http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/2206/index.html
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/2206/22900.html

A 12-page "10 CFR 2.206 PETITION REVIEW BOARD MEETING SUMMARY" dated Sep. 25, 2000, related to Doug Rokke's request for a formal NRC hearing to consider the revocation of the master depleted uranium (DU) license for the US Department of Defense [...] is available at ADAMS now (168k in PDF format):
  <http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html>

Attachments include a (rather illegible) map of Vieques Island

Issues/Action Requested:

The petitioner requested a formal NRC hearing to consider: (1) the revocation of the master DU license for the US Department of Defense (DOD) and all services; (2) implementation of fines and consideration of personal criminal liability; (3) formal protection under the whistleblower statutes for him and all others who are trying to obtain medical care for all DU casualties; and (4) completion of environmental remediation of all DU contamination.

Background:

The petitioner served as a health physicist for the depleted uranium team in Operation Desert Storm (i.e., Gulf War), and after the Gulf War served as the DOD/Army Depleted Uranium Project Director. The petitioner alleges that he became sick from DU exposure and subsequently was denied medical care. The US Navy has a master material license issued by NRC Region II. On February 19, 1999, during a training exercise, DU ammunition was expended on the Live Impact Area of the Vieques Naval Range, on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. The NRC was notified of the incident by the Naval Radiation Safety Committee (NRSC) Executive Secretary on March 5, 1999. The NRSC identified the issuance of the DU ammunition and the subsequent firing of it as a Severity Level IV violation of the Navy's Master Material License (MML); specifically, a violation of Naval Radioactive Material Permit Number 13-00164-L1NP.

A team of Navy Health Physicists was deployed to Vieques between March 10 and 19, 1999. The team performed visual and radiological surveys and recovered a total of 57 DU ammunition penetrators. NRC conducted an inspection on March 22-23, 2000, of the NRSC actions as a result of this incident. Based on the results of this inspection, the NRC determined that the NRSC properly identified a Severity Level IV violation and appropriately issued a Notice of Violation to the responsible command. NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 2810, "Master Material License Inspection Program," states that the NRC will not take any further enforcement action, to cite or to pursue escalation for Severity Level IV violations by permittees that have already been identified and adequately corrected by the MML's Radiation Safety Committee. The petitioner was contacted on July 25, 2000, and was informed of the 10 CFR 2.206 process. Subsequent attempted contacts, including a letter dated August 8, 2000, offering him an opportunity for a presentation to the PRB, received no response.

Current Status:

The PRB met on August 29, 2000, and accepted the petition. An acknowledgment letter and a Federal Register notice on the petition were issued on September 8, 2000.

(a) Any person may file a request to institute a proceeding pursuant to §2.202 to modify, suspend, or revoke a license, or for any other action as may be proper. Requests must be addressed to the Executive Director for Operations and must be filed either by delivery to the NRC Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, or by mail or telegram addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The request must specify the action requested and set forth the facts that constitute the basis for the request. The Executive Director for Operations will refer the request to the Director of the NRC office with responsibility for the subject matter of the request for appropriate action in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) Within a reasonable time after a request pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section has been received, the Director of the NRC office with responsibility for the subject matter of the request shall either institute the requested proceeding in accordance with this subpart or shall advise the person who made the request in writing that no proceeding will be instituted in whole or in part, with respect to the request, and the reasons for the decision.

(c)(1) Director's decisions under this section will be filed with the Office of the Secretary. Within twenty-five (25) days after the date of the Director's decision under this section that no proceeding will be instituted or other action taken in whole or in part, the Commission may on its own motion review that decision, in whole or in part, to determine if the Director has abused his discretion. This review power does not limit in any way either the Commission's supervisory power over delegated staff actions or the Commission's power to consult with the staff on a formal or informal basis regarding institution of proceedings under this section.

(2) No petition or other request for Commission review of a Director's decision under this section will be entertained by the Commission.

[39 FR 12353, Apr. 5, 1974, as amended at 42 FR 36240, July 14, 1977; 45 FR 73466, Nov. 5, 1980; 52 FR
31608, Aug. 21, 1987; 53 FR 43419, Oct. 27, 1988]