ML20134J985

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests That NRC Take Action Re Apparently False Public Testimony Given by Mgt of Plant
ML20134J985
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 06/14/1996
From: Decamp W
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To: Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20134J961 List:
References
NUDOCS 9702130052
Download: ML20134J985 (8)
v • d • e


Text

_ _.-. _ -

e J

Oysta Creek Niaclear Wald P.O. Box 243 Island He@ NJIB732 ,

June 14,1996

^

~

Ilon. Shirley Jackson, Chairman l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission O i Washington, D.C. 20555 O '

Dear Dr. Jackson,

I am writing on behalf of Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch to ruspectfully request

, that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission take action in relation to apparently false public testimony given by the management of GPU Nuclear.

i The transcript of the March 7,1994 hearing before the Lacey Township Zoning Board of Adjustment (enclosed) contains the following testimony, given under oath, by John Barton, who was then the Director of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Mr. Barton testified that it is not safe to operate the Oyster Creek j Nuclear Generating Station without the capacity to fully offload the fuel from the nuclear reactor:

"If we do not install the day spent fuel storage modules by 1996, the plant +

l would not have the capability of totally off-loading fuel from the reactor to the in-plant spent fuel pools." (transcript pp. 94-95)

"In order to operate safely we should be able to remove this fu
l from the j reactor and store it in the spent storage pool."(transcript p. 95)  !

l "Without dry storage and without the ability to to move all the fuel from l l

the reactor, the plant would not be able to operate." (transcript p. 95) i These quotes are fully consistent with the basic thrust of the testimony of managers for GPU Nuclear throughout these hearings, which was that without the additional pool space that a dry storage facility would create, the plant would have to be closed as of the September 1996 refueling outage - with consequent adverse economic impacts on the community in which the Zoning Board members reside.

As I know you are aware, the NRC ruled in February of 1985 in 10 CFR Part 53 )

that reactors may safely be run without full core offload capacity. Mr. Barton

certainly ought to have been aware of this ruling, which had been a matter of record for over nine years at time of his testimony. The fact of Mr. Barton's recent retirement should not absolve the management of GPU Nuclear from the basic responsibility of making truthful statements under oath.

9702130052 970211 PDR ADOCK 05000219 C PDR

R In an article by Neil A. Sheehan from the Asbury Park Press dated April 18, 1996 (enclosed) a spokesperson for GPU Nuclear states that - notwithstanding Mr.

Barton's swom testimony to the contrary - GPU Nuclear plans to run the Ovster Creek reactor without full core offload capacity after the scheduled refueling outsge in September of this year.

Oyster Creek Nuclear ' Watch respectfully requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission undertake two steps in relation to this matter:

(1) We request that the NRC investigate the situation at Oyster Creek in order to ascertain whether there is some special factor at Oyster Creek that would indeed justify Mr. Badon's sworn statement that it is unsafe to operate the Oyster Creek reactor without full core offload capacity.

(2) If no special situation disqualifies Oyster Creek from operating without full core offload capacity, then we regt.ast that the NRC take appropriate disciplinary _

action against GPU Nuclear management for making a false statement under oath.

Sincerely, William decamp, Jr., Trustee Q Oyster Creek Nuclear Watch O 908-714-0334 201-376-6639 1

i

1 LACEY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ,3,,,3,1 OI -:  :.. !

(s)i\1:v44

..6 APPLICATION NO.

3 IN REGAP.D TO THE MATTER OF: 93-40 l l

4 JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO.,  !

BLOCK 1001, LOT 4, TAX MAP 53, 5 800 SOUTH MAIN STREET, FORKED RIVER l

6 7 MONDAY, MARCH 7, 1994 8

r 9 TRANSCRIPT IN THE ABOVE MATTER TAKEN BY AND BEFORE PATRICIA D. WILCENSKI, A CERTIFIED

  1. 10 SHORTHAND REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AT THE TOWNSHIP OF LACEY MUNICIPAL 11 BUILDING, 818 WEST LACEY ROAD, FORKED RIVER, N E '.i l JERSEY, COMMENCING AT 7:45 P.M.

12 13 14 A P P E A R A N C E S:

15 LEVIN & HLUCHAN, ESQUIRES .

16 BY: RICHARD M. HLUCHAN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEYS FOR THE APPLICANT 17 f THOMAS G. GANNON, ESQUIRE 18 BOARD ATTORN,EY i

19 -

20 4

21 22 CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTING SERVICES ARRANGED THROUGH 23 MASTROIAUNI & FORMAROLI, INC.

104 WHITE HORSE PIKE 24 HADDON HEIGHTS, NEW JERSEY 08035 25 (609) 546-1100

a ,.

1 MR. STAWSKI: Thank you. 84 . -

2 A SPEAKER: You didn't answer me.

3 Yes or no?

4 MR. HLUCHAN: Of course there isn't.

5 MR. STAWSKI: That's why he's here.

6

, A SPEAKER: Ten years to get his 7 answer.

1 r 8

MR. HLUCHAN: Can we take a break?

9

(

MR. STAWSKI: Let's take a b@V , -

j 10 five-minute break. k rY[/,

l:: '

it-l' 1 x

(BRIEF RECESS) h 12 MR. HLUCHAN:

ID Mr. Chairman, our next 13

. ffi-

%7 panel of witnesses is the management, and I would

$ 14 ask at this time that Gordon Bond, Harry Leonard

/

,  ;;- 15 and John Barton be sworn, kf 16 r-

, (GORDON BOND, HARRY E. LEONARD AND 17 JOHN BARTON, BEING DULY SWORN WERE EXAMINED AND N 18 TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:)

42

}{'

s.w 19 MR. GANNON: Would you have them g{ 20 in state their names in the order in which they're 1;1 21 sitting?

\ '.C.

j{ 22 MR. ELUCHAN:

$ Gordon Bond, B-o-n-d, f 23 Harry Leonard, L-e-o-n-a-r-d, and John Barton, 24 B-a-r-t-o-n.

g.

.. 25 MR. GANNON: Thank you.

,e t

i

. . . . . ^"

1 MR. HLUCHAN: Thank you. 93 2

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to hand up as I

3 exhibits copies of the resolutions that Mr.

4 Leonard made reference to as part of the record, 5

if I may, and I think we can mark them as a group 6 as Exhibit A-6.

7 And our final witness is Mr. John 8

Barton, who is the director of the Oyster Creek 9

Nuclear Generating Station. Mr. Barton.

10 MR. BARTON: Hi. I'm John Barton.

11 My wife and I reside in the Forked River Beach 12 section of the Township.

13 I have a bachelor of engineering 14 degree from the United States Merchant Marine 15 Academy.

16 I have been in the nuclear power 17 business since 1959, having spent eight years 18 constructing and testing nuclear submarines and 19 i surface vessels for the United States Navy, four l 20 {

years as a senior startup engineer for an Ll 21 architect-engineer firm involved in the l 22 construction and startup of four commercial 23 nuclear power plants.

24 '

25 I came with GPU in 1971 and have been '

various positions as the in startup manager, 9

' l. -

k

~ "

..' .i 1 project manager. I was responsible for 94 2

construction and startup of the TMI , units and was 3

involved in the oyster Creek startup program in 4

1969 when I worked for the architect-engineers 5

firm, have been assigned at Oyster Creek since 6

1985, and have been a director at the station 7 since 1991.

8 I was asked to address the future of i

9 the Oyster Creek Generating Station. Oyster Creek i

10 is currently licensed to operate into the year G

11 2009, and the current plans the company has are to

?-

W 12 operate thb station until that time.. When the ik 13 plant does shut down we expect to maintain all

$1 g .

14 spent f.u e l on-site in a safe condition, and, in c 15 fact, we would be required to do so by Federal 16 law. That would include the monitoring of dry 17 spent fuel storage modules and the maintenance and 18 monitoring of those plant systems necessary to I 19 keep the spent fuel, which i's now stored in the I

20 fuel pool, in a safe condition until the Federal ,-

21 government has a facility which would take spent 22 fuel from electric utilities, }

j 23 The fall of 1996 is a critical time

  • t

' 24 for plant operation. If we do not install the dry ll 25 3 spent fuel storage modules by 1996, the plant

" i

1 would not have the capability of totally 95 l

2 off-loading fuel from the reactor to the in-plant 3 . spent fu_el_pRol_s. This is not a desirable l 4

operating configuration, should the plant need to 5 conduct internal inspections of the' reactor vessel I 6 that would require fuel to be removed from the 7 reactor.  !

In order to operate safely we should be 8

able to remove this fuel from the reactor and 9

store it in the spent fuel storage pool inside the l ~

10 plant, and after 1996 we will not have the i

11 flexibility to do that. i Without dry storage and l 12 without the ability to remove all the fuel fro $.

13 the reactor, the plant would not be able to 14 operate. I 15 Additionally, we would'have spent g.~

7 16 fuel in both the reactor and storage pools 35 17 simultaneously, which would significantly  ;

7 e

18 complicate safe operation of the plant.  !

t

19

.. If one were to assume license renewal Q <c wm  :

,;j, 20 and extension beyond the year 2009, which is a gg ,,,t

{

21 possibility, we would continue to generate 22 electricity and generate additional spent fuel at 4- 23 that time. If a Federal facility is not available X.

24 i-In in 2009, we would need additional dry storage 25

+,.. modules and would, at that time, see'k any needed f ;$

2 1 additional approvals. Thank you. 96 2 MR. HLUCHAN:

That concludes the 3 testimony from the management panel, and these 4 gentlemen are now available for your questions 5 from members of the Board.

6 MR. STAWSKI: Does anyone have any 7 questions?'

8 MR. MOORE: Mr. Bond, you mentioned 9 in your testimony a date, 1998. 7've heard that 9 10 before. Would you elaborate on that?

t a - l 11 MR. BOND: Yes, I'd be happy to.

y, 12 In 1992 when Congress passed the j t

'tI 13 Nuclear Waste Policy Act, they specifically set 70 l f:,f[ 14 that date in the Act.as the target date for an 15 operation of a Federal repository. DOE was given 16 the responsibility of implementing such a I 17 repository'by that date.

[

,. x

  • /t .

K 18 MR. MOORE: And are they moving along

n

,h 19 those lines?

20

(

MR. BOND: No, clearly not. As I WL

~ }. 21 mentioned, the repository is estimated by DOE, lB.l.I.

22 although you will hear various estimates by DOE,

{

a 23 but the one that I'm most' familiar with recently

v. . .

Jyp- 24 was one by Mrs. O' Leary who had estimated it to be mw.

25

.h. ' . 2013 before the repository would be available.

e

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20134J985&oldid=2872794"