ML24279A001
| ML24279A001 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 10/05/2024 |
| From: | Blind A - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 57131, ASLBP 24-986-01-LA-BD01, 50-255-LA-3 | |
| Download: ML24279A001 (0) | |
Text
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 1
10 Supplemental Filing: Further Basis for Contention Five, Holtecs Proposed Sequence, Without NRC approval, Predicate for Specific Exception Request NRC Staff Review.
Prelude: Linking Contention Five to the Specific Exemption Request As previously outlined in Contention Five, petitioners challenged Holtecs failure to meet the regulatory requirements under 10 CFR 50.12, particularly in connection with their Specific Exemption Request submitted on September 28, 2023. The concerns raised in Contention Five are now further reinforced by Holtecs own language in their exemption request, ML23271A140, Request for Exemption from Certain Termination of License Requirements of 10 CFR 50.82.
Specifically, Holtec assumes that the NRCs silence or lack of objection, as stated twice in the Holtec submittal, to their proposed regulatory interpretations or the regulatory framework sequencing of multiple regulatory and Holtec actions, leading to NRC approval to resend the § 50.82 Certifications, amounts to tacit approval. This assumption, however, is procedurally and legally insufficient, as it undermines the requirement for formal and explicit NRC approval before significant actions, such as a review and approval of the Specific Exemption
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 2
10 Request, rescinding 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1) certifications and transitioning back to power operations, can proceed.
This supplemental filing provides further basis to Contention Five by addressing the flaws in Holtecs interpretation of the NRCs regulatory framework, particularly with respect to sequencing and the absence of formal approval, and how this presents a risk to public health and safety.
- 1. Holtecs Reliance on Tacit Approval is Procedurally and Legally Flawed In Holtecs Specific Exemption Request, they state that the PNP 10 CFR Part 50 license remains valid even though the plant transitioned to decommissioning status on June 13, 2022, after submitting certifications under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1).
Holtec claims that no major decommissioning activities have begun and implies that because the NRC has not objected, their interpretation of the regulatory framework for reinstating operational status is reasonable.
ML23271A140, Page 5: On March 20, 2023, HDI met with the NRC, in a public meeting forum, to discuss with the NRC staff the proposed regulatory path to potentially request reauthorization of power operations at PNP. The purpose of the meeting was to provide an overview of the proposed regulatory path and to obtain feedback from the NRC staff on the
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 3
10 reasonableness of the approach. The NRC provided no comments opposing the reasonableness of the approach (Reference 18)
ML23271A140, Page 6: On May 24, 2023, HDI met with the NRC, in a public meeting forum, to discuss the regulatory framework to potentially request reauthorization of power operations at PNP, with focus on the request for exemption to 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2). The purpose of the meeting was to provide an overview of the proposed regulatory framework, with emphasis on the requested exemption to 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2) and to obtain feedback from the NRC staff on the reasonableness of the approach. The NRC provided no comments opposing the reasonableness of the approach (Reference 19).
Petitioners contend, Holtecs interpretation that the NRCs lack of comment equates to tacit approval is a critical flaw. As petitioners have argued, the absence of explicit NRC approval does not imply endorsement of Holtecs proposed regulatory framework. Regulatory precedents, particularly in high-stakes safety environments like nuclear power operations, emphasize that silence from the NRC cannot be construed as approval. Formal regulatory processes require documented and explicit approvals to ensure compliance and safety.
Further Basis: Holtecs reliance on this assumption undermines the procedural rigor expected in nuclear regulatory oversight. Until the NRC formally reviews and approves Holtecs sequencing and interpretations, as it
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 4
10 refers to as the regulatory framework, no legitimate action toward resuming power operations can proceed. By proceeding without formal approval, Holtec risks violating the established regulatory safeguards designed to protect public health and safety.
- 2. Interconnected Nature of Regulatory Actions Requires Explicit Approval of Holtecs proposed Regulatory Framework Sequencing Holtecs proposed regulatory framework sequencing involves a series of interrelated actions, including:
An application to transfer the decommissioning facility operating authority at PNP from HDI to an entity authorized to operate the PNP reactor.
A License Amendment Request (LAR) that reinstates the PNP Renewed Facility Operating License (RFOL) operating Technical Specifications (TS) by amending the Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications (PDTS) technical sections to reflect a power operations plant.
A LAR that reinstates the PNP RFOL operating Technical Specifications administrative requirements by amending the PDTS administrative sections
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 5
10 to reflect a power operations plant. This includes reinstating licensed operator requirements and the removal of Certified Fuel Handlers.
A LAR to amend the PNP RFOL for an Emergency Plan and Emergency Action Levels to support a power operations plant.
Submitting a notification of transition to power operations, rescinding the 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1) certifications.
Reinstating the regulatory requirements necessary for resuming power operations.
Holtec suggests that these steps can proceed under their existing license without immediate NRC approval until they reach the point of reloading fuel. This interpretation overlooks the interconnected nature of these actions and the requirement for explicit NRC approval of the proposed, regulatory framework sequence.
Further Basis: Petitioners argue that the NRC must approve Holtecs proposed sequence of events as a predicate to next, approving the Specific Exemption Request to reverse the 50.82 certifications. The NRC staff has not made such an approval known to the public. Each step in Holtecs proposed regulatory framework sequence affects the overall safety and
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 6
10 operational status of Palisades. For example, rescinding the 50.82 certifications has far-reaching regulatory consequences, including the reinstatement of full NRC oversight under the operational framework.
Without formal NRC approval, first, of Holtecs proposed regulatory framework, this entire sequence is legally incomplete.
Additionally, Holtecs claim that the NRC has provided no comments opposing the reasonableness of their approach does not satisfy the regulatory requirements for explicit approval. This sequencing cannot move forward based on assumption or silence but must be formally reviewed and approved by the NRC to ensure compliance with public health and safety standards.
- 3. Public Health and Safety Risks Without Explicit NRC Approval Holtecs Specific Exemption Request not only relies on an incorrect interpretation of NRC silence but also introduces significant risks to public health and safety by deferring critical safety assurances to future NRC inspections and licensing actions.
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 7
10 Further Basis: The lack of a detailed, independent plan for safely restarting Palisades before securing the exemption undermines the safety rationale required under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2). Petitioners contend that Holtecs deferral of safety assurances to later stages of the licensing process introduces unnecessary risks. Formal approval at each step, including the exemption request, is essential to maintain public safety standards. Also, if allowed, there most likely will be no opportunity for public involvement in the process, so late in its finishing steps.
Holtecs strategy of relying on future regulatory actions as the primary assurance of safety is a circular and flawed logic. Petitioners argue that the NRC must approve the Holtec proposed regulatory framework sequencing first, before review of the request to resend the § 50.82 certifications using a Specific Exception Request, before any steps toward restarting power operations can be initiated. This includes reinstating the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)and addressing other key operational criteria necessary for ensuring public health and safety.
- 4. Holtecs Decommissioning License Does Not Extend to Power Operations Without NRC Approval
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 8
10 Holtecs assumption that their decommissioning license allows them to proceed with certain steps in their transition back to power operations without formal NRC approval is equally flawed. While the decommissioning license grants Holtec certain flexibilities in managing non-operational activities, it does not provide them the authority to move toward reloading fuel or resuming operations without explicit regulatory approval of their proposed regulatory framework.
Further Basis: Petitioners argue that Holtec cannot proceed under the decommissioning license alone. Rescinding the 50.82(a)(1) certifications and reloading fuel are not part of decommissioning activities but are rather steps toward restarting a nuclear facility, which requires full NRC approval.
Holtecs reliance on the decommissioning license without first securing exemption approval introduces significant legal and procedural risks.
Conclusion Holtecs Specific Exemption Request and its reliance on tacit NRC approval and flawed regulatory framework sequencing assumptions present substantial risks to public health and safety. Petitioners respectfully submit this supplemental basis
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two of 9
10 for Contention Five, further arguing that the NRC must formally approve each step in Holtecs proposed regulatory framework sequence, only then, followed by acceptance for review of the specific exemption request, before any substantive actions can be taken toward resuming power operations.
Until such time as the NRC explicitly approves Holtecs regulatory framework proposed interpretations and sequencing proposals, all restoration activities risk undermining the regulatory framework designed to protect public health and safety.
Petitioners reiterate their request for a public hearing on Holtecs exemption request and call for denial of the exemption acceptance review, based on these deficiencies.
October 5, 2024 Contention Five-Part Two
of 10 10 Declaration of Alan Blind