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: JANUARY 2000 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 January 31, 2000. 

A new petition on San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) 2 & 3, (G20000027) was

received. The Petition Review Board (PRB), which met on this petition on January 24, 2000,

decided that it did not meet the threshold screening criteria for a 2.206 petition and was closed

with a one-step acknowledgment/denial letter. 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 January 31, 2000, 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 in the past 12 months.

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: JANUARY 2000 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 January 31, 2000. 

A new petition on San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) 2 & 3, (G20000027) was

received. The Petition Review Board (PRB), which met on this petition on January 24, 2000,

decided that it did not meet the threshold screening criteria for a 2.206 petition and was closed

with a one-step acknowledgment/denial letter. 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 January 31, 2000, 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 in the past 12 months.

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\2000\January\edo220100.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

 / /2000 / /2000 / /2000 / /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

January 31, 2000

(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

Indian Point Unit 2 D. Lochbaum/UCS/G1990465..............................5

San Onofre Units 2 & 3* G. Mills/G2000027................................................7

* Denotes new addition to the list
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: 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: 1/6/2000

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 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
3

cleanup of contaminated ground water, 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 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 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 petitioners’ 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 Earth-Justice requested the presiding officer to rule on whether the ASLB

has jurisdiction with respect to determining whether NRC has complied with the Endangered

Species Act. On December 6, 1999, the staff filed a response arguing that the ASLB should deny

the petitioners’ 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. 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 was published in the

Federal Register on January 3, 2000.

Current Status:

On January 13, 2000, the petitioners filed a reply with the ASLB in support of their motion

originally filed on November 16, 1999, for a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction. The staff is awaiting

an ASLB ruling on the jurisdiction. 

*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 in the concurrence chain and is on track for the proposed

completion date.
5

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: 1/31/2000

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
6

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 in the concurrence chain and is on track for issuance by February 18, 2000.
7

Facility: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

(SONGS), Units 2 & 3

Petitioner: Glen R. Mills

Date of Petition: December 4, 1999

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 1/14/2000

EDO Number: G20000027

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 2/4/2000(completed)

Last Contact with Petitioners: 1/24/2000

Petition Manager: L. Raghavan

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests that the NRC order the licensee to backfit SONGS with an emergency

power supply to the spent fuel pools (SFPs) that would be independent of the emergency diesel

generators (EDGs). As the basis for this request, the petitioner states that the EDGs at nuclear

power plants, including SONGS, in the opinion of the petitioner, were proven to be unreliable. In

support of this basis, the petitioner refers to an experience of February 1999, when the EDGs

started but could not supply power to the buses because of a relay lockout, and another

experience in June 1999, when the EDGs were inoperable in excess of the allowed outage time as

a result of operator incompetence.

Background:

A PRB meeting was held on January 24, 2000.

Current Status:

This is a new petition. The petitioner’s request did not present any plant-specific information nor

anything substantial or new over previous agency considerations given to the issues. The

petitioner raised issues that already have been the subject of NRC staff review and evaluation at

SONGS and the issues have been dispositioned. The incoming correspondence did not provide

sufficient facts to support the petition and, hence, the PRB ruled that it did not meet the screening

criteria (MD 8.11 Pages 8 & 9). A one-step acknowledgment/closeout letter was issued on

February 4, 2000 and the petition was closed.
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 January 31, 2000

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.