ML14184B564
| ML14184B564 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/2014 |
| From: | Deluca K, Sipos J State of NY, Office of the Attorney General |
| To: | Kennedy M, Lawrence Mcdade, Richard Wardwell Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01, RAS 26160 | |
| Download: ML14184B564 (9) | |
Text
STATE OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN DIVISION OF SOCIAL JUSTICE ATTORNEY GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BUREAU July 3, 2014 Via NRC Electronic Information Exchange Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Richard E. Wardwell Michael F. Kennedy Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop - T-3 F23 Two White Flint North 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Re: Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 and Unit 3 Docket Nos. 50-247-LR/50-286-LR; ASLBP No. 07-858-03-LR-BD01
Dear Administrative Judges:
The State of New York submits this letter in response to the Boards June 25, 2014 Order, which provides the parties with the opportunity to inform the Board of any additional issues that should be addressed during the upcoming status conference. The State respectfully suggests that the following issues warrant consideration by the Board for inclusion in the topics to be discussed during the conference:
- 1. NRC Staffs Review of NL-13-075 and Contention NYS-35/36 On May 6, 2013, Entergy submitted revisions to the Indian Point Unit 2 and Unit 3 Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives (SAMA) cost-benefit analysis to NRC Staff in a document titled NL-13-075.1 Entergys May 2013 revised SAMA analysis reclassifies six previously cost-beneficial SAMA candidates as no longer cost-beneficial.2 Entergys conclusion 1
Letter from F. Dacimo, Vice President, Indian Point Energy Center, to NRC Document Control Desk, License Renewal Application-Completed Engineering Project Cost Estimates for SAMAs Previously Identified as Potentially Cost-Beneficial (May 6, 2013) (ML13142A014) (NL-13-075).
2 NL-13-075, attach. 1 at 4-5.
THE CAPITOL, ALBANY, N.Y. 12224-0341 PHONE (518) 473-3105 FAX (518) 473- 2534 WWW.AG.NY.GOV
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board July 3, 2014 is based on revised engineering project cost estimates Entergy completed since the last Commission decision denying interlocutory review.3 Entergys May 2013 SAMA Reanalysis also explains that Entergy has implemented, or elected to implement, four of those SAMAs, even though it is not required to do so as part of license renewal.4 Entergy attempts to explain why implementation of the remaining cost-beneficial SAMAs does not warrant further consideration at this time.5 Entergy submitted a letter to the Board, attaching its May 2013 SAMA Reanalysis one day after it submitted the information to NRC Staff.6 Entergy informed the Board that it submitted this information to the NRC to support resolution of certain issues identified by the Board in its July 14, 2011 decision granting New York States motion for summary disposition of Consolidated Contention NYS-35/36 and that the letter also addresses certain statements by the Commission in its December 22, 2011 ruling on Entergys Petition for Review of that same decision.7 On July 9, 2013, the Board directed that adjudicatory submissions based on NL-13-075 are due no later than 60 days after the Staff issues its draft FSEIS supplement or an equivalent document discussing its review of NL-13-075, or alternatively, no later than 60 days after the NRC Staff notifies the parties that it will not issue a written evaluation of NL-13-075 in any form.8 In its most recent status report, NRC Staff stated that it is reviewing the information in NL-13-075 and it expects to complete its evaluation and to decide whether it will present its evaluation of the information in an FSEIS Supplement or in some other document, later this year.9 The State respectfully requests that Staffs review of this information and its impact on the schedule be discussed at the teleconference. The State also respectfully requests that the 3
Id. at 4-5.
4 Id. at 2.
5 Id.
6 Letter from Kathryn M. Sutton, et al. to Board, Notification of Entergys Submission of the Results of Completed Engineering Project Cost Estimates for SAMAs Previously Identified as Potentially Cost-Beneficial (ML13127A458) (May 7, 2013).
7 Id. at 1.
8 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3),(Granting Entergys Motion Clarification) (Jul. 9, 2014) (ML13190A068).
9 NRC Staffs 29th Status Report in Response to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards Order of Feb. 16, 2012 (July 1, 2014) at 5-6 (ML14182A770) (Staffs 29th Status Report). Similar statements have appeared in earlier status reports. For example, last year in its July 1, 2013 status report, NRC Staff discussed NL-13-075 and stated that Applicants submittal thus has the potential to affect litigation of Consolidated Contention NYS-35/36 and that [t]he Staff has not yet decided whether it will issue a supplement to its FSEIS to address the new information. NRC Staffs 17th Status Report in Response to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards Order of Feb. 16, 2012 (July 1, 2013) at 5 (ML13182A731).
2
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board July 3, 2014 Board consider setting a deadline for Staff to finish its review of this information submitted by Entergy over one year ago as well as an update from Entergy as to the implementation of the SAMA candidates discussed in NL-13-075 and any other SAMA-related actions Entergy has taken.
- 2. Contentions NYS-39/RK-EC-9/CW-EC-10 and CW-SC-4 and Waste Confidence Following the D.C. Circuits decision in State of New York v. NRC, 681 F.3d 471 (D.C.
Cir. 2012), interveners filed new contentions, NYS-39/RK-EC-9/CW-EC-10 and CW-SC-4, addressing spent fuel storage and disposal. On August 7, 2012, the Commission issued CLI 16, which directed that all contentions arising from the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuits New York v. NRC decision be held in abeyance.10 On August 8, 2012, the Board held all pleadings addressing NYS-39/RK-EC-9/CW-EC-10 and CW-SC-4 in abeyance.11 Thereafter, NRC initiated a rulemaking proceeding to address the continued storage of spent nuclear fuel at reactor sites.12 In its various comments on the proposed draft environmental impact statement released by NRC Staff in connection with this rulemaking (RIN 3150-AJ20), the State identified, among other things, various impacts that would be specific to the Indian Point site from the storage of spent nuclear fuel at the site. During a March 21, 2014 NRC Commissioners meeting on the rulemaking, the State noted its concerns about site-specific impacts of storing spent nuclear fuel at Indian Point.13 Following the March 21 meeting, the Secretary placed the transcript of the meeting in the docket in this proceeding.14 In its most recent status report, NRC Staff stated that it expects to complete its waste confidence environmental review and rulemaking by October 2014.15 The State respectfully requests that the impact of the rulemaking on this proceedings schedule should be discussed at the teleconference.
10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Project, LLC (Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3), CLI-12-16, 76 N.R.C. 63, 68-69 (2012).
11 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3), (Holding Contentions NYS-39/RK-EC-9/CW-EC-10 and CW-SC-4 in Abeyance) (Aug. 8, 2012)
(ML12221A387).
12 Staff Requirements Memorandum - COMSECY-12-0016 - Approach for Addressing Policy Issues Resulting from Court Decisions to Vacate Waste Confidence Decision and Rule (Sept. 6, 2012)
(ML12250A032).
13 Transcript of Meeting of NRC Commissioners, Briefing on Waste Confidence Rulemaking, (March 21, 2014) (ML14084A142).
14 Service of Commission Meeting Transcript, (April 11, 2014) (ML14101A388).
15 Staffs 29th Status Report at 4.
3
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board July 3, 2014
- 3. Coastal Zone Management Update As the State previously informed the Board, on November 20, 2013 and December 13, 2013, the New York State Supreme Court for Albany County dismissed Entergys challenges to certain actions of the State of New York Department of State concerning coastal zone issues.16 Thereafter, Entergy sought appellate review of those decisions by an intermediate appellate court, the Third Department of the Appellate Division. It is expected that briefing on the first case will be completed this summer, and that oral argument before the State appellate court will take place in the fall. In addition, Entergy and the Department of State agreed to a stay of the underlying review period until mid-October 2014, with a department decision by December 31, 2014.
- 4. Additional Information By way of background for the Board and the parties, the State provides the following information about the Danskammer electric generation facility located in Town of Newburgh, NY. Although it had not operated since the end of 2012, there is an increasing likelihood that the facility may return to service. On July 1, 2014, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation approved an amendment to the NOx RACT Plan for the Danskammer facility. Under the amended plan Coal firing at the [Danskammer] facility is now prohibited.
Additionally, by way of background for the Board and the parties, the State provides the following information on the updated seismic hazard and potential change in seismic categorization for the Indian Point facilities. In response to a March 2012 request, Entergy recently provided an updated seismic hazard analysis for the Indian Point Unit 2 and Unit 3 facilities. That analysis shows that the anticipated ground motion is larger for higher frequency events than was understood when the Indian Point Unit 2 and Unit 3 facilities received their operating licenses in the 1970s. After receiving the Entergy updated analysis, NRC Staff performed its own analysis. The recently-produced ground motion curves appear to be higher than the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) design curves that resulted from licensing hearings in the 1970s and were adopted by the Commission. The following figures are from a presentation for a June 19, 2014 meeting at NRC headquarters in Rockville:
16 Letter, State of New York to Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, (Dec. 23, 2103)
(ML13357A294).
4
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board July 3, 2014 Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1, Seismic Hazard Evaluation, Entergy, slides 6-7 (June 18, 2014).
Staff has placed the Indian Point Unit 2 and Indian Point Unit 3 facilities in the Priority Group 1 for additional review. According to Staff Group 1 plants are generally those that have the highest re-evaluated hazard relative to the original plant seismic design basis (GMRS to SSE) 5
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board July 3, 2014 as well as ground motions in the 1-10Hz range that are generally higher in absolute magnitude.
Group 1 plants are expected to conduct a seismic risk evaluation and submit it by June 30, 2017.17 During the June 19, 2014 meeting in Rockville, Entergy proposed reclassifying the Indian Point Unit 3 facility from a high priority Group 1 plant to a lower priority Group 3 category.
It is unclear whether the seismic safety analyses for Indian Point Unit 2 and Indian Point Unit 3 would include the systems, structures, and components that those facilities share with the Indian Point Unit 1 facility, which was designed and constructed in the 1950s.
The State respectfully requests that this issue be discussed at the teleconference.
Respectfully submitted, Signed (electronically) by John J. Sipos Kathryn DeLuca Assistant Attorneys General John.Sipos@ag.ny.gov (518) 402-2251 cc: All individuals, parties, and NRC offices on the Service List 17 NRC Staff, Support Document for Screening and Prioritization Results Regarding Seismic Hazard Re-Evaluations for Operating Reactors in the Central and Eastern United States, p. 2 (May 21, 2014)
(ML14136A126.)
6
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
x In re: Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 50-286-LR License Renewal Application Submitted by ASLBP No. 07-858-03-LR-BD01 Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, DPR-26, DPR-64 Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. July 3, 2014
x CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 3, 2014, copies of the State of New Yorks letter concerning topics for discussion during the upcoming status conference were served electronically via the Electronic Information Exchange on the following recipients:
Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Richard E. Wardwell, Administrative Judge Carter Thurman, Esq., Law Clerk Michael F. Kennedy, Administrative Judge James Maltese, Esq., Law Clerk Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Kathleen Schroeder, Law Clerk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mailstop 3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North Mailstop 3 F23 11545 Rockville Pike Two White Flint North Rockville, MD 20852-2738 11545 Rockville Pike Lawrence.McDade@nrc.gov Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Richard.Wardwell@nrc.gov Carter.Thurman@nrc.gov Michael.Kennedy@nrc.gov James.Maltese@nrc.gov Kathleen.Schroeder@nrc.gov Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Mailstop 3 F23 Adjudication Two White Flint North U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11545 Rockville Pike Mailstop 16 G4 Rockville, MD 20852-2738 One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 ocaamail@nrc.gov 1
Office of the Secretary Bobby R. Burchfield, Esq.
Attn: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff Matthew M. Leland, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Clint A. Carpenter, Esq.
Mailstop 3 F23 McDermott Will & Emery LLC Two White Flint North 600 13th Street, NW 11545 Rockville Pike Washington, DC 20005-3096 Rockville, MD 20852-2738 bburchfield@mwe.com hearingdocket@nrc.gov mleland@mwe.com ccarpenter@mwe.com Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.
David E. Roth, Esq. Richard A. Meserve, Esq.
Beth N. Mizuno, Esq. Matthew W. Swinehart, Esq.
Brian G. Harris, Esq. Covington & Burling LLP Anita Ghosh, Esq. 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20004-2401 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission rmeserve@cov.com Mailstop 15 D21 mswinehart@cov.com One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Elise N. Zoli, Esq.
Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Goodwin Procter, LLP sherwin.turk@nrc.gov Exchange Place david.roth@nrc.gov 53 State Street beth.mizuno@nrc.gov Boston, MA 02109 brian.harris@nrc.gov ezoli@goodwinprocter.com anita.ghosh@nrc.gov William C. Dennis, Esq.
Kathryn M. Sutton, Esq. Assistant General Counsel Paul M. Bessette, Esq. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Raphael Kuyler, Esq. 440 Hamilton Avenue Lance A. Escher, Esq. White Plains, NY 10601 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP wdennis@entergy.com 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 Robert D. Snook, Esq.
ksutton@morganlewis.com Assistant Attorney General pbessette@morganlewis.com Office of the Attorney General rkuyler@morganlewis.com State of Connecticut leascher@morganlewis.com 55 Elm Street P.O. Box 120 Martin J. ONeill, Esq. Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP robert.snook@ct.gov Suite 4000 1000 Louisiana Street Houston, TX 77002 martin.oneill@morganlewis.com 2
Melissa-Jean Rotini, Esq. Richard Webster, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney Public Justice, P.C.
Office of the Westchester County Attorney Suite 200 Michaelian Office Building 1825 K Street, NW 148 Martine Avenue, 6th Floor Washington, DC 20006 White Plains, NY 10601 rwebster@publicjustice.net MJR1@westchestergov.com Andrew B. Reid, Esq.
Theresa Knickerbocker, Mayor Springer & Steinberg, P.C.
Kevin Hay, Village Administrator 1600 Broadway, Suite 1200 Village of Buchanan Denver, CO 80202 Municipal Building areid@springersteinberg.com 236 Tate Avenue Buchanan, NY 10511-1298 Phillip Musegaas, Esq.
Administrator@villageofbuchanan.com Deborah Brancato, Esq.
theresak@villageofbuchanan.com Riverkeeper, Inc.
20 Secor Road Daniel Riesel, Esq. Ossining, NY 10562 Thomas F. Wood, Esq. phillip@riverkeeper.org Victoria S. Treanor, Esq. dbrancato@riverkeeper.org Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C.
460 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 driesel@sprlaw.com vtreanor@sprlaw.com Michael J. Delaney, Esq.
Director Energy Regulatory Affairs NYC Department of Environmental Protection 59-17 Junction Boulevard Flushing, NY 11373 mdelaney@dep.nyc.gov Signed (electronically) by
____________________________________
John J. Sipos Assistant Attorney General State of New York (518) 402-2251 John.Sipos@ag.ny.gov Dated at Albany, New York this 3rd day of July 2014 3