ML20206C001
| ML20206C001 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1988 |
| From: | Blough A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Callahan M NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206B722 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-88-198 NUDOCS 8811160070 | |
| Download: ML20206C001 (42) | |
Text
..:.. . L.a . : -: . - -
- ~ ~ a ~~-
% UNITED STATES I' 'j s[ S j* NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REoloNI g*
- 475 ALLENOALE ROAD
- / KING oF PRUSSIA. PENNSYLVANIA te404 FEB 081988 MEMORANDUM FOR: Michael S. Callahan, Congressional Affairs Officer Office of Governmental and Public Affairs FROM: A. Randy Blough, Chief Reactor Projects Section No. 3B Division of Reactor Projects
SUBJECT:
CORRECTIONS TO KENNEDY HEARING TRANSCRIPT OF JANUARY 7,1988 Enclosed are the marked up pages which require correction.
JJ A. Randy B ugh, Chief Reactor Projects Section No. 38
Enclosure:
. A= stated cc w/o enc 1:
R. Wessman, NRR
- 0. Mcdonald, NRR J. Wiggins, RI L. Doerflein, RI M. Miller, RI C. Warren, SRI - Pilgrim 8811160070 00102S PDR FOIA JOHNSON 88-190 PDR f
'9
- N
, 1 revision. I wonder if you can tell us how long it 2 would take FEMA to evaluate th-s plan af ter it's ,
l 3 been submitted and how long it would take FEMA to j 4 ultimately advise the NRC of the acceptability of a 5 plan?
6 Mr. Krimm: Once the plan is submitted, of 7 course, it will be reviewed by the Regional 8 Assistance Committee, and depending on the time and 9 the problems, they should be able do it in about 30 10 days.
11 Mr. Doland: Three months.
12 Mr. Krimm: Ninety days.
13 The chairman: Well, is there any -- what 14 assurance can you give us that Pilgrim won't start 15 before that time?
16 Mr. Krimm: Tln t is not my decision. I 17 can't give you any assurances.
18 The Chairman: Whose decision -- rJeh that 19 bring you --
20 Mr. Krimm: That's the Regulatory 21 Commission's decision.
i 22 The Chairman: Can you give us any assurance 23 kbout that?
24 N 6 N 1N 7: N 3 h ,sJt[tR?fX V2 1 hA h O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPO*. TING SERVICE, INC.
- a. . v. :.L :.. <
. . .~ , . + .. 1 l
l
'i *
. \
v 1 steetkaonf,3LC M
- 2 The Chairman: We'll hear from Dr. Murley, 3 who is the director of the Office of Nuclear 4 Regulatory Commission.
5 dr. Murley: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll t 6 summarize my remarks, which I provided to the s
7 committee in more detail. ,
8 First, I should say that we're not preparsd
., 9 at this time to recommended restart of the Pilgrim 10 plant nor do we have a schedule for the restart for 11 the plant. It is well known --
12 The Chairman: Lot me -- just bofore you
. 13 move on. You say," we tre not ready to restart nor 14 do we have a plan." Can you indicate to us what 15 would be the factors that you would look for to 16 determine whether you will have a plan or whether 17 you will restart? What are the events? What are 18 the things that have to happen.
e 19 Mr. horley: What I --
20 The Chairman: If you rereat them, I would 21 like to permit you the full opportunity, but I 22 would also, es you move through the testimon s ,
23 we're reaching toward the end of it, WF fttFWWEh%
24 to.;.tq 6 g.moreFE N5DillitF~h* I don't want to -
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
, , c. . , - . i. E-: ir - ,
d b
1 -- if you got it later on, just mention it to me,
. e 2 but if you don't, I would appreciate if you would 3 be responsive.
4 dir .. Murley:
I'll mention the maaor factors 5 that we're going to look for are the deficiencies 6 and the plant equipment that we found through our 7 inspection; the deficiencies in the management of 8 the plant and the deficiencies in the emergency 9 preparedness.
10 The Chairman: But again can you indicate 11 how long it will eake to do plant management and 12 evacuation? Do you have any general ballpark 13 figuros? Mr. Doland indicated they thought around 14 90 days. In each one of though -- Let's take each 15 one of those day in the plant, first of all, how 16 long would that take.
17 *Mr'. Murleyt- After the Boston Ediscn Company 18 submits to us their indication that they believe ,
19 they are ready to restart, we think it will take 20 perhaps a month to two months, probably closer to 21 two months by the time we send our own team of 22 inspectors in, review and come to our own 23 conclusion.
24 The Chairman: When does Boston Edison .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
. , . , . . . . . .. a. : e '. . . . .
4
, 1 indicate to you they will submit their 2 recemmendations?
3 MrdSalf3ppf They have indicated, I think, 4 informally to us, it would probably be in late 5 January or February, more like in February.
6 The Chairman: On the question of the plant,
, 7 you expect late January, February, to receive from t- .
8 Boston Edison the final plant designs in term of 9 safety, and then that will take you approximately 10 30 days for you to send your people up there and 11 conduct -- and then they start their review or 12 does it take 30 days to get your people to get 13 together?
14 e dk. Hurley: No, we would have our teams 15 ready. It would take probably two to three weeks 16 at the plant. We would then have to collect our 17 information and come to pull it together, make our 18 conclusions and that, in terms, would take another 19 month, so altogether, perhaps two months.
20 The Chairman: So we are generally thinking 21 sometime in early March that you got -- everything 22 goes on, you'll at leest be able to make some 23 judgment, I suppose. I suppose you may have to go 24 back and get additional information. The fastest .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
~. .
(
o 1 track would be in March. What about with regards 2 to management?
3 'M{Auir1[ey' ' rWith management ,
we're making continuous assessments. What we will do, of 5 course, is watch their peformance while they are 6 getting the plant ready and also during the times 7 when they will be conducting g *'y 7 t L '%e,th.-
8 ..tnactional' tests.4 9 The Chairman: What is a "hot function 10 test"? When do they start?
11 Mr. Murley: Well, they'll being doing some 12 testing, not nuclear testing, and we'll be watching 13 and observing how the plant is being operated.
14 The Chairman: What sort of testing do they 15 do now?
16 Hr. Murley: For example, I was in the plant 17 all morning, and they have a steam supply that they 18 brought. I'd say it's a fossil-fired boiler just
(
19 to generate steam tbTrva'steamrtu,rbines tha9 20 pgenerp g;stematfor the safety pumps. So they will 21 test them and they will test the systems to see if 22 there is leak. That sort of thing is done. We
! 23 watch them carefully because it is a nuclear plant 24 and there is radiation in the plant and even though .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
- n . .. , . . .
L
. . 1 this is a non nuclear test, we watch them.
2 The Chairman: Have you reached any 3 preliminary conclusions that you want to share with 4 us?
5 e>UE Murley: No firm conclusions. I think 6 we can say that they made some significant 7 management changes in the company that we believe ,
8 are improvements. Rhlph Byrd, for example, was 9 brought in after years of experience in the nucleat 10 navy, who was an admiral. He, in turn, has brought 11 in a number of capable people. It remains to be 12 seen whether they can gel as a team that can really
, 13 manage --
14 The Chairman: How long does it take in 15 terms of evacuation to get those guy ready?
16 E 6 i What we will do is, we are 17 reviewing the drafts as they are prepared by the 18 state and local authorities, and we expect that the 19 state will send those to FEMA, and we'll expect 20 we'll get them. At the time, we'll have to come to 4
21 a judgment as to the status of those plans.
22 Perhaps -- I think I say it in a little more 23 structured way in the testimony, if I could go 24 through it, I would like to do that. -
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
m
.a . . u. '.~ . :: ' . . .
,- . -. 'h- '
- ~ -
1 The Chsirman: All right. Go ahead.
3 # Nr~.~ NuY1by : With regard to the current 3 status of the major NRC activities regarding 4 Pilgrim, the plant is shut down; the NRC has me:
5 frequently with the Boston Edison Company, members 6 of the public and with the Commonwealth, as well as 7 local officials, to discuss the issue regarding 8 Pilgrim.
9 Boston Edison has developed a restart plan 5
10 that describeg their programs and plans, but they 11 have not reach$ a posi; ion where they would request 12 NRC to consider a restart decision. In addition,
, 13 as part of its safety enhancement program, Boston 14 Edison has proposed a number of modifications 15 intended to improve plant peformance in the event 16 of an accident at Pilgrim. These modifications are 17 in continence with the NRC's goals of enhancing and 18 obtaining performance under severe accident 19 conditions.
20 We will conduct several public meetings to 21 insure opportunity for pub?,ic participation and 22 input to the assessment panel regarding Boston 23 Edison's restart plan. These meetings will be 24 formal, transcribed session in which the public's ,
3 O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
l
'. . x f r ... .. . ,
e 1 tostinsny will be heard by NEC senior staff.
. 4 2 After the NRC staff has completed the
. 3 restarthreadinessassessment, there will be a 3{
4 public meeting at NRC headquarters at which the 5 staff will inform the NRC commissioners on our 6 findings and recommendations, so that the I
7 Commission itself can make the final restart i
8 decision.
9 The Chairman: Now, who is going to be able 10 to appear at that public meeting?
11 eMr. Murley: Any interested citizen.
12 The Chairman: This is in Washington; is 13 that correct 14 > Mr. Murley: I'm sorry. The meetings that 15 we'll have will be here in the Plymouth area to get 16 concerned citizens' input on the plan itself and 17 our approach to the plan. The Commission meeting, 18 if that's what --
19 The Chairman: Who will be at the meeting?
20 e Mr. Murley: It will be the senior staff 21 from our headquarter (and from our regional office.
)
22 The Chairman: None of the Commissioners 23 would come up to that meeting?
24 . Mr. Murley: Probably not. It would not be O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
~
1,- .
. .. .z. .- '~- i~ . . .
t.
- c. 1 an adjudicatory hearing. It would be a more 2 informal meeting. It will last as long as people 3 will be interested in talking.
4 The Chairman: You and I know that, quite 5 frankly, there is a difference if you have -- the 6 staff have the hearing or whether you have the t 7 principals. With no disrespect, because I have an 8 excellent staff and am proud of them, as you know, 9 and I know, there is a quantum difference on those 10 kind of reactions. People are busy, and all the il rest, but it is an unique set of circumstances.
12 You got two situations, both Pilgrim and Seabrook.
, 13 You know the kinds of -- you may have, I don't 14 know, half a dozen maybe -- I don't know what the 15 others would be. I know one or two that are of 16 such a significance and importance.
17 I find.it difficult to understand what would 18 be more important than those fellows getting out in 19 one of those Gulfstream planes that the government 20 has and spend a nice day up in the Plymouth area 21 and fly back so they could be back with their l 22 families at nighttime. I really don't know what in 23 the world is more important than spending that 24 particular day -- I really do -- I really mean -- .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE CCURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
'. : - . :~ .:.: . - . ~ - . ~. . ..
3 . , .
L-1 (Applause). We'll request it nicely to them. !
u !
2 Hopefully, they'll be responsive, but it -- I l J
3 think, you know that the -- whatever decisions is 4 going to be made, how important it is that people 5 have an opportunity to be heard on these issees, 6 and I think having sat through the hearings 7 tonight, I find that these are well-thought out, 8 well-considered, very well-studied testimonies. I 9 mean, we're not talking about things, quite 10 frankly, that all of us, what we represent, ought 11 to be able to hear whatever people have on their 12 minds in any event, but I think, as you would -- I
, 13 think as you would be able to understand these very 14 impressive pieces of testimony that people spene a 15 lot of time on. Well, I urge you to give that 16 consideration. I will, and I'm sure I will be 17 joined by my c.olleagues, but let's go on with your 18 testimony.
19 .Mr r ;)urley: Yes, Senator. I'll move on now 20 to emergency preparedness.
21 The Chairman: What page are you on?
22 ggs,7 M ig I'm sorry. I have a version 23 that -- when you asked that we limit it to three 24 minutes. .,
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
l .
t.
. 1 The chairman: You can take a little longer 2 time, if you'd like to. I have longer -- one of 3 the testimony which you submitted earlier where you 4 talked about on Page 1, the report brought back 5 into focus a number of problem areas in Pilgrim, 6 such as the shortage of licensed operators, large 7 maintenance backlog, a number of management ,
8 vacancies in maintenance areas, radiological 9 protection weaknesses and emergency preparedness 10 program weaknesses, instances of court procedures 11 and administrative practice of the plant, and 12 continues on. Have all of these been corrected?
13 SW. Murley: They ha**e not yet been 14 corrected. No, sir.
t 15 The Chairman: on the top of 2, and then
(
! 16 I'll let you pick up, you report, "there are five 17 areas that have exhibited recurrent program 18 weaknesses: radiological controls, surveillance of 19 safety-related equipment, fire protection, 20 physica,*, securi y and safeguards and assurances of 21 quality.
l 22 Now, have those been corrected yet?
I
! 23 ' RrNyt* They have not been corrected.
24 We have seen signs of improvement, particularly in -
t l O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
l l .
. : -: .... . .. 1. .
i.n.. ,
L-1 the radiological control area and fire protection 2 and assurance of quality, but we haven't -- they 3 haven't been corrected.
4 The Chairman: Can you give us a rough 5 idea? Ten is the standard in order to be -- you 6 ought to get your C grade. I mean that's sort qf
- I 7 minimum grade. Where are you if you were on the
. 8 radiological control? How close are they to being 9 minimum standards?
10 *Mr. Murley; I think I would say now that 11 they do meet our minimum standards. It's difficult 12 to give them a numerical grade, but I can give you 13 an idea of the action that we take when we think 14 they fall below standards in one of these areas, 15 and this was several year ago.
16 We felt if they fell below these standards, li there were practices at the plant that we thought I
18 were unacceptable, and we took an enforcement 19 action by issuing them an order. And an order is a 20 formal action that modifies a license and we 21 directed them to get an outside consultant to come 22 in and help them formulate improvements to the
! 23 program, and we then made them implement those 24 improvements. It took a very long tide for them to .
i 0'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
, . . . s . _. s c.. . _ .. . . . . . .
r-i 1 do it, and just recently Mr. Russell closed out the 2 order on the basis that we have seen improvements.
3 The chairman: Well, when you found these 4 deficiencies, radiological conirol to be -- did 5 you close down the plant? .
6 Mr. Murley: No, we didn't. We --
7 7 The Chairman: Why not?
8 Mr. Murley: There are many areas that go 9 into our an assessment, judgment, as to the overall 10 operation of the plant. Radiologiest control is 11 one of them. I said fire protection is another.
12 If there's an area we judge to be serious enough, s 13 we'll not hesitate to shut it down. We have nine k
14 plants shut down in the United States today because 15 we don't think they are safe enough to operate; 16 Pilgrim being one of them.
17 The radiological control, what we did, as I 18 said, is issue an enforcement order on our licer.se.
19 The Chairman: Well, you know, I would think 20 that after the NRC identified that this plant was 21 probably the least safe plant in the country and 22 you don't close down, people are going to ark about 23 !.t ; don't you think? What does it take? You got l
24 nine down. You say that this is one of the least .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
.. L u. . : . . L.. . .e J .:. ' ' . ,
. .. . . . . +e s-1 safe plants in the country. Boston Edison closes 2 it down, but you people don't. What kind of 3 assurances can people have in terms --
i 4 Mr. Hurley: In fact, although we didn't 5 issue formal enforcement order, we did, in fact, 6 tell then to shut down the plant. This was in 7 April of 1986 8 The Chairman: That's right. Well, in the
", 9 other circumstance, you closed them or do you ask 10 the company to close them down?
11 Mr. Murley: We ask the com any to close R, R. c-12 them down.
In the case of the ,Dfse bottom % plant,
, 13 we ordered them to imm&diately shut down. So in 14 that case we issued an immediately effective order.
15 In some case we do and other cases, we --
16 The Chairmen: All right. Can you do that 17 -- Let's just continue with ycur testimony.
18 Mr. Hurley: I'm now talking about --
19 The Chairman: Let 's go dc wn -- I'm not , you 20 know, we've had a long evening, but I'm not in any 21 hurry right now. If we could down the bottom of 2.
22 You say, "Let's summarize the current status, 23 Boston Edison and NRC regarding Pilgrim." Let's --
24 why don't we pick up there. Have you got your -
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
.3 4
.. 1 copy?
2 Mr. Hurley: I now have my lengthy copy.
3 Yes, sir. The facility remained shut down. The 4 NRC has met frequently with Boston Edison, members 5 of the public and with the Commonwealth as well as 6 with local officials.
7 The Chairman: Who have you met with the ,
8 public? Do you know?
9 Mr. Murley: Yes. I have met several timee 10 with the Selectmen. I have spent an evening in 11 this very auditorium with the selectmen and with 12 several other people, probably until past midnight, 13 asking questions. My staff and Mr. Russell's staff 14 have met in Duxbury with similar groups. I would 15 guess there have been probably, all in all, half a 16 dozen or more meetings with people in this area. r 17 The Chairman: Continue.
18 Mr. Hurley: Boston Edison has davoloped a .
i 19 restart plan that describes the program plans, 20 actions considered necessary by the company to 21 restart and safely operate the company. Although 22 Boston Edison has not reached a position where it 23 could request of NRC to consider a restart 24 decision, the utility has completed a number of -
l O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
~
- < +
. . .;... e i: . . . . . . . .
}
4.
1 plcnt inprovcoOnts.
2 The reactor was refueled in October and 9
'. O several major system tests on the reactor cooling 4 system and containment structure has been 5 completed. As part of its safety enhancement ,
t 6 progra.?, Bocton Edison has proposed a number of -
7 modification intended to improve plan'. peformance
~
8 in the event of an accident at Pilgrim.
9 The NRC staff reviewed these modifications 10 in August of 1987, and concluded that many of the 11 modifications were appropriate for implementation.
12 The Chairman: Does that suggest anything 13 to you? It says Boston Edison proposet a number r 14 of modifications to improve plant performance in
. 15 the event of an accident at Pilgrim. Does that 16 suggest anything to you? Did we draw any i
17 conclusions about their consideration as to the 18 safety?
19 Mr. Murley: Yes. We have underway, 20 Senator, a generic study. It is a research study 21 on how we can make these cor.tainments even safer.
2: As you know, the issue was raised earler this 23 vvening about the safety of the Mark I
(((' h3 24 containment of the type that Pilgrim has. There
~ _-
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
_. .s: -.L.. . . - i .. '
.. 1 are, I believe, 24 such reactors. l 2 We believe -- NRC believes that they are 3 being safely operated today, but we have research 4 programs to see if we can make them safer. Boston 5 Edison knows the kinds of things that are being 6 considered. They, presumably on their own, assuned 7 that the NRC is coming out with new requirements.
8 We haven't done that, but we are scheduled to ge to 9 our Commission this summer and make such i
10 recommendations.
11 The Chairman: Well, then you wouldn't bring 12 this on-line before then, would you, if you were 13 going to make specific recommendations this summer 14 regarding safety. It wouldn't make any sense, 15 would it, to try to do this prior to that time?
16 Mr. Hurley: There is really two answers, 4
17 Senator. One is that many of the types of things 18 that we're looking at generically, are the very 1
19 things that Boston Edison has done on their own to l 20 improve the plant; and second, if the Commission i 21 decider to do even more, we would make at that 22 time, no matter when that is, we would make Bocton 23 Edison back --
24 The Chairman: Can you be just more .;
l l
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
'"I . - t. _ . - ..D. . .
4 c
- 1 specific? Does that include the torus improvement?
l 2 Mr. Hurley: In our review of that proposed 3 modification, we asked them a number of questions, 4 particularly when you would use it and when you 5 wouldn't. They still owe us a reply on that.
)
6 The Chairman: You are familiar with the 7 technology?
8 Mr. Hurley: Yes.
9 The Chairman: I mean, do you think that 10 that is a large additonal safety or is not?
11 Mr. Hurley: It does if it is used 12 correctly, and it is very important --
13 The Chairman: Let's assume that they use it 14 correctly. I mean, if they are not going to use it 15 correctly, then nothing make any sense at all.
16 (Laughter).
17 Mr. Hurley: Sir, I wish things were always 18 that clear. But when we ask, our questions will 19 elicit that very information; namely, have you 20 studied all the cases and where it could hurt. And 21 that's --
22 The Chairman: What was your impression?
23 Hr. Hurley: Excuse me, Senator. I really 24 have to make this point, Sonator. That the .
I
! O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
i
L, . .' . w J.: . .. . .. ,
4' 1 containment is a very important structure to the 2 plant. Chernobyl did not have such a containment.
3 The containment that was designed has been required 4 by the NRC from day one on these reactors to
. 5 contain radioactivity in fission products.
6 One does not lightly go and change the 7 design that will deliver the ultimate unless you 8 really know what you -- and under the right 9 circumstances. And that's why we're being very 10 cautious on this.
11 The Chairman: Does your report reach any 12 conclusion about whether it will be successful or 13 fail?
14 Mr. Murley: There is a report of some of 15 our experts that we have in our laboratory. They 16 have been looking at the behavior of these kinds of 17 Mark I containments under very severe accident, 18 really unlikely core meltdown accident, and they --
19 I have not read the report myself, but the 20 indications I have is they concluded that under 21 these very severe conditions, the containment could 22 fail when molten fuel touches -- reaches some of 23 tha steel liner parts.
24 The Chairman: That's 80 or 90 percent of -
O'BMIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
=- .- .
. . .. . . ..a.. .w .a> . - . . . . .
se
,, 1 the time, as I understand?
2 Mr. Murley: Again, the understanding that I 3 have, under these very unlikely conditions, that it 4 could fail, yes.
5 The Chairman: As I -- two excerpts from the 6 document, one, the probability of early containment '
7 failuro for Mark I boiling water reactors is the 80 8 or 90 percent range of two primary containment 9 failure by melt-through is a highly probable
, 10 mechanism of early containment failure.
11 What Brookhaven has saic' is that Mark I 12 reactors are highly likely to rupture, release high 13 amounts of radiation into the environment.
14 Am I to understand that the NRC is 15 permitting nuclear plants to rely on Mark I system 16 to continue to operate?
17 Mr. Murley: Yes. The -- As I said, I think 18 I need to say this because peeple are concerned.
19 The NRC believes that the Mark I plants are l
20 operated safely today. We have research program 21 that are looking for ways to make it safer.
22 The Chairman: I don't want --
23 Mr. Murley: I don't want to leave the 24 impression that these plants are like Chernoby1 I ,
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
- :: . .. . a i, '
.- 1 think that would be a disservice, because they are 2 not. These containments, we think, will function 3 and do their job in most accidents. It is only the 4 very severe and very unlikely accident that we are 5 talking about where they could fail early.
6 The Chairman: That ought to be reassuring.
7 (Laughter).
8 Mr. Hurley: As I said, we are looking for 9 ways that can improve even that chance.
10 The Chairman: I think that the problem that !
11 you got to -- the study that is done by your own 12 commission and that gives this kind of -- draws 13 this kind of a. conclusion, which I have just read, 14 and then you respond there really isn't a problem.
15 What kind of a -- what are people suppose to assume 16 on that? You have a study that your commission 17 reached one conclusion and then you comment and 18 testify that there is nothing really to worry 19 about.
20 Mr. Murley: I didn't quite say that, sir.
21 The Chairman: All right. There is 22 something to worry about?
23 Mr. Murley: In the sense, under very severe 24 accident conditions, these containments could fail, .
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
. s .:c . .. . .- . .-:.\ .- .. . . , ... . .
v 1 and we are looking at that, and I'm satisfied with
, 2 that, and we're looking to see what improvements
) 3 can be made to reduce that failure problem.
4 The Chairman: Let's continue.
5 Mr. Murley: Questions have been raised 6 regarding the Mark I containment at Pilgrim and the 7 direct torus vent modification being considered by ,
4 Boston Edison. The direct torus vent would provide 9 a hardened path from the containment torus 10 structure to the plant stack and would be used to il relieve containment pressure in certain severe 12 accident condition. During staff review of this l 13 modification, a number of questions were asked of l .
14 Boston Edison regarding the use of the direct torus l ,
l 15 vent. These questions must be resolved before this 16 system is placed into service.
17 Regarding the management area, Boston Edison 18 has made a number of changes that we believe are 19 improvements. In early 1987, Mr. Ralph Bird was 20 hired as the senior vice president of Nuclear. He 21 has extensive nuclear navy and management 22 experience. Changes have been made in the onsite 23 organization, additional personnel nave been hired 24 and programs for improvement are being implemented. -
O'3RIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
. . . ~ . . . . - . . .. . . - :- .,..i . . . . . '
. .. . i
.. 1 The liRC staf f has a special programnatic 2 approach for assessing the Boston Edison progress 3 at Pilgrim. Our activities are being coordinated 4 by an Assessment Panel that is chaired by the 5 senior staff members from Region 1, and includes 6 representative from the region and from NRC 7 headquarters. Once the Pilgrim restart plan has ,
8 been reviewed by NRC, and after Boston Edison has
- 9 stated it is ready to restart Pilgrim, this panel 10 then will assess restart readiness. It's 11 assessment will be a comprehensive evaluation that 12 considers the general readiness of the plant and 13 personnel to resume safe operation and will include 14 a comprehensive onsite team inspection.
15 In addition, as we indicated to you, Senator 16 Kennedy, and to Congressman Studds in Chairman 17 Zech's letters of November 20, 1987, we will 18 conduct several public meetings to insure 19 opportunity for public participation and input to 20 the assessment panel regarding the Boston Edison
! 21 restart plan. These meetings will be formal, 22 transcribed sessions at which the public's 23 testimony will be heard by NRC senior staff. After 24 the NRC staff has completed the restart readiness -
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
.~
. . , > : . :. . 1. . f::.. -. . . . . . , .. . ....-~ "- I o' l 1
- , ,- 1 assessment, there will be a public meeting at NRC 2 headquarters at which the staff will brief the NRC 3 Commissioners on our findings and recommendation so 4 that the Commission itself can make the ultimate l
5 decision. 1
. l 6 The Chairman: That's part of the problem.
l 7 I mean with all respect to your dedication and ,f 8 service, you hear the test' mony; you make the 9 recommendation; then they, the Commissioners, can
, 10 either take it or not take it. There is no l
11 opportunity - perhaps you can reach one kind of !
l 12 conclusion. As I understand the proceeding, there i
13 is not much opportunity for those who differ with !
14 you, whether they are for against, to be able to l 15 make presentations. The Commissioner can either 16 take yours or not take your recommendations. And f 17 that, I think, is the reason or part of the reason 18 why people want to have an adjudicatory hearing.
19 Now, as I understand -- Would you answer l 20 this? How many of those Section 2.206 petitions 21 for adjudicatory hearings have been filed with the [
i 22 NRC7 }
23 Mr. Hurley: I'll have to provide you the !
'd4 exact number for the record. A good many. .i t
I O'B'RIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
1
)
.- 1 The Chairman: Do you know how many have !
I 2 been granted? l 3 Mr. Murley: I don't know that.
4 The Chairman: As I *anderstand it , one has 5 been, and only once did the NRC grant a special one 6 as a result of a petition. Do you know any reason 7 why they don't grant any more of these hearings?
8 Mr. Murley: I do think it is probably more 9 than one, but we'll get you the correct number for 10 the record. Frequently, the petitions that we 11 receive are asking us to reconsider a licensing 12 action that we've already taken, and in many 13 cases --
14 The Chairman: What if it comes before you 15 make a judgment? If we make that petition, will 16 you support that for us?
17 Mr. Murley: I'm sorry --
18 The Chairman: Would you -- if we make that 19 petition for adjudicator proceedings prior to the 20 time that there is the announcement; would you ,
21 support that, given the fact that you have been 22 here this evening, the type of witnesses that we 23 have heard tonight?
i 24 Mr. Murley: We already responded to that, .
i O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
^ '
, . : . . . =. - .. .
/0 1. .
,, . . :, r~.. ..
O.
.. 1 Senator, and the ..swe.'is that we ag.eed that we 2 should get the views r ' he public and we think 3 that there are several opportunities, I've 4 mentioned several of them, for getting there. But 5 in hearing rights that are -- the adjudicatory 6 hearing rights are triggered really by NRC i 7 licensing action, which in this case would be an 8 action against Boston Edison's license, which would ;
9 be an enforcement matter. Boston Edison would be '
10 the one to have the hearing rights. '
11 The Chairman: As I understand it., it is i 4
12 granted on a discretionary basis. I think we can I -
13 get the standard out, but the law, as I understand ,
L 14 it, it's done on a discretionary basis. ;
15 Mr. Murley: Yes. There can be hearing
~
16 rights, adjudicatory hearing rights, granted on a 17 discretionary, basis and the Commissioners have done l 18 that very -
I 19 The Chai- But you will support our 20 petition, Mr. C' -
Laughter) while you're in [
21 front of all these nico people here. l t
22 Mr. Murley: I abrolutely support the need j 1
23 to get the views of the public and I have done that 24 myself. I work for the Ct:- ssioners and I have to .,
P i
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. l
. a)
~
.c. . ' . a. , c. , . . .. -
. i4 o-1 get their approval. 1 2 The Chairmati Let me move on to another 3 subject. As I understand, the petitions filed by 4 the utility required to be granted. We find that 5 the -- those in terms the of discretionary power in 6 teries of the NRC, when their petitions have come '
7 frou the other rarsly -- I had one instance --
8 we'll stand by your record, but this -- how do you 9 think people will react to that? What the [
10 companies want, they get; and if the people want
.1 it, they give it a lot of thought for 12 consideration. What is your perception? What do !
13 you believe people believe when the system is kind 14 of rigged like that? I don't mean to say rig all 15 the time, but when it is cigged like thst?
16 Mr. Murley: I understand your concern and i*
17 the public's concern.
Weare--Idon'tbelieve[we 18 do have to follow our administrative procedures. l t
19 We're professior.ils. We're trying to regulate in [
20 an area that is --
21 The Chairman: Order. We want to give the j i
d' witness full attention and L'ull courtesy this [
s j 0. 'ening. We still got additional testimony and I .
a
. Ad ssk him to proceed.
I J l t
l
.. j O'BRIEN AND LEVtNE COURT REPORT!NG StrVICE. INC. ,
L i
~
. - . - - - . - .- -.- ~ - - . - ---\
4
.* 1 Mr. Murley: I'll continue with my prepared 2 testimor.y. If restart is authorized, NRC would 3 inctease its inspection coverage for the restart 4 program and by the round-the-clock coverage in 5 startup in site activity. A number of hold points 6 would be inst $tuted and Boston Edison would not be 1 7 permitted to procee6 without NRC authorization. .
8 these decisions would be based on the on-site a inspection team's evaluation of the Pilgrim
. 10 operation.
11 In addition of the areas previously 12 discussed, a number of emergency preparedness 13 concerns have been raised at Pilgrim since the 14 Confirmatory Action tetter was issued in April i 15 1986. Much of what follows en the next page has 16 been repeated, Mr. Krimm has already testified in 17 the FEMA findings.
18 On August 18, 1987, the NRC transmitted the !
t 19 FEMA report to Boston Edison and requested that the 20 utility provide us an action plan and a schedule 21 for assisting the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and 22 local governments in addressing the FEMA-identified I i
23 emergency planning issues. Boston Edison submitted l 24 its action plan on September 17, 1987. This action l l
l O'PRIEN AND LEVINE C0JRT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
1 . . ' .. . . .- . -
, , 1 plan details Boston Edison's plans to assist the 2 Commonwealth and local governrents as well as 1
. 3 describing resources and a schedule for completion.
4 Over the past few months, Boston Edison, the 5 Commonwealth and the local governments in the 6 Pilgrim area have committed considerable resources 7 and efforts toward resolving these concerns. The 8 current status, as we uno."stand, is as follows:
9 Drafts of local plans were completed November 1, 10 1987. These currently are in review in the 11 respective towns. Drafts .)f local procedures are 12 in preparation. These address issues such as buses 13 and sheltering. The draft Massaschuetts Civil 14 Defense Authority Area II plan is corplete wnd 15 under review by the Commonwealth. The draft of the 16 Commonwealth plan for Pilgrim is nearing 17 completion. A training program has been developed 18 by Boston Edison and provided to the Massachusetts 19 Civil Defense Authority.
20 On December 17, 1987, the NRC received the 21 report on Emergency Preparedness .'or an Accident at 22 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant from the Commonwealth.
23 NRC and FEMA will consider tais report in their 24 ongoing review. ,
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
,. .. 3, s W
1 Addit.ionally, Boston Edison submitted an 2 exemption request to NRC on the requirement for 3 conducting its Biennial Full Participation 4 Exercise. The request was based on the need to 5 make improvements in emergency plans. NRC approved 6 that exemption request, stipulating that the 7 exercise be conducted no later that June 30, 1988.
8 The NRC agrees that emergency planning 9 deficiencies do exist at Pilgrim and further agrees 10 that corrective actions are needed. However, il considering the shutdown status of the plant and 12 the progress that is being made to address 13 emergency planning issues, we have not needed to 14 take enforcement action regarding emergency j 15 planning.
16 The NRC will not permit the facility to 17 resume operation until corrective ac' e ions 18 satisfactory to NRC have been taken to address the 19 emergency planning deficiencies identified by FEMA.
20 We will give special attention te the improved i
21 evacuation plans for school and day care centers, 22 as well as improved evacuation plans for special s 23 needs and transportation-dependent population in l l
i 24 the 10-mile emergency planning zone. We will ,j O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
.w ..:
,~ . .. . ,
1 require some dumonstration of the critical aspects
, 2 of these evacuation plans before we can decide if 3 Pilgrie is ready to resume operation. ,
4 However, it may be that restart can be :
5 authorized with some emergency planning issues not i 6 fully resolved. Under the NRC framework, whether 7 an outstanding emergency planning deficiency must ,i 8 delay restart will depend upon considerations of 9 the gravity of the deficiency, the nature of any 1
10 compensatory action and progress toward correction 11 of the deficioner. For Pilgrim, this decision will r f
12 he made ultimately by the commission itself.
13 In conclusion, there has been and will 14 continue to be a high level of NRC management 15 attention to Pilgrim. The NRC staff has adopted a 16 unique approach for monitoring the peformance of 17 the utility as it implements needed improvement, j 18 This approach includes opportunities for public l's . input'to the process. I want to assure the l
. l l
20 Committee that Pilgrim will not be permitted to
, 21 restart until the NRC staff has reviewed carefully
! 22 the plant improvements, ti.e management improvements .
23 and the offsite energwney preparedness improvement f i
and has concluded that the plan will be operating -*
24 l
I o __
, O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SER/ ICE. INC.
- . .m., . . .s . .' . ..
e 1 safely. l 2 Thank you, Senator. That concludes my 3 testimony.
4 The Chairman: Do you know what I think is 5 almost as much of a problem as some of the 6 technical issues, some of which we have gone over 7 -- we'll have time to go over some more -- but ,
8 there is a problem, I think, in the tone of your 9 testimony, which seems to run throughout the
. 10 statement, seems to lean towards restart. It 4
11 leaves the impression that the issues have already 12 been decided, almost as if the NRC bas already
- . 13 decided why Pilgrim should not be allowed.to 14 start. It seems to me to lean torard restart.
15 Leaves the impression that the issues have already 16 been decided. Isn't that backwards? ,
17 Mr. Murley: I am the one who decided in 18 April of 1986, that the plant ought to stay shut 19 down.' I'm the one that told them that there are 20 some additional things that need to corrected and 21 NRC is who one that is keeping it shut down. There <
02 is not a presumption that the plant can restart.
23 They have to coavince us that they hnve made these 24 corrections.
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORT 7NF, SERVICE, INC.
, i . . ;,
1 The Chairman: The top of Page 9 in your 2 testimony, you start off, "It may be that restart 3 can be authorised with some emorgency planning 4 issues not fully resol'eed."
5 Now, that's really rereassuring, I would 6 expect, to a lot of people.
I 7 Mr. Murley: Canqexplain that?
8 The Chairman: Sure. It looks like -- why 9 can't they just maintain that they can't restart 10 until the State of Massachusetts is more. satisfied 11 that they hkve in place a more effectivw emergency l 12 plan.
p 13 Mr. Murley: I don'*. mean that to be a 14 pugnacious statement, but I have to explain that 15 emergency preparedness is a changing process. Mr.
16 Krimm mentioned earlier that things change around 17 the sites population changes, neu schools core in.
18 That's why we require regular exercise in these 19 things. And so it is not uncommon to find 20 deficiencies in operating plants and we don't 21 generally require that a plant be shut down while 22 these deficiencies are corrected. The defense 23 in-depth philosphy has guided the nuclear 24 regulation over the yLars, which is an area that ,
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
L
I e-1 relies on several levels of protection. And so, 2 therefore, we don't necessarily have to shut plants
'. 3 down while deficiencies are corrected; nontheless 4 with Pilgrim, we agreed that these deficiencies are 5 quite serious and that they must take corrective 6 action before we allow them to restart.
7 The Chairman: Wouldn't you agree with me, 8 Dr. Hurley, that there is a considerable question 9 in the minds of many when problems which you a 10 identified, which you have gone through the first 11 page of your testimony and we reviewed briefly 12 during the course of your oral presentation, that 13 they would have some serious problems in knowing 14 whether they were resolved .nless -- without a't h P C--
15 performing another' TALI prior to the restart?
16 Don't you believe that the NRC should conduct J,i t?
17 another 1*trt?
18 Mr. Murley: As I said, we are going to do a 19 comprenhensive evaluation, including an 20 around-the-clock inspection. I'll let Mr. Russell, J,)( p 21 who's responsible for the 3 Dig Report to, respond to 22 that.
23 Mr. Russell: Senator Kennedy. I would like 24 to add two points to the record as it relates to ,
O'BMIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
I 1 cvaluation by the staff of the items which are 2 identified.
3 First, during the public hearing that we 4 proposed to hold, the first one was to gather 5 concerns. We agreed to come back and hold a second 6 meeting to identify the resolution of those 7 concerns, at least to the staff's standards of what 2
8 is required.
9 We have also indicated that we will conduct 10 a detailed team inspection to address both the 11 management issues and whether the program can be 12 put into place effectively. We have indicated to n 13 the State of Massachusetts that they may have an 14 observer to observe that inspection as it is 15 conducted by the NRC, such that they would be in a 16 position to see how that process is conducted.
17 We will also have self assessment performed 18 by the utility themselves, which would be the sVY.& SALP 19 equivalent of the w144 mete PALI report and the ild.
20 staff will be there to evaluate th,e peformance.
21 The purpose is to compare the tuo results and see 22 if the utility is able to critically evaluate their 23 own puformance. Those are the --
24 The Chairman: How will that differ from a O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
, x -
o- 3,i(2 1 144T report?
p 3, p 2 Mr. Russell: A 3343s report, if I can call ML?
3 it, Mini-S M . This has been done for two 4 facilities recently in Region 1 for Beaver Valley 5 Unit duri,ngtheirstartupprogramandfork. e 6 hie 'hnit 4e+c the power :YS$.toactually 7 evaluate the peformance of the company in 8 critical --
9 The Chairman: I hear your words. I was
, J,h d 10 just trying to gather how a Mini'3 ALT is different jar?
11 from full 1 ALT?
12 Mr. Russell: The difference is that we 13 specifjgparticularareastobeev51uatedof 14 concerns that are associated with operation.
15 The Chairman: Do they cover the other areas 16 as well? Do they have special emphasis in the 17 areas of monitoring or the areas that you have 18 identified for weakness?
19 Mr. Russell: We will specifically address 20 each of the areas of the five areas that have been 21 identified as being marginal peformance:
22 radiological monitoring, security surveillance, >'
23 Those areas as indicated each will be addressed in r
24 detail, f
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
_ b
1 The Chairman: And the other parts that are Jh?
2 included in the evaluation in the k T report will .
3 also be included?
4 Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. We will reach a 1 5 conclusion. The format will be sorewhat different.
6 I will be issuing a Readiness for Operation Report 7 that will go to the Dr as a part of th 8 deliberations. That will be a 3.rocess -- 31' '
^
9 The Chairman: Excuse me for interrupting, h\.
s .
10 but the hour is late. As I understand what yeu say i ,.
when I asked about whether you had a IALP 1 11 report, 4tP '
12 you say there are many h M . You'll look in 23 evaluation at the critical areas which have been 14 identified as troubled areas and you get a full 15 report on that, and then the other areas which you J,1 $
16 would normally do in a K report will also be 17 covered. Do -- is that your --
18 Hr. Russell: That is correct. They are in J/1<. P 19 different documents. The K report is --
20 The Chairman: But if they are in different 21 documents, is there -- but they ara collected at 22 the sans time. Would there be one particular place 23 that someone can --
24 Mr. Hurley: There is no doubt that I will O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
r . ; . . . '. '.f
.. . ~ . . ... ;. c . . . . ~l
- .. 1 insist on that we'll have a written report of all 2 those deficiencies that we found and the ,
I
. 3 circumstances.
i 4 The Chairman: That will be done before 5 there is obvious --
6 Mr. Murley: Yes. Absolutely.
7 The Chairman: There is no way of knowing I
8 exactly when this is going to be ready; is that 9 correct?
10 Mr. Murley: No. It will be well before any 11 recommendation is made. l 12 The Chairman: I suppose this is important, i y 13 obviously, in term of your own review. It is ,
14 important as well that people have at least a 15 reasonable chance to review it and to get some j i
16 reccamendation or reaction. Can you give us any l
17 assurances about that? I 18 Mr. Murley: I don't know that we have 19 talked about that. I think it is a good idea, so I l
20 will commit -- l 21 The Chairman You will commit to reviewing i 22 it -- :
i 23 Mr. Hurley: Yes. j i
24 The Chairman: -- in a reasonable time? ,
I r
l l
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
l
[
i : .. . . . .: .. :. . . .. . . .
. L.
." 1 Mr. Murley: Yes.
2 Mr. Russell: Senator Kennedy, I have 3 committed to coming back to this area to review 4 those results following the team inspections.
S The Chairman: It would be marvelous to git C our commissioners, once -- well, let us try and 7 work on that. ,
8 I have other questions which I would like to 9 submit to you. I will make those as part of the 10 record. I will welcome your response, so I want to 11 thank you very much for coming up here. I will 12 excuse you.
. 13 If the audience will stay for one more 14 minute, I would like to make a final comment and 15 then we'll break.
16 First of all, I would like to express our o 17 thanks to the.many people here during the course of 18 these hearings. We also want to thank WPLM for all 19 of their good nelp and assistance and responses l 20 which they have given to us; Jack Campbell who has 1
21 taken a great interest in this whole undertaking 22 and all those who have been part of WPLM.
23 I have just a brief concluding comment.
24 Tonight we have had the opportunity to hear from O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
L.__
i '
/ 1 the citizens who have the most to risk in assuring 2 that Pilgrim is safe, and at least tonight they had 3 to opportunity to have their voices heard. And we 4 have heard from our state officials, expressing their frustration in attempting to protect the l b
6 well-being of their communities butore a noncaring 7 and insensitive bureaucracy. We heard from the 8 federal officials who are charged with the 9 responsibility of deciding if restarting the plant 10 could be permitted without compromising the safety 11 of the residents.
12 Let me say that I um somewhat appalled by 13 what I have heard this evening over the fact that a 14 federal acency would ignore the advice of some 15 experts, especia13/ when a similar reactor was 16 involved in the rsclear nightmare at chernobyl,
. 17 that the federal heeney would even contemplate 18 restarting a plent without a workable evacuation i e 19 plan in the event of a nuclear a,ccident Allowing 20 Pilgrim to restat t at this time would ba 21 disgraceful and a reckless disregard for the safety 22 of the people who live here. And it is apparent 23 f r om the testimony tonight that this plant is light 24 years away from restarting. And I want to make .
l O'8RIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
~ . . . ~ ..
- O e i this committment to you that when I return to 2 washington, I intend to visit with my colleagues in 3 Congress to bring this matter to their attention.
4 Congress should take a hard look at wha. it is 5 spending your money on. And the NRC has been 6 delegated the responsibility to the nuclear 7 industry to adequately protect the people from the 8 dangers of nuclear power. Instead, I'm afraid, we 9 have the NRC that is merely a spokeman for the 10 industry.
11 I firmly believe that the people should have 12 the opportunity to present the same evidence that 13 we have heard tonight to the members of the Nuclear 14 Regulator Commission directly before an 15 adjudicatory hearing, but if they can't, I w'.11.
16 our hearing stands in recess.
17 (hearing concluded at 11 30 p.m.)
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,
O'BRIEN AND LEVINE COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC.
- -________ _____