ML22182A499
| ML22182A499 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/13/2022 |
| From: | Bo Pham Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Mark King Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Buckberg P | |
| References | |
| 2.206, 200700062, CAC TM3058 | |
| Download: ML22182A499 (5) | |
Text
July 13, 2022 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael F. King, Deputy Director Reactor Safety Programs and Mission Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Bo M. Pham, Director /RA Gregory F. Suber for/
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
200700062 - QUARTERLY APRIL - JUNE 2022 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 April 1 through June 30, 2022, including their age statistics.
Enclosure:
Quarterly 10 CFR 2.206 Status Report April - June 2022 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 April - June 2022 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/Ticket No. Page OPEN PETITIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION Tetra Tech EC, Inc. David Anton 2 OEDO-17-00454 Enclosure
OPEN PETITION UNDER CONSIDERATION OEDO-17-00454 (Petition Age: 60 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: June 6, 2022 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 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (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, September 7, 2021, December 3, 2021, and February 28, 2022, 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 June 6, 2022, 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.
ML22182A499 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL4/PM NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/LA NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/BC NRR/DORL/D NAME PBuckberg RButler DWrona BPham (GSuber for)
DATE 07/05/2022 07/08/2022 07/13/2022 07/13/2022