ML20112J815

Nirs,Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch & Citizens Awareness Network Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene on Gpu Nuclear License Amend Request for Plant.*

ML20112J815
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	06/06/1996
From:	Burnette J, Decamp W, Gunter P, Katz D, Steven Schmidt, Szczech M AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK, NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20112J781	List: ML20112J790 ML20112J815 ML20112J834 ML20112J844 ML20112J865 ML20112J873 ML20112J954 ML20112J972 ML20112J977 ML20112J981 ML20112J986
References
OLA, NUDOCS 9606210089
Download: ML20112J815 (10)

Text

-- . .-.

j UNITED STA's tS OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM*4ISSION a General Public Utility Nuclear Corporation ) Docket 50-219 j

) Movement of Heavy Loads Over

_j Irradiated Fuel l Ovster Creek Nuclear Gene. rating Station NUCLEAR INFORMATION AND RESOURCE SERVICE, OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR WATCII, AND CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK REQUEST FOR A J IIEARING AND PETITION TO INTERVENE ON GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY NUCLEAR LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST '

FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION L INTRODUCTION Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.714, petitioners Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS),

Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch (OCNW) and Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) hereby request a hearing and leave to intervene in the license amendment proceeding for General Public Utility Nuclear (GPUN)'s proposal to revise the technical specifications for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS) concerning moving heavy loads over irradiated fuel.

61 Federal Register 20848 (May 8,1996)

II. REQUEST FOR A IIEARING AND PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE A. NUCLEAR INFORMATION AND RESOURCE SERVICE (NIRS),

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR FATCII (OCNW), AND CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK (LAN) IIAVE STANDING.

In any proceeding for the issuance or amendment of an operating license for a nuclear facility, Section 189(a) of the Atomic Energy Act guarantees as a right a hearing "to any person

~

9606210099 960613 PDR ADOCK 05000219 0 ,, ,

PDR _ _

whose interests may be affected" by the licensing action. 42U.S C. 2239(a). The right to intervene under Section 189(a)is governed by " contemporaneous judicial concepts of standing,"

i.e., whether (1) the action being challenged could cause injury-in-fact to the petitioner, and (2) such injury is arguably within the zone ofinterest protected by the Atomic Energy Act or the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"). Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station), LBP-90-6,31 NRC 85, 89 (1990) citing Portland General Electric _Cn. (Pebble Springs Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-76-27,4 NRC 610, 613-14 (1976).

NIRS and OCNW are entitled to intervene in this proceeding on behalf of their members living near the plant who would be injured by an accident caused by the inadequate or unsafe movement of heavy loads over or near irradiated fuel at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Petitioner Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)is entitled to intervene because any adverse precedent set by this proceeding regarding the movement of heavy loads over irradiated fuel at GPUN's GE Mark I Boiling Water Reactor Oyster Creek would directly afTect the safety of future activities for the movement of heavy loads over irradiated fuel at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant aise a GE Mark I Boiling Water Reactor.

1. Petitioners Will Suffer Injury-In-Fact as a Result of the Proposed License l

Amendment.

The petitioners have standing to intervene on behalf of their members, who would suffer l

injury-in-fact by implementation of the proposed license amendment which is inadequate to 1 l

protect their health and safety and the health of the environment in so much that it: 1) would increase the probability of an accident; 2) creates the possibility of an accident not previously identified in the Safety Analysis Report and,3) constitutes a significant reduction in the margin of safety at operating boiling water reactors.

Petitioner Nuclear Information and Resource Seivice (NIRS) is a non-profit tax exempt organization established in 1978 ofindividuals and groups concerned about our nation's energy and environmental future. A number of these g:oups and members of NIRS are located within the OCNGS emergency planning zone.' NIRS has focused considerable effort on OCNGS including public education events in the Lacey and Berkeley Township area and filings to the NRC unde

' See Affidavitt of William decamp, Jr. (NIRS member), Junc 5,1996

CFR 2.206 with regards to conditions at the nuclear power station affecting public health and safety as ' ell as responding to media inquiries arising out of OCGNS operations. NIRS has provided expert witness before the State of New .%rsey Department of Environmental Protectio with regards to issues of public health and safety afReted by the OCNGS emergency plan.

Mr. William decamp, Jr., a NIRS member, was principally involved in establishing a public record of the Lacey Township zoning board hearing on the siting of the NUHOMS dry cask storage facility at OCNGS.

Petitioner Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch (OCNW) is a non-profit environmental group founded in 1994 for the purpose of educating the general public concerning the present and future

- hazards surrounding the operation of OCNGS. Members of OCNW reside, work, travel, and .

recreate in close proximity to OCNGS. OCNW has contributed to the public recc,rd by way of:

1.) hosting a meeting on OCNGS evacuation planning issues in coordination with the Berkeley Township Environmental Commission; 2) enhanced public participation at fourteen Lacey Township Zoning Board hearing for OCNGS on-site dry cask storage,3) distributing literature i

pertaining to OCNG and related issues; 4) enhancing public participation in the New Jersey I

Department of Environmental Protection hearing on the OCNGS Emergency Preparedness Plan and; 5) frequently serving as a contact for interested reporters in the local and national press.

Members are located within both the Emergency Planning Zone and the Ingestion Pathway Zone for OCNGS. Members are concerned that a heavy load drop onto the irradiated fuel or equipment related to fuel pooling cooling capability could result in a off-site release of radiation with unacceptable consequences to their livelihood, health and safety and the environment.'

Petitioner Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)is a non-profit and tax-exempt organization whose members live in New England, chiefly in the vicinity of the Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Station and the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.' According to Mr.

William Sherman, Vermont State Nuclear Inspector and Chairman of the Northeast High Level Radioactive Waste task Force Vermont Yankee, which is also a GE Mark I BWR, faces moving irradiated fuel to dry cask storage in the next five yens

• If CAN is allowed to participate they can assure that this precedential case is fully aired for safety issues and thereby protect their safety

• See Affidavits of Jean Burnette, Shirley Schmidt, and Maria Szczech for Oyster Crcck Nuclear Watch.

• See Affidavit of Dcbroah Katz on behalf of Citizens Awareness Network, June 5,1996.

d See Attachment to Katz Affidavit . The Recorder, May 29,1996, Greenfield, MA.

. 1 interests in view that identical or very similar issues involving movement of heavy loads over irradiated fuel at Vermont Yankee will occur.  :

As discussed in the attached aflidavits William decamp, Jr. for NIRS and OCNW, Jean ,

Burnett, Shirley Schmitt and Maria Szczech for OCNW, and Deb > rah Katz for CAN who have l authorized their organizations to be represented through NIRS in this prmeding, their health and safety and the quality of their environment would be adversely affected by the reduction in the m'argin of safety and increased risk of a heavy load drop associated with the amendment of the Oyster Creek license for the movement of heavy loads over irradiated fuel. All of these individ live, work, travel and/or recreate in the close vicinity of the Oyster Creek nuclear generating l

station and Vermont Yankee nuclear power stations. The afliants are concerned that GPUN is 4

proposing a course of activity which is currently prohibited under the reactor's technical 1

specifications. These afliants are concerned that a heavy load drop accident involving irradiat

~

I

' fuel would inflict radiation exposures affecting their health and safety as a direct result of damage I

to fuel assembly integrity in the irradiated fuel pool and the added risk of rupturing the irradiated fuel pool liner with an associated loss of fuel pool cooling capability. With the added risk of potentially severe off-site consequences, the afliants would additionally be precluded from the residential, occupational, recreational and environmenially sensitive sites indefinitely if an accident occurs. Accordingly, the petitioners have demonstrated that they would suffer a direct

injury as a result of an accident involving a drop of a heavy load into the irradiated fuel.

2. In the Alternative, Petitioners NIRS, OCNW, and CAN Should be 2

Granted Discretionary latervention.

Even if this tribunal finds that the petitioners NIRS, OCNW, and CAN lack standing to address safety issues involving movement of heavy loads over irradiated fuel as s right, the petitioners should be granted discretionary standing.

1.) The petitioners can and will make a significant contribution to ti e record of this case. t (Citing Pebble Springs Nuclear Plants Units 1 and 2). Over the past sever.41 years, NIRS and OCNW have provided extensive contributions to the public record on me ters pertaining to Oyster Creek nuclear generating station potentially afTecting public health and safety and f l

environmental quality. NIRS and OCNW have participated in the filing of petitions under 10 CFR 2.206 with regards to the issues including the material condition of safety-related reactor internal i

components, fire protection, and design deficiencies in the irradiated fuel pool cooling system at OCNGS. NIRS and OCNW hosted a public information forum on issues of concerning including the Mark I pressure suppression system, cracking of the drywell concrete shield wall at OCNGS, and corrosion of the drywell steelliner. The public information forum was covered by an article in the New York Times (June 12,1994). Mr. William decamp, Jr. and NIRS are frequently contacted New Jersey press and asked to comment for the public record on issues potentially arTecting public health and safety arising out of the operation of OCNGS.

2.) The Commission should also exercise its discretion to admit CAN. It is the position of the petitioner that should GPUN be granted a license amendment to change technical specifications currently prohibiting the movement of heavy loads greater than a single fuel assembly over irradiated fuel that the adoption of the amendment will be established as a precedent for similar plants namely Vermont Yankee. As evidenced by current regulatory activity the issue of heavy load movement in nuclear power plants involving irradiated fuel is a significant safety issue. The petitioners have an understanding for the importance of their timely participation in precedential proceedings which is likely to affect and direct near term activities at their respective reactors. The petitioners have an understanding for the need to focus their resources as these precedential issues arise rather than approach these same issues on a piecemeal basis. Therefore, the petitioners seek the oppo::anity to make a timely contribution to the record in matters that are likely to afTect and direct activities at their respective nuclear power stations.

Accordingly, the Commission should exercise its discretion to grant petitioners standing to intervene.

3. The Petitioners Concerns Fall Within the Zone of Interest Protected by the Atomic Energy Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

Petitioners' concerns , as stated in their members' aflidavits and as also set forth in this document relate to their health and safety and the preservation of environmental quality. These concerns focus on the GPUN application to condua m acitivity currently prohibited under their technical specifications that could lead to a heavy load drop on irradiated fuel resulting in unacceptable off-site radiation doses consequences afTecting the petitioners health and safety and precluding them from residential, occupational, recreational and environmentally sensitive sites.

l

.. t Thus, they fall within the " zone ofinterest" protected by the Atomic Energy Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. '

t B. ASPECTS OF PROCEEDING ON WIIICII PETITIONERS SEEK TO .

INTERVENE.

I 10 CFR50.91(a)(1) requires that licensees requesting an amendment provide an analysis "using the standards in 50.92" or the 3 factor test for the issuance of no significant hazards

- considerations. The petitioners review of the GPUN application finds that the licensee has -

submitted simple line item assertions to address the standards of 50.92 while offeringlittle or no analysis. The licensee's safety assessment is brief and lacking in content. This issue has previou 4

.been addressed in NRC Generic Letter 86-03 " Applications for License Amendments" as a basic and reoccurring problem.

The petitioners are aware ofincreased regulatory activity pertaining to problems and

. uncertainties arising out of the unreviewed safety issues associated with the movement of heavy J

loads over irradiated fuel. The petitioners are also aware that GPUN has not completed NRC requested and required actions as pertains to the analyses of heavy loads over irradiated fuel at - s OCNGS.

As previously stated, the petitioners will contend that the GPUN proposed license amendment to change technical specifications prohibiting the movement of heavy loads in excess of a single fuel assembly is inadequate to protect the public's health and safety and the health of

- the environment in so much that it: 1) represents a significant increase in the probability of an accident; 2) creates the possibility of an accident not previously identified in the Safety Analysis Repon and; 3) constitutes a significant reduction in the margin of safety at operating boiling water reactors. .

The petitioners concerns are based on the following NRC documents:

1) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission h ; prepared and issued NRC Bulletin 96-02

" Movement of Heavy Loads Over Spent Fuel, Over Fuel in The Reactor Core, or Over 1 Safety Related Equipment" (April 11,1996) raising the concerns that unreviewed safety issues are associated with specific activities conducted by the licensee to transfer irradiated fuel from the i

I l

l i

l irradiated fuel pool to dry cask storage units. [ Attached] Bulletin 96-02 requires licensees with plans to move heavy loads over irradiated fuel within the next two years to respond within 30 days to both requested and required actions. Oyster Creek is specifically cited in the Bu!!eti pertains to unreviewed safety issues involved in Qis activity. GPUN had previously sought to conduct the activity associated with the movemerit of the dry cask shield plug under 10 CFR 50.59 concluding that no unreviewed safety questions were involved in changing its technical specification which prohibits movement ofloads greater than a single fuel assembly over irradiated fuel. GPUN had attempted to claim through the submittal of a 10 CFR 50.59 request that the proposed change did not constitute an increase in the probability of an accident. NRC Bulletin 96-02 reflects disagreement by NRC staff with the GPUN conclusion in so much as the Bulletin requires all licensees to submit a license amendment for movement of the dry cask sh: ,

plug or other heavy loads over the irradiated fuel.

l GPUN responded to NRC Bulletin 96-02 on May 13,1996 within the 30 day reporting requirement to document that they had made a request to NRC by telephone conference and granted a 30 day extension "to perform necessary analyses regarding lifled loads and to devel plans with regard to any license amendments which may be required." (Attached] The petitio are concerned that the May 16 letter postpones submittal of responses to issues and actions plans and documents an incomplete review of the Oyster Creek movement of heavy load analyses. The J May 13 letter post-dates the April 15,1996 GPUN submittal of the amendment request l l

application for changes to the technical specifications involving movement of the shield plug ove  !

irradiated fuel.

l

2) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued NRC Information Notice 96 26 "Recent Problems With Overhead Cranes" (April 30,1996) to alert licensees to failures of crane equipment and inappropriate licensee activities regarding crane equipment at nuclear power plants. [ Attached] The combination of deterioration and/or inadequee crane equipment and inappropriate licensee activities documented in the information notice underscores the petitione concerns that the GPUN application undermines a baic premise of the OCGNS technical specification designed to conservatively limit and prohibit moven'ent of heavy load activity over irradiated fuel as a preventative measure to reduce risk of accidents resulting from heavy load I

equipment failure and human error.

l

3) NRC Daily Event Report (May 08,1996) reports that on May 07,1996 at the Indian

- Point 2 nuclear power station, Consolidated Edison of New York was in the process of moving a f

I metal transport container weighing 5000 pounds in Unit I when two slings used to attach the load slipped off the hook and dropped the load on the fuel handling floor. (Attached] This accident underscores the petitioners concerns with regard to the fact that accidents have occurred and can happen with loads comparable to the proposed dry cask shield plug movement.

l Dropping of the shield plug onto the Oyster Creek irradiated fuel pool could result in unacceptable off-site consequences atTecting public health and safety and environmental damage i

4) On December 30,1994 Preliminary Notice of Event or Unusual Occurrence (PNO-II-94-055) was filed documenting an accident which occurred on December 28,1994 at f

- Georgia Power Company's Edwin Ilatch Unit I nuclear power station. [ Attached] A used core l shroud bolt head measuring fifteen feet by three inches in diameter and weighing 350 pounds was f being lifted out oithe irradiated fuel pool for shipment oft-site when the steel cable sling failed with the bolt approximately one foot above the fuel pool surface. The bolt fell to the bottom of the irradiated fuel pool without hitting racks or irradiated fuel and tore a three inch diameter gash in the steel liner allowing 2000 gallons of fuel pool cooling water to drain and lowering the fuel pool water level by two inches. This accident underscores the petitioners' concerns that in fact accidents have occurred and can happen with loads less than the shield plug. The accident additionally raises questions with regard to the classic " drop" analysis and the radiological i

consequences from a loss of fuel pool water level. ,a  ;

t e

)

I J

Ill. CONCLUSION '

For the foregoing reasons, the Commission should admit petitioners NIRS, OCNW, and CAN as intervenors. NIRS has been authorized to sign this pleading on behalf of the following petitioners.

Respectfully Submitted,

/ -

Paul Gunter Nuclear Information and Resource Service 142416th Street NW Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036 202/328-0002 - '

J GM ([

William decamp, Jr.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch PO Box 243 Island Heights, NJ 08732 90 714-0334 ? 1/376-6639 b

kan Burnette Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch 715 Chesapeake Drive Forked River, NJ 08731 609/693-8703 O

• Shirley R.'Schdiidt Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch 291 Wells Mill Road Waretown, NJ 08758 609/971-6162 Maria Szczech U " fG 1

Ocean Township Committeewoman Ocean Township 50 Railroad Avenue Waretown, NJ 08758 609/693-3302(o) 609/971-1905(h) l

.s. .

Deborah Katz Citizens AwarenessNetwork PO Box 83 Shelborne Falls, MA 01370 -

413/339-4374 i

June 6,1996

' cc:

.- -NRC Office ofGeneral Counsel Ernest L. Blake, Shaw, Pittman, & Trowbridge 4