ML102380170: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 09/08/2010
| issue date = 09/08/2010
| title = G20100388/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0497 - 2.206 - Vermont Yankee Blackout and Normal Emergency Power Supply
| title = G20100388/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0497 - 2.206 - Vermont Yankee Blackout and Normal Emergency Power Supply
| author name = Quay T R
| author name = Quay T
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR
| addressee name = Mulligan M
| addressee name = Mulligan M
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:... REGUI _ UNITED .:>c. s: O"?. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ('> WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001  
{{#Wiki_filter:...~p.R REGUI _                                   UNITED STATES
<<0  : ca. i;; September 8, 2010 V";:  1>1) ****i' Mr. Michael Mulligan P.O. Box Hinsdale, NH  
      .:>c.           ....,~
~
s:                       O"?.
('>
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
~
ca.V";:
i;;
0 September 8, 2010
                          ~
1>1)             ~O
            ****i' Mr. Michael Mulligan P.O. Box 161 Hinsdale, NH 03451


==Dear Mr. Mulligan:==
==Dear Mr. Mulligan:==
In an email dated June 15, 2010, addressed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Allegation Desk, you submitted a petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206, "Requests for action under this subpart," asking that the NRC take enforcement action by ordering the immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee). Your petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Petition Review Board (PRB) for action. The NRC has made your petition publicly available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML101670176. Your petition included a number of photographs of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station (VHS) switchyard. The VHS provides a backup 4 kV AC power source for Vermont Yankee. This power source is provided through an underground cable stretching from the VHS switchyard to the Vermont Yankee facility. At the Vermont Yankee switchyard, the 13.2 kV VHS power source ties into the site via a transformer where the power source is stepped down to 4 kV.
 
This transformer is referred to as the Vernon Tie. This power source is used for 1) the alternate AC power source for station blackout (SBO) conditions, 2) fire pumps used for fire protection pursuant to 10 CFR, Part 50, Appendix R, and 3) a back-up power source for remote shutdown panels at Vermont Yankee if the control room becomes uninhabitable. The structures in the photographs include components supporting the AC power source leading to Vermont Yankee as well as the local distribution grid to Vernon, Vermont. The photographs focus on rusted transmission towers and a surface hole of unknown depth adjacent to a stanchion.
In an email dated June 15, 2010, addressed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's)
You expressed a safety concern regarding the overall material condition of the VHS switchyard. In your petition, you indicated that the photographs, by themselves, provide a convincing argument that the VHS power source to the Vermont Yankee station is unreliable and should not be used as a backup power source. On June 21, 2010, the PRB met and considered your request for the NRC to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee. The PRB did not identify any immediate safety concerns.
Allegation Desk, you submitted a petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206, "Requests for action under this subpart," asking that the NRC take enforcement action by ordering the immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee). Your petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Petition Review Board (PRB) for action. The NRC has made your petition publicly available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML101670176.
Therefore, the PRB denied your request. You were informed of the PRB's decision not to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee on June 25, 2010. On June 29, 2010, a teleconference was held between you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. A transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, has been provided to you and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML 101930382).
Your petition included a number of photographs of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station (VHS) switchyard. The VHS provides a backup 4 kV AC power source for Vermont Yankee. This power source is provided through an underground cable stretching from the VHS switchyard to the Vermont Yankee facility. At the Vermont Yankee switchyard, the 13.2 kV VHS power source ties into the site via a transformer where the power source is stepped down to 4 kV.
M. -2On July 13, 2010, the PRB met to discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the Vernon Tie to Vermont Yankee and make its initial recommendation in accordance with Management Directive 8.11 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041770328). The initial recommendation of the PRB was that the issues raised in your petition have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC.
This transformer is referred to as the Vernon Tie. This power source is used for 1) the alternate AC power source for station blackout (SBO) conditions, 2) fire pumps used for fire protection pursuant to 10 CFR, Part 50, Appendix R, and 3) a back-up power source for remote shutdown panels at Vermont Yankee if the control room becomes uninhabitable.
Therefore, your petition meets the criteria for rejection. More specifically, the PRB made the following findings regarding the requests made in your petition: Order the Immediate Shutdown of Vermont Yankee. The PRB met and concluded that there was no immediate safety issue justifying immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee An independent investigation, outside of NRC and EntergYl to determine whether fraud and/or falsification of issues were involved in the license renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee. You are requested to refer to the following NRC public web site which provides correspondence regarding Vermont http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/vv/key-correspondence.html By letter dated March 1, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 100570237), the NRC issued a Demand for Information regarding the veracity of statements made by Entergy officials to the state of Vermont regarding underground piping at Vermont Yankee. In the licensee's response dated March 31, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML 100910420), they reference an independent investigation performed as part of the state regulatory proceeding before the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) related to the issuance of a Certificate of Public Good by the VPSB for the continued operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station after 2012. The NRC has not identified any instances in which Entergy staff or officials have provided incomplete or inaccurate information to the NRC (ADAMS Accession No. ML101670271). An investigation on what the petitioner describes as a subtle shift from reliance on diesel generators to the VHS by the Vermont Yankee licensee without the appropriate quality of a nuclear grade electrical power supply. During the SBO review of Vermont Yankee, the NRC staff concluded that the VHS power supply provides an acceptable alternate AC power source.
The structures in the photographs include components supporting the AC power source leading to Vermont Yankee as well as the local distribution grid to Vernon, Vermont. The photographs focus on rusted transmission towers and a surface hole of unknown depth adjacent to a stanchion. You expressed a safety concern regarding the overall material condition of the VHS switchyard. In your petition, you indicated that the photographs, by themselves, provide a convincing argument that the VHS power source to the Vermont Yankee station is unreliable and should not be used as a backup power source.
Regulatory Guide 1.155 does not require that the alternate AC source for SBO conditions possess the same quality standards as the emergency onsite AC sources. The NRC staff has previously reviewed, evaluated, and resolved the reliance that the Vermont Yankee licensee has on the VHS power supply for SBO conditions (ADAMS Accession No. ML060050024).
On June 21, 2010, the PRB met and considered your request for the NRC to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee. The PRB did not identify any immediate safety concerns. Therefore, the PRB denied your request. You were informed of the PRB's decision not to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee on June 25, 2010.
Regarding 10 CFR Appendix R: In the event that the control room had to be evacuated (Le., fire) and operators had to shut down the plant from an alternate shutdown panel, the operators would use the VHS power supply before relying on the onsite diesel generators. The VHS would provide an immediate source of power.
On June 29, 2010, a teleconference was held between you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. A transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, has been provided to you and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML101930382).
Operators would not need to wait for onsite diesel generator startup and loading. This approach is preferable in that it would M. Mulligan -3minimize the time necessary to place the plant in a cold shutdown condition.
 
Operators would still have the onsite emergency diesel generators as a backup if needed.
M. MUlligan                                  -2 On July 13, 2010, the PRB met to discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the Vernon Tie to Vermont Yankee and make its initial recommendation in accordance with Management Directive 8.11 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041770328). The initial recommendation of the PRB was that the issues raised in your petition have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC. Therefore, your petition meets the criteria for rejection. More specifically, the PRB made the following findings regarding the requests made in your petition:
: 4. An inspection by the NRC or other responsible organization of the VHS dam and sWitchyard. The VHS switchyard, and more specifically the components necessary to support the Vernon Tie, have been inspected and examined separately by both Region 1 and NRR personnel. The VHS switchyard was reviewed, inspected, and found acceptable in the staff's safety evaluation dated March 30, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML070870378), supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee. By email dated July 23, 2010, you were informed of the PRB's initial recommendation and provided with a detailed discussion that included the basis of our findings. By email dated August 2, 2010, you responded to the PRB's initial recommendation and requested that your response be made part of the record.
: 1. Order the Immediate Shutdown of Vermont Yankee.
Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML 102210068). On August 26, 2010, a second teleconference was held with you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. The transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, is enclosed and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML 102440275). During that call, you requested that your email, sent earlier that day that included excerpts on papers discussing the cultural theory of risk and identity-protection cognition, be made part of the record. Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML 102380520). In summary, the PRB concludes that the NRC staff has extensively reviewed the power supply provided by the VHS and the reliance placed on this power supply by the Vermont Yankee facility. The PRB's final recommendation is to reject this petition for review as the issues you raise have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC.
The PRB met and concluded that there was no immediate safety issue justifying the immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee facility.
: 2. An independent investigation, outside of NRC and EntergYl to determine whether fraud and/or falsification of issues were involved in the license renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee.
You are requested to refer to the following NRC public web site which provides key correspondence regarding Vermont Yankee:
http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/vv/key-correspondence.html By letter dated March 1, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100570237), the NRC issued a Demand for Information regarding the veracity of statements made by Entergy officials to the state of Vermont regarding underground piping at Vermont Yankee. In the licensee's response dated March 31, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100910420), they reference an independent investigation performed as part of the state regulatory proceeding before the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) related to the issuance of a Certificate of Public Good by the VPSB for the continued operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station after 2012. The NRC has not identified any instances in which Entergy staff or officials have provided incomplete or inaccurate information to the NRC (ADAMS Accession No. ML101670271).
: 3. An investigation on what the petitioner describes as a subtle shift from reliance on diesel generators to the VHS by the Vermont Yankee licensee without the appropriate quality of a nuclear grade electrical power supply.
During the SBO review of Vermont Yankee, the NRC staff concluded that the VHS power supply provides an acceptable alternate AC power source. Regulatory Guide 1.155 does not require that the alternate AC source for SBO conditions possess the same quality standards as the emergency onsite AC sources. The NRC staff has previously reviewed, evaluated, and resolved the reliance that the Vermont Yankee licensee has on the VHS power supply for SBO conditions (ADAMS Accession No. ML060050024).
Regarding 10 CFR Appendix R: In the event that the control room had to be evacuated (Le.,
fire) and operators had to shut down the plant from an alternate shutdown panel, the operators would use the VHS power supply before relying on the onsite diesel generators.
The VHS would provide an immediate source of power. Operators would not need to wait for onsite diesel generator startup and loading. This approach is preferable in that it would
 
M. Mulligan                                 -3 minimize the time necessary to place the plant in a cold shutdown condition. Operators would still have the onsite emergency diesel generators as a backup if needed.
: 4. An inspection by the NRC or other responsible organization of the VHS dam and sWitchyard.
The VHS switchyard, and more specifically the components necessary to support the Vernon Tie, have been inspected and examined separately by both Region 1 and NRR personnel. The VHS switchyard was reviewed, inspected, and found acceptable in the staff's safety evaluation dated March 30, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML070870378),
supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee.
By email dated July 23, 2010, you were informed of the PRB's initial recommendation and provided with a detailed discussion that included the basis of our findings. By email dated August 2, 2010, you responded to the PRB's initial recommendation and requested that your response be made part of the record. Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102210068).
On August 26, 2010, a second teleconference was held with you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. The transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, is enclosed and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102440275). During that call, you requested that your email, sent earlier that day that included excerpts on papers discussing the cultural theory of risk and identity-protection cognition, be made part of the record. Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102380520).
In summary, the PRB concludes that the NRC staff has extensively reviewed the power supply provided by the VHS and the reliance placed on this power supply by the Vermont Yankee facility. The PRB's final recommendation is to reject this petition for review as the issues you raise have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC.
Thank you for your interest in these matters.
Thank you for your interest in these matters.
Sincerely, Theodore R. Quay, Deputy Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No.
Sincerely, Theodore R. Quay, Deputy Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-271
Transcript of August Conference cc w/encl: Distribution via DISTRIBUTION:
 
G201 00388/EDATS:OEDO-201 PUBLIC LPL1-1 RlF RidsNrrPMVermontYankee RidsNrrOd TQuay, DPR RidsOeMailCenter RidsRgn1 MailCenter TMensah RidsNrrWpcMail KMiller, EEEB RidsNrrPmCalvertCliffs Package: ML 102380122 RidsNrrDorl RidsNrrLASLittle RidsNrrAdes RidsOGCRp Resource RidsOiMailCenter
==Enclosure:==
 
Transcript of August 26,2010, Conference Call cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv
 
DISTRIBUTION: G20100388/EDATS:OEDO-201 0-0497 PUBLIC LPL 1-1 RlF                 RidsNrrDorl                    RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrPMVermontYankee RidsNrrLASLittle                    RidsNrrMailCenter RidsNrrOd                   RidsNrrAdes                    RidNrrAdro TQuay, DPR                   RidsOGCRp Resource            RidsEDOMailCenter RidsOeMailCenter             RidsOiMailCenter              RidsOpaMaii RidsRgn1 MailCenter         RidsOcaMailCenter              KGreen TMensah                     DJackson,RI                    RidsNrrDeEeeb RidsNrrWpcMail               RidsNrrDlrRasb                DNguyen, DLR KMiller, EEEB               DSpindler, R1                  DDodson, R1 RidsNrrPmCalvertCliffs Package: ML102380122          Incoming: ML101670176          Response: ML102380170 Petitioner's Email of 8/2/10: ML102210068      Petitioner's Email of 8/26/10 ML102380520 Transcript of 6/29/10: ML101930382          Transcript of 8/26/10: ML102440275
  *Byemail OFFICE        LPL1-~~)~            LPL1-1/LA          DLRlRASB            DE/EEEB/BC NAME          DPicket1            SLittie            RAuluck            RMathew (A)
DATE          I'll \ 1 10          08/31 1 10          08/30/10          08/30/10 OFFICE        LPL1-1IBC            RI/DRP/PB5/BC* 12.206 Coord ~          DPRIDD NAME          NSalgado /Jj.J      DJackson*          ITMensat0'1~ \      TQuay i F**\.\
DATE            q/3 110              08/30/10          ~/~/10              q/~ 110 Official Record Copy
 
Official Transcript of Preceedlngs NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
==Title:==
2.206 Petition Review Board RE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket Number:      (n/a)
Location:            (telephone conference)
Date:                Thuffiday,August26,2010 Work Order No.:      NRC-403                            Pages 1-25 Transcript edited by Douglas Pickett, NRC NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 Enclosure
 
1 1                        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2                      NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3                                    + + + + +
4                10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD (PRB) 5                              CONFERENCE CALL 6                                          RE 7                  VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 8                                    + + + + +
9                                    THURSDAY 1                                AUGUST 26, 2010 11                                    + + + + +
12                      The  conference call                was held,  Ted Quay, 13  Chairperson of the Petition Review Board, presiding.
14 15  PETITIONER: MICHAEL MULLIGAN 16  PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS:
17  TED        QUAY,    Deputy  Director,            Division    of  Policy          and 18                Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 19  DOUGLAS V. PICKETT, Petition Manager 2  DOUGLAS DODSON, Region I, Division of Reactor Projects 21  TANYA MENSAH, Petition Coordinator, NRR 22  KENN MILLER, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch 23  DUC NGUYEN, NRR, Aging Management of Structures 24  Electrical and Systems Branch 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C 20005*3701            www.nealrgross,com
 
2 1 PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS:              (cont.)
2 NANCY SALGADO, NRR, Chief, Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 3 OTHER NRC PERSONNEL PRESENT:
4 JAMES KIM, Project Manager, Division of Operating 5 Reactor Licensing 6 ALICIA CALERO, General Engineer, Division of Policy 7 and Ru1emaking 8 HEATHER JONES, NRC Region I, Vermont Yankee 9 Resident Inspector 10 11 ALSO PRESENT:
12 JIM DeVINCENTIS, Licensing Manager, Entergy 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433        WASHINGTON, DC. 20005*3701    www.nealrgross.com
 
3 1                    T-A-B-L-E      O-F      C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S 2 Welcome and Introductions                                                    4 3                Doug Picket, Petition Manager 4  PRB Chairman's Introduction                                                  8 5              Ted Quay, Chairman 6 Petitioner's Presentation                                                  13 7              Michael Mulligan, Petitioner 8 PRB Chairman's Closing Remarks                                            24 9              Ted Quay, Chairman 1
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701    www.nealrgross.com
 
4 1                          P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2                                                                    10:04 a.m.
3                    BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  Thanks,  everybody, 4 for attending this meeting.
5                    My name is Doug Pickett.
6                    We are here today to allow the Petitioner, 7 Mr.        Michael    Mulligan,        his        second      opportunity            to 8 address the Petition Review Board, who we'll refer to 9 as      the PRB regarding hi s              2. 206 pet i t i on,    dated June 10 15,      2010,  on the adequacy of the Vernon Hydroelectric 11 Station        Tie-In    to  the      Vermont          Yankee  Nuclear      Power 12 Station located in Vernon, Vermont.
13                    I  am    the        Petition          Manager    for          the 14 petition.
15                    The PRB Chairman is Ted Quay.
16                    As  part      of      the      PRB's    review    of        this 17 petition,        Mr. Mulligan has requested this opportunity 18 to address the PRB.
19                    This meeting is scheduled to conclude by 20 approximately          11:00      a.m.          The      meeting    is      being 21 recorded        by    the  NRC      Operations            Center  and  will          be 22 transcribed by a court reporter.                          The transcript will 23 become a supplement to the petition.                            The transcript 24 will also be made publicly available.
25                    I'd    like      to      open        this  meeting        with NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
5 1 introductions.          As we go around the room,                    please be 2 sure        to  clearly state your name,                    your position,          and 3 the office that you work for wi thin the NRC for the 4 record.
5                    I'll start off.                I'm Doug Pickett.                I'm 6 from NRC. I'm the Petition Manager for the petition.
7                    BOARD MEMBER SALGADO:                  Nancy Salgado.          I'm 8 the Branch Chief from Division of Operator and Reactor 9 Licensing.
10                    BOARD    MEMBER        KIM:          James  Kim,    Project 11 Manager        from  the  Division          of      Operating    and    Reactor 12 Licensing, NRR.
13                    COURT  REPORTER:                Folks,    I'm  sorry,          but 14 this        is  the Court Reporter.                The folks      on the staff 15 who      I  think are on a        speakerphone are not making it 16 onto the record.
17                    BOARD    MEMBER          PICKETT:          This  is        Doug 18 Pickett.
19                    I  can send you an email with everybody's 20 name on it so we have                        if you want to go over it 21 again.
22                    BOARD MEMBER MILLER:                  On the line is Kenn 23 Miller, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch.
24                    CHAIRMAN QUAY:              Okay.        You got Ted Quay, 25 the PRB Chairman in Headquarters, NRR.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 2344433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
6 1                    BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  And from Region I.
2                    BOARD MEMBER DODSON:                  Doug Dodson,      Region 3 1, Project Engineer.
4                    BOARD    MEMBER          PICKETT:          The    Residence 5 Office.
6                    BOARD MEMBER JONES:                  Heather Jones.
7                    BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  And the licensee?
8                  MR. DeVINCENTIS:              Jim DeVincentis.
9                    BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  And Mr. Mulligan.
10                    PETITIONER MULLIGAN:                  Yes. This is Mike 11 Mulligan. I'm the petitioner.
12                    BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  And is there anyone 13 who has not introduced themselves on the phone.                                Okay.
14 Then we'll move on.
15                    We've    completed            our      introductions            and 16 we've got the representative from the licensee on the 17 phone.        And Mr. Mulligan has              introduced himself.              And 18 no one else.
19                    I'd  like      to    emphasize          that  we  need          to 20 speak clearly and loudly to make sure that the Court 21 Reporter can accurately transcribe this meeting.                                      If 22 you      do  have  something        that      you      would  like    to      say    I 23 please state your name for the record.
24                    For those dialing into the meeting, please 25 remember        to    mute      your        phones        to  minimize            any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 2344433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
7 1 background noise or distractions.                            If you do not have 2 a mute button,          this can be done by pressing the key 3 star 6.        To unmute, you press star 6 again.
4                    At this time I'll turn it over to the PRE 5 Chairman, Ted Quay.
6                    CHAIRMAN QUAY:              Welcome        to  this meeting 7 regarding          the    2.206        petition            submi t ted    by          Mr.
8 Mulligan.
9                    I'd like        to    first        share some background 10 information on our process.
11                    Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of 12 Federal        Regulations      describes            the    petition process; 13 the        primary  mechanism        for      the      public    to    request 14 enforcement action by                the NRC          in a      public process.
15 This process permits                anyone        to petition the NRC                    to 16 take enforcement-type action related to NRC licensees 17 or licensed activities.                    Depending on the results of 18 its        evaluation,    the      NRC      could        modify,    suspend            or 19 revoke        an  NRC-issued        license            or    take  any        other 20 appropriate enforcement action to resolve a problem.
21                    The    NRC's        staff's            guidance      for          the 22 disposition          of  2.206          petition            requests      in        its 23 Management Directive 8.11 which is publicly available.
24                    The purpose of today's meeting is to give 25 the peti tioner his second opportuni ty to provide any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701                www.nealrgross.com
 
8 1 additional          explanation          or      support        of  the  petition 2 before        the    Petition        Review        Board      makes    its      final 3 recommendation            on    whether            or      not    to  accept        this 4 petition for review.
5                    This meeting is not a hearing,                        nor is it 6 an opportunity for the petition to question or examine 7 the PRB on the merits or the issues presented in the 8 petition request.
9                    No decisions regarding the merits of this 10 petition will be made at this meeting, 11                    Following the meeting, the Petition Review 12 Board will          conduct        its    internal deliberations.                        The 13 outcome        of  this      internal          meeting will            be  discussed 14 with the petitioner, 15                    The      Petition            Review          Board    typically 16 consists        of    a    Chairman,          usually        a    manager    at        the 17 senior executive service level at the NRC.                                  It has a 18 Petition Manager and a PRB Coordinator.                                Other members 19 of the Board are determined by the NRC staff based on 20 the        content      of    the      information              in  the  petition 21 request.
22                    At    this      time,        I  would like to introduce 23 the Board.
24                      I  am Ted Quay,              the Peti tion Review Board 25 Chairman.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
9 1                  Doug Pickett is the Petition Manager for 2 the petition under discussion today.
3                  Tanya      Mensah            is        the    office's          PRB 4 Coordinator.
5                  Our technical staff includes:
6                  Duc  Nguyen        from        the      Office  of    Nuclear 7 Reactor Regulations'          Aging Management of Structures, 8 Electrical, and Systems Branch; 9                  Kenn  Miller        from      the    Office  of    Nuclear 10  Reactor Regulation's Electrical Engineering Branch; 11                  Nancy Salgado from the Office of Nuclear 12  Reactor Regulation's Plant Licensing Branch 1-1, and; 13                  Doug Dodson from NRC's Region I, Division 14  of Reactor Projects.
1                    As described in our process, the NRC staff 16  may        ask clarifying      questions              in  order  to    better 17  understand the petitioner's presentation and to reach 18  a reasoned decision whether to accept or reject the 19  petitioner's      requests        for      review        under  the      2.206 20  process.
21                  I would like to summarize the scope of the 22  petition under consideration and the NRC activities to 23  date.
24                  On June 15,          2010,        Mr. Mulligan submitted 25  to the NRC a petition,              under 10 CFR 2.206 regarding NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.
(202) 2344433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
10 1 the Vernon Hydroelectric Station's power supply to the 2 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
3                    In    this      petition            request,    Mr. Mulligan 4 requested the following:
5                    (1)    The immediate shutdown of the Vermont 6 Yankee facility; 7                    (2)    An independent investigation,                    outside 8 of NRC and Entergy,              to determine whether fraud and/or 9 falsification of issues were involved in the license 10 renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee; 11                    (3)    An investigation on what the petition 12 describes      as    a  subtle shift              from reliance on diesel 13 generators to the Vernon Hydroelectric Station by the 14 Vermont        Yankee      licensee            without      the    appropriate 15 quali ty of      a    nuclear grade              electrical power          supply, 16 and; 17                    (4 )    An      inspection by            the NRC    or other 18 responsible        organization            of    the Vernon Hydroelectric 19 Station dam and switchyard.
20                    On    June        21,      2010,      the    PRB    met          and 21 considered      the    petitioner's              request    for  the    NRC        to 22 immediately order the shutdown of                          the Vermont Yankee 23 Nuclear Power Station.                  The PRB did not identify any 24 immediate safety concerns.                    Therefore,      the PRB denied 25 the request for immediate shutdown.                          Mr. Mulligan was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701            www.nealrgross.com
 
11 1 informed of the PRB's decision on June 25th.
2                      On June    29th,        a  teleconference was              held 3 wi th you,        the Petitioner,            and the PRB        in which you 4 provided          further  explanation              and  support    for        your 5 petition.          A transcript        of that phone call has been 6 provided to you and is publicly available in ADAMS.
7                      On July 13 th,          the PRB met        internally to 8 discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the 9 Vernon Tie to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 10 and        make    its  initial        recommendation          in  accordance 11 with          Management    Directive              8.11.        The      initial 12 recommendation of the PRB is that the issues raised in 13 your peti tion have            already been reviewed,                evaluated 14 and resolved by the NRC.                        Therefore,      your petition 15 meets the criteria for rejection.
16                      In summary, the PRB concluded that the NRC 17 staff          has  extensively          reviewed        the  power      supply 18 provided by the Vernon Hydroelectric Station and the 19 reliance placed on this                  power supply by the Vermont 20 Yankee facility.            During the Station Blackout review 21 of Vermont Yankee, the staff concluded that the Vernon 22 Hydroelectric Station power station supply provides an 23 acceptable al terna te AC power source.                            In addition, 24 the          Vernon    Hydroelectric            Station      switchyard            was 25 reviewed,          inspected      and      found      acceptable      in        the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
12 1 staff's        Safety      Evaluation            dated      March    30.        2007, 2 supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee.
3                    By email        dated July            23,  2010,  you were 4 informed        of  the    PRB's        initial        recommendation            and 5 provided a detailed discussion that included the basis 6 for our findings.
7                    On July 30,          2010,        you requested a second 8 opportuni ty        to    address        the      PRB      for  the  purpose            of 9 providing addi tional supporting information for your 1  petition.
11                      Following today's discussion, the PRB will 12  meet internally to discuss the additional information 13  provided today and make                    its    final    recommendation in 14  accordance with Management Directive 8.11 15                      As a reminder for the phone participants, 16  please identify yourself                    if you make any remarks as 17  this        will  help    in    the      preparation          of  the    meeting 18  transcript that will be made publicly available.
19                      Thank you.
20                      And at this point, Mr. Mulligan,                      I'd like 21  to turn it over to you.                  And you have approximately 35 22  minutes, as Mr. Pickett previously informed you.
23                      PETITIONER MULLIGAN:                  Thank you, sir.
24                      I'd just like to say,                    I'm self aware of 25  how      fortunate    I  am to        be a          citizen of      the    United NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 2344433                  WASHINGTON, D.C, 20005*3701              www,nealrgross.com
 
13 1 States.                Because,          you        know,            essentially            the 2 Constitution            gives    us    the      ideals          for  this    type          of 3 thing.          And I    just -- you know,                  I  feel very fortunate 4 to be a          ci ti zen of the United States and be able to 5 talk to you guys, really, when it gets down to it.
6                      Basically I          attest          that      all    of what was 7 talked about as far as the petition, you didn't -- the 8 NRC        didn't  talk    --    the    NRC and Entergy didn't                        talk 9 about rusting conditions of the electric towers.                                          They 10 didn t    I    do a    detailed inspection.                      I  don t I    know what 11 codes.
12                      I mean,      this whole is -- there -- there's 13 a    lack of      information.              You know,            you go    into      this 14 thing and you kind of want the information,                                    you want 15 to get your ducks                in order and everything.                      But when 16 you        really    get  down      it,      very      little      information            is 17 provided          for  a  petitioner          to--        to    be  able    to      fight 18 back you guys according to your rules and stuff.
19                      And  so,      the      SER    and      I    suspect    Entergy, 20 really hasn't                  I    haven't        found        any place      in here 21 that        they talked about            the rusting towers.                    This        is 22 what        happened with        the    rusting            towers,      this    is      the 23 condition          of    the    rusting          towers          and    explained            it 24 thoroughly          in  engineering            terms.            All  you    guys        are 25 engineers, you know what I'm talking about.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 2344433                    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701                  www.nealrgross.com
 
14 1                    And    then made            an      open    evaluation          of 2 this isn't necessarily about is inoperable.                                  This is 3        the    question        is      essentially              is    licensing 4 relicensing adequate,                is it thorough?                What's missing 5 in this thing, and stuff like that.
6                    And what was missing is an evaluation of 7 what the rust -- rusting towers mean.                              And if you guys 8 were competent, you would have covered that. You would 9 have known how to protect yourselves and Entergy.                                          You 1  would have covered it thoroughly,                              exposed everything 11  and then I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on,                                            and 12  stuff like that.
13                      I can't find anything in the written trail 14  here of anybody discussing the rusty towers, or -- and 15  that, of course, questions, you know.
16                      Is that switchyard going to be taken care 17  of appropriately for the next 20 years of relicensing?
18                      So      essentially,                  maybe        this          isn't 19  necessarily          all    about      whether            the    running      dam        is 20  adequate          for  Vermont        Yankee.              This    is  a    kind          of 21  language thing, you know.                      Help in communication type 22  of thing.
23                      Is  the      Agency          and      Entergy      capable            of 24  communicating,          identifying problems and solving them, 25  and        stuff  like      that?            It's        a  disease      with          the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701                www.nealrgross.com
 
15 1 bureaucracy more that concerns me.                              The sympt oms are 2 the        swi tchyard.        The      disease          is,    essentially,          the 3 twisted language            that's        being used here.                And,        you 4 know,          and  you  don't      have        any      idea  of  the    quali ty 5 behind a lot of these terms, and stuff like that.                                      You 6 don't have any                  I    can't see it              in the documents.
7 It's an issue with the way you document everything, or 8 don't          document    everything,              or    the  rules    of        the 9 documenting -- and documenting stuff.                              And so I don't 10 have -- as an outsider,                  I don't have the information.
11 I      really      don't    have        the        information,      very        much 12 information. Just bits and piece of stuff like that.
13                      And  so,    I    mean that's            essentially where 14 the        big    problem    is:            Language,          the  abili ty          of 15 everybody to talk and communicate, and the essence to 16 know that there's a quality behind this stuff instead 17 of all this -- you know, an institutional failure like 18 we've seen in the Gulf of Mexico, and all this sort of 19 stuff,          it's about    language.              It's about      the garbage 20 dumb of language and communication.
21                      Essentially, it's like throwing your divan 22 in -- you know, you have an old piece of furniture, a 23 divan.            You throw it        in the garbage --              the garbage 24 dump.          Then you go back later on and you're trying -
25 you know,          you go back,        you look for that divan.                      And NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLA.ND AVE" NoW (202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701              www,nealrgross,com
 
16 1 all you find is pieces of the arms and the legs,                                        and 2 they're        all    disconnected            and      fragmentary,      and        you 3 can't make heads or tails.                          You can t  I  make heads or 4 tails really what the components are, and stuff.
5              And  so    this    is    what        I'm      talking    about        with 6 language and stuff.
7                      I wish            see,      I'm on a different phone.
8 I d like to reference the petition that talked about I
9 NSAC,        N-S-A-C 108.          NSAC.          That's      derived from the 1  Electric        Power    Research        Institute,          and  stuff.            And 11  basically the peti tion referenced that as a standard 12  for diesel generators, and stuff.
13                      And, you know, I wish I had -- I wish -- I 14  wanted            I  don't have my computer and I wanted to 1  quote        what    the    Petition          Board        said  about    the        95 16  percent          or    higher        reliability            of    the      diesel 17  generators.            But  I    don't have that.                I'm not --              I 18  don't have access to my computer anymore.
19                      But basically,            the petition said that it 20  was      referenced            the      95    percent was        referenced by 21  EPRI and NSAC-108.
22                      You know, you start going through NSAC-108 23  or NSAC-108, you start going through it the only quote 24  it says about 95 percentibility, and it's a quote here 2    "Generally industry and the NRC like independent EDG NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 2344433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
17 1 reliabilities to be 95 percent or higher."
2                      So, you know,            the way the petition quoted 3 it to me was the 95 percent standard comes from EPRI.
4 And then, you know, you gave me the reference number
  - the reference number. And I looked it up.                                And Doug 6 gave me a copy,            and stuff.              But then it really -- it 7 doesn't really identify is a standard.
8                      You know,        it's just this circular kind of 9 logic          business.      So,      like      I    said,    I  mean    the      only 10 thing          that  referenced          95    percent        was    what    I      just 11 quoted, and stuff. And it really doesn't identify.
12                      This    is    EPRI            this          this  should be 13 EPRI          standard      that        emergency            diesel      generator 14 reliability            should        be      greater        than    95      percent 15 reliable, and stuff like that.
16                      You guys are all engineers and you know, 17 I'm        going    to  talk      about        the      grid    out          outside 18 Vermont Yankee.            I mean, you know basically -- I mean, 19 I was there when we lost a grid, and stuff.                                So -- and.
20 --      and all we had were diesel                        generators.        So,        you 21 know,          it happens. And basically,                you know,      the grid 22 normally stays            energized 100              percent          100 percent 23 reliability.            You    could        essentially          say  that,          and 24 stuff like that.            But that              that's not enough.
25                      We know that            in the past          that we r ve had NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE" NW (202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701              www.nealrqross.com
 
18 1 troubles        with the      grid.            So    we    don t I    depend              we 2 don't know that that is a high enough quality for us 3 for electricity for a nuclear power plant.                                So that' s 4 why we have the diesel generators and to power up all 5 your electricity and stuff like that.
6                    So    you        want        a        higher      quality            of 7 electricity            of electrici ty.                    And so how you test 8 it?        You test it through the plant's two-way system.
9 You just test              you know,          you test it once a month, 1  or whatever you guys do now.                      And it runs for an hour, 11  or      sometimes      you  do      it    for              I  mean,    that show I
12  there's        an  assurance        of      high        quality      power      to      an 13  electric        station      is              I    mean,        that's    the        gold 14  standard.          It's not -- it's not that the grid is -
15  the grid is energized,                although that is nice -- that 16  is really nice to have.                  Everyone knows that,                that we 17  don't want -- we want to use a                              diesel generator;              we 18  want to use the grid.                But we know that the grid is 19  is not adequate, and stuff like that. So then we flip 20  to the -- we use the diesel generators in case of -
21  in an emergency and stuff.
22                      And so, I mean -- so,                    the wording that you 23  gave me with the petition basically says -- the way 24  the      way  the  wording      is,      you      frame    it' s        it's          95 25  percent        reliability        because          the      grid  is        because NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 2344433                  WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701                www.nealrgross.com
 
19 1 that        line  is  energized more              than      95  percent    of      the 2 time,          and stuff like that.                And,      you know,    it isn't 3 the same.            It is -- you know,                  you kind of say,              well 4 the way you word it, it's not clear.                              The way you word 5 it is, it's equivalent to a diesel generator, but it's 6 really not even close to being as reliable as a diesel 7 generator.
8                      And,  you know,          this garbage dump              -- this 9 garbage dump of words and language really bothers me, 1  and        stuff.      And  this      kind      of      circular    stuff,          and 11  you're referencing an EPRI document and then you start 12  looking          into  --  you      know,      more        looking    in  the      dump 13  trying to figure out what's going on,                              and stuff.            And 14  getting bits and pieces of information, and stuff like 15  that.            And  the  EPRI      document            doesn't    even      really 16  reference          the    quality        of      diesel          generators.              It 17  doesn't                it's    not      a      reference.              It    doesn't 18  specifically state this is a reference.
19                      We        EPRI would like you to have -- in 20  that        document,    that    document          that      was  referenced to 21  me, we would like to have all plants have greater than 22  95 percent reliabili ty of the diesel generators,                                        you 23  know.
24                        You know,      I mean,        but then you're kind of 25  saying that's what                  you're kind of -- you're kind of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701                www.nealrgross.com
 
20 1 inferring that's what                the reliabili ty of          the Vernon 2 Tie is, and stuff like that. And we don't -- you know, 3 it's        not  the  same    thing        as          it's not    the        same 4 standard as what we use for diesel generators.                            It's 5 - it's kind of deceptive.
6                    And -- and -- you know, you got an -- it's 7 like I've talked before.                    You've got an incidence on 8 one side and then on the other side you've got five or 9 six codes or rules and you throw them up in the air.
10 None of them really fit. And then what falls back down 11  to the earth, you pick up five or six of these pieces 12 of      the    codes  and    stuff,        and          and you  come          out 13 authoritative -- authoritatively talking that the code 14 says that we're allowed to use -- we're allowed to use 15 the Tie, it's equivalent.
16                    I know that if I was to run around with my 17 photograph and said "Okay,                    that Vermont Yankee is 18 we're -- we're in dire emergency and we want to use 19 and want to use the Vernon Tie,                          we want to use the 20 Vernon Dam and its offshoots.                      We want to use that for 21 emergency power."          And if I showed them that picture, 22 you know 95          percent      of    the people        in my communi ty 23 would say "Oh,          no. That s not right. You can't use."
I 24 You know, they would -- they would tell you that's not 25 adequate.          They would tell you that's an abomination, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433              WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701          www.nealrgross.com
 
21 1 depending upon that grid,                      the visual effects.
2                        I think that's -- you know,                      you got this 3 goggledygook of            technical            stuff        and it doesn't make 4 sense.
5                      And    I    think        the      impression      of    people 6 looking at            the grid and saying what you --                          I    mean, 7 looking at the Tie or looking at the dam -- excuse me.
8 I    think,      you know that                    that      impression that            you 9 want in a          dire emergency and you re going to depend  I 10 upon that          swi tchyard to power up Vermont Yankee and 11 prevent a          core melt,          I  think if you showed them,                        if 12 you said that            "Do you want to depend on this -- the 13 switchyard, "            I  think 95 percent of the people would 14 say the NRC's nuts.
15                        Having overly complex and numerous sets of 16 codes          and  rules    is    worse        than        having  no  codes          and 17 rules at all, you know.                    That's what I think.                I think 18 you can pick up these bits and fragments and pieces of 19 these codes, and nobody understands them.                                And I don't 20 even think the Agency half the time really understands 21 them the way they talk and stuff.
22                        And  you        open              start    opening      up      the 23 curtains,          you know you start walking past the Vernon 24 Swi tchyard and you                say      "How about          this  rust    here?"
25  "Oh,        they  had a      relicensing."                  I wonder what                  I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433                    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com
 
22 1 wonder          how      I    wonder        how    that's      si tuated      in      the 2 relicensing documents and stuff.                              And then you go in 3 there,          and nothing's          even mentioned about                  it.          And 4 then        you  start          then        you      go    through      a  petition 5 process          and they --          they      --    they    --  they reference 6 this        NSAC-108    business          and      you      start    looking          into 7 that.          And, you know,          fragments of information,                    that's 8 all.          It's no clear-cut            -- no clear-cut -- at least 9 what I          can see,    reference to a reliability rate,                                and 10 stuff.
11                      And,    you      know      the      reliability        rate          of 12 diesel generators across the board, you know it's been 13 noted through all the years that everybody plays games 14 with figuring out,              you know,            identifying whether it's 15 a    real      failure    or not        a    failure.          I  mean games 16 everybody            games        that,          the        diesel        generator 17 reliabilities things,                  you know,          to make it -- want to 18 make it look better, and stuff.
19                      You know, I -- so that's                        so that's -- I 20 wish I had              you know, Mr.              Pickett,      I wanted to read 21 that        email  I  sent you into              the record today,                but      I 22 don't have my computer next to me.                                And,    you know,            I 23 don't know if you could read it into the record for 24 me, because I don't have it because of my phone 25                      BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                    Doug Pickett here.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701                www.nealrgross.com


RidsOcaMailCenter DJackson,RI
23 1                      We have the email you sent to us and the 2 write-up          in    it.      And      we      will        include    that        as      a 3 supplement          to  your    peti tion,           and      we'll  put        it      in 4 ADAMS.
5                      PETITIONER        MULLIGAN:              Okay.      I'm        just 6 trying to think of anything I want to say -- anything 7 else        I  want    to  say.        I    think        I    pretty well          much 8 covered it.
9                      Oh.      And      I    made              I  made  a    spelling 10  mistake.          The lessons          from Forsmark in my letter to 11  you initially about the petition.                              And that's F-O-R-S 12  M-A-R-K.          That's the lessons from Forsmark electrical 13  event.          That's an NRC document.                    And I just wanted to 14  correct the spelling in that.
15                      would that letter                      is that letter going 16  to be entered into ADAMS?
17                      BOARD MEMBER            PICKETT:            Are  you    talking 18  about your email from this morning?
19                        PETITIONER        MULLIGAN:                The  email      I      sent 2  you,        I  don't    know,      a    week      ago,      two weeks        ago,        or 21  whatever, in response to the 22                      BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                      Oh,  yes. That's in 23  ADAMS.        And we're making it publicly available.                                  'I'ha t; 24  was at your request.
25                        PETITIONER MULLIGAN:                    Yes,    I  think -            I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.
(202) 234-4433                  WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701                  www.nealrgross.com


RidsNrrDlrRasb
24 1 think that I -- I'm done.
2                    CHAIRMAN QUAY:            Okay.        At this time, does 3 the staff here at Headquarters have any questions for 4 Mr. Mulligan?          Okay.
5                    Seeing none,            does        the  license    have          any 6 questions?
7                    MR. DeVINCENTIS:              Entergy has no questions 8 or comments.
9                    CHAIRMAN QUAY:                Okay.        Does  the    Region 10 have any questions?
11                    BOARD MEMBER DODSON:                    The Region has no 12 questions or comments.
13                    CHAIRMAN QUAY:                Okay.        I  believe        there 14 were no members of the public identified.
15                    So, Mr. Mulligan, I want to thank you for 16 taking time to provide the NRC staff wi th clarifying 17 information on the petition you've submitted.
18                    Before we close,              does      the Court Reporter 19 need          any additional        information            for    the    meeting 20 transcript?          We  did agree            to      provide you with              the 21 names of the individuals here.                          Is there anything else 22  that's needed?
23                    COURT REPORTER:              No.      And Mr. Pickett can 24 either email me or he can call me.                              Does he want my 25 number right now.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NoW.
(202) 234-4433                WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701              www.nealrgross.com


DSpindler, R1 Incoming: ML 101670176 RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrMailCenter RidNrrAdro RidsEDOMailCenter RidsOpaMaii KGreen RidsNrrDeEeeb DNguyen, DLR DDodson, R1 Response: ML 102380170 Petitioner's Email of 8/2/10: ML 102210068 Petitioner's Email of 8/26/10 ML 102380520 Transcript of 6/29/10: ML 101930382 Transcript of 8/26/10: ML 102440275
25 1                     BOARD   MEMBER         PICKETT:           That    would          be 2 helpful.
*Byemail OFFICE LPL1-1/LA DLRlRASB DE/EEEB/BC NAME DPicket1 SLittie RAuluck RMathew (A) DATE I'll \ 1 10 08/31 1 10 08/30/10 08/30/10 OFFICE LPL1-1 IBC RI/DRP/PB5/BC*
3                     COURT REPORTER:             It's 202-234-4433 ask for 4 John.         I'm the only one in the office,                       the only one 5 named John.
12.206 Coord  DPRIDD NAME NSalgado /Jj.J DJackson*
6                     BOARD MEMBER PICKETT:                  Okay. Thank you.
\ TQuay i F**\.\ DATE q/3 110 08/30/10 110 ..Official Record Copy Official Transcript of Preceedlngs NUCLEAR REGULATORY 2.206 Petition Review Board RE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket Number: (n/a) (telephone conference) Thuffiday,August26,2010 Work Order No.: Pages 1-25 Transcript edited by Douglas Pickett, NRC NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., Court Reporters and 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, Washington, D.C. (202) Enclosure 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY ++++10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD CONFERENCE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER ++ ++
7                     PETITIONER MULLIGAN:                   And I'm want -- and 8 I     want     to thank you         for     this        opportunity      to     speak 9 again.
AUGUST 26, ++++The conference call was held, Ted Quay, Chairperson of the Petition Review Board, presiding.
10                     CHAIRMAN QUAY:             You're welcome.
PETITIONER:
1                       And   I   guess        with         that,   I   guess        this 12 meeting's         concluded.             And       thank      you   again,         Mr.
MICHAEL MULLIGAN PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS: TED QUAY, Deputy Director, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DOUGLAS V. PICKETT, Petition Manager DOUGLAS DODSON, Region I, Division of Reactor Projects TANYA MENSAH, Petition Coordinator, NRR KENN MILLER, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch DUC NGUYEN, NRR, Aging Management of Structures Electrical and Systems Branch NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005*3701 www.nealrgross,com 5 10 15 20 252 PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS: NANCY SALGADO, NRR, Chief, Plant Licensing Branch OTHER NRC PERSONNEL JAMES KIM, Project Manager, Division of Reactor ALICIA CALERO, General Engineer, Division of and HEATHER JONES, NRC Region I, Vermont Resident ALSO JIM DeVINCENTIS, Licensing Manager, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, DC. 20005*3701 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 25 3 T-A-B-L-E O-F C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S Welcome and Introductions 4 Doug Picket, Petition Manager PRB Chairman's Introduction 8 Ted Quay, Chairman Petitioner's Presentation 13 Michael Mulligan, Petitioner PRB Chairman's Closing Remarks 24 Ted Quay, Chairman NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 5 10 15 20 25 4 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 10:04 a.m. BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Thanks, everybody, for attending this meeting. My name is Doug Pickett. We are here today to allow the Petitioner, Mr. Michael Mulligan, his second opportunity to address the Petition Review Board, who we'll refer to as the PRB regarding hi s 2. 206 peti t i on, dated June 15, 2010, on the adequacy of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station Tie-In to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station located in Vernon, Vermont. I am the Petition Manager for the petition.
13 Mulligan.
The PRB Chairman is Ted Quay. As part of the PRB's review of this petition, Mr. Mulligan has requested this opportunity to address the PRB. This meeting is scheduled to conclude by approximately 11:00 a.m. The meeting is being recorded by the NRC Operations Center and will be transcribed by a court reporter.
14                       (Whereupon,       at 10:32 a.m.             the meeting was 15  concluded.)
The transcript will become a supplement to the petition.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE, NW (202) 234-4433                 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701               www.nealrgross.com}}
The transcript will also be made publicly available.
I'd like to open this meeting with NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com 5 10 15 20 25 5 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 introductions. As we go around the room, please be sure to clearly state your name, your position, and the office that you work for wi thin the NRC for the record. I'll start off. I'm Doug Pickett. I'm from NRC. I'm the Petition Manager for the petition.
BOARD MEMBER SALGADO: Nancy Salgado. I'm the Branch Chief from Division of Operator and Reactor Licensing.
BOARD MEMBER KIM: James Kim, Project Manager from the Division of Operating and Reactor Licensing, NRR. COURT REPORTER:
Folks, I'm sorry, but this is the Court Reporter.
The folks on the staff who I think are on a speakerphone are not making it onto the record. BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: This is Doug Pickett. I can send you an email with everybody's name on it so we have if you want to go over it again. BOARD MEMBER MILLER: On the line is Kenn Miller, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch. CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. You got Ted Quay, the PRB Chairman in Headquarters, NRR. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com 5 10 15 20 25 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 6 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And from Region I. BOARD MEMBER DODSON: Doug Dodson, Region 1, Project Engineer.
BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: The Residence Office. BOARD MEMBER JONES: Heather Jones. BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And the licensee?
MR. DeVINCENTIS:
Jim DeVincentis.
BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And Mr. Mulligan.
PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
Yes. This is Mike Mulligan.
I'm the petitioner.
BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And is there anyone who has not introduced themselves on the phone. Okay. Then we'll move on. We've completed our introductions and we've got the representative from the licensee on the phone. And Mr. Mulligan has introduced himself. And no one else. I'd like to emphasize that we need to speak clearly and loudly to make sure that the Court Reporter can accurately transcribe this meeting. If you do have something that you would like to say I please state your name for the record. For those dialing into the meeting, please remember to mu te your phones to minimize any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 7 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 background noise or distractions.
If you do not have a mute button, this can be done by pressing the key star 6. To unmute, you press star 6 again. At this time I'll turn it over to the PRE Chairman, Ted Quay. CHAIRMAN QUAY: Welcome to this meeting regarding the 2.206 petition submi t ted by Mr. Mulligan.
I'd like to first share some background information on our process. Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations describes the petition process; the primary mechanism for the public to request enforcement action by the NRC in a public process. This process permits anyone to petition the NRC to take enforcement-type action related to NRC licensees or licensed activities.
Depending on the results of its evaluation, the NRC could modify, suspend or revoke an NRC-issued license or take any other appropriate enforcement action to resolve a problem. The NRC's staff's guidance for the disposition of 2.206 petition requests in its Management Directive 8.11 which is publicly available.
The purpose of today's meeting is to give the peti tioner his second opportuni ty to provide any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 8 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 additional explanation or support of the petition before the Petition Review Board makes its final recommendation on whether or not to accept this petition for review. This meeting is not a hearing, nor is it an opportunity for the petition to question or examine the PRB on the merits or the issues presented in the petition request. No decisions regarding the merits of this petition will be made at this meeting, Following the meeting, the Petition Review Board will conduct its internal deliberations.
The outcome of this internal meeting will be discussed with the petitioner, The Petition Review Board typically consists of a Chairman, usually a manager at the senior executive service level at the NRC. It has a Petition Manager and a PRB Coordinator.
Other members of the Board are determined by the NRC staff based on the content of the information in the petition request. At this time, I would like to introduce the Board. I am Ted Quay, the Peti tion Review Board Chairman.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 Doug Pickett is the Petition Manager for the petition unde r discussion today. Tanya Mensah is the office's PRB Coordinator.
Our technical staff includes:
Duc Nguyen from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations' Aging Management of Structures, Electrical, and Systems Branch; Kenn Miller from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Electrical Engineering Branch; Nancy Salgado from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Plant Licensing Branch 1-1, and; Doug Dodson from NRC's Region I, Division of Reactor Projects.
As described in our process, the NRC staff may ask clarifying questions in order to better understand the petitioner's presentation and to reach a reasoned decision whether to accept or reject the petitioner's requests for review under the 2.206 process. I would like to summarize the scope of the petition under consideration and the NRC activities to date. On June 15, 2010, Mr. Mulligan submitted to the NRC a petition, under 10 CFR 2.206 regarding NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 10 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 the Vernon Hydroelectric Station's power supply to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. In this petition request, Mr. Mulligan requested the following:
(1) The immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee facility; (2) An independent investigation, outside of NRC and Entergy, to determine whether fraud and/or falsification of issues were involved in the license renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee; (3) An investigation on what the petition describes as a subtle shift from reliance on diesel generators to the Vernon Hydroelectric Station by the Vermont Yankee licensee without the appropriate quali ty of a nuclear grade electrical power supply, and; (4 ) An inspection by the NRC or other responsible organization of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station dam and switchyard.
On June 21, 2010, the PRB met and considered the petitioner's request for the NRC to immediately order the shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. The PRB did not identify any immediate safety concerns.
Therefore, the PRB denied the request for immediate shutdown.
Mr. Mulligan was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 11 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 informed of the PRB's decision on June 25th. On June 29th, a teleconference was held wi th you, the Petitioner, and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition.
A transcript of that phone call has been provided to you and is publicly available in ADAMS. On July 13 th, the PRB met internally to discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the Vernon Tie to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station and make its initial recommendation in accordance with Management Directive 8.11. The initial recommendation of the PRB is that the issues raised in your peti tion have already been reviewed, evaluated and resolved by the NRC. Therefore, your petition meets the criteria for rejection.
In summary, the PRB concluded that the NRC staff has extensively reviewed the power supply provided by the Vernon Hydroelectric Station and the reliance placed on this power supply by the Vermont Yankee facility.
During the Station Blackout review of Vermont Yankee, the staff concluded that the Vernon Hydroelectric Station power station supply provides an acceptable al terna te AC power source. In addition, the Vernon Hydroelectric Station switchyard was reviewed, inspected and found acceptable in the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 staff's Safety Evaluation dated March 30. 2007, supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee. By email dated July 23, 2010, you were informed of the PRB's initial recommendation and provided a detailed discussion that included the basis for our findings.
On July 30, 2010, you requested a second opportuni ty to address the PRB for the purpose of providing addi tional supporting information for your petition.
Following today's discussion, the PRB will meet internally to discuss the additional information provided today and make its final recommendation in accordance with Management Directive 8.11 As a reminder for the phone participants, please identify yourself if you make any remarks as this will help in the preparation of the meeting transcript that will be made publicly available.
Thank you. And at this point, Mr. Mulligan, I'd like to turn it over to you. And you have approximately 35 minutes, as Mr. Pickett previously informed you. PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
Thank you, sir. I'd just like to say, I'm self aware of how fortunate I am to be a citizen of the United NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C, 20005*3701 5 10 15 20 25 13 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 States. Because, you know, essentially the Constitution gives us the ideals for this type of thing. And I just --you know, I feel very fortunate to be a ci ti zen of the United States and be able to talk to you guys, really, when it gets down to it. Basically I attest that all of what was talked about as far as the petition, you didn't --the NRC didn't talk --the NRC and Entergy didn't talk about rusting conditions of the electric towers. They didn I t do a detailed inspection.
I don I t know what codes. I mean, this whole is --there --there's a lack of information.
You know, you go into this thing and you kind of want the information, you want to get your ducks in order and everything.
But when you really get down it, very little information is provided for a petitioner to--to be able to fight back you guys according to your rules and stuff. And so, the SER and I suspect Entergy, really hasn't I haven't found any place in here that they talked about the rusting towers. This is what happened with the rusting towers, this is the condition of the rusting towers and explained it thoroughly in engineering terms. All you guys are engineers, you know what I'm talking about. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And then made an open evaluation of this isn't necessarily about is inoperable.
This is the question is essentially is licensing relicensing adequate, is it thorough?
What's missing in this thing, and stuff like that. And what was missing is an evaluation of what the rust --rusting towers mean. And if you guys were competent, you would have covered that. You would have known how to protect yourselves and Entergy. You would have covered it thoroughly, exposed everything and then I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on, and stuff like that. I can't find anything in the written trail here of anybody discussing the rusty towers, or --and that, of course, questions, you know. Is that switchyard going to be taken care of appropriately for the next 20 years of relicensing?
So essentially, maybe this isn't necessarily all about whether the running dam is adequate for Vermont Yankee. This is a kind of language thing, you know. Help in communication type of thing. Is the Agency and Entergy capable of communicating, identifying problems and solving them, and stuff like that? It's a disease with the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 15 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 bureaucracy more that concerns me. The sympt oms are the swi tchyard. The disease is, essentially, the twisted language that's being used here. And, you know, and you don't have any idea of the quali ty behind a lot of these terms, and stuff like that. You don't have any I can't see it in the documents.
It's an issue with the way you document everything, or don't document everything, or the rules of the documenting
--and documenting stuff. And so I don't have --as an outsider, I don't have the information.
I really don't have the information, very much information.
Just bits and piece of stuff like that. And so, I mean that's essentially where the big problem is: Language, the abili ty of everybody to talk and communicate, and the essence to know that there's a quality behind this stuff instead of all this --you know, an institutional failure like we've seen in the Gulf of Mexico, and all this sort of stuff, it's about language.
It's about the garbage dumb of language and communication.
Essentially, it's like throwing your divan in --you know, you have an old piece of furniture, a divan. You throw it in the garbage --the garbage dump. Then you go back later on and you're trying you know, you go back, you look for that divan. And NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLA.ND AVE" (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 1 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 all you find is pieces of the arms and the legs, and they're all disconnected and fragmentary, and you can't make heads or tails. You can I t make heads or tails really what the components are, and stuff. And so this is what I'm talking about with lang uage and stuff. I wish see, I'm on a different phone. I I d like to reference the petition that talked about NSAC, N-S-A-C 108. NSAC. That's derived from the Electric Power Research Institute, and stuff. And basically the peti tion referenced that as a standard for diesel generators, and stuff. And, you know, I wish I had --I wish --I wanted I don't have my computer and I wanted to quote what the Petition Board said about the 95 percent or higher reliability of the diesel generators.
But I don't have that. I'm not --I don't have access to my computer anymore. But basically, the petition said that it was referenced the 95 percent was referenced by EPRI and NSAC-108.
You know, you start going through NSAC-108 or NSAC-108, you start going through it the only quote it says about 95 percentibility, and it's a quote here "Generally industry and the NRC like independent EDG NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 17 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reliabilities to be 95 percent or higher." So, you know, the way the petition quoted it to me was the 95 percent standard comes from EPRI. And then, you know, you gave me the reference number -the reference number. And I looked it up. And Doug gave me a copy, and stuff. But then it really --it doesn't really identify is a standard.
You know, it's just this circular kind of logic business.
So, like I said, I mean the only thing that referenced 95 percent was what I just quoted, and stuff. And it really doesn't identify.
This is EPRI this this should be EPRI standard that emergency diesel generator reliability should be greater than 95 percent reliable, and stuff like that. You guys are all engineers and you know, I'm going to talk about the grid out outside Vermont Yankee. I mean, you know basically
--I mean, I was there when we lost a grid, and stuff. So --and. --and all we had were diesel generators.
So, you know, it happens. And basically, you know, the grid normally stays energized 100 percent 100 percent reliability.
You could essentially say that, and stuff like that. But that that's not enough. We know that in the past that we r ve had NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE" NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701 www.nealrqross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 troubles with the grid. So we don I t depend we don't know that that is a high enough quality for us for electricity for a nuclear power plant. So that' s why we have the diesel generators and to power up all your electricity and stuff like that. So you want a higher quality of electricity of electrici ty. And so how you test it? You test it through the plant's two-way system. You just test you know, you test it once a month, or whatever you guys do now. And it runs for an hour, or sometimes you do it for I mean, that I show there's an assurance of high quality power to an electric station is I mean, that's the gold standard.
It's not --it's not that the grid is the grid is energized, although that is nice --that is really nice to have. Everyone knows that, that we don't want --we want to use a diesel generator; we want to use the grid. But we know that the grid is is not adequate, and stuff like that. So then we flip to the --we use the diesel generators in case of in an emergency and stuff. And so, I mean --so, the wording that you gave me with the petition basically says --the way the way the wording is, you frame it' s it's 95 percent reliability because the grid is because NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that line is energized more than 95 percent of the time, and stuff like that. And, you know, it isn't the same. It is --you know, you kind of say, well the way you word it, it's not clear. The way you word it is, it's equivalent to a diesel generator, but it's really not even close to being as reliable as a diesel generator.
And, you know, this garbage dump --this garbage dump of words and language really bothers me, and stuff. And this kind of circular stuff, and you're referencing an EPRI document and then you start looking into --you know, more looking in the dump trying to figure out what's going on, and stuff. And getting bits and pieces of information, and stuff like that. And the EPRI document doesn't even really reference the quality of diesel generators.
It doesn't it's not a reference.
It doesn't specifically state this is a reference.
We EPRI would like you to have --in that document, that document that was referenced to me, we would like to have all plants have greater than 95 percent reliabili ty of the diesel generators, you know. You know, I mean, but then you're kind of saying that's what you're kind of --you're kind of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 5 10 15 20 25 20 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 inferring that's what the reliabili ty of the Vernon Tie is, and stuff like that. And we don't --you know, it's not the same thing as it's not the same standard as what we use for diesel generators. -it's kind of deceptive.
And --and --you know, you got an --it's like I've talked before. You've got an incidence on one side and then on the other side you've got five or six codes or rules and you throw them up in the air. None of them really fit. And then what falls back down to the earth, you pick up five or six of these pieces of the codes and stuff, and and you come out authoritative
--authoritatively talking that the code says that we're allowed to use --we're allowed to use the Tie, it's equivalent.
I know that if I was to run around with my photograph and said "Okay, that Vermont Yankee is we're --we're in dire emergency and we want to use and want to use the Vernon Tie, we want to use the Vernon Dam and its offshoots.
We want to use that for emergency power." And if I showed them that picture, you know 95 percent of the people in my communi ty would say "Oh, no. That I s not right. You can't use." You know, they would --they would tell you that's not adequate.
They would tell you that's an abomination, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 21 depending upon that grid, the visual effects. I think that's --you know, you got this goggledygook of technical stuff and it doesn't make sense. And I think the impression of people looking at the grid and saying what you --I mean, looking at the Tie or looking at the dam --excuse me. I think, you know that that impression that you want in a dire emergency and you I re going to depend upon that swi tchyard to power up Vermont Yankee and prevent a core melt, I think if you showed them, if you said that "Do you want to depend on this --the switchyard, " I think 95 percent of the people would say the NRC's nuts. Having overly complex and numerous sets of codes and rules is worse than having no codes and rules at all, you know. That's what I think. I think you can pick up these bits and fragments and pieces of these codes, and nobody understands them. And I don't even think the Agency half the time really understands them the way they talk and stuff. And you open start opening up the curtains, you know you start walking past the Vernon Swi tchyard and you say "How about this rust here?" "Oh, they had a relicensing." I wonder what I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 5 10 15 20 25 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 22 wonder how I wonder how that's si tuated in the relicensing documents and stuff. And then you go in there, and nothing's even mentioned about it. And then you start then you go through a petition process and they --they --they --they reference this NSAC-108 business and you start looking into that. And, you know, fragments of information, that's all. It's no clear-cut
--no clear-cut
--at least what I can see, reference to a reliability rate, and stuff. And, you know the reliability rate of diesel generators across the board, you know it's been noted through all the years that everybody plays games with figuring out, you know, identifying whether it's a real failure or not a failure. I mean games everybody games that, the diesel generator reliabilities things, you know, to make it --want to make it look better, and stuff. You know, I --so that's so that's --I wish I had you know, Mr. Pickett, I wanted to read that email I sent you into the record today, but I don't have my computer next to me. And, you know, I don't know if you could read it into the record for me, because I don't have it because of my phone BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Doug Pickett here. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 22 23 24 25 We have the email you sent to us and the write-up in it. And we will include that as a supplement to your peti tion, and we'll put it in ADAMS. PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
Okay. I'm just trying to think of anything I want to say --anything else I want to say. I think I pretty well much covered it. Oh. And I made I made a spelling mistake. The lessons from Forsmark in my letter to you initially about the petition.
And that's M-A-R-K. That's the lessons from Forsmark electrical event. That's an NRC document. And I just wanted to correct the spelling in that. would that letter is that letter going to be entered into ADAMS? BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Are you talking about your email from this morning? PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
The email I sent you, I don't know, a week ago, two weeks ago, or whatever, in response to the BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Oh, yes. That's in ADAMS. And we're making it publicly available.
'I'ha t; was at your request. PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
Yes, I think I (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW. WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5 10 15 20 25 24 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 think that I --I'm done. CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. At this time, does the staff here at Headquarters have any questions for Mr. Mulligan?
Okay. Seeing none, does the license have any questions?
MR. DeVINCENTIS:
Entergy has no questions or comments.
CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. Does the Region have any questions?
BOARD MEMBER DODSON: The Region has no questions or comments.
CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. I believe there were no members of the public identified.
So, Mr. Mulligan, I want to thank you for taking time to provide the NRC staff wi th clarifying information on the petition you've submitted.
Before we close, does the Court Reporter need any additional information for the meeting transcript?
We did agree to provide you with the names of the individuals here. Is there anything else that's needed? COURT REPORTER:
No. And Mr. Pickett can either email me or he can call me. Does he want my number right now. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NoW. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5 10 15 20 25 25 1 helpful. John. I'm named John. I want to again. meeting's Mulligan.
concluded.)
(202)
BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: That would be COURT REPORTER:
It's 202-234-4433 ask for the only one in the office, the only one BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Okay. Thank you. PETITIONER MULLIGAN:
And I'm want --and thank you for this opportunity to speak CHAIRMAN QUAY: You're welcome. And I guess with that, I guess this concluded.
And thank you again, Mr. (Whereupon, at 10:32 a.m. the meeting was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE, NW WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com}}

Latest revision as of 19:36, 11 March 2020

G20100388/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0497 - 2.206 - Vermont Yankee Blackout and Normal Emergency Power Supply
ML102380170
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 09/08/2010
From: Quay T
Division of Policy and Rulemaking
To: Mulligan M
- No Known Affiliation
pickett , NRR/DORL, 415-1364
Shared Package
ml102380122 List:
References
G20100388, OEDO-2010-0497
Download: ML102380170 (30)
v • d • e


Text

...~p.R REGUI _ UNITED STATES

.:>c. ....,~

~

s: O"?.

('>

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

~

ca.V";:

i;;

0 September 8, 2010

~

1>1) ~O

        • i' Mr. Michael Mulligan P.O. Box 161 Hinsdale, NH 03451

Dear Mr. Mulligan:

In an email dated June 15, 2010, addressed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's)

Allegation Desk, you submitted a petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206, "Requests for action under this subpart," asking that the NRC take enforcement action by ordering the immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee). Your petition has been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Petition Review Board (PRB) for action. The NRC has made your petition publicly available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML101670176.

Your petition included a number of photographs of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station (VHS) switchyard. The VHS provides a backup 4 kV AC power source for Vermont Yankee. This power source is provided through an underground cable stretching from the VHS switchyard to the Vermont Yankee facility. At the Vermont Yankee switchyard, the 13.2 kV VHS power source ties into the site via a transformer where the power source is stepped down to 4 kV.

This transformer is referred to as the Vernon Tie. This power source is used for 1) the alternate AC power source for station blackout (SBO) conditions, 2) fire pumps used for fire protection pursuant to 10 CFR, Part 50, Appendix R, and 3) a back-up power source for remote shutdown panels at Vermont Yankee if the control room becomes uninhabitable.

The structures in the photographs include components supporting the AC power source leading to Vermont Yankee as well as the local distribution grid to Vernon, Vermont. The photographs focus on rusted transmission towers and a surface hole of unknown depth adjacent to a stanchion. You expressed a safety concern regarding the overall material condition of the VHS switchyard. In your petition, you indicated that the photographs, by themselves, provide a convincing argument that the VHS power source to the Vermont Yankee station is unreliable and should not be used as a backup power source.

On June 21, 2010, the PRB met and considered your request for the NRC to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee. The PRB did not identify any immediate safety concerns. Therefore, the PRB denied your request. You were informed of the PRB's decision not to order the immediate shutdown of Vermont Yankee on June 25, 2010.

On June 29, 2010, a teleconference was held between you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. A transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, has been provided to you and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML101930382).

M. MUlligan -2 On July 13, 2010, the PRB met to discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the Vernon Tie to Vermont Yankee and make its initial recommendation in accordance with Management Directive 8.11 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041770328). The initial recommendation of the PRB was that the issues raised in your petition have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC. Therefore, your petition meets the criteria for rejection. More specifically, the PRB made the following findings regarding the requests made in your petition:

1. Order the Immediate Shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

The PRB met and concluded that there was no immediate safety issue justifying the immediate shutdown of the Vermont Yankee facility.

2. An independent investigation, outside of NRC and EntergYl to determine whether fraud and/or falsification of issues were involved in the license renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee.

You are requested to refer to the following NRC public web site which provides key correspondence regarding Vermont Yankee:

http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/vv/key-correspondence.html By letter dated March 1, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100570237), the NRC issued a Demand for Information regarding the veracity of statements made by Entergy officials to the state of Vermont regarding underground piping at Vermont Yankee. In the licensee's response dated March 31, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100910420), they reference an independent investigation performed as part of the state regulatory proceeding before the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) related to the issuance of a Certificate of Public Good by the VPSB for the continued operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station after 2012. The NRC has not identified any instances in which Entergy staff or officials have provided incomplete or inaccurate information to the NRC (ADAMS Accession No. ML101670271).

3. An investigation on what the petitioner describes as a subtle shift from reliance on diesel generators to the VHS by the Vermont Yankee licensee without the appropriate quality of a nuclear grade electrical power supply.

During the SBO review of Vermont Yankee, the NRC staff concluded that the VHS power supply provides an acceptable alternate AC power source. Regulatory Guide 1.155 does not require that the alternate AC source for SBO conditions possess the same quality standards as the emergency onsite AC sources. The NRC staff has previously reviewed, evaluated, and resolved the reliance that the Vermont Yankee licensee has on the VHS power supply for SBO conditions (ADAMS Accession No. ML060050024).

Regarding 10 CFR Appendix R: In the event that the control room had to be evacuated (Le.,

fire) and operators had to shut down the plant from an alternate shutdown panel, the operators would use the VHS power supply before relying on the onsite diesel generators.

The VHS would provide an immediate source of power. Operators would not need to wait for onsite diesel generator startup and loading. This approach is preferable in that it would

M. Mulligan -3 minimize the time necessary to place the plant in a cold shutdown condition. Operators would still have the onsite emergency diesel generators as a backup if needed.

4. An inspection by the NRC or other responsible organization of the VHS dam and sWitchyard.

The VHS switchyard, and more specifically the components necessary to support the Vernon Tie, have been inspected and examined separately by both Region 1 and NRR personnel. The VHS switchyard was reviewed, inspected, and found acceptable in the staff's safety evaluation dated March 30, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML070870378),

supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee.

By email dated July 23, 2010, you were informed of the PRB's initial recommendation and provided with a detailed discussion that included the basis of our findings. By email dated August 2, 2010, you responded to the PRB's initial recommendation and requested that your response be made part of the record. Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102210068).

On August 26, 2010, a second teleconference was held with you and the PRB in which you provided further explanation and support for your petition. The transcript of that phone call, which supplements your petition, is enclosed and is publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102440275). During that call, you requested that your email, sent earlier that day that included excerpts on papers discussing the cultural theory of risk and identity-protection cognition, be made part of the record. Accordingly, your email supplements your original petition and has been made publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML102380520).

In summary, the PRB concludes that the NRC staff has extensively reviewed the power supply provided by the VHS and the reliance placed on this power supply by the Vermont Yankee facility. The PRB's final recommendation is to reject this petition for review as the issues you raise have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC.

Thank you for your interest in these matters.

Sincerely, Theodore R. Quay, Deputy Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-271

Enclosure:

Transcript of August 26,2010, Conference Call cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv

DISTRIBUTION: G20100388/EDATS:OEDO-201 0-0497 PUBLIC LPL 1-1 RlF RidsNrrDorl RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrPMVermontYankee RidsNrrLASLittle RidsNrrMailCenter RidsNrrOd RidsNrrAdes RidNrrAdro TQuay, DPR RidsOGCRp Resource RidsEDOMailCenter RidsOeMailCenter RidsOiMailCenter RidsOpaMaii RidsRgn1 MailCenter RidsOcaMailCenter KGreen TMensah DJackson,RI RidsNrrDeEeeb RidsNrrWpcMail RidsNrrDlrRasb DNguyen, DLR KMiller, EEEB DSpindler, R1 DDodson, R1 RidsNrrPmCalvertCliffs Package: ML102380122 Incoming: ML101670176 Response: ML102380170 Petitioner's Email of 8/2/10: ML102210068 Petitioner's Email of 8/26/10 ML102380520 Transcript of 6/29/10: ML101930382 Transcript of 8/26/10: ML102440275

  • Byemail OFFICE LPL1-~~)~ LPL1-1/LA DLRlRASB DE/EEEB/BC NAME DPicket1 SLittie RAuluck RMathew (A)

DATE I'll \ 1 10 08/31 1 10 08/30/10 08/30/10 OFFICE LPL1-1IBC RI/DRP/PB5/BC* 12.206 Coord ~ DPRIDD NAME NSalgado /Jj.J DJackson* ITMensat0'1~ \ TQuay i F**\.\

DATE q/3 110 08/30/10 ~/~/10 q/~ 110 Official Record Copy

Official Transcript of Preceedlngs NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

2.206 Petition Review Board RE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket Number: (n/a)

Location: (telephone conference)

Date: Thuffiday,August26,2010 Work Order No.: NRC-403 Pages 1-25 Transcript edited by Douglas Pickett, NRC NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.

Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 Enclosure

1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + +

4 10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD (PRB) 5 CONFERENCE CALL 6 RE 7 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 8 + + + + +

9 THURSDAY 1 AUGUST 26, 2010 11 + + + + +

12 The conference call was held, Ted Quay, 13 Chairperson of the Petition Review Board, presiding.

14 15 PETITIONER: MICHAEL MULLIGAN 16 PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS:

17 TED QUAY, Deputy Director, Division of Policy and 18 Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 19 DOUGLAS V. PICKETT, Petition Manager 2 DOUGLAS DODSON, Region I, Division of Reactor Projects 21 TANYA MENSAH, Petition Coordinator, NRR 22 KENN MILLER, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch 23 DUC NGUYEN, NRR, Aging Management of Structures 24 Electrical and Systems Branch 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005*3701 www.nealrgross,com

2 1 PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS: (cont.)

2 NANCY SALGADO, NRR, Chief, Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 3 OTHER NRC PERSONNEL PRESENT:

4 JAMES KIM, Project Manager, Division of Operating 5 Reactor Licensing 6 ALICIA CALERO, General Engineer, Division of Policy 7 and Ru1emaking 8 HEATHER JONES, NRC Region I, Vermont Yankee 9 Resident Inspector 10 11 ALSO PRESENT:

12 JIM DeVINCENTIS, Licensing Manager, Entergy 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, DC. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

3 1 T-A-B-L-E O-F C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S 2 Welcome and Introductions 4 3 Doug Picket, Petition Manager 4 PRB Chairman's Introduction 8 5 Ted Quay, Chairman 6 Petitioner's Presentation 13 7 Michael Mulligan, Petitioner 8 PRB Chairman's Closing Remarks 24 9 Ted Quay, Chairman 1

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2

25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

4 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 10:04 a.m.

3 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Thanks, everybody, 4 for attending this meeting.

5 My name is Doug Pickett.

6 We are here today to allow the Petitioner, 7 Mr. Michael Mulligan, his second opportunity to 8 address the Petition Review Board, who we'll refer to 9 as the PRB regarding hi s 2. 206 pet i t i on, dated June 10 15, 2010, on the adequacy of the Vernon Hydroelectric 11 Station Tie-In to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power 12 Station located in Vernon, Vermont.

13 I am the Petition Manager for the 14 petition.

15 The PRB Chairman is Ted Quay.

16 As part of the PRB's review of this 17 petition, Mr. Mulligan has requested this opportunity 18 to address the PRB.

19 This meeting is scheduled to conclude by 20 approximately 11:00 a.m. The meeting is being 21 recorded by the NRC Operations Center and will be 22 transcribed by a court reporter. The transcript will 23 become a supplement to the petition. The transcript 24 will also be made publicly available.

25 I'd like to open this meeting with NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

5 1 introductions. As we go around the room, please be 2 sure to clearly state your name, your position, and 3 the office that you work for wi thin the NRC for the 4 record.

5 I'll start off. I'm Doug Pickett. I'm 6 from NRC. I'm the Petition Manager for the petition.

7 BOARD MEMBER SALGADO: Nancy Salgado. I'm 8 the Branch Chief from Division of Operator and Reactor 9 Licensing.

10 BOARD MEMBER KIM: James Kim, Project 11 Manager from the Division of Operating and Reactor 12 Licensing, NRR.

13 COURT REPORTER: Folks, I'm sorry, but 14 this is the Court Reporter. The folks on the staff 15 who I think are on a speakerphone are not making it 16 onto the record.

17 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: This is Doug 18 Pickett.

19 I can send you an email with everybody's 20 name on it so we have if you want to go over it 21 again.

22 BOARD MEMBER MILLER: On the line is Kenn 23 Miller, NRR, Electrical Engineering Branch.

24 CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. You got Ted Quay, 25 the PRB Chairman in Headquarters, NRR.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

6 1 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And from Region I.

2 BOARD MEMBER DODSON: Doug Dodson, Region 3 1, Project Engineer.

4 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: The Residence 5 Office.

6 BOARD MEMBER JONES: Heather Jones.

7 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And the licensee?

8 MR. DeVINCENTIS: Jim DeVincentis.

9 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And Mr. Mulligan.

10 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: Yes. This is Mike 11 Mulligan. I'm the petitioner.

12 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: And is there anyone 13 who has not introduced themselves on the phone. Okay.

14 Then we'll move on.

15 We've completed our introductions and 16 we've got the representative from the licensee on the 17 phone. And Mr. Mulligan has introduced himself. And 18 no one else.

19 I'd like to emphasize that we need to 20 speak clearly and loudly to make sure that the Court 21 Reporter can accurately transcribe this meeting. If 22 you do have something that you would like to say I 23 please state your name for the record.

24 For those dialing into the meeting, please 25 remember to mute your phones to minimize any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

7 1 background noise or distractions. If you do not have 2 a mute button, this can be done by pressing the key 3 star 6. To unmute, you press star 6 again.

4 At this time I'll turn it over to the PRE 5 Chairman, Ted Quay.

6 CHAIRMAN QUAY: Welcome to this meeting 7 regarding the 2.206 petition submi t ted by Mr.

8 Mulligan.

9 I'd like to first share some background 10 information on our process.

11 Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of 12 Federal Regulations describes the petition process; 13 the primary mechanism for the public to request 14 enforcement action by the NRC in a public process.

15 This process permits anyone to petition the NRC to 16 take enforcement-type action related to NRC licensees 17 or licensed activities. Depending on the results of 18 its evaluation, the NRC could modify, suspend or 19 revoke an NRC-issued license or take any other 20 appropriate enforcement action to resolve a problem.

21 The NRC's staff's guidance for the 22 disposition of 2.206 petition requests in its 23 Management Directive 8.11 which is publicly available.

24 The purpose of today's meeting is to give 25 the peti tioner his second opportuni ty to provide any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

8 1 additional explanation or support of the petition 2 before the Petition Review Board makes its final 3 recommendation on whether or not to accept this 4 petition for review.

5 This meeting is not a hearing, nor is it 6 an opportunity for the petition to question or examine 7 the PRB on the merits or the issues presented in the 8 petition request.

9 No decisions regarding the merits of this 10 petition will be made at this meeting, 11 Following the meeting, the Petition Review 12 Board will conduct its internal deliberations. The 13 outcome of this internal meeting will be discussed 14 with the petitioner, 15 The Petition Review Board typically 16 consists of a Chairman, usually a manager at the 17 senior executive service level at the NRC. It has a 18 Petition Manager and a PRB Coordinator. Other members 19 of the Board are determined by the NRC staff based on 20 the content of the information in the petition 21 request.

22 At this time, I would like to introduce 23 the Board.

24 I am Ted Quay, the Peti tion Review Board 25 Chairman.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

9 1 Doug Pickett is the Petition Manager for 2 the petition under discussion today.

3 Tanya Mensah is the office's PRB 4 Coordinator.

5 Our technical staff includes:

6 Duc Nguyen from the Office of Nuclear 7 Reactor Regulations' Aging Management of Structures, 8 Electrical, and Systems Branch; 9 Kenn Miller from the Office of Nuclear 10 Reactor Regulation's Electrical Engineering Branch; 11 Nancy Salgado from the Office of Nuclear 12 Reactor Regulation's Plant Licensing Branch 1-1, and; 13 Doug Dodson from NRC's Region I, Division 14 of Reactor Projects.

1 As described in our process, the NRC staff 16 may ask clarifying questions in order to better 17 understand the petitioner's presentation and to reach 18 a reasoned decision whether to accept or reject the 19 petitioner's requests for review under the 2.206 20 process.

21 I would like to summarize the scope of the 22 petition under consideration and the NRC activities to 23 date.

24 On June 15, 2010, Mr. Mulligan submitted 25 to the NRC a petition, under 10 CFR 2.206 regarding NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.w.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

10 1 the Vernon Hydroelectric Station's power supply to the 2 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.

3 In this petition request, Mr. Mulligan 4 requested the following:

5 (1) The immediate shutdown of the Vermont 6 Yankee facility; 7 (2) An independent investigation, outside 8 of NRC and Entergy, to determine whether fraud and/or 9 falsification of issues were involved in the license 10 renewal efforts for Vermont Yankee; 11 (3) An investigation on what the petition 12 describes as a subtle shift from reliance on diesel 13 generators to the Vernon Hydroelectric Station by the 14 Vermont Yankee licensee without the appropriate 15 quali ty of a nuclear grade electrical power supply, 16 and; 17 (4 ) An inspection by the NRC or other 18 responsible organization of the Vernon Hydroelectric 19 Station dam and switchyard.

20 On June 21, 2010, the PRB met and 21 considered the petitioner's request for the NRC to 22 immediately order the shutdown of the Vermont Yankee 23 Nuclear Power Station. The PRB did not identify any 24 immediate safety concerns. Therefore, the PRB denied 25 the request for immediate shutdown. Mr. Mulligan was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

11 1 informed of the PRB's decision on June 25th.

2 On June 29th, a teleconference was held 3 wi th you, the Petitioner, and the PRB in which you 4 provided further explanation and support for your 5 petition. A transcript of that phone call has been 6 provided to you and is publicly available in ADAMS.

7 On July 13 th, the PRB met internally to 8 discuss your petition concerning the adequacy of the 9 Vernon Tie to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 10 and make its initial recommendation in accordance 11 with Management Directive 8.11. The initial 12 recommendation of the PRB is that the issues raised in 13 your peti tion have already been reviewed, evaluated 14 and resolved by the NRC. Therefore, your petition 15 meets the criteria for rejection.

16 In summary, the PRB concluded that the NRC 17 staff has extensively reviewed the power supply 18 provided by the Vernon Hydroelectric Station and the 19 reliance placed on this power supply by the Vermont 20 Yankee facility. During the Station Blackout review 21 of Vermont Yankee, the staff concluded that the Vernon 22 Hydroelectric Station power station supply provides an 23 acceptable al terna te AC power source. In addition, 24 the Vernon Hydroelectric Station switchyard was 25 reviewed, inspected and found acceptable in the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

12 1 staff's Safety Evaluation dated March 30. 2007, 2 supporting license renewal for Vermont Yankee.

3 By email dated July 23, 2010, you were 4 informed of the PRB's initial recommendation and 5 provided a detailed discussion that included the basis 6 for our findings.

7 On July 30, 2010, you requested a second 8 opportuni ty to address the PRB for the purpose of 9 providing addi tional supporting information for your 1 petition.

11 Following today's discussion, the PRB will 12 meet internally to discuss the additional information 13 provided today and make its final recommendation in 14 accordance with Management Directive 8.11 15 As a reminder for the phone participants, 16 please identify yourself if you make any remarks as 17 this will help in the preparation of the meeting 18 transcript that will be made publicly available.

19 Thank you.

20 And at this point, Mr. Mulligan, I'd like 21 to turn it over to you. And you have approximately 35 22 minutes, as Mr. Pickett previously informed you.

23 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: Thank you, sir.

24 I'd just like to say, I'm self aware of 25 how fortunate I am to be a citizen of the United NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C, 20005*3701 www,nealrgross.com

13 1 States. Because, you know, essentially the 2 Constitution gives us the ideals for this type of 3 thing. And I just -- you know, I feel very fortunate 4 to be a ci ti zen of the United States and be able to 5 talk to you guys, really, when it gets down to it.

6 Basically I attest that all of what was 7 talked about as far as the petition, you didn't -- the 8 NRC didn't talk -- the NRC and Entergy didn't talk 9 about rusting conditions of the electric towers. They 10 didn t I do a detailed inspection. I don t I know what 11 codes.

12 I mean, this whole is -- there -- there's 13 a lack of information. You know, you go into this 14 thing and you kind of want the information, you want 15 to get your ducks in order and everything. But when 16 you really get down it, very little information is 17 provided for a petitioner to-- to be able to fight 18 back you guys according to your rules and stuff.

19 And so, the SER and I suspect Entergy, 20 really hasn't I haven't found any place in here 21 that they talked about the rusting towers. This is 22 what happened with the rusting towers, this is the 23 condition of the rusting towers and explained it 24 thoroughly in engineering terms. All you guys are 25 engineers, you know what I'm talking about.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

14 1 And then made an open evaluation of 2 this isn't necessarily about is inoperable. This is 3 the question is essentially is licensing 4 relicensing adequate, is it thorough? What's missing 5 in this thing, and stuff like that.

6 And what was missing is an evaluation of 7 what the rust -- rusting towers mean. And if you guys 8 were competent, you would have covered that. You would 9 have known how to protect yourselves and Entergy. You 1 would have covered it thoroughly, exposed everything 11 and then I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on, and 12 stuff like that.

13 I can't find anything in the written trail 14 here of anybody discussing the rusty towers, or -- and 15 that, of course, questions, you know.

16 Is that switchyard going to be taken care 17 of appropriately for the next 20 years of relicensing?

18 So essentially, maybe this isn't 19 necessarily all about whether the running dam is 20 adequate for Vermont Yankee. This is a kind of 21 language thing, you know. Help in communication type 22 of thing.

23 Is the Agency and Entergy capable of 24 communicating, identifying problems and solving them, 25 and stuff like that? It's a disease with the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

15 1 bureaucracy more that concerns me. The sympt oms are 2 the swi tchyard. The disease is, essentially, the 3 twisted language that's being used here. And, you 4 know, and you don't have any idea of the quali ty 5 behind a lot of these terms, and stuff like that. You 6 don't have any I can't see it in the documents.

7 It's an issue with the way you document everything, or 8 don't document everything, or the rules of the 9 documenting -- and documenting stuff. And so I don't 10 have -- as an outsider, I don't have the information.

11 I really don't have the information, very much 12 information. Just bits and piece of stuff like that.

13 And so, I mean that's essentially where 14 the big problem is: Language, the abili ty of 15 everybody to talk and communicate, and the essence to 16 know that there's a quality behind this stuff instead 17 of all this -- you know, an institutional failure like 18 we've seen in the Gulf of Mexico, and all this sort of 19 stuff, it's about language. It's about the garbage 20 dumb of language and communication.

21 Essentially, it's like throwing your divan 22 in -- you know, you have an old piece of furniture, a 23 divan. You throw it in the garbage -- the garbage 24 dump. Then you go back later on and you're trying -

25 you know, you go back, you look for that divan. And NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLA.ND AVE" NoW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701 www,nealrgross,com

16 1 all you find is pieces of the arms and the legs, and 2 they're all disconnected and fragmentary, and you 3 can't make heads or tails. You can t I make heads or 4 tails really what the components are, and stuff.

5 And so this is what I'm talking about with 6 language and stuff.

7 I wish see, I'm on a different phone.

8 I d like to reference the petition that talked about I

9 NSAC, N-S-A-C 108. NSAC. That's derived from the 1 Electric Power Research Institute, and stuff. And 11 basically the peti tion referenced that as a standard 12 for diesel generators, and stuff.

13 And, you know, I wish I had -- I wish -- I 14 wanted I don't have my computer and I wanted to 1 quote what the Petition Board said about the 95 16 percent or higher reliability of the diesel 17 generators. But I don't have that. I'm not -- I 18 don't have access to my computer anymore.

19 But basically, the petition said that it 20 was referenced the 95 percent was referenced by 21 EPRI and NSAC-108.

22 You know, you start going through NSAC-108 23 or NSAC-108, you start going through it the only quote 24 it says about 95 percentibility, and it's a quote here 2 "Generally industry and the NRC like independent EDG NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

17 1 reliabilities to be 95 percent or higher."

2 So, you know, the way the petition quoted 3 it to me was the 95 percent standard comes from EPRI.

4 And then, you know, you gave me the reference number

- the reference number. And I looked it up. And Doug 6 gave me a copy, and stuff. But then it really -- it 7 doesn't really identify is a standard.

8 You know, it's just this circular kind of 9 logic business. So, like I said, I mean the only 10 thing that referenced 95 percent was what I just 11 quoted, and stuff. And it really doesn't identify.

12 This is EPRI this this should be 13 EPRI standard that emergency diesel generator 14 reliability should be greater than 95 percent 15 reliable, and stuff like that.

16 You guys are all engineers and you know, 17 I'm going to talk about the grid out outside 18 Vermont Yankee. I mean, you know basically -- I mean, 19 I was there when we lost a grid, and stuff. So -- and.

20 -- and all we had were diesel generators. So, you 21 know, it happens. And basically, you know, the grid 22 normally stays energized 100 percent 100 percent 23 reliability. You could essentially say that, and 24 stuff like that. But that that's not enough.

25 We know that in the past that we r ve had NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE" NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D,C, 20005-3701 www.nealrqross.com

18 1 troubles with the grid. So we don t I depend we 2 don't know that that is a high enough quality for us 3 for electricity for a nuclear power plant. So that' s 4 why we have the diesel generators and to power up all 5 your electricity and stuff like that.

6 So you want a higher quality of 7 electricity of electrici ty. And so how you test 8 it? You test it through the plant's two-way system.

9 You just test you know, you test it once a month, 1 or whatever you guys do now. And it runs for an hour, 11 or sometimes you do it for I mean, that show I

12 there's an assurance of high quality power to an 13 electric station is I mean, that's the gold 14 standard. It's not -- it's not that the grid is -

15 the grid is energized, although that is nice -- that 16 is really nice to have. Everyone knows that, that we 17 don't want -- we want to use a diesel generator; we 18 want to use the grid. But we know that the grid is 19 is not adequate, and stuff like that. So then we flip 20 to the -- we use the diesel generators in case of -

21 in an emergency and stuff.

22 And so, I mean -- so, the wording that you 23 gave me with the petition basically says -- the way 24 the way the wording is, you frame it' s it's 95 25 percent reliability because the grid is because NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

19 1 that line is energized more than 95 percent of the 2 time, and stuff like that. And, you know, it isn't 3 the same. It is -- you know, you kind of say, well 4 the way you word it, it's not clear. The way you word 5 it is, it's equivalent to a diesel generator, but it's 6 really not even close to being as reliable as a diesel 7 generator.

8 And, you know, this garbage dump -- this 9 garbage dump of words and language really bothers me, 1 and stuff. And this kind of circular stuff, and 11 you're referencing an EPRI document and then you start 12 looking into -- you know, more looking in the dump 13 trying to figure out what's going on, and stuff. And 14 getting bits and pieces of information, and stuff like 15 that. And the EPRI document doesn't even really 16 reference the quality of diesel generators. It 17 doesn't it's not a reference. It doesn't 18 specifically state this is a reference.

19 We EPRI would like you to have -- in 20 that document, that document that was referenced to 21 me, we would like to have all plants have greater than 22 95 percent reliabili ty of the diesel generators, you 23 know.

24 You know, I mean, but then you're kind of 25 saying that's what you're kind of -- you're kind of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

20 1 inferring that's what the reliabili ty of the Vernon 2 Tie is, and stuff like that. And we don't -- you know, 3 it's not the same thing as it's not the same 4 standard as what we use for diesel generators. It's 5 - it's kind of deceptive.

6 And -- and -- you know, you got an -- it's 7 like I've talked before. You've got an incidence on 8 one side and then on the other side you've got five or 9 six codes or rules and you throw them up in the air.

10 None of them really fit. And then what falls back down 11 to the earth, you pick up five or six of these pieces 12 of the codes and stuff, and and you come out 13 authoritative -- authoritatively talking that the code 14 says that we're allowed to use -- we're allowed to use 15 the Tie, it's equivalent.

16 I know that if I was to run around with my 17 photograph and said "Okay, that Vermont Yankee is 18 we're -- we're in dire emergency and we want to use 19 and want to use the Vernon Tie, we want to use the 20 Vernon Dam and its offshoots. We want to use that for 21 emergency power." And if I showed them that picture, 22 you know 95 percent of the people in my communi ty 23 would say "Oh, no. That s not right. You can't use."

I 24 You know, they would -- they would tell you that's not 25 adequate. They would tell you that's an abomination, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

21 1 depending upon that grid, the visual effects.

2 I think that's -- you know, you got this 3 goggledygook of technical stuff and it doesn't make 4 sense.

5 And I think the impression of people 6 looking at the grid and saying what you -- I mean, 7 looking at the Tie or looking at the dam -- excuse me.

8 I think, you know that that impression that you 9 want in a dire emergency and you re going to depend I 10 upon that swi tchyard to power up Vermont Yankee and 11 prevent a core melt, I think if you showed them, if 12 you said that "Do you want to depend on this -- the 13 switchyard, " I think 95 percent of the people would 14 say the NRC's nuts.

15 Having overly complex and numerous sets of 16 codes and rules is worse than having no codes and 17 rules at all, you know. That's what I think. I think 18 you can pick up these bits and fragments and pieces of 19 these codes, and nobody understands them. And I don't 20 even think the Agency half the time really understands 21 them the way they talk and stuff.

22 And you open start opening up the 23 curtains, you know you start walking past the Vernon 24 Swi tchyard and you say "How about this rust here?"

25 "Oh, they had a relicensing." I wonder what I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

22 1 wonder how I wonder how that's si tuated in the 2 relicensing documents and stuff. And then you go in 3 there, and nothing's even mentioned about it. And 4 then you start then you go through a petition 5 process and they -- they -- they -- they reference 6 this NSAC-108 business and you start looking into 7 that. And, you know, fragments of information, that's 8 all. It's no clear-cut -- no clear-cut -- at least 9 what I can see, reference to a reliability rate, and 10 stuff.

11 And, you know the reliability rate of 12 diesel generators across the board, you know it's been 13 noted through all the years that everybody plays games 14 with figuring out, you know, identifying whether it's 15 a real failure or not a failure. I mean games 16 everybody games that, the diesel generator 17 reliabilities things, you know, to make it -- want to 18 make it look better, and stuff.

19 You know, I -- so that's so that's -- I 20 wish I had you know, Mr. Pickett, I wanted to read 21 that email I sent you into the record today, but I 22 don't have my computer next to me. And, you know, I 23 don't know if you could read it into the record for 24 me, because I don't have it because of my phone 25 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Doug Pickett here.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

23 1 We have the email you sent to us and the 2 write-up in it. And we will include that as a 3 supplement to your peti tion, and we'll put it in 4 ADAMS.

5 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: Okay. I'm just 6 trying to think of anything I want to say -- anything 7 else I want to say. I think I pretty well much 8 covered it.

9 Oh. And I made I made a spelling 10 mistake. The lessons from Forsmark in my letter to 11 you initially about the petition. And that's F-O-R-S 12 M-A-R-K. That's the lessons from Forsmark electrical 13 event. That's an NRC document. And I just wanted to 14 correct the spelling in that.

15 would that letter is that letter going 16 to be entered into ADAMS?

17 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Are you talking 18 about your email from this morning?

19 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: The email I sent 2 you, I don't know, a week ago, two weeks ago, or 21 whatever, in response to the 22 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Oh, yes. That's in 23 ADAMS. And we're making it publicly available. 'I'ha t; 24 was at your request.

25 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: Yes, I think - I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

24 1 think that I -- I'm done.

2 CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. At this time, does 3 the staff here at Headquarters have any questions for 4 Mr. Mulligan? Okay.

5 Seeing none, does the license have any 6 questions?

7 MR. DeVINCENTIS: Entergy has no questions 8 or comments.

9 CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. Does the Region 10 have any questions?

11 BOARD MEMBER DODSON: The Region has no 12 questions or comments.

13 CHAIRMAN QUAY: Okay. I believe there 14 were no members of the public identified.

15 So, Mr. Mulligan, I want to thank you for 16 taking time to provide the NRC staff wi th clarifying 17 information on the petition you've submitted.

18 Before we close, does the Court Reporter 19 need any additional information for the meeting 20 transcript? We did agree to provide you with the 21 names of the individuals here. Is there anything else 22 that's needed?

23 COURT REPORTER: No. And Mr. Pickett can 24 either email me or he can call me. Does he want my 25 number right now.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NoW.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

25 1 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: That would be 2 helpful.

3 COURT REPORTER: It's 202-234-4433 ask for 4 John. I'm the only one in the office, the only one 5 named John.

6 BOARD MEMBER PICKETT: Okay. Thank you.

7 PETITIONER MULLIGAN: And I'm want -- and 8 I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak 9 again.

10 CHAIRMAN QUAY: You're welcome.

1 And I guess with that, I guess this 12 meeting's concluded. And thank you again, Mr.

13 Mulligan.

14 (Whereupon, at 10:32 a.m. the meeting was 15 concluded.)

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE, NW (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005*3701 www.nealrgross.com

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML102380170&oldid=2556040"