March 9, 2001

MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Travers

Executive Director for Operations

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

 for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 2001 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 February 28,

2001. During the month, the petition on Indian Point Unit 2 by J. Riccio, of Public Citizen,

(G20010020) was closed. Currently, there are three open petitions: two in the Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), and one in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards (NMSS).

Attachment 1 provides the detailed status of petitions for NRR and NMSS. Attachment 2 

shows the age and staff hours expended on open 2.206 petitions as of February 28, 2001. 

Attachment 3 shows the statistics for the 2.206 petitions processed in the past 12 months.

This report and recently issued Director’s Decisions are placed in the Agencywide Document

Access and Management System (ADAMS), 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
1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

February 28, 2001

(Table of Contents)

Attachment 1

Page

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. No.

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

Haddam Neck Nuclear Generating Station R. Bassilakis/CAN/G20000462............................4

Indian Point Unit 2 J. Riccio/Public Citizen/G20010020.....................5

Indian Point Unit 2 D. Katz/CAN/G20000568.....................................6
2

Attachment 1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

Facility: Moab site of Atlas Corporation (Present Licensee,

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Trustee)

Petitioner: Earthjustice 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: 11/17/2000

Petition Manager: Myron Fliegel

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests 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 (FWS), 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, the petitioner notified NRC of its

intent to sue under the ESA. On December 16, 1998, the petitioner 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 (PRB) meeting was held on January 26, 1999, and the petitioner’s

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 FWS under the ESA. 

Earthjustice had, on January 27, 1999, 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 groundwater, citing the impacts to the endangered fish in the Colorado River and its belief 

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

acknowledging receipt of the supplement, denying immediate action, and notifying the petitioner that NRC

was deferring action on the 2.206 petition, pending a decision by the ASLB on the petitioner’s request for a

hearing on similar issues. 

* Schedule for completion will be set following the filing of Earthjustice’s motion withdrawing its petition. 
3

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 and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP was

chosen to be the 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 petitioner’s

response on December 2, 1999.

On October 28, 1999, the ASLB presiding officer found the Earthjustice petition of January 27, 1999, to be

timely, and entertained further argument on the issue of petitioner’s standing. On November 16, 1999,

Earthjustice requested the presiding officer to rule on whether the ASLB has jurisdiction with respect to

determining whether NRC has complied with the ESA. On December 6, 1999, the staff filed a response

arguing that the ASLB should deny the petitioner’s November 16, 1999, motion. 

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. FWS final biological opinion, as well as mitigative

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

the Federal Register on January 3, 2000.

On January 13, 2000, the petitioner filed a reply with the ASLB in support of its motion originally filed on

November 16, 1999, for a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction. On February 17, 2000, the ASLB granted the

petitioner’s request for hearing. The PRB, in consultation with the Office of the General Counsel (OGC),

deferred action on this 2.206 petition pending resolution of the litigation before the 9th Circuit Court of

Appeals and of the petition before the ASLB.

On June 22, 2000, the petitioner wrote to NRC requesting it to reinitiate consultation with FWS on two

additional issues. On July 21, 2000, NRC wrote to the petitioner stating that it will consider the June 22,

2000, letter as a second supplement to the original petition, which is being held in abeyance, pending the

hearing before the ASLB. On October 30, 2000, the President signed the Floyd B. Spence National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. Section 3405 of that legislation transfers the Atlas site to

the Department of Energy (DOE) with the stipulation that DOE remove the tailings from the Moab site. The

legislation also terminates the NRC license no later than October 30, 2001.

Current Status:

On November 17, 2000, all parties to the ASLB hearing agreed to terminate the proceeding. Earthjustice

agreed to file a motion withdrawing its petition to intervene. Because the issues raised have been

rendered moot by the above transfer, the staff intends to close the petition. However, in view of the

statutory requirement that responsibility for the site be transferred to DOE by October 30, 2001, the staff is

evaluating the proper disposition of the petition before closing it. 
4

Facility: Haddam Neck Nuclear Generating

Station

Petitioner: R. Bassilakis, et al. (CAN)

Date of Petition: 9/26/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 9/29/2000

EDO Number: G20000462

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 3/23/2001

Last Contact with Petitioners: 1/4/2001

Petition Manager: E. Pogue/D. Wheeler

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

(1) A full investigation of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company’s (CYAPCO’s) protective

clothing laundering practices and specifically of the September 20, 2000, incident at a public

laundry facility in which petitioners contend that the licensee may have been laundering

radioactively contaminated clothing. (2) That NRC revoke CYAPCO’s license or suspend it until

such time that an investigation is completed and any contamination found at the public laundry

facility as a result of the incident is remediated. (3) That “this violation of regulation should be

referred to the Department of Justice for investigation.” (4) That an informal hearing be

conducted. 

Background:

A PRB meeting on the petition was held on October 10, 2000. The petitioners were provided

with an opportunity to address the PRB in an open session, and did so with the licensee

present. The PRB concluded that the petition meets the threshold for processing under 

10 CFR 2.206 and also concluded that the details provided in the petitioners’ request were

sufficient to warrant further inquiry. The acknowledgment letter and the Federal Register Notice

on the petition were issued on November 9, 2000. A proposed Director's Decision (DD) was

issued on December 19, 2000. The proposed DD is based primarily on the findings of an NRC

inspection of the licensee's garment laundering practices conducted in response to the petition. 

The NRC inspector concluded that adequate controls were in place to assure that CYAPCO

training materials did not become contaminated, and that CYAPCO's garment laundering

practices are in compliance with NRC regulations and do not endanger the health and safety of

the public. A copy of the proposed DD was provided to both the petitioner and the licensee. 

On January 4, 2001, the petitioners provided comments on the proposed DD, and the staff, in

consultation with the Region, is in the process of resolving the comments raised by the

petitioners. 

Current Status:

A 2-week extension of the completion date has been obtained for issuance of the final DD.
5

Facility: Indian Point, Unit 2

Petitioner: James P. Riccio, et al. (Public Citizen)

Date of Petition: 1/11/2001

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 1/17/01

EDO Number: G20010020

Scheduled Completion Date: 3/9/2001

Last Contact with Petitioners: 1/30/2001

Petition Manager: R. Clark

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners request that the licensee, Con Edison, have its license to operate Indian Point

Unit 2 (IP2) suspended or revoked until there has been a full-participation biennial emergency

planning exercise required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E. The petitioners also requested that

if Con Edison’s license to operate IP2 is not suspended or revoked, it be fined $110,000 for

each day it is not in compliance with the regulatory requirements specified in 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix E.

Background:

A PRB meeting on the petition was held on January 30, 2001. The petitioners were provided

with an opportunity to address the PRB in an open session, and did so with the licensee

present. 

Current Status:

The PRB concluded that the petition did not meet the threshold for processing under 10 CFR

2.206 [Part III of Management Directive 8.11, pages 11 and 12] because the petitioner raises

no new issues or safety concerns. However, the staff has acknowledged that ambiguities exist

in the regulations regarding the frequency and level of exercise participation required between

co-located licensees and offsite authorities. This issue has been reviewed and evaluated by the

staff and is documented in the Commission Information Paper (SECY-00-0238) dated

December 26, 2000. In that paper, the staff concluded that the licensee’s practice of

alternating participation in the biennial full-participation exercises, with the current level of

interactions between the licensees and offsite authorities during the “off biennial” years, is

acceptable, and that there is reasonable assurance that appropriate measures could be taken

to protect the health and safety of the public in the event of a radiological emergency. Thus,

IP2 is not required to conduct another full-participation exercise with offsite authorities until

2002. The petitioners were offered a second opportunity to address the PRB, which they did on

February 28, 2001. The acknowledgment letter addressing the issues contained in the

petitioners’ request was issued on March 1, 2001, and the petition was closed.
6

Facility: Indian Point, Unit 2

Petitioner: Deborah Katz, et al. (CAN)

Date of Petition: 12/4/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 12/11/2000

EDO Number: G20000568

Scheduled Completion Date: 7/9/2001*

Last Contact with Petitioners: 2/9/2001

Petition Manager: C. Gratton

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

(1) That the licensee, ConEd, have its license suspended for the Indian Point Unit 2 (IP2) facility

due to persistent and pervasive negligent management, which has endangered the public

health and safety and the environment due to significant safety problems existent at the site for

decades. (2) Specifically, that NRC investigate the apparent misrepresentation of material fact

by the utility to determine whether the significantly insufficient engineering calculations relied on

to ensure adequacy of design of key systems, including the steam generator (SG) analysis and

the electric bus analysis at the IP2 reactor, were due to a lack of rigor and thoroughness or a

result of deliberately misleading information. (3) Should the investigation determine that ConEd

deliberately provided insufficient and false information, the petitioners specifically request that

ConEd’s operating license be revoked for its IP2 reactor. (4) Should NRC not revoke the

license, and the IP2 reactor returns to operation, the petitioners specifically request that it

remain on the list of agency focus reactors to oversee the operation of the reactor until such

time as its management demonstrates that it can fulfill its regulatory requirements and

commitments. (5) No license transfer requests should be approved for IP2 until such time that

its management can demonstrate that the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)

backlog and the maintenance requirements are up-to-date and workers have been retrained to

the complete and revised UFSAR. (6) NRC should keep IP2 off-line until the fundamental

breakdown in management is analyzed and corrected.

Background:

The petitioners were, in accordance with Management Directive 8.11, offered an opportunity to

address the PRB in an open meeting. This meeting was conducted on January 24, 2001, in

NRC headquarters. A PRB meeting to consider the petitioners’ issues (items 1 thru 5) was held

on February 7, 2001. The PRB recommended accepting the petition, and issuing a partial

Director’s Decision to address the transfer issue (item 5) by May 2001.

Current Status:

During the public meeting with the petitioners on January 24, 2001, the petitioners gave the

staff additional documents for the staff to consider as supplements to the information contained

in the original 2.206 petition request. One set of the documents included numerous condition

reports from IP2. Because of the sensitive nature of these condition reports, the PRB withheld

the reports from being publicly released until they could be evaluated by the staff. In addition,

before releasing the condition reports, the PRB recommended that the licensee provide a

redacted version of the condition reports that could be made publicly available, which the

licensee provided on February 28, 2001. Normally, documents such as these condition reports

are addressed in the allegation process and, therefore, are not part of the public record. In this

case, however, since the condition reports were presented to the staff as a supplement to the

2.206 petition in a transcribed, public meeting as part of the public 2.206 process, they are

being made part of the public record after appropriate redactions to protect the identity of 

individuals. The acknowledgment letter is on course for issuance by March 9, 2001.

___________________________________________________________________________

* Schedule for completion will be calculated 120 days from the date of the acknowledgment 

letter.
1

Attachment 2

AGE AND RESOURCE EXPENDITURES FOR AGENCY 2.206 OPEN PETITIONS

As of February 28, 2001

N

R

FACILITY AGE

(months)*

Scheduled

Completion

Date

Resources

Expended by

Action Office

(HOURS)1

Resources

Expended

by OGC

(HOURS)1

Comments if not meeting the

Agency’s 

120-day Completion Goal

011 ATLAS

CORPORATION

3** TBD2 5 70 On November 17, 2000, all

parties to the ASLB hearingagreed to terminate theproceeding. Earthjustice agreedto file a motion withdrawing itspetition to intervene.

462 Haddam Neck 4 3/23/2001 139.5 4 Proposed DD issued and comments

have been received from petitioners. Staff is reconciling comments.

568 Indian Point Unit 2 1 7/9/2001 225.5 30 |

does not include management or administrative time.

nation.

of the acknowledgment letter.

opped as of May 27, 1999.
1

Attachment 3

Table on Status of Public Petitions

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

Assigned Facility Petition DD Age Comments

Action Date Date at Closure1,2

Office (Months)

NRR Millstone 1, 2 & 3 11/25/96, as 

amended 12/23/96 2/16/2000 37 Partly Granted

NRR Indian Point Unit 2 9/15/99 4/13/2000 6 Denied

NRR Indian Point Unit 3 2/10/2000 7/26/2000 4 Partly GrantedNRR Indian Point Unit 2 3/14/2000 10/6/2000 6 Partly Granted

NRR Hatch Units 1 & 2 5/3/2000 10/18/200 4 Denied

NMSS Envirosafe, Idaho 3/13/2000 12/13/2000 8 Denied 

NMSS US Department of Defense 6/1/2000 1/9/2001 3 Denied 

te of the acknowledgment letter.

etter issued within 5 weeks from date of receipt; DD issued within 4 months of acknowledgment letter.