News

From PennLive:

A senator wants an investigation of the cleanup at an old nuclear waste site about 30 miles east of Pittsburgh.

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey says in a statement Wednesday that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Inspector General should investigate the cleanup of the former Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp., or NUMEC, site, which operated from 1957 until the 1980s.

Read article

 (Directing Staff to Amend Filing on 10 C.F.R. § 2.206)

In a May 17, 2012 Order, this Board directed the NRC Staff to submit “a list of those

occasions since January 1975 on which the NRC official to whom a [10 C.F.R. § 2.206] petition

was submitted granted the substantive relief sought.”1 In response, the Staff identified 142

Director’s Decisions that either granted the petition in whole or in part or, although denying the

1 Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Requesting Filing on Petitions under 10 C.F.R.

§ 2.206) at 1-2 (May 17, 2012) (unpublished) (emphasis in original); see also Licensing Board

Memorandum and Order (Regarding Motion to Extend Time for Filing and to Reschedule Oral

Argument) at 2 (May 24, 2012) (unpublished) (granting approximately a two week extension for

Section 2.206 filing).

- 2 -

petition, either prompted action by the Staff or reflected action already taken by the Staff.2 For

each of these decisions, in accordance with the Board’s request the Staff summarized the relief

granted.

Upon reviewing the filing, it is plain that the Staff did not comply with the Board’s

directive. Rather than, as instructed, identifying solely those petitions in which substantive relief

was provided to the petitioner, the Staff elected to supply the Board with each and every petition

in response to which some action was taken by it. The most cursory examination of the Staff

response reveals that in many, if not the majority, of the instances that action was patently not

substantive in character.

To cite but one example, of the 387 Director’s Decisions reviewed by the Staff only 2

petitions were granted in whole, one of which was that submitted in Pacific Gas and Electric

Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2), DD-90-3, 31 NRC 595 (1990).

On an examination of the relief provided in that instance, it is obvious the relief could not

possibly be characterized as substantive in nature. There, in response to allegations in a

Section 2.206 petition that Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) violated certain antitrust

license conditions in the Diablo Canyon operating licenses, the Director of the Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation withheld a decision on the petition until completion of a ruling by the United

States District Court for the Northern District of California on related issues and thereafter

directed PG&E simply to submit a report regarding the steps it had taken and planned to take to

comply with the District Court ruling.3

It is difficult to believe that the Staff is not conversant with the difference for present

purposes between calling upon a licensee to file a report and what is being sought in the

matters now before the Board, the augmentation of reliable hardened containment venting and

2 NRC Staff Response to the Board Order Regarding Petitions Under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206 at 2

(June 15, 2012).

3 Diablo Canyon, DD-90-3, 31 NRC at 595-96.

- 3 -

spent fuel storage. In the circumstances, we must conclude that in presenting the Board with all

142 instances where some affirmative action was taken with regard to a petition, the Staff chose

simply to ignore the manifest distinction between substantive and procedural relief.

The Staff is directed to file, no later than noon (EDT) on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, an

amended response to this Board’s May 17, 2012 Order. That response shall identify those of

the 142 Director’s Decisions listed in the June 15, 2012 response that, in fact, provided

substantive relief to the petitioner. To accommodate the filing of responsive comments,

provided for by the Board’s June 15, 2012 Order,4 those responsive comments shall now be

filed no later than noon (EDT) on Tuesday, July 3, 2012.

It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY

AND LICENSING BOARD

Dear Ms. Vietti-Cook:

On Monday June 18, 2012, I filed a Petition (“Petition”) in concert with Joint Petitioners to Suspend Final Decisions in All Pending Licensing Proceedings Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings, Re: Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant, (Docket No. 52-039-COL.)

I am formally withdrawing my appearance in the Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant, Docket No. 52-039-COL.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 - Review of 60-Day Response to Request for Information Regarding Recommendation 9.3

Download: ML12160A194

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Edward J. Markey (D- Mass.) today released the following statement after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the 2010 update to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Waste Confidence Decision to temporarily store nuclear waste at power plants for up to six decades, rejecting the “Commission’s conclusions regarding temporary storage because the Commission did not conduct a sufficient analysis of the environmental risks.”

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - NRC Triennial Fire Protection Inspection Report 05000277/2012007 and 05000278/2012007

Download: 2012007

Request for Withholding Information From Public Disclosure for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (TAC Nos. ME8535 and ME8536)

Download: ML121290529

June 20, 2012

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action

Download: ML12144A166

From Rep Markey:

Today, Congressman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) released a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that found that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) doesn’t require operating nuclear reactors to utilize the most updated method of risk analysis to assess vulnerability to earthquakes, floods or other natural disasters. The GAO report found that while the NRC has, since 1986, repeatedly endorsed and recommended the use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA, which is a more comprehensive risk assessment method that looks at all potential causes of an accident for any particular hazard), it has not required any currently operating reactor to actually use the technique to evaluate vulnerabilities to natural hazards such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods.

The threat of natural disasters to nuclear reactor safety is not theoretical. Eight nuclear reactors are in the seismically active West Coast, approximately 27 are near the New Madrid seismic zone in the mid-west, and 5 are in earthquake-prone South Carolina. Last summer, a magnitude 5.8 earthquake centered near Mineral, VA caused the North Anna Nuclear Generating Station to shut down after it experienced a greater seismic impact than the reactors were designed to withstand. Last summer’s flooding in Nebraska threatened the Fort Calhoun and Cooper nuclear power plants, Hurricane Irene caused the shut-down or otherwise impacted the emergency systems of at least nine nuclear reactors in August of 2011, and tornadoes caused the shutdown of several nuclear reactors in 2011.

“This report is yet another indication that while the NRC races ahead to issue or extend licenses for nuclear power plants, it has fallen behind inexcusably in addressing the safety of these very same facilities,” said Rep. Markey, top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee and senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “We know what happened at Fukushima could happen here in the U.S., and we should utilize the best and latest information available to assess vulnerabilities so we can ensure the safety of our operating nuclear reactors.”

“There is simply no excuse for the NRC’s failure to require the most up to date methods to assess the threat posed by natural disasters, such as earthquakes, to our nuclear power plants,” said Senator Boxer, Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “While the NRC has agreed to study the issue, action is needed now to ensure that standards are in place that best protect the health and safety of the American public.”

Read article