ML20137U230
| ML20137U230 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 02/21/1997 |
| From: | Myers H AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137T979 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704160327 | |
| Download: ML20137U230 (5) | |
Text
.-
J 3
~
t s
fGi i e P.O. Box 88 Peaks Island, ME 04108 February 21, 1997 Hon. Shirley Jackson Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 205550-0001
Dear Chairman Jackson:
I am writing in reference to a February 3, 1997 letter from Mr.
Zwolinski which, according to Mr. Zwolinski, responds to my January 22, 1997 letter to you.
In my January 22 letter, I stated that in order that persons having an interest in the matter of Maine Yankee be adequately informed as to the state of the plant's compliance with Commission regulations, it was necessary that certain information be available prior to the February 4 Commission meeting on Maine Yankee.
In his February 3 letter, Mr. Zwolinski states, in effect, that, in large part, the information I requested was not available and/or not rel-cvant to the Commission's February 4 meeting.
.I am writing here to take issue with much of what is stated'in Mr. Zwolinski's letter and to note again that the Commission can not exercise proper oversight of the Maine Yankee matter in the absence of tha kinds of information enumerated in my January 22 letter.
First, I asked for a list enumerating noncomplying conditions at Maine Yankee and regulatory requirement (s) violated as a result of each such noncomplying condition. In his February 3 response, Mr.
Zwolinski indicated that the only listing of noncomplying conditions would be that which related to restart of Maine Yankee! In requesting a list enumerating noncomplying conditions at Maine Yankee and regu-latory requirement (s) violated as a result of each such noncomplying condition, I was acting upon a belief that this information should be Gvailable so that persons interested in this matter, including, pre-sumably, Commissioners, would have information necessary to understand tha totality of the situation at Maine Yankee, not simply the items that need be addressed prior to restart.
The staff seems to have dscided on its own that the Commissioners (and other interested par-tics) did not need this information for an adequate understanding of tha situation at Maine Yankee.
I believe this decision deprived the Commission of information necessary to assess the Maine Yankee situa-tion in toto.
While it may be that the nonresta:rt items are each less Gignificant than the restart items, the total assemblage of the non-rC0 tart. issues-might cast the overall picture in a different light thnn la the case when such issues are not considered; e.g. a picture dcrived from a large rumber of specific snall pieces may well be quite different from a picture derived from the general description of the large pieces presented by the staff.
Second, in my January 22 letter, I requested a' list of outstanding Reintenance items and incomplete corrective actions and the dates on which each such maintenance item and need for corrective action was 9704160327 970414 PDR ADOCK 05000309 P
pon
?
[pon.ShirleyJcckson Fcbruary 21, 1997 identified.
Mr. Zwolinski said that the staff;did not maintain such a list but that NRC inspectors did have access to The information in this regard that was located at Maine Yankee.
Again, I believe this information was and is necessary for an understanding of the overall situation at Maine Yankee.
The staff's failure to have this data cvailable did and does deprive ~the Commission of another category of information necessary to understand the matter.
Third, in my January 22 letter, I requested a listing of par-ticulars with respect to which the Maine Yankee licensee has failed to demonstrate compliance with requirements based on TMI Action Plan Items II.K.3.30 and II.K.3.31.
Mr. Zwolinski' stated that this request related to a matter under investigation and that it would be premature to discuss this item in conjunction with the February 4 meeting.
The thrust of this response is undermined by the fact that NRC staff have, presumably, discussed with Maine Yankee the reasons why Maine Yankee had failed to demonstrate compliance with requirements based on TMI Action Plan Items II.K.3.30 and II.K.3.31.
It is unclear, therefore, why the particulars of this noncompliance could not be discusseo at the February 4 meeting.
Such discussion could have transpired without involving potentially criminal aspects of the matter that might remain under investigation.
1 Fourth, in my January 22 letter, I requested the Commission's I
poaition (and basis for same) with respect to whether~ the Maine Yankee Oparating License will need to be amended should the Entergy Company cogume responsibility'for operating the plant.
It appears from Mr.
Zwolinski's February 3 letter that the Commission has not yet taken a stand on this item notwithstanding that the MYAP'Co has entered into an ngreement with the Entergy Corporation.
The need for a Commission position on the need for a license amendment is not negated by the j
fact that Maine Yankee is not now operating; nonoperation notwith-i standing, it is the fact that the highest level cognizant person directing actions pertaining to compliance with NRC regulations may or may not be an employee of an entity other than the entity holding the Maine Yankee Operating License.
I Fifth, in my January 22 letter, I requested the Commission's rationale'for permitting Mains Yankee to operate in circumstances where neither the licensee nor cognizant NRC officials are able and, willing to affirm that the plant is in substantial compliance with Commission regulations.
While Maine Yankee is currently shutdown, the fcct is that the Commission, without a finding of substantial compli-ance with regulations, permitted Maine Yankee to operate during the pariod between identification of significant noncomplying conditions by the Independent Safety Assessment Team and the December 1996 shut-down.
I noted in my January 22 letter that the Commission's failure to addrcss this item, raised repeatedly, serves to undermine the Com-micsion's. credibility in the community of persons having an interest i
in nuclear regulation. sin his February 3, response, Mr. Zwolinski-avoided addressing my question by ignoring the pre-December 1996 p riod, and by stating that "the staf f must be satisfied there is rcasonable assurance that the facility will be operated in a manner that poses no undue risk to public health and safety."
If Mr. Zwo-
'linski means that such satisfaction will be based on a finding of compliance with regulations, he should so state.
Since he does not otate this, I assume that the staff is prepared to allow Maine Yankee to operate on the basis of a lesser standard than a finding of com-d
- ipen. Shirley Jackson February 21, 1997 4
. pliance with regulations.
In prev aus letters (e.g. letters dated December 13 and December
.30,-1996 ann : January 13, 1997) I raised-questions about the appropri-ateness of allowing Maine Yankee to operate in the absence of a finding of compliance with regulations.
I call your attention to these previous communications.
I also call your attention to the fact that I have heard NRC staff twice invoke in public an even lesser
. standard than a finding that the plant can be operated without posing an undue risk to public health and safety; i.e. a standard based on staff's willingness to live near the plant.. A es'the' Commission
~believe that the public should reach conclusions as.to the adequacy (or inadequacy) of plant safety on the basis of statements made by.
cenior.NRC staff that such staf f would (or would not) be willing to live in-the plant's vicinity?
>In a previous letter, I stated.that while I had respect for Mr.
Zwolinski, I-did not believe that assigning him. responsibility for responding'to correspondence'from me, particularly with respect to the TMI. Action Items II.K.3.30 and II.K.3.31, is likely to lead to a sat-
'isfactory resolution of questions that have been raised in this regard by me and others.. As is.the case with the particular TMI Action Items II.K.3.30 and II.K.3.31, the staff associated with Maine Yankee have.
En overall position to defend with respect to.the Maine Yankee situa-tion.- I do not think i't likely that they will respond to my questions in a manner other that which supports their previously stated posi-tions and rationales.
I have written this series of letters-because I believe that, in significant respects,-the staff continues to enforce its regulations j
at Maine Yankee in the manner that has led to the current quagmire.
I address my questions to you and your fellow Commissioners because the Commission has a responsibility to oversee the staff.
I-will continue-I to address letters to you whether or not the Commission allows the J
i staff-to. continue in the course that has led, at a minimum, to the i
imposition. of huge costs upon Maine-Yankee's owners 'and users of its i
output, and at a maximum, to impose upon Maine Yankee's neighbors a
. rick of a radiological. exposure much greater than the risk'that would,
j partain had the plant been in substantial compliance with the'Commis-Dion's regulations.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, W
Henr R. Myers-C.:
Commissioner Kenneth Rogers Commissioner. Greta Dicus.
Commissioner Nils Diaz Commissioner Edward McGaffigan i
c
~-
ACTION i
3 J
EDO Principal Correspondence Control FROM DUE: 03/10/97 EDO CONTROL: G970130 DOC DT: 02/21/97 FINAL REPLY:
H2nry R. Myers Maina TO:
Chairman Jackson
,FOR SIGNATURE OF :
i Ewolinski i
DESC ROUTING:
MAINE YANKEE
{
Callan Jordan i
Thompson i
Norry Blaha Miller, RI
{DATE: 02/27/Vi 4
jASSIGNEDTO:
CONTACT:
NRR Collins e
~
- fiPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS
Put EDO and Chairman on for concurrence.
Ch2irman's office to review response prior to dicpatch.
(Ref.G970078)
ACTl0N llll$0$**
ENE$$RGj?199' DUE TO NRR DIRECTO CRR ROUTING:
COLLINS 8Y-heb) 0:$
MIRAGLIA u
m THADANI 3 -
ZIMMERMAN J
MARTIN TRAVERS B0HRER I
m
)
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-97-0193 LOGGING DATE: Feb 26 97 ACTION OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:
HENRY KYERS AFFILIATION:
MAINE' ADDRESSEE:
CHAIRMAN JACKSON LETTER DATE:
Feb 21 97 FILE CODE: IDER 5 MAINE YANKEE
SUBJECT:
MAINE YANKEE ACTION:
Direct Reply DIETRIBUTION:
CHAIRMAN SPECIAL HANDLING: SECY TO ACK CONSTITUENT:
ces NOTES:
6 F#7437 -- CHAYRMAN TO REVIEW PRIOR TO DISPATCH DATE DUE:
Mar 12 97
=
SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
AFFILIATION:
I e
)
EDO -- G970130
.