ML16355A155
| ML16355A155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 12/17/2016 |
| From: | Garb J Pilgrim Legislative Advisory Coalition |
| To: | Stephen Burns NRC/Chairman |
| References | |
| LTR-16-0605 | |
| Download: ML16355A155 (2) | |
Text
Mccloskey, Bridin From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Jim Garb <jimgarb@comcast.net>
Saturday, December 17, 2016 9:22 PM Burns, Stephen
Subject:
Kritine.Svinicki@nrc.gov; Roy.hawkins@nrc.gov; Johnson, Michael; daniel.dorman@nrc.gov; Dean, Bill; patcicia.holahan@nrc.gov; Baran, Jeff; Veil, Andrea
[External_Sender] Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth MA Chairman Stephen G. Burns U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
Via email December 17, 2016
Dear Chairman Burns and members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
I write today as a physician board certified in Occupational and Environmental Medicine and as a concerned citizen living on Cape Cod, about 25 miles across open water from the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth MA. I suspect you are all aware by now of last week's inadvertent release to the public of a highly critical interim report from an ongoing high level NRC inspection of Pilgrim. This interim report by inspection lead Donald Jackson has been widely covered in the regional news outlets. As you know, the NRC lowered Pilgrim to the Column 4 performance category last year, one step from forced shutdown.
The report can only be read as highly damning of the condition of the facility and of the ineffective safety culture that management has allowed there. Some of the salient findings detailed in the report include:
Failure of plant workers to follow established industry procedures Broken equipment that never gets properly fixed Lack of required expertise among plant experts Failure of some staff to understand their roles and responsibilities A team of employees who appear to be struggling with keeping the nuclear plant running "The corrective actions in the recovery plan seem to have been hastily developed and implemented, and some have been circumvented as they were deemed too hard to complete."
"We are observing current indications of a safety culture problem that a bunch of talking probably won't fix."
The observations detailed in this report come on top of a dismal safety record over many years, with repeated shutdowns of Pilgrim due to failure of critical equipment, so those of us who closely follow events at Pilgrim were not surprised by the findings. Our only surprise was that they have now been so honestly shared with the public. Even today, Pilgrim is shut down since the inspection team's departure following the discovery of leaks in three of the eight main steam isolation valves, one of which was declared inoperable and had to be removed from service.
Pilgrim is an antiquated facility, the same flawed design as those that failed at Fukushima. Safety fixes that the NRC required for such reactors following Fukushima have yet to be implemented at Pilgrim. It is obvious to anyone who follows the news that the plant has not been adequately maintained. Entergy is slated to close Pilgrim in June of 2019 because it is no longer profitable to operate. It is scheduled for refueling in six months, and nearly 1,000 disintegrating boron panels in the spent fuel storage pool will have to be replaced by September of 2017. It makes no sense for Entergy to address all the safety deficiencies noted in the interim inspection report and pour money into a failing plant that will soon be closing. By the same token, I believe the NRC would be derelict in its duties by allowing Pilgrim to continue operating. Even a small accidental release of radiation, never mind a meltdown, would force your hand and 1
have a chilling effect on the entire nuclear industry in this country from which it might never recover. Finally, there is sufficient excess capacity in the ISO New England power grid that the energy produced by Pilgrim is not necessary.
Pilgrim management has known about this inspection for months. If these findings represent the best they can do after months of preparation, I can only imagine what must go on routinely when they are not under such close scrutiny. I have worked in hospitals for the last 30 years and have gone through several inspections by the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. I can say with certainty that if a hospital were found to have the same type of safety issues found at Pilgrim, it would lose its accreditation. Of course, the stakes are much higher when dealing with an unsafe nuclear reactor.
The citizens of Plymouth and surrounding communities, including Cape Cod from which there is no feasible evacuation route should Pilgrim experience a serious accident, are justifiably concerned about their health, their environment, their property, and their way of life. This interim NRC inspection report clearly documents that our concern is well founded. You have an important job to do. I urge you to take the appropriate step and close Pilgrim now, before refueling in June, and before an unthinkable event occurs. I believe the only reactor the NRC has ever forced to close was Pilgrim back in the 1980's. It's time to close Pilgrim again, this time permanently.
Thank you for your work to protect public safety.
Sincerely, James R. Garb, MD FACOEM Pilgrim Legislative Advisory Coalition Yarmouth Port MA jimgarb@comcast.net 508-375-0419 CC: Commissioner Kristine L. Svinicki Commissioner Jeff Baran Andrea Veil, Executive Director, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards E. Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Michael R. Johnson, Deputy Executive Director for Reactor and Preparedness Programs Daniel H. Dorman, Regional Administrator Region I William M. Dean, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Patricia K. Holahan, Director Office of Enforcement This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com 2