ML20134E525
| ML20134E525 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1997 |
| From: | Miraglia F NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Linnell W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9702060321 | |
| Download: ML20134E525 (5) | |
Text
._
=_.
February 3, 1997 1
Mr. William S. Linnell II Committee for a Safe Energy Future t
P.O. Box 4034 i
Portland, ME 04101
Dear Mr. iinnell:
This is in response to your letter of December 30, 1996.
l Please let me assure you that the points you raise will be considered by the Comission in preparing for and conducting the Comission meeting regarding the Maine Yankee facility now scheduled for February 4, 1997.
It is my understanding that Mr. Charles Frizzle of the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company will not attend the Comission meeting.
q By letter dated January 23, 1997, the Office of the Comission's Secretary j
informed you that you will be allowed 5 minutes to briefly address the J
Comission at the meeting scheduled for 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, February 4,1997.
Sincerely, original signed IT FrankJ. Miras11a /
Frank J. Miraglia, Jr., Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FILENAME - G:\\970015.ltr *see previous concurrences PM:PDII-1*
D:DRPE*
OGC ADPR*
DTrimble SVarga RZimerman r
01/27/97 01/27/97 01/ /97 01/27/97 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
% G o\\
i)
D:NRR*
EDO OCM FMiraglia HThohn SJackson 01/27/97 01/M /97 01/31 /97 i
Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 060070 9702060321 970203 PDR ADOCK 05000309 H
p terug p
t UNITED STATES j
NUCLEAR RE2ULATORY COMMISSION
=
WASHINGTON, D.C. 30666 4 001 o
s,*****/
February 3, 1997 Mr. William S. Linnell II Comittee for a Safe Energy Future P.O. Box 4034 Portland, ME 04101
Dear Mr. Linnell:
This is in response to your letter of December 30, 1996.
Please let me assure you that the points you raise will be considered by the Comission in preparing for and conducting the Comission meeting regarding i
the Maine Yankee facility now scheduled for February 4, 1997.
It is my understanding that Mr. Charles Frizzle of the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company will not attend the Comission meeting.
By letter dated January 23, 1997, the Office of the Comission's Secretary informed you that you will be allowed 5 minutes to briefly address the Comission at the meeting scheduled for 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, February 4,1997.
Sincerely, o
f V
FrankJ.Mi@tg1a,d,ActingDirector Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
l I
l DISTRIBUTION: for letter to William S. Linnell, II dated February 3, 1997 Green Ticket #970015 Docket File (50-309 w/ original incoming)
PUBLIC (w/ incoming)
EDO Reading (#G970015) l l
HThompson l
EJordan PNorry JBlaha HMiller,RI l'
Dross,.
FMiraglia/AThadani RZimmerman BSheron TMartin WTravers SECY # CRC-96-1301 NRR Mail Room'(GT#970015 w/ incoming)
PDI-3 Reading (w/ incoming)
SVarga JZwolinski DTremble JMoore,0GC JAegge,RI R.dorid6-OPA OCA OGC CNorsworthy,NRR i
i 1
l
o e ulare EDO Principal Correspondence Control FROM:-
DUE: 01/22/97 EDO CONTROL: G970015 DOC DT: 12/30/96 FINAL REPLY:
Willicm S. Linnell-II Committee for a safe Energy' Future TOs Chairman Jackson FOR SIGi4ATURE OF :
ROUTING:
MAINE YANKEE Thompson Jordan Norry Blaha Miller, RI Ross, AEOD DATE: 01/09/97 ASSIGNED TO:
CONTACT:
)
NRR Miraglia SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
Put EDO and Chairman on for concurrence.
Chairman's office to review response prior to dicpatch.
gRRRECEIVED:
JANUARY 9,1997 oRR ACTION:
DRPE:YARGA ACTION NRR ROUTING:
MIRAGLIA I
RMAN D
TO E 12,M am 0,0 Z S'fLRON gs
/(j j
MUJIN p
TRCVERS l
30HRER
~
1
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-96-1301 LOGGING DATE: Dec 31 96 ACTION OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:
WILLIAM LINNELL II AFFILIATION:
MAINE ADDRESSEE:
CHAIRMAN JACKSON LETTER DATE:
Dec 30 96-FILE CODE: IDR-5 MAINE YANKEE
SUBJECT:
MAINE YANKEE JANUARY 9; 1997 MEETING ACTION:
Signature of EDO
-DISTRIBUTION:
CHAIRMAN, COMRS, OGC SPECIAL HANDLING: SECY TO ACK CONSTITUENT:
NOTES:
CHAIRMAN'S OFFICE TO REVIEW RESPONSE PRIOR TO DISPATCH. INCOMING LTR PLACED IN THE PDR - 1/3/97.
DATE DUE:
Jan 23 97 SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
AFFILIATION:
SECY WILL RESPOND TO QUESTIONS ON i ATTENDANCE AT THE COMMISSION MEETING j AND THE EDO WILL RESPOND TO THE OTHER ISSUES i
\\
gi?y %,
i
_k,MS l
~
v w
s Ji' Wl "a
'f g g,E[]
,1 3
J:
i
.I v gest u
< w u'
- " 'q 'N g,6,,.w,b d9eva om a
s, e,w i
o r, c+,;" 7
\\
w.
b,,,d
(; w 7,. e co/ 41 V.
e g
cjn.a,nsuv 1
il 1
c bM N-lq u])k,eJmf'ra/A o -.- c9yoo15 J
ommittee for a Safe Energy Future c
l I
3 P.O. Box 4034 P.O. Box 2627
,i M
Pordand,ME Ofl01 Augusta.ME 04338 6
Phone:(207)772-2958 Fax:(207)7801266 Safe energyfor Maine'sfuture...It's in our hands!
l 1'
The Honorable Shirley Jackson, Chair December 30, 1996 United States Nuclear Regulator'y Commission l
Washington, DC 20555 sent by fax j
i re: Maine Yankoo January 9, 1997 meeting I
References:
1: Independent Safety Assessment of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, October, 1996.
2: Minutes of Commission Meeting, October 18, 1996.
3: Maine Yankee response to ref.1, dated December 10, 1996.
Dear Chairwoman Jackson,
As spokesperson for the oldest nuclear watchdog organization in the State of Maine, and as a local elected official, I would like to share my thoughts with you both in this letter and at the January 9, meeting with Maine Yankee. Please let me know if I may have an opportunity to briefly address the Commission at that meeting.
In ref.1, I note that the NRC staff identifies " economic stress" as one of the root causes of problems at Maine Yankee. And in ref.2, Commissioner McGaffigan recognizes that the owners of ~
Maine Yankee have not allowed the plant to retain sufficient earnings in order to maintain the plant properly. I would agree that these financial observations go to the heart of the matter.
I see in ref.3, that while Maine Yankee agrees that " economic stress" is a root cause of their problems, Maine Yankee emphatically disagrees with the NRC staf f's finding that the economic stress was caused by the plant owners' unwi'11.fngness to allow the plant to retain earnings. In other words, the official response is that it was management's fault, not the plant owners' fault, because management never asked the plant owners for enough money.
Meanwhile, the plant owners have announced that they have asked for the resignation of President Charles Frizzle.
_S-Q Ofo 4 @ 84 4 -@ f
=-.. - - - - --.-.-.- -. -.
. ~
- /.'s TEL:
Dec 30.96 14:41 No,gg3 p,93 l if,
l W.S.LINNELL LETTER TO NRC CHAIR SHIRLEY JACKSON, DEC.30,1996 P.2 l
1 I
There is a significant discrepancy between the IBAT report, (Ref.1), on the one hand, and Maine Yankee's response (Ref.3), on
/
j 4
the-other, l
The question is, does Maine Yankee not retain earnings becauseor because it j
Plant owners have not allowed it,the plant's management (Charles F j
It is an important question, as it lies at the root of many l
safety problems. The correct answer is therefore critica Mr. Frizzle be at the January 9th meeting.
1 I am respectfully insisting that Mr.-Frizzle be required to 1
to confirm, under oath, and under further questioning by the NRC,whether or not he ever asked plant owners for more money to I truly do not wish to cause Mr.
Frizzle any more anxiety than his termination already has, I just i
operate the plant safely.
i don't believe the company response. And if the NRC is committed 1
I think you would agree that Mr.
j i
to resolving this root cause, Frizzle could lend tremendous insight to bot solution.
j have a significant self-interest l
Plant owners, it can be argued,in promoting the notion that all prob l
d
}
management:
- 1. They can sidestep the retained earnings issue, avoiding new (and prudent) requirements that they post a bond or otherwJre j
Maine put up the money to guarantee, not merely promise, thatte Yankee will have all the funds that may be necessary to opera the plant safely for the duration of its license. I am notin ref.3, tha impressed by the comment,"ecnceptually endorsed" futurn investmunt f
- 2. To the extent that they can blame management for their problems, Maine Yankee's owners can deflect attention fro i
to deteriorated condition of the plant. It costs almost noth ng50 replace one employee with another. And the expense of hiring r
more employees can be easily cut by laying them off. But prope ky investment in the plant itself is expensive, and shutdown.
I look forward to your response.
With best wishes for the New Year, William S.Linnell II
,e