ML24067A096
| ML24067A096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/07/2024 |
| From: | Carrie Safford - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Annie Caputo, Crowell B, Christopher Hanson, David Wright NRC/OCM |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| ASLBP 24-981-01-SLR-BD01, RAS 56943, 50-250 SLR-2, 50-251 SLR-2 | |
| Download: ML24067A096 (8) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS:
Christopher T. Hanson, Chair David A. Wright Annie Caputo Bradley R. Crowell In the Matter of FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Units and )
Docket No. --SLR-
--SLR-CLI--
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This proceeding relates to the subsequent license renewal of Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Units and. The Licensing Board is considering the hearing request of Miami Waterkeeper.1 Before issuing a decision on the request, the Board certified a question for interlocutory review regarding the timing of the NRC Staffs issuance of the notice of opportunity for hearing in this proceeding.2 We accept the Boards certification and find the timing of the Staffs notice to be a reasonable interpretation of our instructions in CLI--.3 1 Request for Hearing and Petition to Intervene Submitted by Miami Waterkeeper (Nov.,
) (Hearing Request).
2 LBP--, NRC __, __ (Jan., ) (slip op. at ); see C.F.R. §.(f)().
3 See Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Oconee Nuclear Station, Units,, and ), CLI--,
NRC ().
BACKGROUND The NRC Staff issued a notice in the Federal Register announcing an opportunity for members of the public to request a hearing on the Staffs Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Draft SEIS).4 In response to that notice, Miami Waterkeeper requested that the Secretary of the Commission withdraw the Staffs notice of opportunity for hearing.5 The Secretary denied the request to withdraw the hearing notice as beyond the scope of her delegated authority under C.F.R. §. but granted Miami Waterkeeper a partial extension of an additional twenty days to file a hearing request.6 Miami Waterkeeper then filed a timely hearing request with five proposed contentions challenging the Draft SEIS.7 The Board held an initial prehearing conference to hear oral argument on the issues presented in Miami Waterkeepers hearing request.8 After oral argument, the Board issued an order certifying the following question for our consideration:
Should the NRC Staff have waited to issue the notice of opportunity for hearing until it completed the Final SEIS, and if so, how does that impact the conduct of this proceeding?9 4 See Florida Power & Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. and,
Fed. Reg., (Sept., ).
5 Email from Sydnei Cartwright, Miami Waterkeeper, to Brooke Clark, NRC (Oct. 30, 2023), at 1 (attaching Letter from Sydnei Cartwright, Miami Waterkeeper, to Brooke Clark, NRC (Oct. 27, 2023)) (ADAMS accession no. ML23305A127).
6 Order of the Secretary (Nov., ), at - (unpublished).
7 Hearing Request at -.
8 Licensing Board Order (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference) (Dec., )
(unpublished) (scheduling conference for January, ).
9 LBP--, NRC at __ (slip op. at ).
DISCUSSION Today we accept the Boards certification regarding the timing of the hearing notice. For the reasons outlined by the Board, we find that the Board raises a significant and novel issue whose early resolution will materially advance the orderly disposition of this proceeding.10 Therefore, we grant review of the Boards certified question.
In CLI--, we provided direction for five open subsequent license renewal proceedings.11 We directed the Staff to update the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS)12 so that it covers operations during the subsequent license renewal period.13 We also provided that applicants that do not wish to wait for the GEIS update and associated rulemaking could submit a revised environmental report providing information on environmental impacts during the subsequent license renewal period.14 In either case, the Staff would publish a site-specific environmental impact statement (EIS). We stated that:
After each site-specific review is complete, a new notice of opportunity for hearinglimited to contentions based on new information in the site-specific environmental impact statementwill be issued. This approach will not require 10 See LBP--, NRC at __ (slip op. at -); C.F.R. §.(f)() (A ruling referred or question certified to the Commission under §§.(l) or.(f) may be reviewed if the certification or referral raises significant and novel legal or policy issues, or resolution of the issues would materially advance the orderly disposition of the proceeding.). As the Board noted, resolution of the certified question would also materially advance the orderly disposition of other subsequent license renewal proceedings. Id. at & n.. Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club moved to withdraw the hearing notice as premature in the North Anna proceeding. Motion by Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club for Withdrawal of Premature Hearing Notice (Jan., ;
corrected Jan., ) (MLA, MLA).
11 Oconee, CLI--, NRC at.
12 Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (Final Report), NUREG-, rev., vols. - (June ) (MLA) (package).
13 Oconee, CLI--, NRC at.
14 Id. at.
intervenors to meet heightened pleading standards in C.F.R. §.(c) for newly filed or refiled contentions.15 As the Board noted, there are different views on what constitutes a complete site-specific environmental review and thus when the hearing notice should have been published.
Miami Waterkeeper asserted that the Staff should have published the hearing notice after the Staff completed its Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS) rather than after the Draft SEIS. In its view, the Staffs site-specific environmental review for Turkey Point is not complete until the Final SEIS is issued.16 Similarly, the Board emphasized that CLI-- used the phrase [a]fter each site-specific review is complete, which seems clear on its face: complete means complete, not substantially complete.17 The Board also points out that the sentence preceding this phrase provides for a public comment period during the development of the site-specific environmental impact statements, and that the process of developing an EIS is distinct from its completiondevelopment precedes completion.18 On the other hand, FPL argued that [i]n all material respects, the Staffs site-specific review of the applicants site-specific application materials is complete upon issuance of the draft SEIS. To complete the overall process, the Staff will then respond to public comments and make any necessary final adjustments before issuing the final SEIS.19 In addition, the Staff announced its intention to issue hearing notices after publication of draft site-specific EISs at a public meeting 15 Id.
16 Hearing Request at & n..
17 LBP--, NRC at __ (slip op. at ).
18 Id.
19 Florida Power & Light Company Answer in Opposition to Miami Waterkeeper Extension Request (Nov., ), at n..
held to describe its path forward on environmental reviews for subsequent license renewals.20 At the prehearing conference, the Staff acknowledged that this proceeding is unique and that it interpreted the language in CLI-- in a manner consistent with its usual practice of issuing hearing notices at the earliest stage, which is typically at the environmental report stage for reactor license renewals, but in this case, for the five subsequent license renewal applications listed in CLI--, it would be after publication of the Draft SEIS.21 We recognize that the language in CLI-- could be interpreted in different ways. After considering the views expressed by the Board and the participants, we find that the Staff reasonably interpreted the language in CLI-- as allowing the issuance of hearing notices after draft site-specific EISs were complete. While the circumstances surrounding this subsequent license renewal proceeding (as well as the other four proceedings covered in CLI--) are unusual, the Staff appropriately adapted its ordinary practice of announcing hearings at the earliest opportunity to promote efficiency. Consideration of public comments is an important part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. We hesitate to narrowly interpret the language in CLI-- as requiring that the notices of hearing be issued after the consideration of public comments and publication of final EISs, in effect identifying that stage as the completion of the NEPA process. Even a final EIS can be supplemented before the agency issues its record of decision. For example, the Staff may issue a supplemental EIS based on new and significant circumstances or information arising after the publication of the 20 Id. (referring to August, public meeting); see Public Meeting Announcement, Public Meeting on Path Forward for Site-Specific Environmental Reviews for Subsequent License Renewal (Aug., ) (MLA); Public Meeting Summary, Public Meeting on the Path Forward for Site-Specific Environmental Reviews of Subsequent License Renewal (Sept., ), at (MLA).
21 Tr. at.
final EIS.22 Similarly, information developed during any hearing on environmental contentions would supplement the environmental record.23 As such, we find that the Staffs identification of the issuance of the draft site-specific EIS as the point of completion of its site-specific review reflects a reasonable interpretation of the Commissions direction in CLI--.
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we accept the Boards certification and find the Staffs interpretation of our instructions in CLI-- with respect to the timing of Federal Register notices announcing the opportunity for a hearing to be acceptable.
For the Commission Carrie M. Safford Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this th day of March.
22 See C.F.R. §.(a); Luminant Generation Co., LLC (Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units and ), CLI--, NRC, ().
23 See C.F.R. §§.,.; Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (Claiborne Enrichment Center), CLI--, NRC, () (The adjudicatory record and Board decision (and, of course, any Commission appellate decisions) become, in effect, part of the [final EIS].).
CARRIE SAFFORD Digitally signed by CARRIE SAFFORD Date: 2024.03.07 09:52:38 -05'00'
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-250-SLR-2
)
50-251-SLR-2 (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating
)
Units 3 & 4)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing COMMISSION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (CLI-24-01) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Mail Stop: O-16B33 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ocaamail.resource@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Secretary of the Commission Mail Stop: O-16B33 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Emily I. Krause, Chair, Administrative Judge Dr. Sue H. Abreu, Administrative Judge Dr. Michael F. Kennedy, Administrative Judge Noel M. Johnson, Law Clerk Emily Newman, Law Clerk E-mail: Emily.Krause@nrc.gov Sue.Abreu@nrc.gov Michael.Kennedy@nrc.gov Noel.Johnson@nrc.gov Emily.Newman@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop - O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 David E. Roth, Esq.
Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.
Blake C. Vaisey, Esq.
Jeremy L. Wachutka, Esq.
Susan H. Vrahoretis, Esq.
Brian P. Newell, Paralegal Georgiann E. Hampton, Paralegal Caitlin R. Byrd, Paralegal E-mail: David.Roth@nrc.gov Sherwin.Turk@nrc.gov Blake.Vaisey@nrc.gov Jeremy.Wachutka@nrc.gov Susan.Vrahoretis@nrc.gov Brian.Newell@nrc.gov Georgiann.Hampton@nrc.gov Caitlin.Byrd@nrc.gov Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 Steven C. Hamrick, Esq.
E-mail: steven.hamrick@fpl.com
Turkey Point, Units 3 & 4, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251-SLR-2 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (CLI-24-01) 2 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20004 Paul M. Bessette, Esq.
Ryan K. Lighty, Esq.
E-mail: Paul.Bessette@morganlewis.com Ryan.Lighty@morganlewis.com Miami Waterkeeper P.O. Box 141596 Coral Gables, FL 33115 Cameron Bills, Esq.
Email: cameron@miamiwaterkeeper.org Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of March 2024.
CLARA SOLA Digitally signed by CLARA SOLA Date: 2024.03.07 09:56:16 -05'00'