ML20215E213

Responds to 860821 Petition for Suspension of License NPF-39 Under 10CFR50.100.Subj Matter of Petition Reviewed & Considered to Have No Basis or Rationale,Per 10CFR2.206,for Suspension of License

ML20215E213
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	10/08/1986
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Anthony R ANTHONY, R.L.
Shared Package
ML20215E218	List: ML20215E213 ML20215E229
References
2.206, NUDOCS 8610150144
Download: ML20215E213 (4)

Text

's p ncu 7 fg UNITED STATES y ,e , g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5*- ,

[ tVASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 October 3,1936 k ..... /

Mr. Robert L. Anthony P. O. Box 186 Moylan, Pennsylvania 19065

Dear Mr. Anthony:

Your " Petition To The Commission From Anthony /F0E For immediate Suspension of Op. Lic. NPF-39 Under 10 CFR, Sec. 50.100..." dated August 21, 1986 (Petition) has been referred to my office for a response.

The Petition was in regard to a letter dated August 5,1986 from the NRC staff to the Philadelphia Electric Company (licensee) which concerned the continued validity of statements made by the licensee in its application for an amendment to the Limerick Unit 1 operating license. Amendment No. 1 allowed the licensee to defer, by up to 14 weeks, the surveillance tests for operability of certain instrumentation line excess flow check valves. The amendment granted the deferral of testing for all of these valves based on information provided by the licensee that testing of all of the valves required the plant to be shut-down. Following the issuance of the amendment, the licensee revisited this issue, developed testing methods, and tested some of the valves with the plant at power but did not inform the appropriate NRC staff in a timely manner of this change of status. In its letter of August 5, 1986, the NRC staff notes its concern to the licensee that it wasn't kept current on this matter and also noted that tne licensee had initiated steps to prevent recurrence. Based on this correspondence, the Petition requests a variety of actions including suspension of the license which authorizes operation of Limerick Unit 1, a hearing on revocation of the license, the imposition of civil penalties on the licensee and " sanctions" against the licensee's counsel.

The subject matter of the Petition has been fully considered by the staff.

-License Amendment No. I was issued based on information from the licensee which was correct given the considerations it involved. Only later, based upon additional considerations including new information, did the licensee determine some valves could be tested at power. The license amendment would still have been required for the remaining valves. Thus, the concern is not the truth or falsity of the information provided by the licensee but the failure on the part of the licensee to keep the staff current.

With respect to the several requests for action contained in the Petition, there is no basis, rationale or new information provided by the Petition which would support these requests. As was indicated in the staff's letter to the licensee, the staff did not identify any further need for corrective action related to this issue and did not require a response from the licensee.

44 e61oos kof{0%cnosoooggy y

PDR

Accordingly, I do not believe it is appropriate to consider the Petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. This regulation requests that the Petition "...

set forth the facts that constitute the basis for the request." A corollary of the requirement is that the Petition must show something more than merely recite portions of documents prepared by the staff or the licensee. In this instance, in the absence of some specific showing to the contrary, it may be presumed that the staff's earlier response to this issue was adequate. What this Petition signals is disagreement with NRC over handling of the issues raised. Such disagreement, without more, is an insufficient basis for staff action pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. A copy of this letter will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission.

Sinc rely, tiginal %..., a1:

J1ichard 11. Vo!Imet arold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page i

r m PD#4/LA M0'Brien 0# )lPN EM rtin:lb PD#4/D WButler y

ko h

f 19 Alouston D/ DBL M RBernero

/ /86 js/03/86 \c/Q/86 k(0

,f) / /86 g/7 /86 jo / 7/86

{',g

1. R 4 er D

i on

[

o/ /86 / /86

~

cc: Mr. Edward G. Bau2r, Jr.

p Vice President & General Counsel

g *

~

Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 Atomic Safety and Licensing

' Board . Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

'S Washington, DC 20555

i Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

+

I

, DISTRIBUTION (GreenTicket 002074)

FDocket File w/ incoming NRC PDR LPDR EDO #002074 ED0 r/F HDenton/RVollmer RBernero Glainas DCrutchfield WButler RMartin w/ incoming M0'Brien w/ incoming OPA DNossburg(EDO#002074) w/ incoming PDf4 Rdg. w/ incoming LHarmon VStello Bill Clements, SECY, H-1149 OGCw/ incoming JLieberman, (Bethesda))

OGC (Bethesda ASLAB ASLBP ACRS(1)(2)(W-501)

JResner JTaylor TMurley PPAS RLaGrange PEselgroth GKelly GHoller i

e l

l

_ - . _ . . _ - - .