VT . NH
. ME .
MA . RI
. CT . NY
-
on Nuclear Pollution
POST OFFICE
AT ISSUE – Has Entergy
demonstrated that it will adequately manage aging of Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station over the proposed 2
·
structural failure of the reactor steam
dryer?
·
metal fatigue induced failure of reactor
components?
·
steam and water piping failure caused by
flow-accelerated corrosion ?
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff has
already issued its decision to grant a license renewal (subject to Commission
endorsement).
Accordingly, the issue to be decided
by this tribunal is, pending resolution of the three issues bulleted above,
should the Commission endorse, deny, condition, or modify a 2
THE HEARING (I) – This is a Subpart L hearing under Chapter 1
In a Subpart L hearing, normal discovery is
replaced by “disclosure.” Rather than
the requirement to produce all documents reasonably requested by the other
parties, litigants (other than NRC Staff) are obligated to disclose and provide
all relevant documents. After the conclusion of the hearing, litigants will be
required to file Briefs and Reply Briefs.
NEC’s expert witnesses are Joram Hopenfeld, PhD
Nuclear Engineering; Rudolf Hausler, PhD Chemical
Engineering, Ulrich Witte, Nuclear Physicist.
Dr. Hopenfeld has served in the field of nuclear technology and
regulation for more than 4
Dr. Rudolph Hausler is an
internationally recognized expert in erosion and corrosion phenomena with a
distinguished career in industry and consulting spanning more than 4
Ulrich Witte has served 27 years in the commercial
nuclear industry and has had extended experience as a systems configuration
engineer, He has been instrumental in restoring licensing/design basis and
regulatory conformance at several problem-ridden (NRC Watch List) nuclear power
plants.
Shems, Dunkiel,
Raymond Shadis, former
NEC Staff Advisor, Executive Director of Earth Day Commitment/Friends of the
Coast (Maine) has been providing support, coordinating and consulting with NEC,
the attorneys, and the experts on factual, regulatory, research, and logistical
issues.
NEC is a non-profit,
largely volunteer organization that depends entirely on donations to fund its
advocacy and education efforts toward affordable safe, secure, sustainable
energy for everyone.
THE PROCEEDING – Upon
receipt of a licensee’s application for a license amendment (or renewal), the
NRC publishes a single notice in the Federal Record of an opportunity for a
hearing. Within 6
Entergy appealed the
ASLBP acceptance of NEC’s contention that Entergy was not adequately accounting
for effects of an additional twenty years of heated water discharge to the
In the two years since
NEC filed its motion to intervene, Entergy and NRC Staff have filed motions in
opposition to acceptance of NEC’s contentions, motions for summary disposition,
motions in opposition to amendments of NEC contentions, motions seeking to
strike portions of NEC testimony and disqualify NEC witnesses, prefiled
testimony and NEC prefiled testimony rebuttal, and more. NEC has responded to
its two tag-team opponents in kind. The case file contains hundreds of
documents and several thousand pages of pleadings and testimony: all of it
leading to the scheduled five days of adjudicatory hearings in Newfane.
THE HEARING (II) will
be preceded Monday, July 21 with the marking exhibits and other clerical
matters; the hearing itself will begin at 1 pm with a discussion of procedural
issues and 1
Once the hearing is
completed, the litigants will file briefs and counter briefs, followed by a
decision from the ASLBP. That decision will then be reviewed and confirmed,
overturned, modified, or remanded by the Commission.
Members of the public wishing to attend the
hearing are advised to arrive early as there will be a security check at the
courthouse entrance.
THE SIGNIFICANCE – A reporter recently asked NEC just how
significant an event the hearing would be in the license renewal process. The answer: Whatever the outcome, the
intervention and the resulting hearing are of greatest significance to the
people of the region. This hearing is
the only opportunity available to the public in which the federal government
and Entergy are under oath and can be held accountable for what they say.
Unlike non-adjudicatory public meetings and informal hearings where NRC
solicits public comments, it is the people’s only opportunity to present their
concerns and get responses under oath. NRC knows this and so they have
constructed a dense maze of onerous narrow gates, blind alleys, and hurdles in
policy, regulation and legal precedents to exclude all but a very few very
narrowly drawn considerations.
For example, NRC reasons
that litigants cannot challenge the licensee’s current aging (wear and tear)
management program because that is subject to routine NRC oversight and the
presumption is the NRC oversight is effective in identifying defects. NRC
states this with a straight face in spite of ongoing demonstrated maintenance
(and oversight) failures, such as failure to maintain generator electrical
conductor joints resulting in a transformer fire, hydrogen burn, and reactor
scram, failure to maintain spent fuel location records resulting in loss (mis-location) of spent nuclear fuel segments, failure to
maintain and properly test fuel overhead crane resulting in crane brake failure
with a full cask of nuclear fuel, failure to maintain cooling towers resulting
in two structural failures spaced only 11 months apart, failure to maintain steam system stop
valves- resulting in sticking and reactor scram, failure to maintain emergency
notification system broadcast generator, and failure to maintain steam
condenser with resulting in unidentified point source of condensate system
in-leakage.
In spite of all of this,
citizen intervenors are barred from arguing that current practice and condition
is not adequate to assurance plant safety for additional twenty years.
In addition, the Commission prohibits ASLBPs
from investigation, criticism, or generally, second-guessing the NRC Staff
license renewal review. Intervenors are constrained from arguing about the
thoroughness or competence of the NRC Staff’s review and must confine their contentions
to representations made (or omitted) in the licensee’s application. Of course,
the NRC Staff is free to criticize the assumptions, calculations, conclusions,
and general competence of the intervenors.
All of this said, the NRC ASLB/Commission process is all that we have
left of a full panoply of hearing rights promised to
the states and the people when the Federal government took sole authority over
nuclear power regulation at the very onset of commercial reactor development
some six decades ago. Without vigorous advocacy and exercise of these vestigial
rights, such as the advocacy of
This is not just a fight within the rights of the people; it is also a
fight for their rights.
Respectfully submitted,
Raymond Shadis
Consultant to
Post Office Box 98
Cell (for the duration of
the hearing only) 2
Glossary of some abbreviations, acronyms,
and terms that may be used in the hearing
ACRS Advisory
Committee on Reactor Safeguards
ACS alternate
cooling system
AEC Atomic
Energy Commission
AERM aging
effect requiring management
AFW auxiliary
feedwater
AMP aging
management program
AMR aging
management review
ANSI American
National Standards Institute
ART adjusted
reference temperature
ASME American
Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM American
Society for Testing and Materials
ATWS
anticipated transient without scram
BOP balance
of plant
B&PV Boiler
and Pressure Vessel
BTP Branch
Technical Position
BWR boiling
water reactor
CAP
corrective action program
CDF core
damage frequency
CEA control
element assembly
CF chemistry
factor
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CI confirmatory
item
CLB current
licensing basis
CPPU constant
pressure power uprate
CR condition
report
CRD control
rod drive
CUF
cumulative u
CUFen cumulative
u
DBA design
basis accident
EOL end of
life
EPRI Electric
Power Research Institute
EPU Extended
Power Uprate
EQ
Environmental qualification
ER
Applicant's Environmental Report - Operating License Renewal Stage
FAC
flow-accelerated corrosion
FAP fatigue
action plan
FW feedwater
en F
environmental fatigue life correction factor
FERC Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
FIV flow-induced
vibration
FSAR final
safety analysis report
GALL Generic
Aging Lessons Learned Report
GDC general
design criteria or general design criterion
GL generic
letter
GSI generic
safety issue
HELB high-energy
line break
HWC hydrogen
water chemistry
IASCC
irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking
ID inside
diameter
IGSCC
intergranular stress corrosion cracking
IN
information notice
INPO Institute
of Nuclear Power Operations
IPA
integrated plant assessment
IPE
individual plant examination
ISG interim
staff guidance
ISI inservice
inspection
LOCA loss of
coolant accident
LRA license
renewal application
LRPG license
renewal project guideline
MSIV main
stream isolation valvue
MWe megawatts-electric
MWt megawatts-thermal
NEI Nuclear
Energy Institute
NUREG US
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide
NUREG/CR
NWC normal
water chemistry
OI open item
P-T
pressure-temperature
PTS pressurized
thermal shock
PUSAR power
uprate safety analysis report
PWSCC primary
water stress corrosion cracking
QA quality
assurance
QC quality
control
RAI request
for additional information
RFO refueling
outage
RG
regulatory guide, “reg. guide”
RHR residual
heat removal
RPV reactor
pressure vessel
RT
radiographic testing
RV reactor
vessel
SCC
stress-corrosion cracking
SER safety
evaluation report
SSC system,
structure, and component
TLAA
time-limited aging analysis
TS technical specifications “tech. specs.”
UFSAR updated
final safety analysis report
USAR updated
safety analysis report
UT
ultrasonic testing
VT visual
testing