ML101450004
| ML101450004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/25/2010 |
| From: | Leeds E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mulligan M, Saporito T, Shadis R New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, Renewable Electric Systems |
| kim J, NRR/ADRO/DORL, 415-4125 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML101440488 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206 Petitions, EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022, EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087, EDATS: SECY-2010-0145, G20100027, G20100074, G20100098, LTR-10-0069, OEDO-2010-0022, OEDO-2010-0087, SECY-2010-0145, TAC ME3083, TAC ME3325, TAC ME3402 NUREG/BR-0200 R5 | |
| Download: ML101450004 (15) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555*0001 June 25, 2010 Mr. Michael Mulligan P.O. Box 161 Hinsdale, NH 03451 Mr. Raymond Shadis Consultant to New England Coalition P.O. Box 98 Edgecomb, ME 04556 Mr. Thomas Saporito, Executive Director RenewableElectricSystems.com P.O. Box 8413 Jupiter, FL 33468
Dear Messrs. Mulligan,
Shadis, and Saporito:
On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (!\\IRC), I am responding to your letters dated January 12, 2010, from Mr. Michael Mulligan, February 8, 2010, from Mr. Raymond Shadis, and February 20, 2010, from Mr. Thomas Saporito about tritium leaks at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. Your letters are available from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) in the public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.htmlunder ADAMS Accession Nos. ML100190688, ML100470430, and ML100621374. In accordance with Management Directive (MD) 8.11, "Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions," the NRC has processed your letters as a consolidated petition for enforcement action under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206, "Requests for Action under This Subpart," and assigned this consolidated petition to the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Mr. Mulligan requested in his petition that (1) the radioactive leak into the environment of Vermont Yankee (VY) be immediately stopped and VY be immediately shutdown and all leaking paths be isolated and (2) VY disclose its preliminary "root cause analysis " and the NRC release its preliminary investigative report on this analysis before plant startup.
On January 20, 2010, Mr. Mulligan asked to address the Petition Review Board (PRB) before its initial meeting to provide supplemental information for the Board's consideration. By teleconference on January 25, 2010, Mr. Mulligan provided information to the PRB as further explanation and support for the petition. A copy of the transcript is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML100330603.
The PRB met on February 1, 2010, to discuss Mr. Mulligan's petition and denied the request for immediate action to shutdown VY because the PRB did not identify any urgent safety concerns that would warrant an immediate shutdown.
Subsequently, Mr. Mulligan was informed of the PRB's decision on the immediate action, and on February 18, 2010, Mr. Mulligan requested another opportunity to address the PRB to
M. Mulligan, R. Shadis, and T. Saporito
- 2 provide relevant additional information to support the petition. By teleconference on February 23, 2010, Mr. Mulligan provided additional information to the PRB. A copy of the transcript is available in ADAMS under Accession No. I\\IIL100630404.
Mr. Shadis requested in his petition that the NRC (1) require VY to go into cold shutdown and depressurize all systems in order to slow or stop the leak, (2) act promptly to stop or mitigate the leak(s) and not wait until all issues raised by the New England Coalition are resolved, (3) require VY to reestablish its licensing basis by physically tracing records and reporting physical details of all plant systems that would be within scope as "Buried Pipes and Tanks" in NUREG-1801, "Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report," and under the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54, "Conditions of Licenses," (4) investigate and determine why Entergy has been allowed to operate VY since 2002 without a working knowledge of all plant systems and why the NRC's Reactor Oversight Process (RaP) and review process for license renewal amendment did not detect this dereliction, (5) take notice of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee's many maintenance and management failures (from 2000-2010) and the RaP's failure to detect them early and undertake a full diagnostic evaluation team inspection or NRC Inspection Procedure 95003, "Supplemental Inspection for Repetitive Degraded Cornerstones, Multiple Degraded Cornerstones, MUltiple Yellow Inputs or One Red Input," and (6) require Entergy VY to apply for an amendment to its license renewal that would address both aging analysis and aging management of all buried piping carrying or with the potential to carry radionuclides and/or the potential to interact with any safety or safety-related system.
The PRB met on February 17, 2010, and denied the request for immediate action to implement a cold shutdown and depressurize all systems in order to slow or stop the leak because the PRB did not identify any urgent safety concerns that would warrant an immediate shutdown.
On February 19, 2010, Mr. Shadis was informed of the PRB's decision on the immediate action, and Mr. Shadis requested an opportunity to address the PRB before its initial meeting to provide supplemental information for the Board's consideration. By teleconference on March 3, 2010, Mr. Shadis provided information to the PRB as further explanation and support for the petition.
A copy of the transcript is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML100680299.
Mr. Saporito requested in his petition that the NRC (1) order a "cold-shut-down" mode of operation for VY because of leaking radioactive tritium and (2) issue a Confirmatory Order modifying the NRC-issued license for VY so that the licensee must bring the nuclear reactor to a "cold-shut-down" mode of operation until the licensee can provide definitive reasonable assurance to the NRC, under affirmation, that the reactor will be operated in full compliance with the regulations in 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"
and Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50, Criterion 60, "Control of Releases of Radioactive Materials to the Environment," and Criterion 64, "Monitoring Radioactivity Releases," and other NRC regulations and authority.
The PRB met on February 25, 2010, to discuss Mr. Saporito's petition and denied the request for immediate action to bring VY to a "cold-shut-down" mode of operation because the PRB did not identify any urgent safety concerns that would warrant an immediate shutdown.
On March 1, 2010, Mr. Saporito was informed of the PRB's decision on the immediate action, and Mr. Saporito requested an opportunity to address the PRB before its initial meeting to provide supplemental information for the Board's consideration. By teleconference on
M. Mulligan, R. Shadis, and T. Saporito
- 3 March 8, 2010, IVIr. Saporito provided information to the PRB as further explanation and support for the petition. A copy of the transcript is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML100770408.
The PRB met on March 25 and April 22, 2010, and considered these 10 CFR 2.206 petitions (as consolidated) and made an initial recommendation to accept the consolidated petition for review, in part, for the following specific issues and concerns identified in the petitions and/or supplemented during the teleconferences:
(1)
Increasing concentrations of radiocontaminants in the soil and groundwater at VY, as well as an increasing area of contamination, are manifest on a daily basis. VY risks aggravating the contamination by continuing to run the reactor at full power while attempting over a period of a month to triangulate the location of a presumed leak by drilling a series of test wells in the affected area.
(2)
During the license renewal application proceeding, the licensee has averred that it was unaware of the existence of some buried pipes, now uncovered, and it has yet to discover their path and purpose.
(3)
Entergy has, in 8 years of ownership, failed to learn and understand VY's design, layout, and construction. This failure to comprehend and understand the layout, function, and potentially the interaction of the plant's own piping systems constitutes a loss of design basis.
(4)
The NRC's Rap has apparently failed to capture, anticipate, and prevent ongoing maintenance, engineering, quality assurance, and operation issues that have manifested themselves in a series of high-profile incidents since Entergy took over VY. The agency has repeatedly failed to detect root cause trends until they have, as in this instance, become grossly self-revealing.
(5)
The NRC should ensure that Entergy has adequate decommissioning funds. The tritium leak will increase decommissioning costs because of the need for site radiological examination and soil remediation.
In addition, each petitioner stated that the tritium leak is just one example of many maintenance and management failures at VY. All three raised a concern regarding what they perceive as the NRC's failure to examine the deficiencies at VY in an integrated manner. Although the individual petition was written to request enforcement action specifically because of the tritium leak, during each of the transcribed phone calls, each petitioner urged the NRC to take a broader view and assess operational and performance failures at VY collectively, instead of individually. This concern has met the criteria for review in accordance with MD 8.11.
On April 26, 2010, the petitioners were informed of the PRB's initial recommendations to accept, in part, the petitions for review. Both Mr. Shadis and Mr. Saporito requested an opportunity to address the PRB to provide additional explanation or support for the petition after the PRB's initial consideration and recommendation. By teleconference on May 5, 2010, both Mr. Shadis and Mr. Saporito provided additional information to the PRB to explain and support the petition.
A copy of the transcript is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML101320121.
M. Mulligan, R. Shadis, and T. Saporito
- 4 On May 10, 2010, the PRB reconvened to evaluate the consolidated petition, including the additional information provided in the teleconference on May 5, 2010, to determine whether any other issues should be reviewed as part of the 10 CFR 2.206 process. The PRB confirmed its initial recommendation to accept the consolidated petition, in part, because the petitioners did not provide any relevant or new information that would result in a change to the initial recommendation.
As required by 10 CFR 2.206, the NRC will act on your petition within a reasonable time.
Mr. James Kim, assigned as the manager for this consolidated petition, can be reached at 301-415-4125. I have enclosed for your information a copy of the notice that the NRC is filing with the Office of the Federal Register for publication. I have also enclosed for your information a copy of the brochure NUREG/BR-0200, Revision 5, "Public Petition Process," dated February 1, 2003, prepared by the NRC's Office of Public Affairs.
Sincerely,
~~
Eric J.
Office eds, Director f Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-271
Enclosures:
- 1. Federal Register Notice
- 2. NUREG/BR-0200 cc: Listserv
[7590-01-P]
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE, LLC VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-271 LICENSE NO. DPR-28 RECEIPT OF REQUEST FOR ACTION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given that by petitions dated January 12, 2010, from Mr. Michael Mulligan, February 8, 2010, from Mr. Raymond Shadis, and February 20, 2010, from Mr. Thomas Saporito have requested that pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206, "Requests for Action under this Subpart," the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) take action with regard to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
Mr. Mulligan requested in his petition that (1) the radioactive leak into the environment of Vermont Yankee (VY) be immediately stopped and VY be immediately shutdown and all leaking paths be isolated and (2) VY disclose its preliminary "root cause analysis " and the NRC release its preliminary investigative report on this analysis before plant startup.
Mr. Shadis requested in his petition that the NRC (1) requ ire VY to go into cold shutdown and depressurize all systems in order to slow or stop the leak, (2) act promptly to stop or mitigate the leak(s) and not wait until all issues raised by the New England Coalition are resolved, (3) require VY to reestablish its licensing basis by physically tracing records and reporting physical details of all plant systems that would be within scope as "Buried Pipes and Tanks" in NUREG-1801, "Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report," and under the
- 2 requirements of 10 CFR 50.54, "Cond itions of Licenses," (4) investigate and determine why Entergy has been allowed to operate VY since 2002 without a working knowledge of all plant systems and why the NRC's Reactor Overs ight Process (ROP) and review process for license renewal amendment did not detect this dereliction, (5) take notice of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee's many maintenance and management failures (from 2000-2010) and the ROP's failure to detect them early and undertake a full diagnostic evaluation team inspection or NRC Inspection Procedure 95003, "Supplemental Inspection for Repetitive Degraded Cornerstones, Multiple Degraded Cornerstones, Multiple Yellow Inputs or One Red Input," and (6) require Entergy VY to apply for an amendment to its license renewal that would address both aging analysis and aging management of all buried piping carrying or with the potential to carry radionuclides and/or the potential to interact with any safety or safety-related system.
Mr. Saporito requested in his petition that the NRC (1) order a "cold-shut-down" mode of operation for VY because of leaking radioactive tritium and (2) issue a confirmatory order modifying the NRC-issued license for VY so that the licensee must bring the nuclear reactor to a "cold-shut-down" mode of operation until the licensee can provide definitive reasonable assurance to the NRC, under affirmation, that the reactor will be operated in full compliance with the regulations in 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"
and Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, " to 10 CFR Part 50, Criterion 60, "Control of Releases of Radioactive Materials to the Environment," and Criterion 64, "Monitoring Radioactivity Releases," and other NRC regulations and authority.
The requests are being treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. The requests have been referred to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. As provided by 10 CFR 2.206, appropriate action will be taken on this consolidated petition within a reasonable time.
- 3 Each petitioner stated that the tritium leak is just one example of many maintenance and management failures at VY. All three raised a concern regarding what they perceive as the NRC's failure to examine the deficiencies at VY in an integrated manner. Although the individual petition was written to request enforcement action specifically because of the tritium leak, during each of the transcribed phone calls, each petitioner urged the NRC to take a broader view and assess operational and performance failures at VY collectively, instead of individually. This concern has met the criteria for review in accordance with Management Directive (MD) 8.11 "Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions."
Subsequently, the PRB made a recommendation to accept the consolidated petition for review for the following specific issues and concerns identified in the petitions and/or supplemented during the teleconferences:
(1)
Increasing concentrations of radiocontaminants in the soil and groundwater at VY, as well as an increasing area of contamination, are manifest on a daily basis. VY risks aggravating the contamination by continuing to run the reactor at full power while attempting over a period of a month to triangulate the location of a presumed leak by drilling a series of test wells in the affected area.
(2)
During the license renewal application proceeding, the licensee has averred that it was unaware of the existence of some buried pipes, now uncovered, and it has yet to discover their path and purpose.
(3)
Entergy has, in 8 years of ownership, failed to learn and understand VY's design, layout, and construction. This failure to comprehend and understand the layout, function, and potentially the interaction of the plant's own piping systems constitutes a loss of design basis.
- 4 (4)
The NRC's ROP has apparently failed to capture, anticipate, and prevent ongoing maintenance, engineering, quality assurance, and operation issues that have manifested themselves in a series of high-profile incidents since Entergy took over VY. The agency has repeatedly failed to detect root cause trends until they have, as in this instance, become grossly self-revealing.
(5)
The NRC should ensure that Entergy has adequate decommissioning funds. The tritium leak will increase decommissioning costs because of the need for site radiological examination and soil remediation.
Copies of the petitions are available to the public from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) in the public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.htmlunder ADAMS Accession Nos. ML100190688, IVIL100470430, and ML100621374, and are available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of June 2010.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CL~
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NUREG/BR-0200 Public Petition Process ADAMS Accession No. ML050900248
Introductlon The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisviun (NRC, was established in 1975 10 protect public health nnd safely in the ci vilian use of nu clear power und ma teri als in the Uni ted Stutes. A. pall of ils rcsponsib ilitiev, NRC
,,,,ses,,,. all potential heal th and ""fel)' i" ue, relaird 10 licensed activitie*
- nd encourage, mernoer>> of Ihe puhli e III brin g " fely ISsue' to il>atten tio n.
Section 2.2 06 of Till e 10 of the C" cI~ "f f'rclrrol Rrgllla/i(ll" (10 CFR 2.2061describe the pelilion process-s-the primary mechanism fur the public to requ est enfnrcernenr act ion by NRC in u publi c 1'"".."".' Th iv pr,..:e" permit s anyone 10 peti tion NRC 10 In.e enforcemenl aClinn ITlntrd III NRC licC'n~c \\
"1' licensed ncli,*ilie,. Dcpend ill ~ on Ihe re,ull, ofi IHvnluuli" n. NRC cuu ld modi fy,,,,,pend.
or re""ke an NRC ',,,ued li" 'n,,, '" "'I.e "ns' ulhe r appro prla le enforce mem ac lio n I;'
resol" e a pf\\lblcm, RelJue'I' Ihul roise heallh and,afely iss ue, wilho ul fr lJues ling enfnrccmenl DClion n fC re\\,icwt."(1 tl)' mc:m!\\
"Iher Ihan Ihe 2.2116 1'.
In ils e/lull II> improve puhlic confidence, Ihe NRC periodically ":L"e~ Ihe 2.2(16pelilion Jl~~ 10enhance its C'rrCX1 i\\'en c:~,. tim:lint"!\\'
and credi hili!). A, panofllK:sc rca' "." mcnl" Ihe NRC """ ks feedb ack f",m pelil i" I1<'"" nd ollK:r 510. <'IlOlde", Ihro ugh puoli c meelin g' aud workshops. survey. and f'rcl,roll/~!li _""
notices. :I ~ well :I'" frurn ii' IIwn
~ I H(f experience. Specific imp"n-emenl' 10 Ihe 2.206 pmces~ re,ulcin~ fnml lh c:~ initiuth*c.,
inclade:
- Ofrcring ()('li'iuncl1I two l'pponunilics 10 d i",u" Ihe pel iti o n w ilh Ihe NR C ',
peliliun n:"iew b< ~"d (pRill. 111e fi"'l i, 10 nllow Ihe pelil iuner 10 prus'ide e1ab<.ntli'lII mid c1ariliC:llinll oflhe petiliun
-nwNR.C. 1.., h-".. alkof..uunrnlC~ In"'hKb11lIJ1\\ l.h'A"
\\loho f.i~ P'o'!C'ft III J W1f(1) ~"'m,,"('rn_ r**, !'iNC 'n il'"," Art' aflunkd,. dt"C"C" nl rU11t','llUti II! the ll lok" li lt.
UI ~I r rucC'.WAtorpuhhc inn 'lhC'ncnt..., h ~C'\\l &1 thr cDd.1( lhl_
pI", ph l~1 befo re rhe I' RIl," eel' 10 d i",u" the peti tion. Th e second up'pununily come>>
aflcr 1111:.JoRB h ~, discussed the merit-, uf the peti tion und :l 1I0\\.~, the petitioner' In comment nn the PRn', recommendations reganJing acceptance (If the peu rion and any rrque~l\\ for inun ed iatc action.
- Offerin~ an uppununity fur 11 ' 1IIff petitioner-licencee meeting ft. di~r u " the dcttiih of the issue d u ri n~ the' co LU,C of the re view, Providing beucr, more trequenr co nu nu n i C'.ali o n ~ between the ~ taff and petitioner throu ghout the procew,
- !'runding cu pie, " f,1I pertinent petition related "'orre,rttmul'nL'C' and nlhcr dne*
Ullle-nis In Iht'peillinncrs.
Pro vidi ng :t..' ( I flY or Ih,,- pruposc.*d dirrclnr'", JC'ci, ion nn lhl:[)Clition. onlh 10 11", pelilill""r an<l lhe atTcclod I,ccnsee fllr
..:nmltlCnl\\. und....nnsidcring,uchCt)lIImrnl' hL'fnrr i ~... u in ~ Ihe dl'dsiu n in flnnl fUTm.
The.Jetilion.Jn M.'t."S..\\
TIle2.2CXl prn..:c ~~ plll\\'iJl"'a simple. efft"Cli\\'r mcchani'mflITan)'one II' R.~ IJ C: S( enfl'R.-elocnt
- lclinn and uhtain NRC', prompl. Ihuruugh.
and ubjt"\\.*th C' C\\'lIIUali,IOof u nd erl y in~ safely i" uC'll.. II h ~epa r;.lt c and distinct from the procc,,"'"')\\ for rulcllwJ.. ing ~'" t1 IicC'n sing.
allhllugh Iho)' Ino, I10w Ihe puhl ic 10 noi,o
""fel)' m ncem ' 10 NRC.
UnderIhe 2.20(lpmcc\\s. ttl'" pelilicmcr,uhmits OJ rCl.Juesl in ",riling Iu NRC' ) ElC~CU li\\' c Dire clllr fo r Op eralions. ide nlil)'ing Ihe affecled licen, ee or lice n'ed ael i"i ly. Iho re<luc!'Ilcc.I cnfon'cmcOl nc.*linn to helaKe...amJ Ihe facI' Ihe pClilioner heli ",~, pruvi de
, uffic ie nl
~ rn u ll ds for NRC III I" ke
"'nfvll:CI1lCnl aClion. Un\\upportC'd a".;cnions Clf
" !ooafcly problC'm':' ~ cncml opposi liun lu nuc l~.ar power. or illcntilicati'JI} of !\\afcl)' i ~sucs wilhoUI set:'1:. inS cnforC'cment aelion arc nnl considcrct.l sufficient grounds ror c{l n ~ idc r.) t i on a ~ a ::!.206 JlClililln.
Aflcr receiving ':1 request, NRC determines whether the request qual ifie s it ' a 2.2()(-'
petition. If Ihe requ est i~ accepted fur review
- 1> 0 2.206 petition. the NRC se ndv an acknowledg ment letter 10 the petitioner and ;,
co py IU the "pp"'prinle licen. ee and publishe<<
- notice in 11K: Fed'TIlI Nrgi,\\I(*r.If lhe req ues:
i, nlll accep ted, NRC nutifi es the petitioner of ii' decis ion and indicates thut thc petirioner'<<
underly ing s"fe ly conccrnv will he L'On,i<lo led outside the 1.20t1 process, On the ba!ti~ of an eval uation uf the perilion.
theapprop riate c,lncc director i:\\,u C'.'Io a ilL-Chinn and. if wa rr anted, NRC I,ke, lIpprup"ale enforcement uction.TIuuughnut thc,: cvuluation proce ss, NRC ".nd. co pie - of all per tincnt
...orrevponde nce Iu the pei iuon cr ':IOLI Itu IIITec lod lice",... NRC 1'1" CO, 1111 reh.led cOfl\\" \\p..lnucnce in ii' Puhlic f)ocumcnl Jot'II,m (l'IlR) in RUL*.,*ille. Maryland. and 11\\ Iho a~enc y doe'ulOcl1l (,'onlo ll ' Y\\IC'm. li nw('\\'cr.
Ihe age"ey wilhh"I<I, i" ftom,alion Ihal "uul<l l'"mp fllrn i,,~ an jn.... ~ l'o lig; l ti on or () n~ U1 np.
enfurcemenl :u:l ion I\\"luling III i !'<i~lIc, in Ih ~
1'~ li l i " n _ 11'0 NRC,,1,u. ends Ihe pe,il""
nthrf infnnllution,uch as pertinent gl"nC'rie kilo", and hullelin'.
The NRC nOlitie' Iho peliti"nor uf 1110 peliliOIl\\
...1:llm. ~\\*c ry 60 iliIy,. ur mur~ rrrquc:-nll) it' :1
~il!nili ~n t aClin" uccurr-. Mon thly Ufll.lnlc, un "II pending 2.2116 pelilion ' oro ",*~t1 "ol e Oil N RC ', web,ile " I !uU!' ((ww wn r<' ClIV (
(J.:aiJjQl: -mllc.luc-cuJha*lilJOVoclilitlll, -'::-10N iruk.UnmI. and in Ihe PDR.
1','lIlIon T"chnlcal R~, ie" Medin!:
A petitionh:chniC'ul l"t"\\*icw mecring ~er\\"c ' nol onl)' 3!ro a ~o un.:C' lIf pOIc:ntially....illuahk infnrmnlinn rOf NRC 10 c:vahmlC' a 1.2Ufl pel iliun. hUI "lsl1 affmd, Ihe pel il i"n,*r
!t u h~ lant i \\' t" i n \\ ' u h' c:-m~ n l in Ihe rt'\\' i~", and d t'c hion -mal i n~ pnlce,s l h ro u ~ h d ir~ct d,scu"iun, wilh NRC aud Ihe license<_Such u mee ling will he held whenever Ihe " a" believe, Ihal il would be !>cneli cilll III Ihe re"ie,,' uf Ihc pelili"n, Nute Ihal Ihe '",....Iinl,:
can be orrered :11 "ny Ii"", Juring NRC', rc,iow uf.1 pclilion:IflJ j, npenIn puhliC' cJh-.er\\'alion.
Il irttlor*. Oc-chlon TI,o NRC ', olli ci, 1response 10a 2.2l)(l petition i, " wriuen decision by the direct or of rhe apprnpriate office that,Jdn:s",. the concern, raised In the petition. TIle agen cy's glial i' lu ivsue a rml'lIscd decision for comment within 12()doys [rum Ihe <laic oflhe ackn uwled gmcnl lcucr, Howe ver**dditinnul rime lIl"y beneeded 10 co nduct nn invcs tign tion. co mplete an in' peelion, or anal)'l c particularly complex technical issue" lf the ~oal i. nlll mol. the NRC
' Inff will promptly infunn rhe petitioner uf a
-c hcdulc ch.,nge.
T he direct u r>> de cr sion incl ude' th e prufessiunal Sl,,((" evalu ation of nil pertinen t m lormation from the'peti tion, L'ofl't'ptmdcl'k:'c
" ith Ihe peliliuller..nd the li,,*cn M*.l*.
IIllomlalion frill1l ;lny tnC'cting. rr sul l~ of an)'
11I\\'(":\\tlgation UT in~ pec l iun. ami any 0 1her JI...'UI1ll-nh. rcJaleJ 10 flC'lilinni"uc.'. Fulluwing fc'olulion or :10)' cOOllll cnh rC'~i\\'et.I on Ihe
. p rop()~r l.l c.kds ion. the c.Ii~cIHT
- S d ~ci si nn h.
pnl\\'idcJ ll l lh~ pc'li liunrr and Ihe licen".",,*. UI14..I I'llt)\\ lctilu NRC '~ wch sile lindmadc u\\'aihlhlC' in Ihe I'DR. A nlll ice of us'ailn hilil)' is puoli,hed in Ihe l'rdrml R'!:i" "
l) i Tl'('h ~r '> dC",:i,itJO\\ niH)"hej'UrO :h fl\\llo\\\\'s' A,k*cj\\iun I!runting J relition, in full.
e'plollls Ihe h",i, fnr Ihc drci' lIln and gm nt. lhe IIclion relJue'lrd in Ihe pelilion
( e. ~.. NRC i" u i n~ an order III II1l"li fy.
, u' pend, llr re"lIke a IiL..-nsc).
A decision dcn)'ing, peli lion, in full.
p",,'ide, Ihe re" son for Ihe den i,,1 and c.li"us.....e.\\all malleT) rai\\Cd in the pelilion.
- A dcci ~ion gmnlinl: n pelitiun. in pan. in c" ",s whe.. the NRC decide' nul IIIgranr Ihe ae liun re4 ue'led. hUI I" l
c i,,"cd hy lhe NRC in,'n" " where,0111e uf Ihc i ~sucs 3!~,c--.:ia lC',j wilh Ihe pclilion CDn he c"mpleled p.-n mpll )' hUI ' ignifiealll sehe<lule doh.)" "n: anlicipntod IK:foro
resolution of the ent ire petition. A final director's dec ision i. is. ued at the conclusion of the effort.
The Commi sion will not entertain requests for review of a director's decision. However, on its own, it may review a deci ion within 25 calendar days.
NRC Management Directive 8.11. "Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions," contains more detailed information on citizen petitions.
For a free copy of the directive, write to the Superi ntendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013-7082. or call 202 512-1800.
Electronic Access Those parts of the monthly status report on 2.206 petitions that are not of a sensitive nature, as well as recently issued director's decisions, and Management Directive 8.11, are placed on the NRC's web site at h1.U2JL www.n rc*cov/readinc-rm/doc-collections/
petitions-2-206lindex.html and in Ihe agency's Public Document Roo m.
Other Processes for Public Involvement In addition to the 2.206 petition process, NRC has several other ways that permit the public to expres concerns on mailers rela ted to the NRC's regulatory activities.
- The NRC's allegation process affords ind ividuals who mise safety concerns a degree of protection of their identity.
- Under the prov isions of 10 CFR 2.802.
NRC pro vides an opportunity for the public to petition the agency for a rulemaking.
- T he NRC's licensing process offers members o f the pub lic, who are spec ifically affected by a licensing action, an opport unity to formally participate in licensing proceedings. Th is process applies not only to the initial licensing actions but also to license amendments and other activirie suc h as decom missioning and license renewals.
- For major regulatory actions involving preparation of environmental impact statements, NRC offers. eparate opportunities for public participation in its environmental proceedings.
- The public can attend a number of meetings including ope n Commission and staff meetings, periodic media brietings by Regional Administrators. and special meetings held near affected facilities to inform loca l communities and respond to their questions.
More information on these activities can be found in NRC's pamphlet entitled, "Public Involvement in the Nuclear Regulatory Process," NU REG/BR-0215.
Office of Public Affairs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Telephone 301-415-8200 or 1-800-368-5642 NUREG/BR-0200. Rev. 5 February 2003
Package: ML101440488; Incomings: ML100190688, ML100470430, and ML100621347 Letter: ML101450004; Federal Register Notice: ML101450007 NUREG/BR-0200: ML050900248
- Via email OFFICE LPL1-1/PM LPL1-1/LA Tech Editor R1/BC' LPL1-1/BC DPR/DD DORUD NRR/OD NAME JKim SLittie KAzariah-Kribbs DJackson NSalgado TBlount JGiitter ELeeds DATE 6/3/10 6/3/10 6/1/10 6/3/10 6/8/10 6/14/10 6/15/10 6/25/10
Letter to Michael Mulligan, Raymond Shadis and Thomas Saporito dated Junp. 7-'). 2nlO
SUBJECT:
2.206 PETITION FOR VERMONT YANKEE DISTRIBUTION: G20100027/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0022 G20100074/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0087 G20100098/EDATS: OEDO-2010-0145 PUBLIC LPL1-1 RtF RidsNrrDorl RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrDpr RidsNrrPMVermontYankee RidsNrrLASLittle TBlount TMensah RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsNrrMailCenter RidsOgcRp RidsOgcMailCenter RidsEdoMailCenter RidsOpaMail RidsRgn1 MailCenter RidsNrrOd RidsOelVlaiICenter RidsOcaMailCenter RidsOIGMailCenter