ML21054A320
| ML21054A320 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 02/23/2021 |
| From: | Gill W, Leidich A, Doris Lewis, Lovett A, Raimo S Balch & Bingham, LLP, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Entergy Nuclear Palisades, Entergy Services, Holtec Decommissioning International, Holtec, Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman, LLP |
| To: | NRC/OCM |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-255-LT-2, 72-007-LT, License Transfer, RAS 55984 | |
| Download: ML21054A320 (6) | |
Text
February 23, 2021 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Commission In the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-255 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Entergy )
Nuclear Palisades, LLC, Holtec International, )
and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC)
)
(Palisades Nuclear Plant) )
)
Applicants Opposition to Dont Waste Michigan, et al.s Motion to Extend Filing Deadline I. Introduction Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(c), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., on behalf of itself, Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC, Holtec International, and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC (Applicants) submits this answer opposing the February 23, 2021 motion of Dont Waste Michigan, Beyond Nuclear, and Michigan Safe Energy Future (collectively, Petitioners) to extend the deadline for filing hearing requests in this proceeding. 1 Petitioners claim that the deadline should be extended due to purportedly voluminous historical documents that have been added to NRCs ADAMS since January 12, 2021. As discussed below, Petitioners have failed to demonstrate good cause to delay the proceeding, as the documents in question largely appear to be documents transmitted from the legacy system, and thus were previously available, and Petitioners have not shown that any bear on its ability to file a hearing 1
Dont Waste Michigan, et. al., Motion to Extend Deadlines for Filing of Intervention Petitions and Public Comments in Palisades License Transfer Proceeding (Feb. 23, 2021) (hereinafter, Motion).
4836-9257-4173.v1
request. In addition, Petitioners have made no effort to consult as required by the NRC rules or to justify this eleventh-hour request.
II. Legal Standard The Commissions rules require good cause for an extension request. 2 As the Commission has explained, the Commission expects adherence to its hearing procedures and recognizes that applicants are entitled to prompt resolution of disputes concerning their applications. 3 Accordingly, the Commission has stated that extensions should only be granted when warranted by unavoidable and extreme circumstances. 4 This is especially true when, as in this case, the parties are proceeding under the Commissions Subpart M procedures. 5 Without good cause, failure to comply with the NRCs deadlines is inexcusable.
III. Petitioners Fail to Meet the Good Cause Requirement Foremost, Petitioners fail to demonstrate unavoidable and extreme circumstances sufficient to justify an extension of the deadline in this case. First, the documents in question are not new. Petitioners claim that the documents have recently been placed for the first time in the NRCs ADAMS online archive. 6 That is not the case. A brief review demonstrates that these archival documents are repetitive of files already available on request through NRCs Legacy ADAMS system. 7 It appears that many of the documents were placed in Legacy ADAMS 2
10 C.F.R. § 2.307(a).
3 Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, CLI-98-12, 48 N.R.C. 18, 19 (1998).
4 Id. at 21. See also Baltimore Gas & Elec. Co. (Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-98-25, 48 N.R.C. 325, 342 (1998), petition for review denied sub nom., Natl Whistleblower Ctr. v. NRC, 208 F.3d 256, 264 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Tennessee. Valley Authority (Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-10-26, 72 N.R.C. 474, 476 (2010).
5 Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers, Final Rule, 63 Fed. Reg. 66,721, 66,722 (Dec. 3, 1998) (The procedures are designed to provide for public participation . . . while at the same time providing an efficient process that recognizes the time-sensitivity normally present in transfer cases).
6 Motion at 2.
7 Revealing the Document/Report column in ADAMS shows the documents Accession number from Legacy ADAMS.
2 4836-9257-4173.v1
starting in 2001, thus they have, in fact, been available to the public on request for nearly 20 years. The documents are now being digitized as part of agency efforts to ingest more than 42 million images of Atomic Energy Commission and NUDOCS microforms and paper to improve access. 8 This digitization effort is not extreme, unavoidable, or even unique. It is occurring across the agencys legacy files. If the NRCs digitization of documents available in the Legacy system were considered grounds for an extension, then there would be grounds for continuous extensions across agency proceedings until the digitization process is complete. This cannot be the case.
Second, Petitioners make no effort to show that these documents are relevant or needed to formulate a hearing request. Petitioners only speculate as to the potential relevance of these documents. Petitioners admit that the archival material is potentially important to the publics understanding of matters at Palisades or the documents may have direct relevance to understanding the decommissioning plans at Palisades. 9 This does not indicate that any of the purportedly new archival documents will impact the hearing requests in this proceeding. Indeed, Petitioners fail to identify a single, new archival document with relevance to this matter. Such speculative assertions as to the mere possibility that relevant material may exist cannot be enough to establish an unavoidable or extreme circumstance sufficient to delay the proceeding.
Finally, Petitioners have provided no reason for waiting until the last minute to move for this extension. Petitioners affiant Michael Keegan admits that he has been searching ADAMS for weeks, and during those recent weeks has encountered literally hundreds of documents 8
USNRC, Congressional Budget Justification, Fiscal Year 2021, NUREG-1100, Vol 36 at 87 (ADAMS Accession No. ML20024D764).
9 Motion at 3.
3 4836-9257-4173.v1
related to Palisades from the 1980s to the present. 10 Thus, there is no reason for Petitioners to wait until the day before the deadline to file a request for an extension, when the asserted grounds for that request have been known to them for weeks.
Nor have Petitioners provided any justification for ignoring the consultation requirement set forth in the NRCs rules. The motion rule, at 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(b), requires that the moving party must make a sincere effort to contact other parties in the proceeding and to resolve the issue(s) raised in the motion, before filing a motion. The motion must be rejected if it does not include a certification that the moving party met this requirement. Petitioners did not meet this requirement, and Applicants were not consulted prior to the filing of the Motion. That failure, by itself, is sufficient justification for the Motion to be denied.
IV. Conclusion For all of the foregoing reasons, Petitioners Motion to Extend the Filing Deadline should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
/Signed electronically by Anne R. Leidich/
Anne R. Leidich David R. Lewis PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: 202-663-8707 Facsimile: 202-663-8007 anne.leidich@pillsburylaw.com david.lewis@pillsburylaw.com 10 Declaration of Michael Keegan at 1 (Feb. 23, 2021).
4 4836-9257-4173.v1
/Executed in Accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)/
Susan H. Raimo ENTERGY SERVICES, LLC 101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Washington, D.C. 20001 Operations, Inc (202) 530-7330 and Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC sraimo@entergy.com
/Executed in Accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)/
Alan D. Lovett BALCH &BINGHAM LLP 1710 Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, AL 35203-2015 (205) 226-8769 alovett@balch.com
/Executed in Accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)/
William F. Gill IV HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL 1 Holtec Boulevard Counsel for Holtec International Camden, NJ 08104 and Holtec Decommissioning (856) 797-0900 International, LLC w.gill@holtec.com 5
4836-9257-4173.v1
February 23, 2021 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Commission In the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-255 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Entergy )
Nuclear Palisades, LLC, Holtec International, )
and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC)
)
(Palisades Nuclear Plant) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., on behalf of itself, Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC, Holtec International, and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC Opposition to Dont Waste Michigan et al.s Motion to Extend the Filing Deadline has been served through the EFiling system on the participants in the above-captioned proceeding this 23rd day of February 2021.
/signed electronically by Anne R. Leidich/
Anne R. Leidich 4836-9257-4173.v1