ML19276H523

Transcript of 791109 Press Conference on Facility in Washington,Dc.Pp 1-18

ML19276H523
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	11/09/1979
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
NUDOCS 7911290357
Download: ML19276H523 (18)

Text

SM C30K?? lu: :~n

...S.0 - 2.5..'S e---.-.,

.7.,

rr. r A

N UCLEAR REG UI. ATO RY CO MMISSIO N IN THE MATTER OF:

PRESS CONFERENCE on CONSUMERS POWER COMPAN'l

\\@.%

PALISADES NUCLEAR POWER FACILITY q c.l;.

'bG

$,_3 g g 3 U

0 s.

c}

...g y

e.,..

p g

Place - Washington, D. C.

Date.

Friday, 9 Nove::$er 1979 Po wes 1 - 18 7.i. phen.:

(202)347 3700 ACE -FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.

omaneynm 1422 512 L

444 North Capitel Street Washington. D.C. 20001 7 9112 90 h NATIONWIDE COVERAGd DAILY

i l

i 1l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I

2 I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

3l 1

4 j

i 5

6 l

7 PRESS CONFERENCE l

8 with 9

i DR. JOSEPH M.

HENDRIE I

10 i Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

11 i VICTOR STELLO, JR.

Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement 12 JOSEPH J.

FOUCHARD 13 l Director, Office of Public Affairs l

l 14 '

OD 15 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 16 '

PALISADES NUCLEAR POWER FACILITY 17l 18 1717 H Street, N.

W.

19 '

Washington, D.

C.

20,

Friday, 9 November 1979 21 22 '

23 '

24 iw.,ai n oorters, inc.

25 !

1422 513 t

R 8230 1

2 t

4ELTZER

-l mte 1 1

\\

~

l 2

(2:15 p.m.)

i 3i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Good afternoon.

I welcome those i

I 4

few of you who have penetrated the demonstration going o..

l i

t i

5 outsidm and who have chosen to come here rather than either l

i l

6' being for or against what is going on in the local streets.

l 7

This afternoon I wish to announce that the NRC staff 8'

is proposing to fine the Consumers Power Company cf Jackson, 9! Michigan, a civil penalty of S450,000.

That is the largest 10 civil penalty which the NRC or its predecessor regulators have 11 !

ever levied.

I 12 !

It is for violations of NRC regulations at the 13 Palisades Nuclear Power Plant near South Haven, Michigan, and 14 involves a matter of the breach of the containment integrity.

15 I should note that there have not been any public I

i 16 health effects associated with the violations.

Nevertheless, i

I 17 l we regard it clearly as a very serious one.

13 i I am going to turn the rostrum over to Vic Stello l

19 l in a moment, as the Director of the Commission's Office of i

20 t Inspection and Enforcement.

The action is being taken over 21 Mr. Stello's signature.

It is, however, with the anderstanding i

22 ;

that all of the Commissioners have 'een informed and are c

23 agreeable to the action going forward at this time.

24 I would like to make a couple of comments in a N.d eral Repo,ters, Inc.,

25 general way about the enforcement activities of the l

1422 514

nte 2 3

I Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and in particular i.n connection 2

with the matter of these civil penalties.

The law, you will 3

reca12, under which we are empowered to levy these penalties 4l provides for a maximum dollar amount of $5,000 for one 5

violation for one day.

It further sets a limit on the total 6

dollar amount of civil penalties that may be levied ac. inst 7

any licensee for any number of violations within a 30-dav i

I 8

period to $25,000.

9:

These are amounts, as we and many others have 10 remarked, which are really quite small compared with the II financial scale of the operations of the large utilities and 12 the large plants that are concerned in these matters.

i l

13 l The Commission requested of the Congress in February j

Id l of this year an increase in its civil penalty authority to l

IS

$100,000 for a violation and for removal of a limit on a 16 ! maximum amount in any given period, 30 days or any other 17 period.

That legislation still pends before the Congress.

13 And I will use a second of my time here to note i

19 that I continue to encourage the Congress in the strongest i

20 possible terms to get on with that legislation.

21,

In carrying out its enforcement actions, the NRC, 22, and in particular, in connection with levying of penalties

l 23 for violations, the ITRC has been criticized in times ast for 1

24 look for rather inwer amounts to

.eersi s.oorters. :ne. N seeming to, on the one hand, 25 l be levied for a violation than even the present law would l

1422 515 i

Ete 3 l

4 l

I allow; but also, it seemed to take an extremely long time to 2

finally arrive at a determination and to take the formal l

3 ] action of levying the penalty.

l 4!

I think those criticisms are valid, and one of the 5:

reasons that I have chosen to announce today's civil penalty i

6; myself is to make it clear that that is certainly not going i

7!

to be the case in the future.

3 In the present. case, the time is a little under

?

c0 days, which is a considerable improvement over the general I

10 l record of the past.

We hope to improve it, and Vic Ste lo is II working hard in his organization, which handles and processes 12 these matters, to improve the time.

It just doesn't have the 13 effect that it ought to have if a penalty is finally levied Id I

many, many months after the violation has been discovered.

15 l Secondly, with regard to the amounts, it has always i

16

-ceen this Commission's determination that these plants be I7!

operated safely, and that the most meticulous and searching I3 i

attention is to be paid to the safety systems that are provided 19 on the plants.

We are going to do everything we can, and I 20 think the penalty going forward today emphasizes that, to make 21 '

sure that this message comes through in the strongest possible 22 !

terms to the e

.iting utilities.

t i

43 :

e I think that's cienty on m*; side.

And Vic, I think you ought to take over and detail the things.

}422 hlb 24

. ;erai neponers, inc.

25 l QUESTION:

Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.

Before you i

nte 4 5

1 yield to him -.

2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I'm not only going to yield; I

r 3:

I'm going to have to go.

There are a number of other urgent l

l l

4' matters.

l 5

QUESTICN:

The next to the last paragraph of the 6

press release, the company can either pay the fine or protest 7;

its imposition, Who would it lodge that protest with?

l 8

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

With the Nuclear Regulatory l

9l Commission.

The formal notice of the levying of the penalties i

i 10 '

says, in effect, to put it in clain words:

If you would like i

11 !

to argue with us about this penalty or any part of it, you l

12 !

have 20 days to file a statement of your protest with.

And 13 what that would then trigger is a proceeding in the Commission's 14 adjudicatory system under a board to examine the merits of the 15 issue and to make a determination on whether the penalty 16 i should stand or indeed there are some alleviating circumstances 17!

that ought to be considered.

I i

IS ;

QUESTION:

A little earlier in your statement, you l

19 '

said all the Commissioners have been informed and are acreeable I

~

20 ;

with the action plan put forward at this time.

So would a 21 l protest stand a chance?

i 22 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Sure.

The Commission, which has 23 +

the dual role in this agency of being in effect the supreme 24 court of the formal adjudicatory system carried out by our e seral Reporters, Inc.

i 25 boards and appeal boards, would finally review, would review lk22 a

mte 5 6

I on appeal or perhaps on its own motion any final action of the I

agency.

And our determination on such a process would be f

2 i

3:

based on the record made in those formal proceedings.

And i

4l indeed, it's perfectly possible in any given case that those I

I 5l proceedings would develop in:ormation in addition to that 6

that we have in hand now as the staff prepares to go forward, i

7 and that that information would be taken into account in the i

8l final determination.

9 The other side of our role, of course, is that we 10 are collectively the heads of this regulatory agency and have I

a management and executive responsibility to see that it is j

I2 well-run and effectively run in the public interest, as a 13 government organization.

And that means that we cannot, I

because of our other role, the adjudicatory one, just stand l

Id 15 back and be completely ignorant and off in a dark room with 16 regard to the actions the staff has taken.

17 So on this matter, as in a good many other matters, IS l the staff develops what it believes is the pertinent informa-I l9 ;

tion and informs Commissioners, and we have indeed individually 20 we haven't met on the matter or anything of that sort, but i

21 have individually not demurred in the action that Vic Stello i

22 is taking today.

j 4']

)) 8

]

23 '

QUESTION:

All this touches on the dilemma that 24 '

you addressed to the Health Subcommittee yesterdav?

.3.,Jeral Reporters, Inc. I

^

25 :

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Yes, it does.

But I point out i

l l

nte 6 7

I l

l l

1l that every regulatory agency in town that makes rules and l

l 2;

issues them, and has any sort of proceedings under its 3'

legislation, is in precisely the same position.

There is a di dual executive management function for the agency, and that i

5, adjudicatory function.

So it's by no means, you know, a strange:

6 and novel configuration in American government, but one which i

7 a number of -- is present for a number or agencies.

And I a

think it's a perfectly reasonable system.

3-1 9

Thank you very much, i

i 10 I

i 11 12 i

13 14 l 15 '

kk l

16,

17 l 18,

i 19-l 20 21 i

22,

23 24 ;

o-Jerai Amorters, Inc.

25 1 i

tl

8 10 02 01 sh MMM i

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm so rry, I c an' t s t ay w ith 2

you, out matters press in tne other room.

3 MR. STELLO:

Thans you, Mr. Chairman.

What I 4

wanted to co was to oriefly descrice the proolem that 3

occurred at Palisades, whicn is the oasis for taking the a

actio n se nave taken.

4 The action is ceing ta ken because there was a condition 3

whicn lasteo since April of last year, a year and a half

/

ago, approximately, whereby the containment integrity was 10 violatec.

Il fnere is a line that comes out of a penetration f rom the 12 containment that nas two valves which are operatec 13 manually. Th at is locally.

14 These valves are in a system which is used or was 15 pro po sed to ce used to purge the containment for hydrogen lo control following a loss of coolant accident, saould ever 1/

tnat need arise.

13 In order to assure that tnis systam coulJ perform its IV function, tnere neeas to be tests made of tne system, in 20 particular a filter that is in the system.

21 In April of last year, 1978, when they we re perf orming a 22 test to measure the e fficiency of tne filter, they had to 23 coen these two velve s, whicn are normally to ce close d, end 2

nence, to assure tha t tne containment is isolatec f a tas 2;

a tmo s o ne r e.

1422 520

9 0 02 02 sh MMM i

Apparently, wnen they perf orm this test to measure the 2

e ffic iency of the filters, these valves were not closed.

3 This year wnen tney shut down for their refueling outtage in 4

Septemoer, they are required oy licensing concitions to a

measure the integrity of the valves with regard to le ak 6

tightness, how much leakage woulo tnere be oy these valves.

We ll, oc/lously, when you pe rf orm the leak rate test on d

these valves, they founc that tney we re open.

They were not

/

succo sed to ce open.

10 There is no way that we can ascertain with certainty that il these valves, in fact, have oeen open since April of last 12 year.

13 The licens ee celieves tna t that is, in fact the case.

We 11 celleve that that is, in f ac t, the case.

Bu t there is no 15 positive means to do this since they are manual valves.

16 That is, there are not instruments in the control room whicn 1/

would have indicated position of these valves.

13 (ou only can do it on the casis of the recora review end 19 on the basis of that review, we found nothing to concluoe 20 that these valves in fact were closed at any time during the 2i past year and a half.

22 Secause this is a serious saf e ty question, one of the 23 most fundame ntal saf e ty carriers prov iced to protec t the 24 nealth ano sefety of the puolic is tne containment.

22 And since it's clear that the inte grity of tnat 1422 521

10 00203 shMMA 1

containment has oeen apparently violated for the l'ast year 2

and a hal f, it becama clear to me that this cuestion needed 3

ver/ careful, very oelicerate consioeration recaroing wnat 4

was the proper enf orcement action.

There were a range of things tnat coulo ce cone, v ario us 3

o thi.ngs tnat are possible in the course of en acticn, is i

simply issuing a notice of violation witn no other a ttenaant 3

or po tential "penaltie s" e ssoc ia ted with it.

9 It cou ld issue a civil penalty oy itself, an assessment 10 of dollar values up to and including the dollar value tnat 11 we nave im po s ed, which, inc id e n ta lly, is the maximum.

12 Bu t le sse r amounts coulc have oeen imposed, issuing some 13 kind of order of one type or another up to and including 14 orders to snow cause why the lic e n se ought not to ce la susoended or revoked.

16 he ll, I thought tha t this was, in my view, a very serious li safety question that is indicative of a brea%oown in the la syste m whica allowed the containment to ce violated.

l/

I therefore came to the view that we ougnt to use the 20 full enforcament authority available under the civil penalty 21 and did so.

22 But I am not satisfied that that by itself was enough, 23 and t he re for e, have also issued an order to the licensee 24 whi:n. will a menc his license concition and r3 quire him to 25 p er f o r? periodic tests in valves such as the s e and to acort i422 322

11 00204 Mn MMM i

cac< the results or those audits, anc tnat that license 4

condi tion woulo remain in ef f ect at the moment an 3

indeterminste perioc of time until we are sure that things 4

are ceing conducted oy the licensee as they should ce.

Me, in addition, have required the licensee to come in o

and cell us now he intenas to fill tnat recuirement es well e

as assure us tnat he is going to give attention to the 6

cetails that are necessary to assure tne plant is in fact

/

coe ra ted sat' e ly, and he is to do tnat unoer the ccnci tions

'e allowed to start up.

13 of tnis orcer oefore the plant will o

li I don't %now wnen he will propose to come in for this 12 meeting, out it is my Juagme n t that he will procaoly went to 13 co so in the very near future, since the plant is s;ill in e 14 refueling ou ttage.

la I expect that he will try to have this meeting in the la very near future, so that wnen his re fueling outtage is 1/

comolete, he would ce acle to make the ergument to start up la the plant.

ly Sut tne argument to start up the plant or the argument to 2J decide whetner any f urtner enforcement actica will ce neeceo 2

will depend on the re sponse that we get from the licensee 22 as recuired in the order.

23 I have also acaea one otner thing that I celieve is 2

necessary since I have indicatec cefore, an; I woula lica to 20 empnasics tnat enforcement actions tnat are taken, al:hounn 1422 521

12 00205 sh MMM i

they are taken with regard to this particular licensee, I 2

celleve that these actions also are i mco r tan t in that they 3

send a me ssage to the rest o f the industry to assure that 4

that message in this particular case is received oy the a

crope r levet s of management within cne opera ti,g u-ili ti e s.

a I will os sending a le tter to executive a f ficers in each of tne operating utilities to make sure t hat they unaerstana 3

the croolem.

/

I have ju st simoly proposed to heve a letter indicating 13 now I feel acout it and append to it a copy of the order an; 11 the orocosed imposition of the civil penalty, which I 12 uncerstand copies are aveildole in the ca;'< o f the room.

13 I am persuadec that that will serve to get tneir 14 attention and cause them to look very carefully at tneir own 15 systems and make sure that this kina of a situation doesn't 16 develop in tneir own plant.

l/

I don't nave anything else that I think I need to covir.

13 Do yo u have questions ?

1/

QUESTION:

Mr. 5tello, could you de scrice this 20 line, this purge line?

How cig is it, and tne fact that it 21 was open -- what would have happenea if there nad oeen a 24 loss of coolant accicent?

23 AR. STELLA

• Okay.

The line is aoou t four incnes 24 in ciameter.

The valves ari aoout four inches.

Intre is e 22 filter housing in the line downstream of the s e valves on :ne 1422

$24

13 30 02 06

~ ' hMMM i

otner side of the containment, so to speak.

And tney were 2

designed for low pressure wnen the containment is 3

essentially at atmosphere.

4 iney would not be able to withstend, are not cesignec to d

withstand One pressures tnat one would norma lly expec t to 5

reaca if he nad a very sucstantial 1 ss of ccolant accidant.

50 if you had a loss of c oolant occident anc these valves S

were, incesa, open, the filter housing and the rest of tne

/

sys te m downs tream would not ce expectec to survive, and 13 nence, you would have a containment whicn was open to tna 11 atmosphere througn this line.

12 The amount of material tnat coula escape sould 09 limi te d 13 to tne amount that could pass througn that size line.

14 QUESTION:

That's pretty oig?

la MR. STELLO:

Yes, that's f airly la rge.

But in 15 terms of the size of the containment, tne containment is a 1e ver/ large pressure vessel.

So over sooe pe riod of hours,

la One fission procucts that would be in taere sould get out ly into the environment until such time as one coulc attempt to 22 close these valves, which would be very cifficult since thef 2

would have to be closed witn difficulty.

24 fne raciological consequences woula, of course, -epena on 23 the accioent itself, and they could ce substantially, cy 2i ard?rs of m3;nituce, greater than wnat ve vould cernit of la d ar t 100 of our re gula tions.

1422 525

14 0 02 O I shMMM i

So you woulc calculate and you would have to decide on 2

what kind of maximum you are analyzing.

A classical siting 3

accicent, it would ce several orders of magnituoe greater 4

than the Part 100 guideline values..

5

.ie nc e, it is e ve ry serious question.

a JUESTIO;1:

Who discovered this?

.'ho s e inspection

/

was i t?

NRC inspection or utility inspection?

3 MR. STELL3: No, I thougnt I explained that.

.inen 9

they were performing a test, as required by their license, 10 the u tili tie s -

11 JU ESTIoi1:

The utility, and then they reported to 12 you?

13 A2. STELLO:

And then they reported to us.

They 11 discoverea that tne valves we re open.

15 QUESTION:

Do you feel that, you know, when you is cegin to crack down like this with neavy mone tary oenelties, 14 enat this might give them a negative incentive to report all 13 these littis things that they nave to report?

1/

MR. STELLAS Then the penalties would croceoly get 22 larcer if I found tna t that dere occurring.

21 I don't oelieve that I would ce in a position to fina 22 myself willing to tolerate that situation.

2J JU ES TIO.J :

Did thi s reactor have an.'l?C inspector 2+

in residence?

2;

'G. 5TELLa:

There was a resi;ent insoector 1422 526

15 10 02 08

-h MMM i

assignec to this reactor in July of this year.

2 OJESTION:

Doesn't he have a checklist to chec.:

a out whetner tne safe ty f eatures are --

4

'id. 5TELLO:

He cid perform caecks on a nuacer of a

safety syst3ms.

Howsver, he dio no: perform one on :nis a

one.

/

CUESTION:

Were there any transients during thh i

period cetween -- you think this valve may nave been ooen?

/

MR. STELLO: No, tnere was no untoward healta h) e ff ec ts as a result of it being coen.

Inere were no fission 11 products released, no accidents in ;his time period.

Ic

'G.. 0UCHA RD:

I never thought that I woula hear e 13 reporter use the wora " transient."

14 (Laughter.)

15 QUESTInd:

Why dic the resident inspector not lo chec4 the system?

Il MR. 5TELLO:

It cle arly is impossiole f or one 13 inspector to check all of tne things that need to De ene %ea 19 in the plant.

He checked a nuacer of syste.ns -- I nave 2s f orgo tten -- f our or five that he went tnrough as part of 21 inspections that ne conducted.

But it's just not possiole 24 for us witn tne resioent inspector, or even snen we edd an 23 a ddi t iona l insoec tor, which we nope to ao tais year, to feel 21 tha we are goino to be aole to eneck everytning.

2a dowever, wnen we add this adoitional inso ec tor taim year, 1422 527

16 00209 s n '4Li i

it will ce in these areas wnere he will ce concentrating nis 2

a ff or ts.

3 30 I f eel ouite comfortaole in oelieving that our chances 4

of finding nis <ino of tning as a result of our own a

inspection activities will 31gnifi antly inc r e as e as we e oc o

One next inspector, wno will concentrata his activity in

/

this particular area.

3 JU 55 f !O.1:

This et least montniy inspection taet

/

/ou were tal%ing aoout will Jo on for a time not 3pec ifia c.

IJ MR. STELLO:

That's correct.

11 QJ E5 TION:

Do you think tnat a letter to tne la exe:utives of the otner utilities would get them to 100% at 13 tnis?

Do taere remain any steps to make tnis e general 14 Licensing condition?

10 MA. STELLO:

I don't thing at the moment that it to ougnt to be a general license concition.

It ougnt to 09 es is a result, as it is in this :s se, whe re I wanted them to ao 13 more.

l/

I celieve if tney have reasonaole inspection progre,s, 20 that they will ce doing the equivalant of nis.

If we find 21 that that's not tne case, taen I will not hesitate to issue 22 a cdi t iona l o roe rs to licensees requir ing enem to do it.

2a If I fina tnat af ter I send tnis letter ena we 70 cact 2+

and look, tn a t tnat's the case -

2; JU 55 TIO.i :

Does tai s suooes t to you net mevo?

1422 528

17 10 02 10 NhBN i

some sort or an indicator snould have oeen in the control 2

room, tha t tnis sort of a valve is -- wnich, es you say, is 3

an important saf ety f eature -- they coulo te ll wnat the 4

s tatus of it was?

U.

STELLJ:

I woulo ratner tnan nave inoi:etec io a

the control room, I would rather nave a mecnanism for wnicn e

tne/ go around auciting.

The se are manue l /a lve s.

They 3

can' t have en ooerating arm.

They cannot ce coerated from

)

the control room.

10 iney are to ce physically closed.

Ana, in fect, there is 11 a.< a y for wnich you can put a lock on tnem end lock tnem 12 closed.

Aqa one ought to have procedures to go in and audit 13 and make sure tnat fact is the casa f rom tioe to time.

14 I' d ratha r have a visual o oservation o f Je termina tion 15 that the valves are in the.aosition they should be in tais la case, although that is anotner way to loo k e t tne croolem.

II I f eel mo re assured oy having the actual obse rva tion o f 13 valve position rather than relying ]n lignt3 in the control li room.

2)

IJE5TIai4:

How often was a util i ty supposed to do 21 the inspections in which th3y discovered the valves were 22 open?

23

'U. S T E L'_ J :

ine leak rate tes ts aere reouir?c, es 21 I rec all, every refueling cottage, acout 1: montrs.

2a OUESTIO.!:

Mas the reactor operating.every oey 1422 529

18 0 02 11 in MMM i

curing tnat 18-montn period oecause I tn'nk there's 2

something in the cac4 here acout how many days was it a

coerating?

+

12. STELLO:

243 aays, I celieve.

I t's

..r i t t e n a

aown ner? somewnere.

Acout 200 --

a

'J A. 'AU 32 A (:

424, the last nuacer in tne c a c '<.

/

VOICE:

424 is the total aays, I see.

3 MA. STELLO:

The tecl3 in the oack gives tne

/

actual cays.

la 2UE5 TION: Thank yo u.

I got it.

11

13. STELLO:

Any other questions?

12 QUESTION:

When is Pelisede s dua to recoen not 13 counting what's hacpening?

14 MA. STELLO:

Their refueling outtage that tney're 10 in now I celieve was schedulea to end some time aoout the dr d' 16 midale of D3 cemoe r.

14 QUESTION:

Does tais ection necessarily crecluae 13 their apening, then?

Is MR. STELLO:

Not necessarily.

Sun i f.ve don't ;a t 2]

satisfactory answers, it could.

21 u rthe r questions ?

22 2dESTIOJ:

Just one more tning.

Is tnere a 2a aesi; nation like delisaces I,

2, 3?

2e M.f. STELLO: Only one unit tnere.

Thank you.

2; (aheraucon, at 2: 40 p.m.,

the press criefing was conclucea.)

1422 530