[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5043-5044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2837]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-029, (License No. DPR-3)]


Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Receipt of Petition for 
Director's Decision Under 10 C.F.R. 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that by an ``Emergency Motion for Compliance 
with Circuit Court Opinion'' (Petition), dated January 17, 1996, 
Citizens Awareness Network and New England Coalition on Nuclear 
Pollution (Petitioners) request that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) take action with regard to operation by Yankee Atomic Energy 
Company (YAEC or Licensee) of its Nuclear Power Station at Rowe, 
Massachusetts (Yankee Rowe).
    By an Order dated January 23, 1996, the Commission referred the 
Emergency Motion to the NRC staff for treatment as a petition pursuant 
to 10 C.F.R. Sec. 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. The Commission 
ordered the NRC staff to respond to the Petitioners' claim of emergency 
within 10 days, or February 2, 1996, and to the Petition as a whole 
within 30 days, or February 22, 1996.
    Petitioners request that the NRC comply with Citizens Awareness 
Network Inc. v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Yankee 
Atomic Electric Company, 59 F.3d 284 (1st Cir. 1995) (CAN v. NRC). 
Specifically, Petitioners request that the Commission immediately 
order:
    (1) YAEC not to undertake, and the NRC staff not to approve, 
further major dismantling activities or other decommissioning 
activities, unless such activities are necessary to assure the 
protection of occupational and public 

[[Page 5044]]
health and safety; (2) YAEC to cease any such activities; and
    (3) NRC Region I to reinspect Yankee Rowe to determine whether 
there has been compliance with the Commission's Order of October 12, 
1995 (CLI-95-14), and to issue a report within ten days of the 
requested order to Region I.
    As the bases for their requests, Petitioners state that:
    (1) CAN v. NRC requires the cessation, and prohibits commencement, 
of decommissioning activities at Yankee Rowe, pending final approval of 
the licensee's decommissioning plan after opportunity for a hearing. 
CLI 95-14 forbids YAEC from conducting any further major dismantling or 
decommissioning activities until final approval of its decommissioning 
plan after completion of the hearing process;
    (2) CAN v. NRC obliges the Commission and the staff to provide an 
opportunity to interested persons for a hearing to approve a 
decommissioning plan;
    (3) CAN v. NRC requires the Commission to reinstate its pre-1993 
interpretation of its decommissioning regulations, General Requirements 
for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities, 53 FR 24,018, 24,025-26 (June 
27, 1988), limiting the scope of permissible activities prior to 
approval of a decommissioning plan to decontamination, minor component 
disassembly, and shipment and storage of spent fuel, if permitted by 
the operating license and/or 10 C.F.R. 50.59. Under Long Island 
Lighting Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), CLI-90-08, 32 
NRC 201, 207, n.3 (1990), this means that the licensee may not take any 
action that would materially affect the methods or options available 
for decommissioning, or that would substantially increase the costs of 
decommissioning, prior to approval of a decommissioning plan. Under 
CLI-91-2, 33 NRC at 73, n.5, and CLI-92-2, 35 NRC at 61, n.7, other 
decommissioning activities, in addition to major ones, are prohibited, 
including offsite shipments of low-level radioactive waste produced by 
decommissioning activities, until after approval of a decommissioning 
plan;
    (4) decommissioning activities permitted by NRC Inspection Manual, 
Chapter 2561, Sec. 06.06, ``Modifications or Changes to the Facility'', 
before approval of a decommissioning plan are limited to maintenance, 
removal of relatively small radioactive components or non-radioactive 
components, and characterization of the plant or site;
    (5) YAEC is conducting decommissioning activities, with the 
approval of the NRC technical staff, in flagrant violation of CAN v. 
NRC and of CLI-95-14, thus threatening to render the decommissioning 
process nugatory and to deprive Petitioners of their hearing rights 
under Section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act;
    (6) by letter dated October 19, 1995, YAEC described 
decommissioning activities in progress, and by letter dated October 24, 
1994, interpreted permissible ``major'' dismantling as removal of non-
radioactive material required to support safe storage of spent fuel and 
of those portions of the facilities which remain, or to support future 
dismantlement. Of the nine activities proposed in the letter of October 
19, 1995, five constitute major dismantling or other impermissible 
decommissioning activities, such as major structural changes in the 
nature of Component Removal Project activities found unlawful in CAN v. 
NRC and in CLI-95-14;
    (7) by letter dated November 2, 1995, the NRC staff approved the 
activities described by the Licensee in its letter of October 19, 1995;
    (8) Petitioners advocate the SAFSTOR decommissioning alternative 
because it allows levels of radioactivity and waste volumes to 
decrease, thus reducing occupational and public radiation exposures, 
and lowering decommissioning costs;
    (9) NRC Inspection Report No. 50-29/95-05 (December 16, 1995) 
concludes that the issue whether activities observed were in compliance 
with CLI 95-14 is unresolved, but approves YAEC's proposed activities, 
contrary to the requirements of NRC Inspection Manual, Chapter 2561, 
Sec. 06.06, ``Modifications or Changes to the Facility'' (March 20, 
1992); and
    (10) YAEC's criterion for permissible decommissioning activities, 
that any activity involving less than 1 percent of the on-site 
radioactive inventory is not ``major'' and may take place before 
approval of a decommissioning plan, violates CAN v. NRC because it 
would allow completion of decommissioning before any decommissioning 
plan could be approved in hearing, and constitutes unlawful 
segmentation under the National Environmental Policy Act.
    The Petitioners' request for emergency action to cease 
decommissioning activities was mooted in part by the Licensee's 
completion of eight of the nine activities evaluated by the NRC staff 
letter of November 2, 1995. Even if these activities had not been 
completed, they would have been permissible under the Commission's pre-
1993 interpretation of its decommissioning regulations. By letter dated 
January 31, 1996, Petitioners' request for emergency action to cease 
shipment of low-level radioactive waste produced by decommissioning 
activities was denied, and Petitioners' request for reinspection of the 
Yankee Rowe facility to determine compliance with CLI-95-14 and to 
issue an inspection report was granted.
    The Petition is being evaluated pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 2.206 of the 
Commission's regulations by the Director of the Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation. As provided by the Commission's Order of January 
23, 1996, a decision on the Petition as a whole will be issued no later 
than 30 days from the date of the Order, or February 22, 1996.
    A copy of the Petition is available for inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20555.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of February 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William T. Russell,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-2837 Filed 2-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P