ML19353D419

C-10 Research and Education Foundation'S Response to Nextera'S Motion for Leave to File Responsive Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

ML19353D419
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/19/2019
From:	Curran D C-10 Research & Education Foundation, Harmon, Curran, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-443-LA-2, ASLBP 17-953-02-LA-BD01, RAS 55487
Download: ML19353D419 (2)

Text

December 18, 2019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

)

In the Matter of )

NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC ) Docket No. 50-443 (Seabrook Station, Unit 1) )

_____________________________________)

C-10 RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FOUNDATIONS RESPONSE TO NEXTERAS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE RESPONSIVE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(c), C-10 Research and Education Foundation (C-10) hereby responds to NextEra Energy Seabrook LLCs (NextEras) Motion for Leave to File Responsive Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Dec. 13, 2019) (NextEra Motion). C-10 responds as follows:

1. C-10 consents to the filing of Sections I.A.2, I.A.3, and I.A.4 of NextEra Seabrook LLCs Responsive Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Dec. 13, 2019)

(Responsive Proposed Findings) because they correctly state facts that have changed and rulings by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) that have been issued since C-10 filed its own Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on November 21, 2019 (corrected on November 27, 2019).

2. C-10 consents to the filing of the three paragraphs in Section I.B., because they respond to C-10s interpretation of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) legal decisions that were cited for the first time in C-10s Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. While C-10 does not agree with NextEras interpretation of those authorities, C-10 sees no unfairness in giving NextEra an opportunity to address the relevance of those cases.

3. C-10 does object to the filing of paragraph I.A.1 and Sections C through I, in which NextEra claims to correct erroneous statements in C-10s proposed findings. NextEra Motion at 2. NextEra has failed to justify its motion. Contrary to NextEras arguments, C-10 has not misrepresented the factual record of the case, nor has C-10 failed to support its factual assertions with record citations. Id. C-10s proposed findings are thoroughly documented, cogently stated, and presented in an organized outline form.

There is no doubt that C-10 and NextEra have very different perspectives on the adequacy of NextEras license amendment request to satisfy NRC safety regulations. But all parties have had an adequate opportunity to present their evidence and differing views of that evidence in their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Granting NextEra an additional opportunity to set forth its own views is not warranted.

In the alternative, if the Board should determine that NextEra has justified its request to submit additional proposed factual findings, C-10 requests an opportunity to submit reply findings by January 15, 2020. (Dr. Saouma has a January 11, 2020 manuscript deadline.)

Respectfully submitted,

__/signed electronically by/___

Diane Curran Harmon, Curran, Spielberg, & Eisenberg, L.L.P.

1725 DeSales Street N.W., Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20036 240-393-9285 dcurran@harmoncurran.com December 18, 2019 2