ML17333A981

Initial Scheduling Order

ML17333A981
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	11/29/2017
From:	Ronald Spritzer Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
SECY RAS
References
50-443-LA-2, ASLBP 17-953-02-LA-BD01, RAS 54064
Download: ML17333A981 (8)

Text

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

Ronald M. Spritzer, Chairman Nicholas G. Trikouros Dr. Sekazi Mtingwa In the Matter of: Docket No. 50-443-LA-2 NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC ASLBP No. 17-953-LA-BD01 (Seabrook Station Unit 1) November 29, 2017 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER After reviewing the parties written submissions and conferring with the parties during a conference call on November 28, 2017, the Board adopts this Order to govern this proceeding.

The Board has previously determined that the hearing in this proceeding will be conducted using the simplified hearing procedures of 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart L.1 A. Mandatory Disclosures. The parties submitted a joint motion on mandatory disclosures required by 10 C.F.R. § 2.336 and the hearing file required by 10 C.F.R. § 2.1203.2 The Board agrees that the disclosure protocol set forth in the joint motion will govern the parties disclosure obligations under sections 2.336 and 2.1203:

1. The parties are not required to identify or produce privileged documents (e.g.,

attorney-client communications, attorney work product, deliberative process).

However, the parties will identify proprietary documents.3 1 Licensing Board Order (Identifying hearing procedures, requesting information related to scheduling, and deferring deadlines for production of initial disclosures and the hearing file)

(Oct. 26, 2017) (unpublished).

2 Joint Motion Regarding Mandatory Disclosures and Hearing File Obligations (Oct. 20, 2017).

3 Any request for production of proprietary documents would be governed by the terms of any appropriate protective order to be issued by the Board. Within fourteen (14) days of the initial

2. The parties are not required to identify or produce any document that has been served on the other parties to this proceeding.

3. The parties are not required to identify or produce press clippings.

4. The parties are not required to identify or produce draft documents (including comments on drafts, resolutions of comments, draft transmittals or similar documents). However, NextEra will identify available drafts of test reports prepared as part of the alkali-silica reaction (ASR) testing performed at the Ferguson Structural Engineering Laboratory (FSEL) for NextEra, and the parties will identify (and produce, if requested) any relevant final revisions of documents, i.e., Rev. 1, Rev. 2.

5. The NRC Staff will identify all relevant documents available via the NRCs website or the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), as required by 10 C.F.R. §§ 2.336(d) and 2.1203. The parties are not otherwise required to identify or produce documents available via the NRCs website or ADAMS.

6. The parties are not required to produce documents that are publically available.

However, the parties will identify such documents (other than documents available via the NRCs website or ADAMS, which are covered in item 6, above), along with information regarding the location of such documents (e.g., web address).

7. If an identical document is found in multiple locations or in multiple formats (e.g.,

hardcopy and electronic), the parties are only required to identify or produce one instance of the document.

8. All required productions shall be provided in a text-searchable electronic format, to the extent practicable.

Initial disclosures are due January 4, 2018. Monthly updates are due on the last working day of each month thereafter, unless the parties agree on a different schedule.4 B. Amended and New Contentions.

1. Consolidated Briefing. If a party wishes to file a new or amended contention, the party must file simultaneously the motion requesting leave to file the contention and the substance of the proposed contention. This consolidated filing must specify how the motion satisfies the disclosures, the parties will submit joint or separate proposals for the Boards consideration regarding the issuance of a protective order.

4 See 10 C.F.R. § 2.336(d).

good cause criteria of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii) and how the proposed contention satisfies the admissibility criteria of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(i)-(vi).

Within twenty-five (25) days after service of the motion and proposed contention, any other party may file an answer responding to the motion and contention.5 Within seven (7) days of service of the answer, the movant may file a reply.6

2. Timeliness. Any new or amended contentions must be filed in compliance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(2), including the requirements in section 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii) that any new or amended contention must be submitted in a timely fashion based on new information that is materially different from that previously available. The Board will consider a proposed new or amended contention timely under 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(1)(iii) if it is filed within thirty (30) days of the date when the new and materially different information on which it is based first becomes available.

This 30-day deadline applies to all new or amended contentions, including those based on the Staffs Safety Evaluation. If Intervenors believe that the Safety Evaluation requires additional time for review because of its length or complexity, or have some other specific reason why thirty days is not sufficient time to prepare a new or amended contention, they should promptly request an extension of the deadline after consulting with other parties. The Board will grant an extension only for good cause shown.7 5 Id. § 2.309(i)(1).

6 Id. § 2.309(i)(2).

7 See id. § 2.307(a); FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), LBP-15-1, 81 NRC 15, 30 n.72 (2015) (The Commission has suggested that if an intervenor cannot meet the requirements for filing a contention under the new 10 C.F.R.

§ 2.309(c)(1), he or she can still take advantage of an extension request under 10 C.F.R.

§ 2.307 if unanticipated events, such as a weather event or unexpected health issues, prevented the participant from filing for a reasonable period of time after the deadline. (quoting 77 Fed. Reg. 46,562, 46,571-72 (Aug. 3, 2012))).

C. Dispositive Motions. Dispositive motions, such as motions for summary disposition under 10 C.F.R. § 2.1205, may often be less efficient than proceeding directly to a Subpart L hearing, in which the Board decides contentions on the merits, but primarily on the basis of written testimony and exhibits. The parties are reminded that the Board need not consider a motion for summary disposition unless its resolution will serve to expedite the proceeding.8 While the Board will not prohibit dispositive motions, it expects the parties to consider carefully whether they can assert in good faith that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact relating to each such motion and that the motion has the potential to terminate the proceeding.

As appropriate, the Board may order that no answer to a dispositive motion need be filed.

Any motions for summary disposition are due thirty (30) days before the first deadline for direct testimony.

D. Status Report. The NRC Staff currently expects to issue the Safety Evaluation by the end of August 2018.9 The Staff should promptly notify the Board if this estimate changes.

E. Schedule. The parties have submitted a joint proposal on hearing schedules.10 The schedule includes a three-step evidentiary process with written direct testimony from C-10 Research & Education Foundation, Inc. (C-10), followed by written direct testimony from the NRC Staff and NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC (NextEra), and finally rebuttal testimony from C-10. The Board has adopted most of the schedule proposed by the parties, which is set forth in Tables 1 and 2 below.

The parties may file any proposed questions for the Board to propound to witnesses at least five (5) days before the date of the evidentiary hearing. All parties may file proposed 8 10 C.F.R. § 2.710(d)(1).

9 Letter from Brian G. Harris, Counsel for NRC Staff, to the Board (Nov. 14, 2017).

10 Joint Proposal on Hearing Schedule (Nov. 17, 2017).

questions for the Board to consider.11 The Board, however, is not required to ask the questions proposed.12 The examination plans should contain a brief description of the issue or issues that the party contends need further examination, the objective of the examination, and the proposed line of questioning (including specific questions) that may logically lead to achieving the objective. Proposed examination questions and plans should be filed in camera, using the NRCs E-Filing system, and should not be served on other parties.

The parties are not required to file motions in limine in order to preserve their objections to evidence. To the extent a party elects to file such a motion, it should be filed at least five (5) days before the date of the hearing.

The schedules below will govern this proceeding. For these schedules, SE is the date on which the Safety Evaluation becomes available for public review.

TABLE 1 If new or amended contentions are filed, the following deadlines apply:

SE+30 New or amended contentions deadline (D)

D+25 Answers to new or amended contentions D+32 Replies to answers to new or amended contentions Board Order (O) on admission of new or amended contentions (if oral D+77 argument is not required) (45 days after replies are due)

O+14 Complete mandatory disclosures O+30 Summary disposition motions O+60 C-10 written direct testimony, statements of position, and exhibits NRC Staff & NextEra written direct testimony, statement of position, and O+105 exhibits O+135 C-10 written rebuttal testimony, statements of position, and exhibits O+150 Evidentiary Hearing (Hrg)

Hrg+90 Initial decision 11 10 C.F.R. § 2.1207(a)(3)(i)-(ii).

12 Id. § 2.1207(a)(3)(iii).

TABLE 2 If no new or amended contentions are filed, the following deadlines apply:

D+14 Complete mandatory disclosures13 D+30 Summary disposition motions D+60 C-10 written direct testimony, statements of position, and exhibits NRC Staff and NextEra written testimony, statements of position, and D+105 exhibits D+135 C-10 written rebuttal testimony, statement of position, and exhibits D+150 Evidentiary Hearing (Hrg)

Hrg+90 Initial decision F. Motions to Modify the Schedule. The Board understands that modification of the schedule may be appropriate based on future developments. Any motion for an extension or enlargement of time or other modification should be filed within ten (10) days of when the party learns of the facts and circumstances establishing the need for an extension or modification.14 The movant must first attempt to resolve the issue with the other parties, and if unable to do so must include the certification required by 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(b) stating that the party made a sincere effort to contact the other parties and to resolve the issues raised in the motion.

It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

/RA/

Ronald M. Spritzer, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland November 29, 2017 13 This deadline was not provided in the joint proposal submitted by the parties; however, it is consistent with the deadline to complete mandatory disclosures that the parties proposed in Table 1. Should the parties feel that mandatory disclosure is necessary beyond this point, the Board will consider a motion to modify the schedule within ten days of service of this Order.

14 See 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(a).

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

)

NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC ) Docket No. 50-443-LA-2 (Seabrook Station, Unit 1) )

)

(License Amendment) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Office of the Secretary of the Commission Mail Stop: O-16B33 Mail Stop: O-16B33 n Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 ocaamail@nrc.gov Hearing Docket hearingdocket@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop: T-3F23 Mail Stop: O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Ronald M. Spritzer, Chair Catherine Scott, Esq.

Administrative Judge Catherine.Scott@nrc.gov ronald.spritzer@nrc.gov Anita Ghosh, Esq.

anita.ghosh@nrc.gov Nicholas G. Trikouros Brian Harris, Esq.

Administrative Judge brian.harris@nrc.gov nicholas.trikouros@nrc.gov Jeremy Wachutka, Esq.

jeremy.wachutka@nrc.gov Dr. Sekazi K. Mtingwa John Tibbetts - Paralegal Administrative Judge John.Tibbetts@nrc.gov sekazi.mtingwa@nrc.gov OGC Mail Center: Members of this office have Sarah Ladin, Law Clerk received a copy of this filing by EIE service.

sarah.ladin@nrc.gov

NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC (Seabrook Station Unit 1) - Docket No. 50-443-LA-2 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC C-10 Research & Education Foundation 801 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., #220 44 Merrimac Street Washington, DC 20004 Newburyport, Mass. 01950 Steven C. Hamrick, Esq. Natalie Hildt Treat steven.hamrick@fpl.com natalie@c-10.org NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC 700 Universe Boulevard Juno Beach, FL 33408 William Blair, Esq.

william.blair@fpl.com NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004 Paul M. Bessette, Esq.

paul.bessette@morganlewis.com Ryan K. Lighty, Esq.

ryan.lighty@morganlewis.com

[Original signed by Brian Newell ]

Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of November, 2017 2