MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Travers

Executive Director for Operations

THRU: Samuel J. Collins, Director

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Associate Director

 for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: DECEMBER 1999 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS

UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

The attached monthly report gives the status of 10 CFR 2.206 petitions as of December 31,

1999. During the month, the petition on Diablo Canyon Nuclear Station (G19990600) was closed. 

A new petition on Northeast Utilities Millstone 2 & 3 (G20000002) was closed as it did not meet

the threshold screening criteria for a 2.206 petition. Thus, there are three open petitions: two in

NRR and one in NMSS.

Attachment 1 provides the status of petitions for the Offices of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards (NMSS) and Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). Attachment 2 gives the status of

petitions that are in a confidential status and for internal distribution only. Attachment 3 shows the

age and staff hours expended on open 2.206 petitions as of December 31, 1999, including a

summary of the status of 2.206 petitions exceeding the 120-day scheduled completion goal. 

Attachment 4 shows the statistics for the 2.206 petitions processed during 1999.

Those parts of the monthly report not of a sensitive nature, and recently issued Director’s

Decisions, are placed in the Public Document Room and on the NRC’s external home page,

making them readily accessible to the public. The URL address is

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/2206/index.html.

Attachments: As stated

CONTACT: Ram Subbaratnam, NRR

 415-1478
MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Travers

Executive Director for Operations

THRU: Samuel J. Collins, Director

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Associate Director

 for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: DECEMBER 1999 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS

UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

The attached monthly report gives the status of 10 CFR 2.206 petitions as of December 31,

1999. During the month, the petition on Diablo Canyon Nuclear Station (G19990600) was closed. 

A new petition on Northeast Utilities Millstone 2 & 3 (G20000002) was closed as it did not meet

the threshold screening criteria for a 2.206 petition. Thus, there are three open petitions: two in

NRR and one in NMSS.

Attachment 1 provides the status of petitions for the Offices of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards (NMSS) and Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). Attachment 2 gives the status of

petitions that are in a confidential status and for internal distribution only. Attachment 3 shows the

age and staff hours expended on open 2.206 petitions as of November 30, 1999, including a

summary of the status of 2.206 petitions exceeding the 120-day scheduled completion goal. 

Attachment 4 shows the statistics for the 2.206 petitions processed during 1999.

Those parts of the monthly report not of a sensitive nature, and recently issued Director’s

Decisions, are placed in the Public Document Room and on the NRC’s external home page,

making them readily accessible to the public. The URL address is

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/2206/index.html.

Attachments: As stated

CONTACT: Ram Subbaratnam, NRR, 415-1478

I:\PERSONALWEB\NRC\PUBLIC\2206\1999\December\2201299.web.wpd 

DISTRIBUTION: See next page

OFFICE PDII/PM LA:PDII PDII/PD NMSS/IMNS/

IMOB

DLPM:D ADPT:NRR D: NRR

NAME RSubbaratnam* Dunnington* HBerkow PGoldberg* JZwolinski/SBlack BSheron SCollins

1/16 /2000 1/ 15 /1999 / /2000 1/16 /2000 / /2000 / /2000 / /2000
* See Previous Concurrence OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

Distribution:

File Center

M. Tschilitz, OEDO

F. Miraglia, DEDR/OEDO

C. Paperillo, DEDMRS/EDO

P. Norry, DEDM/OEDO

J. Blaha, AO/EDO

E. Julian, SECY

PDII r/f

W. Gleaves, NRR

S. Collins, NRR

B. Sheron, NRR

E. Baker, OD

R. Subbaratnam, NRR

K. Cyr, OGC

D. Dambley, OGC

L. Chandler, OGC

F. Cameron, OGC

J. Goldberg, OGC

J. Cordes, Jr., OCAA

R. Borchardt, OE

P. Lohaus, OSP

W. Kane, NMSS

P. Goldberg, NMSS

S. Moore, NMSS

P. Anderson, OEDO(E-mail)

E. Dunnington, NRR

B. Boger, NRR

M. Stein, OE

G. Caputo, OI

G. Tracy, EDO

E. Adensam, NRR

J. Zwolinski , NRR

S. Black, NRR

H. Berkow, NRR

A. Kugler, NRR

OCA

OPA

Regional Administrators

PUBLIC w/att 1, 3, & 4 (Att 2 is "NOT FOR EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION")
Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

December 31, 1999

(Table of Contents)

Attachment 1

Page

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. No.

Atlas Corporation Dagget, et al./(G19990011)...................................2

Connecticut Yankee and Millstone Units 1,2 &3 Katz, Citizens Awareness Network

(CAN)/GT96919....................................................4

Nine Mile Point Unit 1 T. Judson/G19990268...........................................5

Indian Point Unit 2 D. Lochbaum/UCS/G1990465..............................7

Diablo Canyon Units 1 & 2 D. Lochbaum,UCS/G19990600............................9

Millstone Units 2 & 3 STAR et al...........................................................10
2

Attachment 1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

Facility: Moab Mill Reclamation Trust with

Pricewaterhouse (Former Licensee Atlas

Corporation, present Licensee

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Trustee)

Petitioner: Earth Justice Legal Defense Fund

Date of Petition: 1/11/99

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 1/12/99

EDO Number: G19990011

OGC Number: P-99-02

Scheduled Completion Date: TBD*

Last Contact with Petitioner: 12/2/99

Petition Manager: Myron Fliegel

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners request NRC to take six immediate actions to halt impacts to and to ensure the

conservation of the endangered species of fish in the Colorado River near the Atlas site.

Background:

On August 2, 1988, Atlas submitted an application for a license amendment to revise its site

reclamation plan for uranium mill tailings at its no longer operating site near Moab, Utah. On

March 30, 1994, a notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement was published

in the Federal Register. In January 1996, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was

published for public comment. On July 29, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in

accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), issued a final biological opinion

for impacts to federally listed endangered species from the reclamation of the Atlas mill tailings

site. On October 12, 1998, and November 13, 1998, petitioners notified NRC of their intent to

sue under the ESA. On December 16, 1998, petitioners filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction

against NRC in the U.S. District Court, District of Utah.

A petition was filed on January 11, 1999, requesting the NRC to take six immediate actions

related to potential impact on endangered fish in the Colorado River due to contaminants from the

Atlas Uranium mill tailings pile. A Petition Review Board meeting was held on January 26, 1999,

and the petitioners’ requests for immediate action were denied by a letter of that date. In the

letter, it was noted that none of the six items identified in the petition addresses a health, safety,

or environmental concern that requires emergency steps before a complete review as provided

for in 10 CFR 2.206. An acknowledgment letter for this petition was published in the Federal

Register on February 12, 1999. On May 13, 1999, the staff received a supplement to the 2.206

petition requesting immediate action on several items: (1) to suspend the issuance of the license

amendment to permit reclamation; (2) to initiate a supplemental National Environmental Policy Act

process; and (3) to reinitiate consultation with Fish and Wildlife Services under the Endangered

Species Act. Earthjustice petitioned the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) to intervene

on the Atlas Corporation’s proposal to reclaim the Moab mill tailings and on the cleanup of

contaminated ground water, citing the impacts to the endangered fish in the Colorado River and
3

its belief that the biological opinion was erroneous. On May 27, 1999, the NRC wrote to the

petitioners, acknowledging receipt of the supplement, denying immediate action, and notifying

petitioners that NRC was deferring action on the 2.206 petition, pending a decision by the ASLB

on the petitioners’ request for hearing on similar issues. 

On September 17, 1999, the staff filed responses to the ASLB presiding officers’ questions of 

July 30, 1999. On September 29, 1999, the staff provided the ASLB with a copy of its 

September 29, 1999, letter to Dames & Moore, notifying that organization that it had been

selected to become the Trustee for the Atlas Moab site, since the Atlas Corporation is in

bankruptcy. Copies of both filings were sent to the petitioner. Dames & Moore subsequently

withdrew as trustee.

On October 18, 1999, Earthjustice filed a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit,

arguing that the May 27, 1999, letter and a May 28, 1999, license amendment constitute final

agency action and a de facto denial of the 2.206 petition. On November 3, 1999, OGC filed a

motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A copy of the

motion was sent to the petitioner. On November 23, 1999, the petitioner filed a response to the

NRC motion to dismiss arguing that the rejection of its request for immediate action and

subsequent lack of action on the part of the NRC in issuing a final Director’s Decision constitutes

a final agency action. NRC filed its reply with the court to the petitioners’ response as above on

December 2, 1999.

Current Status:

On December 27, 1999, an Order transferring source material license SUA-917 from Atlas

Corporation to the Maob Mill Reclamation Trust was signed. The Order transfers the license to

the Trust and orders the Trust and the Trustee (PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP) to perform

reclamation of the uranium mill tailings site in accordance with the terms and conditions of the

license. The terms and conditions of the license include reasonable and prudent measures in the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s final biological opinion, as well as mitigative measures developed

by the NRC staff. The Order was effective December 30, 1999, and will be published in the

Federal Register.

*The schedule for issuance of the Director’s Decision will be set following the ASLB’s decision.
4

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: 2/15/2000

Last Contact with Petitioners: 11/26/99

Petition Manager: J. Zimmerman

Case Attorney: R. Hoefling

Issues/Action Requested:

The 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 partial Director's Decision (DD-97-21) addressing most of the issues was issued to the

petitioners on September 12, 1997. 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. The licensee recently pleaded guilty to felony counts and

accepted fines that are the largest penalty, civil or criminal, in the history of the commercial nuclear

power industry. Although there are continuing investigations, they are viewed as beyond the scope

of concerns that would affect the facility license.

Because the outcome of the investigations is not expected to influence the NRC’s decision

concerning NNECO’s future operation of the Millstone reactors, the staff proposed to the Petition

Review Board (PRB) to finalize and issue the Director’s Decision by February 15, 2000. The PRB

met on November 24, 1999, and affirmed the proposed course of action.

Current Status:

The final Director’s Decision is being prepared and is on track for the proposed completion date.
5

Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 

Petitioners: Tim Judson

Syracuse Peace Council, et al.

Date of Petition: May 24, 1999

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 5/24/99

EDO Number: G19990268

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 11/28/99 (Completed)

Last Contact with Petitioners: 10/22/99

Petition Manager: D. Hood

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners request that NRC suspend NMPC’s operating license for NMP1 by postponing the

scheduled restart date until (1) NMPC releases the most recent inspection data on the plant’s core

shroud, (2) a public meeting can be held in Oswego County to review this inspection data and

the...repair design to core shroud welds V-9 and V-10, and (3) an adequate public review of the

safety of the plant’s continued operation is accomplished. This request is based upon the

assertions of “new and unreviewed” information and “safety concerns.”

By letter dated August 10, 1999, the petitioners requested a separate public meeting to discuss

issues arising since the petition was submitted; namely, cracks identified in the main drain line and

control rod stub tubes during hydrostatic testing of the Unit 1 reactor vessel, and the 1997 cracks

in the emergency core cooling condensers. Although the August 10, 1999, letter includes issues

that are beyond the scope of the initial petition (expanding the scope (1) from cracks in the core

shroud to cracks in other components and (2) to concerns about the shroud inspection results) the

NRC staff will respond to the August 10, 1999, letter as a supplement to the petition. In the August

10, 1999, letter, petitioners express concern that (1) the NRC’s leak-before-break model for

assessing safety of aging reactors is inadequate; (2) cracking is not confined to the core shroud

but is spreading throughout the internals, pipes, and other systems, representing an unanalyzed

condition being identified piecemeal, revealing a pattern of degradation of reactor components and

systems, and suggesting overall embrittlement of the reactor; (3) core shroud weld V-10 exceeded

the crack growth rate limit in the NRC’s November 1998 safety evaluation and the rate predicted

by General Electric; and (4) the large crack growth rate measurement error (about 10

microinch/hour) provides a great deal of uncertainty compared to the NRC’s limit of 22

microinch/hour, and the measured rate should be at least 2 sigma below any established safety

limit.

Background:

A Petition Review Board (PRB) meeting on the petition was held on June 2, 1999. The PRB

accepted the May 24, 1999, letter as a valid petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206, but denied the

request for a public meeting (hearing). The PRB determined that the request for immediate action

to revoke or suspend the operating license for NMP1 by postponing the scheduled restart date

should be denied because the cracked vertical welds (V9 and V10) have been repaired, restoring
6

these shroud welds to their design bases; the licensee is following relevant staff-approved industry

guidance (e.g., several BWRVIP reports) for outage activities; and the staff has already evaluated

most of the NMP1-specific issues raised in the petition. These include a 1997 modification to the

tie rod base support design (redesign of wedge-retaining clip), previous restart and operation

contingent upon a mid-cycle reinspection of vertical welds, extended operation to the end of the full

cycle, and the shroud reinspection plan for the 1999 refueling outage (RFO15). Also, the

licensee’s repair of V9 and V10 welds was in accordance with a staff-approved repair/inspection

plan. 

An acknowledgment letter and Federal Register notice on the petition were issued on June 11,

1999. The acknowledgment letter accepted the May 24, 1999 petition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206,

but denied the request for meetings and other immediate actions before restart of Unit 1. Copies

of the licensee’s June 9, 1999, letter on the 1999 shroud weld reinspection results and the

licensee’s July 12, 1999, letter on the tie rod cap screw failure were forwarded to the petitioner on

July 26, 1999. 

The staff held a Plant Performance Review meeting at the Nine Mile Point site on October 22,

1999. This meeting discussed licensee performance issues, some of which relate to issues in the

petition and its supplement dated August 10, 1999. Mr. Judson received a copy of the NRC’s

letter dated September 30, 1999, and attended the meeting. After the meeting with the licensee,

the staff remained in the area and answered questions from the petitioner and local press.

The Director’s Decision DD-99-14 on the petition was issued on November 28, 1999. The NRC

staff’s subsequent review of the 1999 shroud reinspection results support NMPC’s conclusion,

reached before restart, that the structural integrity of the core shroud will be maintained during at

least the current operating cycle in its present configuration. The additional issues raised by the 

petitioner in the supplement to the petition were previously known and addressed by the NRC. 

These issues were resolved consistent with approved BWRVIP programs, codes and standards,

plant technical specifications, and the Commission’s regulations. The crack growth rate for weld

V10 did not exceed the NRC staff’s accepted limit and its repair has eliminated concern for its

current and future behavior. As discussed in the Decision, the issues raised in the petition do not

represent a significant safety issue and the actions requested in the petition were not granted. 

Current Status:

The decision became a final agency action after the 25-day period allowed for Commission

review.
7

Facility: Indian Point Unit 2 

Petitioner: D. Lochbaum

Union of Concerned Scientists

Date of Petition: September 15, 1999

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 9/15/99

EDO Number: G19990465

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 2/18/2000

Last Contact with Petitioners: 10/25/99

Petition Manager: J. Harold

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests that the NRC modify or suspend Indian Point Unit 2's operating license to

prevent restart until the five identified issues are resolved. In lieu of license modification or

suspension, the petitioner requests issuance of a Confirmatory Action Letter or Order requiring

the petitioner’s identified issues be addressed prior to restart. Additionally, the petitioner requests

a public hearing on the petition be conducted in the vicinity of the plant prior to restart. The petition

identified five issues, which are as follows: (1) Apparent Violation of Station Battery Design and

Licensing Basis; (2) Apparent Failure to Adequately Correct Circuit Breaker Problems; (3)

Apparent Unreliability of Emergency Diesel Generators; (4) Potential Unjustified License

Amendment for Under-Voltage and Degraded Voltage Relay Surveillance Intervals; and (5)

Apparent Errors and Non-Conservatism in Individual Plant Examination. A telephone conference

was held on September 22, 1999, between the Petitioner and the Petition Review Board offering

the Petitioner an opportunity to articulate, in more detail, the basis for the petition and to allow the

staff to ask the Petitioner clarifying questions. There were two additional issues provided during

the telephone conference call. They are: (1) Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2's (IP2)

ability to cope with a station blackout scenario with current procedures, and (2) the incorporation of

licensing commitments into plant procedures. 

Background:

In a public meeting held in Region I on September 14, 1999, to discuss a plant trip at IP-2 from full

power on August 31, 1999, ConEd described the complications of the events that led to the trip

and provided a copy of their recovery plan. This plan detailed actions that ConEd viewed as

necessary to complete prior to plant restart. On September 15, 1999, the staff received a 10

CFR 2.206 petition from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) on IP2. A Petition Review

Board (PRB) meeting on the petition was held on September 22, 1999. An acknowledgment letter

and Federal Register notice on the petition were issued on October 8, 1999. The PRB accepted

the petition as a valid one pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. The PRB determined that the petitioner’s

issues had been identified by the licensee in their September 14,1999, meeting and plant restart

was contingent upon implementation of the recovery plan which would resolve the petitioner’s

issues. The PRB concurred that several issues in the petition as well as others not addressed

need to be resolved prior to restart, thereby partially granting the petition. The PRB also made a

decision to request a licensee response to the issues raised in the petition to aid the staff in

preparing the acknowledgment letter to the petitioner. The licensee’s response dated September

24, 1999, provided information, on the docket, which the staff had already acquired through its

ongoing inspection effort. An additional request for additional information was issued on October
8

1, 1999, and the licensee responded by letter dated October 6, 1999. The staff used this

information in part to prepare the acknowledgment letter which was issued on October 8, 1999. 

The staff determined the immediate enforcement actions the petitioner requested were not

appropriate because the short-term actions in the licensee’s recovery plan adequately addressed

some of the petitioner’s issues and all of the restart issues. However, had the licensee not

adequately addressed these issues, the staff would have considered enforcement actions. The

unit was restarted on October 13, 1999.

The petitioner, in a letter dated October 12, 1999, expressed dissatisfaction that the

acknowledgment letter failed to address his safety concerns on the station battery design and

licensing basis and the adequate correction of breaker problems. The staff responded to those

concerns by letter dated October 25, 1999. The staff determined that the issues raised in the

petitioner’s October 12, 1999, letter did not change the conclusion of the October 8,1999,

acknowledgment letter. However, the staff plans to factor the supplemental information into the

final decision on the petition. 

Current Status: 

The Region I AIT follow-up inspection report was received on December 21, 1999. The Director’s

Decision is currently in preparation and is scheduled to be issued by February 18, 2000.
9

Facility: Diablo Canyon Power Plant,

Units 1 and 2

Petitioner: D. Lochbaum

Union of Concerned Scientists

Date of Petition: November 24, 1999

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 11/24/99

EDO Number: G19990600

Scheduled Completion Date: 12/22/99(Completed)

Last Contact with Petitioners: 11/30/99

Petition Manager: S. Bloom

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petition requests that the operating licenses for Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 be suspended

on December 20, 1999, if PG&E has not fully satisfied the nine conditions of the Department of

Labor findings. The petitioner also requests that the NRC issue an order requiring PG&E to have

an independent contractor assess the safety culture at Diablo Canyon, and that a public meeting

be held to present their concerns to the NRC staff. As the basis for the request, the petition states

that the findings of the Department of Labor (DOL) indicate that PG&E illegally discriminated

against Mr. Neil Aiken, a former reactor operator, who had his security access revoked for being

diagnosed with a Delusional Disorder by the company doctors. The petitioners raised numerous

safety concerns and suggested that this may have a “chilling effect” with others at the plant and

could lead to obvious negative safety implications. The petitioner is concerned about the clear

indications that the safety culture at Diablo Canyon is not conducive to employees raising safety

concerns without fear of retaliation. The petitioner states that the request serves a dual purpose

of ensuring that Mr. Aiken’s condition is remedied as soon as possible and also of reinforcing to

other conscientious workers at Diablo Canyon that PG&E will not get away with infringing on their

rights under federal law.

Background:

A PRB meeting was held on November 30, 1999. 

The petitioner’s request raised issues that were the subject of a previous petition request dated

November 24, 1998, and resolution was achieved via Director’s Decision (DD-99-05) issued on

March 12, 1999. A one-step acknowledgment/closeout letter is proposed to be issued on this

petition explaining the prior consideration given to the issue and, as was stated in the DD, the

licensee already performed a full safety culture survey in October 1998 and mini safety culture

survey in December 1999 which targeted previously identified areas of concern. Thus, the intent

of the petitioner’s request was met. In regard to the Department of Labor decision, it was noted

that the agency does not have any jurisdiction to reinstate the dismissed employee. Further, the

licensee’s appeal of the DOL findings puts them on hold until the appeal is resolved. The NRC

cannot interfere with the DOL process.

Current Status:

A one-step acknowledgment/denial letter on the petition was issued on December 22, 1999, and

the petition was closed.
10

Facility: Northeast Utilities(NU), Millstone 

Units 2 and 3

Petitioner: Standing for Truth About Radiation (STAR) et

al.

Date of Petition: December 30, 1999

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 1/4/2000

EDO Number: G20000002

Scheduled Completion Date: Completed

Last Contact with Petitioners: 12/30/99

Petition Manager: J. Zimmerman

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners request that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) force Northeast Utilities

(NU) Millstone nuclear reactors to suspend operations prior to the year 2000-(Y2K)-computer roll

over period. The petitioners stated that given the complexity and cascading effects that Y2K

computer bug can create, and it is impossible to guarantee that nothing will go wrong given the

catastrophic consequences of a worst case scenario accident, the petitioners insist that NU not

gamble with their and the lives of their children. The petitioners call on NRC to make NU adhere to

a “good corporate neighbor” policy and immediately place the unit 2 and 3 reactors in a cold shut

down mode until all safety systems are tested post Y2K computer roll over period and have on site

enough diesel generator fuel for a minimum 30-day period, for each reactor including unit 1. The

petitioners also request that NU triple the staff in the key areas of control room, and the reactor

core and spent fuel pool cooling systems. They assert that the financial cost incurred to meet their

safety demands will relieve the anxiety of the people, and be money well spent.

Background:

A Petition Review Board (PRB) meeting was held on January 5, 2000. The PRB affirmed the earlier

decision made by the Office Director, NRR, that the petition did not meet the threshold screening

criteria for a 2.206 petition. The petition did not provide any specific bases for the concerns related

to the safe operation of Millstone Units 2 and 3.

Current Status:

A one-step acknowledgment/denial letter on the petition was issued on December 30, 1999, and

the petition was closed. The letter explained that the Commission, in conjunction with the nuclear

Industry, had developed a comprehensive set of procedures intended to address and minimize the

potential public health and safety concerns that might be created at nuclear facilities because of

Y2K issues. The licensee for the Millstone facilities had informed NRC that all safety-related

systems were Y2K compliant, and, as a consequence, those facilities could be safely shut down if

necessary. 
1

Attachment 2

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206 with

 Petitions Involving the Office of Enforcement (OE),

the Office of Investigations (OI), the Inspector General (IG), and

the Department of Justice (DOJ), and Other Sensitive Information

<< ---- NOT FOR EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION----->>

DELETED

END OF STATUS REPORT

<<<---NOT FOR EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION--->>>
1

Attachment 3

AGE AND RESOURCE EXPENDITURES FOR AGENCY 2.206 OPEN PETITIONS

As of December 31, 1999

Deleted
1

Attachment 4

Report on Status of Public Petitions

Under 10 CFR 2.206 for DDs Issued and/or Closed During the Last 12 Months

Petition Number Assigned Facility Petition DD Age Comments

Action Date Date at Closure1,2

Office

G980568 NRR Haddam Neck 9/11/98 1/12/99 3 Partly Granted

G19980547 NMSS Atlas Corporation 9/10/98 1/20/99 2 Denied

GT977724 NRR D.C.Cook 10/9/97 2/11/99 14 Partly Granted

G980233 NRR Vermont Yankee 4/10/98 2/10/99 8 Denied

G199980707 NRR Diablo Canyon 11/24/98 3/12/99 2 Denied

G980199 NRR Browns Ferry 4/5/98 3/29/99 11 Denied

G19980622 NMSS FUSRAP 10/15/98 3/26/99 3 Denied

G19980678 NRR Perry 11/9/98 4/18/99 4 Denied

G980592 NRR River Bend 9/25/98 4/18/99 5 Denied

603 NRR Millstone 8/21/95 7/27/99 45 Partly Granted

G19990173 OE Seabrook 3/31/99 8/3/99 3 Denied

GT97181 NRR Connecticut Yankee 3/11/97 9/9/99 29 Partly Granted

G19980767 NMSS Enviro Care of Utah 12/30/98 7/12/99 5 Granted

G19990201 NRR Millstone 3/31/99 9/28/99 4 Denied

G19990224 NRR Nine Mile Point 1 & 2 4/5/99 10/28/99 4 Denied

G19990268 NRR Nine Mile Point 1 5/24/99 11/28/99 5 Denied

1) Age calculated from the date of the acknowledgment letter.

2) Goals: Acknowledgment letter issued within 5 weeks from date of receipt; DD issued within 4 months of acknowledgment letter.
PDII-2 DOCUMENT COVER PAGE

DOCUMENT NAME: 

I:\PERSONALWEB\NRC\PUBLIC\2206\1999\December\2201299.web.wpd

ORIGINATOR: Ram Subbaratnam

SECRETARY NAME: Doreen Turner

SUBJECT: Monthly Status Report for 2.206 Petitions- September 1999

*****ROUTING LIST*****

 NAME DATE

 1. E. Dunnington / /00

 2. R. Subbaratnam / /00

 3. H. Berkow / /00

 4. P. Goldberg, NMSS / /00

 5. S. Black/J.Zwolinski / /00

 6. B. Sheron / /00

 7. S. Collins / /00

 8. Secretary - Dispatch

CAN THIS DOCUMENT BE DELETED AFTER DISPATCH? yes_X__ no___