ML19197A330

Watch Motion to File a New Contention

ML19197A330
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	07/16/2019
From:	Lampert J Pilgrim Watch
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-293-LT, 72-1044-LT, License Transfer, RAS 55090
Download: ML19197A330 (42)

Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket No. 50-293 Entergy Corporation Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station License Transfer Agreement Application PILGRIM WATCH MOTION TO FILE A NEW CONTENTION On April 20, 2019 Pilgrim Watch filed a Petition to Intervene and Hearing Request in this proceeding. That now-pending Petition showed that Pilgrim Watch has standing, and has set forth two admissible contentions.

Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c), Pilgrim Watch hereby moves to file the following new contention 3:

The Applicants LTA cannot be granted unless and until the NRC:

(1) Has investigated Holtec International (Holtec), SNCL-Lavalin (SNCL),

Holtec Decommissioning International (HDI), and Comprehensive Decommissioning International (CDI); and (2) Based on those investigations has determined that a) Each of them is trustworthy and reliable and otherwise possesses the character prerequisite to allowing it to participate in or control the decommissioning of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, and

2 b) Approving the License Transfer Application will not be inimical to the common defense and security or constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.1 At the outset, it is important to make clear what this contention is, and what it is not.

Pilgrim Watchs Contention 3 is that the NRC has not done its job; and that the License Transfer Application cannot be allowed unless and until it does so. It is the NRC, not Pilgrim Watch, that has a statutory and regulatory duty to determine that Holtec (that owns HDI, will own Holtec Pilgrim, and is a majority owner of CDI that will decommission Pilgrim) and SNCL (that is the co-owner of CDI) are in fact trustworthy, reliable and of good character. It is the NRC, not Pilgrim Watch, that properly cannot grant Holtecs license transfer application unless and until it has made those determinations and has also found that granting the License Transfer Application will not be inimical to the common defense and security and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public. 10 CFR § 61.23 This contention does not seek to prove that Holtec, SNCL, and the subsidiaries HDI and CDI that they own and control, are in fact untrustworthy, unreliable, and lack good character; but it identifies numerous reports that Holtec and SNCL, the real parties-in-interest, are not. This contention also does not seek to prove that allowing the LTA will present a risk to the common defense, security, and public health and safety.

This contention does say that the NRC cannot meet its statutory and regulatory obligations by considering only the technical and financial qualifications of HDI, ignoring the obvious fact 1 Pilgrim Watch contacted other counsel. Counsel for Holtec and Entergy said they will oppose; Counsel for the Commonwealth said that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts takes no position on the motion.

3 that newly-formed HDI and CDI themselves have no history and that their character is necessarily that of their owners, and ignoring the character of those owners, Holtec and SNCL. It is the NRCs job to determine the truth, and to insure that giving these companies the right to decommission not only Pilgrim but numerous other nuclear power stations will not create a risk to the public health, safety, and the environment before approving the LTA.

This Motion meets the requirements of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f) for a Contention. It also meets the requirements for a new contention set forth in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)

With respect to the former, Contention 3 is set forth with particularity (10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1); Contention 3 is plainly within the scope of this proceeding - whether the Applicants LTA should be granted (10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(iii). This motion specifically states the issues of fact and law raised by Contention 3 (10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(i), explains the bases for Contention 3 (10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(ii), demonstrates that the issues it raises are material to findings the NRC must make to support granting the LTA (10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(iv), and provides a statement of the facts now known to Pilgrim Watch that support Pilgrims Watchs position and on which it intends to rely at hearing.2 With respect to 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c), Pilgrim Watch recently learned that the NRC has not conducted, and has no intention of conducting, the investigations that are prerequisite and essential to making these determinations, despite the fact that the NRC is well aware of numerous allegations and media reports that Holtec and SNCL, the companies that will control and direct Pilgrims decommissioning, have a long-standing history of malfeasance. The information on which this Motion is based was not previously available, and it is materially different from information that 2 The sources and documents on which Pilgrim Watch currently intends to rely are also referenced.

4 was previously available. This Motion is timely filed less than 30 days after the information on which it is based became available on June 18 and June 19, 2019.

The specific new information upon which this Petition is based is the NRCs June 18, 2019 decision in the Matter of Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-219-LT and 72-015-LT, CLI-10-06. (Oyster Creek decision), a June 19 email to James Lampert from the Neil Sheehan, NRC Public Affairs, and a December 20, 2018 letter from the NRC Office of Enforcement of which we first learned on June 18, 2019. 3 The Atomic Energy Act is clear that an applicants character is an important factor in whether a license should be granted to it (42 U.S.C. §2232a: Each application for a license hereunder shall be in writing and shall specifically state such information as the Commission, by rule or regulation, may determine to be necessary to decide such of the technical and financial qualifications of the applicant, the character of the applicant). This is confirmed by ASLB decisions (See Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-691, 16 NRC 897, 915 n.25 (1982); and LBP-84-20, 19 NRC 1285, 1297 (1984)). Numerous NRC regulations stress the importance of trustworthiness and reliability.

Until Pilgrim Watch obtained a copy of the June 18th Oyster Creek decision, and learned of the Office of Enforcement Letter on the same day, and received the email from Mr. Neil Sheehan, NRC Public Affairs on June 19, 2019, Pilgrim Watch had no reason to believe that the NRC, in deciding whether the grant the LTA, would ignore the character not only of newly-3 Copies of the email exchange with Mr Sheehan, and of the Office of Enforcement letter that Pilgrim Watch first learned of and received on June 18th, are attached as Exhibit 1.

We expect Holtec and Entergy to say that the Office of Enforcement letter was available in December, despite the fact that it was not publicly available. PW had no reason to know of it, or even think it might exist, until June 18. Power Authority of the State of New York (James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant; Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3), LBP-01-4, 53 NRC 121, 127 (2001).

5 formed HDI and CDI, but also that of Holtec and SNCL that own and control these subsidiaries and provide their management.

The Oyster Creek decision makes very clear that, in the Oyster Creek proceeding, the NRC conducted no background check and made no determination of trustworthiness and reliability of even HDI. It also makes clear that the NRC there and in the future, will limit its inquiry to HDIs financial qualifications; and that it has no intention of considering the trustworthiness, reliability or character of any separate entities such as Holtec, SNCL or CDI, even though those separate entities, in reality, will be responsible for and control decommissioning.

Mr. Sheehans email did not answer the basic question posed to him:

Do NRC rules, regulations or policy require a licensee itself to have been determined to be trustworthy and reliable? If so, what are the applicable rules, regulations or policy?

His reference to 10 CFR 50.40(c) in connection with his statement that the NRC has broad discretion when issuing a license, seems a clear indication that the NRC will exercise its discretion only with respect to the applicant for a licensee (regardless of how new, experienced, or independent may be) and whether that entity alone is technically and financially qualified.

10 CFR 50.40(b), and that the character of those who will actually be responsible for and control decommissioning is irrelevant.

The Office of Enforcement also eschews responsibility. In its December 20, 2018 letter responding to a Beyond Nuclear concern that The CEO of Holtec International attempted to bribe an Exelon quality assurance auditor it said that The NRC Staff determined that NRC regulations do not specifically address bribery. Perhaps not surprisingly, the Office took a very

6 narrow view and ignored that bribery must be addressed when determining trustworthiness, reliability and character.

In other words, despite the requirements of the Atomic Entergy Act and many of its own regulations, nothing suggests that the NRC will investigate and determine the answer to a very basic question: Can Holtec, SNCL, and the new companies they own and control, be trusted to decommission Pilgrim in a way that will protect the public health and safety and the environment?

II. Background On November 16, 2019, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. filed what has been called a License Transfer Application (Application). The term License Transfer is somewhat misleading.

There are now two Pilgrim licensees, both of which owned and controlled by the parent, Entergy Corporation, Inc. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENOI) is the Licensed Operator, and Entergy Nuclear Generation Company (ENGC) is the Licensed Owner. (See Figure 1: Simplified Organization Chart (Current), pg. 10 of the Application).

As shown in the Simplified Organization Chart (Post-Transfer) (Figure 1, pg. 11 of the Application) and stated in the Equity Purchase and Sale Agreement, Holtec (or more precisely a subsidiary, Nuclear Asset Management Company) will buy all of the stock of Pilgrims owner, now named ENOI. The name of the company will be changed to Holtec-Pilgrim; and the same legal entity will continue to exist. But it will be controlled by Holtec rather than by Entergy.

The situation with respect to the other proposed licensee, HDI, is different. According to the NRC website, ENOI currently is the licensed operator not only of Pilgrim but also of several

7 other Entergy-owned plants. ENOI will continue to exist, and apparently continue to operate these plants, after Pilgrim is sold, but ENOI will have no longer have responsibilities with respect to Pilgrim.

Rather, if the sale of Pilgrim to Holtec is accomplished, all the responsibility for Pilgrims operation will be assumed by HDI, a newly-formed company owned, controlled by Holtec International, and managed by Holtec senior staff. Application, p. 4.

As said at page 2 of the Application:

HDI, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Holtec, will assume licensed responsibility for Pilgrim. HDI is a special purpose entity formed by Holtec to be the licensed operator that will decommission nuclear power plants, including Pilgrim.

HDIs licensed activities will involve possessing and disposing of radioactive material, maintaining the facility in safe condition (including storage, control, and maintenance of the spent fuel), decommissioning and decontaminating the facility, and maintaining the ISFSI until it can be decommissioned.4 Comprehensive Decommissioning International, LLC (CDI), a company jointly formed and owned by Holtec and SNCL, will be the decommissioning general contractor. The Application says that Holtec and SNCL are transferring employees, e.g., commercial nuclear personnel and capabilities into CDI, and that CDI will manage and perform the day-to-day Pilgrim activities, including decommissioning activities. (Id, pp. 2, 4) It also says that CDI will be staffed with a combination of Holtec and Atkins (now owned by SNCL) personnel who have considerable nuclear experience, including experience in spent fuel handling and decommissioning; the fact of the matter is that Holtec may have experience in spent fuel handling, but it has essentially none in decommissioning.

4 Holtec Pilgrim and HDI will enter into a Decommissioning Operator Services Agreement with HDI that provides for HDI to act as Holtec Pilgrims agent and for Holtec Pilgrim to pay HDIs costs of operation, including all decommissioning costs. (Page 2 of Enclosure 1 of the Application.)

8 For the purposes of this Contention 3, the principal companies whose character, trustworthiness and reliability are important and should be investigated by the NRC are Holtec and SNCL.

If the LTA is approved, HDI will be the named licensed operator, but to limit any investigation to HDI would ignore reality. Newly-formed HDI has no history. It is owned and controlled by Holtec, and managed by Holtec senior staff. Its trustworthiness, reliability and character are those of Holtec. Neither HDI, nor its Holtec management and employees, have decommissioning experience.

Newly-formed CDI similarly has no history. It is controlled, owned and staffed by both HDI and SNCL. Its trustworthiness, reliability and character are those of Holtec and SNCL.

CDCs only decommissioning experience comes from SNCL.

Pilgrim Watch expects Holtec to argue that the only trustworthiness, reliability and character that is important is that of HDI itself, and that whether Holtec, SNCL or CDI is trustworthy and reliable and of good character is irrelevant. Any such argument would be wrong.

Holtec and SNCL created a multi-level corporate structure and organization in an effort to limit and avoid financial liability. But their legal machinations do not allow the NRC to ignore reality and to abdicate its statutory obligation to license[] and regulate[] the Nation's civilian use of radioactive materials to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety and to promote the common defense and security and to protect the environment. https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc.html The reality, clear from Holtecs LTA and press releases, is that Holtec and SNCL decided to team-up to create a new joint venture, CDI, to decommission closed nuclear power plants:

9 Comprehensive Decommissioning International, LLC (CDI) was formed in 2018 with the express purpose of creating a company to provide all-encompassing project solutions for the accelerated decommissioning of retired nuclear power plants. https://cdi-decom.com/about us.

Lawyers created the corporate structure shown in the LTA to do this in a way that would maximize profits and minimize legal risk and liability. The key entity in this new business is CDI that will staffed by former SNCL personnel with decommissioning experience and former Holtec personnel who have experience in spent nuclear fuel storage. Since the lawyers to provide an entity that could become Pilgrims licensed operator, they created HDI. They also planned to acquire Pilgrims current owner, renamed Holtec-Pilgrim, and its decommissioning fund so that CDI, that would actually do the decommissioning work, could be paid and send its profits upstream to Holtec and SNCL.

The statutory frustration principle requires the NRC to disregard the multi-level corporate form when, as here, pretending that only HDI is important would render the NRC unable to regulate Pilgrims decommissioning as required to adequately protect the public health and safety. See Safety Light Corp. (Bloomsburg Site Decommissioning and License Renewal Denials), LBP-95-9, 41 NRC 412, 458 (1995).

More important, an argument that the NRC can only investigate HDI would conveniently overlook that the applicant for the LTA is Holtec, not HDI.

It would also overlook that the NRC s mission is to license[] and regulate[] the Nation's civilian use of radioactive materials to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety and to promote the common defense and security and to protect the environment. To perform that the NRC may, and properly should, consider all of the information before deciding whether to approve the LTA and allow CDI to decommission

10 Pilgrim decommissioning under the control and direction of Holtec and SNCL. The NRCs right to regulate and to decide what to approve and whom to license, is much broader than its regulatory authority over an already licensed entity.

III. An Investigation is Required The Atomic Energy Act is clear that an applicants character is an important factor in whether a license should be granted. (42 U.S.C. §2232a). Holtec is the LTA applicant.

Ethics is a legitimate area of inquiry in a license transfer proceeding such as that before the NRC now. Ga. Power Co. (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-93-16, 38 NRC 25 (1993); Three Mile Island, ALAB-772, 19 NRC at 1227; Piping Specialists, Inc.

(Kansas City, Missouri), LBP-92-25, 36 NRC 156, 153 (1992).

Holtecs and SNCLs character must be considered by the Commission in deciding whether to grant a license to HDI to decommission Pilgrim. Piping Specialists, Inc., supra. See also Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-691, 16 NRC 897, 915 n.25 (1982).

A. Reports Numerous news media have reported that Holtec and SNCL have a long-standing history of corruption, fraud, bribery and lying in connection with their corporations business dealings.

The NRC knows about these reports and allegations. See, e.g., ML18312A251, ML18337A419, ML19066B331; ML18324A638, ML19009A326, ML19017A348 and MO 19127A026.

For example, ML19009A326 describes and provides links to several articles dealing with alleged SNCL corruption. In summary, these report that SNCL, the company that supposedly

11 brings technical experience and expertise to the decommissioning process,5 and is a co-owner of the entity that supposedly will decommission Pilgrim, has been charged with corruption, fraud, bribery, misleading investors, paying public officials to influence government decision, defrauding other organizations, forging documents, and making illegal political contribution :

1. https://www.app.com/story/news/local/redevelopment/2018/12/21/exelon-no-need-hearing-how-oyster-creek-closing-hits-lacey/2380673002 -

SNC-Lavalin has been charged with corruption, fraud and bribery in Canada

2. https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/SNC-lavalin-shareholder...

LONDON, ON and TORONTO, May 23, 2018-SNC-Lavalin Shareholder Class Actions Settle for $110 million Earlier this year, the company settled two civil suits over allegations of misleading investors about its activities in Libya. The company said it would pay

$88 million and insurance payments would bring the total settlement to $110 million.

3. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/SNC-lavalin-s-montreal.

RCMP are raiding engineering firm SNC-Lavalin's headquarters in Montreal, although officials won't confirm the nature of the investigation.

4. https://www.enr.com/articles/45592-SNC-lavalin-plots-course-after...

Canada-based global engineer-constructor SNC-Lavalin could face pressure to sell or exit the public market, analysts say, after the Ottawa government said it would not negotiate a remediation deal.

5. https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/SNC-lavalin-federal-prosecutors.

MONTREAL -- SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. shares plunged to their lowest level in years on Wednesday after it announced that federal prosecutors won't agree to negotiate a deal that would set aside.

5 The License Transfer Application makes clear that although Holtec is a major manufacturer of spent nuclear fuel dry casks, any significant decommissioning experience and expertise resides in SNCL. See Enclosure 1, pp. 12-13.

12 The charges stem from allegations that SNC-Lavalin paid nearly $48 million to public officials in Libya between 2001 and 2011 to influence government decisions. The RCMP has also charged the company, its construction division and a subsidiary with one charge each of fraud and corruption for allegedly defrauding various Libyan organizations of roughly $130 million.

6. http://digital.njmonthly.com/njmonthly/january_2019/

SNC-Lavalin has had a legal cloud over its head since 2015 (the same year it began collaborating with Holtec) when allegations surfaced that former employees paid $150 million in bribes to officials in Libya to influence government policy and win contracts. In one case, a former SNC-Lavalin vice president is awaiting trial on charges he made bribes to the Gaddafiregime. In a separate case, a former SNC-Lavalin vice president of construction pleaded guilty in July to using a forged document following a widespread corruption investigation involving the construction of a super-hospital in Canada. And in May, Canadian authorities filed charges against SNC-Lavalin after a multiyear probe related to illegal political contributions.

7. SNCL website - http://www.SNClavalin.com/en/SNC-lavalin-contests-the-federal-charges-february-19-2015 SNC-Lavalin contests the federal charges by the public prosecution service of Canada, and will enter a non-guilty plea Today, SNC-Lavalin (TSX: SNCL) was informed that federal charges have been laid by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada against SNC-Lavalin Group Inc., SNC-Lavalin International Inc. and SNCL-Lavalin Construction Inc. Each entity has been charged with one count of fraud under section 380 of the Criminal Code of Canada and one count of corruption under Section 3(1)(b) of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. SNCL-Lavalin firmly considers that the charges are without merit and will vigorously defend itself and plead not guilty in the interest of its current employees, families, partners, clients, investors and other stakeholders. In Summary-In Canada, SNCL has been charged with corruption, fraud and bribery relating to business dealings in Libya committed over a period of 10 years.

Other documents relating to SNCLs trustworthiness, reliability and character, and to its history of underestimating costs to win a contract, cutting corners to save money, and leaving others both unprotected and stuck with the bill, are listed and discussed in Exhibit 2. In addition

13 to providing more detailed information about the reports discussed above, they report, among other things that:

8. SNCLs overseas construction manager was in jail in Switzerland and another SNCL agent was jailed in Mexico for fraud, bribery, human trafficking, and providing forged documents. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/cynthia-vanier-began-plotting-gaddafi-sons-escape-in-early-2011-SNCL-lavalin

9. Criminal charges were laid against senior SNCL executives in 2014-2019 for bribery in connection with the construction of a Canadian hospital. Id.

10. SNCL history of

a. underestimating costs (https://thenarwhal.ca/the-secretive-role-of-SNC-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/; https://countysustainabilitygroup.com/ 2019/06/04/the-secretive-role-of-SNC-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/); https://coutrysustainabilitygrop.com/

2019/06/04/the-secretive-role-of-SNC-Lavalin-in -the-site-c.

b. cutting corners to save money (SNC-Lavalin controversy reaches into Manitoba, DAVE TAYLOR, Winnipeg Free Press, March 14, 2019).

c. dumping radioactive waste into sub-basements rather than removing all radioactive debris from a site (https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/snc-lavalin-controversy-reaches-into-manitoba-507129682.html).

Whether the proposed licensees have enough money properly to decommission Pilgrim, and whether they will leave a clean site, are major concerns of both Pilgrim Watch and the Commonwealth.

14 In 2013 the World Bank barred SNCL and its global affiliates from bidding on contracts for 10 years (https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-SNCL-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/March 10, 2019; https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-SNC-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/; https://thenarwhal.ca/the-secretive-role-of-SNC-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/. It had good reason to do so. We respectfully suggest that the NRC should issue a similar ban if its investigation confirms what existing reports say.

ML19064B331 refers to Holtecs checkered history. Five documents relating to that history are discussed below. The first two say that Holtecs CEO Dr. Singh6 made false statements to New Jersey government officials, the third that Holtec made misrepresentations to both the NRC and the State of New Mexico in connection with Holtecs planned New Mexico waste storage facility, and the last two accuse Dr Singh of bribery and attempted bribery in connection with Holtecs nuclear waste storage business:

1. ProPublicas May 23, 2019 report, A False Answer, a Big Political Connection and $260 Million in Tax Breaks7 said that Holtec Internationals CEO gave a false answer in a 2014 application for a New Jersey tax break application:

"A company that won the second-largest tax break in New Jersey history gave a false answer about being prohibited from working with a federal agency in sworn statements made to win $260 million in taxpayer assistance for a new plant in Camden.

"A review by WNYC and ProPublica found that Holtec International CEO Kris Singh responded no on certified forms submitted to the state in 2014 6

In addition to being Holtecs CEO, Dr. Singh chairs its Board of Directors. According to the License Transfer Application, the senior management of HDI is composed of Holtec personnel., p. 8 7 https://www.propublica.org/article/holtec-international-george-norcross-tax-breaks

15 that asked if the applicant had ever been barred from doing business with a state or federal agency. The forms were submitted to the New Jersey Economic Development Authority as part of the companys successful application for tax breaks.

"In fact, the international nuclear parts manufacturer was caught up in a contracting investigation at the federally owned Tennessee Valley Authority. In 2010, Holtec was barred for 60 days from doing any federal business and paid a $2 million administrative fine to the TVA, according to an agency report. Holtecs debarment marked the first time the agency had taken such action against a contractor.

If the relevant authority determined there was a misrepresentation, they can terminate the grant, they can seek fines and penalties and in circumstances where there is information about a willful failure to disclose, obviously theres a possibility of criminal penalties as well.

2. ProPublicas June 26, 2019 report, How Unelected Officials Run Your Government,8 that, in his sworn application to the New Jersey Economic Development Authority, Holtec CEO Kris Singh said that other states, including Ohio and South Carolina, had offered [Holtec] robust proposals, despite the facts that just weeks before filing [Holtecs] application in New Jersey Ohio had stripped the company of tax credits there for failing to create the jobs it had promised as part of a similar program, and that local elected officials and economic development staffers in Ohio, as well as South Carolina, said in interviews that they knew of no approved package of incentives their states had offered Holtec.

3. A June 19, 2019 letter from New Mexicos Commissioner of Public Lands to Dr. Singh (with copies to NRC Commissioner Kristine Svinicki and the Secretary of DOE) saying, among other things, that Holtec has made numerous misrepresentations to the NRC and New Mexico :

8 https://www.propublica.org/article/a-huge-tax-break-went-to-a-politically-connected-company-in-new-jersey-despite-red-flags

16 I write to express my safety concerns and to address several misrepresentations that Holtec has made to the NRC and New Mexicans about its control of the proposed disposal site as well as agreements that it claims to have secured from New Mexico State Land Office mineral lessees. The State Land Office has reviewed a number of Holtec's submissions to the NRC, including the company's Facility Environmental Report (FER) and Safety Analysis Report (SAR). Those submissions contain statements that have the potential, intended or not, to mislead federal regulators and the public alike, and require immediate correction.

I am deeply concerned about the misrepresentations Holtec made to the NRC about purported agreements and restrictions regarding mineral leasing at the Site that do not exist and may very well never ever exist. Understanding the extent of oil and gas operations and other mining activities that may be conducted at the Site is essential to accurately assessing the risks of Holtec's planned nuclear storage operations. Holtec's NRC filings are materially inaccurate in this regard.

4. Beyond Nuclears report that Holtec's President and CEO, Kris Singh, attempted to bribe whistle-blowers (Oscar Shirani, Exelons lead QA Auditor, and Dr. Ross Landsman, NRC Dry Cask Inspector) with respect to quality assurance violations in the design and fabrication of Holtec irradiated nuclear fuel storage and transport containers.9 Shirani also confided that at one point, during his distress at Exelon, the CEO of Holtec International, Chris Singh - who still serves in that capacity, by the way - attempted to bribe him into silence. Singh approached Shirani and offered to hire him. He told Shirani that he could write his own paycheck.

All Shirani had to do was name the six-figure salary he wanted, and Shirani was hired. The quid pro quo, of course, was that Shirani remain silent about Holtecs QA violations. Shirani, a man of absolute integrity, declined the attempted bribe. 10 9 http://www.beyondnuclear.org/centralized-storage/2017/4/5/summary-of-oscar-shiranis-allegations-of-quality-assurance-v.html; https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/holtec-nuclear-waste-cans-kris-singh-apparent-bribery-and-allegation-of-bribery/

10 Ibid, quote referenced Excerpted from Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, Dec. 7, 2015, FC1119 public comment opposing Exelon takeover of Pepco, re: Exelons abuse of whistleblowers.

17

5. Mining Awarenesss report, in an article titled Holtec Nuclear Waste Cans - Kris Singh:

Apparent Bribery-Kickback and Allegation of Attempted Bribery, that:11 Holtec was caught and fined in at least this one apparent bribery case. Holtecs Kris Singh was also accused of attempted bribery of a whistleblower. How many times was Holtec-Singh not caught? Surely bribes are like cockroaches and mice, if you see one there are likely many more.

Holtec was the first company ever debarred from the TVA (which exists since 1933) for apparent bribery.

We have also been told that Holtec is in hot water in Chernobyl. According to Beyond Nuclears board member Lucas Hixson who is based there, Holtec is facing huge fines and fees in Chernobyl for scandals, missed deadlines, and engineering errors re: radioactive waste "management." This may be verified by contacting Kevin Kamps at Beyond Nuclear.

Other documents relating to Holtecs trustworthiness, reliability and character are listed and discussed in Exhibit 2. In addition to providing more detailed information about the reports discussed above, they report, issues relating to Holtecs quality control and assurance, which are another measure of overall competence and character. An NRC specialist, Dr. Ross Landsan is quoted as saying that As far as I am concerned, Holtec has no quality assurance, and there are reports of recent spent fuel cask issues showing problems with the quality of Holtecs spent fuel storage casks. https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-SNC-lavalins-plan-to-http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/356082/26721045/1449520345260/12+6+15+DC+PSC+comment+re

+Shirani.pdf 11 https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/holtec-nuclear-waste-cans-kris-singh-apparent-bribery-and-allegation-of-bribery/

18 turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/March 10; https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-SNC-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold.

Fundamentally the integrity or character of Holtecs, SNCLs, HDIs and CDIs management personnel is central to the Commissions ability to find reasonable assurance that a facility can be safely operated; lack of character qualifications on the part of a licensee or applicant is sufficient grounds for denying a license application. Georgia Power Company, supra.

Candor is an especially important element of management character because of the Commissions heavy dependence on an applicant or licensee to provide accurate and timely information about its facility. La. Power & Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3), ALAB-812, 22 NRC 5, 48, 51 (1985), citing Three Mile Island, ALAB-772, 19 NRC at 1208; Piping Specialists, LBP-92-25, 36 NRC at 156. False statements by individuals who have any responsibility for Pilgrims decommissioning are evidence of lack of management character sufficient to preclude an award of an operating license. Consumers Power Co.

(Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2), LBP-84-20, 19 NRC 1285, 1297 (1984), citing Houston Lighting

& Power Co. (South Texas Project, Units 1 & 2), LBP-84-13, 19 NRC 659, 674-75 (1984), and Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-83-2, 17 NRC 69, 70 (1983).

In deciding whether Holtec, SNCL, HDI and CDI have the character to operate and decommission Pilgrim in a manner consistent with the public health and safety and NRC requirements, the Commission cannot properly ignore evidence of behavior, such as that outlined in the reports above and also those attached in Exhibit 2. They clearly bring into question the companies candor, truthfulness, and willingness to abide by regulatory requirements and accept responsibility to protect public health and safety. Metro. Edison Co.

19 (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1), CLI-85-9, 21 NRC 1118, 1136-37 (1985).

In making its required investigation and determinations, the NRC cannot ignore Holtecs and SNCLs alleged behavior and violations simply because some of them took place in the past. USEC, Inc., supra. If found to be true, the allegations outlined in the above reports involve Holtec and SNCL personnel who will be employed at, or involved with, or control, i.e.,

have responsibilities for, Pilgrims decommissioning. See Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2), LBP-84-20, 19 NRC 1285, 1297 (1984).

The reports listed above are not exhaustive. Exhibit 2 is a compilations of other media reports of allegations pertaining to Holtecs and SNCLs reported character, trustworthiness and reliability. We expect that any NRC investigation into Holtecs and SNCLs character, trustworthiness and reliability would find others.

B. NRC Regulations Numerous NRC regulations and other statements show that the NRCs official position is that trustworthiness and reliability are important to protect the public health, safety and security.

These are principally concerned with existing licensees. But the policies and concerns that they address apply equally to what is important to an NRC decision whether to grant a license or approve an LTA. See, e.g.:

73.56(c) - The licensee's or applicant's access authorization program must provide high assurance that the individuals who are specified in paragraph (b)(1), and, if applicable, paragraph (b)(2) of this section are trustworthy and reliable.

20 Can the NRC approve Holtecs LTA license without requiring the same high assurance that those who the LTA says will be involved in Pilgrims decommissioning are is trustworthy and reliable?

73.2(a) Background check includes, at a minimum, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal history records check (including verification of identity based on fingerprinting), employment history, education, and personal references. A background check must be sufficient to support the trustworthiness and reliability determination so that the person performing the check and the Commission have assurance that granting individuals access to Safeguards Information does not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.

If a licensees employees must undergo a background check sufficient to support a determination that the prospective employee is trustworthy and reliable, must this not also require the same determination be made with respect the entities that the LTA say will control and actually accomplish decommissioning?

77.5 - Trustworthiness and reliability are characteristics of an individual considered dependable in judgment, character, and performance, such that unescorted access to category 1 or category 2 quantities of radioactive material by that individual does not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety or security. A determination of trustworthiness and reliability for this purpose is based upon the results from a background investigation.

21 Can the NRC ensure that there is no unreasonable risk if it approves the LTA without conducting the same background investigation of Holtec and SNCL to determine if they are dependable in judgment, character and performance?

EA-09-293 - The Licensee shall designate a Reviewing Official for determining unescorted access to the radioactive materials as listed in Attachment 2 to this Order by other individuals. The designated Reviewing Official shall be determined to be trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee in accordance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to this Order and must be permitted to have unescorted access to the radioactive materials listed in Attachment 2 to this Order as part of his or her job duties.

How can the NRC properly approve an LTA that would give HDI the right to determine if an individual is trustworthy and reliable without first itself making the same determination with respect to Holtec that controls and manages HDI?

ML051360471 - Dissemination of licensees physical protection information is limited to individuals who have an established need-to-know and who are trustworthy and reliable.

Once again, how this information be protected unless Holtec and SNL have been determined to be trustworthy and reliable counted on to limit dissemination?

22 IV. Conclusion Holtec and SNCL have joined forces to decommission Pilgrim and at least six other nuclear reactors. Holtecs LTA is designed to make it possible for Holtecs and SNCLs new joint venture to decommission Pilgrim.

The NRC is responsible for regulating decommissioning in a way that will protect the public health and safety and the environment. Pilgrim Watchs Contentions 1 and 2 say that the NRC should not grant the LTA because the proposed licensees do not have enough money to do the job, and also because they have not shown that their plan will protect the environment.

Contention 3 says that he NRC should not grant the LTA, and thus approve Holtecs and SNCLs new business plan, unless and until it has investigated Holtec, SNCL, HDI and CDI, and has determined that each of the four is trustworthy and reliable, and possess the character that is prerequisite to allowing it to participate in or control Pilgrims decommissioning.

Pilgrim Watchs new contention 3 should be admitted for hearing, and for the reasons set forth here and in contentions 1 and 2 the LTA should not be approved.

Respectfully submitted on July 17, 2019, (Electronically signed)

Mary Lampert 148 Washington Street, Duxbury MA 02332 Tel. 781.934.0389 Email: mary.lampert@comcast.net James B. Lampert 148 Washington Street, Duxbury MA 02332 Tel. 781.934.0389 Email: james.lampert@comcast.net

23 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket No. 50-293 & 72-1044 LT Entergy Corporation Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station License Transfer Agreement Application CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.305, I certify that copies of Pilgrim Watch Motion to File a New Contention have been served upon the Electronic Information Exchange, the NRCs e-filing system, in the above-captioned proceeding, on July 16, 2019.

Signed (electronically) by Mary Lampert Pilgrim Watch, director 148 Washington Street Duxbury, MA 02332 Tel. 781.934.0389 Email: mary.lampert@comcast.net

24 EXHIBIT 1 Email exchange between James Lampert and Neil Sheehan Office of Enforcement Letter

25 From Neil Sheehan, to James Lampert, 6/19/2019, 9:10am Mr. Lampert, Thank you for your inquiry. The NRC is prohibited from providing legal advice in response to outside inquiries. As a general matter, the agency does have broad discretion when issuing a license to ensure that the issuance of the license would not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. (See, for example, 10 CFR 50.40(c)). Many NRC licensees are, among other things, subject to personnel access authorization requirements in 10 CFR Part 73 (for all nuclear power plants) and 10 CFR Part 37 (for many materials licensees). More information on these programs is available on the NRC website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/. We hope this helps.

Neil Sheehan NRC Public Affairs (610) 337-5331 From: james.lampert@comcast.net [1]

Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 10:49 AM To: Sheehan, Neil <Neil.Sheehan@nrc.gov>

Cc: 'Mary Lampert' <mary.lampert@comcast.net>; james.lampert@comcast.net

Subject:

[External Sender] Licensee Qualifications Neil:

As I read Appendix B to Part 73, reactor security personal cannot have any felony convictions involving the use or a weapon or that reflect on his or her reliability. 37.25 apparently requires that any individual having unescorted access must have been determined to be trustworthy and reliable; and fitness-for-duty seems to incorporate this requirement since it says that employees must have previously been granted unescorted access. It also seems that there is a more-general requirement that licensee conduct background checks to support determinations of trustworthiness and reliability; and that trustworthiness and reliability determinations are prerequisite to any individual being allowed unescorted access to category 1 or category 2 quantities of a licensees radioactive material.

My question is fairly simple: Do NRC rules, regulations or policy require a licensee itself to have been determined to be trustworthy and reliable? If so, what are the applicable rules, regulations or policy?

The NRC apparently does look at a licensees technical qualifications and financial responsibility, but I could not find any trustworthy and reliable requirement or any kind of back-ground check.

To pose what should be an absurd example, would current NRC rules, regs and policies allow licenses to be issued to a Mafia organization that had very large financial assets and technical expertise?

Thanks as usual for your help.

Jim Lampert

26 Electronic Mail To: Mr. Kevin Kamps kevin@beyondnuclear.org

SUBJECT:

CONCERNS REGARDING HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL (ALLEGATION NO. NMSS-2018-A-0018)

Dear Mr. Kamps:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has completed its follow up in response to the concerns you brought to our attention on July 30, 2018 regarding Holtec Internationals Consolidated Interim Storage Facility in New Mexico. You were concerned about attempted bribery by the Holtec International CEO, and numerous design and fabrication issues with Holtec casks. The enclosure to this letter restates your concerns and describes the NRCs review and conclusions with regard to each concern.

Thank you for informing us of your concerns. Closure of an allegation does not prevent us from revisiting a concern, especially if we obtain new information. Allegations are an important source of information in support of the NRC's safety mission. We take our safety responsibilities to the public very seriously and will continue to do so within the bounds of our lawful authority. We feel that our actions in this matter have been responsive to your concerns and plan no further action. If, however, new information is provided that suggests that our conclusions should be altered, we will reevaluate that information to determine if additional evaluation is indicated.

If you believe there was NRC employee misconduct involved in the handling of this allegation, you may contact the NRC Office of the Inspector General (OIG) by any of the following methods:

1.

Telephone: 1-800-233-3497 (OIG Hotline Number)

2.

Online submission: http://www.nrc.gov/insp-gen/complaint.html

3.

In Writing:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Inspector General Hotline Program, Mail Stop O5-E13 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Should you have any additional questions, or if we can be of further assistance to you, please contact me at 301-287-9423 or Sarenee Hawkins at301-287-9292, or email us at HQ_Allegations@nrc.gov.

December 20, 2018

27 Sincerely,

Enclosure:

As stated Dori L. Willis, Senior Allegation Coordinator Headquarters Allegation Team Office of Enforcement

28 STATEMENT OF CONCERNS ALLEGATION NO. NMSS-2018-A-0018 CONCERN 1:

The CEO of Holtec International attempted to bribe an Exelon quality assurance auditor.

NRC Response:

In response to your concern, technical staff in the NRCs Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) reviewed the regulations in Part 71, Packaging And Transportation Of Radioactive Material, and Part 72, Licensing Requirements For The Independent Storage Of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, And Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste, in order to determine whether NRC regulations address bribery of a licensee employee by a vendor employee. The NRC staff determined that NRC regulations do not specifically address bribery. However, bribery or attempting to bribe a person could directly impact an individuals state of mind while committing another violation against NRC regulations in a deliberate manner. Since you did not provide specific information and/or details pertaining to any activities that would be in violation of NRC regulations, NRC staff determined that we are unable to evaluate this concern.

Additionally, based on the information that you have provided, the recipient of the attempted bribe is deceased and therefore, not available to provide any additional information regarding the attempted bribe.

CONCERN 2:

A former lead quality assurance (QA) auditor for Exelon identified numerous major design and fabrication issues during a QA inspection of Holtec International (the cask designer) and its subcontractors.

NRC Response:

In order to review your concern, NMSS staff reviewed all reports of NRC inspections at the Holtec facility from 2000 to 2004 that assessed Holtecs Quality Assurance activities related to the design and fabrication of NRC licensed dry fuel storage systems. In addition, NMSS staff reviewed other NRC files that discussed these concerns. Overall, NRC staff determined through the review of the aforementioned documents that your concerns were assessed during the previous inspection activities. Although in some cases the documentation was not specific to the exact concern, all general topic areas were shown to have been reviewed by the NRC. The NRC determined that your concerns did not provide any new information which would prompt the NRC to take any additional actions. Therefore, the NRC was not able to substantiate that any of the major design and fabrication issues that were identified during the 1999 -

2000 QA inspection of Holtec International were not already identified and addressed by Holtec International.

ENCLOSURE

29 EXHIBIT 2 ILLUSTRATIVE ARTICLES SUPPORTING CONTENTION Bribery, Fraud, Lies, Corruption - Blacklisted SNCL

1. Company to decommission US reactors has corruption history http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2018/8/5/company-to-decommission-us-reactors-has-corruption-history.html

• Lavalin is embroiled Canadian Crown federal charges for fraud, embezzlement and bribery and blacklisted from doing business with the World Bank's global contracts.

• that history to date arrives with serious allegations and findings of corruption and fraud in the corporations business dealings that now need airing with regard to the pending Oyster Creek nuclear decommissioning deal and several others also on CDIs new agenda.

• According to Torontos Globe and Mail newspaper, SNC Lavalin Group Inc. is scheduled for a preliminary hearing in Canada in September or October over federal corruption and fraud charges. The Crown prosecutor has combined two cases against SNC that focus on the embezzlement of funds, bribery and wrongdoing for lucrative contracts in Libya between 2001 and 2011. A former senior executive is named in one case and SNC and several subsidiaries are named in the other.

• SNC has acknowledged wrongdoing with assurances that sweeping ethics changes are now in place.

• World Bank debarred the corporation and 100 of its affiliates in 2013 for 10 years from further Bank contracts. This followed misconduct involving conspiracy to pay bribes and bidding misrepresentations involving Bank-financed contracts in Bangladesh and Cambodia in violation of procurement guidelines. The SNC Lavalin sanction from 2013 to 2023 is the longest-running financially punitive action taken by the World Bank.

According to the Banks related press release, This case is testimony to collective action against global corruption.

2. The Strange Story Behind the SNC-Lavalin Affair, Ian Austen, Feb. 15, 2019 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/world/canada/snc-lavalin-justin-trudeau.html

• Seven years ago, Elisabeth Malkin, my colleague in Mexico City, and I worked on one of the strangest stories of my career. It involved a consultant from Mount Forest, Ontario, with no previous experience in the Middle East being sent by construction and engineering firm SNC-Lavalin to assess the turmoil in Libya that eventually led to the overthrow of its dictator, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.

• For $100,000, the consultant, Cynthia Vanier, wrote a five-page report condemning the NATO-led bombing campaign against Colonel Qaddafis forces.

She wound up in a Mexican jail, charged with trying to smuggle the dictators son into that country, and remained there for 18 months.

• It was among a series of episodes that exposed widespread corruption at SNC-Lavalin, led to the firing of its top executives (several of whom were arrested) and raised questions about the survival of the company.

30

• SNC-Lavalins time with the Qaddafi family is at the heart of a political mess confronting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just eight months before a federal election.

• It began over a week ago when The Globe and Mail, citing anonymous sources (subscribers only), reported that when Jody Wilson-Raybould was justice minister, Mr. Trudeau or his aides pressured her to cut a deal that would allow SNC-Lavalin to escape a criminal conviction for bribery in Libya. That was followed this week by the announcement of an

• Lets step back for a quick overview of SNC-Lavalins troubled history, and where Trudeaus current problem may lead:

• SNC-Lavalin -What did it do? The current controversy comes from charges laid by the police four years ago. They accuse the company of paying 47.7 million Canadian dollars in bribes to officials in Libya to win contracts there, and of defrauding the Libyan government and its agencies of 129.8 million Canadian dollars.

• But thats not all. In 2013, the World Bank banned SNC-Lavalin from bidding on contracts for a decade to settle a corruption inquiry into its activities in Bangladesh.

An Indian government investigation showed that the company paid bribes there where it built a major hydroelectric dam.

• Back home, Pierre Duhaime, SNC-Lavalins former chief executive, pleaded guilty this month to charges related to tens of millions of dollars in bribes the company paid to secure the contract to build a hospital complex in Montreal. A public official has pleaded guilty to taking bribes from SNC-Lavalin that landed it the contract to renovate the landmark Jacques-Cartier bridge in Montreal.

• How has it responded? Publicly, the companys new management claims all bribery and all other forms of lawbreaking are in its past.

• Privately, it has heavily lobbied politicians at all levels of government and in all parties. The company was looking for changes to criminal law that would allow it to dodge a conviction by paying a large fine and proving that it now has clean hands the United States and Britain have similar remediation agreements.

• While it made no link, the Trudeau government introduced just such a change to the Criminal Code last March, burying it in the hundreds of pages of the federal budget bill.

• SNC-Lavalin has been actively pushing for a way to avoid a criminal conviction in a corruption and bribery case.

• What are the allegations against Mr. Trudeau? According to The Globe and Mail, his office improperly pushed Ms. Wilson-Raybould to get federal prosecutors to drop the criminal case and use the new settlement system.

• The prosecution service is supposed to do its work free of the influence of politicians. Justice ministers in Canada, in their dual role as attorney general, can give prosecutors orders. But thats only supposed to happen in exceptional cases and the law requires the government to make those orders public through an official notice.

• In the end, however, nothing happened. SNC-Lavalin is still heading to court.

31

3. HOT GARBAGE GRIFTERS: SNC-LAVALINS PLAN TO TURN NUCLEAR WASTE INTO LONG-TERM GOLD-FULL STORY: THE ENERGY MIX @THEENERGYMIX https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/March 10, 2019, Paul Mckay https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/

• In 2013, following sordid proof of bribery and kickback schemes from Libya to Bangladesh, the World Bank banned SNC-Lavalin and its 100 global affiliates from bidding on contracts for 10 years.

• In 2018, the federal election watchdog reported the company had made more than $117,000 in illegal political donations (the lions share of which went to the Liberals) by secretly conscripting employee donations and routing them through obscure pathways. In January 2019, a disgraced company executive pleaded guilty to orchestrating the illegal election finance scheme.

4. The secretive role of SNC-Lavalin in the Site C dam l The Narwhal https://thenarwhal.ca/the-secretive-role-of-snc-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/

• SNC-Lavalin which has been banned from World Bank infrastructure contracts for 10 years following allegations of bribery schemes in Bangladesh

• On Wednesday, a Quebec judge ruled that SNC-Lavalin must stand trial on charges of fraud and corruption for allegedly paying $47.7 million in bribes to public officials in Libya between 2001 and 2011. The RCMP has also charged SNC-Lavalin, its construction division and a subsidiary with one charge each of fraud and corruption for allegedly swindling almost $130 million from various Libyan organizations.

5. https://www.cbc.ca/1.5153429 @jonmontpetit

• There is enough evidence against SNC-Lavalin for the engineering corporation to be tried on fraud and bribery charges, a Quebec Court judge has ruled

6. CBC News, Feb 3 2019 SNC-Lavalin should be barred from federal contracts: MP Charlie Angus-Call comes after two former executives pleaded guilty to breaking laws Elizabeth Thompson https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snc-lavalin-contracts-angus-1.5003135

• NDP Member of Parliament Charlie Angus is calling on the federal government to block SNC-Lavalin from competing for government contracts after two executives pleaded guilty to charges in recent weeks. (CBC)

• The Canadian government should suspend engineering giant SNC-Lavalin from competing for future federal government contracts after two former top executives pleaded guilty to charges in recent weeks, says NDP MP Charlie Angus.

• "How is it that a company with such a horrific record of corporate malfeasance is able to obtain so many government contracts and continue to bid on government contracts?" said Angus. On Friday, former SNC-Lavalin CEO Pierre Duhaime pleaded guilty to breach of trust in a plea deal that resulted in 20 months of house arrest, 240 hours0.00278 days <br />0.0667 hours <br />3.968254e-4 weeks <br />9.132e-5 months <br /> of community service and a $200,000 donation to a fund for victims of crime. His trial had been scheduled to begin Monday.

32

• The prosecution dropped 14 other charges, including forgery, conspiracy and fraud.

Duhaime is the fourth person to plead guilty in connection with the $1.3 billion contract to build Montreal's McGill University Health Centre, including SNC-Lavalin's former vice-president of construction.

• In late November, the company's former vice-president Normand Morin pleaded guilty to charges of violating Canada's election financing rules through an elaborate scheme that sent more than $117,000 to the federal Liberal and Conservative parties and to individual candidates

• Under federal elections law, companies are not allowed to contribute to parties or candidates. The scheme allowed SNC-Lavalin to circumvent the law by making political donations through employees, who were then reimbursed by the company through "false refunds for personal expenses or payment of fictitious bonuses," according to the 2016 compliance agreement between the federal Commissioner of Elections and SNC-Lavalin.

• Angus, however, said he believes SNC-Lavalin should be suspended from further government contracts until the full details of the election financing scheme are clarified.

• In a letter to the government sent after CBC News revealed that Morin had quietly pleaded guilty, Angus said SNC-Lavalin has faced charges of corruption and bribery of politicians and other public officials in multiple countries and was debarred from World Bank-financed contracts.

• In an interview with CBC News, Angus said he doesn't buy the company's argument.

"To simply say that was the old crew, we're the new crew, doesn't cut it," he said. "Either we have standards for corporate ethical behaviour about compliance with the law and respect for the law, or Canada is just a Wild West place.

7. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/cynthia-vanier-began-plotting-gaddafi-sons-escape-in-early-2011-snc-lavalin

• By 2014, SNC-Lavalins overseas construction manager Ben Aissa was in jail in Switzerland and SNC-Lavalin agent Cynthia Vanier was jailed in Mexica for fraud, bribery, and human trafficking, having using $1.8 million of SNC-Lavalins money to provide forged documents to Saadi and his family.

• Citing a pattern of corruption on the part of SNC-Lavalin, in 2013 the World Bank banned SNC and its affiliates for 10 years from bidding on any projects financed by the Bank.

• SNC-Lavalins CEO Pierre Duhaime resigned in 2012 and was shortly arrested by Montreal police for fraud and other crimes.

• Criminal charges were laid against senior SNC-Lavalin executives from 2014 to 2019 for bribery (amounting to $22.5 million) in connection with the construction of the McGill superhospital.

• SNC-Lavalin is also being investigated for potential criminal activity in connection with a contract to repair Montreal's Jacques Cartier Bridge (early 2000s).

• A SNC-Lavalin ex-VP pleaded guilty in 2018 to orchestrating an elaborate scheme of illegal political donations, with $117,000 funnelled through the bank accounts of SNC-Lavalin employees who were reimbursed from corporate funds with disguised book-keeping entries utilizing specialized secret codes.

• A Wake-Up Call

33

• Canadians should pay attention to what is going on. If indeed SNC-Lavalin has a crooked corporate culture that cannot be cured, should they be trusted to put the public interest ahead of their own bottom line?

Holtec

8. Bribery: HOT GARBAGE GRIFTERS: SNC-LAVALINS PLAN TO TURN NUCLEAR WASTE INTO LONG-TERM GOLD-FULL STORY: THE ENERGY MIX

@THEENERGYMIX https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/March 10, 2019, Paul Mckay https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold

• Holtec paid a US$2-million fine related to bribery payments to a convicted federal utility manager, and was the subject of scathing safety reviews by a U.S. quality assurance engineer who was later terminated for suspected whistleblowing. A federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission specialist in nuclear cask

safety, Dr.

Ross

Landsman, contemporaneously concluded: As far as I am concerned, Holtec has no quality assurance.

This is the same kind of thinking that led to the NASA Space Shuttle disaster.

9. Misrepresentations/False Statements: ProPublicas May 23, 2019 report, A False Answer, a Big Political Connection and $260 Million in Tax Breaks https://www.propublica.org/article/holtec-international-george-norcross-tax-breaks

• Holtec International gave false answer in a 2014 New Jersey tax break application connected to political boss George E. Norcross III, a Holtec board member. Five days after WNYC and ProPublica asked about it, lawyers called it "inadvertent" and asked the state to correct it. "A company that won the second-largest tax break in New Jersey history gave a false answer about being prohibited from working with a federal agency in sworn statements made to win $260 million in taxpayer assistance for a new plant in Camden.

34

• review by WNYC and ProPublica found that Holtec International CEO Kris Singh responded no on certified forms submitted to the state in 2014 that asked if the applicant had ever been barred from doing business with a state or federal agency. The forms were submitted to the New Jersey Economic Development Authority as part of the companys successful application for tax breaks.

• "In fact, the international nuclear parts manufacturer was caught up in a contracting investigation at the federally owned Tennessee Valley Authority. In 2010, Holtec was barred for 60 days from doing any federal business and paid a $2 million administrative fine to the TVA, according to an agency report. Holtecs debarment marked the first time the agency had taken such action against a contractor.

• If the relevant authority determined there was a misrepresentation, they can terminate the grant, they can seek fines and penalties and in circumstances where there is information about a willful failure to disclose, obviously theres a possibility of criminal penalties as well,

10. Misrepresentations/False Statements: THE REAL BOSSES OF NEW JERSEY How Unelected Officials Run Your Government https://www.propublica.org/series/the-real-bosses-of-new-jersey In January 2014, as Holtec International explored sites for a new national headquarters and high-tech manufacturing center, the New Jersey company told state officials that the Garden State had stiff competition.

A number of other states, including Ohio and South Carolina, had offered robust proposals to persuade the nuclear technology firm to relocate, said Holtec CEO Kris Singh in his sworn application to the New Jersey Economic Development Authority.

Generous tax breaks from New Jerseys new economic development program, he argued, could place Camden on a level playing field with Holtecs other suitors. In return, the firm pledged the retention of 160 jobs and the creation of an additional 235 positions. Six months later, the EDA awarded the company $260 million in taxpayer assistance the second-largest tax break in state history.

What Holtec didnt reveal, though, was that just weeks before filing its application in New Jersey, Ohio had stripped the company of tax credits there for failing to create the jobs it had promised as part of a similar program. According to records obtained by WNYC and ProPublica, none of the 200 positions it had pledged in 2009 to bring to Orrville, a small town about 20 miles outside Akron, ever materialized.

Holtec, in particular, has become Exhibit A in a program that critics have blasted for what they say is fraud and mismanagement. In May, WNYC and ProPublica discovered that the company had given a misleading sworn statement; it falsely answered no about once being barred from working with a federal agency, a situation that could have jeopardized its application. After the story, state officials put Holtecs tax break on hold and

35 announced an investigation into the firm. Holtec has said that it made an inadvertent mistake that it would like to correct.

Potential actions, subject to a board vote, could include reductions in awards, suspensions of tax breaks or terminations of incentives.

In the case of Holtec, the company told New Jersey that sites in Ohio, South Carolina and Pennsylvania would cost $5 million to $7 million a year less in rent and labor costs. In comparison to other states that are successfully wooing manufacturing investment to their territories, New Jersey has high site acquisition and construction costs, high labor cost, relatively high cost of living and high property taxes, Singh, the CEO, wrote.

But nowhere in Holtecs 49-page application did the company provide details on the tax incentives from those other states. Emails released by the EDA show that staffers at the agency did, in fact, ask Holtec to supply specifics.

What evidence can you provide to demonstrate incentive offers of competing states including the abatement of real estate taxes? staffers Kevin McCullough and Justin Kenyon asked Holtec in April 2014, four months after the company lost its Ohio tax break.

Nick Abraczinskas, Holtec's vice president of contracts, offered no details though. The discussions with South Carolina have been focused on tax abatement on the potential facility, which we are not allowed to provide the details of that offer due to confidentiality, he wrote.

Contacted by WNYC and ProPublica, a spokeswoman for the South Carolina Department of Commerce said there was no record of an application by Holtec for tax incentives there. And a regional development group said that while Holtec was one of several nuclear technology firms looking to locate at a federal site on the Savannah River, talks were preliminary and no offer was made.

In December 2013, the Ohio Tax Credit Authority stripped Holtec of its tax breaks on the recommendation of state economic development officials. At the time, records show, Holtec had actually reduced the number of employees there, from 102 to 98.

WNYC and ProPublica reached out to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue with questions about Holtec's application for tax incentives in the state, but the information is considered confidential under Pennsylvania's Right-to-Know Law.

This year, every company that received a New Jersey tax break has been asked to go through recertification.

Pellerin said the EDA has the right to disqualify any firm from getting tax breaks if it provides false information to the state. The task force reported that more than $500 million in incentives have either been voluntarily terminated or may be subject to termination.

36

11. Misrepresentations/False Statements: Letter State of New Mexico Commissioner Public Lands to Dr. Singh, June 19. 2019 (Emphasis added)

June 19, 2019 Krishna Singh President and CEO Holtec International Krishna P. Singh Technology Campus 1 Holtec Blvd. Camden, NJ 08104

Dear Dr. Singh:

I write regarding Holtec International's stated plans to build and operate a nuclear waste storage facility in westem Lea County, New Mexico, near the Eddy County line. In the course of applying for a 40-year permit from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to deposit in New Mexico up to 120,000 metric tons of highly radioactive waste from nuclear facilities across the United States, Holtec has stated that its proposal enjoys "overwhelming support" in the state. In fact, a number of New Mexico industry associations, from the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association to the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, recently have expressed serious concerns about-and in some instances outright opposition to-Holtec's proposal. Along with elected officials and non-profit organizations, they have raised significant questions about the effect of the proposed nuclear waste storage site on New Mexico's oil and gas industry, farm and ranch economy, and environment. This letter will not restate those concerns, which are a matter of public record.

Instead, as New Mexico's Commissioner of Public Lands, with direct oversight of mineral leasing at the location of Holtec's planed facility, I write to express my safety concerns and to address several misrepresentations that Holtec has made to the NRC and New Mexicans about its control of the proposed disposal site as well as agreements that it claims to have secured from New Mexico State Land Office mineral lessees. The State Land Office has reviewed a number of Holtec's submissions to the NRC, including the company's Facility Environmental Report (FER) and Safety Analysis Report (SAR). Those submissions contain statements that have the potential, intended or not, to mislead federal regulators and the public alike, and require immediate correction.

The site for Holtec's proposed nuclear waste facility (the Site) is located in Section 13, Township 20 South, Range 32 East, and portions of Section 17 and 18, Township 20 South, Range 33 East, between the cities of Hobbs and Carlsbad. Holtec has repeatedly and publicly characterized the Site as under its control. See, e.g., FER 2.2.1. In fact, the subject land is a split estate; while Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, LLC privately owns the surface estate, the State of New Mexico, through the New Mexico State Land Office, owns the mineral estate.

The State Land Office's control of the Site's mineral estate is not disclosed in the FER or other NRC submissions. To the contrary, in its filings with the NRC, Holtec appears to have entirely disregarded the State Land Office's authority over the Site's mineral estate. Holtec sent notice of its initial license application in March 2017 to over 60 elected and appointed government officials, but failed to include the State Land Office. The company's subsequent filings continue to ignore the State Land Office's legal interest in the Site. For example, Table 1.4.1 of the FER lists all applicable regulatory requirements,

37 permits and required consultations-but conspicuously omits any reference to the State Land Office.

As you know, the Site is located within the Permian Basin, one of the world's most productive oil and gas-producing regions, and there is significant oil and gas development (as well as potash mining) in the Site's immediate vicinity. Holtec claims throughout its NRC submissions that it has secured the agreements of mineral lessees on or near the Site to forebear from certain development activities. For instance, Section 2.4.2 of the FER states that "[b]y agreement with the applicable third parties, the oil drilling and phosphate extraction activities have been proscribed at and around the site and would not affect the activities at the site." Along similar lines, Section 2.6.4 of the SAR notes: "With regard to potential future drilling on the Site, Holtec has an agreement [2.6.9] with Intrepid Mining LLC (Intrepid) such that Holtec controls the mineral rights on the Site and Intrepid will not conduct any potash mining on the Site.

Additionally, any future oil drilling or fracking beneath the Site would occur at greater than 5,000 feet depth, which ensures there would be no subsidence concerns [2.1.8]."

Holtec's claim that it has secured third-party agreements for control of the Site is incomplete at best. Site control generally refers to ownership of, or a leasehold interest in, a right to develop a particular tract of land. Holtec does not "control" the "mineral rights on the Site." Instead, Holtec only has an agreement with a single company, Intrepid, relating to that company's potash mining-an agreement that has yet to be approved by the State Land Office, under whose authorization Intrepid conducts its mining activities on the Site. The State Land Office's oil and gas lessees, meanwhile, confirm they have not entered into agreements with Holtec to suspend or limit their oil and gas development to accommodate Holtec's planned nuclear waste disposal facility. In addition, there are other mineral resources potentially present on the Site that may fall within the State Land Office's mineral estate that are not addressed in Holtec's filings at all.

In addition to misstating its control over the Site, Holtec also treats as a foregone conclusion the State Land Office's ability and desire to restrict oil and gas drilling on the Site. Holtec, through the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, has proposed that the State Land Office impose a negative easement called a "land use restriction or condition" on all mineral development on the Site, including a ban on oil and gas development between the surface and a depth of 3,000 feet, and a prohibition on any directional or horizontal wells bottomed beneath the site that Holtec believes might "disturb or conflict" with its use of the site. The State Land Office has not approved any such restriction, which would likely trigger legal challenges from businesses that already are conducting operations on the Site pursuant to their existing mineral leases.

The State Land Office's oil and gas leases on and adjacent to the Site do not impose any depth restrictions on drilling activities. Contrary to Holtec's assurances that "any future oil drilling or fracking

... would occur at greater than 5,000 feet depth," the State Land Office's analysis demonstrates the existence of numerous active oil and gas wells within a three-mile radius of the Site at depths of 5,000 feet or less.

38 In addition, two of the State Land Office lessees on or immediately adjacent to the Site, COG Operating, LLC and EOG Resources, Inc., raise significant concerns about the proposed project and the land use restriction that Holtec requires, particularly its implications for salt water disposal wells, pipelines, and horizontal wells underneath the Site that Holtec might determine-using unknown criteria - will "disturb or conflict" with its nuclear waste storage operations. Both companies advise that they will explore all legal options if the State Land Office were to impose a restriction on oil and gas activities that are permitted under their current leases, along the lines of what Holtec seeks. For those reasons, it is difficult to take at face value Holtec's representation in its May 23, 2019 letter to the State Land Office that "Oil and Gas is not affected by the facility."

The International Atomic Energy Agency appears to share the State Land Office's and its lessees' concerns about the unknown interaction between nuclear waste storage and preexisting oil and gas development on the very same tract of land. In a 2007 publication, it explains that"[a]ny potential site will require an adequately controlled single-use land area to accommodate storage facilities," and that potential waste disposal sites should "avoid land with exploitable mineral and energy resources." International Atomic Energy Agency, Selection of Away-From-Reactor Facilities for Spent Fuel Storage: A Guidebook, IAEA-TECDOC-1558 (Sept. 2007) at 3.2.2 (pp. 23-24) (emphases added). Despite Holtec's assurances to the NRC and to New Mexicans, it does not appear that your company has undertaken a thorough and critical analysis of the possible conflicts between your nuclear waste storage proposal and the vital economic activities that are already taking place on the Site.

Finally, while I appreciate Holtec's attendance at a February 19, 2019 meeting at the State Land Office to overview the company's plans, a number of serious questions that I and my staff raised at that meeting remain unanswered. Holtec to date has not responded to our inquiry about the effects that its proposed operations will have on oil and gas lessees' present or future fracking activities. In addition, we asked Holtec to identify the worst-case scenario for an accident or other adverse event at the Site, and explain how the company would respond to such a contingency. To date, we have not received any meaningful response to this inquiry, an omission that requires the State Land Office to assume that Holtec has not sufficiently analyzed the risks posed by its planned operations or is unwilling to do so.

If Holtec's proposal moves forward, nuclear waste likely would remain in southeastern New Mexico until 2048 at the earliest, and possibly much longer since there is no designated permanent repository anywhere in the nation for high-level radioactive waste. As the Commissioner of Public Lands, I am deeply concerned about the misrepresentations Holtec made to the NRC about purported agreements and restrictions regarding mineral leasing at the Site that do not exist and may very well never ever exist. Understanding the extent of oil and gas operations and other mining activities that may be conducted at the Site is essential to accurately assessing the risks of Holtec's planned nuclear storage operations. Holtec's NRC filings are materially inaccurate in this regard. Given these safety concerns, and lack of consideration for the State Land Office's fiduciary responsibilities, I do not believe that Holtec's proposed nuclear storage project is in the best interests of the State Land Office, its lessees, and its beneficiaries.

39 Sincerely, Stephanie Garcia Richard Commissioner of Public Lands cc:

Hon. Rick Perry Secretary, United States Department of Energy Hon. Kristine Svinicki Chair, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hon. Michelle Lujan Grisham Governor of the State of New Mexico Quality Assurance Holtec

12. HOT GARBAGE GRIFTERS: SNC-LAVALINS PLAN TO TURN NUCLEAR WASTE INTO LONG-TERM GOLD-FULL STORY: THE ENERGY MIX @THEENERGYMIX https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold/March 10, 2019, Paul Mckay https://theenergymix.com/2019/03/10/hot-garbage-grifters-snc-lavalins-plan-to-turn-nuclear-waste-into-long-term-gold

• San Onofre: Holtec made design changes to its casks without notifying the utility or the federal regulator. Only a few had been filled before workers noticed a loose bolt which could jam hot fuel bundles, or puncture the metal cask lining, or prevent future inspections or removal of spent fuel. Work was stopped for 10 days and the NRC was notified. It in turn ordered Holtec to stop supplying casks with the modified design, but many had already been delivered to other nuclear plant sites.

• Then fuel transfers were halted again because inexperienced Holtec employees allowed a 50-ton Holtec canisterfilled with hot spent fuel bundlesto be dangerously misaligned as it was being lifted by a crane and inserted into a vault at the San Onofre site. The NRC reprimanded Holtec sharply for lax training and oversight related to the incident.

• The episodes illustrate the vanishingly small margins of error when dealing with nuclear wastes. Luckily, no leak or accident occurred at San Onofre. But the errant four-inch stainless steel bolt (and the unauthorized cask design change by Holtec) was discovered only by chance, just as 43 identical Holtec casks were waiting to be filled at San Onofre. Others had already been filled at nuclear sites from New England to Alabama.

40

13. JUSTIN TRUDEAU FACES CALLS TO RESIGN RE: SNC-LAVALIN SCANDAL As reported by Newsweek. February 28, 2019 Holtec is also infamous for QA (Quality Assurance) violations in the manufacture of its irradiated nuclear fuel canisters, brought to light by whistleblowers.

And Holtec CEO Krishna Singh has also made racist remarks re: his own African American and Puerto Rican American workers in Camden, NJ. (Singh excuse workmanship)

Underbidding or Securing No-Bid Contracts SNCL

14. The secretive role of SNC-Lavalin in the Site C dam l The Narwhal https://thenarwhal.ca/the-secretive-role-of-snc-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/

The embattled company is reaping millions in public money from no-bid contracts for British Columbias third hydro dam on the Peace River a project that is already billions of dollars over budget Sarah Cox May 30, 2019

• SNC-Lavalin has received approximately $120 million in direct award Site C dam contracts, obscuring the embattled engineering firms role in building the largest publicly funded infrastructure project in B.C.s history.

• For one contract, SNC-Lavalin provided BC Hydro with a shadow estimate number-crunching to confirm BC Hydros figure for its forecasted $8.335 billion price tag for the dam, The Narwhal found after reviewing Site C documents.

• The estimate proved to be wildly wrong, missing the mark by $2 billion.

• SNC-Lavalin also grossly underestimated cost of Muskrat Falls dam

• SNC-Lavalin also played a major role in the cost estimate for the hugely over-budget Muskrat Falls dam on the lower Churchill River in Labrador, now the subject of a two-year inquiry to determine why the project proceeded.

• SNC-Lavalin supplied about 70 per cent of the information for Muskrat Falls base cost estimate of $6.2 billion, according to testimony at the inquiry.

• The dams price tag subsequently swelled to $12.7 billion, leaving Newfoundlanders facing untenable hydro rate hikes unless the federal government steps in to bail out the cash-strapped province.

• SNC-Lavalins Canadian track record: low-balling cost estimates

41

• Dermod Travis, executive director of Integrity BC, a non-partisan organization working to ensure government integrity and accountability, said the Muskrat Falls and Site C dams are far from the first time that SNC-Lavalin has low-balled cost estimates for projects in Canada.

15. The secretive role of SNC-Lavalin in the Site C dam, June 4, 2019 https://countysustainabilitygroup.com/2019/06/04/the-secretive-role-of-snc-lavalin-in-the-site-c-dam/

• Site C dam costs likely over $10 billion, completion date in doubt.

• missing the mark by $2 billion.

Money Over Public Health, Safety, Environment SNCL

16. SNC-Lavalin controversy reaches into Manitoba, DAVE TAYLOR, Winnipeg Free Press, March 14, 2019 http://ee.winnipegfreepress.com/?publink=2ef3059f4

• Canadians should watch with great trepidation as SNC-Lavalin and partners make plans for the operation and decommissioning of Canadas nuclear labs.

• SNC-Lavalin is one of four partners in the Canadian National Energy Alliance, which operates the Pinawa site and is intent on filling the defunct radioactive reactors remains with concrete. The alliance intends to monitor the sarcophagus for a mere 100 years and leave future generations to clean up the mess that will eventually occur when the radioactivity leaches into the Winnipeg River.

• It has altered the original decommissioning plan significantly, cutting corners to save money. Deteriorating concrete canisters next to the Winnipeg River will be emptied, and these 46 truckloads of high-level radioactive waste will accompany another 2,000 shipments of low-and intermediate-level waste through the Whiteshell and Kenora. The ultimate destination is a poorly designed near-surface disposal facility in Chalk River, Ont.

17. Winnipeg Free Press: SNC-Lavalin Controversy Reaches into Manitoba, March 17, 2019 https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/snc-lavalin-controversy-reaches-into-manitoba-507129682.html

• in 2014, just before the Trudeau government came to power, the Harper administration gave SNC-Lavalin and its US and UK corporate partners management control over $8 billion in federally-owned nuclear waste liabilities, with a mandate to reduce those liabilities as quickly and cheaply as possible. Most of the waste is at three sites: Port Hope on the shore of Lake Ontario, Chalk River on banks of the Ottawa River, and the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment at Pinawa in Manitoba.

• True to form, SNC-Lavalin and its consortium partners operating under the banner of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has announced radical new plans for dealing with Ottawas multi-billion -dollar waste problems lickety-split. Instead of carefully dismantling the highly radioactive structures of two shut-down nuclear reactors in Manitoba and Ontario, and removing all the radioactive debris from the site, as previously planned, the consortium will simply dump all the long-lived radioactive components into the sub-basement of the reactor building and flood the interior with quick-setting cement, turning those structures into concrete radioactive waste dumps right beside the Winnipeg and Ottawa Rivers. Many of the dozens of human-made

42 radioactive materials housed within will remain dangerously radioactive for thousands of years, and the concrete structures will never last that long.