MEMORANDUM TO: L. Joseph Callan

Executive Director for Operations

FROM: Bruce A. Boger

Acting Associate Director for Projects

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: MAY 1998 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS UNDER

10 CFR 2.206

The attached monthly report reflects the status of 10 CFR 2.206 petitions as of May 30, 1998. The petition on

Seabrook (GT970873) for which the DD 98-03 became a final agency action on 4/13/98 is closed.

Attachments 1, 2, and 3 give the status of petitions for the Offices of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

and Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Attachment 1 includes only petitions with status change from the previous

update, Attachment 2 includes petitions with no status change from the previous update, and Attachment 3 lists

other sensitive matters, which are for internal distribution only. Please note that Attachment 1 also includes first

time additions to the list of petitions.

By issuing the monthly report on the status of pending 10 CFR 2.206 petitions, the staff is documenting its

responsiveness to petitioners. Those parts of the monthly report not of a sensitive nature will be placed in the

Public Document Room and are intended to be a link on the NRC external home page, making them readily

accessible to the public. However, this feature is currently not in operation.

Attachment 1:

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206 with Status

Change from Previous Update

May 30, 1998 

Facility Petitioner/EDO No.

Commonwealth Edison Company* Robarge, National Whistle Blower Center/G980185

Envirocare of Utah, Inc. Cochran, Natural Resources Defense Council/GT970863

Babcock & Wilcox Citizen's Action for a Safe Environment, et. al

Millstone 1,2,3 Bassilakis, CAN, Gunter, Nuclear Information Resource

Service/G980070

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Borchmann/GT97494

St. Lucie/Turkey Point Saporito, National Litigation Consultants/multiple GTs

Vermont Yankee Daly/G980233

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Dwyer/GT97339

* Denotes Addition to the petition list from previous update
Facility: Commonwealth Edison Company

Petitioner: National Whistleblower Center and Randy Robarge

Date of Petition: 3/24/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/30/98

EDO Number: G980185

OGC Number: P-98-006

Scheduled Completion Date: 8/27/98

Last Contact with Petitioner: 4/17/98

Petition Manager: G. Dick

Case Attorney: S. Chidakel

Issues/Action Requested:

ComEd's assertion in a pleading associated with a Nuclear Whistleblower case revealed that the filing of a PIF

[Problem Identification Form] does not equate to engaging in "protected activity" fosters an atmosphere of

intimidation and chills the reporting of safety concerns; ComEd intentionally imposed restrictive confidentiality

aimed at prohibiting employees from providing information to the NRC in violation of 10 CFR 50.7.

Petitioner requests: 1) Immediate issuance of a show cause order requiring ComEd to explain why the filing of a

PIF does not constitute core protected activity under section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act, 42 USC §

5851 (1993); 2) The issuance of a Level I violation and appropriate civil penalty for taking action that ComEd

knew or should have known would chill employees from filing PIFs( Level III violation for a 10 CFR § 50.7

issued on November 28, 1995, see EA 95-235); 3) Require the licensee to post a public apology for claiming

that the filing of a PIF does not constitute protected activity; 4) Issue a show cause order to ComEd requiring it

to explain under oath why the imposition of restrictive confidentially clauses prohibiting employees from

directly communicating information to the NRC should not be prohibited; 5) Require ComEd to transmit to all

individuals under similar restrictive confidentiality terms notice that they are now free to communicate

information to the NRC; 6) Require licensee to release to the NRC copies of all restrictive confidentially

agreements entered into by ComEd and any subcontractors employed by ComEd since March 21, 1990 (the date

of the Federal Register notice of 10 CFR §50.7(f) was published).

Background:

This is a new petition received on March 24, 1998. One of the petitioners, Mr. Robarge, has an active

Department of Labor Discrimination Case (98-ERA-2) and these issues arose during the Discovery portion of

the case.

Current Status:

Petition Review Board (PRB) met on 4/9/98 and an acknowledgment letter was issued on April 29, 1998. Based

on the PRB meeting's decision, a request for additional information was sent on May 20, 1998 to the licensee in

which the licensee was requested to respond to the petition and provide the staff with a the copy of letter

referenced in the petition.
Facility: Envirocare of Utah, Inc.

Petitioner: T. Cochran, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Date of Petition: 12/12/97

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 12/18/97

EDO Number: GT970863; GT980293

OGC Number: P-97-014

Scheduled Completion Date: TBD; Awaiting OI report and Staff Evaluation of OI Report

Last Contact with Petitioner: 5/20/98

Petition Manager: H. Lefevre

Case Attorney: H. McGurren

Issues/Action Requested:

Immediate NRC investigation and suspension of Envirocare's license.

Background:

The Petitioner was contacted by telephone on 12/18/97 and informed of NRC's receipt of the petition. NRC's

letter of 12/31/97 to Mr. Charles Judd of Envirocare requires that the licensee do the following: (1) respond to

each of the issues raised in the petition, (2) advise the NRC whether it intends to enforce its Employment

Agreement against current and former employees who have engaged, or do engage, in protective activities

cognizable under Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act (Section 211) and other employee protection

statutes, and (3) respond to inconsistencies in its employee protection policies as identified in NRC's 12/08/97

letter.

The staff's letter of 1/16/98 to Thomas Cochran of NRDC indicates: (1) acknowledgment of receipt of the

Petition, (2) a request that NRDC provide the names of individuals referenced in the Petition; (3) NRC's referral

to the FBI of possible criminal violation of Section 211, (4) NRC's conclusion that no further immediate action

concerning Envirocare's NRC license is warranted, and (5) NRC's providing the Petitioner with a copy of the

notice of receipt of the Petition that will be placed in the Federal Register. NRDC's 1/21/98 response to NRC's

1/16/98 letter provided the names of 11 individuals (all attorneys, for the most part, affiliated with law firms

representing competitors of Envirocare) who may have knowledge of current and former employees (beyond

those identified in the Petition) who feel threatened by Envirocare.

Current Status:

The staff issued, on 5/13/98, letters to three law firms and the State of Utah confirming that the identified

individuals had responded with the requested information or otherwise. The Petitioner submitted another

petition on 5/06/98. Upon review of this new petition, the Petition Review Board (PRB) in its 5/19/98 board

meeting determined that it provided no new information. The board decided that the 5/06/98 petition (EDO

Control: G980293) would be grouped with the existing petition of 12/12/97. The Petitioner was informed by

voice mail on 5/20/98 of NRC's receipt of the 5/06/98 petition. A formal acknowledgment letter to the

petitioner's letter is planned for issuance by early June 1998.
Facility: Babcock & Wilcox

Petitioner: Citizen's Action for a Safe Environment, The Kiski Valley Coalition to

Save Our Children

Date of Petition: 3/26/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review

Organization:

4/10/98

EDO Number: G980224

OGC Number: P-98-008

Scheduled Completion Date: 5/11/98

Last Contact with Petitioner(s): 4/9/98

Petition Manager: D. Orlando

Case Attorney: J. McGurren

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioners request a hearing on the decommissioning of the former radioactive materials burial area known as

the Shallow Land Disposal Area in Parks Township, PA.

Background:

This is a new petition received on March 26, 1998.

Current Status:

The petition review board met on April 22, 1998, to discuss how to proceed with this request. On May 13, 1998,

NRC staff responded to the petitioners March 26, 1998, request and indicated that since the petitioner did not

explicitly request NRC to undertake an enforcement action, the March 26, 1998 letter would not be treated as a

a petition under 10 CFR 2.206. The staff indicated that when the decommissioning plan was submitted to NRC,

the petitioners could request a hearing on the matters raised in their March 26, 1998, request. The petition is

therefore closed.
Facility: Millstone Units 1, 2, & 3

Petitioners: R. Bassilakis, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) and P. Gunter,

Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)

Date of Petition: 2/2/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued

by:

NRR

Date Referred to Review

Organization:

2/4/98

EDO Number: GT980070

OGC Number: P-98-002

Scheduled Completion Date: 7/10/98

Last Contact with Petitioners: 5/12/98

Petition Manager: S. Dembek

Case Attorney: M. Rafky

Issues/Action Requested:

The Petition requests three actions: (1) The revocation of the license to operate Millstone Units 1, 2, and 3 as the

result of ongoing intimidation and harassment of its work force by NU management; (2) The revocation of the

license to operate Millstone Units 1, 2, and 3 as the result of persistent licensee defiance to adherence to NRC

regulations and directives to create a Aquestioning attitude@ for its workers to challenge management on

nuclear safety issues without fear of harassment, intimidation, or reprisals by NU; and (3) That NRC refer the

Nuclear Oversight Focus 98 List and the reported licensee management attempt to destroy the list to the

Department of Justice for investigation of a potential coverup.

Background:

The acknowledgment letter was sent to the petitioners on 3/11/98. On 3/27/98, the petitioners were sent a copy

of the Millstone licensee's response to a 2/10/98 NRC request for additional information. PRB met on 2/23/98

and determined that there may be need for OE and OI involvement, but wanted to see how the licensee

responded to the NRC's February 10, 1998 letter.

Current Status:

On 5/12/98, the petitioners were sent a copy of the licensee's April 24, 1998, supplemental response letter. The

staff completed its review of the licensee's responses and performed 8 interviews of licensee personnel to verify

key aspects of the licensee's written responses. The Director's Decision has been drafted and is in concurrence.
Facility: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

Petitioner: P. Borchmann

Date of Petition: 6/23/97, 6/28/97, and 7/11/97, as supplemented 10/21/97

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 7/3/97

EDO Number: GT97494

OGC Number: P-97-011

Scheduled Completion Date: 6/5/98

Last Contact with Petitioner: 4/20/98

Petition Manager: B. Westreich

Case Attorney: H. McGurren

Issues/Action Requested:

Demands that the NRC extend the current San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Unit 3 refueling

outage until all outstanding public safety concerns are fully resolved including: (1) serious flaws in the SONGS

emergency evacuation plans for both San Diego and Orange County; (2) undersized pressurizer; (3) SONGS

mismanagement in loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) dose calculations; (4) Unit 1 spent fuel pool is not designed

for permanent storage; (5) high density racks in Units 2 and 3 spent fuel pools increase the probability of

accidental criticality as degradation of materials occurs and break up of pool during a seismic event; (6) the

condition of the spent fuel pool waterproof membrane is unknown; (7) NRC has failed to establish requirements

and procedures for licensee monitoring any leaks in the spent fuel pool; (8) local population will not respond to

an emergency at SONGS because of conditioned response to military training at Camp Pendleton or because of

lack of attention due to listening to tapes or compact disks; (9) reliance on civilian personnel to respond to an

emergency; (10) no safe disposal plan exists for the spent fuel from SONGS; (11) SONGS and Southern

California Edison are more interested in profit than safety; and (12) questions regarding SONGS increase in

liability insurance.

Background:

The petitioner was contacted by telephone on 2/19/98 to discuss the status of the petition. An acknowledgment

letter to the original three letters which denied the petitioner's request for immediate action was issued on

9/22/97. The petitioner sent a response dated 10/21/97 to the 9/22/97 acknowledgment letter. An

acknowledgment letter to the 10/21/97 petitioner's letter was issued on 2/17/98.

Current Status:

The completion date was extended to 6/05/98 due to delays with the review of the emergency plan. The

Director's Decision is in concurrence.
Facility: St. Lucie 1 & 2, Turkey Point 3 & 4

Petitioners: T. Saporito, Jr. National Litigation Consultants

Date of Petitions: 2/26, 2/27, 3/6, and supplemented 3/15, 3/17, 3/29, 3/30, and 4/4/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/2/98

EDO Numbers: G980124/125, G980138, G980203/204/232

OGC Number: P-98-003

Scheduled Completion Date: 10/28/98

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/14/98

Petition Manager: W. Gleaves

Case Attorney: S. Chidakel

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioner requests the NRC (1) take escalated enforcement action, including modifying, suspending, or

revoking FPL's operating licenses until it demonstrates that there is a work environment which encourages

employees to raise safety concerns directly to the NRC, and issuing civil penalties for violations of the NRC's

requirements; (2) permit you to intervene in a public hearing regarding whether FPL has violated the NRC's

employee protection regulations and require FPL to allow NLC to assist its employees in understanding and

exercising their rights under these regulations; (3) conduct investigations and require FPL to obtain appraisals

and third-party oversight in order to determine whether its work environment encourages employees to freely

raise nuclear safety concerns; (4) inform all employees of their rights under the Energy Reorganization Act and

NRC's regulations to raise such concerns; and (5) establish a website on the Internet to allow employees to raise

concerns to the NRC.

Background:

The petition manager telephoned the petitioner on 4/7/98 and 4/14/98. The Petition Review Board met in March

19, 1998 to discuss the ongoing proceeding. The staff intends to group a large number of issues into specific

categories and address each category. Much of the petition is repetitive to past issues, previously addressed.

Current Status:

On 4/14/98, the petition manager contacted the petitioner to discuss the public nature of the petition process.

The acknowledgment letter and Federal Register notice were issued on May 4, 1998. The new issues have been

divided among a team from OI, OGC, NRR/Projects, and Region II. OI issues will be forwarded to OI for their

action. Previously addressed issues will be referred to information contained in previous director's decisions.

The licensee has been requested to address the individual issues, within the limits of privacy for named

individuals, as quickly as possible. The licensee's response will be compared and validated against staff

responses.
Facility: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station

Petitioner: M. Daly, New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, Inc.

Date of Petition: 4/10/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 4/15/98

EDO Number: G980233

OGC Number:

Scheduled Completion Date: 5/15/98 (Immediate Response)

Last Contact with Petitioner: 5/13/98

Petition Manager: R. Croteau

Case Attorney: H. McGurren

Issues/Action Requested:

The Petitioner requests that the NRC issue an order requiring that the licensee's more limiting administrative

limits, which preclude Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee) from operating with a torus

water temperature above 80 0F or with service water injection water temperature greater than 50 0F, shall

remain in force until certain conditions are met. The conditions include a complete reconstitution of the

licensing basis for the maximum torus water temperature, submittal to the NRC of a TS amendment request

establishing the correct maximum torus water temperature, and completion of NRC review of the amendment

request.

Background:

The current TS specify a maximum torus temperature of 100oF, however, the licensee determined that 90oF had

been used as an input to the containment response analysis. The licensee then instituted administrative controls

to limit torus temperature to 90oF while a TS change was prepared. While performing preliminary calculations

and evaluations to verify the adequacy of the 90oF limit, the licensee determined that it was necessary to further

reduce the administrative limit to 80oF until the final analysis was completed. This issue was discussed with the

licensee in a series of meetings on March 5, March 24, and April 7, 1998. During the meetings the licensee

indicated that the adequacy of a 90oF initial torus temperature would be confirmed and a TS amendment request

would be submitted before restart from the outage (May 1998). The licensee intends to restart the plant,

administratively controlling torus temperature to 90oF, while the NRC reviews the TS change.

Current Status:

PRB met on 4/16/98 and a letter denying the petitioner's immediate request was issued on May 13, 1998. The

licensee has submitted the TS amendment specifying a torus water temperature limit of 90oF and the staff is

reviewing the submittal. The Director's Decision will be issued once the staff has reviewed the TS amendment

specifying the maximum torus water temperature (expected to be 90oF) and written a Safety Evaluation.
Facility: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

Petitioner: S. Dwyer

Date of Petition: 4/25/97

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 5/2/97

EDO Number: GT97339

OGC Number: P-97-009

Scheduled Completion Date: 6/12/98

Last Contact with Petitioner: 4/20/98

Petition Manager: M. Fields

Case Attorney: H. McGurren

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioner believes that San Onofre will not be able to withstand a major seismic event due to the degradation of

steam generator internal tube supports. In addition, petitioner requests that a thorough investigation should be

done in Unit 2 to find any corrosion of the steam generator internal tube supports similar to that identified in

Unit 3. Further, petitioner requests that a general seismic evaluation upgrade should be done for the San Onofre

steam generators and a retrofitting upgrade of the steam generator supports could be done at the same time.

Background:

An acknowledgment letter was issued on 6/26/97 denying the petitioner's request to immediately shut down the

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. The licensee submitted information in a letter dated 10/17/97 that the

staff is using to reply to the petitioner's concerns . The staff's course of action involved reviewing the inspection

results of both units, most recently during mid cycle outages conducted in Feb-April, 1998. Inspection findings

are being finalized for issuance and will be used in the final Director's Decision.

Current Status:

The Director's Decision is in concurrence and will issued by June 12, 1998.

Attachment 2:

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206 with No Status Change from Previous Update 

May 30, 1998 

Facility Petitioner/EDO No.

Advanced Medical Systems, Inc. Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District/EDO10395

Philadelphia VA Medical Center Lovell, Ann/G980069

Millstone Galatis, We the People, Inc./EDO603

Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Katz, Citizens Awareness Network(CAN)/GT96919

Connecticut Yankee Bassilakis, CAN/GT97181

D.C. Cook, Units 1 and 2 Lochbaum/GT97724

Haddam Neck Block, CAN/G980168

Browns Ferry 1 Lochbaum/G980199
Facility: Advanced Medical Systems, Inc.

Petitioner: Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District

Date of Petition: 8/19/94

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 8/29/94

EDO Number: 10395

OGC Number: P-94-020

Scheduled Completion Date: 9/10/98

Last Contact with Petitioner(s): 4/16/98

Petition Manager: J. DeCicco

Case Attorney: R. Weisman

Issues/Action Requested:

Amend AMS license to install, maintain, and operate alarms on all drains from the London Road facility.

Background:

An acknowledgment letter was issued on 9/7/94. On 12/29/94 the Sewer District requested a license renewal

hearing per Subpart L, 10 CFR 2.1205. The staff provided status updates to the petitioner by telephone on

5/30/95, 8/1/95, 10/3/95, 12/4/95, 2/12/96, 4/16/96, 6/18/96, 8/20/96, 10/22/96, and 12/20/96. The staff

requested the petitioner's views regarding the impact of a settlement agreement on the petition by letter dated

2/3/97. The petitioner's letter dated 3/4/97 indicated that the petitioner's requests are not completely covered by

the settlement agreement, and the petition remains relevant. A decision was made by the staff to defer the

Director's Decision until completion of the license renewal application review process, currently scheduled to be

completed by September, 1998.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.

Facility: Philadelphia VA Medical Center

Petitioner: Ann Lovell

Date of Petition: 01/28/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 2/4/98

EDO Number: G980069

OGC Number: P-98-001

Scheduled Completion Date: 6/30/98

Last Contact with Petitioner(s): 4/23/98

Petition Manager: T. Taylor

Case Attorney: S. Chidakel
Issues/Action Requested:

Request NRC to immediately suspend or revoke the NRC Operating License issued as they are operating in a

manner in which there is potential to present a significant danger to medical center patients, staff, and the

general public.

Background:

A copy of the Petition was provided to the Office of the Inspector General on 2/12/98. An acknowledgment

letter was sent to the petitioner on 2/27/98, and a Federal Register notice announcing the receipt of the Petition

was filed with the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

The Petition Review Board met on 2/10/98 to discuss the petition. A letter was sent to the VA Philadelphia on

February 27, 1998, informing them of receipt of the petition and requested their views on the central concerns

expressed by the petitioner. We requested a response by 3/31/98. Region I received the licensee's response by

letter dated 3/31/98. A letter was sent to the Petitioner on April 23, 1998, providing the Petitioner with a copy of

the PVAMC's response to the petition, and updating the Petitioner on the status of the Petition. The Petition

Review Board is scheduled to meet again on 6/8/98 to discuss the results of Region I's inspection of the

licensee.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.

Facility: Millstone

Petitioners: G. Galatis and E. Hadley on behalf of We the People, Inc.

Date of Petition: 8/21/95, supplemented 8/28/95

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 8/30/95

EDO Number: 603

OGC Number: P-95-015

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/30/98

Last Contact with Petitioner(s): 5/5/98

Petition Manager: S. Dembek

Case Attorney: R. Hoefling

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners allege that Northeast Utilities (NU) has offloaded more fuel assemblies into the spent fuel pool

than permitted under License Amendments 39 and 40; that NU has knowingly operated Millstone in violation of

its operating licenses; and that NU has submitted material false statements. Petitioners seek a 60 day license

suspension for Millstone Unit 1 (after the unit is brought into compliance with the license and the design basis).

The petitioners also request that the operating license be revoked until the facility is in full compliance with the

terms and conditions of its license; before reinstatement of the license, a detailed independent analysis of the

offsite dose consequences of total loss of spent fuel pool water be conducted; that enforcement action be taken

against NU pursuant to 10 CFR 50.5 and 50.9; that actions be taken regarding a proposed license amendment

pending before the Commission wherein NU seeks to increase the amount of spent fuel it may offload and that

the amendment be denied; that the NRC retain an independent expert, at NU's expense, to prepare a safety
analysis report on the proposed amendment; and that, before the issuance of any amendment, an analysis

including both the probability and consequences of applicable events be conducted. In the supplement,

Mr. Galatis raised additional concerns including concerns at Millstone Units 2 and 3 and Seabrook.

Background:

Northeast Utilities (NU) provided its responses in 9/22/95 and 10/11/95 letters. The acknowledgment letter was

issued on 10/26/95. The staff completed its review of the licensee's amendment request and on 11/9/95 issued

the amendment and safety evaluation. A spent fuel pool inspection was conducted at Millstone in March 1996 to

review the 10 CFR 2.206 concerns as well as other spent fuel pool issues. On 12/26/96, the staff issued a partial

Director's Decision (DD-96-23) that addressed the technical aspects of the petitioners' requests. The wrongdoing

aspects are still under review and will be addressed in a subsequent Director's Decision. The completion date

was extended to 6/30/98 to allow time for additional staff review. A status update letter was sent to the

petitioner on 5/5/98.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.

Facility: Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Units 1, 2, and 3

Petitioners: D. Katz, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) and P. Gunter, Nuclear

Information and Resource Service

Date of Petition: 11/25/96, as amended 12/23/96

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review

Organization:

12/20/96

EDO Number: GT96919

OGC Number: P-96-026

Scheduled Completion Date: 7/1/98

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/17/98

Petition Manager: D. McDonald

Case Attorney: R. Hoefling

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioners request the staff to take the following actions: (1) immediately suspend or revoke Northeast Utilities'

(NU's) license to operate the Connecticut Yankee (CY) (Haddam Neck) and Millstone reactors due to chronic

mismanagement; (2) investigate the possibility that NU made material misrepresentations to the NRC

concerning engineering calculations and other information or actions relied upon to assure the adequacy of

safety systems at CY and Millstone; (3) if an investigation determines that NU deliberately provided insufficient

and/or false or misleading information to the NRC, revoke NU's operating licenses for CY and Millstone, or, if

not, keep the reactors off-line pending a Department of Justice independent investigation; (4) if the reactors

remain operating, petitioners request that they remain on the NRC's "watch list"; (5) keep CY and Millstone

off-line until NU's chronic mismanagement has been analyzed, remedial management programs put into effect

and the NRC has evaluated and approved the effectiveness of NU's actions; (6) in the event NU decides to

decommission any or all of the reactors at issue, petitioners request the NRC not to permit any decommissioning

activity to take place until the above issues are resolved; and (7) commence an investigation into how the staff

allowed the illegal situation at NU's Connecticut reactors to exist and continue over a decade.
Background:

A Director's Decision (DD-97-21) addressing most of the issues was issued to the petitioners on 9/12/97.

DD-97-21 partially granted some of the petitioner's requests. Request (3) above was partially deferred for the

Millstone plants and will be addressed in a subsequent final Director's Decision, currently scheduled for 7/1/98.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.

Facility: Connecticut Yankee

Petitioners: R. Bassilakis, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) and P. Gunter,

Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)

Date of Petition: 3/11/97

Director's Decision To Be Issued

by:

NRR

Date Referred to Review

Organization:

3/20/97

EDO Number: GT97181

OGC Number: P-97-003

Scheduled Completion Date: 9/30/98

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/20/98

Petition Manager: T. Fredrichs

Case Attorney: M. Rafky

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioners request (1) that the NRC commence enforcement action against Connecticut Yankee (CY) (Haddam

Neck) by means of a large civil penalty to assure compliance with safety-based radiological control routines, (2)

modification of CY's license to prohibit any decommissioning activity, which would include dismantling or

decontamination, until CY manages to conduct routine maintenance of the facility without any contamination

events for at least 6 months, and (3) placement of CY on the NRC's "watch list."

Background:

An acknowledgment letter was issued on 4/3/97. The petitioner was contacted by telephone on 7/9/97 and

informed of the status of the petition. A partial Director's Decision (DD-97-19) was issued on 9/3/97. DD-97-19

denied requests (2) and (3) above. In a public meeting on 10/27/97, which the petitioner attended, the staff

stated that it was pursuing enforcement action regarding the remaining open item in the petition. Request (1)

regarding enforcement action has been deferred and will be the subject of a final Director's Decision, currently

scheduled for 9/30/98.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.
Facility: Donald C. Cook, Units 1 and 2

Petitioner: D. Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists

Date of Petition: 10/9/97

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 10/15/97

EDO Number: GT97724

OGC Number: P-97-013

Scheduled Completion Date: 8/8/98

Last Contact with Petitioner: 04/28/98

Petition Manager: John Stang

Case Attorney: R. Hoefling

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioner requests that the operating licenses for Donald C. Cook Units 1 and 2 be modified, revoked, or

suspended until there is reasonable assurance that their systems are in conformance with design and licensing

bases requirements. The petitioner also requests that a public hearing into this matter be held in the Washington,

DC area prior to the first unit at D.C. Cook being authorized to restart so that the petitioner can present

information supporting the contentions in this petition.

Background:

The acknowledgment letter was issued on 12/9/97. The petitioner sent in a letter on 1/6/98 objecting to the use

of the MD 8.11 criteria to determine if a public hearing would be held without first asking him if he had new

information to present. The letter stated that he did have new information but did not provide it. A public

meeting (not hearing) was held on 1/12/98 to allow the petitioner to present his concerns.

The petitioner sent in an addendum to the petition on 1/12/98, which provided a written copy of the issues he

presented at the 1/12/98 meeting. In addition, the petitioner submitted a request on 1/15/98, to review the draft

confirmatory action letter (CAL) followup inspection report prior to Cook being authorized to restart. An

acknowledgment letter for both the 1/12 and 1/15/98 requests was issued on February 23, 1998. The petitioner

was contacted by phone on 2/10/98 to clarify how issues he raised in the 1/12/98, letter were addressed in the

acknowledgment letter, and to provide him with a general status update on Cook and the CAL. The petitioner

was contacted by phone on 2/23/98, to advise him of a meeting to be held at the Cook site to discuss their status

on the CAL and other issues. On 4/28/98 the petitioner was contacted to give a status update and to provide

clarifications on the petition response.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.
Facility: Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station

Petitioner: J. Block

Date of Petition: 3/13/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/20/98

EDO Number: G980168

OGC Number: P-98-004

Scheduled Completion Date: 8/20/98

Last Contact with Petitioner: 4/22/98

Petition Manager: T. Fredrichs

Case Attorney: M. Rafky

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioners requested immediate suspension of the licensee's operating license. Petitioners present three issues in

support of their request: 1) that contaminated materials were released offsite, 2) that on-site radiological failures

have occurred, and 3) that the licensee's planned procedure to ventilate the spent fuel building through open

doors and roof hatches, in the event that the spent fuel pool cooling system becomes inoperable and can not be

restored, constitutes an unmonitored, unplanned release of radiation.

Background:

This is a new petition received on March 20, 1998. An acknowledgment letter was issued on 4/22/98.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.

Facility: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1

Petitioner: D.Lochbaum

Date of Petition: 4/5/98

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 4/6/98

EDO Number: G980199

OGC Number:

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/29/98(Acknowledgment letter) 7/31/98 Decision

Last Contact with Petitioner: 5/4/98

Petition Manager: A. DeAgazio

Case Attorney: R. Hoefling

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner asked for an informal hearing requesting (1) that the Operating License for Browns Ferry, Unit 1

be revoked and 2) that the NRC should require the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to submit either a
decommissioning plan or a lay-up plan for Browns Ferry, Unit 1. As the basis for the Union of Concerned

Scientist (UCS) request, the petitioner asserts that because Browns Ferry Unit 1 has been on "administrative

hold" since June 1, 1985, and has not been operated since then, revocation of the operating license and requiring

relicensing, if TVA later decides to restart Unit 1, is a better, safer process than is the current Inspection Manual

Chapter 0350 restart process. Further, the petitioner asserts that requiring a decommissioning plan would

provide assurance that the irradiated fuel is stored safely and that Units 2 and 3 are sufficiently independent of

Unit 1 for safe operation.

Background:

This is a new petition received on April 5, 1998. The 2.206 petition review board convened in mid April, 1998

and endorsed a proposed course of action. The acknowledgment letter was issued 4/29/98 with a decision not to

hold an informal hearing on the UCS petition.

Current Status:

There is no change in status for this update.