCONNELL: Hello 18 MR. EPSTEIN: Hello.
19 MR. McCONNELL: Mr. Epstein?
20 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes.
21 MR.
McCONNELL:
Hi, this is Keith 22 McConnell at the NRC Headquarters.
23 MR. EPSTEIN: Hi, Keith. How are you?
24 MR.
McCONNELL:
- Good, thanks.
Is 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 4
FirstEnergy on the line?
1 MR. LENTZ: Yes, FirstEnergy's on the 2
line. We have myself, Tom Lentz. We have Dave 3
Jenkins, Mike Beiting.
4 MR. McCONNELL: One second. How do you 5
spell that?
6 MR. LENTZ: B-E-I-T-I-N-G. Then, lastly, 7
Jim Emley, E-M-L-E-Y.
8 MR. McCONNELL: All right, again, I'm 9
Keith McConnell. I'm Deputy Division Director here in 10 the Division of Waste Management and Environmental 11 Protection.
We have responsibility for the 12 decommissioning program here at NRC.
13 I'd like to remind everybody at the outset 14 that we are recording this conversation as part of the 15 2.206 process as specified in Management Directive 16 8.11.
17 What I'll do is I'll have -- we'll go 18 around the room up here to let everybody know who's on 19 the phone line up here. John?
20 MR. BUCKLEY: John Buckley.
21 MS. BANOVAC: Kristina Banovac.
22 MS. BURGESS: Michele Burgess.
23 MS. JEHLE: Patricia Jehle from the Office 24 of the General Counsel 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 5
MR. DUSANIWSKYJ: Michael Dusaniwskyj.
1 MR. HARWELL: Shawn Harwell.
2 MS. CHANG: Lydia Chang.
3 MR. McCONNELL: That's it from NRC 4
Headquarters. Is there anybody else on the line that 5
hasn't been identfied yet?
6 (No response.)
7 MR. McCONNELL: I guess not. Okay, Mr.
8 Epstein, are you aware of the -- our 2.206 petition 9
process?
10 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes.
11 MR. McCONNELL: Okay. As part of 12 Management Directive 8.11, I'm obligated as chair of 13 the Petition Review Board to go through the process in 14 brief terms just so it's clear to everyone how the 15 process flows and what the purpose of this particular 16 teleconference is.
17 So, just to walk through the process, the 18 first step under Management Directive 8.11 is the 19 appointment of a petition manager. That is John 20 Buckley. He is acting for Kris Banovac who is on 21 detail right now, but is sitting in on the call. And 22 Kris will take over when she gets back in December.
23 John will be the point of contact between you, Mr.
24 Epstein, and the NRC.
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 6
The second step is the designation of a 1
petition review board. And that's been done. Again, 2
I'm Keith McConnell. I'm the chair of the board. It 3
also has as members John Buckley as the petition 4
manager, Mike Dusaniwskyj from our Office of Nuclear 5
Reactor Regulations as technical reviewer, Steven 6
Jefferson, who isn't here, from our Office of 7
Investigations, and Mick Hilton, who also wasn't able 8
to make it, from our Office of Enforcement. And then 9
Patty Jehle -- Jehle, did I say it right?
10 MS. JEHLE: Jehle.
11 MR. MCCONNELL: Jehle, sorry.
12 MS. JEHLE: It's fine.
13 MR. MCCONNELL: From the Office of General 14 Counsel. The initial meeting of the petition review 15 board, which we held actually just before this call, 16 is to make an assessment and come up with a path 17 forward. That's been followed by the meeting with the 18 petitioner, to provide the petitioner with the 19 opportunity to provide additional information on the 20 request to take enforcement action, and also allows 21 the board to ask any questions it might have about the 22 submittal prior to it making a decision on whether it 23 meets the 2.206 petition process criteria.
24 Again, I'd like to not that the meeting, 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 7
the
- telecon, is being
- recorded, and will be 1
transcribed to serve as a record of the meeting. I'd 2
also note that this entire process is a public 3
process, and I think, Mr. Epstein, that John has 4
probably made you aware of that at this point.
5 MR. EPSTEIN: That's correct.
6 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. After our meeting 7
with you, Mr. Epstein, we will meet again in closed 8
session to determine whether the request meets the 9
criteria for a 2.206 petition, and as a consequence 10 whether to attempt it.
11 Once that decision is made, John will 12 inform you, Mr. Epstein, of that decision. And you 13 have the opportunity to comment on the board's 14 recommendations and decisions. That would also be 15 done in an open teleconference, which would also be 16 recorded. Based on that teleconference, the board 17 would decide whether to modify its recommendations, 18 and final recommendations would be provided to you in 19 an acknowledgement letter.
20 If the request meets the criteria for a 21 2.206 petition, a Federal Register notice is issued.
22 The goal then for the NRC staff is to issue a draft 23 director's decision to you for comment within 120 days 24 of acknowledging -- of the acknowledgement letter.
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 8
The second goal, the second metric we use 1
is that we then are obligated to attempt to issue a 2
final director's decision within 45 days of the end of 3
your comment period on the proposed director's 4
decision. And that's pretty much the process as 5
outlined in Management Directive 8.11. Are there any 6
questions?
7 MR. EPSTEIN: The only question I'd have 8
is -- I have two questions. One is, I noticed during 9
the introduction, I believe there are seven NRC folks.
10 Some of those folks apparently are not on the review 11 board. So I was just trying to determine what their 12 function is in this process.
13 MR. MCCONNELL: Michelle Burgess is within 14 the Office of FSME, which is Federal and State 15 Materials and Environmental Management Programs, and 16 is our liaison with the Office of Enforcement, so 17 that's her purpose for being here.
18 Kris Banovac, as I mentioned, will be 19 taking over as petition manager when she returns from 20 detail. Lydia Chang is a branch chief in our Special 21 Projects
- Group, and her responsibility includes 22 financial assurance for (inaudible) facility.
23 MR. EPSTEIN: (inaudible) 24 MR. MCCONNELL: Shawn Harwell is assisting 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 9
Mike Dusaniwskyj in review.
1 MR. EPSTEIN: It's kind of hard to hear 2
you. There's some activity on one of the phone lines, 3
but I think I got the gist of it.
4 MR. MCCONNELL: Yes, we're trying to take 5
care of that right now. We have a meeting going on in 6
an adjoining room.
7 MR. EPSTEIN: What's the timeline before 8
there's a recommended decision.
9 MR. MCCONNELL: What our intent is --
10 after we get done with this call, is to meet in closed 11 session again.
12 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes?
13 MR. MCCONNELL: And then, hopefully, 14 within the next week make an initial decision, such 15 that the acknowledgement letter gets out by November 16 15th.
17 MR. EPSTEIN: Thank you.
18 MR. MCCONNELL: Any other questions?
19 Okay. Anything from FirstEnergy?
20 MR. LENTZ: No.
21 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. So with that, Mr.
22 Epstein, I don't know if you had any presentation, or 23 any sort of additional information you wanted to 24 provide the board?
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 10 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes, I do. And I don't want 1
to take up a lot of time. Most of the information I 2
wanted to communicate was contained in my DFI on 3
September 30th. I just want to add a couple 4
additional points of reference, so that everybody gets 5
a feel for the continuity and the chain of custody 6
that I've been through personally, and what the 7
community has been through collectively.
8 I mean, everybody knows that construction 9
began in '69, and the accident occurred in '79. I 10 would just point in terms of rate-making purposes at 11 the time of the accident, the plant was owned by three 12 companies, all under the GPU umbrella.
13 50 percent was Met Ed, 25 percent JCP&L, 14 and another 25 percent Penelec. At the time of the 15 accident, some people may not be aware, there was no 16 decommissioning fund. So when we began this odyssey 17 in '79, there was $560,000,000 available. Most of 18 that was -- about $335,000,000 was available through 19 the Price-Anderson pool.
There was another 20
$140,000,000 available, although that was handled by 21 the insurers, so that was an insurance pool. And 22 another 800 -- or actually $85,000,000 from the NRC.
23 So we had the accident. There was no 24 decommissioning fund. After the accident, there was 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 11 about $560,000,000 available. I think everybody, 1
including the agency, the company, the community 2
understood there was a problem with funding the clean-3 up, so back in November of 1980, to the credit of the 4
NRC, the Advisory Panel was constructed.
5 And that operated for about 15 years, and 6
I'll come back to that briefly. In the interim, there 7
just wasn't enough money to clean the plant up. So I 8
was one of the people who took a rather unpopular 9
stand of supporting what was known as the Thornburgh 10 plan back in July of '81.
11 And the Thornburgh plan provided about 12
$987,000,000 to defuel TMI 2. We thought as a 13 community that it would be better that the company 14 didn't become
- bankrupt, wasn't insolvent, and 15 continued to function.
16 It was at that point that we began to 17 experience a problem between what the industry 18 committed, and what they would come through on. At 19 the time, the industry committed $150,000,000 to 20 defueling. They came up with about $91,000,000. And 21 again, just to give folks the chain of custody and the 22 perspective and continuity, one of the reasons for the 23 DFI is that I want to make sure that there's a 24 correlation between what a company says will be there, 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 12 and what is actually there.
1 So this is again going back to July of 2
'81. The Thornburgh plan came to fruition, the NRC 3
convened as a matter of record numerous -- I think 4
there were 78 Advisory Panel meetings. I included in 5
my DFI a number of quotations made by the company, 6
transcripted by the NRC that they would have no 7
problems coming up with the funds to clean up the 8
plant.
9 In fact, I would ask that you refer to the 10 record, or at least reach out to Dr. Michael Masnik, 11 who coordinated the TMI Advisory Panel meetings, to 12 get some sense of how anxious people were about there 13 not being money available to decommission TMI 2 when 14 that time came about.
15 And I've made some references in the DFI, 16 and there are numerous references that stipulated from 17 the company that there would be no problem coming up 18 with the funding. As such, we entered into post-19 defueling monetary storage in the early nineties. The 20 decommissioning fund then was underfunded. It 21 continued to be underfunded.
22 The company -- there was some change in 23 custody again. Obviously, the company operating was 24 the same, but they changed their name back in the 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 13 eighties, and the island itself was bought by 1
FirstEnergy. Again, just to give you some sense of 2
where we're going, the plant cost a substantial amount 3
of money to build, cost a substantial amount of money 4
to defuel, and by the time we got to 2005 under new 5
management, the company successfully sued the local 6
taxing authorities.
7 And the company has now had the plant, in 8
April of 2005, valued at zero. In fact, it is the 9
company's position that the plant has no value. They 10 were paying about -- there's a substantial amount of 11 money that's not falling into the property tax 12 agreement.
13 My concern is this, and as I summarized, 14 we're now into the year 2010. The plant was supposed 15 to be cleaned up on 2014. The money is not there.
16 Due to the license extension at TMI 1, it's my 17 understanding that the clean-up has now been postponed 18 to 2034, at a minimum, which is in conflict with what 19 the company originally testified back in '88, that 20 delaying the clean-up would decrease the cost and 21 increase safety.
22 So now there's a gap, a substantial gap, 23 between what it will cost to decommission and how much 24 is in the decommissioning fund. And as I pointed out, 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 14 as a matter of law, as a the rate caps expire in 1
Pennsylvania, 75 percent of the company that owns TMI 2
2 will no longer have the ability to raise funds to 3
bridge that gap.
4 My suggestion, and I can't tell this board 5
what to do, is that there have been two recent 6
developments that may help in terms of guidance. One 7
was a guarantee that was offered in December of 2009 8
by Entergy up at Vermont Yankee, to close the gap. In 9
other
- words, provide a
guarantee between the 10
$40,000,000 that is necessary to clean the plant and 11 the $40,000,000 that's not there.
12 Or I think the second option the NRC could 13 pursue is a letter of credit, which was recently done, 14 as witnessed by an NRC press release, on September 1st 15 at Zion, when Zion's license was transferred to 16 Environmental Solutions, I'm aware that -- or Zion 17 Solutions put into place a $200,000,000 letter of 18 credit.
19 Now let me just conclude by saying, 20 whether it's a guarantee or a letter of credit, 21 there's a gap. And that gap is not going to be able 22 to be met through the rate-making machinations, and 23 prior to the consummation of the merger between these 24 two companies, and consistent with the information 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 15 (inaudible) established, I think it's incumbent on the 1
NRC to issue the DFI.
2 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. Thank you for that.
3 I
would like to ask a
clarifying
- question, 4
specifically about what action you're requesting the 5
NRC take. Is it only a demand for information?
6 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes, at this point.
7 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. I mean, we did note 8
that on page six, as it's identified the way it's 9
paginated on our system here, that you say "at a 10
- minimum, the proposed merger must be held in 11 abeyance." Are you talking about -- I guess this is 12 the merger between FirstEnergy and Allegheny Power?
13 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes, but I don't think the 14 NRC has the ability to do that, since it's my 15 understanding that FirstEnergy has not filed any 16 formal applications with the Agency.
17 MR. MCCONNELL: That's correct. And we 18 just wanted to make it clear that, in the absence of 19 any request, we wouldn't be taking action in that 20 matter.
21 MR. EPSTEIN: Yes, however I would not 22 oppose the NRC if they decided to initiate such an 23 action.
24 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. Just to be clear, 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 16 it's not our intent to do that.
1 MR. EPSTEIN: I understand.
2 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. Any other questions 3
from any of the board members?
4 (Pause) 5 Mr. Epstein, I think we're pretty clear on 6
what you're asking for, and why you're asking for it.
7 So just sitting around the table here, we don't seem 8
to have any other questions for you. I guess I would 9
open it up to FirstEnergy if they have any questions 10 or comments?
11 MR. LENTZ: Just one question. Is there 12 any part of this petition that is outside of existing 13 regulation, in particular 50.75?
14 MR. BUCKLEY: I don't think so.
15 MR. MCCONNELL: I guess the judgment here, 16 right now, without having thought about it very much, 17 is that we don't think so. But certainly that can be 18 part, I think, of the decision-making process, of 19 whether it meets the criteria for a 2.206 petition.
20 MR. BUCKLEY: Well, the question was 21 actually, I think, posed to Eric, if he felt that 22 there were some facts that were missing here.
23 MR. MCCONNELL: Thank you.
24 MR. EPSTEIN: Not that I'm aware of, but I 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 17 can get back to you if you want to send me -- you 1
know, if you formally just make the question available 2
to my email address. I'm actually not at my office 3
right now, so off the top of my head the answer would 4
be no. But I would like an opportunity to respond to 5
it.
6 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. FirstEnergy, do you 7
have anything else for the petitioner?
8 MR. LENTZ: Nothing at this moment.
9 MR. MCCONNELL: Okay. Anything for NRC?
10 MR. LENTZ: No.
11 MR. MCCONNELL: Well, with that, I believe 12 we have all the information we need. We're going to 13 go on mute here for a second. We'll be right back.
14 (Pause) 15 Okay, we're back. I think, again, that's 16 all we have from the NRC perspective. So unless there 17 is some other information that you, Mr. Epstein, or 18 FirstEnergy wants to provide, we will end the call.
19 MR. EPSTEIN: No, I mean, the only thing I 20 would add is -- and I don't know if you have 21 accessibility to Dr. Masnik, but there are substantial 22 transcripts of the TMI Advisory Panel that clearly 23 deliniates a commitment made by the company to clean 24 the plant up. So I would only ask that you avail 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 18 yourself of either Dr. Masnik or the transcripts that 1
are available.
2 MR. MCCONNELL: Our colleagues from the 3
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation indicate that 4
they have it.
5 MR. EPSTEIN: Okay. Thank you.
6 MR. MCCONNELL: With that, we will close 7
the call. Again, we will try to complete our action, 8
at least on the decision on whether it meets the 2.206 9
criteria, by November 15th.
10 MR. EPSTEIN: Thank you, sir.
11 MR. BUCKLEY: And there will be a 12 transcript made of this call from the recording.
13 MR. MCCONNELL: Thank you, folks.
14 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 15 teleconference was concluded.)
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25