ML080310873

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Letter from Sherwin E. Turk to the Licensing Board Regarding the Petitioners Fire Protection Contentions
ML080310873
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 01/31/2008
From: Sherwin Turk
NRC/OGC
To: Lathrop K, Lawrence Mcdade, Richard Wardwell
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, RAS 15016
Download: ML080310873 (2)


Text

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001 January 31, 2008 Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Dr. Kaye D. Lathrop Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 190 Cedar Lane E.

Ridgway, CO 81432 Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3)

Docket Nos. 50-247-LRI 50-286-LR

Dear Administrative Judges:

Enclosed for your information is a copy of a letter from Annette Vietti-Cook (Secretary of the Commission) to S ~ ~ s a n Shapiro, Esq., dated January 30, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML0803002430), in response to Ms. Shapiro's objection and request for hearing concerning the fire protection exemption modification issued on September 28, 2007. The Secretary's letter explains that the Atomic Energy Act does not afford hearing rights on an exemption request.

As the Licensing Board is aware, Ms. Shapiro has filed contentions seeking a hearing on the same exemption modification on behalf of her clients, in their request for hearing in the instant license renewal proceeding. See WestCANIPHASE Contentions 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 20; see also New York AG Contention 20. The NRC Staff may cite the Secretary's letter of January 30, 2008, during oral argument on the Petitioners' fire protection contentions.

Sincerely,

&d;i,

[I*

Sherwin E. Turk Counsel for NRC Staff

Enclosure:

As stated cc wlencl.: Service List

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 January 30,2008 SECRETARY Susan Shapiro, Esquire 12 Perlman Drive Spring Valley, NY 10977 RE:

Objection to NRC's grant of an exemption to Indian Point Unit 3

Dear Ms. Shapiro:

We received your petition on behalf of several organizations expressing your objection to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) September 28, 2007 grant of an exemption concerning Indian Point Unit 3 fire protection standards. The action you are challenging is an exemption from NRC regulations; it is not a license amendment as asserted in your petition. In Commonwealth Edison Co. (Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 & 2), CLI-00-5, 51 NRC 90 (2000), the Commission examined the text and legislative history of S189a. of the Atomic Energy Act and concluded that the Atomic Energy Act does not provide for hearings on exemptions from NRC regulations. See also Kelley v. Selin, 42 F.3d 1501, 1517 (6th Cir. 1995), ("Flhe grant of an exemption from a generic requirement does not constitute an amendment to the reactor's license that would trigger hearing rights.") Accordingly, your request for a hearing is denied.

Sincerely, Annette Vietti-Cook Martin J. O'Neill, Esquire