ML11271A189
| ML11271A189 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/2011 |
| From: | Brancato D, Musegaas P Riverkeeper |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 21149, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML11271A189 (4) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of ) Docket Nos.
) 50-247-LR Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ) and 50-286-LR (Indian Point Nuclear Generating )
Units 2 and 3) ) September 28, 2011
___________________________________________ )
RIVERKEEPER, INC. RESPONSE IN SUPPORT OF STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME Pursuant to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards (ASLB) July 1, 2010, Scheduling Order,1 Riverkeeper, Inc. (Riverkeeper) hereby submits its response in support of the State of New Yorks Motion for an Extension of Time so that Outstanding Issues Affecting the Content of Prefiled Testimony and Statements of Positions May Be Resolved, filed September 27, 2011 (hereinafter NYS Extension Motion). For the following reasons, Riverkeeper agrees that the requested extension of time for the filing of Intervenors Initial Statements of Position and written testimony beyond the current deadline of October 11, 2011 is necessary and warranted.
First, Riverkeeper fully agrees with the concerns articulated by New York State (NYS) with respect to various unresolved issues pertaining to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staffs assessment of metal fatigue. See NYS Extension Motion at 6-7. These unresolved issues implicate Riverkeepers Contention TC-1 (which is joined with New York State 26), and, thereby prejudice 1
In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos.
50-0247-LR and 50-286-LR, ASLBP No. 07-858-03-LR-BD01, Scheduling Order (July 1, 2010), at ¶ G.5 (An answer to a motion to exceed the page limit, to file a reply, or to extend the time for filing a pleading shall be filed and served within one (1) business day after the filing of the motion).
1
Riverkeepers ability to fully and appropriately submit an initial statement and testimony on this issue by October 11.
Second, Riverkeeper currently has an unresolved inquiry pending with Entergy related to as yet undisclosed documents relating to metal fatigue. In particular, on May 13, 2011, Riverkeeper sent Entergy a letter seeking certain clarifications and additional relevant documents related to Entergys mandatory disclosures pertaining to metal fatigue. By letters dated June 7, 2011 and August 10, 2011, Entergy partially responded, indicating in the latter that in response to Riverkeepers inquiries, Energy had requested certain additional documents from its vendor Westinghouse. Riverkeeper sent a letter to Entergy on September 1, 2011 seeking a timeframe for when such documents would be provided. On September 9, 2011, Entergy provided the documents it had requested from Westinghouse. After Riverkeeper and its designated expert, Dr.
Joram Hopenfeld, reviewed these newly received documents, it became apparent that further relevant documents could exist. As a result, Riverkeeper sent another letter to Entergy on September 26, 2011 requesting clarification as to whether such documents exist, and disclosure if they do. At the time of this filing, Entergy had not yet responded to Riverkeepers September 26 request.2 In light of these circumstances, moving forward with the filing of initial Statements of Position and written testimony at this time would be inappropriate. Like New York State, Riverkeeper submits that additional time is necessary so that Riverkeeper can thoroughly review relevant analyses and assessments related to metal fatigue prior to being required to present its case on this issue.
Third, Riverkeeper respectfully submits that additional time is warranted for the filing of Intervenors initial statements and testimony due to the recent dedication of Riverkeepers 2
Please note that New York States Extension Motion also indicates that Entergy is working to determine whether additional Westinghouse documents may be responsive and produced. NYS Extension Motion at 8.
2
limited resources to reviewing NRC Staffs Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SER).
The ASLBs Amended Scheduling Order dated June 7, 2011 provided the parties with 30 days to file any new or amended contentions arising from new information contained in the SER.3 Thus, Riverkeepers resources have been focused on reviewing the SER and engaging our expert to determine whether or not to file supplemental contentions.
As New York State also noted in its motion, the SSER states that Entergy will be submitting another supplement to its LRA on September 28, 2011. The SSER notes that the LRA Supplement will include an inspection plan for reactor vessel internals, but does not provide detail on what additional information may be included by Entergy. It is entirely possible that the Supplement also includes information on other plant systems and licensee commitments that will require further review and response from Riverkeeper.
Finally, Riverkeepers limited resources have also been focused on filing a new contention in the instant proceeding, based upon new information arising out of the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Report. Briefing on this contention was only recently completed.4 For the foregoing reasons, Riverkeeper supports New York States Motion for an Extension of Time for the filing for intervenors initial statements of position and written testimony.
3 In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos.
50-0247-LR and 50-286-LR, ASLBP No. 07-858-03-LR-BD01, Amended Scheduling Order (June 7, 2011), at 2.
4 Riverkeeper is also currently a party to a New York State administrative proceeding arising from Entergys request for an adjudicatory hearing, challenging the New York State Department of Environmental Conservations April 2, 2010 denial of Entergys application for a Water Quality Certificate for Indian Point 2 and 3, pursuant to § 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act (the obligation of which stems directly out of Entergys operating License Renewal Application). Adjudicatory hearings begin in that proceeding on October 14, 2011 in Albany, New York, and pretrial preparation and submission of testimony continues up until the commencement of the hearing. Riverkeeper is currently completing pre-filed rebuttal testimony on a range of issues for submission on September 30, 2011.
3
Respectfully submitted, Signed (electronically) by Phillip Musegaas Phillip Musegaas, Esq.
Deborah Brancato, Esq.
Riverkeeper, Inc.
20 Secor Road Ossining, NY 10562 914-478-4501 dbrancato@riverkeeper.org phillip@riverkeeper.org Dated: September 28, 2011 Ossining, NY 4