|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARU-602875, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Rule for Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors1997-11-21021 November 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Rule for Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors U-602719, Comment Supporting Proposed Communication;Gl 97-XX, Assurance of Sufficient Net Positive Suction Head for ECCS & Containment Heat Removal Pumps1997-03-20020 March 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Communication;Gl 97-XX, Assurance of Sufficient Net Positive Suction Head for ECCS & Containment Heat Removal Pumps ML20136F2841997-03-11011 March 1997 Memorandum & Order (Terminating Proceeding).* Grants Southwestern Electric Cooperative 970311 Motion to Terminate Proceeding & Dismisses 970228 Petition for Leave to Intervene.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 970311 ML20136F3281997-03-0707 March 1997 Establishment of Atomic Safety & Licensing Board.* Board Being Established in Following Proceeding to Rule on Petitions for Leave to Intervene And/Or Requests for Hearings.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 970307 ML20136F3561997-02-28028 February 1997 Petition for Leave to Intervene of Southwestern Electric Cooperative,Inc.* Requests That Commission Grant Petition for Leave to Intervene & Grant Other Relief as Commission Deems Appropriate.W/Certificate of Svc U-602603, Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors1996-06-21021 June 1996 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors U-602559, Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matl.Proposes Changes to Wording of Pr1996-02-27027 February 1996 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matl.Proposes Changes to Wording of Pr U-602408, Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Plant Shutdown & Low Power Operations.Requests Addl Period for Public Comment Be Made Available1995-02-0101 February 1995 Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Plant Shutdown & Low Power Operations.Requests Addl Period for Public Comment Be Made Available ML20071N4861994-07-21021 July 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-59 Re Changing 10CFR50 & 73 for Frequency W/Which Licensee Conduct Independent Reviews & Audits of Safeguards Contingency Plan & Security Program from Every 12 Months to Every 24 Months ML20056G3351993-08-27027 August 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Review of 10CFR2.206 Process U-601930, Comment Opposing Draft Rev 1 to NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Sys - 10CFR50.72 & 50.73,Clarification of NRC Sys & Guidelines for Reporting1992-01-30030 January 1992 Comment Opposing Draft Rev 1 to NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Sys - 10CFR50.72 & 50.73,Clarification of NRC Sys & Guidelines for Reporting JSP-860-90, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty1990-10-30030 October 1990 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty ML20043F9941990-06-0606 June 1990 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55, Coordinating Revs of FSAR W/Refueling Cycles.Approval of Rulemaking Change Would Provide for More Logical & Timely Basis for Incorporating Plant Procedure Changes in Future U-601249, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Nuclear Plant License Renewal (NUREG-1317)1988-10-21021 October 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Nuclear Plant License Renewal (NUREG-1317) ML20204J3461988-10-20020 October 1988 Order Imposing Civil Monetory Penalty in Amount of $75,000. Violation a Occurred as Stated.For Violation C,Violation Most Appropriately Classified at Severity Level IV & Should Be Removed as Violation Supporting Civil Penalty ML20205Q9141988-10-20020 October 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Commission Statement on Fitness for Duty of Nuclear Power Personnel. Commission Requested to Reconsider Efforts Prior to Issuing Final Rule ML20247N7531988-07-28028 July 1988 Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-53 Requesting NRC Action to Review Undue Risk Posed by BWR Thermal Hydraulic Instability.Nrr Should Issue Order Requiring All GE BWRs to Be Placed in Cold Shutdown for Stated Reasons ML20196C5481988-06-0707 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re leak-before-break (LBB) Technology.Believes That Extension of LBB Technology to Performance Requirements for Emergency Core Cooling Sys Appropriate U-601050, Advises That Util Endorses BWR Owners Group 870820 Comments on Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document1987-09-30030 September 1987 Advises That Util Endorses BWR Owners Group 870820 Comments on Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document ML20206J2131987-04-10010 April 1987 Transcript of 870410 Public Meeting,Discussion/Possible Vote in Washington,Dc Re Full Power OL for Plant.Pp 1-73. Supporting Documentation Encl ML20135H3381985-09-11011 September 1985 Order Revoking CPPR-138 ML20133N7801985-08-0707 August 1985 Unexecuted Indemnity Agreement B-91 ML20129A8351985-07-11011 July 1985 Memorandum & Order Terminating Proceeding Per 850517 Motion on Grounds of Mootness.Requests ASLB Authorize NRR to Rescind CPPR-138.Served on 850712 ML20126F1611985-06-13013 June 1985 Memorandum & Order Directing Any Party Wishing to Examine Photographs to File Request W/Aslb by 850701.Photographs Deal w/850611 Memorandum & Order Requesting Addl Info on Unit 2 Excavation.Served on 850614 ML20126A0141985-06-11011 June 1985 Memorandum & Order Requiring NRC to Provide ASLB & Parties W/Photographs,Maps & Accompanying Explanations Referred to in G Laroche 850606 Affidavit Re Evacuation.Served on 850612 ML20126C3271985-06-11011 June 1985 Order Directing NRC Provide ASLB W/Photographs,Maps & Accompanying Explanations Referred to in 850606 Affidavit of Germain Laroche Addressing Environ Conditions of Excavation Site.Served on 850612 ML20125B3021985-06-0606 June 1985 Affidavit of G Laroche Re Environ Conditions of Site,Berm Const & Site Stabilization.Prof Qualifications,Se Turk Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20125B2631985-06-0606 June 1985 Response to Applicant 850517 Motion to Terminate Proceeding. No Opposition Offered,Subj to Two Listed Site Redress Conditions.G Laroche Affidavit Encl ML20128P7311985-06-0303 June 1985 Notice of Filing of Answer to Applicant Motion to Terminate Proceeding ML20128P7401985-05-29029 May 1985 Response to Applicant Motion to Terminate Proceeding.No Objections Offered.Method Applicant Proposed for Remediating Unit 2 Excavation Area Questioned.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20127G1901985-05-17017 May 1985 Motion to Terminate Proceeding,Due to 831018 Cancellation of Unit & 850409 Withdrawal of Application for OL & Request for Rescission of CPPR-138.All Stabilization Work Described in FSAR Completed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20114D0281985-01-28028 January 1985 Notice of Filing of Joint Stipulation.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20114D0441985-01-28028 January 1985 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20099D2701984-11-15015 November 1984 Third Supplemental Response to State of Il First Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20099D2921984-11-15015 November 1984 Third Supplemental Response to State of Il Second Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20099D2561984-11-15015 November 1984 First Supplemental Response to Prairie Alliance First Round of Discovery.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20099C6261984-11-15015 November 1984 Supplemental Responses to Applicant Interrogatories Re Contentions 2 & 3.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20097G2291984-09-18018 September 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence ML20097G2071984-09-18018 September 1984 Notice of Change of Address & Telephone Number.Related Correspondence ML20098A3921984-09-11011 September 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094P6621984-08-13013 August 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20090E5021984-06-28028 June 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20090E4831984-06-28028 June 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092J8221984-06-22022 June 1984 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20091R9621984-05-31031 May 1984 Notice Forwarding NRC Region III Re Independent Design Review.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20090L2101984-05-22022 May 1984 Notice of Appearance of SL Johnson.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20087P8451984-04-0404 April 1984 Second Supplemental Response to State of Il First Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20087P8201984-03-23023 March 1984 Second Supplemental Response to State of Il Second Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20086T9881984-03-0202 March 1984 Notice of Filing of Joint Stipulation in OL Hearing ML20080Q4241983-10-0606 October 1983 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl 1997-03-07
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20125B2631985-06-0606 June 1985 Response to Applicant 850517 Motion to Terminate Proceeding. No Opposition Offered,Subj to Two Listed Site Redress Conditions.G Laroche Affidavit Encl ML20128P7401985-05-29029 May 1985 Response to Applicant Motion to Terminate Proceeding.No Objections Offered.Method Applicant Proposed for Remediating Unit 2 Excavation Area Questioned.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20127G1901985-05-17017 May 1985 Motion to Terminate Proceeding,Due to 831018 Cancellation of Unit & 850409 Withdrawal of Application for OL & Request for Rescission of CPPR-138.All Stabilization Work Described in FSAR Completed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071E9881983-03-11011 March 1983 Response Opposing Prairie Alliance 830305 Affidavit Opposing Applicant 830117 Motion for Summary Disposition or for Continuance Pending Discovery.Rules Prohibit ASLB Consideration of Late Filed Affidavit.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070V3241983-02-11011 February 1983 Answer Opposing Applicant Motion That Discovery Not Be Had Re Prairie Alliance 830128 Request for Documents.No Good Cause Shown Why Discovery Should Not Be Had.Supporting Statements Irrelevant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20070T2041983-02-0303 February 1983 Answer Opposing Applicant Motion for Summary Disposition of Prairie Alliance Contention Vi.Motion Fails to Resolve & Address All Issues of Fact Raised in Contention.All Relevant Documents Not Available to Alliance.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028G2571983-02-0202 February 1983 Motion for Protective Order That Discovery Not Be Had Re Prairie Alliance 830128 Request for Production of Documents on Contention Vi.Motion for Summary Disposition Shows No Remaining Issue of Fact on Contention.W/Certificate of Svc ML20028E3841983-01-17017 January 1983 Motion for Summary Disposition of Prairie Alliance Contention Vi.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists & Util Entitled to Favorable Decision.Statement of Matl Fact Encl ML20028E3161983-01-17017 January 1983 Response in Opposition to Prairie Alliance 830105 Motion to Compel Production of Documents on Contention Vi.No Genuine Issue of Fact Exists Re Contention Vi.Applicants Entitled to Summary Disposition as Matter of Law.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070M1621983-01-0505 January 1983 Motion to Compel Util Production of Documents.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20071P1831982-10-29029 October 1982 Motion to Withdraw as Prairie Alliance Atty.Prairie Alliance Does Not Have Ability to Pay Prof Expenses Incurred,Is Unwilling to Incur Addl Prof Expenses & Desires to Resume Member Coordination.Proof of Svc Encl ML20058J1501982-08-0202 August 1982 Response to 820608 Suppl to Applicant 820422 Motion for Protective Order.Aslb Ruling on Motion Should Be Deferred Unless Parties Disagree on Extent of Disclosure.Proposed Protective Order Encl.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054E6481982-06-0808 June 1982 Suppl to 820422 Motion That Discovery Not Be Had Re Production of Any Documents Re Quality Rept Sys.State & Applicants Are Negotiating on Method & Conditions for Disclosure of Quality Matters ML20054E7231982-06-0707 June 1982 Reply to Prairie Alliance 820513 Answer to Applicant 820505 Motion That Hearings Be Held in Clinton,Il.Lists Blatant Inaccuracies & Omissions in Prairie Alliance Answer That Must Be Corrected.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054E7201982-06-0707 June 1982 Request for Leave to File Reply to Prairie Alliance Answer to Applicant Motion That Evidentiary Hearing Be Held in Clinton,Il.Misstatements & Omissions of Fact Need to Be Corrected ML20052G8281982-05-13013 May 1982 Answer Opposing Applicant 820504 Motion to Hold Evidentiary Hearings in Clinton,Il.Primary Purpose of Motion Is to Cause & Maximize Inconvenience to Intervenors.Applicant Reasons W/O Merit.Proof of Svc Encl ML20051W6401982-05-12012 May 1982 Answer Opposing State of Il 820429 Motion to Allow Discovery on Prairie Alliance Contention 2.Further Discovery Unnecessary Due to Broad Scope of Il Prior Requests & Util Obligation to Suppl Requests.W/Certificate of Svc ML20052F4021982-05-0606 May 1982 Initial Response to Applicant 820422 Motion for Protective Order.Aslb Should Defer Ruling on Motion Until Notified of Parties' Inability to Resolve Issues & State of Il Filed Substantive Response.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052F4091982-05-0404 May 1982 Motion for Evidentiary Hearing to Be Held in Clinton,Il. Strong Public Support Exists for Hearings to Be Held in Clinton & Adequate Facilities Exist to Accommodate Hearings. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052E5801982-04-29029 April 1982 Motion to Allow Discovery on Events Re Prairie Alliance Contention 2 That Have Been Reported or Occurred Since 811111 Cutoff of Second Round Discovery Requests.Addl Problems W/Qa/Qc Plan Discovered.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052A4741982-04-22022 April 1982 Motion for Protective Order Re Production of Documents on Quality Rept Sys.Sys Based on Util vice-president/plant Personnel Agreement That Repts Would Be Confidential. Disclosure Would Breach Trust.W/Certificate of Svc ML20054B7501982-04-12012 April 1982 Brief Supporting Prairie Alliance 820326 Supplemental Contentions.Proof of Svc Encl ML20050C3381982-03-31031 March 1982 Supplemental Motion Answers to Second Request for Production of Documents.Aslb 820216 Order Covers Matl Sought.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20050A5381982-03-26026 March 1982 Motion for Leave to File Statement of Issues Per 10CFR2.715(c).Issues Re Qa/Qc Program & Evaluation for Adverse Sys Interaction Meet Procedural Requirements of Specificity.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K1821982-03-23023 March 1982 Suppl to Answer to Applicant Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 5 & NRC Motion to Defer Consideration. Genuine Issue of Fact Exists Re Whether Applicant Performed ATWS Analysis.Proof of Svc Encl ML20049K0861982-03-23023 March 1982 Suppl to 811221 Answer Opposing Applicant Motion for Summary Disposition of Prairie Alliance Contention 5.ASLB in Perry Case Refused to Dismiss ATWS Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0321982-03-23023 March 1982 Answer Supporting NRC Motion for Dismissal of Prairie Alliance Contention 5.Contention Is Generic & Lacks Requisite Nexus W/Plant & Therefore Fails to Meet Specificity Requirements.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20040C0361982-01-15015 January 1982 Answer Opposing State of Il Motion to Compel Answers to Il Second Set of Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents.Each Document Specifically Identified as Relevant to Particular Interrogatory.W/Certificate of Svc ML20039G0351982-01-0606 January 1982 Motion for Protective Order Re Prairie Alliance Discovery of Documents Containing Confidential,Research,Development or Commercial Info ML20039D7341981-12-31031 December 1981 Motion for Order Compelling Applicants to Answer Second Set of Interrogratories.General Attempt at Compliance W/First Round Discovery Requests Does Not Foreclose More Specific Requests.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20039D8331981-12-31031 December 1981 Motion for Leave to File Motion to Compel Answers to Second Set of Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents.Circumstances Prevented Motion from Being Filed on 811230.Affidavit & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039C2421981-12-21021 December 1981 Answer to Applicants' 811125 Motion for Summary Disposition of Prairie Alliance Contention 5 & to NRC 811207 Motion to Defer Consideration of Motion.Motion Should Be Deferred Until SER Issuance.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039C2461981-12-21021 December 1981 Answer Opposing Applicant Motion for Summary Disposition of Prairie Alliance Contention 5.Statement of Matl Fact as to Which There Is Genuine Issue to Be Heard & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039B7981981-12-15015 December 1981 Motion for Protective Order Disallowing Discovery Re Interrogatories Objected to in Prairie Alliance Partial Second Round of Discovery ML20039B8011981-12-15015 December 1981 Motion for Protective Order Disallowing Discovery Re Interrogatories Objected to in State of Il Second Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009B2571981-07-0808 July 1981 Answer to 810626 Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery.Any Delay at This Time Increases Likelihood of Addl Delay Later in Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20008G1661981-06-25025 June 1981 Joint Motion for Extension of Time Until 810727 to Complete Discovery Per ASLB 810601 Memorandum & Order.Extension Would Not Seriously Jeopardize Timely Completion of Proceeding. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20002E5541981-01-26026 January 1981 Answer Opposing Prairie Alliance Suppl to Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Suppl Fails to Present Justifiable Contention or Cure Defects in Original Filing. Certificate of Svc & Notices of Appearance Encl 1985-06-06
[Table view] |
Text
,
- h69 9
f June 6,1985 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD DOCKETED In the Matter of. )
ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY, et al. Docket No. 50-462 OL'85 JtJN 10 A11 :57 (ClintonPowerStation, Unit 2) ygg ,
000aETyjGJ }E9V:U.
NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO APPLICANT'S MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDING On May 17, 1985, Applicant Illinois Power Company filed a " Motion
.to Terminate Proceeding" (" Motion"), in which it requested that the Licensing Board enter an Order (1) finding that this proceeding is moot, (2) authorizing the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to rescind Construction Pemit No. CPPR-138, and (3) terminating this i proceedingwithoutprejudice(Motion,at2).1/ The NRC Staff (" Staff")
herewith. submits its response to Applicant's Motion.
DISCUSSION As noted by the Applicant, Unit 2 of the Clinton Power Station has been cancelled, and the Applicant has requested that its operating license application be withdrawn and that its construction permit be 1/ Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 62.107, " withdrawal of an application after the issuance of a notice of hearing shall be on such terms as the presiding officer may prescribe." See, Oklahoma (Black Fox Station, Units 1 and_e.g_., 2), LBP-83-10, Public Service 17 NRC 410 Co. of (1983).
o 5061 850606 d0io500o*,2 )
PDR
L, 1
i rescinded (seeExhibit2toApplicant'sMotion).Inlightofthe cancellation of Unit 2, the Staff concurs with the Applicant that this adjudicatory proceeding has been rendered moot, and we agree that the Applicant's Motion should be granted. On this basis, Counsel for the Staff has previously authorized the Applicant to represent that the l
Staff does not object to the grant of Applicant's Motion. At the same time, the Staff wishes to place on the record of this proceeding our i views as to certain conditions for environmental re' dress of the Unit 2
- ite, which we believe should be required by the Board as conditions for the dismissal of this proceeding.
As set forth in the Affidavit of Germain LaRoche, attached hereto, t
. following the Staff's receipt in April 1985 of Applicant's request that i its application be withdrawn and its construction permit rescinded, the Staff performed a review to determine whether any provisions for the protection of the environment should be required (Affidavit, at 2).
I
' The Staff reviewed the present environmental conditions of the site, p as well as relevant portions of the Final Safety Analysis Report, the l Environmental Report, and the draft Environmental Protection Plan for l
l Unit I which was submitted for Staff review on May 14,1985(Id.).
The Unit 2 site lies entirely within the Unit 1 exclusion area, on property owned by the Applicants, and is not visible to persons located i
outside the exclusion area. The site excavation, in overall dimensions, l is approximately 40 feet in depth, 350 feet in width, and 1350 feet in length (including the elongated area at the south end of the site in j which a gravelled access road, approximately 450 feet long, descends to the bottom of the excavation). The bottom of the excavation is approxi-
- . mately 900 feet in length and 280 feet in width. One side of the exca-vation abuts the radwaste, control and diesel buildings for Unit 1.
Portions of the north and south sides of the excavation are covered by a
{
l revetment composed of a grout intrusion blanket. The remaining portions of the north and south sides and the east side of the excavation are 4
sloped and.are stabilized by herbaceous vegetation. A drain at the bottom of the excavation empties into the cooling pond; the elevation of the cooling pond is 690 feet above MSL, while the elevation at the !
j bottom of the drain is 695 feet above MSL. There is a flap gate in the drain to prevent backflow into tim . excavation from the cooling pond (Id.,at2-3).
The Unit 1 Applicants have comitted to construct a three-foot high -
t berm on the three exposed sides of the Unit 2 excavation, in order to prevent any flood waters from entering the excavation (FSAR I 2.5.4.14.4).
The Applicants have not yet informed the Staff whether the berm will be constructed of earth or concrete, or both. However, if the berm is to
.be constructed in whole or in part of earth, the Staff will require the Applicants to stabilize the berm with vegetation in order to prevent !
soil erosion (Id., at 3).
With the cancellation of Clinton Unit 2 the Unit 2 excavation will be considered as part of the Unit I site. As a condition to the
- licensing of Unit 1, the Applicants are required to submit an Environ-l mental Protection Plan (EPP) for review and approval by the Staff; upon approval, the EPP will be appended as Appendix B to the Unit 1 operating license. The EPP is to include a statement consistent with the following i
- provision contained in the draft EPP which was submitted for Staff review I
, . _ , . . . . , _ - _ _ , _ _ , , _ . _ _ , , _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . , - . _ , , , - - _ , , _ _ _ _ _,_-.-.._.,-,,,_.m_....__ -.
. on May 14, 1985:
If harmful effects or evidence of trends towards irreversible damage to the environment are observed, the licensee shall provide a detailed analysis of the data and a proposed course of action to alleviate the problem.
(Id.,at3-4). In addition, the EPP will provide, as does the draft EPP, that before engaging in additional construction or operational activities which may affect the environment, the licensee must prepare
- an environmental evaluation of such activity, if the activity has meas-urable environmental effects which are not confined to on-site areas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction.
When the evaluation indicates that the activity involves an unreviewed environmental question, prior approval of the activity must be obtained from the Director of NRR. When such an activity involves a change in the EPP, the activity and change to the EPP may be implemented only in accordance with an appropriate license amendment. The Staff considers that these provisions in the EPP provide an acceptable mechanism for addressing any unforeseen detrimental impacts as may occur in the future (Id.,at4).
The Staff is satisfied that the Unit 2 site is presently stabilized and does not present any significant adverse environmental impacts, and that the cancellation of Unit 2 does not pose any immediate detrimental environmental impacts. The Staff has concluded that the Applicants' commitment to construct a berm around the Unit 2 excavation provides a satisfactory means for ensuring the continued environmental acceptability of the site, provided that the berm is stabilized with vegetation, if
.. necessary, to prevent soil erosion. The Staff does not perceive any immediate need to fill the Unit 2 excavation and is satisfied, at least as of now, that the ultimate disposition of the Unit 2 excavation may be deferred for future consideration. If it should later appear that the excavation requires further redress, such action may be required by the Staff pursuant to the provisions contained in the Environmental Protection Plan for Unit 1 (Id., at 4-5).
In sum, the Staff is satisfied that no significant adverse envi-ronmental impacts are likely to result in the foreseeable future from the cancellation of Clinton Unit 2, and no further conditions for site redress are presently required except as described in the attached Affidavit (Id.,at5),whichconditionsaresummarizedbelow.2_/
CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above and in the attached Affidavit, the Staff does not oppose the grant of Applicant's Motion, subject to the following site redress conditions:
2/ The' Staff notes that on May 29, 1985, the People of the State of Illinois (represented by the Illinois Attorney General) filed an
" Answer to Applicant's Motion to Tenninate Proceeding", in which they requested the Board to require that "a detailed environmental, safety and cost assessment be conducted of Applicant's proposed method for remediating the Unit 2 excavation area, before that method is approved" (Answer, at 2). In view of the Staff's con-clusions that no significant adverse environmental impacts are likely to result in the foreseeable future from the cancellation of Unit 2, and that the conditions for site redress set forth herein provide a satisfactory means for ensuring the environmental acceptability of the site, the Staff considers that the study requested by the People is not required at this time.
- 1. The Applicant shall construct a berm around the Unit 2 excavation, in accordance with its FSAR commitments.
The Applicant shall stabilize the berm with vegetation if necessary to prevent soil erosion.
- 2. The Unit 2 excavation will henceforth be~ con-sidered as part of the Unit I site. The Environmental Protection Plan for Unit 1 shall be construed to apply to the Unit 2 excavation.
In accordance with 10 C.F.R. 9 2.107, the Staff recommends that the two conditions set forth above be made conditions of the Board's Order dismissing this proceeding.
Respectfully submitted, MA b/
Sherwin E. Turk Deputy Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 6th day of June,1985 J
I J