[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 175 (Friday, September 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54567-54568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-23144]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-247]


Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.; Facility Operating 
License No. DPR-26, Receipt of Additional Information Relating to 
Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that additional information has been 
submitted in support of a Petition dated March 14, 2000, filed by Mr. 
David A. Lochbaum, on behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists, the 
Nuclear Information & Resource Service, the PACE Law School Energy 
Project, and Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project 
(petitioners). The petitioners requested that the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) take action with regard to Indian Point 
Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 (IP2), owned and operated by Consolidated 
Edison Company of New York, Inc. (the licensee). The petitioners 
requested that the NRC issue an order to the licensee preventing the 
restart of IP2, or that the license for IP2 be modified to limit it to 
zero power, until (1) all four steam generators are replaced, (2) the 
steam generator tube integrity concerns identified in Dr. Joram 
Hopenfeld's differing professional opinion (DPO) and in Generic Safety 
Issue 163 are resolved, and (3) potassium iodide tablets are 
distributed to residents and businesses within the 10-mile emergency 
planning zone (EPZ) or stockpiled in the vicinity of IP2. The original 
Petition was published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 
19398). Previously, supplemental information consisting of a letter 
from Mr. Lochbaum dated April 14, 2000, a letter from Mr. Riccio dated 
April 12, 2000, and information provided at a public meeting on April 
7, 2000, was acknowledged by letter dated June 26, 2000, and published 
in the Federal Register on July 14, 2000 (65 FR 43789). Subsequent to 
these supplemental letters, additional information and requests were 
received by letters dated June 12, June 29, and July 13, 2000.
    As stated in the original and second Federal Register notices, the 
requests that the NRC prevent the licensee from restarting IP2 until 
all four steam generators are replaced and until potassium iodide 
tablets are distributed to people and businesses within the 10-mile EPZ 
or are stockpiled in the vicinity of IP2 are being treated pursuant to 
10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. On the basis of 
information provided in the June 29 supplement, the NRC staff 
determined that the request that IP2 not be permitted to restart until 
after a full-participation emergency preparedness exercise has been 
successfully completed meets the criteria for review under 10 CFR 
2.206. As provided by Section 2.206, action will be taken on this 
request within a reasonable time.
    In their June 12 supplement, the petitioners requested that IP2 not 
be allowed to restart until concerns identified in an internal Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) memorandum dated May 12, 2000, are 
addressed. Specifically, the petitioners requested that NRC and FEMA 
re-evaluate the adequacy of the IP2 emergency planning drills and that 
a new, more realistic exercise be conducted. However, in a letter to 
the NRC dated June 20, 2000, FEMA clarified the positions stated in the 
internal FEMA memorandum, and confirmed that FEMA continues to find 
that there is reasonable assurance of the adequacy of offsite emergency 
preparedness at IP2. In addition, the NRC staff determined that the 
issues raised in this supplement had already been the subject of NRC 
staff review at IP2 and that the information provided in the supplement 
was not sufficient to warrant further inquiry.

[[Page 54568]]

    In the July 13 supplement, the petitioners requested the 
reinstatement of their request that Dr. Hopenfeld's DPO be resolved 
before allowing IP2 to restart, asserting that the resignation of a DPO 
panel member raised doubts about the efficacy of the DPO process, and 
that, therefore, the Petition Review Board should reconsider its 
rejection of Dr. Hopenfeld's DPO for review under the 10 CFR 2.206 
process. However, the NRC staff rejected this request because it did 
not meet the the 10 CFR 2.206 criteria. Dr. Hopenfeld's concerns were 
generic in nature and the information the petitioners had provided was 
not uniquely applicable to IP2 to support the assertions raised in 
their 10 CFR 2.206 Petition. The information in the July 13 supplement 
did not provide any information to alter that determination, and, 
therefore, this request will not be treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of 
the Commission's regulations.
    Copies of the Petition and additional information are available for 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC, and accessible 
electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link at 
the NRC Web site (http://www/nrc.gov).

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of August 2000.

Roy P. Zimmerman,
Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-23144 Filed 9-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P