December 20, 2007 

MEMORANDUM TO: Luis A. Reyes 

Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Bruce A. Boger, Associate Director /RA/ 

 for Operating Reactor Oversight and Licensing 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

SUBJECT: NOVEMBER 2007 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC 

PETITIONS UNDER TITLE 10 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL 

REGULATIONS (10 CFR) SECTION 2.206 

In accordance with SECY-93-355, AReview of Regulations and Practice Governing Citizen 

Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 2.206,@ the enclosed report 

gives the status of petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.206. As of November 30, 2007, there 

was one open petition accepted for review under the 2.206 process in the Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation (NRR). Information that has changed since the last monthly report is 

highlighted. 

Enclosure 1 provides a detailed status of the open petitions as of November 30, 2007. 

Enclosure 2 provides the status of incoming letters that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) staff is reviewing to determine if they meet the criteria for review under the 

2.206 process. 

Enclosure 3 shows the age statistics for the open 2.206 petitions as of November 30, 2007. 

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

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. By making these documents readily 

accessible to the public, the NRC staff is addressing the performance goal of ensuring openness 

in our regulatory process. 

Enclosures: As stated 

CONTACT: Holly Cruz, NRR/DPR 

 301-415-1053 
December 20, 2007 

MEMORANDUM TO: Luis A. Reyes 

Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Bruce A. Boger, Associate Director /RA/ 

 for Operating Reactor Oversight and Licensing 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

SUBJECT: NOVEMBER 2007 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC 

PETITIONS UNDER TITLE 10 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL 

REGULATIONS (10 CFR) SECTION 2.206 

In accordance with SECY-93-355, AReview of Regulations and Practice Governing Citizen 

Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 2.206,@ the enclosed report 

gives the status of petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.206. As of November 30, 2007, there 

was one open petition accepted for review under the 2.206 process in the Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation (NRR). Information that has changed since the last monthly report is 

highlighted. 

Enclosure 1 provides a detailed status of the open petitions as of November 30, 2007. 

Enclosure 2 provides the status of incoming letters that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) staff is reviewing to determine if they meet the criteria for review under the 

2.206 process. 

Enclosure 3 shows the age statistics for the open 2.206 petitions as of November 30, 2007. 

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

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. By making these documents readily 

accessible to the public, the NRC staff is addressing the performance goal of ensuring openness 

in our regulatory process. 

Enclosures: As stated 

CONTACT: Holly Cruz, NRR/DPR 

 301-415-1053 

DISTRIBUTION: WITS200700062 

See next page 

ADAMS Accession Number: ML073510485 NRR-106 

OFFICE PM:PSPB BC:PSPB DD:DPR ADRO 

NAME HCruz SRosenberg HNieh BBoger 

DATE 12/17/07 12/17/07 12/19/07 12/20/07 

OFFICIAL AGENCY RECORD 
DISTRIBUTION FOR NOVEMBER 2007 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS 

UNDER TITLE 10 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, SECTION 2.206 

Date: December 20, 2007 

DISTRIBUTION: WITS200700062 

PUBLIC 

PSPB Reading File 

RidsEdoMailCenter 

EmileJulian 

PatriciaAnderson 

RidsNrrOd 

RidsNrrAdro 

RidsOgcMailCenter 

RidsOpaMail 

RidsOcaMailCenter 

RidsOeMailCenter 

RidsNrrWpcMail 

JosephDeCicco 

PatriciaRathbun 

NormaGarciaSantos 

GuyCaputo 

HollyCruz 

MarkKowal 

DougPickett 

JamesKim 

JohnBoska 

RidsNrrDpr 

RidsNrrDprPspb 

RidsNrrLADBaxley 

RidsNrrPMTMensah 

RidsRgn1MailCenter 

RidsRgn2MailCenter 

RidsRgn3MailCenter 

RidsRgn4MailCenter 
Status of Open Petitions 

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. Page

Vermont Yankee Raymond Shadis representing ............................1-2 

 New England Coalition (NEC) 

 G20070597 

ENCLOSURE 1
 

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206 

Facility: Vermont Yankee 

Petitioners: Raymond Shadis representing NEC 

Date of Petition: August 27, 2007 

Director’s Decision to be Issued by: NRR 

EDO Number: G20070597 

Proposed DD Issuance: March 5, 2008

Final DD Issuance: TBD 

Last Contact with Petitioner: October 3, 2007 (teleconference) 

Petition Manager: James Kim 

Case Attorney: Giovonna Longo 

 

Issues/Actions requested: 

 

The petitioner asks that the NRC act immediately to restore reasonable assurance of 

adequate protection of public heath and safety that is now degraded by the failure of the 

licensee and its employees to report adverse conditions leading to a reduction in plant 

safety margins. 

The petitioner requests: 

1. NRC completion of a Diagnostic Evaluation Team examination or Independent 

 Safety Assessment of Vermont Yankee to determine the extent of condition of 

 non-conformances, reportable items, hazards to safety and the root causes 

 thereof. 

2. NRC completion of a safety culture assessment to determine why worker safety 

 concerns were not previously reported and the why assessments of safety culture 

 under the Reactor Oversight Process failed to capture the fact or reasons that 

 safety concerns have gone unreported. 

3. Derate Vermont Yankee to 50% of licensed thermal power with a mandatory 

 hold at 50% until a thorough and detailed structural and performance analysis of 

 the cooling towers, including the alternate cooling system, has been completed 

 by the licensee; reviewed and approved by NRC; and until the above steps have 

 been completed. 

4. NRC investigation and determination of whether or not similar nonconforming 

 conditions and causes exist at other Entergy-run nuclear power plants. 

If prompt action can not be taken through the 10 CFR 2.206 process, NEC recommends 

the NRC exercise its statutory discretion to halt power operation until it can be 

determined to what extent Vermont Yankee is being operated in an unanalyzed condition 

and until it can be determined that reduction in margins of public health and safety have 

been restored and do so prior to screening NEC=s letter for acceptance into the 2.206 

process. 
 

-2- 

Background: 

On August 27, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action pursuant to 

10 CFR 2.206. On September 6, 2007, the petitioner was notified by telephone call that the 

requested immediate action to derate or shutdown the Vermont Yankee Power Plant was denied 

since the petition did not identify safety hazards sufficient to either derate or shutdown the plant. 

On September 12, 2007, the NRC staff held a teleconference with the petitioner, providing the 

opportunity to address the Petition Review Board (PRB). The PRB made an initial 

recommendation that the petition met the criteria for review under 10 CFR 2.206, and notified 

the petitioner by telephone of its decision to accept the petition only with respect to the review of 

technical concerns with the cooling towers on September 26, 2007. The petitioner requested a 

second opportunity to address the PRB by teleconference. This teleconference was held on 

October 3, 2007. In an email dated October 3, 2007, the petitioner forwarded additional press 

articles to supplement the original petition request. 

Current Status: 

The PRB met on October 17, 2007, in an internal meeting to consider the additional information 

provided by the petitioner during the October 3, 2007, teleconference. In the meeting, it was 

determined that the information provided in the petition was credible and sufficient to warrant 

review under 10 CFR 2.206, with respect to the cooling tower collapse. The final PRB 

recommendation was provided in an acknowledgement letter to the petitioner on 

November 6, 2007 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) 

Accession No. ML072920190). The Proposed Director’s Decision will be issued by 

March 5, 2008. 
 

Status of Potential Petitions Under Consideration 

Facility: Indian Point, Units 2 and 3 

Petitioners: Friends United for Sustainable Energy 

 (FUSE – Sherwood Martinelli) 

Date of Petition: June 25, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070540 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioners state that current NRC regulations are prejudiced and biased, usurp 

Stakeholder rights and presume that license renewal is a foregone conclusion, so long 

as the licensee spends enough money, and follows guidelines essentially drafted by the 

powerful nuclear industry lobby, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). 

1. The petitioners request that the NRC issue an order enjoining the NRC from 

considering any new license applications until the NRC regulations are revised to 

protect the Constitutional First Amendment Rights, as well as the Equal 

Protection and Due Process Rights of Stakeholders. 

2. Based upon the safety and security concerns identified on pages 4-14 of the 

petition (allegations), the petitioner requests that all licenses for IP be suspended 

until the site is in full compliance with all local, state and federal laws, statutes, 

rules and regulations. 

3. Request for rulemaking (Part 54). 

Background: 

On June 25, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action pursuant to 10 CFR 

2.206. On August 15, 2007, the petition manager contacted the petitioner to acknowledge 

receipt of the 2.206 petition. The petitioner requested that the allegations contained within the 

June 25, 2007, letter be handled in accordance with the 2.206 process. The PRB met internally 

on August 20, 2007, and August 27, 2007, to discuss the petitioner=s requests for immediate 

action (Items #1 and #2). On September 5, 2007, the petition manager informed the petitioner of 

the PRB=s decision to deny the requests for immediate action. A teleconference was scheduled 

for the petitioner to address the PRB on September 6, 2007. On September 5, 2007, the 

petitioner requested that the PRB delay the teleconference until October 2007, so that FUSE 

could focus its resources on responding to the Opportunity for Hearing for the Indian Point 

License Renewal. Due to multiple failed attempts to contact the petitioner by telephone, the 

petition manager contacted the petitioner by email on September 26, 2007, to inform the 

petitioner of the current status of the petition and to coordinate a date for a PRB meeting. The 

PRB met internally on October 30, 2007, to make an initial recommendation. 

ENCLOSURE 2 
 

-2- 

Current Status: 

The petition manager contacted the petitioner on November 2, 2007, to inform the petitioner of 

the PRB’s initial recommendation to accept the petition with respect to the concerns regarding 

the Indian Point sirens and groundwater, but deny the request for immediate shutdown. The 

petitioner requested an opportunity to address the PRB, and the meeting has been scheduled 

for December 21, 2007. After this meeting, the PRB plans to issue an acknowledgement letter 

containing the PRB’s final recommendation. 

On November 7, 2007, the NRC received notice that Sherwood Martinelli would be replacing 

Susan Shapiro as the FUSE point of contact for this petition. 

Facility: Indian Point (IP); ADAMS 

Petitioner: Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE-Sherwood Martinelli) 

Date of Petition: September 21, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070670 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioner states document access on the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) is not adequate, and further, historical documents have 

not been transferred, making the review of documents necessary for IP2 and IP3 license 

renewal impossible. The petitioner states that it is impossible to have an accurate picture 

of the General Design Criteria (GDC) for IP, which is critical to understanding the LRA 

(License Renewal Application). The petition also states that citizens cannot adequately 

review aging management programs proposed by the licensee (IP2 and 3) when 

Chapter 14 of the updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR), cannot be reviewed fully 

since the NRC has almost fully redacted under the name of national security. 

1. The petitioner asks for an order from the NRC that would put every historical 

document into ADAMS, and those pertaining to IP, organized into a centralized 

folder. The file would be further broken down into three sub-folders, one for each 

reactor licensee, and a forth for all documents that discuss one or more Entergy 

sites that include one or more of the IP reactors. 

2. The petitioner requests the NRC rules relating to proprietary requests by 

licensees be weighed against the public’s right to know. This includes making 

documents/information public, even if it would hurt the company's financial 

interests, and/or see them lose their edge in the industry, if the need to know of 

the public is more important. 

3. The petitioner requests that every proprietary document pertaining to IP be 

reviewed under NRC rules and regulations, and where possible, released to the 

public via ADAMS. For those documents the NRC deems proprietary, the 

petitioner asks the NRC to require the licensee to place into the public domain via 

ADAMS the required detailed summary. 
 

-3- 

4. The petitioner requests the NRC order its staff and Entergy to provide to the 

public a full and un-redacted version of the UFSAR for both plants so that the 

 public can fully understand the risks associated with IP, and adequately weigh the 

proposed aging management plans found in the licensee’s LRA. 

5. The petitioner requests a “stay of the clock” until this review is complete, and all 

proprietary document issues have been resolved. Further, the petitioner requests 

the petition be expedited through the decision making process to facilitate 

meeting the deadline for filing contentions of November 30, 2007. 

Current Status: 

By letter dated September 21, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action 

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. In a letter dated, October 24, 2007, the NRR staff notified the 

petitioner that the request does not meet the criteria for consideration under 10 CFR 2.206, 

because it does not contain a request for enforcement-related action. Instead, the request 

seeks changes in NRC’s management of its document system, ADAMS, and constitutes a 

challenge to NRC rules regarding the treatment of proprietary information. The request to 

require the licensee to provide an un-redacted version of the Safety Analysis is not a request for 

enforcement related action, but instead constitutes a challenge to NRC requirements regarding 

treatment of sensitive information. Finally, the request for a stay on the license renewal 

application process is not a request for enforcement related action, but raises a licensing 

concern. Accordingly, the petitioner was informed that the request will be further reviewed by 

the NRR Division of Operating Reactor Licensing. 

In a letter dated November 2, 2007, the petitioner disagreed with the PRB recommendation and 

requested that Chairman Klein overturn the PRB decision. A green ticket was assigned for the 

NRC staff to address the petitioner’s disagreement. In a letter dated December 5, 2007, the 

NRR Associate Director for Operating Reactor Oversight and Licensing concurred with the 

PRB's decisions and documented this decision to the petitioner (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML073240984).

Facility: Indian Point (IP), Units 2 and 3 

Petitioner: Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE-Sherwood Martinelli) 

Date of Petition: September 21, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070671 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioner states the NRC and the NEI have wrongfully concluded that the likelihood 

of a terrorist attack on a nuclear reactor site is insufficient to warrant consideration in the 

environmental impact statement (EIS) scoping process. 

1. The petitioner requests the environmental costs of a terrorist attack be included in 

the EIS scoping process for the IP nuclear reactors. Specifically, the petitioner 

requests the EIS scoping process include the environmental cost studies for 

individual targeted terrorist attacks on individual locations/components at the 
 

-4- 

facility. In addition, the petitioner requests the environmental costs of a targeted 

terrorist attack on multiple locations/components of the facility be included. 

Current Status: 

By letter dated September 21, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action 

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. In a letter dated, October 24, 2007, the NRR staff notified the 

petitioner that the request does not meet the criteria for consideration under 10 CFR 2.206, 

because it does not contain a request for enforcement-related action, but instead seeks a 

change in NRC policy or regulations. The petitioner was informed that the request will be 

reviewed by the NRR Division of License Renewal. 

In a letter dated November 2, 2007, the petitioner disagreed with the PRB recommendation and 

requested that Chairman Klein overturn the PRB decision. A green ticket was assigned for the 

NRC staff to address the petitioner’s disagreement. In a letter dated December 5, 2007, the 

NRR Associate Director for Operating Reactor Oversight and Licensing concurred with the 

PRB's decisions and documented this decision to the petitioner (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML073240984). 

Facility: Indian Point, Units 2 and 3 

Petitioners: Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE-Sherwood Martinelli) 

Date of Petition: September 28, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070700 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioner states Entergy has not taken adequate action to ensure the IP2 and 3 

emergency sirens are fully operational. 

1. The petitioner requests that the NRC issue an order to place IP2 and 3 in cold 

shutdown until their emergency sirens are fully approved by the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the NRC, and the system is 

operating within 96 percent. 

2. The petitioner requests the NRC fine Entergy $130,000 per day from 

September 28, 2007, forward until they have complied with the NRC's order. 

Current Status: 

By letter dated September 28, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action 

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. The PRB met internally on October 30, 2007, to determine if the 

petition met the criteria for review under 10 CFR 2.206. The petition manager contacted the 

petitioner on November 1, 2007, to inform the petitioner of the PRB’s initial recommendation to 

accept the petition with respect to the concerns regarding the Indian Point sirens, but deny the 

request for immediate shutdown. The petitioner requested an opportunity to address the PRB, 
 

-5- 

and the meeting has been scheduled for December 21, 2007. After this meeting, the PRB plans 

to issue an acknowledgement letter containing the PRB’s final recommendation. 

Facility: Indian Point (IP) 

Petitioner: Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE-Sherwood Martinelli) 

Date of Petition: September 28, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070701 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioner states IP1 is in violation of its SAFESTOR status, citing the following 

concerns: 

1. Various components of IP1 are being used to support the activities and 

 operations of other NRC-licensees, specifically IP2 and 3. 

2. IP1 has failed to repair leaking spent fuel pools (SFP) so that current spent fuel 

rods could be moved into a refurbished SFP, allowing the current SFP to be 

drained and restored to design basis. 

3. IP1 is cross contaminating waste streams with a separate NRC licensee by using 

the IP2 SFP to transfer separately licensed materials into dry cask storage. 

4. IP1 is allowing mixed wastes to be stored in the IP1 containment area, and in 

various non-specifically identified burial sites risking human health and the 

environment. The mixed waste burial sites are not fully identified and monitored, 

thus creating possible migration pathways for human ingestion. 

5. Entergy is attempting to modify the license for IP1 to bring back into operation the 

IP1 crane to co-mingle licensee spent fuel waste streams by moving IP1 rods into 

the IP2 SFP. The IP2 SFP is to the point of bursting, and cannot provide 

adequate rack space for a full core emergency dump after the spring turn around 

unless they can begin moving fuel from the pool in large quantities this fall. 

The petitioner requests the NRC remove IP1 from SAFESTOR, and move it into official 

full decommissioning status, with decommissioning to begin immediately. 

Current Status: 

By letter dated September 28, 2007, the petitioner filed a petition for an enforcement action 

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. The NRC staff is reviewing the petition to determine if it meets the 

criteria for review under 10 CFR 2.206. In a letter dated, December 5, 2007, the NRC Office 

Director for the Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs notified 

the petitioner of the PRB’s conclusion that the submittal did not meet the criteria for 

consideration under 10 CFR 2.206 because it is not a request for enforcement-related action, 

but a licensing action (ADAMS Accession No. ML073120262). The current license provides for 
 

-6- 

Indian Point 1 decommissioning at the same time as Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 1 is 

authorized to store spent fuel pursuant to Technical Specifications. 

Facility: Yucca Mountain Project 

Petitioner: State of Nevada - Catherine Cortes Masto, Attorney General 

Date of Petition: October 16, 2007 

EDO Number: G20070731 

PRB meeting: TBD 

Issues/Actions requested: 

The petitioner states that it has recently found a number of Sandia National Laboratory 

(SNL) documents that show SNL has subordinated safety and scientific accuracy to meet 

the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) deadline to file a license application for the 

Yucca Mountain Geologic Repository. 

The petitioner requests that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inform DOE 

to take the following actions: 

1. “suspend Sandia from any future work on the Yucca Mountain project” until an 

independent/external investigation is completed 

2. arrange investigation of SNL’s “safety-conscious environment” by an independent 

external organization 

3. “confirmation of a new safety culture” at SNL. 

Current Status: 

On October 16, 2007, the petitioner filed the petition titled, “Petition for an Independent 

Investigation and Suspension of Sandia National Laboratories from Further Work on the 

Yucca Mountain Project,” citing 10 CFR 2.206. On October 25, 2007, the PRB met 

internally to discuss the petition from the State of Nevada. The PRB concluded that the 

petition from the State of Nevada does not meet the criteria for a 2.206 petition because 

the petition does not request the Commission to take an enforcement-related action 

against an NRC licensee, applicant, certificate holder, or their contractors. Moreover, the 

NRC has not received a license application from the Department of Energy for the Yucca 

Mountain Geologic Repository. 

On November 15, 2007, the petition manager called Ms. Marta Adams, Senior Deputy 

Attorney General, and informed her of the PRB’s decision. In addition, the NRC staff 

sent a closure letter dated November 15, 2007, to the petitioner to formally document the 

PRB’s decision. 

The PRB agreed that the substantive concerns expressed by the State of Nevada are 

best addressed in the context of a future licensing proceeding, should NRC receive an 

application to construct a repository at Yucca Mountain. The PRB agreed that, in view of 

these conclusions, the petition should be handled as routine correspondence. 
AGE STATISTICS FOR AGENCY 2.206 PETITIONS

Assigned 

Action 

Office 

FACILITY/ 

Petitioner 

Incoming 

petition 

PRB 

meeting1

Acknowledgment 

letter/days from 

incoming2

Proposed 

DD 

issuance 

Date/age3

Date for 

final 

DD/age4

Commen

Agency=s 

NRR Vermont 

Yankee/ Raymond Shadis - NEC 

08/27/07 09/12/07 

10/03/07 

11/06/07 

71 

03/05/08 

120

TBD 

Delayed dumeetings wproviding thpetitioner to supplemen

1) Goal is to hold a PRB meeting, which the petitioner is invited to participate in, within 2 weeks of receipt of petition. 2) Goal is to issue acknowledgment letter within 35 days 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.