March 20, 2003

MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Travers

Executive Director for Operations

FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Associate Director /RA/

 for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 2003 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS

UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

The attached report gives the status of petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.206. As of

February 28, 2003, there were three open petitions, which were accepted for review under the

2.206 process: two in the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards and one in the

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

Attachment 1 provides a detailed status of the open petitions.

Attachment 2 provides the status of incoming letters that the staff has been reviewing to

determine if they meet the criteria for review under the 2.206 process. 

Attachment 3 shows the age statistics for the open 2.206 petitions as of February 28, 2003.

Attachment 4 shows the age trend of closed petitions for the last 3 years. 

This report, Director’s Decisions, and other 2.206-related documents are placed in the

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. In making these readily accessible

to the public, the staff has identified another vehicle to address one of our performance goals,

i.e., to enhance public confidence.

Attachments: As stated

CONTACT: Robert Clark, NRR

415-2297
March 20, 2003

MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Travers

Executive Director for Operations

FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Associate Director /RA/

 for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 2003 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS

UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

The attached report gives the status of petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.206. As of

February 28, 2003, there were three open petitions, which were accepted for review under the

2.206 process: two in the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards and one in the

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

Attachment 1 provides a detailed status of the open petitions.

Attachment 2 provides the status of incoming letters that the staff has been reviewing to

determine if they meet the criteria for review under the 2.206 process. 

Attachment 3 shows the age statistics for the open 2.206 petitions as of February 28, 2003.

Attachment 4 shows the age trend of closed petitions for the last 3 years. 

This report, Director’s Decisions, and other 2.206-related documents are placed in the

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. In making these readily accessible

to the public, the staff has identified another vehicle to address one of our performance goals,

i.e., to enhance public confidence.

Attachments: As stated

CONTACT: Robert Clark, NRR

415-2297

DISTRIBUTION: See next page

Accession No.: ML030640623 *See previous concurrence

OFFICE PM:PDI-1 LA:PDI-1 D:PDII* D:DLPM* NMSS* ADPT:NRR

NAME RClark SLittle HBerkow JZwolinski PGoldberg BSheron

DATE 3/19/03 3/19/03 03/05/03 03/10/03 03/11/03 3/19/03

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC

WKane, DEDR/OEDO

CPaperillo, DEDMRS/EDP

PNorry, DEDM/OEDO

JCraig, AO/OEDO

JShea, ODEO

PAnderson, OEDO

EJulian

SCollins, NRR

RLaufer

SRichards

RBorchardt, NRR

BSheron, NRR

CMohrwinkel, NRR

KCyr, OGC

LChandler, OGC

JGoldberg, OGC

JCordes, Jr., OCAA

FCongel, OE

PLohaus, STP

MVirgilio, NMSS

PGoldberg, NMSS

FBrown, NMSS

BBoger, NRR

MStein, OE

GCaputo, OI

JZwolinski, NRR

LMarsh, NRR

HBerkow, NRR

RClark, NRR

OCA

OPA

Regional Administrators

PDI-1 Reading 

EDO Reading

SLittle

DWidmayer
Attachment 1

Status of Open Petitions

Page

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. No.

Oyster Creek Generating Station Edith Gbur for Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch/

G20020385................................................... 1

Waltz Mill Pennsylvania Site Viacom, Inc.

G20020629.................................................... 3

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Congressman Dennis Kucinich

G20030048.................................................... 5
Attachment 1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

Facility: Oyster Creek Generating Station

Petitioner: Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch

Date of Letter: 6/21/2002, as supplemented on July 18, 2002

Director’s Decision to Be Issued by: NMSS

EDO Number: G20020385

Proposed DD issuance: 12/10/2002

Last Contact with Petitioner: 02/24/03

Petition Manager: Steve O’Connor

Case Attorney: Jack Goldberg

Issues/Actions requested:

The petitioner requests that the NRC issue an order to the licensee, suspending the dry cask

storage program at Oyster Creek. 

Background:

As a basis for the above requests, the petitioner raised concerns with: the location of the Oyster

Creek independent spent fuel storage installation relative to local roads and communities; the

ability of the NUHOMS dry spent fuel storage system to survive a sabotage attack; the

adequacy of Oyster Creek security measures for fuel handling activities; the adequacy of the

Oyster Creek emergency evacuation plan; and the quality of the NUHOMS systems planned for

use at Oyster Creek.

The petitioner participated in a telephone call with the Petition Review Board on July 18, 2002. 

In response to the PRB discussion, the petitioner provided additional information on 

July 18, 2002, to supplement the petition request. This information is also being considered in

the review of the petition.

The petitioner’s request for NRC to immediately suspend the license for the NUHOMS dry

spent fuel storage system and halt transfer of spent fuel from wet pool storage to dry storage

modules at Oyster Creek was denied because the safety concerns were reviewed and

determined not to pose an undue risk to public health and safety. The Commission does not

believe that immediate action is required because the licensee for Oyster Creek is not planning

to load additional fuel canisters until 2003.

An acknowledgment letter and Federal Register notice were issued on August 7, 2002.

On October 30, 2002, a teleconference was held with the petitioner and her counsel regarding

the status of the proposed Director's Decision (DD). The petitioner asked that we specifically

address certain accident scenarios discussed in the petition in our response. She also asked if

there was any way that the petitioners could get a hearing for the Oyster Creek ISFSI issues. 

An additional teleconference with the petitioner was held with a member of OGC present on

November 4, 2002, to further discuss the issue of a hearing. The staff prepared a proposed DD
- 2 -

that was sent to the petitioners and the licensee for comment on December 10, 2002. Since 

the petitioner did not receive the proposed DD, it was re-sent on January 7, 2003, and the

comment period extended to February 6, 2003.

Current Status:

The petitioner did not meet the February 6, 2003, date to respond to the proposed DD. The

staff called the petitioner on February 6, 2003, to determine when to expect comments to

proposed DD. The petitioner stated that they are still working on the response. The petitioner

was contacted again on February 24, 2003, to check on status of their response. Petitioner

agreed to provide comments by February 28, 2003.

Update:

Comments were not received on February 28, 2003 as promised, but were received on

March 5, 2003, and March 10, 2003. The staff is currently reviewing petitioner’s comments.
- 3 -

Facility: Waltz Mill Pennsylvania Site 

Petitioner: Viacom, Inc.

Date of Letter: October 30, 2002 

Director’s Decision to be Issued by: NMSS

EDO Number: G20020629

Proposed DD issuance: TBD

Last Contact with Petitioner: 02/20/03

Petition Manager: Patrick Isaac (NRR) / Derek Widmayer (NMSS)

Case Attorney: Jack Goldberg

Issues/Actions requested:

That the NRC issue an order to Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, the holder of

license SNM-770 on the Waltz Mill, Pennsylvania Site, which would require

Westinghouse’s cooperation in the decommissioning of the Westinghouse Test Reactor

(WTR) license TR-2. In particular, the order would require Westinghouse to:

(1) provide certain radiological survey data to NRC which NRC has requested. The

survey data in question determines what residual radioactivity remains in-situ. 

(2) accept under SNM-770 certain residual byproduct materials now held under Viacom

license TR-2 and located at the WTR.

Background:

Viacom is the current holder of NRC facility license TR-2 which authorizes possession,

but not operation, of the WTR. To complete the Final Decommissioning Plan, two

provisions still need to be accomplished. These are determining the residual

radioactivity remaining in-situ and preparing the necessary amendments for and

requesting the transfer of the remaining residual radioactivity and WTR facilities to the

SNM-770 license.

At the time the decommissioning plan was approved, Westinghouse was the NRC

licensee under both TR-2 and SNM-770, and so the transfer of the residual radioactive

material from one materials license to another, held by the same licensee on the same

site, was straightforward. Viacom now holds the TR-2 license while Westinghouse

holds the SNM-770 license. Westinghouse’s and Viacom’s decommissioning

responsibilities to each other at the Waltz Mill Site are set forth in an Asset Purchase

Agreement. By refusing to accept the transfer to the SNM-770 license, Viacom alleges

that Westinghouse is in violation of 10 CFR 50.5. 

Westinghouse submitted a response to the petition on December 20, 2002. Viacom has

indicated that they will not respond to the Westinghouse response at this time.
- 4 -

Current Status:

On February 20, 2003, a public PRB meeting was held in Rockville, Maryland with the

petitioner and both licensees (Viacom and Westinghouse Electric Company). At the 

meeting, lawyers and staff personnel from both companies provided additional

information to support their position. 

The PRB was scheduled to meet March 6, 2003, to determine if this petition meets the

acceptance criteria for review under 2.206.

Update:

There are several reasons why it took the staff 4 months to determine whether this

petition meets the criteria for review under 2.206. First, the petition involves complex

legal and contractual issues. Second, the staff had to await both parties’ responses to

the petition, which took the parties several months, and then had to review and evaluate

the responses prior to engaging in the public PRB meeting. The petitioners were not

available to meet with the PRB until February 20, 2003. Following the public PRB

meeting, there was still some uncertainty among the cognizant staff groups and

management regarding acceptance of these issues as a petition. Finally, at the

March 6, 2003, closed PRB meeting, agreement was reached to accept the petition for

review under 2.206.
- 5 -

Facility: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station

Petitioner: Congressman Dennis Kucinich

Date of Letter: February 3, 2003 

Director’s Decision to be Issued by: NRR

EDO Number: G20030048

Proposed DD issuance: TBD

Last Contact with Petitioner: 2/14/03

Petition Manager: Dan Collins (NRR)

Case Attorney: Jack Goldberg

Issues/Actions requested:

That the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) immediately revoke FirstEnergy

Nuclear Operating Company’s (FirstEnergy) license to operate the Davis-Besse Nuclear

Power Station (DBNPS) for the reasons given in the background. 

Background:

On March 5, 2002 during a refueling outage, FirstEnergy performed inspection of the

DBNPS reactor pressure vessel head penetration (VHP) nozzles in accordance with

NRC Bulletin 2001-01. During this inspection, the licensee discovered cracks in several

VHP nozzles. Subsequent to the machining process to repair VHP Nozzle 3, the nozzle

was observed to displace, or tip in the downhill direction as the machining apparatus

was withdrawn. The displacement led DBNPS personnel to examine the region

adjacent to VHP Nozzle 3. The licensee discovered a cavity with a surface area of

approximately 20-30 square inches. Upon further examination, the licensee identified

that the cavity extended completely through the 6.63 inch-thick carbon steel reactor

pressure vessel (RPV) head down to a thin internal liner of stainless steel cladding. 

Although the exposed cladding withstood the primary system pressure during previous

plant operation, it was not designed to be a reactor coolant system pressure boundary. 

Boric acid corrosion of the carbon steel RPV head was the primary contributor to the

RPV head degradation.

In response to the licensee's identification of extensive damage to the pressure

boundary material of the RPV head on March 5, 2002, the NRC dispatched an

Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) to Davis-Besse on March 12, 2002, to examine

conditions that led to the head degradation. The NRC also issued a Confirmatory

Action Letter (CAL) to the licensee on March 13, 2002, which stated that NRC approval

is required for restart DBNPS. The CAL also documented a number of actions that the

licensee must implement before the NRC will approve a restart. The NRC also

enhanced monitoring of corrective actions at Davis-Besse, as described in NRC

Inspection Manual Chapter 0350, “Oversight of Operating Reactor Facilities in a

Shutdown Condition with Performance Problems,” to provide the required oversight

throughout the plant's shutdown and restart. The AIT follow-up special inspection report

(50-346/02-08) dated October 2, 2002, cited a number of violations of the Davis-Besse

operating license and NRC regulations.
- 6 -

Using information from various publicly available documents (such as NRC inspection

reports, newspaper articles, and reports published by the Union of Concerned

Scientists) to support his case, the Petitioner offers the following five basic arguments,

in various forms, on why the Davis-Besse operating license must be revoked:

1. NRC regulations and guidelines require revocation of the Davis-Besse license.

2. Revocation of the Davis-Besse license is necessary to hold FirstEnergy

accountable for its violations of NRC regulations and its own operating license.

3. If the NRC doesn’t revoke the Davis-Besse license, NRC isn’t appropriately

using the authority granted it by Congress.

4. Revocation of the Davis-Besse license is necessary in order to ensure that

FirstEnergy is complying with all NRC regulations and guidelines.

5. Revocation of the Davis-Besse license is required in order for there to be

consistency in the manner that the NRC enforces its regulations.

Current Status:

a. The staff issued an acknowledgment letter on February 10, 2003, to inform the

Congressman that the PRB has determined that the petition meets the

acceptance criteria for review under 2.206. The acknowledgment letter also

informed the Petitioner that, pending completion of the NRC’s investigative

process, the NRC does not have sufficient basis to immediately revoke the

Davis-Besse operating license. Thus, the Petitioner’s request for immediate

revocation of the license was denied. 

b. The staff called the Petitioner’s staff on February 14, 2003, to explain the 2.206

process and to offer an opportunity to address the PRB. The Congressman's

staff indicated that they do wish to address the PRB but need more time to

prepare for the presentation. 

c. The PRB is waiting to hear back from Congressman's staff to establish a date for

its presentation to the PRB.
Attachment 2

Status of Potential Petitions Under Consideration

Facility: Maine Yankee

Petitioner: Randall Speck, Special Counsel for the State of Maine

Date of Letter: November 15, 2002

Responsible Office: NMSS

PRB meeting: To be scheduled 

Issues/Actions requested:

That the NRC conduct a hearing on the efficacy of indefinite, long-term spent fuel

storage at Maine Yankee.

Resolution:

The petitioner has also requested a hearing, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, regarding the

October 16, 2002, safeguards order and interim compensatory measures. On

December 10, 2002, the staff sent a letter to the petitioner stating that a decision on the

acceptability of the 2.206 petition will be held in abeyance until the staff makes a

determination on the hearing request. 

Facility: Palo Verde 

Petitioner: Thomas Saparito representing the National Environmental

Protection Center

Date of Letter: January 17, 2003

Responsible Office: NRR

Public PRB meeting: N/A

Issues/Actions requested:

That the NRC issue a civil penalty against Arizona Public Service (APS) and against the

licensee’s law firm; that the NRC cause an investigation through extensive interviews to

determine if employees feel free to raise environmental safety concerns to the licensee

or to the NRC without fear of reprisal, harassment or intimidation; that the NRC take

actions to cause an investigation of APS to determine through extensive interviews

whether employees are knowledgeable and aware of how to file a discrimination

complaint under 10 CFR 50.7, and under OSHA EPA statues; that the NRC investigate

through extensive interviews to determine if employees are provided training by the

licensee with respect to employee protection provisions under 10 CFR 50.7 and OSHA

EPA statutes.

Resolution:

The staff was unable to contact the petitioner by phone or by e-mail. The staff, therefore,

issued an interim letter to the petitioner dated February 27, 2003, explaining that his petition did 
- 2 -

not meet the acceptance criteria for review under 2.206. The petitioner’s concerns will be

addressed in future correspondence. 

Facility: Indian Point 2

Petitioner: Raymond Shadis representing the New England Coalition on

Nuclear Pollution (NECNP)

Date of Letter: February 17, 2003

Responsible Office: NRR

Public PRB meeting: To be scheduled

Issues/Actions requested:

That the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) investigate if the IP2 Security

Superintendent revealed Safeguards Information (SGI) to the public.

If SGI was released to the public, that the NRC take appropriate enforcement action

immediately. The petitioner also requests that such enforcement action be taken not

only with respect to the individual, but also with respect to the handling of SGI by the

licensee and the NRC, in general, so that such revelations as may compromise

adequate protection of the public health and safety, and which may be inimical to the

common defense, are prevented in the future.

Resolution:

a. NRC staff (NSIR) will determine whether SGI was released to the public.

b. If NSIR determines that SGI was released, the petitioner will be informed that the

issues raised in the petition will be treated as an allegation. The allegation will

be investigated by the Office of Investigations for potential civil and criminal

actions against those who publicly disclosed SGI.

c. PRB will reconvene after receiving a response from NSIR.
Attachment 3

AGE STATISTICS FOR AGENCY 2.206 PETITIONS

ASSIGNED

ACTION

OFFICE

FACILITY Incoming 

petition

PRBmeeting1

Acknowledgment 

letter / 

days from

incoming2

Proposed DDissuanceDate/ age3

Scheduled

date for

final DD/

age 4

Comments if no

Com

NMSS Oyster Creek 6/21/02 7/18/02 8/07/02

47

12/10/2002

120

---

NMSS Waltz Mill Site 10/30/02 02/20/03 02/28/03 TBD ---

NRR Davis-Besse 02/03/03 TBD 02/10/03

7

03/07/03

33

04/18/03

75

1) Goal is to hold a PRB meeting, which the petitioner is invited to participate in, within 2 weeks of receipt of petitio

up two weeks from the date that the letter is issued until it is received by the reviewing organization).

2) Goal is to issue acknowledgment letter within 5 weeks of the date of incoming petition.3) Goal is to issue proposed DD within 120 days of the acknowledgment letter.4) Goal is to issue final DD within 45 days of the end of the comment period.
Attachment 4