|
---|
Category:Legal-Motion
MONTHYEARML15251A6782015-09-0404 September 2015 Motion for Leave to Intervene by First Energy Nuclear Operating Company ML15132A5152015-05-12012 May 2015 Certificate of Service of Beyond Nuclear Reply to Oppositions to Motion to Admit New Contention ML15128A2912015-05-0808 May 2015 Beyond Nuclear'S Motion to Amend Nepa Placeholder Contention in License Renewal Proceeding for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant ML15132A1972015-05-0808 May 2015 Certificate of Service for Beyond Nuclear'S Motion to Amend NEPA Placeholder Contention, Filed May 8, 2015 ML15128A2982015-05-0808 May 2015 Reply by Beyond Nuclear, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Seed Coalition and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy to Oppositions by Applicants and NRC Staff to Motions to Admit New Contentions ML15112B2012015-04-22022 April 2015 Beyond Nuclear'S Hearing Request and Motion to Intervene ML15112B1992015-04-22022 April 2015 Beyond Nuclear Motion to Reopen Record of License Renewal Proceeding ML15112B2022015-04-22022 April 2015 Standing Declaration of Victoria Clemons ML15065A2222015-03-0606 March 2015 FENOC Motion for Clarification Regarding Termination of Proceeding ML14364A4052014-12-30030 December 2014 Intervenors' Second Motion to Supplement Contention No. 7 on Worsening Shield Building Cracking and Inadequate Amps in Shield Building Monitoring Program ML14335A7802014-12-0101 December 2014 Joint Proposed Corrections to the Transcript of the Oral Argument Held on November 12, 2014 ML14315A0492014-11-11011 November 2014 Notice of Filing of Riley Email (Exhibit a to Contention No. 7) ML14311A9892014-11-0707 November 2014 Petitioners and Intervenors Consolidated Reply to Answers to Petitions to Suspend Final Reactor Licensing Decisions, Motions to Admit a New Contention, and Motions to Reopen the Record ML14255A0302014-09-12012 September 2014 Erratum to Intervenors' Motion to Amend and Supplement Contention No. 7 on Worsening Shield Building Cracking and Inadequate AMPs in Shield Monitoring Program ML14252A8982014-09-0909 September 2014 Unopposed Motion to Establish Consolidated Briefing Schedule for Proposed Contention 7 Admissibility Filings ML14251A6092014-09-0808 September 2014 Intervenors Motion to Amend and Supplement Contention No. 7 on Worsening Shield Building Cracking and Inadequate AMPs in Shield Building Monitoring Program ML14245A6562014-09-0202 September 2014 Intervenors' Motion for Admission of Contention No. 7 on Worsening Shield Building Cracking and Inadequate Amps in Shield Building Monitoring Program ML14144A0002014-05-23023 May 2014 Intervenors' Reply in Support of Motion for Admission of Contention No. 6 on Shield Building Concrete Void, Cracking and Broken Rebar Problems ML14112A0072014-04-21021 April 2014 Motion for Admission of Contention No. 6 on Shield Building Concrete Void, Cracking and Broken Rebar Problems ML14112A0082014-04-15015 April 2014 Exhibit 7 - Request for Additional Information (Rai), April 15, 2014 ML14113A0012014-04-14014 April 2014 Exhibit 3 - Declaration of Victoria Clemons ML14058A6822014-02-27027 February 2014 Certificate of Service of Petition to Suspend ML14058A6832014-02-27027 February 2014 Petition to Suspend Reactor Licensing Decisions and Reactor Re-Licensing Decisions Pending Completion of Rulemaking Proceeding Regarding Environmental Impacts of High-Density Pool Storage of Spent Fuel and Mitigation Measures ML14112A0092014-02-19019 February 2014 Exhibit 1 - Preliminary Notice of Event or Occurrence, February 19, 2014 ML14112A0032014-02-15015 February 2014 Exhibit 2 - Toledo Blade Article, Davis-Besse Had Air Gap in Shield Building, February 15, 2014 ML13277A7252013-10-0303 October 2013 Intervenors' Memorandum in Opposition to 'Fenoc'S Petition for Certification of Waste Confidence-Related Question to the Commission Pursuant to 10CFR2.323(f)(2).' ML13266A4322013-09-23023 September 2013 Fenoc'S Petition for Certification of Waste Confidence-Related Question to the Commission Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 2.32.(f)(2) ML14112A0042013-09-20020 September 2013 Exhibit 6 - Preliminary Notice of Event or Occurrence, September 20, 2013 ML13192A2842013-07-11011 July 2013 Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company'S Answer Supporting the NRC Staff'S Motion to Strike Portions of Petitioners Reply ML13192A5052013-07-11011 July 2013 Petitioners' Reply in Opposition to NRC Staff Motion to Strike ML13190A2162013-07-0808 July 2013 Petitioners' Reply in Opposition to FENOC 'Motion to Strike' ML13182A4792013-07-0101 July 2013 NRC Staff Motion to Strike Portions of Joint Petitioners Reply or, in the Alternative, for Leave to Reply ML13179A4032013-06-28028 June 2013 Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company'S Motion to Strike Portions of Petitioners' Reply ML13173A0012013-06-21021 June 2013 Petitioners' Reply in Support of Petition to Intervene and for an Adjudicatory Public Hearing of FENOC License Amendment Request ML14112A0062013-05-20020 May 2013 Exhibit 8 - Expert Witness Report of Arnold Gundersen, 50-246-LA ML12334A2602012-11-29029 November 2012 Joint Proposed Corrections to the Transcript of the Oral Argument Held on November 5-6, 2012 ML12304A0652012-10-30030 October 2012 Motion to File Intervenors' Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB Order Granting Fenoc'S Motion to Strike Nunc Pro Tunc ML12297A3532012-10-22022 October 2012 Intervenors' Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB Order Granting Fenoc'S Motion to Strike Intervenors' Reply in Opposition to Firstenergy'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 4 (SAMA Analysis-Source Terms) ML12278A0402012-10-0404 October 2012 Intervenors' Response in Opposition to Fenoc'S Motion to Strike 'Intervenors' Reply in Opposition to Firstenergy'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 4 (SAMA Analysis - Source Terms).' ML12268A3762012-09-24024 September 2012 Fenoc'S Motion to Strike Intervenors' Reply in Opposition to Firstenergy'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 4 (SAMA Analysis - Source Terms). ML12258A7772012-09-14014 September 2012 Intervenors' Reply in Opposition to 'Firstenergy'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 4 (Sama Analysis - Source Terms).' ML12237B1972012-08-24024 August 2012 Intervenors' Combined Reply to NRC and FENOC Answers to Inervenors' Third and Fourth Motions to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking) Information Notice 2010-12, Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend and/or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notice 2010-12: Contain2012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend and/or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notice 2010-12: Containment Liner Cor Information Notice 2010-12, Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notic2012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notice 2010-12: Containment Liner Cor Information Notice 2010-12, Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend and/or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notice 2010-12: Con2012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend and/or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-51 Through B-53); Turkey Point Event Report; NRC Information Notice 2010-12: Containment Liner Cor ML12230A0032012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-49 Through B-50) ML12230A0022012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-44 Through B-48) ML12230A0012012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Responses (B-39 Through B-43) ML12230A0002012-08-17017 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix VI: NRC FOIA Response (B-33 Through B-38) ML12229A5872012-08-16016 August 2012 Intervenors' Fifth Motion to Amend And/Or Supplement Proposed Contention No. 5 (Shield Building Cracking). Appendix III: NRC FOIA Responses (B-24 Through B-26) 2015-09-04
[Table view] |
Text
May 25, 2012 Charles A. Casto, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III 2443 Warrenville Road, Suite 210 Lisle, IL 60532-4352
Subject:
FENOC VIOLATING FEDERAL REGULATIONS (AGAIN)
Dear Mr. Casto:
By letter dated December 2, 2011, NRC Region III issued Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL)
No. 3-11-001 to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) regarding commitments related to cracking identified in the reinforced concrete shield building at Davis-Besse (ADAMS ML11336A355). The first commitment listed in this CAL stated:
FENOC will provide the results of the root cause evaluation and corrective actions to the NRC, including any long-term monitoring requirements, by February 28, 2012.
By letter dated February 27, 2012, FENOC submitted a root cause evaluation to the NRC (ADAMS ML120600056).
By letter dated May 14, 2012, FENOC submitted to the NRC a revised root cause assessment prepared by its contractor (ADAMS ML12138A037). In the first paragraph of this letter, FENOC stated:
Following this submittal [of the root cause evaluation on February 27, 2012], during on-site NRC inspection activities, observations were identified with the content of both the FENOC Root Cause Analysis Report as well as the contractor root cause assessment report used to develop the FENOC Root Cause Analysis Report.
By letter dated May 16, 2012, FENOC submitted to the NRC a revised root cause evaluation (ADAMS ML12142A053). The first paragraph of this letter also repeated, verbatim, the sentence quoted above.
Federal regulation §50.9, Completeness and accuracy of information, requires:
(a) Information provided to the Commission by an applicant for a license or by a licensee or information required by statute or by the Commission's regulations, orders, or
May 25, 2012 Page 2 license conditions to be maintained by the applicant or the licensee shall be complete and accurate in all material respects.
FENOC conceded violating this federal regulation by submitting information pursuant to a Confirmatory Action Letter that was incomplete and/or inaccurate. That this information was incomplete and inaccurate in material respects was again conceded by FENOC when it stated the problems were discovered during on-site NRC inspection activities. Had the information been deemed by the NRC to either be complete and accurate or be incomplete/inaccurate but immaterial during its inspections, the re-submittals of the root cause assessment and root cause evaluation would not have been necessary. The re-submittals under these circumstances constitute prima facie evidence that FENOC violated §50.9.
Alternatively, FENOC own efforts could have identified the incomplete and/or inaccurate information. The federal regulation would still have been violated, but some credit might be warranted for it having been self-identified and corrected.
That does not seem to be the case here. It took NRC efforts to identify the incomplete/inaccurate information and compel its correction. This violation of §50.9 is especially disconcerting because of FENOCs bad track record. For example, by letter dated January 28, 2004, the NRC informed FENOC that its inspections determined (ADAMS ML040280594):
The response [submitted by FENOC] dated November 11, 1998, failed to provide complete and accurate information concerning protective coating deficiencies and foreign material in containment.
By letter dated February 27, 2004, FENOC acknowledged this violation of federal regulations (ADAMS ML040620456). On pages 4 and 5 in Attachment 1 to this letter, FENOC stated:
FENOC took the following actions to ensure future compliance with 10 CFR 50.9 at the DBNPS:
Issued a new company policy stressing the requirements for complete and accurate information, Provided training to personnel on the need for ensuing information is complete and accurate, Established training for new supervisors and employees, which includes responsibilities under 10 CFR 50.9 for complete and accurate information, and Issued a new procedure governing validation, review, and approval of correspondence with the NRC.
These corrective actions - if actually taken - failed to achieve sustained effectiveness.
May 25, 2012 Page 3 That the NRC inspectors uncovered and revealed the incomplete and/or inaccurate information in FENOCs root cause evaluation and assessment reflects well upon the agency. The NRC did not take the submitted information for granted but instead took steps to verify it. Those steps identified the problems corrected by the re-submittals. But NRC inspectors should not figure prominently in the establishment of complete and accurate information. §50.9 clearly places that burden exclusively on the shoulders of the licensees. In this case, FENOC violated §50.9.
We look forward to the NRC taking enforcement action1 against FENOC for having once again violated federal regulations that require it to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC.
Sincerely, David Lochbaum Director, Nuclear Safety Project PO Box 15316 Chattanooga, TN 37415 (423) 468-9272, office (423) 488-8318, cell 1
This letter is expressly NOT a request per 10 CFR 2.206 for the NRC to take enforcement action against FENOC. If NRC wont take the necessary enforcement action clearly warranted by the facts in this case, our 2.206 petition wont alter that inaction.