Text

Responds to Addressed to Chairman Jackson Re Concerns of Radiological Control Violations at Plant,As Addressed in CAL 1-97-07,dtd 970304 & Insp Repts 50-213/96-12,50-213/97-01 & 50-213/97-02
	ML20212F183
Person / Time
Site:	Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date:	10/23/1997
From:	Collins S; NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Farber D; CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK
Shared Package
ML20212F188	List: ML20212F183; ML20212F239;
References
	50-213-96-12, 50-213-97-01, 50-213-97-02, 50-213-97-1, 50-213-97-2, CAL-1-97-07, CAL-1-97-7, NUDOCS 9711040205
	Download: ML20212F183 (10)
	v • d • e

- -- ~ ~

a

g ea *80g

g* UNITED STATES

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, o.C. soteHopt i

".

,,,,,* October 23, 1997

1

Mr. Douglas G. Farber

Citizens Awarenens Network

54 Old Tumpike Road

Haddam, Connecticut 06438

Dear Mr. Farber.

Your letter of August 11,1997, addressed to Chairman Jacksnn, has been referred to me for a

reply. Your letter voices concems about severalissues.

Your first concem is that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)is unwilling to penalize the

Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCo) for radiation control violations. We

disagree with your statement; in fact, the NRC has taken very strong regulatory action issuing a

Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL No. 197 007) dated March 4,1997, to the licensee as a result

of NRC identified radiological work control violations. The violations prompting the CAL were

principally associated with a November 2,1996, rt actor cavity airbome radioactivity event and

events concoming control and monitoring of radioactive materials identified in February 1997.

(Reference NRC inspection Report Nos. 50 213/9612,97 01, and 97 02.) The CAL effective!v

restrains the licensee from performing any significant radiological work, including

decommissioning activities, until radiological control program improvement is realized and

venfied by the NRC. In addition, the NRC issued a Notice of Violation to the licensee on

August 12,1997, as a result of radiological controls violations idantified during inspections ,

conducted in June and July 1997 (Ref. NRC Inspection Report No. 50-213/97 06.)

NRC is aware of assertionu by the Connecticut Public Utikties Commission (CPUC) involving

radioactive soil contamination and potential environmentalimpact from previous radioactive spills

and events at Haddam Neck (HN). In response, NRC has expanded its ongoing inspections to

include a comprehensive reevaluation of Connecticut Yankee's historical record to determine i

'

what effect, if any. Connecticut Yankee's actions may have had on public health and safety. The

reevaluation includes independent radiological surveys and sample analysis by both NRC and

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Personnel. Although NRC's review to date

indicates there is no health and safety concem to the public or licensee employees, our

evaluation is continuing.

Due to issues identified in the CAL, and information from the ongoing inspection efforts, NRC is ,

'

currently considering additional enforcement action in regard to the radiation control program at

the Haddam Neck plant, in addition to the CAL on radiation control violations, on May 12,1997, !

the NRC proposed a $650,000 civil penalty against CYAPCo (F.A 96-001 et al.) for other

violations found during inspections conducted by he NRC between November 21,1995, and g ;

November 22,1996; the licensee paid the civil penalty on June 11,1997. y\

t

b ,

I

H

hMh13 pm ,

,

<

i

l ,

a

,._._ _

- _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ __ ___ _ .

.

Mr. Douglas Fart >er 2

Because your second concem involves a rate caso presently before the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC), the NRC will not comment at this time on the specific issues in

this haaring. However, the NRC continues to believe that 10 CFR 50.75 prescribes acceptable

methods to assure and to maintain reasonable assurance for decommissioning funding. Prior to

permanent cessation of operations, CYAPCo had provided reasonable assurance that funds

would be available for decommissioning. The information provided in the Post Shutdown

Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR), submitted on August 22,19g7, Indicates that the

licensee has ample funds to commence decommissioning activities and to place the facility in a

SAFSTOR condition should a concem arise that decommissioning funding may become

inadequate. We are aware that issues brought forth in the FERC case currently in progress may

affect the level of financial assurance that CYAPCo can provide in the future. Upon resolution of

the rate case before FERC and after submittel of the site specific decommissioning cost

estimate, which is expected by December 5,1998, the NRC will reassess the adequacy of

decommissioning funding for HN. The NRC is holding a public meeting at 6:30 p.m. O,,

October 27,1997, in the Haddam Killingsworth High School, Higganum, CT to solicit public

comments on the decommissioning of HN.

Your third concem deals with a presumed insufficiency in our regulations regarding

decommissioning costs. In CAN's judgment, the cost of site remediation and environmental

impacts at HN were underestimated and NRC employee Richard Conte's remarks at the July 30,

1997, Community Decommissioning Advisory Committee (CDAC) meeting would indicate that

such underestimation is happening at all U.S. nuclear plants. However, examination of the

formulas in 10 CFR 50.75(c) indicate that escalation factors are provided for labor, energy, and

burial costs.

As part of our assessment of the decommissioning cost estimates, the FERC case's resolution,

and public comments, as discussed above, the NRC will use the appropriate formula and <W ilo

determine compliance with the regulation. This assessment will determine if the overall cost

estimate is within the bounds of the regulation. Also, Mr. Conte's comments at the CDAC were

made in the context of a general statement that it is not totally unexpected to find some soil

contamination at a nuclear power plant site, especially at those with outdoor storage tanks that

hold radioactive fluids. He did not impty, nor did he intend to imply, that the extent of

contamination and the scope of work for remediation was fully known. Detailed site

characterization is being conducted by the licensee and will be subject to NRC inspection. This

information should allow a more precise determination of the scope and extent of contamination

levels. In this regard, an NRC staff member, specializing in site cleanup, remediation, and costs,

will attend the October 27 meeting and will be able to provide more information in these areas.

Finally, a rut amendment to NRC regulations,10 CFR 20.1401, Subpart E, addresses

residual radioactivity after decommissioning and provides for protection to the public, plant

workers, and the environment. This regulation was formulated with extensive public

involvement, and was coordinated with other Federal agencies. It provides this protection in a

cost effective manner. I have enclosed an NRC press release, dated May 21,1997, that

contairm more information about this recently approved regulation.

,

, -

, ,---m -- , - , ,

~

.

Mr. Douglas Farber 3- October 23, 1997

Should you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Morton Fairtile of my staff at

(301)415 1442.

Sincerely,

@sWhy

BamuelJ.Comns

Samuel J. Collins, Director

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Docket No. 50 213

Enclosure: As stated

cc w/ enclosure: See next page

plSTRIBUTION:

iContral File (w/ original incoming) , SCollins/FMiraglia OPA

PUBLIC (w/ incoming) RZimmerman OCA

EDO# GT97609 BSheron SECY (GT#970844)

SCallan WTravers MClark (GT#970609)

AThadani PDND r/f (w/ incoming) EHylton (w/ incoming)

HThompson JRoe Region l

PNorry DMatthews MBoyle (MLB4) E mail only

JBlaha SWeiss LThonus

SBurns SBajwa ASLBP

JLieberman MFairtile(w/ incoming) JHickey

HMiller, RI OGC AMarkley

PHarris RDudley TFredrichs

MMasnik JMinns MWebb

KBohrer (012-G18) MClark Econner (ELC) E-Matt

EDO r/f NRR Mall Room (EDO#GT97609 w/ incoming)

SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE

PDND:PM PDND:LA,'v PDND:(A)SC TECH ED.* OGC*

MFairtile EHylton/f,p MMasnik RSanders MRafky

9/)W97 9/3097 E 9p7 9/11/97 9/16/97

PDND.DA (A)D R -

OC

SWeiss P -JR S ollins ' SJackson

_9/JV97

4/g 7 10/ f 7 9/ /97 -

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SECY\ACTN_lTM\G1609

d\I

-

. . - - - _ . . . ~ . . - - . - . -. . - . . - - - _ - - . . .

,

.

3- ;

Mr. Douglas Farber ;

Should you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Morton Fairtile of my staff at

(301)415 1442.

t

'

Sincerely,

i

amuel J. Chilins, Director

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ;

,

Docket No 50 213

I

Enclosure: As stated

cc w/ enclosure:- See next page ,

.

A

. - . . .

-

,_ . - - . _ , . . - , , , - _ _ . - . _ . , _ , _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ -

.- - - . - --- . . . -, -

,- _ -

.

o

'

Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. Haddam Neck Plant ,

'

Docket No. 50 213

r

I

CC:

Resident inspector :

Lillian M. Cuoco, Esq. Haddam Neck Plant _

,

Senior Nuclear Counsel clo U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i

Northeast Utilities Service Company 362 injun Hollow Road l'

P. O. Box 270 East Hampton, CT 06424 3099

Hartford, CT 06141 0270-

Mr. James S. Robinson

Mr. Kevin T. A. McCarthy, Director Manager, Nuclear Investments and i

Monitoring and Radiation Division Administration

Department of Environmsntal Now England Power Company

Protection 25 Research Drive

- 79 Elm Street Westborough, MA 01582

Hartford, CT 00106 5127

Mr. G. P. van Noordonnen

- Mr. Allan Johanson Manager - Nuclear Licensing

Assistant Director Northeast Utilities Service Company

Office of Policy and Management 362 Injun Hollow Road

Policy Development and Planning East Hampton, CT 06424 3099 +

Division

450 Capit-l Avenue MS#52ENR Regional Administrator ,

P. O. Box 341441 r;egion i 4

Hartford, CT 06134 1441 U.S. Nucles- Regulatory Commission

475 Allendale Road

Mr. F. C. Rothen King of Prussia, PA 19406

Vice President Work Services

Northeast Utilities Service Company Board of Selectmen

P. O. Box 128 Town Office Building

Waterford, CT 06385 Haddam, CT 06438

Mr. D. M. Goebel

Vice President - Nuclear Oversight

Northeast Utilities Service Company

P. O. Box 128

Waterford, CT 06385

i

Mr. J. K. Thayer

Recovery Officer Nuclear Engineering

and Support '

Northeast Utilities Service Company

P. O. Box 128 '

Waterford, CT 06385

,

e

a n an, ,- m- en-e=~m e-ws, e-w-~ - v , tr

-~ - -- ~ - . . - _ _ . - . . _ - . - - _ . _ - .-__.- -- - -

,

, fWtp1/www.mc gov /OPAlgmo'ntr.rcvi97 08).htm httpAwww.nre gov OPA:'gmo'nrarevS7 083.htm

i . _ _ ._ _ ._ .

_ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ -._

f._

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

l

Washington DC 20555

l t

t

Telephone: 301/415-8200 - E mail: opaWnre. gov

'

l

-. . . . . .

. .- - - - - . . _ - . . .- .

. - . .

No.97-083

May 21,1997

NRC APPROVES MAXIMUM PERMISSil3LE RADIATION LEVELS

FOR LICENSE TERMINATION

I

The Nuclear Repulatory Commission has approved an amendment to its regulations to establish

maximum permissible radiation levels when a nuclear facility permanently shuts down, is released foi

other uses, and the license is tenninated. ;

-The new rules will require licensees of pennanently shutdown facilities to reduce remaining

radioactivity to sumciently low levels to pennit the license to be terminated safely. Release of the

property may be either:

Unrestricted, in which case it could be used for any purpose, or

Restricted, so that it could not be used for certain purposes, such as residential housing.

The Commission believes that the new standards are consistent with specific recommendations of both

national and international bodies tasked with the development of guidance for radistion protection; are

appropriately based on risk, cost benefit, and socio economic standards; provide the needed flexibility to

accommodate site specific conditions; and are sufficiently conservative to ensure protection of public

health and safety and the environment.

Unrestricted Release

Under the new regulations, a site may be released for unrestricted use if the radiation dose from

contamination remaining on the property wni be as far below 25 millirems per year as is reasonably

achievable. (Twenty five millirems may be compared to a dose of about 5 millirems of background

radiation from one round trip cross-country airline ilight: 50 millirems average per year from medical

examinations; and 300 millirems per year average in the United States from natural background

radiation.)

Restricted Release

The new regulations permit release of a site for restricted use provided that the dose from contamination

remaining on site is as low as is reasonably achievable and that legally enforceable institutional controls 1

(such as deed restrictions) will ensure that the dose does not exceed 25 millirems per year.

,

in addition, if a site is released for restricted use, the licensee must provide financial arrangements to

allow an independent third party to assume and carry out responsibilities for any necessary control and

maintenance of the site.

Further, a licensee that intends to decommission by restricting use of the site must seek advice- from

individuals and institutions in the community who may be affected by the decommissioning--on whether

iof3 M SURE n8'20'9711:245

_ _ -

_ - _ _ _ . ~ _ - _ - _ . _ .

_ - _ _ - . _ __

_ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _

_ __ _ _

,

. hap //ww w.ntc. guWOPAlgmo'nrarev/97-083.htm hupWwww nre gowOPAlgmo'nrcrcwn08).htn

'

e individuals and institutions in the community who may be affected by the decommissioning -on whcther

the provisions for institutional controls proposed by the licensee (1) will provide reasonable assurance !

that the radiation dose from co. taminat on remaining on site will not exceed 25 millirems per year,(2)

will be enforceable, and (3) will not impose undue burdens on the local community or other affected

parties,

in obtaining this advice, the licensee must provide for participation by a broad cross section of

community interests, provide an opportunity for a comprehensive discussion on the issues by

participants, and make public a summary of the results of such discussions.

The Commission expects that institutional controls will be very effective in keeping doses to levels

below 25 millirems per year. Nevertheless the Commission has included an additional level of protection

in the rule to protect against the situation where the 25 rnillirems per-yea' level could be exceeded by

requiring that licensees provide reasonable assurance that, if the institutional controls were no longer in

efTect, the maximum yearly radiation dose from contamination remaining on site would not exceed 100

millirems per year, and be as low as is reasonably achievable.

Licensees in rare circumstances could also propose that, in the event i- stitutional controls were no

longer in effect, the residual radioactivity could be as high as 500 millirems per year. Ilowever, licensees

who propose to use the 500 millirem criterion must (1) demonstrate that furt ber reductions in remaining

radioactivity are not technicJly achievable, would be prohibitively expensive, or would result in net

3ublic or environmental harm: (2) make provision for durable institutional controls, such as engineered

3arriers or government control or ownership; and (3) provide sufficient financial resources to enable an

independent third parv to carry out periodic rechecks of the site at least every 5 years to make sure that

the institutional controls remain in place, and to assume and carry out responsibilities for any necessary

controls and maintenance of those controls.

Altemate Criteria for 1.icense Termination

The Commission expects the vast preponderance oflicensees to reduce residual radioactivity to levels

that meet the new enteria for unrestricted or restricted release, liowever, the Commission is concemed

about the possible presence of certain diflicult sites that could present unique decommissioning

problems.

Ilecause it is preferable to have provisions in the rule to deal with these sites cather than have licensees

seek an exemption process outside the rule, the rule contains provisions under which the Commission

may tenninate a license using allemate criteria, greater than 25 millirems per year, if the licensee

provides assurance that public health and safety would continue to be protected, and that it was unlikely

that the radiation dose from all potential man made sources combined would be more than 100 Allirems

per year. The licensee must also place restrictions on site use to the extent practical and reduce the

radiation dose to levels that are as low as reasonably achievable.

The Commission expects the use of attemate criteria to be contined to rare situations. To ensure that this

is the case, the Commission is requiring that licensees who propose to use alternate criteria must seek

advice or comment from alTected parties and, as in the case where restricted release is sought, provide

for participation by representatives of a broad cross section of community interests who may be affected

by the decommissiomng, an o pportunity for a comprehensive, collective discussion on the issues, and a

publicly available summary ol the results of all such discussions,

in addition, the use of alternate criteria to terminate a license will require the approval of the

Commission, aller consideration of NRC staff recommendations that address any comments provided by

the Environmental Protection Agency and by the public.

Public input

To provide ample opportunities for public comment, when the Commission receives a license

tennination or decommissioning plan, or a proposal for cestricted release of a site or release using

2 of 3 08009711:24:33

- -- _ -. - -

, hnp://www.nre gov /OPA/gmo nr:rev/97 083.htm http:// nre goviOPAlgmo'nrarn/97 083 hu

alternate criteria, the agency will publish a notice in the Federal Register. In addition, it will provide

local notincation via a notice in local newspapers, letters to state or local organizations, or other

appropriate means. It will also notify the Environmental Protection Agency, appropriate local and statc.

govemments and Indian Nations and solicit their comments.

Specific additional requirements for public input are described above for the restricted use and alt rnate

entena cases.

Pronosed and Final Rule >

A proposed rule on this subject was published for public comment on August 22,1994. The full text of '

the final rule and a description of specific changes made as a result of the comments received on the

proposed rule, and additional NRC analysis, will be contained in s Federal Register notice to be

published soon.

The Commission did not adopt a separate groundwater protection standard, as recommended by the

Environmental Protection Agency. NRC agrees with the need to control exposures from drinking

groundwater that is potentially contaminated a..d agrees that the environmental integrity of the nation's

groundwater needs to be prot <:cted. Ilowever, NRC has concluded that protection of public health and

safety in the use of this valuable resource is achieved by limiting e- sure to person., from all potential

pathways of exposure (i.e., radiation from the ground, eating food aom soil or fish from surface water,

inhalation of dust, etc.), including the groundwater pathway, to as far below 25 millirems per year as is

reasonably achievable and that imposition of a separate stan(' rd for groundwater would not provide any

significant enhancement of public health and safety and is therefore unnecessary.

Yesterday Shirley Ann Jackson, Chainnan of the NRC, met with Fred liansen, Deputy Administrator of

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to discuss the proposed final rule. At that meeting, she

discussed the features of the rule, and NRC's position on the adequacy of the 25-millirems-per year all

pathways standard, the concept of"as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA) included in the NRC's

rule, and the NRC's position that, in light of the all pathways standard and ALARA, there is no need for

a separate groundwater standard. Ilansen expressed EPA's interest in continuing discussions with NRC

regarding timely notice to EPA of proposed NRC license termination in some specific categories of

cases. The Commission has agreed to continue a dialogue with EPA following finalization of the rule.

The new cleanup criteria for decommissioning will not a 3 ply to sites already covered by a license

tennination or decommissioning plan approved previous y by the Commission or approved within 24

months of the clTective date of the rule (w hich will be announced in the Federal Register).

The final rules that the Commission has promulgated wili generally apply to most NRC licensees and to

most liccasec.aegu!ated by Agreement States (which are states that have assumed, by mutual

agreement, part of the NRC's regulatory authority). An Agreement State may implement more stringent

standards ifit finds a need to impose such standards for local conditions.

-. -__ -. .-

NRC llome Pag l News and Infornmtica l E-mail

3 of 3 08'20/9711:2 8:33 ~

_ _ _ _ _- . _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . --

. . . _._. __ _ - _

y.

'

..

y.

'

,O: ._

o

/

tuf G AW hh ct.

'

.

o u t-

c5 8 kN/h [ $ feeA b- Control

'

DO CONTAOL: G970609

kuC- DOC DT: 08/11/97

FINAL REPLY:

TO: 8 ,,2 I 'l -

. Chairman Jackson

FOR SIGNATURE OF : ** GRN ** CRC NO: 97-0844

' Collins

DESC: ROUTING:

CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK, CAN, CONCERNS RE THE Callan

' NRC'S UNWILLING % ESS TO PENALIZE THE Thadani

CONNECTICUT-YANREE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY DESPITE Thompson

DOCUMENTED RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL VIOLATIONS AT Norry

HADDAM NECK STATION Blaha

Burns

DATE: 08/21/S7 Lieberman, OE

Miller, RI

ASSIGNED TO: CONTACT:

NRR Collins-

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:

Put EDO and Chairman on for concurrence.

Chairman's office to review response prior

.to dispatch.

NRR RECEIVED: AUGUST' 21, 1997

NRR ACTTON: .ORPM: ROE

NRR ROUTING: COLLINS' q ap l sp

MIRAGLIA

Mu lv,M

81

,

ZIMMERMAN

'SHERON f [*g J Q Q R D}R {C J C.R'$ [syr,7,] 3

TRAVERS

6Y N _l u,C A /

t

.

_ _ . . .

- - . , . - .- - . .

4 ,

-

.. .

, , .

.

1 *

.. l

- OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY-

CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET

!

~ PAPER NUMBER: CRC-97-0244 LOGGING DATES.:Aug 19-9.7 *

'

' ACTION OFFICE: :EDO ,

'

'NUTHOR: DOUGLAS FARBER

= AFFILIATION - CONNECTICUT i

-ADDRESSEE: CHAIRMAN JACKSON

' LETTER DATE: .Aug 11 97 FILE CODES.

SUBJECT: CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK,'CAN,-CONCERNS REGARDING

THE NRC'S UNWILLINGNESS TC PENALIZE THE CONNECTICVT

YANKEE-ATOMIC POWER COMPANY-DESPITE DOCUMENTED

RADNLOGICAL CONTROL VIOLATIONS AT HADDAM NECK STA

ACTION: ($gpa; hth k

DISTRIBUTION: CHAIRMAN, RF

SPECIAL HANDLING: SECY.TO ACK

-CONSTITUENT:

NOTES' dtyg,C M i

DATE DUE - Sep 5 97

SIGNATURE: DATE SIGNED:

, AFFILIATION:

.

4

-

EDO -- G970609 '

.

vr

ML20212F183

Text

Navigation menu

Search