[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47523-47525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23821]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-213]


Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company; Issuance of Director's 
Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, has issued a Director's Decision concerning a Petition 
dated March 11, 1997, filed by Ms. Rosemary Bassilakis pursuant to 
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 2.206 (10 CFR 
2.206) on behalf of the Citizens Awareness Network and the Nuclear 
Information and Resource Service (Petitioners). The petition requests 
that, on the basis of the repeated failures of the radiation protection 
program at the plant, the NRC (1) commence enforcement action against 
the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CY) by means of a large 
civil penalty to ensure compliance with safety-based radiological 
control routines, (2) modify CY's license for the Haddam Neck plant 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 to prohibit any decommissioning activity, 
which would include decontamination or dismantling, until CY manages to 
conduct routine maintenance at the facility without any contamination 
events for at least 6 months, and (3) place the Haddam Neck plant on 
the NRC Watch List.
    The Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has determined 
that the Petition should be deferred in part and denied in part for the 
reasons stated in the ``Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-
97-19), the complete text of which follows this notice and is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 
L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the Local Public Document Room 
for the Haddam Neck Plant at the Russell Library, 123 Broad Street, 
Middletown, Connecticut.
    A copy of this decision has been filed with the Secretary of the 
Commission for the Commission's review. As provided by 10 CFR 2.206(c), 
this decision will become final action of the Commission 25 days after 
issuance unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review 
of the decision within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of September 1997.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Collins,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. 50-213 (10 CFR 2.206)]

    In the Matter of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, 
(Haddam Neck Plant)

Partial Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

I. Introduction

    On March 11, 1997, Ms. Rosemary Bassilakis submitted a petition 
pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 2.206 
(10 CFR 2.206) on behalf of the Citizens Awareness Network and the 
Nuclear Information and Resource Service (Petitioners) requesting that 
the NRC (1) commence enforcement action against the Connecticut Yankee 
Atomic Power Company (CY) by means of a large civil penalty to assure 
compliance with safety-based radiological control routines, (2) modify 
CY's license for the Haddam Neck plant, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, to 
prohibit any decommissioning activity, which would include 
decontamination or dismantling, until CY manages to conduct routine 
maintenance at the facility without any contamination events occurring 
for at least 6 months, and (3) place the Haddam Neck plant on the NRC 
Watch List.
    In support of their requests, the Petitioners claimed that of 
particular concern was Northeast Utilities' inability to maintain 
proper radiological controls at the Connecticut Yankee (Haddam Neck) 
nuclear reactor. The Petitioners quoted an NRC press release describing 
continuing problems at the Haddam Neck facility, and stated that in 
their view the facility's management was making empty verbal assurances 
to the NRC that contamination problems were being properly controlled. 
The Petitioners also alleged that the NRC Confirmatory Action Letter 
(CAL) of March 4, 1997, discussing radiological controls at the Haddam 
Neck plant, is clearly insufficient.

II. Background

    The NRC staff shares the Petitioners' concerns regarding the 
failures of the Haddam Neck radiological controls program and has 
detailed these concerns in Inspection Reports 50-213/96-12 (December 
19, 1996) and 50-213/97-02 (March 21, 1997), and in the aforementioned 
CAL (discussed in more detail below). In summary, these failures 
resulted in the unplanned exposure of two individuals, longstanding 
discrepancies in the calibration of several radiation monitors that are 
used to monitor and control radiological effluent releases, and the 
inadequate control of radioactive material that resulted in the 
undetected release of contaminated equipment to a non-licensed vendor.
    In response, the NRC has taken comprehensive and significant 
actions to resolve its concerns in the area of radiological controls, 
including the aforementioned CAL, a required licensee response to the 
findings in Inspection Reports 96-12 and 97-02, a management meeting 
with the former CY management held at the NRC Region I office, and a 
second management meeting with the new CY management held on May 28, 
1997, in the NRC Region I offices on these same issues. This second 
management meeting gave NRC regional and headquarters staff an 
opportunity to meet the new Haddam Neck management and confirm their 
commitment to resolve the above problems. The meetings were open to

[[Page 47524]]

public observation. As indicated by the CAL, another meeting between 
the Region I Administrator and CY management will be held before any 
NRC determination that the issues noted in the CAL have been resolved. 
Meanwhile, under the CAL, the licensee has agreed not to perform any 
radiological work except that required to maintain the plant in a safe 
configuration.
    The CAL identifies four significant activities to which the 
licensee has committed to bring its management and implementation of 
radiation control programs up to a standard acceptable to the NRC, as 
follows:
    (1) Identify, in writing, specific compensatory measures that CY 
will put in place to ensure sufficient management control and oversight 
of ongoing or planned activities that require radiological controls.
    (2) Hire an independent assessor to assess the quality and 
performance of the CY radiological control programs and their 
implementation.
    (3) By May 30, 1997, on the basis of the results of the independent 
assessment, (a) identify problems, determine root causes, and develop 
broad-based and specific corrective actions; (b) identify performance 
measures that may be used to determine the effectiveness of 
radiological control programs; and (c) submit a plan and schedule to 
the Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, for implementing improvements 
in the radiological control programs.
    (4) Before eliminating any interim compensatory measures (as 
committed to in the response to Item 1, above), meet with the Region I 
Administrator to describe program implementation and performance 
improvements achieved or planned.
    With regard to CAL Item 1, above, the licensee has identified and 
implemented compensatory measures (a) by limiting work in 
radiologically controlled areas to only work that is considered 
necessary, (b) requiring specific radiation work permits (RWPs) for 
more limited ranges of radiological work, and (c) placing additional 
controls on work requiring a specific RWP. CY also hired an independent 
assessor, Millennium Services Incorporated, to perform the required 
assessments, therefore completing CAL Item 2. The licensee has most 
recently submitted a response in accordance with CAL Item 3, regarding 
improvements to its radiation protection program.
    The primary objective of the licensee's Radiation Protection 
Improvement Plan is to institute near and long-term permanent 
improvements to the site Radiation Protection Program by establishing 
processes to:
    <bullet> Identify problems, root causes, improvement items/
initiatives and associated corrective actions using site programs and 
processes;
    <bullet> Establish responsibility for corrective action 
implementation;
    <bullet> Prioritize and implement corrective actions using a logic 
scheme based on potential risk and/or critical facility decommissioning 
milestones (e.g. reactor coolant system decontamination, major 
component removal);
    <bullet> Track, trend and report corrective action implementation 
using site programs and processes;
    <bullet> Verify corrective action adequacy and completeness in 
addressing the initial improvement initiative through monitoring and 
feedback;
    <bullet> Verify that completion of one or more identified 
corrective actions resolves the identified root cause; and
    <bullet> Document problem resolution, from identification through 
corrective action closure, using site programs and process.

The licensee has scheduled completion of its Plan to occur by the 
end of 1997.

    A meeting with the Regional Administrator (CAL Item 4) is expected 
to occur before the end of 1997.

III. Discussion of Petitioners' Requests

    The first request was for a large civil penalty to assure 
compliance with safety-based radiological control routines.
    The NRC is currently considering enforcement action in regard to 
failed radiation program controls at the Haddam Neck plant. Therefore, 
this request is deferred pending a decision on NRC action in this 
area.<SUP>1</SUP> After the NRC resolves these issues, you will be 
informed through a future Director's Decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In a letter dated May 12, 1997, the NRC proposed a $650,000 
civil penalty against CY (EA-96-001 et al.) for violations found 
during inspections conducted between November 21, 1995, and November 
22, 1996; the licensee paid the civil penalty on June 11, 1997. 
Although the violations on which this civil penalty were based do 
not involve radiological controls, the May 12 action clearly 
demonstrates the NRC's resolve to impose significant civil penalties 
on a licensee when appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Petitioners also requested that the NRC impose a 6-month 
moratorium on any decommissioning activities at Haddam Neck until the 
licensee demonstrated its competence in avoiding contamination events 
while conducting necessary maintenance. This request is denied for the 
following reasons. Although contamination events may occur in the 
future, there is no reason to believe, based on previous semiannual 
environmental reports and annual exposure reports of plant workers, 
that 10 CFR Part 20 dose limits will be exceeded at the Haddam Neck 
plant. Additionally, an NRC Senior Resident Inspector is currently on 
site to monitor and inspect the licensee's day-to-day performance. 
Furthermore, the CAL addresses the radiation protection program at 
Haddam Neck by focusing on the needed improvements in the licensee's 
radiation control program and by ensuring NRC approval before any of 
the interim measures in Item 1 of the CAL are withdrawn.
    The Petitioner's third request was that the NRC place Haddam Neck 
on the NRC Watch List. As a general policy, an operating plant is 
placed on the Watch List when a licensee's performance warrants NRC 
monitoring beyond that normally required by the NRC inspection program. 
In this case, the Haddam Neck plant is permanently shut down and will 
not be returning to operation. Additionally, the NRC's inspection 
program has led to several actions being taken to respond to the 
deficiencies identified at Haddam Neck. As described above, these 
actions include the confirmatory action letter, meetings with licensee 
management to emphasize NRC expectations, a requirement to improve the 
radiation protection program, and retention of an onsite senior 
inspector to monitor licensee performance. The NRC believes that, under 
these circumstances, the actions taken adequately protect public health 
and safety and that the current inspection program can appropriately 
monitor licensee performance. Therefore, this request is denied.

III. Decision

    For the reasons stated above, the Petition is deferred in part and 
denied in part. The decision and the documents cited in the decision 
are available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's 
Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2210 L Street NW., 
Washington, DC.
    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of the decision will be 
filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission's review. 
As provided by this regulation, the decision will constitute the final 
action of the Commission 25 days after issuance, unless the Commission, 
on its own motion, institutes a review of the decision within that 
time.


    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of September 1997.


[[Page 47525]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Collins,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-23821 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P