ML070780305
| ML070780305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/2007 |
| From: | Epstein E Susquehanna |
| To: | Lathrop K, William Sager, Austin Young Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, NRC/SECY/RAS |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-387-LR, 50-388-LR, ASLBP 07-851-01-LR, RAS 13253 | |
| Download: ML070780305 (10) | |
Text
R.* J3b. *DOCKETED USNRC March 12, 2007 (8:00am)
OFFICE OF SECRETARY United States of America RULEMAKINGS AND Nuclear Regulatory Commission ADJUDICATIONS STAFF Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-387-LR PPL Susquehanna, LLC ) 50-388-LR Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, ) ASLBP No. o7-851-ol-LR Units 1 and2 )
Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O-16 C1 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Attn: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff Eric Joseph Epstein's Response to the Atomic Safety Licensing Board Panel's Request for Information March 11, 2007
Dear Judges Young,
Lathrop and Sager:
Enclosed for filing in the Matter of PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-387-LR &
50-388-LR; ASLBP No. 07-851-ol-LR), please find Eric Joseph Epstein's Response to the Atomic Safety Licensing Board Panel's Request for Information during the March 8, 2007 Teleconference. Specific information requests pertaining to citations for standing and "Category 2" delineations have been prepared and submitted by Mr. Epstein via electronic mail on March 11, 2007. This filing will.
also be sent via United States Postal Service on Monday March 12, 2007.
-rE~e; 0L -r1E 7J 'E c-tj- 6 7
Re: Standing Georgia Power Co. (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2), LBP-93-5, 37 NRC 96 (1993), aff'd, CLI-93-16, 38 NRC 25 (1993), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved standing for a petitioner living 35 miles from the plant one week per month.
In the CFC Logistics proceeding, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASL&B) "hasten[ed] to add ... that the 'obvious potential' aspect of 'proximity-plus' standing is not a concept that can be applied with engineering or scientific precision..." 60 NRC 475, 485 (2004), p. 487.
"[A] minor exposure to radiation, even one within regulatory limits, is sufficient to state an injury in fact" for standing purposes. Duke Cogema Stone
& Webster (Savannah River Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility), LBP-o1-35, 54 NRC 403, 417 (2001), rev'd on other grounds, CLI-o2-24, 56 N.R.C. 335 (2002) (citing Yankee Atomic Electric Co. (Yankee Nuclear Power Station), CLI-96-7, 43 NRC 235, 247-48 (1996)); see also id. at 420 (standing inquiry does not require precision regarding probability of petitioner receiving unwanted dose of radiation). The asserted harm - injury to the health and safety - is clearly encompassed by the health and safety interests protected by the Atomic Energy Act. Id. at 417; see also 42 U.S.C. § 2013.
In Pebble Springs, (4 NRC at 614-617. See Infra, § II. A.5.) the Commission also held that even if a Petitioner for intervention could not satisfy the strict judicial standing test, intervention could still be allowed as a mater of discretion.
Mr. Epstein routinely pierces the 50 mile proximate rule during his day-to day-actives simply by traveling to Lebanon, Schuylkill and upper Dauphin Counties. As noted during the teleconference, Mr. Epstein is a member of the Board of Directors of the Sustainable Energy Fund of Central Eastern Pennsylvania since its inception in 1999. He is also a director of GreenConnexions, Inc. since 2006 which is based in the same office. Both entities have a 29 county constituency that mimics PPL's residential customer base.
2
His commute to the office in Allentown, and meetings at off site locations, must necessarily pierce the fifty mile proximity zone for substantial periods of time. Mr. Epstein's meeting schedule, as of March 9, 2007, was only available from April through June 2007, and includes business meetings in Allentown, Fogelsville, and Hazleton on the following days and evenings:
- April 1o, 12, 16, 26 and 27.
- May 1O, 15, 17 and 30.
- June 5, 6, 12, 19, 21, 26 and 28.
Please note more meetings will likely be scheduled as necessary in Conyngham (seven miles from Berwick) and Grantville (48 miles from Berwick). In addition, the SEF's counsel, Hourigan, Kluger & Quinn, PC is located in Kingston (28 miles from Berwick), and as Chair of the Human Relations Committee, Mr. Epstein must spend time in close proximity to Berwick for legal related matters.
For more information go to: www.thesef.org 3
Re: "Category 2" Declinations for Contentions Contention 1:
(i) Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted.
PPL Susquehanna failed to provide the requisite data necessary to determine if it has the ability to maintain and service the financial obligations it inherited from the original licensee, i.e., PP&L. Regulatory conditions have materially changed and adversely affected PPL's ability to guarantee it can finance the "back-end" of nuclear power production at the SSES.
(ii) Provide a brief explanation of the basisfor the contention.
PPL Susquehanna LLC, the majority owner and operator of the Susquehanna Electric Station, is the corporate progeny of the original holding company, i.e., PP&L, that applied for, and obtained a license to operate the SSES, and the new corporation warrants a comprehensive financial due diligence to ascertain the ability of the nascent and emerging limited liability corporation to service its nuclear obligations under deregulation.
Category 2: Socioeconomic Offsite land use (license renewal term)
SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Significant changes in land use may be associated with population and tax revenue changes resulting from license renewal 4
Contention 2:
(i) Provide a specific statement of the issue of law orfact to be raisedor controverted.
PPL failed to factor, consider and address numerous water use and indigenous aquatic challenges present and anticipated for the Susquehanna River.
(ii) Provide a briefexplanation of the basisfor the contention.
The Susquehanna River Basin Commission and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) are in the process of collecting, evaluating, and implementing a comprehensive water use plan for Pennsylvania, i.e., Act 220. Moreover, recent and consistent droughts in Pennsylvania (2002) as well as flooding (2006) have forced state and regulatory bodies to reexamine water as a commodity in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
In addition, a number of infestations, specifically Asiatic clams and Zebra mussels, have required power plants to prepare plans to defeat these aquatic invasions.
Category 2:
Groundwater Use and Quality: Groundwateruse conflicts (potableand service water, and dewatering;plants that use greater than loo gpm)
SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Plants that use more than lo0 gpm may cause groundwater use conflicts with nearby groundwater users. See § 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(C);
5
Contention 2 (Continued)
Category 2:
Groundwater Use and Quality: Groundwateruse conflicts (plantsusing cooling towers withdrawing make-up waterfrom a small river)
.SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Water use conflicts may result from surface water withdrawals from small water bodies during low flow conditions which may affect aquifer recharge, especially if other groundwater or upstream surface water users come on line before the time of license renewal. See § 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A);
Category 2:
Socioeconomics Public services: public utilities SMALL OR MODERATE. An increased problem with water shortages at some sites may lead to impacts of moderate significance on public water supply availability; and, Category 2:
Human Health: Microbiologicalorganisms (publichealth) (plantsusing lakes or canals, or cooling towers or cooling ponds that discharge to a small river)
SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. These organisms are not expected to be a problem at most operating plants except possibly at plants using cooling ponds, lakes, or canals that discharge to small rivers. Without site-specific data, it is not possible to predict the effects generically. See § 51.53 6
Contention 3:
(i) Provide a specific statement of the issue of law orfact to be raised or controverted.
PPL's demographic profile is flawed and incomplete and fails to consider the aging population and workforce which impacts supports services, emergency planning, workforce replenishment and traffic patterns.
(ii) Provide a brief explanation of the basisfor the contention.
Pennsylvania is the second oldest state in the nation after Florida and its fastest growing population segment is octogenarians. An aging population base has unique and sensitized needs that were not factored, considered, or analyzed in the licensee's application. Moreover, PPL's intent to raise electric prices by at least 20% to 30% in the near future hits fixed-income and aging population bases especially hard.
Category 2:
Socioeconomics Offsite land use (license renewal term)
SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Significant changes in land use may be associated with population and tax revenue changes resulting from license renewal.
7
Contention 4:
(i) Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted.
PPL's tax analysis is fatally flawed and lacks historical perspective. The Company failed to assess the impact of Revenue Neutral Reconciliations at the SSES on local citizens, residents, taxpayers, and homeowners.
(ii) Provide a brief explanation of the basisfor the contention.
By limiting their historic snapshot from 2001-2005, PPL provides a false and incomplete fiscal picture of the impact their property devaluations and legal suits had on local taxing bodies. The transition from the PURTA to RNR has been a disaster. PPL has conveniently omitted the tax strain it has caused the Berwick Area School District, Salem Township, Luzerne County, residential consumers and senior citizens living on fixed incomes.
Category 2:
Socioeconomics Offsite land use (license renewal term)
SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Significant changes in land use may be associated with population and tax revenue changes resulting from license renewal.
8
Contention 5:
(i) Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raisedor controverted.
PPL is in violation of the following Federal Regulations: 10 CFR § 50.47; 10 CFR § 50.54; 10 CFR § Part 5o Appendix E; and 44 CFR § 350.
(ii) Provide a briefexplanation of the basisfor the contention.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission should-hold a final decision for relicensing the SSES in abeyance until such time that PPL can demonstrate and verify its compliance with emergency preparedness measures at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station under the Radiological Emergency Protective Measures outlined in 10 CFR § 50.47 (Condition of Licenses).
Category 2:
Socioeconomic Public services, Transportation SMALL, MODERATE, OR LARGE. Transportation impacts are generally expected to be of small significance. However, the increase in traffic associated with the additional workers and the local road and traffic control conditions may lead to impacts of moderate or large significance at some sites.
9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of enclosed correspondence dated February 23, 2007, were served on the persons listed below by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid and electronic mail.
Administrative Judge Susan L. Uttel, Esquire Ann Marshall Young, Esq., Chairman Molly L. Barkman, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board US N.R.C. - OGC Mail Stop T-3 F23 Mail Stop 0-15 D-21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 amy(nrc.gov Pillsbury, Winthrop et al Administrative Judge David R. Lewis, Esquire Dr. Kaye D. Lathrop PPL Susquehanna, LLC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 2300 N Street, N.W.
Mail Stop T-3 F23 Washington, D.C. 20037-1128 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 klathrop@independence.net Administrative Judge Dr. William W. Sager Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Mail Stop T-3 F23 Office of Commission Appellate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Adjudication Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Mail Stop 0-16 C1 wsager@tamu.edu U.S. NRC Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Secretary Att'n: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Mail Stop 0-16 Ci U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DXC. 20555-0001O secy@nrc.gov; hearingdocket@nrc.gov Dated: March 11, 2007 10