[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 21031]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9751]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-247]


Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Indian Point 
Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2; Issuance of Final Director's Decision 
Under 10 CFR 2.206

    By letter dated September 15, 1999, Mr. David A. Lochbaum, on 
behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists (Petitioner), pursuant to 
Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 
2.206), requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(Commission or NRC) take action with regard to the Indian Point Nuclear 
Generating Unit No. 2 (IP2), owned and operated by Consolidated Edison 
Company of New York, Inc. (Con Ed). The Petitioner requested that the 
NRC take enforcement action to modify or suspend the operating license 
for IP2, operated by Con Ed (the licensee), to prevent the reactor from 
resuming operation until the five issues identified in the attachment 
to the Petition have been fully resolved. As an acceptable alternative 
in lieu of a suspension or modification of the license, the Petitioner 
requested that the NRC issue a confirmatory action letter or an order 
requiring these issues to be fully resolved before unit restart. The 
five issues that were raised in the Petition are (1) The apparent 
violation of station battery design and licensing bases, (2) the 
apparent failure to adequately correct circuit breaker problems, (3) 
the apparent unreliability of emergency diesel generators, (4) the 
potentially unjustified license amendment for undervoltage and degraded 
voltage relay surveillance intervals, and (5) the apparent errors and 
nonconservatisms in individual plant examinations (IPEs). Along with 
the last issue, the Petitioner stated that the event on August 31, 
1999, at IP2 revealed potential problems with the plant-specific risk 
assessment developed by the licensee and now used to establish 
priorities for maintenance and inspections. Additionally, the 
Petitioner requested that a public hearing on this Petition be 
conducted in the vicinity of the plant before its restart is authorized 
by the NRC. In a transcribed telephone conversation between the 
Petitioner and the members of the NRC's Petition Review Board on 
September 22, 1999, the Petitioner clarified two of the issues in the 
Petition. First, the Petitioner stated that because of an apparent 
failure to accomplish the commitment in the NRC's safety evaluation for 
the license amendment mentioned in the Petition, the Petitioner was 
concerned that past licensing commitments may not have been 
implemented. Second, the Petitioner questioned whether the amount of 
time the licensee took to perform certain actions during the event on 
August 31, 1999, was consistent with the times expected if a station 
blackout (SBO) had occurred since many of the procedures and processes 
in response to an SBO event were used.
    The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has 
addressed the technical concerns provided by the Petitioner. However, 
the Petitioner's request for the staff to take enforcement action was 
not granted for the reasons that are explained in the ``Final 
Director's Decision Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-00-02). The complete 
text of the Final Director's Decision is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room located in the 
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and will be 
accessible electronically from the agencywide documents access and 
management system (ADAMS) public library component on the NRC web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov (the electronic reading room).
    A copy of the Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the 
Commission for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 
2.206(c) of the Commission's regulations. As provided for by this 
regulation, the Decision will constitute the final action of the 
Commission 25 days after the date of issuance of the Decision unless 
the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the Decision 
within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of April 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Collins,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-9751 Filed 4-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P