ML16119A509

LTR-15-0319, LTR-15-0375-1 - Transcript of 10 CFR 2.206 Petition Review Board Teleconference on 4/20/16 with Pilgrim Watch, Cape Downwinders, the Town of Duxbury Nuclear Advisory Committee Pilgrim Severe Weather, Emergency Response - Pages

ML16119A509
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	04/20/2016
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Guzman R V
References
2.206, LTR-0319, LTR-15-0375-1, NRC-2307, TAC MF6462
Download: ML16119A509 (36)

Text

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: 10 CFR 2.206 Petition Review Board Docket Number: (n/a)

Location: teleconference Date: Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Work Order No.: NRC-2307 Pages 1-35 Edited by: Richard V. Guzman, Petition Manager NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC. Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION + + + + + 10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD (PRB) CONFERENCE CALL RE PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER PLANT + + + + +

Wednesday April 20, 2016 + + + + + The conference call was held at 1:06 p.m. Eastern Time, SCOTT MORRIS, Chairperson of the Petition Review Board, presiding.

PETITIONER:

MARY LAMPERT, Director, Pilgrim Watch REBECCA CHIN, Co-Chair, Duxbury Massachusetts Advisory Committee BILL MAURER, volunteer, Cape Downwinders

2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 NRC STAFF: SCOTT MORRIS, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, PRB Chair JOE ANDERSON, Branch Chief Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, Division of Preparedness and Response RICHARD GUZMAN, Project Manager Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation SINGH MATHARU, Senior Electrical Engineer Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NANCY MCNAMARA, State Liaison Officer Region I EMILY MONTEIH, Senior Attorney Office of General Counsel SERITA SANDERS, Petition Coordinator, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DOUG TIFFT, State Liaison Officer Region I

3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P R O C E E D I N G S 1 1:06 P.M. 2 MR. GUZMAN: My name is Richard Guzman. 3 I'm a project manager in the Office of Nuclear Reactor 4 Regulation. I'd like to thank everyone for attending 5 this meeting. 6 The purpose of today's teleconference is 7 to allow the Petitioners representing Pilgrim Watch, 8 Cape Downwinders, and the Town of Duxbury Nuclear 9 Advisory Committee, and we'll hereafter call them the 10 Petitioners, to address the Petition Review Board in 11 light of the PRB's initial recommendation regarding 12 the 2.206 petition, dated June 11, 2015 regarding 13 radiological emergency response and switchyard 14 vulnerability at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. 15 I'm the Petition Manager for the petition 16 and the PRB chairman is Scott Morris. The meeting 17 is scheduled, as indicated, from 1 o'clock to 2 18 o'clock p.m. Eastern Time, and the meeting is being 19 recorded by the NRC Operations Center and is being 20 transcribed by a court reporter. The transcript will 21 become a supplement to the petition and will also be 22 made publicly available in ADAMS. 23 I'll go ahead and start the 24 teleconference with introductions and as we go around 25 4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the room and the bridge line, I ask that you clearly 1 state your name, your position and your office or 2 organization for the record. 3 Again, this is Rich Guzman, Project 4 Manager in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 5 or NRR, and here on our end, 6 MR. ANDERSON: Joe Anderson, Office of 7 Nuclear Security and Incident Response. 8 MS. SANDERS: Serita Sanders, the backup 9 to Merrilee Banic for the Petition Coordinator, 10 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 11 MR. GUZMAN: Go ahead, Scott. 12 MR. MORRIS: Scott Morris. I'm the 13 Petition Review Board Chairman. I'm also from the 14 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 15 MR. GUZMAN: Okay, are there any other 16 NRC headquarters participants who have dialed in on 17 the phone, if you could introduce yourselves? 18 MS. MONTEITH: This is Emily Monteith, 19 Office of General Counsel. 20 MS. MATHARU: This is Singh Matharu. I 21 work in the Electrical Branch, NRR. 22 MR. GUZMAN: Okay. Hearing no one else, 23 how about the NRC participants from the Regional 24 Office, if anyone is on line from the Regional Office, 25 5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 if you could introduce yourselves? 1 MS. McNAMARA: Nancy McNamara, State 2 Liaison Officer, Region I. 3 MR. GUZMAN: Okay. 4 MR. TIFFT: This is Doug Tifft, Liaison 5 Officer, Region I. 6 MR. GUZMAN: All right. I'm sorry, can 7 you repeat that? 8 MR. TIFFT: Yes. This is Doug Tifft, 9 State Liaison Officer, NRC Region I. 10 MR. GUZMAN: Thanks, Doug. And if 11 there's any representatives on the line for Entergy, 12 the licensee for Pilgrim, if so, please introduce 13 yourselves? 14 (No response.) 15 And for the record, would the Petitioners 16 now please introduce yourselves? 17 MS. LAMPERT: Mary Lampert, Pilgrim 18 Watch, Director. 19 MS. CHIN: Becky Chin or Rebecca Chin, 20 Co-Chair of the Duxbury Nuclear Advisory Committee. 21 MR. MAURER: Bill Maurer, volunteer at 22 Cape Downwinders, Falmouth, Massachusetts. 23 MR. GUZMAN: Okay, thank you. It is not 24 required for members of the public to introduce 25 6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 themselves for this call. However, if there are any 1 members of the public on the phone that wish to do so 2 at this time, please state your name for the record. 3 (No response.) 4 Okay, hearing none, we'll move on. For 5 our court reporter, can you please state your name? 6 COURT REPORTER: Colleen Herbert. Neal 7 R. Gross & Company. 8 MR. GUZMAN: Okay, and I'd like to 9 emphasize that we each need to speak loudly and 10 clearly to ensure that the court reporter can 11 accurately transcribe this meeting. And also, if you 12 do have something that you would like to say, please 13 first state your name for the record. 14 For those dialing in to the 15 teleconference, please remember to mute your phones 16 to minimize any background noise or distractions. If 17 you don't have a mute button, this can be done by 18 pressing the key *6 and then to unmute, press the key 19 *6 again. Thanks. 20 At this time, I'll turn it over to Scott 21 Morris, the PRB Chairman. 22 MR. MORRIS: Thanks, Rich. Again, it's 23 Scott Morris. You already mentioned the purpose of 24 the call. I'm going to just kind of go through some 25 7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 boilerplates as far as the purpose of this 1 conversation today and I'll try to get through that 2 fairly quickly so we can allow the Petitioners the 3 most amount of time possible here. 4 Just a little bit of background, so I 5 think most of you probably know this, but for the 6 record, Section 2206 of Title of the Code of Federal 7 Regulations describes this process that we're 8 embarked upon here, the petition process, which is 9 really the primary way for the public to request 10 enforcement actions to be taken by the NRC in a public 11 process. The process permits anyone to petition the 12 NRC to take an enforcement action related to any of 13 the NRC's licensees or license activities. 14 Depending on how the NRC and particularly 15 the Petition Review Board evaluates the petition, the 16 NRC can ultimately modify, suspend, or revoke an NRC 17 license. It can also take any other appropriate 18 enforcement action necessary to resolve the issue. 19 The NRC has guidance on how it implements the Section 20 2206 process and that's available on a public website 21 in Management Directive 8.11. 22 The purpose, really as I said, the 23 purpose of today's meeting is to give Mary, Bill, and 24 others, the Petitioners, an opportunity to address 25 8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the Board with any additional explanation in support 1 for the petition that they have filed in light of our 2 initial recommendation to reject the petition. And 3 I believe Rich had a call or some sort of 4 communication with you, the Petitioners, back in late 5 March, March 31, 2016 to kind of outline in a big 6 picture way what our basis for our initial 7 recommendation was. 8 But in terms of today, this meeting is 9 not a hearing. It's not an opportunity to question 10 the board members, examine the board members or 11 recommendations on the merits or issues presented in 12 the petition request that's already been filed. 13 We're not going to make any decisions today. We're 14 going to listen and get clarifying information, ask 15 questions as needed. 16 Following the call today, we as the 17 Petition Review Board, will conduct further internal 18 deliberations and the outcome of those deliberations 19 will be discussed with Petitioners. 20 The PRB, as the chairman, which in this 21 case is myself, and the chairman is usually a Senior 22 Executive Service level individual here at the NRC. 23 I meet the qualification. I happen to be in NRR. My 24 current position is Director of the Division of 25 9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Inspection and Regional Support. 1 The PRB also has a Petition Manager which 2 is Rich and a PRB Coordinator which is Merrilee. Are 3 there other board members, including Emily Monteith, 4 which you heard, and I think you also heard Joe 5 Anderson from the Office of Nuclear Security and 6 Incident Response? 7 (No response.) 8 And there's also an individual from our 9 Electrical Branch in NRR as well, since some of the 10 aspects of the petition involve electrical issues at 11 the Pilgrim facility. So as described in the process 12 that I outlined and that I mentioned with the 13 Management Directive 8.11, we can ask clarifying 14 questions and likely will in order to better 15 understand the Petitioners' presentation today. And 16 afterwards we will consider if we need to modify any 17 of our initial recommendations based on what we got 18 today. And then our final recommendations will be 19 included in a letter, a formal letter. 20 Before I hand it off, I'm going to 21 briefly summarize the scope of the petition that was 22 filed and the information that we considered to date. 23 So back in June of last year, 2015, the Petitioners 24 submitted the petition under Section 2206 of Title 25 10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 10, Part 50 regarding concerns about the adequacy of 1 the emergency response plan and the protective 2 measures at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. And on 3 July 13th about a month later, the Petitioners 4 supplemented their initial filing to include 5 information concerning Pilgrim switchyard 6 vulnerability and loss of power, and specifically at 7 the station during severe weather events. 8 In addition, the Petitioners requested 9 the NRC to institute this proceeding, a proceeding, 10 I should say, to modify, suspend, or take other action 11 as may be proper to the operating license at Pilgrim 12 such that the NRC can provide reasonable assurance 13 that adequate protective measures can and will be 14 taken in the event of a radiological emergency at the 15 Pilgrim facility. 16 The Petitioners also requested that the 17 NRC evaluate the adequacy of Pilgrim's radiological 18 emergency plan and associated procedures due to 19 alleged deficiencies in the reasonable assurance 20 assessments made by the Federal Emergency Management 21 Agency, or FEMA, and the Massachusetts Emergency 22 Management Agency, or MEMA. 23 Petitioners were also concerned at that 24 time with Pilgrim switchyard vulnerability to 25 11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 flashovers and requested that the NRC require Pilgrim 1 to shut down their unit as a precautionary measure 2 whenever severe weather conditions are forecast at 3 the site. 4 We also held a teleconference with the 5 Petitioners back on July 9th of last year, again 2015, 6 in which the Petitioners addressed the Board with 7 additional explanation and support for the petition. 8 Several months later, about a month ago, in fact, 9 March 31, 2016, Rich Guzman informed the Petitioners 10 of the Board's initial recommendation to reject the 11 petition on the basis that first the petition 12 requests were not enforcement-related actions and 13 therefore outside of the scope of 2.206 process 14 and/or parts of this petition raised issues that it 15 had already been subject to NRC staff review to which 16 resolution has already been achieved. 17 On April 2nd of this month, the 18 Petitioners requested a teleconference with the Board 19 to comment on that initial recommendation and that is 20 what we're here to do today. So this is a brief 21 reminder for all the participants in this. When you 22 speak, please identify yourself before you make any 23 remarks. That helps the individual who is producing 24 the meeting transcript because this will be made 25 12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 publicly available. The transcript will be made 1 publicly available. And it is a public meeting, so 2 I would like to remind all participants to refrain 3 from discussing any NRC sensitive or proprietary 4 information to the extent you're aware of it during 5 today's meeting. 6 So now I'm going to turn it over to the 7 Petitioners and allow Mary, Bill, and others to 8 provide any additional explanation or support that 9 they believe the Board should consider as part of 10 this petition. And again, for the record, please 11 introduce yourself and do speak loudly and clearly. 12 If you need to -- I don't hear any background noise, 13 so that's good, but just as a help, if you don't have 14 a mute button on your phone, which I suspect most 15 people do, but if you don't you can mute your line by 16 pressing *6 and then unmute it again by pressing *6. 17 So that's why I wanted to provide an intro, let me 18 just hand it off to Mary. 19 MS. LAMPERT: Oh, great. Mary Lampert, 20 L-A-M-P as in Peter E-R-T, Pilgrim Watch Director. 21 We appreciate this opportunity to express why we find 22 the initial decision untenable based on the evidence 23 presented to you that FEMA and MEMA misrepresented 24 the adequacy of Pilgrim's emergency response plan 25 13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 during the Juno storm and misrepresented that local 1 EMDs were consulted. Their false statements brings 2 into question whether this was an isolated instance 3 or is part of a pattern. And until this is resolved 4 by NRC, there is no reasonable assurance that NRC has 5 fulfilled its responsibilities for emergency plans. 6 The Petitioners' requests 1, 2, and 4, we 7 believe, are within scope contrary to the PRB's 8 initial decision. And to find out what NRC's 9 responsibilities are, we went to NRC's website and 10 also read the MOU between NRC and FEMA which is 11 hyperlinked on the emergency planning website that 12 NRC has. 13 NRC is responsible first to assess the 14 licensee emergency plans for adequacy. This cannot 15 conceivably mean that you can base assessment of 16 adequacy on false statements. There is an implied 17 requirement to assess the reports for their 18 adequacies, especially when facts are provided to the 19 contrary. Pilgrim Watch and the other Petitioners 20 showed that FEMA's reports on the adequacy of Juno 21 were patently false and to determine adequacy, the 22 NRC needs to review Pilgrim's emergency plans itself 23 to determine if FEMA's Juno misrepresentations are 24 isolated or a pattern. 25 14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Second, NRC is responsible to verify that 1 licensee emergency plans can be adequately 2 implemented. The petition has showed they cannot be 3 implemented contrary to FEMA and MEMA's statement 4 that evacuation was possible. And so again, it is 5 within the scope to request that NRC do its job and 6 determine adequacy. 7 Third, NRC is responsible to review FEMA 8 findings and determinations as to whether offsite 9 plans are adequate and can be implemented. In this 10 instance, review includes whether the findings 11 represent fact or fiction. We showed fiction. 12 Number four, NRC is responsible to make 13 radiological health and safety decisions with regard 14 to the overall state of emergency preparedness such 15 as assurance that continued operation, issuance of 16 operating licenses which isn't pertinent here, taking 17 enforcement actions, etcetera. And so therefore, it 18 is incumbent the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to 19 look at these three requests, act on them, so NRC can 20 do its job. 21 We know the buck stops with NRC. In the 22 MOU between NRC and FEMA, it says "nothing in this 23 MOU shall be construed in any way to diminish NRC's 24 responsibility for protecting the radiological health 25 15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and safety of the public." In other words, it is 1 within NRC's scope to review the adequacy of 2 Pilgrim's emergency plan especially in light of the 3 fact that FEMA and MEMA reports were inaccurate. 4 The Petitioners' third request which 5 involved a request, an order for shutdown during 6 severe weather, the PRB said that this is 7 sufficiently resolved. We disagree because the 8 question is whether the precautionary shutdown is a 9 requirement of NRC and if so, how is severe weather 10 conditions defined? In other words, what is the 11 trigger for shutdown? And would that be adequate to 12 protect public health and safety which is NRC's 13 responsibility or is this another voluntary industry 14 initiative which cannot be enforced and therefore we 15 argue would not be protective of public health. 16 So in short, we believe that the initial 17 decision is basically untenable on the basis of the 18 facts known to the PRB through our 2.206 petition and 19 we conclude that NRC is the responsible party to 20 assess, verify, review offsite emergency plans to 21 make radiological and health and safety decisions 22 with regard to the overall state of emergency 23 preparedness such as assurance for continued 24 operation, issuance -- or taking enforcement actions 25 16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 such as notices of violations, civil penalties, 1 orders, shutdown of operating reactors, setting the 2 120-day clock or whatever. To take those actions, 3 it is necessary for the NRC to do its homework, take 4 its responsibility to assure that the reports and 5 what they have been relying on have been accurate. 6 So in essence, that's what I have to say. 7 Bill, Becky, do you have comments? 8 MR. MAURER: Bill Maurer, M-A-U-R-E-R, 9 Cape Downwinders. I live in Falmouth, Massachusetts. 10 You know, after the blizzard of January 11 2015 with the switchyard failure, I went back through 12 the records and Pilgrim switchyard had failed -- I 13 can go back to 1978, the blizzard of '78. Pilgrim 14 switchyard failed eight times. We're currently under 15 severe winter weather conditions. That's a pattern. 16 This is like a no brainer kind of stuff, 17 you know? In a blizzard, evacuations are off the 18 table as an emergency response. In fact, in this 19 last blizzard in January 2015, Governor Baker banned 20 any travel for a certain period of time. So it's 21 just remarkable to me that the NRC, MEMA, Entergy, 22 and BECO before that couldn't connect those dots, 23 that during a blizzard, we can't evacuate Pilgrim. 24 During a blizzard, Pilgrim is really susceptible to 25 17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 switchyard flashovers and scraps. It took public 1 pressure to get the NRC and MEMA to make that 2 correlation. 3 In my mind, this is not heads up law and 4 this is not rocket science. So either people ignored 5 it or people weren't smart enough to connect the dots. 6 Either way, it -- I don't like the sound of it. 7 So now, the switchyard is still 8 inadequate. Actually, in a supplemental inspection 9 report that was issued on January 26, 2015, it was a 10 supplemental inspection report that was an inspection 11 that was done December 2014, the NRC discovered that 12 Entergy had actually put failed insulators in 13 storage, insulators that failed in a storm in 14 February 2013, never sent them out for testing to 15 determine root cause. This is just unacceptable. 16 So when the NRC now says well, now we're 17 shutting the plant down, we'll ask Entergy to shut 18 the plant down during severe weather, you know, 19 credibility is gone as far as I'm concerned. It's 20 just -- I don't know what to say, tell you how 21 disappointed I am that this is the way things are 22 playing out. 23 I mean this is probably not just specific 24 to Pilgrim, you know, all the power plants that are 25 18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 in places that get blizzards are faced with the same 1 fact that during a blizzard evacuations are 2 impossible. The cookbook, one size fits all, 3 emergency planning, the accounts that they make for 4 severe winter weather are certainly inadequate, based 5 on empirical evidence at Pilgrim and I'm sure at other 6 plants around the country. I think those needed 7 upgrading. Thank you. 8 MS. LAMPERT: Bill, if I could just make 9 one clarification, Mary Lampert, Pilgrim Watch. 10 MR. MAURER: Sure. 11 MS. LAMPERT: The clarification would be 12 not simply blizzards, but severe weather making 13 evacuation untenable because you have situations of 14 hurricanes. You have situations of severe flooding. 15 There are all sorts of natural events. And due to 16 climate change severe weather patterns, whether they 17 be blizzards, hurricanes, or what have you are 18 becoming more frequent. 19 Therefore, and this is a second point and 20 a request for clarification, did NRC require that 21 there be shutdown as a precaution prior to a severe 22 event, natural event, that would impede evacuation or 23 is this an NRC suggestion, a voluntary industry 24 initiative? If it's the latter, then it's 25 19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 unacceptable, we believe and that was the thrust of 1 our third request. 2 Go ahead, Bill. I'm sorry for 3 interrupting. 4 MR. MAURER: That's okay. You're 5 exactly right. It's any sort of severe weather that 6 takes evacuation off the table as an option. I don't 7 know what else to say. I'm just in awe that we found 8 ourselves in this position after the storm, the 9 blizzard of 2015, the public pressure to -- did 10 anybody connect the dots? That's it. Thank you. 11 MS. CHIN: This is Rebecca Chin, C-H-I-12 N. I co-chair the Nuclear Advisory Committee for 13 Duxbury, Massachusetts. Actually, I'd like to say I 14 completely agree with Ms. Lampert's comment in the 15 beginning and Bill Maurer's comments just recently. 16 I have lived in town for the entire 17 history of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant and I can't 18 tell you how disappointed I am in the oversight of 19 the NRC and taking responsibility. It does land on 20 your toes. It is at your doorstop that you cannot 21 pass over to another federal agency and say not my 22 problem, somebody else's. And it's not okay. 23 This is a nuclear power plant. We depend 24 on you to do your job and to look at the reports that 25 20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 come through that are probably insufficient at this 1 point as to this petition as far as what NEMA and 2 FEMA 3 stated in their ability to protect the emergency 4 plans for the Town of Duxbury or the EOC around the 5 entire plant. It is not okay to disregard the 6 reality of the fact that we were not able to evacuate. 7 Our emergency manager director did not 8 get called to ask for his opinion if the plants could 9 be implemented and that the town was left to their 10 own devices should something have gone wrong at that 11 point and that the call to require a shutdown with 12 the advanced notice of severe weather should not be 13 an option. The plant is never going to make that 14 call easily without a great deal of either public 15 pressure or you telling them they must shut down as 16 a precaution to protect the residents in probably a 17 50-mile radius of that plant because there's no way 18 in a major storm that anybody inside that radius is 19 going to be able to move. That's my comment. 20 MS. LAMPERT: Again, Mary Lampert. 21 Excuse me, does somebody else want to say something? 22 MR. MAURER: Yes, this is Bill Maurer. 23 You know, I just want to sort of punch away a little 24 bit and say that sometimes during blizzards it's not 25 21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 just a day, it can be three days before people are 1 able to get out and even shovel their driveways. So 2 that's it. Thank you. 3 MS. LAMPERT: Let me clarify my concern 4 with the NRC abdicating responsibility by saying you 5 rely blindly on FEMA for determination of adequacy. 6 One of my sons teaches at a university. For large 7 lecture classes, he has TAs do the grading. Now if 8 a student points out that a TA flunked him, but look 9 here at the exam, it's plus perfect, whose 10 responsibility is it? Is it the TA's responsibility? 11 No, the buck stops with my son because he is the 12 professor at that university. He is the one who is 13 responsible. 14 So to say in a similar vein that these 15 questions are out of scope, 1, 2, and 4, makes no 16 sense. No, they're totally within scope because you, 17 the NRC, cannot with a straight face make a 18 determination that emergency plans at Pilgrim Station 19 are adequate to protect public health and safety. 20 You can't say that now because your statement of that 21 rests upon a determination by FEMA and MEMA that have 22 been shown to you to have lied. 23 And so therefore, it is for you to do 24 your job, you have to make an assessment yourself by 25 22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 coming up here as Commissioner Carr did at one point, 1 send a team up to look at the plant, to make an 2 evaluation yourselves, because you are the 3 responsible party. And because Entergy has 4 determined to continue to operate until May 31st, 5 2019, the emergency plans remain very important at 6 least through that date. 7 MR. MORRIS: Okay. Any other thoughts, 8 comments, clarifying information from any of the 9 Petitioners before I open it up for questions from 10 some of the board members? 11 (No response.) 12 Doesn't sound like it. This is Scott 13 Morris again, Petition Review Board chairman. 14 Anybody on the call from the Nuclear 15 Regulatory Commission staff, specifically the 16 Petition Review Board members themselves, have any 17 questions or clarifying requests from the 18 Petitioners? 19 (No response.) 20 Are you guys there? Rich? 21 MR. GUZMAN: We have no comments over 22 here. 23 MS. LAMPERT: We put them to sleep, I 24 think. 25 23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. MORRIS: No, I've been taking notes. 1 This is Scott Morris again. 2 Okay, I don't -- as I indicated, we're 3 not really here to negotiate what NRC should be doing. 4 We're here to collect information to make sure that 5 we're making the most informed, appropriate decision 6 that we can make given the circumstances, given the 7 facts, given the information presented. 8 I think I have that and I do appreciate 9 the additional offerings here today and I really -- 10 I do believe I fully grasp what the challenges are 11 that you're raising here with respect to the station, 12 with respect to the NRC and its roles and 13 responsibilities and with respect to FEMA and MEMA. 14 I believe I have a full and firm understanding of all 15 of the issues. 16 I personally don't have any additional 17 questions or clarifying information and again, I 18 would just offer it up to the board to give another 19 chance, if there's something that they didn't quite 20 grasp or fully appreciate from what you said today. 21 I would just make one comment about roles 22 and responsibilities. And it's true, NRC is the 23 regulator of nuclear safety and security and our goal 24 obviously and our mission is to ensure public health 25 24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and safety for the civilian uses of nuclear and 1 radiological materials. And we are very serious 2 about that in spite of what you may think. 3 I will say that there are very well-4 defined roles and responsibilities of every entity 5 that we engage with in executing our mission. I 6 think in the -- well, I know in the initial response 7 or initial recommendation that the Board had that was 8 communicated to you last month, I'm not sure how well 9 you understand the basis behind those initial 10 recommendations and I don't want to invite the 11 Petitioners to ask the board members specific 12 questions, but I will just offer that some of the -- 13 particularly with respect to items 1 and 2 where there 14 are assertions and slash allegations of 15 misrepresenting the facts or not telling the truth, 16 lying, I think I heard, you know, those are very 17 serious charges. 18 Typically, we don't handle those under 19 the petition process and I think that's what Rich 20 communicated. We handle those under alternate means, 21 whether it be through Inspectors General of those 22 various agencies and organizations or some other 23 potential avenues. And those are under consideration 24 as well. 25 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 The petition review process has one 1 avenue to pursue and you have elected to pursue those 2 particular issues under this process. I think what 3 the Board communicated was in those cases, there are 4 other more appropriate means to address those 5 matters. 6 MS. LAMPERT: May I interrupt? This is 7 Mary Lampert. I think there are different levels to 8 look at misrepresentation. What you're referring to 9 is you could go to the Inspector General at FEMA, and 10 I guess the Attorney General from MEMA, to address a 11 particular misrepresentation. But there is, and what 12 we brought forward, a broader level of that and that 13 is seeing as how we showed that FEMA and MEMA 14 represented facts in this instance that it then is 15 incumbent through this process for the NRC to then 16 take a hard look to determine whether this was an 17 isolated instance or not. And it would trigger NRC 18 to then in a precautionary manner to do your job, to 19 look at the adequacy of Pilgrim's plans because there 20 is a potential that your approval of the plans and 21 determination that Entergy was fulfilling its 22 obligation to follow the rules and guidance of 23 planning may be incorrect because you were relying 24 upon FEMA and perhaps that was a big mistake. 25 26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. MORRIS: I understand. Thanks. 1 This is Scott Morris. I understand your 2 clarification, Mary. And I appreciate that. So 3 thanks for that. 4 Yes, clearly, just for the public record, 5 it's clearly the NRC, the licensee in concert with 6 the state and local officials developed a plan, but 7 ultimately the NRC reviews and approves that plan and 8 once it's approved and part of their operating 9 license, then clearly there's not only an 10 expectation, but a requirement that the plan be 11 implemented. And so I understand that. 12 And I think what I'm hearing you say is 13 well maybe the plan as written and as reviewed and 14 approved by the NRC may, in fact, the plan itself may 15 not be adequate, in part or in whole because there's 16 a reliance upon a third party or a state and local 17 plan and emergency officials who exercise its role in 18 support of that plan. 19 MS. LAMPERT: Correct. Because in the 20 past we have found 2.206 petitions about emergency 21 planning, about for example -- 22 MR. MORRIS: Right, I understand. 23 MS. LAMPERT: -- decay. And there could 24 well be a common thread running here. 25 27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. MORRIS: Well, I will say -- I 1 appreciate that, Mary. Again, Scott Morris here. I 2 will say that as the regulator, we are -- we do, in 3 fact, approve and have requirements for emergency 4 planning and a variety of other things. It's our 5 expectation that, in fact, those plans be 6 implemented. That expectation is based on a 7 presumption. The presumption is that the parties 8 that are -- the entities that are party to that plan 9 will do their -- fulfill their function as written. 10 MS. LAMPERT: I guess they're reputable 11 presumptions, rebuttable. 12 MR. MORRIS: Exactly. And it doesn't -- 13 the plan itself does not contemplate the -- whether 14 or not somebody will willfully ignore or abdicate, I 15 think is the word you used at one point, elements of 16 the plan. And so when those -- when assertions of 17 that type of impropriety or willful behavior or 18 careless disregard or however you want to 19 characterize it, as I said, we don't -- we're not 20 saying we're ignoring it. We're just saying that our 21 initial recommendation was based on the presumption 22 or the fact that that could be remedied through 23 alternative process. That's all we were saying in 24 the -- 25 28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. LAMPERT: Yes, well, the alternative 1 processes would be a spank on FEMA's and MEMA's rear 2 end -- 3 MR. MORRIS: I don't want to comment on 4 what may ultimately happen. 5 MS. LAMPERT: Yes, but I'm just saying 6 that's what could happen. Dealing directly with that 7 instance, but again it doesn't solve the broader 8 problem. 9 MR. MORRIS: I understand. I do. 10 MR. MAURER: Can I jump in? This is Bill 11 Maurer. 12 MR. MORRIS: Yes, sir. 13 MR. MAURER: Hi. When we've chosen 14 alternative routes like talking to MEMA, Governor 15 Baker, Senator Markey, what comes back to us is we're 16 preempted by the NRC. So you're telling us to -- 17 MR. MORRIS: Yes. 18 MR. MAURER: It's like a dead-end street. 19 MR. MORRIS: I hear you. I guess I'm a 20 little, well, I'll just say I understand what your 21 understanding is or what you've been told. 22 MR. MAURER: In the meetings. 23 MR. MORRIS: Yes. 24 MR. MAURER: In the meetings. But 25 29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that's the posture people take. 1 MR. MORRIS: The other thing I just 2 wanted to mention by way of clarification is with 3 respect to the switchyard at the station, and as you 4 said, its pattern of challenges that it's experienced 5 over the lifetime. That's something that we, too, 6 are in full recognition of. There have been a number 7 of inspection and assessment activities that occurred 8 at the facility including as recently as this year 9 where -- and I will say that members of this very 10 board have been in communication with the folks 11 responsible for implementing those inspections. 12 Those inspections have looked at this. They have 13 taken a look at the equipment issue. They've taken 14 a look at the licensee processes with respect to 15 maintaining and operating those systems. 16 So it's their conclusion, based on boots 17 on the ground, so to speak, and looking at the actions 18 that the licensee has taken and proposes to take 19 should there be another incident like Juno. We found 20 that to be sufficient and adequate, consistent with 21 our regulatory structure, requirements, etcetera. 22 MR. MAURER: Why not just fix the 23 switchyard? Why not just spend the money just to fix 24 it instead of the band-aid approach? How about a 25 30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 little belt and suspenders instead of do as little as 1 possible? 2 MR. MORRIS: Yes, I don't want to comment 3 on this call with respect to the actions that the 4 licensee has or intends to take absent what's already 5 in the public record and inspection reports. But I 6 think that the belt and suspenders approach, I think 7 that the regulatory infrastructure requirement plan, 8 oversight, other things that we do, I think provide 9 a reasonable -- without -- I mean this is Scott Morris 10 speaking, provide a belt and suspenders approach. 11 And I'll leave it at that. I understand your 12 concerns and really what I wanted to make sure I fully 13 grasp what it is you are conveying. 14 MR. MAURER: Absolutely. I feel like 15 the Agency and Entergy has been recklessly gambling 16 with public safety in regards to that switchyard and 17 seeing if it can go through blizzard after blizzard 18 after blizzard without repairing it. 19 MR. MORRIS: All right. 20 MS. LAMPERT: The company has been losing 21 money and they're going to close May 31, 2019, so 22 anyone would be a fool to think they're going to spend 23 money on it. And NRC has shown no enthusiasm for 24 requiring them to spend money. And that's the way 25 31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 it is. So we hope our luck holds out and that said, 1 that was only one part of the petition. And so we 2 look forward to hopefully, you determining that the 3 other three were in scope and that your response will 4 also indicate whether a precautionary shutdown is, in 5 fact, a requirement by providing the ML, so we can 6 see that it is a requirement to their license and a 7 definition of severe weather that would trigger the 8 shutdown, or again, whether it is a suggestion by the 9 NRC and opt to a voluntary behavior by Entergy that 10 wants to squeeze every drop of juice out of the lemon. 11 MR. MORRIS: I understand. 12 MS. LAMPERT: So that's what we'd really 13 like to hear. 14 MR. MORRIS: This is Scott. I 15 understand. 16 MS. LAMPERT: It was great talking to 17 you. 18 MR. MORRIS: I'm sorry? 19 MS. LAMPERT: I just said it was nice 20 talking with you. 21 MR. MORRIS: Oh, okay. You mentioned ML 22 and ML for those who may not be familiar including 23 our individual transcribing, ML stands for Main 24 Library. It's a reference to a specific number in 25 32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 our Electronic Library System. 1 Okay, I don't think that the licensee for 2 Pilgrim is on the line, but I'll ask one more time if 3 perhaps someone, an individual from the licensee 4 joined the conference? If not, or if so, I would ask 5 them if they have any questions. If not, I'll ask 6 if there are any members of the public on this call. 7 (No response.) 8 And it doesn't sound like it. 9 MS. LAMPERT: Becky, is there anything 10 you want to say? 11 MS. CHIN: I made my comments and echo 12 your original comments and Bill's comments and my 13 concerns that the licensee is allowed to have options 14 that probably shouldn't be put in their pocket. They 15 should be on their toes by the NRC to require shutdown 16 when a predicted major storm is coming into the 17 coastline and not leave it to luck. 18 MR. MORRIS: Okay, thank you for that. 19 Well, listen, I do appreciate the time you took out 20 of your day today to provide us that additional 21 information and I can assure you that we are going to 22 take that information. We will go back and review 23 our notes and the transcription from this. We will 24 reconvene as a board, consider the additional 25 33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 comments that you've made and we will render -- I 1 think, an appropriate decision and that will be a 2 publicly-available document. 3 Before we close, does the court reporter 4 or the individual who is transcribing this call need 5 any information? 6 COURT REPORTER: Yes. Thank you. I do 7 have a few questions, actually, about spelling. 8 Could I have for the record everyone's -- everyone 9 present from the PRB and who is also on the call from 10 the NRC state their name, if they could spell it for 11 me and also their title or affiliation. 12 MR. GUZMAN: Is it Colleen? 13 COURT REPORTER: This is Colleen. 14 MR. GUZMAN: Do I have your name right, 15 Ms. Court Reporter? 16 COURT REPORTER: Yes. 17 MR. GUZMAN: In the past, I've just 18 emailed all the names to the reporter to make it 19 easier and facilitate that process, so I can either 20 get your email address or I can send it to Matina. 21 COURT REPORTER: To who? Excuse me. 22 MR. GUZMAN: I can provide her a list of 23 the names so that way we're not using up this time. 24 COURT REPORTER: Okay, that's fine. 25 34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. MORRIS: Okay? 1 COURT REPORTER: Great. 2 MR. MORRIS: Any other questions, 3 Colleen? COURT REPORTER: No, that will 4 be all. 5 MR. MORRIS: All right, again, well, 6 thank you all. With that, we'll conclude the meeting 7 and we're going to terminate the phone connection. 8 Thanks again. 9 MS. LAMPERT: Thank you. 10 MR. MAURER: Thank you. 11 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 12 went off the record at 1:56 p.m.) 13