ML17083B483
| ML17083B483 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 12/07/1984 |
| From: | Lieberman J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17083B484 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-86-197 2.206, DD-84-19, NUDOCS 8412140310 | |
| Download: ML17083B483 (4) | |
Text
~p,8 RECyi gC,
~p
+
O~
Cy 0
C O
++*++
. 0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 December 7, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation James Lieberman Director and Chief Counsel Regional Operations and Enforcement Division, OELD AMENDED 2.206 PETITION RE:
DIABLO CANYON Enclosed for your action is an undated letter from the Government Accountability Project amending its July 31, 1984 2.206 petition filed on behalf of Messrs.
James L. Mcgermott and Timothy J. O'Nei ll concerning the Diablo Canyon penalty.
That petition was denied in part by a Director's Decision (DD-84-19) issued August 20, 1984.
The question of whether the two petitioners had been improperly terminated or harassed and if so, what, if
- any, NRC action was appropriate, was left open until completion of an investigation by the Office of Investigations.
While the current petition submits some additional information on the question of harassment and intimidation, it is essentially a
new petition.
Twelve affidavits detailing 491 allegations have been submitted (only to the Office of Investigations) in support of 15 additional requests for relief, listed in Enclosure 1.
Many of the fifteen items have already been responded to in a letter from the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) to Mr. Thomas Devine dated September 24, 1984.
(Exhibit 2 to the petition).
The petitioner has requested that the NRC either grant or deny the requested relief within 30 days or reach agreement within 30 days with petitioners on a corrective action plan.
The initial response to the petitioner should address this request.
The final response to the petition should be based on analyses of the allegations presented and for those items addressed in the EDO's letter, a
determination of whether the information submitted or developed elsewhere changes the previous response.
We have drafted for your use an acknowledgment letter with a Federal Register Notice.
Further information describing your plans, if any, to meet with the petitioner should be inserted by your staff or Region V as appropriate.
We will assist your staff in developing a final response to the petition.
If you need further information from the licensee in taking final action, we CONTACT:
Karen D. Cyr, OELD x27269
~'
can assist your staff in drafting an appropriate request for such information under 10 CFR 50.54(f).
Please ensure that I am provided copies of all correspondence related to the petition and that I am asked to concur on all staff correspondence.
Enclosures:
(1) Requested Relief (2) Petition (3) Draft letter and Notice cc:
(w/out encl.)
J. Hartin, Reg.
V D. Eisenhut, NRR H. Scherling, NRR E. Christenbury, OELD L. Shollenberger, Reg.
V ames Lieberman Director and Chief Counsel Regi'onal Operations and Enforcement Division, OELD