ML14336A645
| ML14336A645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/02/2014 |
| From: | Bessette P Entergy Nuclear Operations, Morgan, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP |
| 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 26978 | |
| Download: ML14336A645 (4) | |
Text
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 Tel. 202.739.3000 Fax: 202.739.3001 www.morganlewis.com Paul M. Bessette Partner 202.739.5796 pbessette@morganlewis.com December 2, 2014 Lawrence G. McDade, Chairman Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Docket:
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 50-286-LR RE:
Views of the Parties Regarding Proposed Track 2 Hearing Schedule
Dear Administrative Judges:
In accordance with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards (Boards) suggestion during the July 17, 2014 teleconference,1 this letter provides the Board with input from the State of New York (New York), Riverkeeper, Inc. (Riverkeeper), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy),
and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff (collectively, the Parties) regarding Track 2 scheduling matters.
The NRC Staff issued Supplement 2 to the Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (SSER 2) on November 6, 2014, and it became available to all of the Parties on November 10, 2014.2 On November 18, the Parties held an initial conference call in an effort to develop a proposed schedule for moving forward on Track 2 contentions. The Parties advised the Board of this conference, and of the Parties intent to 1
Transcript of Telephonic Conference at 4607 (July 17, 2014) (ADAMS Accession No. ML14209A932).
2 See Letter from Sherwin Turk to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, (Nov. 7, 2014) (ADAMS Accession No. ML14311A800); NUREG-1930, Supplement 2, Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3, (Nov. 2014) (ADAMS Accession No. ML14310A803).
Entergy obtained a copy of SSER 2 via the NRC listserv on November 7, 2014; the deadline for its potential filings is Monday, December 8, 2014.
Administrative Judges December 2, 2014 Page 2 continue consultations to this end.3 The Parties consulted further on November 24 and December 1 and 2, 2014. The views of the Parties are summarized below.
New or Amended Contentions and Dispositive Motions Based on SSER 2 Under the Boards scheduling orders,4 any new or amended contentions or dispositive motions arising from new information contained in SSER 2 would be due 30 days from November 10, or by December 10, 2014. During the Parties consultations, New York and Riverkeeper proposed a 60-day extension of that deadline (for a total of 90 days from receipt of SSER 2), until Monday, February 9, 2015. In support of this proposal, New York and Riverkeeper indicated that a substantial amount of time - close to three years - was spent by NRC Staff in developing SSER 2, and that, in turn, a reasonable and fair timeframe in which to fully review and consider SSER 2 was necessary. In addition, New York noted restrictions on the availability of its experts, including health considerations for one of its experts, through December and January and into February.
Riverkeeper also noted restrictions on expert and attorney availability during the holidays and through early January. Thus both New York and Riverkeeper believe that a 60-day extension is the minimum necessary to provide sufficient time for legal and expert reviews of SSER 2 and related materials. Due to the unavoidable unavailability of New Yorks expert witness for medical reasons, NRC Staff and Entergy do not object to the proposed 60-day extension, until February 9, 2015, for all parties to file new or amended contentions or dispositive motions.
The Parties also agree that the deadline for dispositive motions arising from SSER 2 should be the same as the deadline for new or amended contentions, consistent with the existing scheduling orders. This approach would avoid any diversion of party resources that might occur if a dispositive motion or motions were due before the deadline for new or amended contentions.
New, Amended or Updated Written Testimony for Existing Track 2 Contentions The Parties recognize that the existing Track 2 contentions have been held in abeyance for an extended period of time, and that there may be a need to supplement or amend previously-submitted testimony. In addition, no testimony has been filed on one of the admitted bases for NYS-38/RK-TC-5, related to reactor vessel internals. The scheduling orders directed the filing of intervenors initial written statements of position, written testimony with supporting affidavits, and exhibits either 30,5 40,6 or 907 days after the Trigger Date, which would be either the issuance of 3
Letter from Paul Bessette to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, (Nov. 20, 2014) (ADAMS Accession No. ML14324A822).
4 See Licensing Board Scheduling Order at 6, 11 (July 1, 2010) (unpublished) (2010 Scheduling Order); Licensing Board Amended Scheduling Order, at 2-3 (June 7, 2011) (unpublished) (Amended Scheduling Order)
(collectively, scheduling orders).
5 Amended Scheduling Order at 3.
6 Id.
7 2010 Scheduling Order at 13.
Administrative Judges December 2, 2014 Page 3 SSER 2, or the last timely reply or answer to new or amended contentions or dispositive motions.
Absent subsequent Board action, however, it is unclear what specific deadlines might apply for new or updated evidentiary filings.
New York and Riverkeeper respectfully submit that a more appropriate Trigger Date would be the date of the Boards decision on any new or amended contentions or dispositive motions; such an approach would be more expeditious and allow the parties to avoid expending unnecessary resources in light of the Boards ultimate rulings. Entergy and the NRC Staff believe that the Trigger Date, as defined in the existing scheduling orders, provides sufficient schedule flexibility and should be maintained.
Entergy and the NRC Staff recommend amending the time line to allow submission of intervenors new, amended, or updated testimony for the three existing Track 2 contentions no later than 60 days from the Trigger Date. New York and Riverkeeper recommend amending the timeline to allow submission of intervenors new, amended, or updated testimony no later than 90 days from the Trigger Date.
Given the impending deadlines for the submission of new or amended contentions and dispositive motions, which currently are as soon as Monday, December 8, the Parties respectfully request that the Board act expeditiously on the Parties recommendations, or order such filings to be held in abeyance until the Board can issue further direction.
Respectfully submitted, Executed in accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)
Paul M. Bessette, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004 Phone: (202) 739-5796 Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail: pbessette@morganlewis.com Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
c:
Service List
DB1/ 81388668.3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and
)
50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
)
)
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3)
)
)
December 2, 2014 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.305, I certify that, on this date, a copy of Entergys letter to the Administrative Judges was served upon the Electronic Information Exchange (the NRCs E-Filing System), in the above-captioned proceeding.
Signed (electronically) by Ryan K. Lighty Ryan K. Lighty, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004 Phone: (202) 739-5274 Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail: rlighty@morganlewis.com