March 7, 2002

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: JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2002 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC

PETITIONS UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

The attached report for January and February 2002 gives the status of 10 CFR 2.206 petitions

as of February 28, 2002. Currently, there are four open petitions, which have been accepted

for review under the 2.206 process, three in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and one

in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. 

Attachment 1 provides the detailed status of the open petitions. Attachment 2 shows the age

statistics for the open 2.206 petitions as of February 28, 2002. Attachment 3 shows the

statistics for all 2.206 petitions processed in the past 12 months.

This report and recently issued Director's Decisions are placed in the Agencywide Documents

Access and Management System, making them readily accessible to the public.

Attachments: As stated

CONTACT: Donna Skay, NRR

415-1322
DISTRIBUTION:

M. Satorius, OEDO

W. Kane, DEDR/OEDO

C. Paperillo, DEDMRS/EDO

P. Norry, DEDM/OEDO

J. Craig, AO/EDO

E. Julian, SECY

PDII r/f

S. Collins, NRR

J. Johnson, NRR

R. Borchardt, NRR

B. Sheron, NRR

E. Baker, OD

R. Subbaratnam, NRR

K. Cyr, OGC

L. Chandler, OGC

F. Cameron, OGC

J. Goldberg, OGC

J. Cordes, Jr., OCAA

F. Congel, OE

P. Lohaus, STP

M. Virgilio, NMSS

P. Goldberg, NMSS

F. Brown, NMSS

P. Anderson, OEDO (E-mail)

E. Dunnington, NRR

B. Boger, NRR

M. Stein, OE

G. Caputo, OI

J. Shea, OEDO

E. Adensam, NRR

J. Zwolinski, NRR

S. Black, NRR

H. Berkow, NRR

D. Skay, NRR

OCA

OPA

Regional Administrators

PUBLIC w/att 1, 2, & 3
1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

February 28, 2002

(Table of Contents)

Attachment 1

Page

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. No.

Salem Nuclear Generating Station, 

Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Hope Creek 

Generating Station, and Oyster Creek 

Generating Station Norm Cohen/ Unplug Salem

Campaign/G20010389.............................2

All 103 Operating Nuclear Power

Plants in the U. S. M. Kohn/National Whistleblower

Center/G20010485...................................4

Indian Point Unit Nos. 2 and 3 Alex Matthiessen/Karl Coplan/Pace Environmental

Litigation Clinic, Inc., Riverkeeper, Inc. and

Villages of Hastings and Croton-on-Hudson/ 

G20010508, G20010556, G20010567,

G20020034, G20020051, G20020064,

G20020073, and G20020085 ..................5

Carolina Power & Light/ Jim Warren of North Carolina Waste Awareness

Progress Energy (CP&L) and Reduction Network (NC WARN)

G200100461..............................................7
2

Attachment 1

Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

Facilities: Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2

Hope Creek Generating Station

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Petitioner: Norm Cohen, Unplug Salem Campaign 

Date of Petition: 9/17/2001

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 9/19/2001

EDO Numbers: G20010389

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/30/2002

Last Contact with Petitioners: 1/9/2002

Petition Manager: R. Fretz

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) order either the

closure of, or an immediate security upgrade at, the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit

Nos. 1 and 2, Hope Creek Generating Station, and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. 

In addition, the petitioner requested that: (1) the plants’ defenses be upgraded to withstand a

jet crash similar to that which occurred at the World Trade Center (WTC) on September 11,

2001; (2) all the spent fuel pools be brought into the containment buildings until a new jet

bomber-proofed containment is built for them; (3) the NRC triple the number of Operational

Safeguards Response Evaluation (OSRE) security inspections; and (4) the NRC cancel

proposals to allow nuclear power plants to conduct their own security inspections. 

Background:

The events of September 11, 2001, were cited as the basis for the request, with the petitioner

stating that the four New Jersey nuclear power plants are vulnerable to terrorist threats,

including a suicide airplane attack similar to that experienced at the WTC. 

Two closed Petition Review Board (PRB) meetings were conducted on November 19, 2001,

and November 29, 2001, to consider the merits of the requested actions. The PRB concluded

that the petition met the threshold for processing under 10 CFR 2.206, and that the details

provided in the petitioner’s request were found sufficient to warrant further inquiry (Part III of

Management Directive (MD) 8.11). An acknowledgment letter and a single Federal Register

notice common to this and two other similar petitions (see pages 3 and 4) were issued on

December 20, 2001. 

The petitioner was contacted on December 7, 2001, and informed of the staff’s progress to 

date. The petitioner was informed that the NRC had advised all NRC licensees, after the

September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the WTC, to go to the highest level of alert, which they

promptly did. Since there were no credible threats, there was no need to order the plants to

shut down. However, the petitioner's immediate action requests were, in effect, partially

granted in that the NRC had taken actions in response to the September 11, 2001, event by

issuing many safeguards and threat advisories to the industry. The petitioner was informed that

the NRC will follow the 10 CFR 2.206 petition process as explained in MD 8.11 to the extent

possible without compromising sensitive information. 
3

Current Status:

The petitioner was contacted again on January 9, 2002, and informed of the progress on this

petition and the scheduled completion date of April 30, 2002. Orders were sent to all licensees

on February 25, 2002, to formalize the heightened security measures and to require certain

additional enhancements. A PRB meeting was held on February 28, 2002, to determine the

staff actions in response to the Orders. The PRB decided to issue separate Director’s

Decisions for each of the security-related petitions discussed on pages 2, 4, and 5 rather than

combine in one response.
4

Facility: All Operating Nuclear Power

Plants (103) in the U. S.

Petitioner(s): Michael D. Kohn, National Whistleblower Center

Date of Petition and Supplement: 10/24/2001 and 1/16/2002

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 10/26/2001

EDO Numbers: G20010485

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/30/2002

Last Contact with Petitioners: 12/20/2001 (phone calls made on 02/20 and

02/27/02 were not returned)

Petition Manager: G. Shukla

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requested that the NRC take immediate short-term and long-term corrective

actions to protect the public against the possibility of terrorists seizing control of a large

commercial jetliner and crashing into a nuclear power plant in the United States. The petitioner

also requested that the NRC staff take certain specified compensatory measures to protect the

public and the environment from the catastrophic impact of a terrorist attack on a nuclear power

plant or a spent fuel pool.

Background:

As a basis for the above requests, the petitioner states that no commercial nuclear power plant

located within the United States was designed to withstand the impact of a large commercial

airliner. The petitioner cites the plants’ inability to be protected against terrorist attacks,

including a suicide airplane attack similar to the attack on the World Trade Center (WTC). The

petitioner discusses NRC’s failure to adequately assess risk of malevolent airborne attacks,

failure to adequately assess the risk of terrorist attacks at spent fuel storage facilities, and

failure to adequately protect nuclear power plants from terrorist attacks. 

Current Status:

There are two other petitions with similar requests concerning the security of nuclear power

plants in the U.S. subsequent to the terrorist attacks on the WTC on September 11, 2001. (See

pages 2 and 4 for the current status of these petitions). 

The petitioner was contacted on December 7, and 20, 2001, and informed of the staff’s

progress to date. The petitioner was informed that the NRC had advised all NRC licensees,

after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the WTC, to go to the highest level of alert,

which they promptly did. Since there were no credible threats, there was no need to order the

plants to shut down. However, the petitioner's immediate action requests were, in effect,

partially granted in that the NRC had taken actions in response to the September 11, 2001,

event by issuing many safeguards and threat advisories to the industry. Furthermore, Orders

were sent to all licensees on February 25, 2002, to formalize the heightened security measures

and to require certain additional enhancements. The petitioner was informed that the NRC will

follow the 10 CFR 2.206 petition process as explained in Management Directive 8.11 to the

extent possible without compromising sensitive information. An acknowledgment letter and a

single Federal Register notice common to this and two other similar petitions (see pages 2 and

4) were issued on December 20, 2001. By letter dated January 16, 2002, Winston & Strawn

provided comments on the petition on behalf of several licensees, in support of the NRC
5

acknowledgment letter to Michael D. Kohn dated December 20, 2001. These comments will be

considered in preparing the Director's Decision, which is scheduled for issuance on 

April 30, 2002. 

Facility: Indian Point Units 2 and 3

Petitioner(s): Alex Matthiessen/Karl Coplan/Pace Environmental

Litigation Clinic, Inc., Riverkeeper, Inc., et al. 

Date of Petition: 11/8/2001, plus several supplements

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 11/9/2001

EDO Numbers: G20010508, G20010556, G20010567, G20020034, 

G20020051, G20020064, G20020073, G20020085,

G20020092, G20020095, G20020096, G20020097,

and G20020098

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/30/2002

Last Contact with Petitioners: 01/07/2002

Petition Manager: P. Milano

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioners request that: (1) the NRC issue an order to the Indian Point 2 and 3 licensee for

a temporary shutdown to conduct a full review of vulnerabilities, security measures, and

evacuation plans; (2) the NRC require the licensee to provide sufficient information about

security for NRC to determine their ability to meet realistically expected threats and contemplate

making the measures permanent; (3) the NRC mandate specifically listed measures to set up

and protect a permanent no-fly zone and a defensive system to protect the “entire facility”; and

(4) a revision be made to the emergency planning to include terrorists risks and multiple attacks

on the infrastructure used in an evacuation. Finally, the petitioner requested that the NRC shut

down the Indian Point facility permanently if security cannot be sufficiently ensured, and order

the immediate conversion from spent fuel storage pools to a dry cask system. 

Background:

As a basis for the above requests, the petitioners state that no commercial nuclear power plant

located within the United States was designed to withstand the impact of a large commercial

airliner. The petitioners cite the plant’s inability to be protected against terrorist attacks,

including a suicide airplane attack similar to the attack on the World Trade Center (WTC).

On November 21, 2001, the Village of Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, submitted its Board of

Trustees’ resolution calling for action very similar to that of the above petitioner and citing the

same bases. Since the resolution did not make reference to 10 CFR 2.206, the Village Clerk

was contacted on December 27, 2001, to explain the petition process and discuss the existing

petition. The Village Clerk asked to have this resolution treated as a supplement to the existing

petition. A response letter was sent to Hastings-on-Hudson on January 29, 2002.

On November 26, 2001, the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York, in accordance with their

Board of Trustees Resolution, requested that they too join the Riverkeeper, Inc., et al. as a copetitioner. The PRB acceded to the request and recommended that they be included and 
6

acknowledged along with the rest of the petitioners. A response letter was sent to the copetitioner on December 20, 2001.

Mr. Matthiessen was contacted on December 20 and 27, 2001, and informed of the staff’s

progress to date. An acknowledgment letter and a single Federal Register notice common to

this and the two other similar petitions (see pages 2 and 3) were issued on December 20, 2001. 

The petitioners were informed that the NRC had advised all NRC licensees, after the

September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, to go to the highest level of alert, which they promptly

did. Since there were no credible threats, there was no need to order the plants to shut down. 

However, the petitioner's immediate action requests were, in effect, partially granted in that the

NRC had taken actions in response to the September 11, 2001, event by issuing many

safeguards and threat advisories to the industry. Furthermore, Orders were sent to all

licensees on February 25, 2002, to formalize the heightened security measures and to require

certain additional enhancements. The petitioners were informed that the NRC will follow the 10

CFR 2.206 petition process as explained in Management Directive 8.11 to the extent possible

without compromising sensitive information.

Current Status:

Alex Matthiessen, one of the petitioners, was contacted on January 7, 2002. He requested a

meeting with the PRB. The PRB decided at its meeting on January 24, 2002, that such a

meeting was unnecessary because the petitioners did not indicate that they had additional

information to provide to the staff.

The NRC received numerous letters from individuals endorsing the requests of the petitioners. 

The staff will acknowledge receipt of their letters.

The NRC also received letters from the Town of Stony Point, dated December 12, 2001, and

the Bedford Central School District, dated December 13, 2001. These letters make identical

requests to the Riverkeeper petition and the petitions from the Villages of Hastings and Crotonon-Hudson. The staff will treat the Town of Stony Point and the Bedford Central School District

as co-petitioners, and their letters as supplements to the petition. A response letter was sent to

the Town of Stony Point on February 5, 2002. A letter to the Bedford Central School District is

in concurrence.

Also included as part of this petition are letters received from Nyack Public Schools, the Peace

and Community Action Committee, the Village of Dobbsferry, the Town of Newcastle, and the

Hastings-on-Hudson school district in February 2002.

A PRB meeting was held on February 28, 2002, to determine staff actions in response to the

Orders issued on 2/25/02 and the numerous supplements received recently. The PRB decided

to issue separate Director’s Decisions for each of the security-related petitions discussed on

pages 2, 3, and 4 rather than combine in one response. 
7

Utility Carolina Power & Light (CP&L)

Petitioner: Jim Warren of North Carolina Waste Awareness and

Reduction Network (NC WARN)

Date of Petition: November 5, 2001 and February 12, 2002

Director’s Decision to Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 12/11/01

EDO Number: G200100461

Scheduled Completion Date: 05/31/02

Last Contact with Petitioner: 01/31/02

Petition Manager: David Pstrak

Case Attorney: Jack Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests that NRC require CP&L to halt rail shipments of spent nuclear fuel. 

The petitioner stated that DOE suspended a shipment of fuel assemblies due to the threat of

terrorist attacks on the shipment during transport. The petitioner believes the NRC should also

require CP&L to suspend rail shipments of irradiated fuel indefinitely to ensure the safety of the

citizens in North Carolina.

Background:

The petitioner states that the DOE suspended a shipment of spent fuel assemblies following the

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, because of the potential for a terrorist attack on the

shipment. The petitioner requests that NRC require indefinite postponement of all spent fuel

shipments within the CP&L system. The petitioner states that failure to do so would indicate a

conflict between DOE and NRC positions on the safety of rail shipments of spent fuel.

Current Status:

The PRB met on January 16, 2002, and agreed that the incoming petition meets the criteria to

be considered under the 2.206 process. The PRB decided not to grant the part of the petition

that requested immediate action to halt the rail shipments of spent fuel within the CP&L system. 

The PRB determined it was appropriate to send an acknowledgment letter to Mr. Warren, and it

was issued on January 31, 2002. 

The petitioner sent the Chairman another letter dated February 12, 2002, in which he requested

once again that NRC halt the shipments of spent fuel by CP&L to the Harris Plant. This letter is

being treated as a supplement to the original petition. A response letter is being developed and

will be structured around the pending interim compensatory measures.
Attachment 2

AGE STATISTICS FOR AGENCY 2.206 OPEN PETITIONS

As of February 28, 2002

ASSIGNED

ACTION

OFFICE

PETITION

 NUMBER

FACILITY Acknowledgment

Date

AGE

(days)*

Scheduled 

Completion

Date

Comments if not meeting the Agency’s 

120-day Completion Goal

NRR

G20010389 Salem 1, 2,

Hope Creek,Oyster Creek

12/20/2001 42 4/30/2002 -

NRR

G20010485 All 103 Nuclear

Power Plants inthe U.S.

12/20/2001 42 4/30/2002 -

NRR G20010508, 

G20010556,G20010567,G20020034,G20020051,G20020064,G20020073, andG20020085

Indian Point 2, 3 12/20/2001 42 4/30/2002

NMSS

G200100461

Carolina Power&Light/ ProgressEnergy (CP&L)

02/01/02 0

*Age calculated from the date of the acknowledgment letter.

Note: The two columns representing resources expended by the action office and OGC have been deleted from information is difficult to obtain on a monthly basis and is of marginal utility for purposes of this report.
1

Attachment 3

Table on Status of Public Petitions

Under 10 CFR 2.206 for DDs Issued During the Last 12 Months

Petition Number Assigned Facility Petition DD Age 

Action Date Date at Clos

Office (Month

G19990011 NMSS Moab Site of Atlas Corp. 1/11/1999 5/7/2001* N/A G20000568 NRR Indian Point Unit 2 12/4/2000 7/25/2001 4 G20010159 NRR All Licensees using

Wackenhut Security 4/24/2001 9/28/2001 4 

1) Age calculated from the date of the acknowledgment letter to the proposed Director’s Decision issuance.2) Goals: Acknowledgment letter issued within 5 weeks from date of receipt; proposed DD issued within 4 months of ack

* No DD issued on this petition.