ML16155A201

Notice (Providing Parties' Proposed Cross-Examination Questions)

ML16155A201
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	06/03/2016
From:	Michael Gibson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
SECY RAS
References
50-250-LA, 50-251-LA, ASLBP15-935-02-LA-BD01, RAS 51138
Download: ML16155A201 (5)

Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:

Michael M. Gibson, Chairman Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Dr. William W. Sager In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-250-LA and 50-251-LA FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ASLBP No. 15-935-02-LA-BD01 (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating, Units 3 and 4) June 3, 2016 NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions)

As noted in the Boards recent Initial Decision in this proceeding, the parties were offered an opportunity to propose cross-examination questions during the evidentiary hearing.1 The Board hereby provides those proposed questions as Attachment A for inclusion in the official record of the proceeding.2 FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

/RA/

Michael M. Gibson, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland June 3, 2016 1 LBP-16-08, 83 NRC __, __ (slip op. at 8) (May 31, 2016).

2 10 C.F.R. § 2.1207(a)(3)(iii). This Notice has been served this date by the Office of the Secretary on those designated in the accompanying service list through the agencys E-filing system and by e-mail.

ATTACHMENT A A. Proposed Cross-Examination Questions for Dr. Stoddard

1. FPL Proposed Questions

i. Are you aware of the ammonia and phosphorus data in the CCS and adjacent areas during the time period of the data in the Bay you discussed?

ii. You mentioned that the L-31 discharge point is far to the south of the BBSW-7B surface monitoring station. Is this point where the water that FPL withdraws would otherwise have been discharged or are there L-31E discharges further north?

iii. As a biologist, do you have any expertise to interpret groundwater readings or the ability to opine as to causes of certain water readings?

iv. You indicate that this degradation is related to the L-31 E withdrawal authorization. What evidence do you have to link it to the license amendment?

2. NRC Staff Proposed Questions

i. What would the natural variation of phosphorous and ammonium be throughout the year? How does the chart account for this variation?

ii. Please provide original data for graphs. How were the DERM data obtained?

How would the phosphorous and ammonia tracers be related to increased salinity?

iii. Can you account for how the four degree temperature change allowed in the cooling canals resulted in changes to the saltwater migration?

iv. With respect to canal level and the graphs, how does this show cause-effect?

What other sources of water are there? What other factors impact canal temperature levels?

3. CASE Proposed Questions

i. What is the biological impact of the migration of hypersaline water from the CCS on the area to the west (and southwest and northwest) of the Tukey Point plant, not just on Biscayne Bay?

ii. What is the exact biological impact of hypersalinity on animal life?

B. Proposed Cross-Examination Questions for Remaining Witnesses

1. FPL Questions

i. Ms. Grange, was your discussion of the short duration that temperatures would exceed 100 °F your reasonable forecast?

ii. Mr. Bolleter, yesterday Dr. Stoddard discussed ammonia and phosphorus readings in Biscayne Bay. Can you provide any information regarding values of those nutrients in the cooling canals at the same time?

iii. Mr. Scroggs, can you provide a discussion of the factors that led to the recent increase in salinity in the cooling canal system?

iv. All witness, in your opinion, will the ultimate heat sink license amendment lead to significant impacts on groundwater?

v. Mr. Andersen, in 2012, could you have predicted the high salinity levels of 2013?

2. NRC Staff Questions

i. Ms. Grange, in your discussion of the GEIS, you concluded that a reasonable reader might conclude there are no groundwater impacts from the operation of the Turkey Point plant. Please explain how groundwater impacts were discussed in the Commissions rules in Part 51, Appendix B, describing the GEIS, and Supplement 5 for Turkey Point.

ii. Ms. Grange, please elaborate on why state licensing and permitting processes may be used when preparing the EA and the impacts to groundwater from the requested licensing action.

3. CASE Questions

i. NRC Staff witnesses, should the NRC be more hands-on in monitoring the cooling canal system or should they continue to defer to the states?

ii. All witnesses, given the expected life of Turkey Point Units 3 & 4, what are the anticipated freshwater demands of the plant (both routine and extraordinary) into the future to maintain stability in the cooling canal system?

iii. FPL witnesses, what actual steps have/will be taken to permanently correct the problems that the cooling canal system is causing beyond the Turkey Point plant?

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251-LA

)

)

(Turkey Point Nuclear Generating )

Units 3 & 4)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange and by electronic mail.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Secretary of the Commission Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Mail Stop: O-16C1 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov Michael M. Gibson, Chair Administrative Judge E-mail: michael.gibson@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Mail Stop: O-16 F3 Administrative Judge Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: michael.kennedy@nrc.gov Brian Harris, Esq.

David Roth, Esq.

Dr. William W. Sager Catherine Scott, Esq.

Administrative Judge Catherine Kanatas, Esq.

E-mail: william.sager@nrc.gov Matthew Ring, Esq.

John Tibbetts, Paralegal Nicole Pepperl, Law Clerk E-mail: brian.harris@nrc.gov E-mail: nicole.pepperl@nrc.gov david.roth@nrc.gov catherine.scott@nrc.gov Jennifer Scro, Law Clerk catherine.kanatas@nrc.gov E-mail: jennifer.scro@nrc.gov matthew.ring@nrc.gov john.tibbetts@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Mail Stop: O-7H4 Washington, DC 20555-0001 ocaamail@nrc.gov

Turkey Point, Units 3 & 4, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251-LA NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions)

Florida Power & Light Company Citizens Allied for Safe Energy, Inc. (CASE) 700 Universe Blvd. 10001 SW 129 Terrace Juno Beach, Florida 33408 Miami, FL 33176 Nextera Energy Resources Barry J. White William Blair, Esq. E-mail: bwtamia@bellsouth.net E-mail: william.blair@fpl.com Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 Steven C. Hamrick, Esq.

E-mail: steven.hamrick@fpl.com

[Original signed by Herald M. Speiser ]

Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of June, 2016 2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:

Michael M. Gibson, Chairman Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Dr. William W. Sager In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-250-LA and 50-251-LA FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ASLBP No. 15-935-02-LA-BD01 (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating, Units 3 and 4) June 3, 2016 NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions)

As noted in the Boards recent Initial Decision in this proceeding, the parties were offered an opportunity to propose cross-examination questions during the evidentiary hearing.1 The Board hereby provides those proposed questions as Attachment A for inclusion in the official record of the proceeding.2 FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

/RA/

Michael M. Gibson, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland June 3, 2016 1 LBP-16-08, 83 NRC __, __ (slip op. at 8) (May 31, 2016).

2 10 C.F.R. § 2.1207(a)(3)(iii). This Notice has been served this date by the Office of the Secretary on those designated in the accompanying service list through the agencys E-filing system and by e-mail.

ATTACHMENT A A. Proposed Cross-Examination Questions for Dr. Stoddard

1. FPL Proposed Questions

i. Are you aware of the ammonia and phosphorus data in the CCS and adjacent areas during the time period of the data in the Bay you discussed?

ii. You mentioned that the L-31 discharge point is far to the south of the BBSW-7B surface monitoring station. Is this point where the water that FPL withdraws would otherwise have been discharged or are there L-31E discharges further north?

iii. As a biologist, do you have any expertise to interpret groundwater readings or the ability to opine as to causes of certain water readings?

iv. You indicate that this degradation is related to the L-31 E withdrawal authorization. What evidence do you have to link it to the license amendment?

2. NRC Staff Proposed Questions

i. What would the natural variation of phosphorous and ammonium be throughout the year? How does the chart account for this variation?

ii. Please provide original data for graphs. How were the DERM data obtained?

How would the phosphorous and ammonia tracers be related to increased salinity?

iii. Can you account for how the four degree temperature change allowed in the cooling canals resulted in changes to the saltwater migration?

iv. With respect to canal level and the graphs, how does this show cause-effect?

What other sources of water are there? What other factors impact canal temperature levels?

3. CASE Proposed Questions

i. What is the biological impact of the migration of hypersaline water from the CCS on the area to the west (and southwest and northwest) of the Tukey Point plant, not just on Biscayne Bay?

ii. What is the exact biological impact of hypersalinity on animal life?

B. Proposed Cross-Examination Questions for Remaining Witnesses

1. FPL Questions

i. Ms. Grange, was your discussion of the short duration that temperatures would exceed 100 °F your reasonable forecast?

ii. Mr. Bolleter, yesterday Dr. Stoddard discussed ammonia and phosphorus readings in Biscayne Bay. Can you provide any information regarding values of those nutrients in the cooling canals at the same time?

iii. Mr. Scroggs, can you provide a discussion of the factors that led to the recent increase in salinity in the cooling canal system?

iv. All witness, in your opinion, will the ultimate heat sink license amendment lead to significant impacts on groundwater?

v. Mr. Andersen, in 2012, could you have predicted the high salinity levels of 2013?

2. NRC Staff Questions

i. Ms. Grange, in your discussion of the GEIS, you concluded that a reasonable reader might conclude there are no groundwater impacts from the operation of the Turkey Point plant. Please explain how groundwater impacts were discussed in the Commissions rules in Part 51, Appendix B, describing the GEIS, and Supplement 5 for Turkey Point.

ii. Ms. Grange, please elaborate on why state licensing and permitting processes may be used when preparing the EA and the impacts to groundwater from the requested licensing action.

3. CASE Questions

i. NRC Staff witnesses, should the NRC be more hands-on in monitoring the cooling canal system or should they continue to defer to the states?

ii. All witnesses, given the expected life of Turkey Point Units 3 & 4, what are the anticipated freshwater demands of the plant (both routine and extraordinary) into the future to maintain stability in the cooling canal system?

iii. FPL witnesses, what actual steps have/will be taken to permanently correct the problems that the cooling canal system is causing beyond the Turkey Point plant?

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251-LA

)

)

(Turkey Point Nuclear Generating )

Units 3 & 4)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange and by electronic mail.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Secretary of the Commission Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Mail Stop: O-16C1 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov Michael M. Gibson, Chair Administrative Judge E-mail: michael.gibson@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Mail Stop: O-16 F3 Administrative Judge Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: michael.kennedy@nrc.gov Brian Harris, Esq.

David Roth, Esq.

Dr. William W. Sager Catherine Scott, Esq.

Administrative Judge Catherine Kanatas, Esq.

E-mail: william.sager@nrc.gov Matthew Ring, Esq.

John Tibbetts, Paralegal Nicole Pepperl, Law Clerk E-mail: brian.harris@nrc.gov E-mail: nicole.pepperl@nrc.gov david.roth@nrc.gov catherine.scott@nrc.gov Jennifer Scro, Law Clerk catherine.kanatas@nrc.gov E-mail: jennifer.scro@nrc.gov matthew.ring@nrc.gov john.tibbetts@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Mail Stop: O-7H4 Washington, DC 20555-0001 ocaamail@nrc.gov

Turkey Point, Units 3 & 4, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251-LA NOTICE (Providing Parties Proposed Cross-Examination Questions)

Florida Power & Light Company Citizens Allied for Safe Energy, Inc. (CASE) 700 Universe Blvd. 10001 SW 129 Terrace Juno Beach, Florida 33408 Miami, FL 33176 Nextera Energy Resources Barry J. White William Blair, Esq. E-mail: bwtamia@bellsouth.net E-mail: william.blair@fpl.com Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 Steven C. Hamrick, Esq.

E-mail: steven.hamrick@fpl.com

[Original signed by Herald M. Speiser ]

Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of June, 2016 2