ML082880570
| ML082880570 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/2008 |
| From: | Barnett M, William Froehlich, Moore T Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Florida Power & Light Energy Point Beach, Saporito Energy Consultants |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-266-LA, ASLBP 08-870-01-LA-BD01, LBP-08-19, RAS 1316 | |
| Download: ML082880570 (6) | |
Text
LBP-08-19 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
William J. Froehlich, Chairman Thomas S. Moore Mark O. Barnett In the Matter of Docket No. 50-266-LA FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC ASLBP No. 08-870-01-LA-BD01 Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 October 14, 2008 (License Amendment Request)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Denying Request for Hearing)
Before the Licensing Board is a request for hearing1 filed by Saporito Energy Consultants by and through its President, Thomas Saporito (Petitioner or SEC).2 This docket concerns a May 28, 2008 license amendment request (LAR) filed by FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC (FPL or Applicant) for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The LAR proposes a one-cycle revision to the technical specifications that would incorporate interim alternate repair criteria into the criteria for Steam Generator (SG) tube repair 1
This is the third of a recent series of hearing requests by this Petitioner that consist of unsupported allegations. See, e.g., Request for Hearing and Leave to Intervene (Aug. 18, 2008) (regarding Turkey Point License Amendment); Request for Hearing and Leave to Intervene (July 2, 2008) (regarding St. Lucie confirmatory order). As in Turkey Point, the Petitioner has improperly attempted to supplement its initial contentions in its reply. Compare Petitioners Response to Answers by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff and by the Florida Power and Light Company (Sept. 20, 2008) at 6-14, with Petitioners Response to Answers by the Florida Power and Light Company (regarding Turkey Point License Amendment) (Sept. 16, 2008) at 6-13.
2 Request for Hearing and Leave to Intervene (August 20, 2008) [hereinafter SEC Request].
to be used during the Unit 1 2008 fall refueling outage and the subsequent operating cycle. For the reasons discussed below, we deny SECs hearing request.
As in its recent pleadings in other cases (supra note 1), SEC has not shown it has standing. Specifically, SEC has not linked any specific offsite harm to the proposed amendments, demonstrated how it will be harmed as a result of the approval of the Applicants LAR, or shown how, should the LAR be rejected, the Petitioners asserted injury would be remedied.
SECs proffered contentions challenge the proposed license amendments as failing to meet the various parts of the 10 C.F.R. § 50.92(c) standard for significant hazards consideration determinations.3 Because 10 C.F.R. § 50.58(b)(6) provides that [n]o petition or other request for review of or hearing on the staffs significant hazards consideration determination will be entertained by the Commission, the Petitioners contentions are not appropriate for review by this Licensing Board.
Additionally, SEC has not satisfied the contention admissibility requirements set forth in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1), all of which must be met for a contention to be admissible.4 Specifically, the Petitioners contentions fail to provide supporting facts or expert opinion5 or raise a genuine dispute of material fact or law with the Applicant.6 3
Contentions 1 and 2 assert that the proposed amendment increases the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, Contention 3 asserts that the proposed amendment creates the possibility of a new or different accident from any accident previously evaluated, and Contention 4 asserts that the amendment involves a significant reduction in a margin of safety. SEC Request at 2-3. These contentions quote almost verbatim the language of 10 C.F.R. § 50.92(c)(1)-(3).
4 Arizona Pub. Serv. Co. (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3), CLI-91-12, 34 NRC 149, 155 (1991).
5 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(v).
6 Id. § 2.309(f)(1)(vi).
On September 30, 2008, FPL moved to strike SECs Reply and for Sanctions.7 On October 4, 2008, SEC opposed FPLs motion.8 Because we reject SECs hearing request, FPLs motion to strike is moot. Regarding the motion for sanctions, NRC regulations permit
[a]ny person whose interest may be affected by a proceeding and who desires to participate as a party [to] . . . file a written request for hearing and a specification of the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing.9 The Commission and the licensing board have imposed sanctions against a party seeking to file a written request for hearing only when that party has not followed established Commission procedures.10 Here, although we find SECs request for hearing must be denied, we are loath to conclude that SEC has transgressed agency procedures to the extent that sanctions should be imposed. As we noted in Turkey Point, [a] meritless petition warrants denial not sanctions.11 The Petitioner should be aware, however, that repeated filings of meritless petitions may result in their summary denial.
For the reasons set forth in our decisions in the Turkey Point12 and St. Lucie13 cases, we find that the Petitioner (1) fails to demonstrate standing as required by 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(d),
(2) impermissibly attempts to challenge the Staffs significant hazards consideration in derogation of 10 C.F.R. 50.58(b)(6), and (3) fails to provide an admissible contention as 7
FPLs Motion to Strike Saporitos Reply and For Sanctions (Sept. 30, 2008).
8 Petitioners Opposition to FPL Energy Seabrook, LLCs Motion to Strike Saporitos Reply and for Sanctions (Oct. 4, 2008).
9 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(a).
10 Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3),
CLI-06-04, 63 NRC 32, 38 (2006). See also Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3), CLI-07-28, 66 NRC 275, 275 (2007).
11 Florida Power & Light Co. (Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4), LBP-08-18, 68 NRC
__, __ (slip op. at 12) (Oct. 9, 2008).
12 Id.
13 Florida Power & Light Co. (St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), LBP 08-14, 68 NRC __
(slip op.) (Aug. 15, 2008).
required by 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f). Therefore, the Board denies the hearing request and terminates this proceeding.
Accordingly, it is on this 14th day of October 2008, ORDERED that:
- 1. The hearing request of Saporito Energy Consultants by and through its President, Thomas Saporito regarding FPLs May 28, 2008 license amendment request is denied.
- 2. FPLs Motion to strike SECs reply and certify its question to the Commission regarding the imposition of sanctions against Mr. Saporito is denied.
- 3. In accordance with the provisions of 10 C.F.R. § 2.311, any appeal to the Commission from this Memorandum and Order must be taken within ten (10) days after it is served.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD14
/RA/
William J. Froehlich, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
/RA/
Thomas S. Moore ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
/RA/
Mark O. Barnett ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland October 14, 2008 14 A copy of this Memorandum and Order was sent this date by the Agencys E-Filing System to: (1) Counsel for the NRC Staff; (2) Counsel for FPL; and (3) Thomas Saporito.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )
)
FPL ENERGY POINT BEACH, LLC ) Docket No. 50-266-LA (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1) )
)
(License Amendment) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing LB MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (DENYING REQUEST FOR HEARING) (LBP-08-19), dated October 14, 2008, have been served upon the following persons by the Electronic Information Exchange.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop: T-3F23 Mail Stop: O-15D21 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 William J. Froehlich, Chair Marcia Simon, Esq.
Administrative Judge E-mail: mjs5@nrc.gov E-mail: wjf1@nrc.gov Lloyd Subin, Esq.
E-mail: lbs3@nrc.gov Thomas S. Moore Brian Newell, Paralegal Administrative Judge E-Mail: bpn1@nrc.gov E-mail: tsm2@nrc.gov OGC Mail Center E-mail: OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov Mark O. Barnett Administrative Judge E-mail: mob1@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Office of the Secretary of the Commission Mail Stop: O-16C1 Mail Stop: O-16C1 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 OCAA Mail Center Hearing Docket E-mail: ocaamail@nrc.gov E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov
2 Docket No. 50-266-LA LB MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (DENYING REQUEST FOR HEARING) (LBP-08-19)
FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC 700 Universe Boulevard 801 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
P. O. Box 14000 Suite 220 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Washington, DC 20004 Mitchell Ross, Esq. Steven C. Hamrick, Esq.
E-mail: mitch.ross@fpl.com E-mail: steven.hamrick@fpl.com Antonio Fernandez, Esq.
E-mail: antonio.fernandez@fpl.com Saporito Energy Consultants Post Office Box 8413 Jupiter, FL 33468-8413 Thomas Saporito, President E-mail: saporito3@gmail.com
[Original signed by Evangeline S. Ngbea]
Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland This 14th day of October 2008