ML20126F298

Responds to 921130 Request for Public Hearing Prior to Restart of Plant & Concerns Re Status of SG at Plant. Meeting Held on 921201 to Discuss Cause & Repair of SG primary-to-secondary Tube Leak That Occurred on 921109

ML20126F298
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	12/17/1992
From:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Rosolie E NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES
References
NUDOCS 9212300225
Download: ML20126F298 (2)

Text

.

~

QW 4.-

1. pg.

v Q'

3*

UNITED STATES -

T E

I, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' r

?

E p

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 8

4

• • • • C December 17, 1992.

-i Mr. Eugene Rosolie

133 S.W. 2nd Avenue

. Portl and... Oregon 97204

Dear Mr. Rosolie:

I am responding to your letter of November 30, 1992, to the Commissioners of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 'In your letter you requested "a public hearing" prior is the restart of Trojan and expressed concerns about t

the__ status:of the steam generators at the Trojan Nuclear Plant.

F As you' may know, the staff held' a meeting at the Trojan site in Rainier, Oregon, on December 1,1992, to discuss the cause and repair of the steam generator primary-to-secondary tube leak that occurred on November 9,1992.

This meeting was held to provide an opportunity for Portland General Electric (PGE)Lto inform the NRC staff on toe issues raised in the Confirmatory Action Letter, dated November 13, 1992. The meeting was attended by NRC headquarters personnel, NRC Region V personnel, PGE,. and members of the media and general public. The meeting also included a discussion of the proposed emergency technical-specification change that was prepared by-the licensee.

The llcensee recently withdrew its request for the emergency technical specification' change and is conducting augmented steam generator tube inspections.

It is our. understanding that~ the licensee is evaluating the

+

-steam generator tube inspection data and they.are considering a range of possible actions that depend on the result of the data evaluation. The NRC staff is following the inspection process and,any subsequent request for technical specification-amendment closely.

As a result of this information and the interest that you have expressed, _I

-have directed my staff to put you on the service -list for the _ Trojan Nuclear' Pl ant. As such, you will receive all outgoing correspondence related to Trojan. : Additionally, I have directed my staff to inform you by telephone if any technir e specification amendment request is submitted by the licensee on n

the curren steam generator issue so that you may be aware of the' current 3

status of o.e issue and your rights to request a hearing with respect to any requested license. amendment. This should enable you to file a timely 1

l_

application for a formal hearing on any requested amendment.

I I would advise you to consultcTitle 10, Code of Federal Reaulations (10 CFR),

1 L

for an understanding-of your rights and responsibilities regarding a hearing request;, specifically. refer to 10 CFR:50.91,L and 10 CFR 2.714.

In general, you;may file a petition for leave to intervene-and request a hearing during the notice period on any licensing action proposed by the licensee, or you

make any public comment on the no significant-hazards determination without requesting a hearing and filing a petition for' leave to intervene.

)

21n0ii 9212300225 921217 pg

,7.

my mg

~.r

, ; ma u I

r

e L:

Ic.-

_MrdEugeneLRosolie-December 17, 1992

- Finally, you' may petition the staff pursuant to 10 CFR,2.206 to-modify, _

suspend, or revoke'a license, provided you specify the action requested and set forth the facts that constitute the basis for the request.

However, -

. petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 is not a request for a_ hear _ing.-

The staff welcomes informed participation in the licensing process.

Sincerely, Or'igTnni tie 600 W p3 E. yarle7.

Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation <

DISTRIBUTION:

iDocket1 File:(50k344"W/ incoming),

NRC & Local PDRs (w/ incoming) i EDO# 8342 PDV Action File J. Taylor, J. Sniezek J-Martin, kV K. Knubel 4

T. Murley/F. Miraglia J. Partlow J. Roe-M. Virgilio W. Russell F. Gillespie PDV' Reading File D. Crutchfield T. Quay OCA L. Kokajko._

D. Foster OGC (15B18)

OPA (2G5)

~SECY-(92-0991)

NRR Mail Room (ED0# 8342 w/ incoming)

T. Gibbons C. Hawes B.'Clayton K Perkins, RV

-*See Previous Concurrence

'0FC PDV/LA~w

_ PDV/PM /

PDV/D_m a TECH ED*

NAME DFoster kMoNko TQuay MMejac t

DATE M//7/92 D/b/92 lb/l7/92 12/07/92

'0FC AD45/DRPW*-

D/DRPW*

ADP/NRR*

DD/NRR*:

D/flBR _

NAME MVirgilio' JRoe' JPartlow FMiraglia kukey DATE~

12/15/92 12/15/92-12/16/92 12/16/92-

/%lf/92' 0FFICIAL: RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: GT8342.ROS :.

L

'2-

~.

... ~_.-

?f!

Mr. Eugene Rosolie-

- 2'-

1

-Finally,- you may petition the staff pursuant-to 10 CFR 2.206 to modify,

-suspend, or revoke a license, provided you specify the-action requested and set forth the facts that constitute the basis for the request.- However, a

. petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 is not a re' quest for a-hearing.

The-staff welcomes informed participation in the' licensing process.

Sincerely, Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation li l

l

..,.._,-.:__.,~._.__...--..,,._.-...:._.

-PAGE 02

.-(

r NORTHNEST ENVIRONMENTAL.bDVOCATES I

I November 30, 1992 Ivar, Selin, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission as!jington, D.C.

20555 W

5.a..a c.u...,...

i I.

N["'Doa Chairman:

I Wo 4re deeply concerned regarding recent revelations about the' risks posed to the public due to known steam generator tubq cracking at the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant (Docket No.

50-344).

We are requesting that you act immediately in the int (rest of public health and safety to resolve this issus.

I We became aware of the issue when an internal NRC Staff docdment, Memorandum for Frank P. Gillespie, Director, Pordram Management, Policy Development,.and Analysis Branch, off4ce of Nuclear Reactor Regulation from C.J.

Heltenes, Jr.) Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, September 28, 1992, was made public on November 23, 1992.

We fro also aware that on November 24th Mr.-Gillespie issued a Mgmorandum for Mr. Heltemos stating, "Our review of the prigritization analysis has identified several aspects of the' analysis that are incorrect und do not accurately reflect operating experience or current licensing posftions."

The licensce, Portland General Electric (PGE),

and state regulator, Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE),

havfalsoadoptedthisposition.

It is now time for the NRC to step forward and be open with publ ic in discussing this issue.

Wo request that you-order a pyblic hearing, release all documents to the Public DocQment Room and the Local Public Document Room in Por$1and, Oregon, and allow those on your staff who have concerns to explain in writing if their concerns still-are valid, specifically:the person, or persons, who original issded the Differing Professional Opinion (DPo).

It is our bc14cf that without such a statement resolution of this insQe wi31 be impossible.

t, Si

erely, Mp f'C A

Eu.ne Ro lie I

hYi'5%W$QN?h---

302 Haseltine Bldg.,133 S.W. 2nd Ave., Portland, OR 97204-3526 (503)295-0490 FAX 295 6634 l'rInted on IP4nf. Unbicuched itesycled Puper