ML071440213

New England Coalition, Inc.'S (NEC) Response to NRC Staff'S Answer in Support of Entergy'S Motion for Summary Disposition of New England Coalition Contention 3 (Steam Dryer)

ML071440213
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	05/18/2007
From:	Tyler K New England Coalition, Shems, Dunkiel, Kassel, & Saunders, PLLC
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-271-LR, ASLBP 06-849-03-LR, RAS 13687
Download: ML071440213 (7)

Text

DOCKETED.

USNRC May 21,2007 (7:55am)

UNITED STATES OFFICE OF SECRETARY NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC ) Docket No. 50-271 -LR and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ) ASLB No. 06-849-03-LR

)

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) )

NEW ENGLAND COALITION, INC.'S (NEC) RESPONSE TO NRC STAFF'S ANSWER IN SUPPORT OF ENTERGY'S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF NEW ENGLAND COALITION CONTENTION 3 (STEAM-DRYER)

Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §§ 2.1205(c) and 2.710(a) New England Coalition, Inc.

(NEC) hereby responds to the NRC Staff's Answer In Support of Entergy's Motion for Summary Disposition of NEC's Contention 3 (Steam Dryer). NEC incorporates by reference its Opposition to Entergy's Motion for Summary Disposition (May 9, 2007),

and makes the following additional arguments in response to the NRC Staff filing.

A. Entergy makes no clear commitment to visual inspection of the steam dryer during the license renewal period.

The NRC Staff notes that the Board admitted NEC's Contention 3 in part because it found that NEC "identified sufficient ambiguity in Entergy's aging management plan for the steam dryer to meet the requirements for contention admissibility." See, In the Matterof Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Operations,Inc.

(Vermont Yankee NuclearPower Station), 64 NRC 131, 191 (2006). Entergy's proposed plan remains ambiguous with respect to Entergy's commitment to visual inspection of the steam dryer during the license renewal period, an essential component of a valid aging

-rmPc-Je=---6cY-7 O I 2L

_f management plan., -See, Declaration of.Dr. Joram Hopenfeld in support of NEC'.s Petition to In.tervene ("Hopenfeld, Declaration 1") at ¶¶ 18-19 (visual inspection is key element of Vermont Yankee steam dryer aging management plan).

'Entergy doesinot ,expressly state on motion for summary judgment that visual inspectionSwwilll continue, throughout 'the license, renewal period. Rather, Entergy is careful not to commit to visuhl, inspedtiorn during the renewed license term, referring only to its current-teim program of~visiial ihispection during some refueling outages through spring 201G. Entergy7s'ambiguity on the subject: of visual inspectionwis;radily apparent in contrast ,tc.Ats -express co-mmitment to.'monitoring plantparametersthat may indicate steam dryerc racking throughout the renewed license' term. Compare,Declaration of Jbhhh,R., II f 2a1n9 in, Support.of Entei'gy's Motion1for Summary.Dispositiorn of NEC Contention 3 fm" 2 [Monitoring of plant parameters] will continule, for;the enti:'e license rer..',wal period:',' I;d. at ¶ 22 ("VY is -implementing...

visual inspectio-h guideIdes in GE-SIL-6.4 "); I.. at ¶ 28 ("Periodic visual examinations Qf the~steam: dryer'in accordance*with' [EVY License;AmendmentNo. 229]2 will continue to ensure~that unacceptable flaw deVelopment~or grot,1h'is not occurring."').

,Instead of expr~essly.eommitting to ývislal inspection during the renewed license term, Entergy refers, as it 'has in all. pye'Vicus ;Contention 3 filings,"to' a Vermont Yankee Facility Operatin'g. License Amendment&,No. 229) that is irrelevant to the renewed license term. ,Thislicense condition wvasdeveloped in' the proceedings for extended -poweruprate (EPU) of the Vermont Yankeetplaiat, and-requires visual inspectionof the Vernont

'Entergy concedes, however, that parameter monitoring is of limited utility. Hoffman Declaration, Exhibit 5 at 6 ("monitoring steam moisture content and other reactor parameters does not consistently predict imminent dryer failure nor will it preclude the generation of loose parts.").

2 This license condition requires visual inspection of the steam dryer only through.spring 2010, and will expire during the current license term.

\,

Yankee steam dryer during refueling outages in spring of 2007, fall of 2008, and spring of 2010. As NEC has previously argued and the Board has abknowledged, this: license condition will expire during the current license term, anddoes not constitute an aging management plan. See, NEC's Opposition to Entergy's Request for Reconsideration of NEC's Contention 3 at Part, II(B); In the Matter.ofEnitergyNuclearý Vermont Yankee, LLC, andEntergy Nuclear Operations,Incn (Vermont YankeeNublearPower Station),64 NRC at 189 ("Steam dryer monitoring~and 4nspection plans for the time-period prior to, 2012 are not directly relevant to, nor dispositive of, our ruling on; NEC Contenti6n 3,:.

except to the.extent that Entergy's -license renewalapplication, or other material properly before this Board.. indicates a commitmentto continue existing program.?).

Entergy also refers to its recent licensing commitment ito"coihtinue inspections in accordance with,the Steam Dryer Monitoring Program,.Revision3 .(SDMP") in-the event that BWRVIP-139 is not approved prior to the period of extended operation.".'

Hoffman Declaration ¶ 25, citing VY RelicensingRdnewat Commitment List,::..

Commitment No.' 37. This also is not a commitmnent to *conduct visual inspections during the renewed license term., The SDMP primarily describes the' EPU power ascension test plan, and provides for visual inspection of the steam dryer only, in spring of 2007, fall of 2008, and-spring of 2010,. as required under Operatingi License Amendment No. 229.

See, ML061290566,ý Steam Dryer Monitoring Prigram,. Revision 3 atý I (The SDMP is "an initial power ascension test plan designed to assess steam dryer performance from 100% OLTP., toý 120% OLTP, .*. and to, performr:confirmatoriy inspectioins for a period of time following initial and continued operation at uprated power levels."); Id. at*6 3:

VI (SDMP requires visual inspection.,only.during the current license term, in spring of 2007, fall of 2008, and spring of 2010).

Facts regarding the nature and sufficiency of Entergy's visual inspection program during the renewed license term remain unclear and therefore in dispute, and Entergy's motion for summary judgment should be denied.

B. t T-he Board should, not decideEntergy's motion for summary judgment before the release of post-EPU steam dryer inspection data.

The NRC Staff filing clarifies Entergy's misleading statement on motion for summary judgment that "inspections conducted to date confirm that fatigue-induced cracking of the VY steam dryer is not occurring." In fact, there have been no inspections of the steam dryer since the plant commenced operation under EPU. Affidavit of Jonathan G. Rowley, Kaihwa R. Hsu and Thomas G. Scarbrough Concerning NEC Contention 3 at ¶ 10. The first such inspection is scheduled this month, May 2007, and will produce data that is highly relevant to NEC's Contention 3 arguments concerning the validity of Entergy ACM/CFD-based stress load analyses and assumptions, and the validity of its proposed aging management program (apparently consisting mainly or exclusively of plant parameter monitoring that Entergy concedes will not prevent the hazardous generation of loose parts).

The Board should not decide Entergy's motion for summunary judgment u'ntil after the results of the May 2007 inspection. are made available to the Board and all the parties.

10 C.F.R. § 2.710(c)(where party opposing summary judgment cannot present facts essential to justify the party's opposition, prlesiding officernmay deny motion for 4

,summary judgment, order a continuance, or makeriother appropriate order); Initial Scheduling Order T 6.

C. The NRC Staff filing ftirther demonstrates that material facts-concerning whether the Vermont Yankee steam dryer is cracking are in dispute.

The NRC Staff filing further demonstrates the existence of a factual'dispute regarding whether the Vermont Yankee steam dryer is in fact cracking. Entergy represented on motion for.summary judgment that inspectionslto date confirm that there has been no fatigue-induced cracking of the steam dryer. Entergy Statement of Material Facts Regarding NEC Contention 3 On Which No Genuine Dispute Exists ¶ 7. NEC contested this claim, and further notes that the most relevant data is not yet available.

See, Part B, above; NEC Statement of Disputed Material Facts and Response to Entergy Statement of Material Facts. Regarding NEC Contention 3 On Which No Genuine Dispute Exists ¶ 7. The NRC Staff also disagrees with Entergy, apparently taking the position that there has been some fatigue-induced cracking, but not "such as would generate loose parts, or cracks or tears that would result in excessive moisture carryover."

Affidavit of Jonathan G. Rowley, Kaihwa R. Hsu and Thomas G. Scarbrough Concerning NEC Contention 3 at ¶¶ 9, 10. This factual dispute precludes summary judgment on Contention 3.

WHEREFORE,,,Entergy's Motion for. Summary Disposition should be'denied.

May 18, 2007". New England Coalition, Inc* -.

by: RV\~

-RonaldA. Shms*:, "

Karen Tyler SHEMS DUNKIEL KASSEL & SAUNDERS PLLC Attorneys for NEC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC ) Docket No. 50-271-LR and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ) ASLBP NO. 06-849-03-LR

)

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Clara Cavitt, hereby certify that copies of the NEW ENGLAND COALITION, INC'S RESPONSE TO NRC STAFF'S ANSWER IN SUPPORT OF ENTERGY'S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF NEW ENGLAND COALITION CONTENTION 3 (STEAM DRYER), in the above-captioned proceeding were served on the persons listed below, by U.S.

Mail, first class, postage prepaid; by Fed Ex overnight to Judge Elleman; and, where indicated by an e-mail address below, by electronic mail, on the 18 th day of May, 2007.,

Administrative Judge Office of the Secretary Alex S. Karlin, Esq., Chair Attn: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Mail Stop: O-16C1 Mail Stop T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov E-mail: ask2@nrc.gov Sarah Hofmnann, Esq.

Administrative Judge Director of Public Advocacy Thomas S. Elleman Department of Public Service Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel 112 State Street, Drawer 20 5207 Creedmoor Road, #101 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 Raleigh, NC 27612 E-mail: sarah.hofmann@state.vt.us E-mail: elleman@eos.ncsu.edu Mitzi A. Young, Esq.

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Mary C. Baty, Esq.

Mail Stop: O-16C1 Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 0- 15 D21 Washington, DC 20555-0001 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission E-mail: OCAAmailgnrc.gov Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: may nrc.gov; mcbl nrc.gov Administrative Judge Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Marcia Carpentier, Esq.

Mail Stop T-3 F23 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-3 F23 Washington, DC 20555-0001 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission E-mail: rew@nrc.gov. Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail mxc7@_nrc.gov

Callie B. Newton, Chair Dan MacArthur, Director Gail MacArthur Town of Marlboro Lucy Gratwick Emergency Management Marcia Hamilton P.O. Box 30 Town of Marlboro Selectboard Marlboro, VT 05344 P.O. Box 518 E-mail: dmacarthur@digc.org Marlboro, VT 05344 E-mail: cbnewtonsover.net; marcialynnra),evl.net Djavid R. Lewis, Esq.

Anthony Z. RoiSman, Esq. Matias F. Travieso-Diaz Pillsbury Wintho-0p Shaw Pittman LLP National Legal Scholars Law Firm 2300 N Street NW 84 East Thetford Road Washington. DC 20037-1128 Lyme, NH 03768 E-mail: david.lewis@pillsburylaw.com E-mail: aroisman(dnationalle-aalscholars.com matias.travieso-diaz@pillsburylaw.com SHEMS DUNKIEL KASSEL,:,i'SAUNDERS, PJLLC by:

Cl(a'ra C~avitt,' flor Ronald A. Sheems, Esq, and Karen Tyler, Esq.

91 College Street

Bulington, VT 05401 802 860 1003 802 860 1208 (fax)'-

rshems@sdkslaw.com ktvler(,sdkslaw.com for the firm' Attorneys for New England Coalition, Inc.