[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 70 (Monday, April 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19702-19703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08409]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-255; NRC-2014-0216]


Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Palisades Nuclear Plant

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Director's decision under 10 CFR 2.206; issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a 
final director's decision with regard to a petition dated March 5, 
2014, as supplemented on April 8, May 21, and September 3, 2014, filed 
by Mr. Michael Mulligan (the petitioner), requesting that the NRC take 
action with regard to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENO or the 
licensee) at Palisades Nuclear Plant (PNP). The petitioner's requests 
and the final director's decision are included in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

DATES: April 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0216 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0216. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document 
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time 
that a document is referenced.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennivine Rankin, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1530, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Deputy 
Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has issued a final director's 
decision (ADAMS Accession No. ML15054A365), on a petition filed by the 
petitioner on March 5, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14071A006), as 
supplemented on April 8, May 21, and September 3, 2014 (ADAMS Accession 
Nos. ML14143A212, ML14142A101, and ML14259A135, respectively). The 
petitioner requested a number of actions be taken by the NRC and the 
licensee for equipment failures at PNP. As the basis for the request, 
the petitioner stated that there have been recent plant events and 
equipment failures at PNP, such as parts of the primary coolant pump 
(PCP) impeller breaking off and lodging in the reactor vessel (RV) and 
flaws in the control rod drive mechanisms (CRDMs). The petitioner 
requested immediate action to prevent the PNP from restarting due to a 
piece of PCP impeller that was lodged between the RV and the flow skirt 
and due to flawed CRDMs.
    By email dated March 19, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14083A680), 
the NRC staff denied the petitioner's request for immediate action to 
prevent PNP from restarting, based on the following factors:
    1. The NRC performed an in-depth independent review of the 
licensee's analysis and concluded that the impeller piece did not pose 
a threat to safe operation of the reactor and RV.
    2. The licensee replaced all of the CRDM housings prior to plant 
startup.
    By teleconference on April 8, 2014, and again on September 3, 2014, 
the petitioner addressed the Petition Review Board (PRB). The meetings 
provided the petitioner with an opportunity to provide additional 
information and to clarify issues cited in the petition. The 
transcripts of these meeting were treated as supplements to the 
petition and are available in ADAMS, as previously noted.
    In the agency's letter dated September 25, 2014 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML14237A726), the NRC accepted the following specific issues of the 
petition for review under Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR):

    1. Request for PNP to open every PCP for inspection and clear up 
all flaws.
    2. Request for PNP to replace the PCPs with others designed for 
their intended duty.

[[Page 19703]]

    3. Request an Office of the Inspector General (OIG) inspection 
on why different NRC regions have different analysis criteria for 
similar PCP events.
    4. Request a $10 million fine over these events.
    5. Request for PNP to return to yellow or red status and for the 
NRC to intensify its monitoring of PNP.

    The NRC sent a copy of the proposed director's decision to the 
petitioner and the licensee for comment on January 23, 2015 (ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML14338A435 and ML14338A431). The petitioner and the 
licensee were asked to provide comments within 15 days on any part of 
the proposed director's decision that was considered to be erroneous or 
any issues in the petition that were not addressed. Comments were 
received from the petitioner and are addressed in an attachment to the 
final director's decision.
    The Deputy Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 
denied the petitioner's requests for the following actions:

    1. Request for PNP to open every PCP for inspection and clear up 
all flaws.
    2. Request for PNP to replace the PCPs with others designed for 
their intended duty.
    3. Request a $10 million fine over these events.
    4. Request for PNP to return to yellow or red status and for the 
NRC to intensify its monitoring of PNP.

The reasons for this decision are explained in the final director's 
decision DD-15-03, under 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. 
The petitioner's request for an OIG inspection on why different NRC 
regions have different analysis criteria for similar PCP events has 
been forwarded to the OIG. The NRC found no basis for taking the 
requested enforcement-related actions against PNP; thus, the NRC denies 
the petition. NRC staff did not find that the continued operation of 
PNP would adversely affect public health and safety. The NRC determined 
that the licensee's actions to date are adequate and there is 
reasonable assurance that the operation of the PNP will not endanger 
the health and safety of the public. For the performance deficiencies 
and inspection findings that the NRC has identified at PNP, the agency 
will continue to monitor the progress of the licensee's completion of 
corrective actions through planned inspections consistent with the 
NRC's ongoing reactor oversight process.
    Consistent with 10 CFR 2.206(c), the NRC staff will file a copy of 
this final director's decision with the Secretary of the Commission for 
the Commission to review. As provided for in 10 CFR 2.206(c)(1), the 
final director's decision will constitute the Commission's final action 
within 25 days of the date of the decision unless the Commission, on 
its own motion, chooses to review the decision within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 6th day of April 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jennifer Uhle,
Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015-08409 Filed 4-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P