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: MARCH 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 March 31, 2000,

except for recent developments related to the Salem and Indian Point 2 petitions. During March

2000, three new petitions, one on Indian Point Unit 2 (G20000133), one on Envirocare of

Utah/Snake River Alliance (G20000138,136), and one on Salem Units 1 & 2 (G2000111) were

received for processing. Thus, there are six open petitions: four in the Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation (NRR) and two in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

(NMSS).

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

status of petitions that are in a confidential status and is for internal distribution only. 

Attachment 3 shows the age and staff hours expended on open 2.206 petitions as of March 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 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
Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206

March 31, 2000

(Table of Contents)

Attachment 1

Page

Facility Petitioner/EDO No. No.

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

Indian Point Unit 2 D. Lochbaum/UCS/G1990465..............................4

Indian Point Unit 3 D. Lochbaum/UCS/G20000062............................6

Indian Point Unit 2* D. Lochbaum/UCS/G20000133............................7

Salem Unit 1 & 2* N. Cohen/UNPLUG Salem Campaign/

G20000111...........................................................8

Envirocare of Utah/Snake River 

Alliance* L. Bickwit, Jr./G20000138,

G2000136.............................................................9

* 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: 3/23/2000

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 (PRB) 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 cleanup of contaminated groundwater, citing the impacts to the endangered fish in the
3

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 the petitioners that NRC was deferring action on the 2.206 petition,

pending a decision by the ASLB on the petitioners’ request for a 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 petitioners. 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 petitioners. 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 petitioners’ 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 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.

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. On February 17,

2000, the ASLB granted the petitioners’ request for hearing, and the PRB, in consultation with

the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), will decide the future course of action on this petition.

Current Status:

The staff in consultation with OGC is deferring 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.

* Schedule for completion will be set following resolution of the litigation issues. 
4

Facility: Indian Point Unit 2 

Petitioner: D. Lochbaum

Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)

Date of Petition: 9/15/99

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 9/15/99

EDO Number: G19990465

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 4/17/2000

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/7/2000

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 (IP2'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 (PRB), 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) IP2's 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 IP2 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 UCS on IP2. A 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 1, 1999, and the licensee responded by letter dated October 6, 1999. The staff used
5

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

1999. The staff determined that 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 Augmented Inspection Team follow-up inspection report was received on

December 21, 1999. An extension to the scheduled completion date was requested to allow

incorporation of details of enforcement action from the August 31, 1999, event and to evaluate

the February 15, 2000 event, in which IP2 experienced a steam generator tube failure, for any

commonalities. The Director’s Decision, including details of the enforcement action decisions

stated above, is in concurrence and is projected to be issued by mid-April 2000.
6

Facility: Indian Point Unit 3

Petitioner: D. Lochbaum, UCS

Date of Petition: 2/10/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 2/10/2000

EDO Number: G20000062

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 7/24/2000

Last Contact with Petitioners: 3/24/2000

Petition Manager: G. Wunder

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests that the NRC order the licensee to conduct assessments of the Indian

Point 3 (IP3) corrective action program and work environment and to take appropriate action in

response to these assessments. The petitioner further requested that these orders be closed

before the NRC allows the transfer of the IP3 license. As the basis for the requested action,

the petitioner cited allegations by Ms. Rebecca Green, formerly a member of the licensee’s

Operations Review Group, that her work environment was not safety-conscious. The petitioner

also cited various inspection reports, which identified shortcomings in the licensee’s corrective

action programs, as well as a letter informing the licensee of a potential violation of 10 CFR

50.7 involving discrimination against an employee. 

Background:

A Petition Review Board (PRB) meeting was held on February 16, 2000. The petitioner was

provided with an opportunity to address the PRB in an open session to articulate the petition,

and did so with the licensee present.

The PRB concluded that the petition meets the threshold for processing under 10 CFR 2.206

and the PRB concluded that the details provided in the petitioner’s request are found sufficient

to warrant further inquiry.

Current Status:

An acknowledgment letter and Federal Register notice on the petition were issued on March 24,

2000.
7

Facility: Indian Point Unit 2

Petitioner: Mr. David A. Lochbaum, Union of

Concerned Scientists (UCS), on behalf of

Nuclear Information & Resource Service,

PACE Law School Energy Project, and

Public Citizen’s Critical Mass Energy Project

Date of Petition: 3/14/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/14/2000

EDO Number: G20000133

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: 8/5/2000

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/7/2000

Petition Manager: L. Wiens

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

Petitioners request that the NRC issue an Order to ConEd Company of New York preventing

the restart of Indian Point Unit 2 (IP2) until the following conditions are satisfied: (1) all four

steam generators (SGs) are replaced; (2) the SG tube integrity concerns identified in Dr. Joram

Hopenfeld’s Differing Professional Opinion (DPO) and in generic safety issue GSI-163, “Multiple

Steam Generator Tube Leakage,” are resolved; and (3)Potassium Iodide (KI) tablets are

distributed to residents and businesses within the 10-mile emergency planning zone or

stockpiled in the vicinity of the IP2 facility. The petitioners also requested that a public meeting

be held in the vicinity of the IP2 facility as soon as possible.

Background:

Petition Review Board (PRB) meetings were held on March 16, 2000, and March 21, 2000. The

petitioners were provided with an opportunity to address the PRB in an open session during the

initial March 16, 2000 meeting, and did so with the licensee present.

Current Status:

This is a new petition. The PRB concluded that the petitioners’ first request meets the

threshold for processing under 10 CFR 2.206 and also concluded that the details provided in

the petitioners’ request were found sufficient to warrant further inquiry. However, the PRB

determined that the request to order IP2 to remain shut down until Dr. Hopenfeld’s DPO is

resolved and until KI tablets are distributed or stockpiled (requests 2 & 3) did not meet the

requirements of the 2.206 process, in that they were generic issues and were not specific to

IP2. The petitioners’ request for a public meeting was granted and conducted on April 7, 2000. 

An acknowledgment letter and Federal Register notice on the petition were issued on April 5,

2000. 

Dr. Hopenfeld issued a memo to Dr. Travers on April 5, 2000, which he characterized as a

“supplement to my DPO regarding Multiple Steam Generator Leakage.” Also, by letter dated

April 12, 2000, Public Citizen’s Critical Mass Energy Project supplemented the petition with

regard to the KI issue, and by letter dated April 14, 2000, the UCS supplemented the petition

with regard to the DPO. The PRB will reconsider whether these two issues meet the criteria for

consideration under 10 CFR 2.206.
8

Facility: Salem Nuclear Units 1 & 2

Petitioner: Norm Cohen

UNPLUG Salem Campaign

Date of Petition: 2/22/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/1/2000

EDO Number: G20000111

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: TBD

Last Contact with Petitioners: 4/7/2000

Petition Manager: R. Fretz

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requests that the NRC order the Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, to be

immediately shut down so that their steam generators (SGs) can be completely checked out by

both NRC inspectors and by independent scientists so as to assure the people of South Jersey

and Delaware that these two plants are indeed safe to operate. The petitioner later expanded

this concern during the presentation to the Petition Review Board (PRB) (see below) that

certain members of the public are concerned that either one of the Salem units could

experience an SG tube rupture, and that the “public lacks the confidence in the NRC” to ensure

the safe operation of the Salem Generating Station given the event at Indian Point, Unit 2.

Background:

The PRB met on this petition on March 14, 2000, and March 21, 2000. The petitioner was

provided with an opportunity to address the PRB in an open session during the March 14, 2000

meeting, and did so with the licensee present.

Current Status:

This is a new petition. The NRC staff is not aware of any recently identified violations at Salem

Units 1 & 2 associated with the SG inspections that are covered under the inservice inspection

program. NRC inspection reports (No. 05000272 & 311/1999004) found the SGs’ condition

satisfactory. Mr. Cohen’s request does not present any plant-specific information, nor anything

substantial or new over previous agency considerations on SG issues. As such, the petitioner’s

request does not meet the screening criteria threshold per Management Directive 8.11 (pages 8

and 9) for accepting the petition under 10 CFR 2.206. Therefore, the PRB recommended that

the Petition Manager prepare a reply letter explaining that the request will not be treated as a

2.206 petition, and the staff will address the issues raised by the petitioners under the controlled

correspondence process. The letter was issued on April 17, 2000. The letter provided the

technical basis for the acceptability of Salem’s SGs. Any generic concerns identified during the

review of the IP2 tube failure will be considered for application to other pressurized water

reactors, including Salem.
9

Facility: Envirocare of Utah & Snake River Alliance

Petitioner: L. Bickwit, Jr.

Date of Petition: 3/13/2000

Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NMSS

Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/16/2000

EDO Number: G2000138, G2000136

OGC Number: -

Scheduled Completion Date: TBD

Last Contact with Petitioners: 3/27/2000

Petition Manager: J. Lusher

Case Attorney: J. Goldberg

Issues/Action Requested:

Snake River Alliance is requesting that the NRC: (1) take jurisdiction of 11e.(2) material; (2)

take action to ensure the workers and the public are fully protected from radiation exposure; and

(3) enforce the AEA and NRC’s regulation governing disposal of mill tailings byproduct material

as defined in section 11e.(2) of Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA). 

Envirocare of Utah contends that the Commission’s current interpretation of UMTRCA is

erroneous and that it should be revised as soon as possible. It also requests that the NRC

recognize its authority over all section 11.e.(2) material, and should take appropriate

enforcement action to ensure that all such material is disposed of at section 11e.(2)-licensed

facilities.

Background:

The Executive Director for Operations has agreed in principle that the petitions from Snake River

Alliance and Envirocare of Utah can be consolidated and handled as one petition because the

requested actions are similar per Management Directive (MD) 8.11, Page 9. This will be

finalized in the Petition Review Board (PRB) meeting now scheduled for April 11, 2000. The

petitioners, in accordance with MD 8.11, are being provided with an opportunity to address the

PRB in an open session to articulate the petition, with the owners of the facility present.

Current Status:

This is a new petition. 
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 March 31, 2000

ASSIGN

ED

ACTION 

OFFICE

PETITION

NUMBER

OGC

NUMBE

R

FACILITY AGE

(months)

*

Schedule

d

Completio

n 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

NMSS G19990011 P-99-02 ATLAS

CORPORATION

13 TBD2 5 44.5 Earthjustice filed a petition

with the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the 9th Circuit

regarding the staff’s de facto

denial of the 2.206 petition. 

Staff action deferred pending

resolution of the litigation

before the 9th Circuit Court

of Appeals and the petition

before the ASLB

NRR G1990465 - INDIAN POINT UNIT

2

5 4/17/2000 2488.0 17.5 Incorporation of

additional enforcement

action from 8/31/99

event into the DD. The

DD is currently projected

for issuance by mid-April

2000.

NRR G20000062 - INDIAN POINT UNIT

3

- 7/24/2000 35.0 1.0

NMSS G2000138,13

6

ENVIROCARE OF

UTAH/SNAKE RIVER

ALLIANCE

- TBD* 28.5 4.0

NRR G2000111 SALEM UNITS 1 & 2 - TBD* 73.0 9.0

NRR G20000133 - INDIAN POINT UNIT

2

- 8/5/2000 118.0 -

1

 Staff professional time only; does not include management or administrative time.

2 Projected completion date (Please see Attachment 1 for explanation).

*Age calculated from the date of the acknowledgment letter.
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

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

GT96919 NRR Millstone 1, 2 & 3 11/25/96, as 

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

Granted

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\2000\March\edo200003.wpd

ORIGINATOR: Ram Subbaratnam

SECRETARY NAME: Doreen Turner

SUBJECT: Monthly Status Report for 2.206 Petitions- March 2000

*****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___