ML20205S060
| ML20205S060 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Browns Ferry, Perry, River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137L548 | List: |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 9904260071 | |
| Download: ML20205S060 (8) | |
Text
-
Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10 CFR 2.206 with Status Change from Previous Update March 31,1999 (Table of Contents)
Attachment 1 Page Eacility Petitioner /EDO No. &
Browns Ferry 1 Lochbaum/G980199.. . . ............2 Envirocare of Utah, Inc. Natural Resources Defense Council.. .3 Army Corps of Engineers NRDC/G 19980622/T.Cochran.............. 4 River Bend Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)/
G 9 8 0 5 9 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Perry Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)/G 19980678............ ... 6 Millstone Galatis, We the People, In c . /ED 0 60 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Connecticut Yankee Bassilakis, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)/GT97181............... 8 l
l i
9904260071 990420 PDR ADOCK 05000259 Q PDR
r Attachment 1 Report on Status of Public Petitions Under 10CFR 2.206 with Status Change from Previous Update Facility: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1 Petitioner: D.Lochbaum Date of Petition: 4/5/98 Director's Decision To Be issued by: NRR l Date Referred to Review Organization: 4/6/98 l EDO Number: G980199 l
OGC Number: P-98-007 Scheduled Completion Date: Completed 3/26/99 Last Contact with Petitioner: 1/15/99 l Petition Manager: A. DeAgazio Case Attorney: R. Hoefling Issues / Action Requested:
The petitioner asked for an informal hearing requesting that (1) the operating license for Browns Ferry, Unit 1, be revoked and (2) the NRC should require the Tennessee Valley l Authority (TVA) to submit either a decommissioning plan or lay-up plan for Browns Ferry, Unit 1. As the basis for the Uaion of Concerned Scientists (UCS) request, the petitioner asserts that because Browns Ferry, Unit 1, has been on " administrative hold" since June 1, 1985, and has not been operating since then, revocation of the operating license and requiring relicensing, if TVA later decides to restart Unit 1, is a better, safer process than is the current inspection Manual Chapter 0350 restart process. Further, the petitioner ,
i asserts that requiring a decommissioning plan would provide assurance that the irradiated l fuelis stored safely and that Units 2 and 3 are sufficiently independent of Unit 1 for safe operation.
Background:
This petition was received on April 5,1998. The 2.206 Petition Review Board convened in mid-April 1998, and endorsed a proposed course of action. The acknowledgment letter was issued April 29,1998, with a decision not to hold an informal hearing on the UCS petition. The petitioner sent in another letter dated June 5,1998, requesting the staff reconsider conducting a public hearing. The staff has determined that while the 2.206 petition alone does not meet the criteria contained in Management Directive 8.11 regarding a hearing, the staff has chosen to conduct an informal hearing near the Browns Ferry site to afford the petitioner, licensee, and members of the public an opportunity to provide relevant information to the staff. A Federal Reaister notice (63 FR 51626) to hold an !
informal hearing in the Browns Ferry area was issued on September 28,1998. An informal hearing was held in the Browns Ferry area on October 26,1998.
Current Status:
The Director's Decision (DD-99-06) on the petition was issued on March 26,1999. The decision is under Commission review for a final agency action.
2
7 *-
Facility:
Petitioner:
Envirgcare of Utah. Inc.
L .. Natural Resources Defense Council Date of Petition: 12/30/98
' .' Director's Decision To Be Isoued by: NMSS/DWM Date Referred to Review Organization: 12/30/98 1
, EDO Number: G19980767 j l - OGC Number: P-99-01 Scheduled Completion Date: 6/2/99 Last Contact with Petitioner: 01/26/99 j Petition Manager: Harold Lefevre i Case Attorney: J. McGurren issues / Action Requested:
The petitioner requests that the NRC issue an order to show cause why Khosrow B. Semnani, j former President of Envirocare, should not be prohibited from participating in any NRC-licensed j activity.
Background:
1
)
The petitioner correctly points out that in the February 7,1997, denial of the Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC's) petition of January 8,1997, requesting revocation of all of Envirocare's licensesi NRC indicated that no immediate action was required to protect public health and safety. NRC further recognized, and so stated in the February 7,1997, Director's Decision, that the on-going (at that time) criminal investigation centering on Mr. Semnani's alleged bribery of Mr. Larry Anderson (former Director of the Utah Division of Radiation Control) may raise potential issues of integrity, which, if proven, may raise questions as to whether the NRC should have the requisite reasonable assurance that Envirocare will comply with Comrnission requirements.
]
The Department of Justice's (Justice's) criminal investigation of Mr. Semnani resulted in his conviction on a single charge of misdemeanor tax fraud. Mr. Semnani has not been convicted of bribery. According to documents recentiy received by NRC, Mr. Semnani's agreement with Justice indicates that he was extorted by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson has not been convicted of extortion. To the best of the staff's knowledge, no Justice charges have been filed against Mr.
Anderson. Additionally, a civil trial to determine whether Mr. Anderson is legally entitled to monies allegedly owned him by Mr. Semnani has yet to be held.
Mr. Semnani entered into an agreement with the Department of Energy (DOE) in 1997 wherein he, in light of possible economic sanctions against Envirocare, agreed to debar himself as president of Envirocare. This DOE /Mr. Semnani agreement remains in effect although it is the staff's understanding (through newspaper accounts) that Mr. Semnani has recently approached the DOE requesting that his debarment be lifted. The PRB meeting was held on January 20, 1999. An - acknowledgment letter was issued on Feb. 2,1999.
Current Status:
NRC's responses to letters received from Mr. Semnani's attorney (Jan.12,1999) and NRDC's Mr.
Cochran (Jan.19,1999) were issued on March 8 and March 12,1999, respectively. On March l 24,1999, Mr. Anderson was indicted on six charges of extortion, fraud, and tax evasion. His i
arraignment on these charges is scheduled for April 15,1999. The NRC staff anticipates receipt of Mr. Semnani's rebuttal of issues raised in the Petition in the very near future.
3
p 1 l
1 Facility:
Multiple Sites under the United States Formerly j
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Proaram (FUSRAP)
Petitioner: Thomas Cochran, Natural Resources Defense Council James Sottile, IV, Caplin & Drysdale Christian R. Pastore, Caplin & Drysdale Date of Petition: 10/15/98 !
I Director's Decision To Be Issued by: OGC Date Referred to Review Organization: 10/21/98 i EDO Number: G19980622
' OGC Nurnber: P-98-015 Scheduled Completion Date: Completed 3/26/99 l
Last Contact with Petitioner: 3/1/99 )
Petition Manager: J. Lusher Case Attorney: H. Newsome issue / Action Requested: i The petitioners have requested that NRC exert authority to ensure that the Corps of
]
Engineers' handling of radioactive materials in connection with the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) is effected in accord with a properly issued license and all other applicable requirements.
Background:
Until recently, FUSRAP was administered by the Department of Energy. In October of 1997, Congress transferred funding for FUSRAP from DOE to the Corps of Engineers.
NRDC believes that the Corps should obtain an NRC license to conduct activities under FUSRAP. At this time, NRC has not required the Corps to obtain a license. Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is currently reviewing NRDC's request. An acknowledgment letter was issued on November 30,1998.
Current Status:
The Director's Decision (DD-99-06) on the petition was issued on March 26,1999. The decision is under Commission review for a final agency action. I i
1 4
I
! 4 I
Facility: River Bend Station Petitioner: D. Lochbaum
. Date of Petition: 9/25/98 Director's Decision To Be issued by: NRR Date Referred to Review Organization: 9/29/98 EDO Number: G980592 OGC Number: P-98-14 Scheduled Completion Date: 4/19/99 Last Contact with Petitioner: 2/22/99 Petition Manager: R. Fretz Case Attorney: R. Hoefling issues / Action Requested:
The petition requested enforcement action to require an immediate shutdown of the River Bend Station (RBS) and that the facility remain shut down until all failed fuel assemblies are removed from the reactor core. The RBS licensee, Entergy Operations, Inc., had recently filed NRC Daily Event Report No. 34815, in which it reported "a possible defect in fuel cladding." As an alternate action, the petitioner also stated that RBS could be restarted I following the proposed shutdown after its design and licensing bases were updated to l permit operation with failed fuel assemblies. In addition, the petitioner requested a public hearing to present new plant-specific information regarding the operation of RBS, as well as I to discuss a UCS report dated April 2,1998, entitled " Potential Nuclear Safety l
Hazard / Reactor Operation With Failed Fuel Cladding." '
Background:
An acknowledgment letter was issued on 10/29/98. Since the petition did not provide specific information which would lead the staff to conclude that an urgent safety problem existed, the petitioner's request for the immediate shutdown of RBS was denied.
However, in the acknowledgment letter the NRC offered the petitioner an opportunity for an informal public hearing. On 11/6/98, the petitioner responded to the NRC's acknowledgment letter, and accepted the offer for an informal public hearing. The response for this petition is being coordinated with a similar petition associated with Perry Nuclear plant. The NRC has written to the licensee, in a letter dated 12/1/98, requesting their participation in the hearing and a formal response to the issues raised in the 9/25/98 Petition.
l l
Current Status:
An informal public hearing was held on February 22,1999, as scheduled. This provided an opportunity for the petitioner, the licensee and the public to provide their inputs, which coJld be usefulin the preparation of the Director's Decision. The Director's Decision is currently scheduled to be issued on April 19,1999.
6
~- -
7
- g facility
- Perry Nuclear Station. Unit 1
- l. , Petitioner: D. Lochbaum i
Date of Petition: 11/9/98 Director's Decision To Be Issued by: NRR Date Referred to Review Organization: 11/13/98 EDO Number: G19980678 OGC Number: P-98-16 Scheduled Completion Date: 4/19/99 Last Contact with Petitioner:- 2/22/99 Petition Manager: D. Pickett Case Attorney: R. Hoefling issues / Action Requested:
The Petition requested enforcement action to require an immediate shutdown of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) and that the facility remain shut down until all failed fuel assemblies are removed from the reactor core. As an alternate action, the petitioner asserted that PNPP could be restarted after its design and licensing bases were updated l to permit operation with failed fuel assemblies. Additionally, the petitioner requested an l
informal public hearing to present new information on reactor operation with failed fuel assemblies as well as to discuss the April 1998 UCS report on reactor operation with failed
! fuel assemblies. As the basis for the request, the Petition states that operation with one or more failed fuel assemblies is not permitted by Perry's design and licensing bases. More l specifically, UCS contends that Perry is also violating its worker radiation protection l program (Al ARA) licensing basis.
Background:
A PRB meeting was held on November 23,1998, to screen the petition. Since the petition
! did not provide specific information which would lead the staff to conclude that an urgent ;
safety problem existed, the petitioner's request for the immediate shutdown of PNPP was
- denied. However, in the acknowledgment letter, the NRC offered the petitioner an
[ opportunity for an informal public hearing that will be coordinated with a similar petition l associated with River Bend Statinn. The acknowledgment letter and Federal Reaister
! notice denying the petitioner's request for an immediate shutdown were issued on December 16,1998.
Current Status:
i An informal pu.klic hear ng was held on February 22,1999, as scheduled. This provided an opportunity for the petitioner, the licensee and the public to provide their inputs, which could be usefulin the preparation of the Director's Decision. The Director's Decision is currently scheduled to be issued on April 19,1999.
6 u
i Fccility: Millstone Pstitionsrs: G. Galatis and E. Hadley on behalf of We the
.._ , People, Inc.
I- Date of Petition: 8/21/95, supplemented 8/28/95 Director's Decision To De issued by: NRR l Date Referred to Review Organization: 8/30/95 l EDO Number: 603 OGC Number: P-95-015 Scheduled Completion Date: 6/30/99'
~
Last C'mtact wdh Petitioner (s): 4/2/99 Petition Manager: R. Eaton Case Attorney: R. Hoefling issues / Action Requested:
, The petitioners allege that Northeast Utilities (NU) has offloaded more fuel assemblies into the l spent fuel pool than permitted under License Amendments 39 and 40; that NU has knowingly operated Millstone in violation of its operating licenses; and that NU has submitted material false statements. Petitioners seek a 60-day license suspension for Millstone Unit 1 (after the unit is brought into compliance with the license and the design basis). The petitioners also i request that the operating license be revoked until the facility is in full compliance with the
, terms and conditions of its license; before reinstatement cf the license, a detailed independent l analysis of the offsite dose consequences of totalloss of spent fuel pool water be conducted; l i
that enforcement action ce taken against NU pursuant to 10 CFR 50.5 and 50.9; that actions ;
! be taken regarding a proposed license amendment pending before the Commission wherein NU i
- seeks to increase the amount of spent fuelit may offload and that the amendment be denied; that the NRC retain an independent expert, at NU's expense, to prepare a safety analysis report on the proposed amendment; and that, before the issuance of any amendment, an analysis including both the probability and consequences of applicable events be conducted.
j in the supplement, Mr. Galatis raised additional concerns including concerns at Millstone Units i 2 and 3 and Seabrook. 1
Background:
Northeast Utilities (NU) provided its responses in 9/22/95 and 10/11/95 letters. The acknowledgment letter was issued on 10/26/95. On 12/26/96, the staff issued a partial Director's Dedsion (DD-96-23) that addressed the technical aspects of the petitioners' requests. The staff conducted an informal public hearing with the petitioner on April 18, 1998. The wrongdoing aspects are still under review and will be addressed in a subsequent final Director's Decision. An enforcement panel met on 10/13/98. Region I has drafted a Commission paper to resolve the enforcement issues associated with this petition. Final resolution and the schedule for comph: tion of the petition will occur following resolution of enforcement issues.
Current Status:
Staff enforcement action regarding findings of the Ol report were completed. Final portion of the DD for closing out this petition is in preparation.
@ An extension for completion date of the petition has been requested.
7
p Facility: Connecticut Yankee Petitioners: R. Bassilakis, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) and i
., , P. Gunter, Nuclear information and Resource Service (NIRS) I Date of Petition: 3/11/97 Director's Decision To Be issued by: NRR Date Referred to Review Organization: 3/20/97 EDO Number: )
GT97181 OGC Number: P-97-003 Scheduled Completion Date: 6/30/99 8 Last Contact with Petitioners: 3/30/99 Petition Manager: T. Fredrichs Case Attorney: M. Rafky issues / Action Requested:
Petitioners request (1) that the NRC commence enforcement action against Connecticut Yankee (CY) (Haddam Neck) by means of a large civil penalty to assure compliance with
, safety-based radiological control routines, (2) modification of CY's license to prohibit any decommissioning activity, which would include dismantling or decontamination, until CY manages tn conduct routine maintenance of the facility without any contamination events for at least 6 months, and (3) placement of CY on the NRC's " watch list."
Background:
An acknowle% ment letter was issued on 4/3/97. The petitioner was contacted by telephone on 7/9/97 and informed of the status of the petition. A partial Director's l Decision (DD-97-19) was issued on 9/3/97. DD-97-19 denied requests (2) and (3) above, i
in a public meeting on 10/27/97, which the petitioner attended, the staff stated that it was pursuing enforcement action regarding the remaining open item in the petition.
I Current Status:
Staff enforcement action regarding findings of the 01 report was completed on 4/6/99.
I
@ An extension for completion date of the petition has been requested.
l l
1 8
u