Letter Sequence Request |
|---|
|
Initiation
- Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request
- Acceptance
|
MONTHYEARML0727706052007-10-16016 October 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Concerning Draft Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to Indian Point Generating Station
Project stage: Draft RAI
NL-08-021, License Renewal Application Amendment 22008-01-22022 January 2008
License Renewal Application Amendment 2
Project stage: Other
ML0735305362008-02-15015 February 2008
IP 71003, Post-Approval Site Inspection for License Renewal
Project stage: Other
ML0806702862008-03-0404 March 2008
Letter from David E. Roth & Kimberly A. Sexton to Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Project stage: Request
ML0806701252008-03-0606 March 2008
Supplement to NRC Staffs Answer to Entergys Motion to Strike the Reply of Westcan, Et Al. to the Responses Filed by Entergy and the NRC Staff
Project stage: Request
ML0810002692008-03-31031 March 2008
Answer of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. to Riverkeepers Request for Admission of Amended Contention TC-1 (Concerning Environmentally Assisted Metal Fatigue)
Project stage: Request
ML0812603812008-05-0505 May 2008
Notice of Closed Meeting to Discuss the NRCs Assessment of Palisades Nuclear Plant Security Performance for the 2007 Calendar Year
Project stage: Request
ENOC-08-00028, J.A. FitzPatrick, Palisades, and Big Rock Point, Decommissioning Fund Status Report2008-05-0808 May 2008
J.A. FitzPatrick, Palisades, and Big Rock Point, Decommissioning Fund Status Report
Project stage: Request
NL-08-096, Request for Relief to Extend Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and Request for License Amendment for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses2008-07-0808 July 2008
Request for Relief to Extend Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and Request for License Amendment for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses
Project stage: Request
ML0820307962008-07-21021 July 2008
License Amendment Request for License Condition to Support Implementation of Extended In-Service Inspection Interval
Project stage: Request
ML0827603842008-10-0101 October 2008
Attachment 2, Marked Up Tech Spec Pages for License Amendment Request: Reporting of Reactor Vessel In-Service Inspection Information and Analyses in Support of Code Relief Request for Extension of Reactor Vessel
Project stage: Request
ML0827603832008-10-0101 October 2008
Attachment 1, Evaluation of the Proposed Change to License Amendment Request: Reporting of Reactor Vessel In-Service Inspection Information and Analyses in Support of Code Relief Request for Extension of Reactor Vessel
Project stage: Request
AEP-NRC-2008-41, Request for Relief to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and Request for License - Amendment for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses2008-10-0909 October 2008
Request for Relief to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and Request for License - Amendment for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses
Project stage: Request
ML0831505562008-11-14014 November 2008
Acceptance Review Letter Relief Request (ISIR-29) for Use of Risk-Informed Extension of the Reactor Pressure Vessel Inservice Inspection (ISI) Interval from 10 to 20 Years
Project stage: Acceptance Review
ML0833100062008-11-26026 November 2008
Draft RAIs Request for Relief to Extend the D.C. Cook Unit 2 Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination (ISIR-29)
Project stage: Draft RAI
ML0834300182008-12-10010 December 2008
Request for Additional Information Relief Request (ISIR-29) for Use of Risk-Informed Extension of the Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Pressure Vessel Weld Examination
Project stage: RAI
ML0904304002009-01-14014 January 2009
Request to Extend Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and Request for License Amendment for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses - Response to Request for Additional Information
Project stage: Response to RAI
CP-200900009, Request for Relief to Extend the Unit 1 & 2 Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and License Amendment Request 09-004 to Add License Condition for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses2009-03-0404 March 2009
Request for Relief to Extend the Unit 1 & 2 Inservice Inspection Interval for the Reactor Vessel Weld Examination and License Amendment Request 09-004 to Add License Condition for Submittal of ISI Information and Analyses
Project stage: Request
ML0907207042009-03-13013 March 2009
E-mail Transmitting Verbal Authorization for Relief Requests ISIR-29 and ISIR-30
Project stage: Approval
ML0912601632009-06-0808 June 2009
Evaluation of Relief Request (ISIR-29) to Extend the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examination
Project stage: Approval
ML0918907412009-07-0808 July 2009
Withdrawal of License Amendment Request: Reporting of Reactor Vessel Inservice Inspection Information and Analyses in Support of Code Relief Request for Extension of Reactor Vessel In-Service Inspection Interval
Project stage: Withdrawal
2CAN100902, Request for Alternative ANO2-ISI-004 - Proposed Alternative to Extend the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examinations2009-10-29029 October 2009
Request for Alternative ANO2-ISI-004 - Proposed Alternative to Extend the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examinations
Project stage: Request
TMI-09-142, Request to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld and Internal Examinations - Relief Requests RR-09-01 and RR-09-022009-10-29029 October 2009
Request to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld and Internal Examinations - Relief Requests RR-09-01 and RR-09-02
Project stage: Request
RC-11-0117, Request to Use Alternatives to ASME Code Requirements in VCSNS 3rd Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval (RR-III-07) Risk-Informed Extension of Reactor Vessel In-Service Inspection Interval2011-08-16016 August 2011
Request to Use Alternatives to ASME Code Requirements in VCSNS 3rd Ten Year Inservice Inspection Interval (RR-III-07) Risk-Informed Extension of Reactor Vessel In-Service Inspection Interval
Project stage: Other
2CAN041303, Additional Reactor Vessel Closure Head Weld Request for Alternative ANO2-ISI-004 Proposed Alternative to Extend the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examinations2013-04-24024 April 2013
Additional Reactor Vessel Closure Head Weld Request for Alternative ANO2-ISI-004 Proposed Alternative to Extend the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examinations
Project stage: Request
2CAN111305, Unit 2, Response to Request for Additional Information Related to Relief Request ANO2-ISI-0042013-11-11011 November 2013
Unit 2, Response to Request for Additional Information Related to Relief Request ANO2-ISI-004
Project stage: Response to RAI
AEP-NRC-2018-51, Request to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examination - Relief Request ISIR-4-082018-08-0101 August 2018
Request to Extend the Inservice Inspection Interval for Reactor Vessel Weld Examination - Relief Request ISIR-4-08
Project stage: Request
2008-05-08
[Table View] |
Text
March 4, 2008 Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Dr. Kay D. Lathrop Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 190 Cedar Lane E.
Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Ridgway, CO 81432 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating, Units 2 and 3)
Docket Nos. 50-247-LR/286-LR
Dear Administrative Judges:
The NRC Staff wishes to provide notice of the following new information that will be presented by the Staff during oral argument on the admissibility of contentions next week.
- 1.
In the Staffs response to contentions, filed on January 22, 2008, the Staff did not oppose the admission of New York Contention 261 or Riverkeeper Contention TC-1,2 both of which concern the manner in which metal fatigue was addressed in Entergys license renewal application (LRA). The Applicant has provided new information, however, which warrants that the Staffs response to those contentions be modified. Specifically, on January 22, 2008, the 1 See NRC Staffs Response To Petitions For Leave To Intervene Filed By (1) Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, (2) Connecticut Residents Opposed To Relicensing Of Indian Point, And Nancy Burton, (3) Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc., (4) The State Of New York, (5)
Riverkeeper, Inc., (6) The Town Of Cortlandt, and (7) Westchester County (NRC Staff Response to Connecticut, et al.), dated January 22, 2008, at 77-78.
2 Id. at 115-118.
Judge McDade March 04, 2008 Judge Lathrop Judge Wardwell Applicant submitted LRA Amendment 2,3 in which it amended pertinent portions of the LRA in which, inter alia, it provided specific commitments to manage fatigue using the existing Fatigue Monitoring Program under 10 C.F.R. 54.21(c)(1)(iii) rather than a program for which details would be submitted in the future, and provided additional information regarding its calculations and quality assurance.4 Based on this revision to the LRA, the Staff has determined that the LRA omissions alleged in New York Contention 26 and Riverkeeper Contention TC-15 have been cured. Accordingly, the Staff has concluded that these two contentions are now moot and should be rejected.6
- 2.
The Staff has determined that the following statement, which appears in the Staffs response to Cortlandt Contention Misc-2 and WestCAN/PHASE Contention 44, is erroneous and should be stricken:
Further, a licensee who has filed a timely renewal application and has not yet received a final determination on the LRA does not need to file the final decommissioning plan and application for termination until one year after a final determination on the LRA is made. 1991 Statement of Consideration, 56 Fed.
Reg. at 64,968-69.7 3 See Letter from Fred R. Dacimo (Entergy) to NRC Docket Control Desk, dated January 22, 2008 (
Subject:
License Renewal Application Amendment 2) (Entergy Letter NL-08-021).
4 See id., Attachment 1, passim.
5 See "New York State Notice of Intention to Participate and Petition to Intervene," dated November 30, 2007; at 230-32; Riverkeeper, Inc.'s Request for Hearing and Petition to Intervene in the License Renewal Proceeding for the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, dated November 30, 2007, at 12-13.
6 Both New York and Riverkeeper are aware of the LRA amendment. Riverkeeper has stated that it intends to review the LRA Amendment and submit any revisions to Contention TC-1 that are warranted by March 7, 2008. See Riverkeeper, Inc.'s Reply to Entergy's and NRC Staff's Responses to Hearing Request and Petition to Intervene, dated February 15, 2008, at 4. The State of New York has indicated its awareness of the LRA amendment, but has not stated whether it plans to file a new or amended contention based on the new information. See New York State Reply in Support of Petition to Intervene, dated February 22, 2008, at 126-30. In the event that new or amended contentions are filed, they would be governed by the requirements of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(2).
7 See NRC Staff Response to Connecticut, et al., at 131; NRC Staff Response to Petitions for Leave to Intervene Filed by (1) Westchester Citizens Awareness Network, [et al.] (NRC Staff Response to WestCAN, et al.), dated January 22, 2008, at 102.
Judge McDade March 04, 2008 Judge Lathrop Judge Wardwell This correction, however, does not alter the Staffs previous conclusion that these contentions are inadmissible, in that they raise issues that pertain to the current operating license and are beyond the scope of this proceeding. See NRC Staff Response to Connecticut, et al., at 131; NRC Staff Response to WestCAN, et al., at 102.
The Staff will be prepared to respond to questions concerning these matters at the oral argument next week, concerning the contentions admissibility.
Respectfully submitted,
/RA/
David E. Roth Counsel for the NRC Staff
/RA/
Kimberly A. Sexton Counsel for the NRC Staff cc: Service List
