ML20205F001

Responds to Re Safety of Perry Nuclear Power Plant & That Plant Operating with Limited Leaks in Three Fuel Rods for Several Months.Informal Public Hearing Re Leaks at Perry Facility Held in Rockville,Md on 990222

ML20205F001
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	03/25/1999
From:	Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Latourette S HOUSE OF REP.
Shared Package
ML20205F006	List: ML20205F001 ML20205F040
References
NUDOCS 9904060077
Download: ML20205F001 (2)

Text

kh a

[

4 UNITED STATES 3 -

k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION b

7g WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055'>-0001 o,

\\

,,8 March 25, 1999 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Steven C. LaTourette United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman LaTourette:

{

l am responding to your letter of February 4,1999, regarding the safety of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant. The Perry facility has been operating with limited leaks in three fuel rods for several months. The licensee, who has characterized these leaks as " pinhole"in size, plans to continue oper9 ting in this fashion until its refueling outage, which is scheduled to begin on March 27,1999. In your letter, you requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) conduct a public hearing on this matter and that we share with you in writing our position j

on plant operation with known fuel pinhole leaks.

By letter dated November 9,1998, the NRC received a petition from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) requesting an immediate shutdown of the Perry plant located in Perry, Ohio.

The petition requested that the facility remain shut down until all failed fuel assemblies were removed from the reactor core. As an alternate action, UCS stated that Perry could be restarted following the proposed shutdown aftei the licensee updated its design and licensing basis to permit operation of the plant with failed fuel assemblies. Finally, the petition requested a public hearing in order to present new plant-specific information regarding the operation of the

//

Perry facility with failed fuel assemblies. By letter dated December 16,1998, the staff denied

//

the petitioner's request for a shuidown of the Perry facility, but offered the ooportunity, which I

the petitioner accepted, for an informal public hearing on this matter. The staff's letter, which is enclosed for your information, indicated that a formal response would be prepared within a reasonable period of time following the hearing.

[,

An informal public hearing on this matter was held in RocMle, Maryland, on February 22, 1999. Representatives from UCS and First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee for the Perry facility), and others, were participants in the hearing. Video teleconferencing of the hearing was made available to members of the public at both the Lake Ene College in Painesville, Ohio, and at the Forum Conference and Education Center in Cleveland, Ohio. The hearing was held to gather additional information, as indicated in the original petition, from both UCS and the licensee before the NRC staff prepares its formal response to the UCS petition.

The staff is currently preparing thic formal response to the UCS petition, which will include the staff position on the acceptability of plant operation with known fuel pinhole leaks. This

-n{$

9904060077 990325 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR

s,

.E, 2-response is scheduled for completion by the end of April 1999. Accordingly, we will send you a copy of our response at that time.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may be of additional assistance.

f Sincerely,

)

) L41 -

Shirley Ann Jackson i'

Enclosure:

. December 16,1998 Letter to the Union of Concerned Scientists

3..

f (*e p

\\.

UNITED STATES s

[

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION w

y wA HINGToN, D.C. 30seH001 December 16, 1998 Mr. Dav'd A. Lochbaum Union r,f Concemed Scientists 1616 re Street, NW, Suite 310 Warhington, DC 20036-1495

Dear Mr. Lochbaum:

I have received the Petition that you submitted on behalf of the Union of Concemed Scientists (UCS), ' dated November 9,1998, addressed to Dr. William Travers, Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Petition requests enforcement

. action to require an immediate shutdown of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP), Unit No.1 and that the facility remain shut down until all failed fuel assemblies are removed from the reactor core. You also stated that as an altemate action, PNPP could be restarted following the proposed shutdown after its design and licensing bases were updated to permit operation with failed fuel assemblies. Additionally, the Petition requested a public hearing to present new plant-specific information regarding the operation of FNPP, as well as to discuss a UCS report dated April 2,1998, entitled " Potential Nuclear Safety Hazard / Reactor Operation With Failed Fuel Cladding."

As the basis for your request, you cited the NRC's Weekly Information Report for the week ending October 30,1998, that describes the apparent existence of two pin hole fuelleaks at the Perry facility. In your opinion, operation with one or more failed fuel assemblies is not permitted by the. Perry design and licensing bases. In addition, you also stated that by operating with possible failed fuel cladding, PNPP is violating its licensing basis for the radiation worker protection (as low as reasonably achievable [ALARA]) program. You have referred to NRC Information Notice No. 87-39, " Control of Hot Particle Contamination at Nuclear Plants," which describes how continued operation with degraded fuel may elevate radiation exposure rates for plant employees. You have noted that the licensee has the option of shutting down the facility to remove the failed fuel assemblies but has chosen to continue plant operation.

Your Petition further reasserted the UCS position that nuclear power plants operating with fuel cladding failures were potentially unsafe and were in violation of Federal regulations. ?n its April 1998 report, the UCS stated that it has not been demonstrated that the effects from design-bases transients and accidents (e.g., hydrodynamic loads, fuel enthalpy changes, etc.) prevent pre-existing fuel failures from propagating. Therefore, you concluded that it was possible that "significantly more radioactive material will be released to the reactor coolant system during a transient or accident than that experienced during steady state operation. Thus, the e::isting

' design bases accident analyses for Perry do not bound its current operation with known fuel

. cladding failures."

When the staff received your Petition, it conducted a pre... aary evaluation to determine if an urgent safety issue was involved that warmnted the requested action. Although you raised i

e

[

l m

i David A. Lochbaum important concems in your Petition, the staff has concluded that the Petition uncovered no urgent safety problems that warranted immediate action by the NRC. Technical Specifications (TN limits on reactor coolant system (RCS) activity typically account for a small fraction of failed fuel, which can occur during normal operations. These limits are set to values of RCS specific activity, wh!ch ensure that the radiological consequences of postulated design-basis accidents are within the appropriate dose acceptance criteria. At PNPP, operation with a minimal amount of fuel cladding damage is allowed, provided the licensee continues to meet RCS chemistry requirements of TS Section 3.4.8.' Furthermore, the Petition did not include any information indicating that PNPP has operated oute!de its TS limits. Consequently, your request for enforcement action to require the immediate shutdown of PNPP is denied.

The licensee has taken actions to address the suspected condition of the fuel assemblies, including the insertion of control rods to " isolate" the fuel assemblies in order to minim!ze reactor coolant activity levels. The NRC has been monitoring RCS activity at PNPP and will continue to ensure that there is no' undue risk to public health and safety.

In your Petition, you also requested that the NRC conduct an informal public hearing in order to "present new information on' reactor operation with failed fuel assemblies" as a followup to the April 1998 UCS report, as well as to provide plant-specific information regarding the operation of PNPP, To ensure that potential issues relating to this material are apnropriately addressed, the NRC is hereby offering you an opportunity to present tha new information referred to in your Petition at an ir, formal public hearing. The public hearing will also allow the licensee and the public to present other pertinent information, as well as provide a means to solicit questions from all participants. The NRC staff will subsequently use the information gained from the hearing to evaluate the issues raised in your Petition and to render a Director's Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.

The Union of Concemed Scientists submitted a similar Petition conceming continued plant operation with fuel cladding failures at the River Bend Station on September 25,1998. As with the current Petition, your Petition for River Bend requested a hearing in the Washington, D.C.,

3rea to discuss new information on reactor operation with failed fue; assemblies. Your letter of November 6,1998, accepad NRC's offer for an informal public hearing and described the new information that you wish to discuss. Through verbal communications with Robert Fretz, the NRC Project Manager for the River Bend Station, we understand that you are willing to address both the River Bend and the Perry facilities in a combined public hearing. We would also like to combine both facilities in a public hearing in the Washington, D.C., area. Since you are currently

- dealing with Mr. Fretz to establish a mutually agreeable date, time, and location for the informal -

public hearing, we request that you continue to use Mr. Fretz as your point of contact.

if you have additional new information beyond that provided in your letter of November 6,1998, we request that you provide, in advance of the hearing, the new information on reactor operation with failed fuel assemblies. For your information, the NRC Project Manager for the Perry facility

_is Douglas Pickett. Mr. Pickett can be reached at (301) 415-1364.

i

.?

l David A. Lochbaum.

Your Petition has been referred to me pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations.- As provided by Section 2.206, action will be taken on your request within a reasonable time. I have enciosed for your information a copy of the notice that is being filed with l

the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

j Sincerely, ahi or Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

FederalRegister Notice cc w/ encl: See next page I

l

)

t I

1 1

l l

l 1

l l

L. Myers Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Centerior Service Company cc:

Mary E. O'Reilly James R. Williams FirstEnergy-A290 Chief of Staff 10 Center Road Ohio Emergency Management Agency Perry, OH 44081 2855 West Dublin Granville Road Columbus, OH 43235-7150 Resident inspector's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mayor, Village of Perry P.O. Box 331 4203 Harper Street i

Perry, OH 44081-0331 Perry, OH 44081 Regional Administrator, Region 111

' Radiological Health Program U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ohio Department of Health 8G1 Warrenville Road P.O. Box 118 Lit >le, IL 60532-4531 Columbus, OH 43266-0118 Sue Hiatt Ohio Environmental Protection OCRE Interim Representative Agency I

8275 Munson DERR-Compliance Unit Mentor, OH 44060 ATTN: Mr. Zack A. Clayton P.O. Box 1049 ihnry L. Hegrat Columbus, OH 43266-0149 Regulatory Affairs Manager Cleveland Electric illuminating Co.

Chairman Perry Nuclear Power Plant Perry Township Board of Trustees P.O. Box 97, A210 37EO Center Road, Box 65 Pe f OH 44081 Perry, OH 44081 FirstEnergy Corporation State of Ohio Michael Beiting Public Utilities Commiss!on Associate General Counsel East Broad Street 76 S. Maia Coiumbus, OH 43266-0573 Akron, OH 44308 William R. Kanda, Jr., Plant Manager Mayor, Village of North Perry Cleveland Electric illuminating Co.

Notth Perry Village Hall Perry Nuclear Power Plant 4778 Lockwood fload P.O. Box 97, SB306 North Perry Village, OH 44081 Perry, OH 44081 Donna Owens, Director Ohio Department of Commerce Division ofIndustrial Compliance l

Bureau of Oaerations & Maintenance 660S Tussir, dead P.O. Box 4009 Reyno!dsburg, OH 43068-9009

i

?

7590-01 P t

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-440 LICENSE NO. NPF-58 THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY. ET AL

- RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given that by Petition dated November 9,1998, David A. Lochbaum (Petitioner), acting on b', half of the Union of Ccncerned Scientists (UCS), has requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) take action with regard to the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.1 (PNPP), operated by The Cleveland Electric illuminating Company and Centerior Service Company. Petitioner requests that enforcement action be taken to require an immediate shutdown of the PNPP, and that the facility remain shut down until all failed fuct assemblies are removed from the reactor core. As an attemate action, UCS also stated that following the requested shutdown, PNPP could be restarted after its design and licensing bases were updated to permit operation with failed fuel assemblies. Additionally, the Petition i

requested a public hearing to present new plant-specific information regarding the operation of PNPP, as well as to discuss a UCS report dated April 2,1998, entitled ' Potential Nuclear Safety Hazard / Reactor Operation With Failed Fuel Cladding."

As the basis for the request, the Petitioner cited the NRC's Weekly Information Report for the week ending October 30,1998, that describes the apparent existence of two pin hole fuelleaks at the Perry facility. In the opinion of the Petitioner, operation with one or more failed fuel assemblies is not permitted by ths Perry design and licens!ng bases. In addition, the Petitioner stated that by operating with possible failed fuel cladding, PNPP is violating its li:ensing basis for the radiation weker protection (as low as reasonably achievable [ALARA])

program. The Petitioner referred to NRO information Notice No. 87-39, "Centrol of Hot Particle

\\

/

dWNO 9 [..

/

_ f.

-?--

s 4

2 Contamination at Nuclear Plants," which describes how continued operation with degraded fuel may elevate radiation exposure rates for plant employees.

i I

The Petitioner further reasserted thc UGS position that nuclear power plants operating

{

with fuel cladding failures are potentially unsafe and are in violation of Federal regulations. In its April 1998 report, the UCS stated that it has not been demonstrated that the effects from 4

. design-bases transients and accidents (i.e., hydrodynamic loads, fuel enthalpy changes, etc.)

. prevent pre-existing fuel failures from propagating. Therefore, the Petitioner concluded that it :

I was possible that "significantly more radioactive material will be released to the reactor coolant -

. system during a transient or accident than that experienced during t,teady state operation."

l The request is being treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations.

I The request has been referred to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.' As i

provided by Section 2.206, appropriate action will be taken on this petition wit' i a reasonable time. By letter dated December 16,1998, the Director denied Petitioner's request for enforcement action to require The Cleveland Electric lilum5ating Company to immediately shut

- down PNPP. In addition, the Director also extended an offer to the.Detitioner for an informal public hearing at a date to be determined. A copy of the petition !s available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, N.W., Washir,gton, D.C. 20S55-

)

0001.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1

l a ue.

ins, ire or Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Rockville, Maryland,

This 16thday of