ML24142A259
| ML24142A259 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 05/21/2024 |
| From: | Michael Gibson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 57029, 50-338-SLR-2, 50-339-SLR-2, ASLBP 24-984-02-SLR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML24142A259 (0) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL
Before the Licensing Board:
Michael M. Gibson, Chair Nicholas G. Trikouros Dr. Gary S. Arnold
In the Matter of: Docket Nos. 50-338-SLR-2 50-339-SLR-2 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY ASLBP No. 24-984-02-SLR-BD01
(North Anna Power Station, Units 1 & 2) May 21, 2024
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Request to Address Contention Admissibility and Impacts of Final Rule Applying Generic Environmental Impact Statement to Subsequent License Renewal Period)
This proceeding concerns the twenty-year subsequent renewal of the licenses for North
Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, that currently authorize Virginia Electric and Power
Company (VEPCO) to operate North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Louisa
County, Virginia, until, respectively, April 1, 2038 and August 21, 2040. On January 8, 2024, a
notice was published in the Federal Register announcing the opportunity to request a hearing
on the December 2023 draft site-specific environmental impact statement for North Anna Power
Station Units 1 and 2 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff (NRC Staff). 1
Petitioners Beyond Nuclear, Inc. (Beyond Nuclear) and the Sierra Club, Inc. (Sierra Club) filed a
hearing request on March 28, 2024. 2 On April 3, 2024, this Licensing Board was established to
rule on standing and contention admissibility matters and to preside at any hearing. 3 On April
1 See 89 Fed. Reg. 960 (Jan. 8, 2024).
2 See Hearing Request and Petition to Intervene by Beyond Nuclear and the Sierra Club (Mar.
28, 2024).
3 See Establishment of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (April 3, 2024).
15, 2024, we issued a Memorandum and Order setting this matter for oral argument on
contention admissibility and establishing the information technology and other administrative
matters for this oral argument. 4 Then, on May 14, the Board granted the Petitioners unopposed
motion to postpone oral argument until Monday, June 3, 2024 at 1:00 PM ET. 5 But the oral
argument will now commence on Monday, June 3, 2024 at 10:00 AM ET because of certain new
developments that are set forth immediately below.
Specifically, on May 16, 2024, the Commission adopted a final rule that will make a new
generic environmental analysis applicable to both the initial license renewal (LR) and the first
subsequent license renewal (SLR) for nuclear power plants (2024 Rule). 6 This 2024 Rule is
supported by a 2024 revision to the 2013 version of NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental
Impact Statement [(GEIS)] for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. 7 These updates will include
changes to Table B-1, Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear
Power Plants, in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 (Table B-1). 8
Of particular relevance to this proceeding, these updates to Table B-1 will now delineate
80 separate environmental topics that are to be cl assified either as generic (Category 1) issues
or as plant-specific (Category 2) issues. Two of Petitioners contentions appear to implicate
Table B-1 Category 1 issues (Design basis acci dents and Severe accidents), while the third
contention appears to implicate one Table B-1 Category 2 issue (Climate change impacts on
4 See Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference (amended)) (Apr. 15, 2024) (unpublished).
5 See Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Granting Motion for Extension of Time and Postponing Oral Argument) (May 14, 2024) (unpublished).
6 See Mem. from Carrie M. Safford, Secretary, NRC, to Raymond V. Furstenau, Acting Executive Director for Operations, NRC, at 1 (May 16, 2024) ((Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML24137A164) [hereinafter SRM].
7 See NUREG-1437, [GEIS] for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Final Report, Vol. 1 (Rev. 2 Feb. 2024) (ADAMS Accession No. ML23201A224 [hereinafter 2024 GEIS]; see also NUREG-1437, [GEIS] for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Final Report, Vol. 1 (Rev. 1 June 2013) (ADAMS Accession No. ML13106A241) [hereinafter 2013 GEIS].
8 See SRM at 1.
environmental resources). Based on prior Commission precedent, denoting a contention as
falling within either Category 1 or Category 2 can have a substantial impact on the standards
that apply to the admission of the contention.
In light of these significant regulatory changes, the Board has concluded there are now
several additional matters associated with the agencys 2024 Rule and the 2024 GEIS that
warrant consideration at the June 3, 2024 oral argument. Accordingly, counsel should be
prepared to address the following matters in a pre-argument filing and during the oral argument
on June 3, 2024.
- 1. Topic 1. The 2024 Rule language adopted by the Commission states that the rule will
become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. When is
publication in the Federal Register anticipated? In this interim period after the 2024
Rule has been approved by the Commission but before it is effective, how should the
Board proceed with respect to Petitioners contentions? The Board also notes that
the deadline to comply with the 2024 Rule is one year after the 2024 Rules
publication in the Federal Register. 9 Is this one-year deadline of any consequence to
this proceeding? Why or why not?
- 2. Topic 2. In evaluating the environmental impacts associated with the renewal of a
license for a nuclear power plant, 10 C.F.R. § 51.95(c)(4) provides that the NRC
staff, adjudicatory officers, and [the] Commission shall integrate the conclusions in
the generic environmental impact statement for issues designated as Category 1
with information developed for those Category 2 issues applicable to the plant under
10 CFR § 53.51(c)(3)(ii) and any new and significant information. Before this Board
9 See SRM Encl., Edits to the Federal Register notice at 2 (May 16, 2024) (ADAMS Accession No. ML24137A219).
can consider the admissibility of Petitioners contentions in this proceeding, must the
NRC Staff first incorporate the provisions of the 2024 Rule and the 2024 GEIS into
its December 2023 site-specific EIS? If so, when will the NRC Staff complete these
tasks?
- 3. Topic 3. Previously, the Commission has held that the admissibility of Category 1
license renewal contentions is to be governed by the applicable GEIS and
associated updates to Table B-1. See Exelon Generation Co., LLC (Limerick
Generating Station, Units 1 and 2), CLI-12-19, 76 NRC 377, 385-87 (2012)
(indicating that, notwithstanding recognized opportunity in license renewal cases to
contest matters involving new and significant environmental information, challenges
to Table B-1 Category 1 issues require that petitioner submit a 10 C.F.R. § 2.335(b)
waiver petition). As set forth immediately below, two of the Petitioners contentions
appear to implicate Category 1 issues under the 2024 Rule.
- a. Topic 3a. In a previous contention admissibility proceeding involving the North
Anna facility, Petitioners filed both a contention and a 10 C.F.R. § 2.335(b)
waiver petition challenging the applicants Environmental Report for failing "to
consider the environmental implications of an earthquake in 2011 that exceeded
the design basis for North Anna. In that proceeding, North Anna, LBP-21-4,
93 NRC 179, 188 (2021), a previous licensing board denied both the contentions
admissibility pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1) and the associated waiver
petition. Petitioners appeal of that licensing boards decision in LBP-21-4 was
dismissed without prejudice by the Commission in North Anna, CLI 22-3, 95 NRC
40, 41-42, 43 (2022), and Petitioners were invited to re-file this contention and to
submit any other new or amended contentions that challenged the NRC Staffs
revised site-specific environmental impact statement. Nevertheless, Petitioners
Contention 1 in this proceeding appears to be substantially the same contention
that they proffered in LBP-21-4 and the just-adopted 2024 Rule will retain the
2013 GEISs designation of Design basis accidents as a Table B-1 Category 1
issue during the SLR period. Accordingly, before this Board can adjudicate the
admissibility of Contention 1, should Petitioners be afforded the opportunity to
submit an amended contention, as appropriate, and a waiver petition under
section 2.335(b), to assert this Design-basis accident claim once the 2024 Rule
becomes effective?
GEIS to Petitioners contentions here, it is nevertheless significant that the 2024
Rule makes a change with respect to Severe accidents. Under the 2013 GEIS,
Severe accidents were classified as a Category 2 issue insofar as a petitioner
challenged alternatives to mitigate severe accidents where the facility had not
previously performed a severe accident mitigation alternatives analysis.
However, it now appears that the 2024 Rule will direct that Table B-1 be updated
to reclassify Severe accidents as a Category 1 issue. Accordingly, before this
Board can adjudicate the admissibility of Contention 2, should Petitioners be
afforded the opportunity to submit an amended contention, as appropriate, and a
waiver petition under section 2.335(b), to assert their Severe accident claim
once the 2024 Rule becomes effective?
- 4. Topic 4. The 2024 Rule creates a new Table B-1 Category 2 issue, Climate change
impacts on environmental resources that had not previously been delineated as an
environmental issue in the 2013 GEIS. With this change, does the issue raised in
Contention 3 fall within this Table B-1 Category 2 issue? On the other hand, if
Contention 3 does not fall within this Category 2 issue, does it fall within any other
Table B-1 issue as defined under the 2024 Rule? Finally, if Contention 3 does not
- 6 -
fall within any Table B-1 issue at all, does the 2024 Rule affect in any other way this
Boards adjudication of Contention 3 in this proceeding?
Relative to these topics, no later than Wednesday, May 29, each party shall file a Table
of Legal and Factual Authorities it considers relevant to the above-listed topics. The Table
should be organized so that the legal and factual authorities listed for each topic do not exceed
one page, with Topics 3a and 3b having one page each.
During oral argument on June 3, the Board will first briefly confirm that Petitioners have
standing. After doing so, the Board will hear presentations from the parties regarding the topics
outlined above that concern the impact of the Commissions adoption of the 2024 Rule.
Petitioners, followed by the NRC Staff and then VEPCO, will each be afforded 15 minutes to
address the above-listed topics. Petitioners will also be afforded 5 minutes of rebuttal.
At the conclusion of oral argument on these topics, the Board will question the parties
about the admissibility of Petitioners contentions under any not yet discussed contention
admissibility standards in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1).
Finally, the Board will confer as to whether closing arguments would be beneficial for
making its ruling on the matters addressed during oral argument.
It is so ORDERED.
FORTHEATOMICSAFETY ANDLICENSINGBOARD
/RA/
Michael M. Gibson, Chair ADMINISTRATIVEJUDGE
Rockville, Maryland May 21, 2024 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
In the Matter of )
)
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-338- SLR-2
) 50- 339 -SLR-2 (North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Request to Address Contention Admissibility and Impacts of Final Rule Applying Generic Environmental Impact Statement to Subsequent License Renewal Period) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop: O-16B33 Mail Stop - O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ocaamail.resource@nrc.gov David E. Roth, Esq.
Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.
Susan H. Vrahoretis, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reuben I. Siegman, Esq.
Office of the Secretary of the Commission Caitlin R. Byrd, Paralegal Mail Stop: O-16B33 Georgiann E. Hampton, Paralegal Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: david.roth@nrc.gov E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov sherwin.turk@nrc.gov susan.vrahoretis@nrc.gov reuben.siegman@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission caitlin.byrd@nrc.gov Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel georgiann.hampton@nrc.gov Mail Stop: T-3F23 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Michael M. Gibson, C hair, Administrative Counsel for Virginia Electric and Power Judge Company Nicholas G. Trikouros, Administrative Judge Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC Dr. Gary S. Arnold, Administrative Judge 1111 Pennsylvania Ave NW Emily Newman, Law Clerk Washington, DC 20004 E-mail: michael.gibson@nrc.gov Paul Bessette, Esq.
nicholas.trikouros@nrc.gov Scott Clausen, Esq.
gary.arnold@nrc.gov Ryan K. Lighty, Esq.
emily.newman@nrc.gov E-mail: paul.bessette@morganlewis.com scott.clausen@morganlewis.com ryan.lighty@morganlewis.com
Virginia Electric and Power Company (North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos.
50- 338- SLR-2 and 50-339-SLR-2)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Request to Address Contention Admissibility and Impacts of Final Rule Applying Generic Environmental Impact Statement to Subsequent License Renewal Period)
Counsel for Beyond Nuclear and Beyond Nuclear Sierra Club Reactor Oversight Project Harmon, Curran, Spielberg, & 7304 Carroll Avenue #182 Eisenberg, LLP Takoma Park, MD 20912 1725 DeSales Street, N.W. Paul Gunter Suite 500 E-mail: paul@beyondnuclear.org Washington, DC 20036 Diane Curran E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com
Office of the Secretary of the Commission
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of May 202 4.
2