ML16155A451

/06/03 E-mail 10 CFR 2.206 Petition Concerning Degraded Baffle-Former Bolts - Denial of Immediate Action Requests (LTR-16-0297)

ML16155A451
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	06/03/2016
From:	Richard Guzman Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Olson J Ayres Law Group, Friends of the Earth
Guzman R
References
LTR-16-0297
Download: ML16155A451 (2)

Text

Guzman, Richard From: Guzman, Richard Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 5:08 PM To: 'Jessica L. Olson' Cc: 'Richard Ayres'; 'John Bernetich'; 'wglew@entergy.com'

Subject:

2.206 Petition Concerning Degraded Baffle-Former Bolts at Indian Point (LTR-16-0297)

ADAMSAccessionNumber: ML16155A451 ADAMSVersionSeriesId: {5CFFE89C-E817-484F-8645-9C541AB19A69}

Good Afternoon, I have been assigned as a Petition Manager for the 10 CFR 2.206 petition you submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on May 24, 2016, regarding your concerns with baffle-former bolts at Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3.

Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations describes the petition process - the primary mechanism for the public to request enforcement action by the NRC in a public process. This process permits anyone to petition NRC to take enforcement-type action related to NRC licensees or licensed activities.

Depending on the results of its evaluation, NRC could modify, suspend or revoke an NRC-issued license or take any other appropriate enforcement action to resolve a problem. The NRC staffs guidance for the disposition of 2.206 petition requests is in Management Directive 8.11, which is publicly available.

The 2.206 process provides a mechanism for any member of the public to request enforcement action against NRC licensees. The 2.206 process is separate from the allegations process which affords individuals who raise safety concerns a degree of protection of their identity. In the 2.206 process, all of the information in your letter will be made public, including your identity.

You specifically requested in your letter for the NRC to immediately issue an order preventing restart of Indian Point, Unit 2 until the Commission concludes, based on its own investigation, that the unit can be safely operated, and order the immediate shutdown and inspection of Indian Point, Unit 3 until the petition is adjudicated. On June 3, 2016, your request for immediate action was reviewed by members of the Petition Review Board (PRB), which includes staff from the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and Region I. After thorough review and discussion, the PRB determined that there were no immediate safety significant concerns which would adversely impact the publics health and safety; therefore, the PRB denied your request for immediate action.

In accordance with NRC Management Directive 8.11, you have the opportunity to address the PRB, either in person at the NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD, or by telephone conference. The purpose of this interaction is so that the petitioner can discuss the petition and verbally supplement the petition with any new information.

During the meeting, the PRB is in listening mode and will not make any decisions regarding your petition.

I would appreciate if you could advise me by Friday, June 10, 2016, if you agree to the NRCs processing your request under the 2.206 process. In addition, please advise me if you would like to address the PRB. If you would like to meet in person, I will need to schedule a formal public meeting at the NRC Headquarters. If you would prefer to address the PRB via phone, I will also work with you to coordinate a date/time during the upcoming weeks.

If you have other questions on the 2.206 process, or regarding the role as petition manager, please contact me or Doug Pickett at 301-415-1364.

Thank you, 1

~~~~~~~~~

Rich Guzman Sr. PM, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office: O-8E10 l Phone: 301-415-1030 2

Guzman, Richard From: Guzman, Richard Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 5:08 PM To: 'Jessica L. Olson' Cc: 'Richard Ayres'; 'John Bernetich'; 'wglew@entergy.com'

Subject:

2.206 Petition Concerning Degraded Baffle-Former Bolts at Indian Point (LTR-16-0297)

ADAMSAccessionNumber: ML16155A451 ADAMSVersionSeriesId: {5CFFE89C-E817-484F-8645-9C541AB19A69}

Good Afternoon, I have been assigned as a Petition Manager for the 10 CFR 2.206 petition you submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on May 24, 2016, regarding your concerns with baffle-former bolts at Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3.

Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations describes the petition process - the primary mechanism for the public to request enforcement action by the NRC in a public process. This process permits anyone to petition NRC to take enforcement-type action related to NRC licensees or licensed activities.

Depending on the results of its evaluation, NRC could modify, suspend or revoke an NRC-issued license or take any other appropriate enforcement action to resolve a problem. The NRC staffs guidance for the disposition of 2.206 petition requests is in Management Directive 8.11, which is publicly available.

The 2.206 process provides a mechanism for any member of the public to request enforcement action against NRC licensees. The 2.206 process is separate from the allegations process which affords individuals who raise safety concerns a degree of protection of their identity. In the 2.206 process, all of the information in your letter will be made public, including your identity.

You specifically requested in your letter for the NRC to immediately issue an order preventing restart of Indian Point, Unit 2 until the Commission concludes, based on its own investigation, that the unit can be safely operated, and order the immediate shutdown and inspection of Indian Point, Unit 3 until the petition is adjudicated. On June 3, 2016, your request for immediate action was reviewed by members of the Petition Review Board (PRB), which includes staff from the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and Region I. After thorough review and discussion, the PRB determined that there were no immediate safety significant concerns which would adversely impact the publics health and safety; therefore, the PRB denied your request for immediate action.

In accordance with NRC Management Directive 8.11, you have the opportunity to address the PRB, either in person at the NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD, or by telephone conference. The purpose of this interaction is so that the petitioner can discuss the petition and verbally supplement the petition with any new information.

During the meeting, the PRB is in listening mode and will not make any decisions regarding your petition.

I would appreciate if you could advise me by Friday, June 10, 2016, if you agree to the NRCs processing your request under the 2.206 process. In addition, please advise me if you would like to address the PRB. If you would like to meet in person, I will need to schedule a formal public meeting at the NRC Headquarters. If you would prefer to address the PRB via phone, I will also work with you to coordinate a date/time during the upcoming weeks.

If you have other questions on the 2.206 process, or regarding the role as petition manager, please contact me or Doug Pickett at 301-415-1364.

Thank you, 1

~~~~~~~~~

Rich Guzman Sr. PM, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office: O-8E10 l Phone: 301-415-1030 2