ML060100328
| ML060100328 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 01/10/2006 |
| From: | Hawkens E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| Byrdsong A T | |
| References | |
| 50-0219-LR, ASLBP 06-844-01-LR, RAS 11007 | |
| Download: ML060100328 (5) | |
Text
RAS 11007 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOCKETED 01/10/06 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SERVED 01/10/06 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
E. Roy Hawkens, Chairman Dr. Paul B. Abramson Dr. Anthony J. Baratta In the Matter of AMERGEN ENERGY COMPANY, LLC (License Renewal for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station)
Docket No. 50-0219-LR ASLBP No. 06-844-01-LR January 10, 2006 ORDER (Directing Supplemental Briefing on Hearing Requests)
Pending before the Board are two Requests for Hearing and Petitions for Leave to Intervene (Petitions) dated November 14, 2005, challenging the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) License Renewal Application submitted by AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (AmerGen) to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on July 22, 2005. One Petition was filed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
[hereinafter referred to as New Jersey], and the other Petition was filed by the Nuclear Informa-tion and Resource Service (NIRS), Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch, Inc., Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety, New Jersey Public Interest Research Group, New Jersey Sierra Club, and New Jersey Environmental Federation [hereinafter referred to collectively as NIRS].
On December 12 and 14, 2005, AmerGen and the NRC filed oppositions to the Petitions.
The Board, having reviewed the above submissions, hereby directs additional briefing consistent with the following instructions:
1.
Regarding NIRSs contention concerning the drywell liner corrosion management program, for present purposes it may be assumed that NIRS raises valid techni-1 The Board is aware that a license renewal safety review seeks to mitigate the detrimental effects of aging resulting from operation beyond the initial license term and, accordingly, that Commission rules focus[] the renewal review on plant systems, structures, and components for which current [regulatory] activities and requirements may not be sufficient to manage the effects of aging in the period of extended operation. Florida Power & Light Co.
(Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4), CLI-01-17, 54 NRC 3, 10 (2001) (quot-ing 60 Fed. Reg. 22,461, 22,463, 22,469 (May 8, 1995)). We seek greater specificity as to the ambit of this legal standard. To assist us in fleshing out the meaning and actual applicability of this standard, we ask the participants to discuss what they view as illustrative examples of contentions concerning plant systems, structures, and components that fall within and without this standard, and explain why such examples are similar to or distinguished from NIRSs contention concerning the drywell liner corrosion management program.
cal issues concerning the effectiveness of the program. NIRS, AmerGen, and the NRC Staff shall provide additional briefing, not to exceed ten (10) pages, that explains in further detail the legal basis for concluding that this contention falls within or without the scope of this license renewal proceeding. In particular, the brief shall: (1) relying with specificity on applicable caselaw, describe with precision the legal framework for defining the scope of the proceeding as it relates to the drywell liner corrosion management program; and (2) explain why or why not as a matter of law the drywell liner corrosion management program falls within this legal framework. We emphasize that the parties should not reiterate the technical aspects of their arguments; rather, the Board is interested in a further explication of the legal standards for determining the boundaries of the scope of this proceeding as it applies to the drywell liner corrosion manage-ment program.1 2.
Regarding New Jerseys contention concerning the combustion turbines, New Jersey, AmerGen, and the NRC Staff shall provide additional briefing, not to exceed five (5) pages, identifying with specificity the contractual agreement (or its equivalent) which demonstrates that AmerGen can rely on First Energy 2
Copies of this order were sent this date by Internet e-mail to counsel for: (1)
AmerGen; (2) New Jersey; (3) NIRS; and (3) the NRC Staff.
to maintain, inspect, and test the combustion turbines in accordance with AmerGens aging management plan. Additionally, the participants shall explicitly state what would happen (with cites to any governing regulatory, licensing, or contractual provision) if the combustion turbines become unavailable, or if AmerGens aging management plan for the combustion turbines is not properly implemented. Finally, the participants shall explain why the regulatory requirements in 10 C.F.R. § 50.63 and the General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants (Appendix A, Part 50, Criterion 17) are sufficient (or not) to ensure that Oyster Creek will have an adequate source of backup power.
The supplemental briefs shall be due on Tuesday, January 17, 2006.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD2
/RA/
E. Roy Hawkens, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland January 10, 2006
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
AMERGEN ENERGY COMPANY, LLC
)
Docket No. 50-219-LR
)
)
(Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing LB ORDER (DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON HEARING REQUESTS) have been served upon the following persons by U.S.
mail, first class, or through NRC internal distribution.
Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Administrative Judge E. Roy Hawkens, Chair Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Administrative Judge Paul B. Abramson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Administrative Judge Anthony J. Baratta Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Ann P. Hodgdon, Esq.
Daniel Hugo Fruchter, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop - O-15 D21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Michele R. Donato, Esq.
P.O. Box 145 106 Grand Central Avenue Lavallette, NJ 08735
2 Docket No. 50-219-LR LB ORDER (DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON HEARING REQUESTS)
Paul Gunter, Director Reactor Watchdog Project Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street, NW, Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036 Donald J. Silverman, Esq.
Kathryn M. Sutton, Esq.
Alex S. Polonsky, Esq.
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsyvlania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004 Bradley M. Campbell, Commissioner New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection P.O. Box 402 Trenton, NJ 08625-0402 Jill Lipoti, Director New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Environmental Safety and Health P.O. Box 424 Trenton, NJ 08625-0424 Ron Zak New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Nuclear Engineering P.O. Box 415 Trenton, NJ 08625-0415 J. Bradley Fewell, Esq.
Exelon Corporation 200 Exelon Way, Suite 200 Kennett Square, PA 19348 Suzanne Leta NJPIRG 11 N. Willow St.
Trenton, NJ 08608 Richard Webster, Esq.
Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic 123 Washington Street Newark, NJ 07102-5695
[Original signed by Evangeline S. Ngbea]
Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 10th day of January 2006