Text

Advises That Was Not Intended as 10CFR2.206 Petition & Thus,Director'S Decision 81-21 Should Be Recinded
	ML20071H980
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point, 05000000
Issue date:	11/12/1981
From:	Lorion J; CENTER FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY
To:	Harold Denton; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20071H975	List: ML20071H977; ML20071H980;
References
	FOIA-82-546 DD-81-21, NUDOCS 8203120426
	Download: ML20071H980 (2)
	v • d • e

s y .. .

f -

-g7

(. -

CNR V" .

CE.NTER FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY November 12, 1981*[

e * .

ICERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Harold Denton '

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ~

Dear Mr. Denton,

As to my letter on behalf of the Center for Nuclear Responsibility dated November 9, 1981, I wish to reiterate our position that the 1etter to the Commission dated September 11, 1981, concerning the operating condition of Turkey Point Unit #4 was merely advisory, having presented no Jegal arguments and without representation of counsel, and Qas not intended to be a formal' legal pleading unde'r 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's Regulations.-

~

On November 10, 1981, I registered ~our position telephonically with Richard' Levi in the Office of. General Counsel, and asked that the Commission rescind the Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 dated November 5, 1981. Mr. Levi. said that he would inform the Commission of our concern, but advised me that our letter and the Director's Decision was under consideration by the Commission as

, a formal legal petition under 10 CFR 2.206. I wish to formally

' note our exception to this in' equitable and improper treatment of our factual and advisory Jetter as a formal legal pleading, since this was not intended on our part and our rights are impaired i

by not having had the opportunity to be represented by counsel.

f I would also like to bring it to the Commission's attention that if the Center for Nuclear Responsibility,had intended to file a i legal petition on Turkey Point Unit #4, we would have presented a legal as well as" factual case, and would have been represented

.by counsel. As this was not the case , I. hereby request tihat the Commission ~ formally agree to the position of CNR outlined in our letter of November 9,1981, and ask that the Commission rescind the .

Director's Decision Lader 10 CFR_2.206 .

Mk N fC E dYgo DP Emon G

~

- ~

6,- ,

, f Nuclear Regulatory Commission '

page 2 November 12, 198,1 * ,,

e .

e Furthermore, if the Commissio lith advisory letter as a formal legal pleading and decides notn persists in look to rescind the Director's Decision, please advise us of this position

- at-the earliest possible time, so that we can enlist the aid of counsel since future' legal action may be required to protect the position of the Center for Nuclear Responsibility.

In closing, we would like to stress the fact that outside of the legal argume,nts, the reality is that Turkey Point Unit deteriorating and the time is fast approaching when this nuclearil4 is rapidly unit will not be acceptably safe.

the people of Miami must be a concern to.the commission.The public health and safet Respectfully' yours ,

U fio h Joette Lorion

~

Research Director Center for Nuclear Responsibility-4 e

p.

1L cc/ see next page 's e

u l

k

\

- JD' e?l t:: I I N Ft i: ) -

. CENTER FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY November 9, 1981 21

~

o Certified Mail: Return Receipt Requested .

r 1d Mr, Harold R. Denton

.e g ! Office of Nuclear Reactor Replation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cordssion

nt Washington, D.C. 20555 tik,

Dear Mr. Denton,

real '

ti! This is in response to your letter to me and Director's ot4 Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 dated Novheber 5,1981. Please be *

'unt:{ advised that my letter of September 11,1981, on behalf of the i Center for Nuclear Responsibility and concerning steam generator i

tube integrity and pressure vessel embrittlement in Turkey Point Unit #4, was not a formal petition under'10 CFR 2.206 of the -

l i

Commission's Regulations. ,

The September lith letter has merely advisory and intended to bring to your attention potential safety and legal problems associated with the continued operation of this severely degraded nuclear unit. It was never my intention, nor that of the Center for Nuclear Responsibility, that this letter be treated as a t

i formal legal petition in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206 of the. -

Coc=ission's Regulations.-

Should the Center for Nuclear Responsibility decide to initiate a formal petition for consideration of license review

4, our petition or possibic' shutdown of Turkey Point Nuclear Unit will be labled a petition .in accordance with the rules of practice under 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's Regulations and will, have -

representation of counsel. - .

. Respectfully yours, -

OO FSC dorio o Joette Lorion Research Director CNR

~

Enclosure:

cc w/ encl.

Letter Sept. 11,1981 jf b

_ WW Pu"Iwwn o

                  ..                                                                                             ~
    ",.-      p2%g                                                                                .

l* & '. UNITED STATES .

        .!        )s,(j}A                    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
           ;;.g          ,:. r                       . WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 h,?              "

4.O ** November 5,1981 - ' [

~~

Docket No. 50-251 , Ms. Joette Lorion . .

           . Center for Nuclear Responsibility                                            ,l      -

7210 Red Road Room 208 South Miami, Florida 33143

Dear Ms. Lorion:

This is in response to your letter dated September 11, 1981, which you wrote out of . concern about the Turkey Point Plant Unit No. 4 in which you requested that the Nuclear Reg 61atory Commission take steps to ime-diately initiate a license review of this nuclear reactor unit, that the NRC request that Turkey Point Unit No. 4 shut down immediately for its already delayed steam generator inspection and that the NRC consider the suspension of the license for Turkey Point Unit No. 4 until such time as . Florida Power and Light Company sutxnits proof tha.t this reactor unit's pressure vessel would maintain its integrity in a loss of cooling accident. For the reasons' set forth in the enclosed response to your' letter, your

requests are hereby denied. , A copy of this determination will be placed in the Commission's Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, N. W. , Washington, D. C. 20555 and at the Environmental and Urban Affairs Library, Florida International

University, Miami, Florida 33197. A copy will also be filed with the Office of the Secretary of the Comission for its review in accordance with 10 CFR 52.206(c) of the Comission's regulations.

Si ncerely, Nb ~ Harold R. 6enton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regula. tion

Enclosure:

               . Director's Decision Under             -s 10 CFR 32.206 cc w/ encl:    See next page                                                       -

e) o p~

                                                )                                   _

i E $t\G T 0 t

                                                                                                                                      .s        .
             .               " Robert E. Uhrig                                                            ,

F1orida Power and Light Company cc: Mr. Robert Lowenstein, Esquire Mr. Jack Shreve Lowenstein, Newman, Reis and Axelrad Office of the Public Counsel 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Room 4 Holland Building. - Tallahassee,'. Florida 32304 Suite 1214 ' Washington, D. C. 20036 Administrator Environmental and Urban Affairs Librahy Department of Enyironmental Regulation Florida International University . Miami, Florida 33199 Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida Mr.. Norman A. Coll, Esquire 2600 Blair Stone Road

       -                              Steel, Hector and Davis                                 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 1400 Southeast First National Bank Building                                            .

Miami, Florida 33131 - Mr. Henry Yaeger, Plant Manager

Turkey Point Plant '

Florida Power and Light Company . ' P. O. Box 013100 ,

                                    " Miami, Florida 33101 -                    --                   -

Honorable Dewey Knight -

                       .              County Manager of Metropolitan
                                                ^

Dade County . Miami, Florida 33130 Bureau ~ of Intergovernmental' Relations , 560 Apalachee Parkway

                                     . Tallahassee, Florida   32304 Resident Inspector                                                                               '

4 Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station . U. S. Huclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 1207 Homestead, Florida 33030 Regional Radiation Repr'esentative EPA Region IV' . 345 Courtland Street, H.W. Atlanta, Giorgia '30308 s e e P. %

As indicated above, the steam generator tubes of Unit 4 are being regularly monitored. Moreover, the license for Unit 4 requires a cold .;hutdown if leakage

.              exceeds th,e prescribed limit of 0.3 gpm per steam generator. 9]                Staff is of the view that the 0.3 gpm leakage limit, and actions required should this rate be exceeded (along with the monitoring p,reviously described), are fully adequate to protect the health and jafety of the,public.10/                                              }

Finally, the Center asserts in.its letter that steam generator tube integrity is an unresolved safety issue. While it is true that the pmblem of steam generator tube integrity is not fully resolved, the problem has re-ceived careful ongoing review and analysis, as* described above. Accordingly, and in view of the history of the steam generators of Unit 4, further action , by NRC regarding Unit 4's steam. generators is unnecessary at this time. The procedures and safeguards instituted in relation to 'that problem are sufficisnt to safeguard the public health and safety.* l.lf 9/, Facility O'perating License No. DPR-41, as amended, paragraph D(2).-

                ,10f Safety Evaluations, footnotes 3 and 5, suora.

11/ NRC Regulatory Guide 1.83 contains the standard procedures for

~~

inspecting steam generators, which standards are considered adequate - by NRC for protecting the public health and safety. The procedures which have been developed for Turkey Point and inserted in Unit 4's operating license as mandatory requirements are significantly , more rigorous than the procedures in Regulatory Guide 1.83, and therefore previde an additional margin of safety. - - V

                                 .e
                     )        p

'. .o - -

                       .           III. _Recuested Action With Raference to Reactor Pressure Yessel                          '

The Center asserts that Turkey point Unit No. 4 is one of a number of nuclear power plants "whose steel pressure vessel nay be vulnerable to cracking or shattering caused by . thermal shock in the event of an accident that requires high pressure injection emergency cooling." The - petition further cites pressure vessel safety as an unresolved safety issue. , During the past few months the subject of reactor pressure vessel thermal shock has received increased attention by the NRC staff and industry representatives. The NRC -staff has recently evaluated (1) the - types of transients or accidents that could lead to over, cooling of the , reactor system; (2) expertence to date with transients that have

                                                                                ~
                  .            occurred in U.S. pressurized water reactors; (3) the probability that, such overcooling events will occur; and (4) the capability of reactor vessels to withstand these transients.                                           '

As a result of its evaluations to date, the staff has concluded . that the probability of a severe overcooling transient is relatively low. For Babcock & Wilcox designed reactors this probability is estimated to

                                                   -3 be about 10 per reactor per year, and for Westinghouse and Combustion Engineering designed reactors, it is loser, perhaps by an order of magnitude.             The staff has also concluded that,' based on present irradia-tion leve,1s 'at operating reactors, reactor vesse1 failure from such an .

e

                                         *e 86
^

en d,. -

r- . event in the near tem is unlikely. Therefore, no immediate licensing actioh is required for operating reactors including Unit 4.12f . However, the staff believes that additional action should be taken to resolve the long-term problem. Toward this end, t'he staff, the Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) owners' group, and FWR vendors are working together to , determine the scope of the generic pressure , vessel problem. In addition, plants with the nost limiting condition (in tems of assured period of ' continued safe operation) in each vendor's group have been selected for individual study. Unit 4 having been selected as one of the plants for plant-specific study, a. letter dated August 21, 1981, was sent to require the licensee in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 50.54(f) of the Commission's regulations

to submit infomation for review. Based upon the generic and plant-specific studies and reviews, NRC will take timely action in relation to the reactor vessel problem.

IV. Recuest for " License Review" . The letter from the Center also asked: . tha.t the Nuclear Regulatory Comission take steps to imediately initiate a license review of this nuclear reactor unit CUnit 43. It is the responsibility. of s the Nuclear. Regulatory Comission to protect the public health and safety, and this can only be accom-plished if adequate safety systems exist to protect the public .in case of an accident .:. . . We hope at this point the NRC Will derate the unit, so that it - - doesn't operate in an unsafe manner.- - Requests for a " license rev'iew" and to "derate the unit" appear, ' to be synonbno'mous with the request that the NRC consider the suspen-sion of the~. license of Unit 4. Other than the assertions which have lyf Preliminaryy Assessment of Themal Shock to PWR Reactor Pressure Vessels. 5FCY FO N fPav>-3N'

                                                                                                                               ...c
                                                         - 10 been discussed abovd concerning the steam generators and reactor                , the vessel petitioner advances np facts that relate to possible safety inadequacies.                                ,.

V. Conclusion-Based on the foregoing discussion I have detemined 'that the petitidner's' request for an order to shut down the Turkey Point Plant Unit 4 to inspect _ steam generator tubes should be and is hereby denied. Further, based upon the staff analyses of the Reactor Vessel question, I have also concluded l-that the petitioner's request for consideration of suspension of the li cense of Turkey Point Unit No. 4 should also be denied. - A copy of this decision will be placed in the conmission's

              'Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, N.W., ,D.C.                  Washington 20555
              -and the local public document room for the Turkey Fofnt Plant located at the Environmerital Urban Affairs Library, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199 A copy of this decision will also be filed with the Office of,the Secretary of the Commission for its                    -                 -
       . review 'in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 2.206(c) of the Commission's re r.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY CD.". MIS Y .. l) <---- f' - Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation f Dated at Bethesda, Maryland ( this 5th day of November ,1981. [= . . L' . K. , y,'.w . p .. = '.O- .

 ,-          ..l*                                      -

y .

                          '.                      ;                                                                        i' 1                             ,
                                              ~

i. N 'CNR ' 7,

                                                         .           (j                                                                              /              ,

V i - i

CENTER FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY /

U.S. Nuclear RegulatoIy CoMdission ; 1717 H Street, N.W. lith. Floor - Washington, D.C. 20555 . ~ , f,9 4

Nun::io J. Palladino, Chairman

I, $ Victor Gilinsky, Co:anissioner '~ Peter A. Bradford, Comnissioner : John P, Ahearne, Connisssioner September 11,1981 Genti-

                             .: to '

what ay, its to)you out NRC's e the of concern lack of about Turkey concern as .to Point thenuclear unit #4, increasingly and severe ,

       ,      safety problems plaguing this unit. Areas of innediate concern to myself                                                                    '

and other Miami; residents living near this reactor unit are: j -

   .          1. Turkey PoirN . Unit #4 is one of eight nuclear reactor dnits that the NRC                                                         L.

i', has named whose steel pressure vessel may be vulnerable to cracking or . shattering caused by thermal shock in the event of an accident that requires high pressurer injection emera-ncy cooling. l

2. Turkey Point Unit .f 4 is operating in 'an inpaired condition with nearly 25% -

of its steam generator tubes plugged and re: roved frca service.. This reduction in ' heat transfer area could cause this unit to be 5more susceptible to overheat'ing, necessitating emergency cooling. / t i

3. Turkey Point liiit #4 is requised t$ be shut down every six mon't hs for

! steam generator inspectica and tube plugging in order to maintain safe operation of the unit. ne 1:Ut inspecticn was scheduled for July of 1981 but the NRC granted FP5L an extensica on its operating, license allowing l Unit #4 to run for two additional renths. Tnis is despite the fact that the NRC has stated in various documents 'that "we do not have an adequate technical basis to predict steam generator perfonnance for periods longer - than six months."- s o of o

4. Turkey Point Unit #4 is operating presently with steam generator tubes -

that may be on .the verge of leaking. The Union of Concerned Scientists

                 'in a 1975' study en hbclear Power Risks claims that if only a handful of tubes ruptured in an accident, the emergency core cooling system                                                                   j would be stalled and the core could mit. Should such an accident occur and                                                          '
                  'the reactor vessel did not maintain its integrity,there' would be no way'                                                         !

to protect the public health and safety of the residents of.etiami. e s

5. Both steam generator tube integrity and P: essure vessel integrity are i'

unre, solved safety issues before the NRC.- -

j)lD5 ll u 'fv < 'I' mu- : 8

           -- -~                                                                                                                                                     ~.

s

             . .                                                                                                                                                           n
                                                                            .,                                                                                                    y e
                                                                                                                                                               ' ~

In light of these safety problems at Turkey Point. Unit 14, we ask' '

t,at n the Nuclear . Regulatory Comission take steps to inmed.htely' intitiate - It is the responsibility a license review of this nuclear reactor unit. of, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to arot'ect the public health and safety , and this can only be accomplis %ed if adequate' safety systeis exist . f to protect the public in case of an accident. , Turkey Point Unit #4 will continue to deteriorate, and is quickly 7 approaching the magic number of 25% of its tubes plugged. We hope at this ' ,. point the NRC will derate the unit,so that it doesn't operate in an unsafe manner. 's _q In closing, we ask that the NRC request tnat Wrkey Point Unit #4 shut din inmediately for its already delayed steam generator inspection. ,,c We also ask that the NRC consider the suspension of the license for 'Ibrkey - Point Unit #4 until such time as FP5L submits proof

that this reactor unit's pressure vessel would maintain its integrity in a loss of cooling accident, ,

                                       . As the consequences of a core me$t would.be totally unacceptable to                                                                 .          .

the residents of Miami, we respectfs11y .ask that prompt action be taken on these cnicial matters. y Respectfully yours, 4 R b\0It 0Q Joette Lorion - Center for Nuclear Responsibility ' cc Marshall Grautenhuis , NRC - Atomic Safety and 1.icensing Board Joe Gilliland, NRC Atlanta ~ Attorney clartin Hodder , Robert Pollard,-UCS Dr. Gordon Edwards, CCNR 9

0 e 4

 $6 *
  > +

4- F,~ e 5 -_ '. a. .}}

ML20071H980

Contents

Text

Dear Mr. Denton,

Dear Mr. Denton,

Enclosure:

Dear Ms. Lorion:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

ML20071H980

Text

Dear Mr. Denton,

Dear Mr. Denton,

Enclosure:

Dear Ms. Lorion:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

Search