ML21277A089
| ML21277A089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/2021 |
| From: | Caroline Carusone Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Mark King Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Buckberg P | |
| References | |
| 2.206, 200700062, CAC TM3058 | |
| Download: ML21277A089 (7) | |
Text
October 15, 2021 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael F. King, Deputy Director Reactor Safety Programs and Mission Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Caroline L. Carusone, Deputy Director /RA/
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
QUARTERLY JULY - SEPTEMBER 2021 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF PUBLIC PETITIONS SUBMITTED UNDER TITLE 10 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, SECTION 2.206 (CAC NO. TM3058)
This memorandum transmits the quarterly status report of petitions being evaluated under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 2.206, Requests for action under this subpart. This report covers open and closed petitions from July 1 through September 30, 2021, including their age statistics.
Enclosure:
Quarterly 10 CFR 2.206 Status Report July - September 2021 cc: SECY EDO OGC OCA OPA OCFO CONTACT: Perry Buckberg, NRR/DORL 301-415-1383
Quarterly Status Report of Public Petitions Submitted Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 2.206 July - September, 2021 For each open or closed petition listed below, the individual status page summarizes the issues raised by the petitioner, the background, and the next steps.
When a petition is received, the submittal is evaluated against the screening criteria in Management Directive (MD) 8.11, Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions, to determine if consideration by a Petition Review Board (PRB) is warranted or if the submittal will be dispositioned outside of the 10 CFR 2.206 process. If a submittal is currently being screened, it will not be included in this report. If a submittal has been screened and dispositioned outside of the 10 CFR 2.206 process, the submitter will be notified, and the submission will not be included in this report.
If PRB consideration is warranted, the petition will be referred to as an open petition under consideration in this report. If a PRB makes its final determination to not accept a petition for further review, the submitter will be notified, and the petition will be listed as a closed petition.
If a PRB accepts a petition for further review under 10 CFR 2.206, the petition will continue to be listed as an open petition under consideration until the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) staff formally grants or denies the requested actions in a Directors Decision (DD). After issuing a DD, the petition will be listed as a closed petition.
Licensee/Facility Petitioner/EDO No. Page OPEN PETITIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION Tetra Tech EC, Inc. David Anton 2 OEDO-17-00454 Fermi Unit 2 Beyond Nuclear 4 Dont Waste Michigan OEDO-20-00148 Enclosure
OPEN PETITION UNDER CONSIDERATION OEDO-17-00454 (Petition Age: 51 months)
Facility: Tetra Tech EC, Inc.
Licensee Type: Materials Petitioner(s): David Anton Date of Petition: June 29, 2017 DD to be Issued by: Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Acknowledgment Letter Issued: Not Applicable Closure Letter Issued: Not Applicable Last Contact with Petitioner: September 7, 2021 Petition Manager: James Smith Case Attorney: Lorraine Baer Issues/Actions Requested:
The petitioner requested that the NRC revoke the materials license for Tetra Tech EC, Inc., due to concerns about its role in the cleanup of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HPNS) in San Francisco, California, including remediation of radiological contamination. The submittal was lengthy with multiple attachments and included requests and concerns outside of the scope of 10 CFR 2.206.
Background:
On June 29, 2017, the petitioner filed a petition for enforcement action under 10 CFR 2.206 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18178A067).
On July 20, July 22, and August 1, 2017, the petition manager and petitioner discussed timing of a public meeting.
On October 19, 2017, the PRB met and decided to hold the petition in abeyance because the issues raised are the subject of ongoing reviews separate from the 10 CFR 2.206 process.
On December 6, 2017, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the processing of the petition was taking longer than the usual amount of time due to the need to obtain results from ongoing reviews outside the 10 CFR 2.206 process.
On February 13, 2018, the petitioner supplemented the petition with information pertaining to other HPNS site areas that may have included work done by Tetra Tech at Parcels C and E at HPNS.
On June 18, 2018, the petition manager discussed with the petitioner the petition status and the next possible opportunity to address the PRB.
On August 15, 2018, the PRB met to discuss whether the petition meets the MD 8.11, Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions criteria for acceptance.
On September 13, 2018, the petitioner and the petition manager discussed logistics of a tentative meeting.
On October 17, 2018, the petitioner addressed the PRB in a public meeting. The petitioner did not submit additional information during the meeting, but the transcript is considered a supplement to the petition.
On October 29, 2018, the PRB met to discuss the information provided by the petitioner during the October 17, 2018, public meeting.
As a result of several internal deliberations, the PRBs initial determination was to reject the 10 CFR 2.206 petition.
On February 22, 2019, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the PRBs initial determination was to reject the petition. The petitioner requested a second opportunity to address the PRB.
On June 25, 2019, the petitioner addressed the PRB in a second public meeting. The transcript is considered a supplement to the petition. The petitioner also provided supplemental information after the meeting.
On August 9, 2019, the licensee provided a response to the PRB regarding statements made by the petitioner during the June 25, 2019, public meeting and the petitioners supplement submitted after the meeting.
On September 12, 2019, the PRB met to discuss the final recommendation.
On December 19, 2019, a letter was issued by the NRC stating that the petition will be held in abeyance and will be reassessed after the legal resolution of the Department of Justice civil complaint against Tetra Tech.
On April 24, 2020, August 24, 2020, and December 21, 2020, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the petition was still being held in abeyance pending legal resolution of the Department of Justice civil complaint against Tetra Tech.
On December 22, 2020, the petitioner informed the petition manager of changes to the petition contacts.
On May 7, 2021, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the petition was still being held in abeyance pending legal resolution of the Department of Justice civil complaint against Tetra Tech.
Actions Completed This Quarter/Next Steps:
On September 7, 2021, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the petition was still being held in abeyance pending legal resolution of the Department of Justice civil complaint against Tetra Tech.
The petition manager will continue to check for updates regarding the civil complaint. The petition manager will inform the petitioner if any emergent petition-related activity occurs and will inform the petitioner whether or not there is a change to the abeyance status of the petition.
OPEN PETITION UNDER CONSIDERATION OEDO-20-00148 (Petition Age: 17 months)
Facility: Fermi Unit 2 Licensee Type: Reactor Petitioner(s): Terry Lodge Date of Petition: April 16, 2020 DD to be Issued by: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Acknowledgement Letter Issued: Not Applicable Closure Letter Issued: Not Applicable Last Contact with Petitioner: July 27, 2021 Petition Manager: Scott Wall Case Attorney: Rob Carpenter Issues/Actions Requested:
The petitioner requested that the NRC issue Demands for Information to obtain a formal risk assessment of torus coating conditions, a list of tasks deferred due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, and answers to his questions about the COVID-19 impact on emergency planning.
Background:
On April 16, 2020, the petitioner filed a petition under 10 CFR 2.206 (ADAMS Accession No. ML20111A334).
On April 22, 2020, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the initial screening of the petition had begun.
On June 26, 2020, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the NRC had determined that immediate action was not warranted. The petition manager informed the petitioner that a PRB would be performing its initial assessment of the torus coating related request to determine if it should be accepted into the 10 CFR 2.206 process. The petition manager also informed the petitioner that their requests for information from DTE Energy related to deferred tasks and COVID-19 impacts on emergency planning have screened out of the 10 CFR 2.206 petition process.
On September 29, 2020, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the PRBs initial assessment was that the petition did not meet the MD 8.11 criteria for accepting petitions under 10 CFR 2.206. The petition manager offered the petitioner an opportunity to address the PRB.
On October 9, 2020, the petitioner requested a delay in scheduling a meeting with the PRB until the NRC responds to the petitioners Freedom of Information Act request.
On November 9, 2020, the petition manager notified the petitioner that the PRB agreed to delay scheduling the meeting with the PRB until after the response has been issued for the Freedom of Information Act request.
Actions Completed This Quarter/Next Steps:
On July 12, 2021, after confirming that the petitioner had received over 1300 pages of information through the Freedom of Information Act request since November 9, 2020, the petition manager contacted the petitioner to offer another opportunity to address the PRB.
The petition manager reminded the petitioner of the September 2020 PRB initial
assessment to not accept the petition for review. The petition manager requested a response by July 26, 2021.
On July 27, 2021, after receiving no response from the petitioner regarding the opportunity to address the PRB, the petition manager informed the petitioner that the PRB would be moving ahead with its final determination regarding acceptance or nonacceptance of the petition for review.
The draft closure letter is in concurrence and expected to be issued by the end of the calendar year.
ML21277A089 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL4/PM NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/LA NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/BC NRR/DORL/DD NAME PBuckberg RButler DWrona CCarusone DATE 10/1/2021 10/6/2021 10/7/2021 10/15/2021