ML22090A249
| ML22090A249 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/2022 |
| From: | Roth D NRC/OGC |
| To: | NRC/OCM |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-277-SLR, 50-278-SLR, ASLBP 19-960-01-SLR-BD01, RAS 56377 | |
| Download: ML22090A249 (6) | |
Text
March 31, 2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
BEFORE THE COMMISSION
In the Matter of
CONSTELLATION ENERGY GENERATION Docket Nos. 50-277 -SLR LLC (F/K/A EXELON GENERATION 50-278-SLR COMPANY, LLC)
(Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3)
NRC STAFFS RESPONSE TO VIEWS ON PRACTICAL EFFECTS
INTRODU CTION
Pursuant to the Commissions direction in CLI-22-4, 1 the NRC Staff hereby provides its
response to the views of Beyond Nuclear, Inc. 2 and the views of Constellation Energy
Generation, LLC (Constellation) 3 concerning the practical effects of (1) the subsequent renewed
licenses continuing in place and (2) the previous renewed licenses being reinstated.
DISCUSSION
Beyond Nuclear asserts that if Constellations subsequent renewed licenses remain in
place, it signals that the NEPA process will not result in any meaningful insights or changes, and
therefore weighs in favor of vacating the extended license in its entirety, and restoring the initial
1 Exelon Generation Co., LLC (Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3), CLI-22-4, 95 NRC __
(Feb. 24, 2022) (ADAMS accession no. ML22055A557).
2 Beyond Nuclear s Response to Constellation Energy Generation, LLCs Petition for Partial Reconsideration of CLI-22-04 and Beyond Nuclear s Views in Response to CLI 04 (Mar. 17, 2022)
(ML22076A089) (Beyond Nuclear s Views).
3 Constellations Response to Commission Request for Views in CLI-22-04 (Mar. 21, 2022)
(ML22080A250) (Constellations Views).
2
renewed licenses. 4 However, the Commission has already determined that under some
circumstances it may allow a license to remain in place while the agency cures a National
Environmental Policy Act (N E PA) deficiency. 5 With respect to the Peach Bottom subsequent
renewed licenses, the Commission has stated its expectation that there is sufficient time to cure
the NEPA deficiency. 6
Beyond Nuclear also argues, in part, that it would not be appropriate for the
Commission to reinstate all of the now -outdated safety programs that applied to the initial
license renewal term. 7 Instead, Beyond Nuclear asserts that [h]aving completed a safety
review and offered a hearing on Constellations revised Aging Management Plan (AMP), the
Commission may declare that Constellations initial renewed license has effectively been
amended, with the required procedures for fairness and due process, to incorporate the revised
A M P. 8 Beyond Nuclear s argument that the Commission may sua sponte convert a license
renewal proceeding into a license amendment proceeding while still respecting the required
procedures and due process 9 lacks merit. As the Commission noted in Oyster Creek, a license
4 Beyond Nuclear s Views at 14. Beyond Nuclear also asserts that the NRC suppressed evidence (the Ramuhalli report). Id. at 12. This claim is baseless, as reflected by the recitation of the record Beyond Nuclear itself provides. See id. at 4. In any case, Beyond Nuclear used the Ramuhalli report (original and as revised) as part of Beyond Nuclear s hearing request, which was denied by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Exelon Generation Co., LLC (Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3),
LBP-19-5, 89 NRC 483 (2019) (ML19171A159); aff d, Peach Bottom, CLI-20-11, 92 NRC 335 (2020); revd on other grounds, Peach Bottom, CLI-22-4, 95 NRC __.
5 Powertech (USA), Inc. (Dewey-Burdock In Situ Uranium Recovery Facility), CLI-19-1, 89 NRC 1, 6 (2019)
(stating in part Until Powertech can lawfully use its NRC license, the risk of harm occurring to any Tribal cultural resources that is traceable to the identified NEPA deficiency will remain hypothetical....
Continuing to leave Powertechs license in place for now thus appears to us to be the approach most consistent with the courts opinion. ). Notably the Commission did not attempt here to set forth a comprehensive formula for addressing any future circumstances in which significant NEPA deficiencies are found through our hearing process after staff issuance of a license under 10 C.F.R. § 2.1202(a).
Powertech, CLI-19-1, 89 NRC at 10- 11.
6 Peach Bottom, CLI-22-4, 95 NRC at __ (slip op. at 4).
7 Beyond Nuclear's Views at 10- 11, 14-16.
8 Id. at 15.
9 Beyond Nuclear s Views at 15 (asserting this would be consistent with Amergen Energy Co., LLC (Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station), CLI-08-13, 67 NRC 396, 400 (2008)).
3
renewal may be set aside (or appropriately conditioned) even after it has been issued, upon
subsequent administrative or judicial review. 10 I f a renewed license is subsequently set aside,
the operating license previously in effect will be reinstated. 11 The Commission never intended
10 C.F.R. § 54.31(c) to suggest that if a renewed license were somehow set aside upon appeal,
the licensee could not continue operating under its previous operating license. 12 Oyster Creek
does not hold that the Commission can convert a proceeding involving the review of an
application for a subsequent renewed license into a proceeding concerning the sufficiency of the
current license. 13 Instead, the process for raising concerns about the sufficiency of the current
license is the 10 C.F.R. § 2.206 process; license renewal applications are licensing actions and
are not considered under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206. 14 If Beyond Nuclear believes that either Peach
Bottom unit would not be safe to operate under the reinstated renewed licenses, then Beyond
Nuclear may request action under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206. 15
In contrast, Constellation argues that reinstating the previous Peach Bottom licenses
would eliminate the subsequent license renewal license conditions that, among other things,
require compliance with enhanced aging management programs, with the result being that the
licensee would not be required to comply with those programs. 16 Constellation further asserts
that each of the forty-four aging management programs and fifty c ommitments in the aging
10 Oyster Creek, CLI 13, 67 NRC at 400.
11 10 C.F.R. § 54.31(c). The regulation states in part that the license previously in effect will be reinstated unless its term has expired and the renewal application was not filed in a timely manner, but those factors are not relevant here because, as the Commission noted in Peach Bottom, CLI-22-4, 95 NRC at
__ (slip op. at 3), the previous Unit 2 and Unit 3 licenses expire on August 8, 2033, and July 2, 2034, respectively.
12 Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal, 56 Fed. Reg. 64,943, 64,964 (Dec. 13, 1991).
13 Oyster Creek concerned a motion for the Commission to refrain from making a final decision on the issuance of a renewed license. Oyster Creek, CLI-08-13, 67 NRC 396.
14 Carolina Power & Light Co. (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1), DD-07-3, 65 NRC 643, 644 (2007).
15 See Nextera Energy Seabrook, LLC (Seabrook Station, Unit 1), CLI-19-7, 90 NRC 1, 3 (2019).
16 Constellation's Views at 5.
4
management program would have to be individually evaluated[,] and those based solely on
subsequent license renewal would be removed. 17 Constellation argues that reinstating the
superseded initial renewed licenses would create a s ituation where Peach Bottom would be
authorized to continue to operate in the subsequent period of extended operation under the
timely renewal provisions but would no longer be required to comply with the commitments to
effectively manage aging effects during such extended operation. 18 Constellation states that it
is not clear how to restore or address changes to the licensing basis if the previous licenses
were reinstated. 19 The Staff agrees that the previous superseded licenses did not require (and,
if reinstated, would not require) the licensee to implement the new and enhanced programs
developed for subsequent renewal. 20 The Staff also agrees that reconciling the licensing basis
under a reinstated license would be complex. 21
17 Id.
18 Id.
19 Id. at 6.
20 NRC Staff Views on the Practical Effects of (1) The Subsequent Renewed Licenses Continuing In Place and (2) The Previous Licenses Being Reinstated, at 8 (Mar 21, 2022) ( ML22080A274).
21 Id. at 9-10.
5
CONCLUSION
The Staff notes that Beyond Nuclear and Constellation appear to agree that the
enhanced subsequent license renewal aging management programs are preferable to the
previous programs required by the superseded initial renewed licenses but disagree as to how
to retain them. The Staff's view is that maintaining the subsequent renewed licenses is the
simplest, most efficient way to continue requiring those enhanced aging management programs
found desirable by both Beyond Nuclear 22 and Constellation.
/Signed (electronically ) by/
David E. Roth Counsel for NRC Staff Mail Stop: O A44 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Telephone: (301) 287 -9121 E-mail: David.Roth@nrc.gov
Dated this 31st day of March 2022
22 The Staff understands that maintaining the subsequent renewed licenses is not what Beyond Nuclear advocates. See Beyond Nuclear s Views at 16.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
BEFORE THE COMMISSION
In the Matter of
CONSTELLATION ENERGY GENERATION Docket Nos. 50-277 -SLR LLC (F/K/A EXELON GENERATION 50-278-SLR COMPANY, LLC)
(Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3)
Certificate of Service
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R § 2.305, I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing NRC STAFFS
RESPONSE TO VIEWS ON PRACTICAL EFFECTS, dated March 31, 2022, have been served
upon the Electronic Information Exchange ( the NRCs E-Filing System), in the captioned
proceeding, this 31st day of March 2022.
/Signed (electronically) by/
David E. Roth Counsel for NRC Staff Mail Stop: O A44 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Telephone: (301) 287 -9121 E-mail: David.Roth@nrc.gov Dated this 31st day of March 2022