ML25003A145
| ML25003A145 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 01/03/2025 |
| From: | Lodge T, Taylor W Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste Michigan, Law Office of Terry J. Lodge, Law Offices of Wallace L. Taylor, Michigan Safe Energy Future, Nuclear Energy Information Service, Three Mile Island Alert |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 57250, ASLBP 24-986-01-LA-BD01, 50-255-LA-3 | |
| Download: ML25003A145 (0) | |
Text
BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-255-LA-3 Holtec Decommissioning International,
)
)
ASLBP No. 24-986-01-LA-BD01
)
(Palisades Nuclear Plant)
)
January 3, 2025
)
PETITIONING ORGANIZATIONS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE AGENDA Pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.323(c), the Petitioning Organizations (Beyond Nuclear, Dont Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future, Three Mile Island Alert, and Nuclear Energy Information Service), by and through counsel, move for reconsideration of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards (ASLB) December 30, 2024 Memorandum and Order Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference. Specifically, the Petitioning Organizations request that the Board reconsider the time allocations expressed in that Order and expand the same as detailed below.
/s/ Terry J. Lodge Terry J. Lodge, Esq.
316 N. Michigan St, Suite 520 Toledo, Ohio 43604 Phone 419-205=7084 tjlodge50@yahoo.com
/s/ Wallace L. Taylor Wallace L. Taylor, Esq.
4403 1st Ave. S.E., Suite 402 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 Phone 319-366-2428 wtaylorlaw@aol.com Co-Counsel for Petitioning Organizations 1
MEMORANDUM No matter the ultimate outcome, this proceeding will produce a determination unprecedented in over 60 years of nuclear power plant licensing, viz., whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should permit a mothballed nuclear power plant in decommissioning mode to be withdrawn from decommissioning for purposes of a restart of full power operations.
Both the NRC Staff and Holtec admit that there is no clear regulatory basis for restarting a closed reactor and that Holtecs proposed pathway is ad hoc in nature. The exemption request is complex, and in the view of the Petitioning Organizations, it severely strains the purpose and import of the NRCs limited discretion to exempt nuclear power plants from compliance with NRC regulations.
Besides extensive briefing in opposition to the exemption request, the Petitioning Organizations also set forth in their Petition for Leave to Intervene seven (7) substantive and procedural contentions, several of which assert complicated facts and/or legal arguments.
The Boards December 30 Order affords the Petitioning Organizations 5 minutes for opening argument, followed by 15 minutes of inquiry by the ASLB, then 5 minutes of closing argument and 2 minutes for rebuttal of other parties arguments - a total of 27 minutes for their entire case, but only 12 minutes to direct the scrutiny of the unprecedented exemption request and seven accompanying contentions. The Petitioning Organizations respectfully submit that this allocation of time does not allow for the consideration the issues deserve, that it potentially is a denial of due process and is unfair to the interests of their hundreds of members and to the general public interest.
By contrast, in the license amendment proceeding Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Docket No. 70-143-LA, the ASLB on December 6, 2022 ordered much more expansive terms. Nuclear 2
Fuel Services was a license amendment request where a Petition to Intervene brought by a sole intervenor raised four (4) contentions. The petitioner was given 30 minutes to present its arguments on contention admissibility issues, with Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., and the NRC Staff each allotted 20 minutes to respond. The petitioner was allowed to reserve up to 10 minutes of its prescribed time for rebuttal. Significantly, there was no specific time limitation on Board questions. The conference lasted for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 23 minutes. A copy of the referenced prehearing order accompanies this Motion.
The Petitioning Organizations request that they be allotted 20 minutes for opening argument as to the legality of the exemption request; 20 minutes for their presentation of argument as to the seven contentions; 20 minutes for closing argument; and 10 minutes for rebuttal of other parties arguments. In addition, as in Nuclear Fuel Services, there need not be a time limit on Board questions. Indeed, these Petitioners expect the Board will ask the parties challenging questions about the significant unprecedented issues that demand thorough inquiry from the Board.
The Petitioning Organizations would not object to similar allotments of time to the other parties.
In conclusion, the Petitioning Organizations believe that the Board has not dignified the importance and complexity of the issues raised in their Petition with adequate time to address and amplify their arguments. Legal argumentation of the exemption request in particular is likely to be followed up by Board questions which suggest or posit hypothetical concerns and require restatements of logic and discussion of past licensing cases that one or more parties suggest are analogous or precedential.
For these reasons, the Petitioning Organizations request that the Board reconsider the 3
time allocations ordered on December 30, 2024 and expand the same in the interests of justice and fairness.
/s/ Terry J. Lodge Terry J. Lodge, Esq.
316 N. Michigan St, Suite 520 Toledo, Ohio 43604 Phone 419-205=7084 tjlodge50@yahoo.com
/s/ Wallace L. Taylor Wallace L. Taylor, Esq.
4403 1st Ave. S.E., Suite 402 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 Phone 319-366-2428 wtaylorlaw@aol.com Co-Counsel for Petitioning Organizations 4
BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
Holtec Decommissioning International,
) Docket No. 50-255-LA-3 LLC and Holtec Palisades LLC
)
)
(Palisades Nuclear Plant)
) January 3, 2025
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 3.305, I certify that, on January 3, 2025, a copy of the foregoing PETITIONING ORGANIZATIONS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PREHEARING CONFERENCE AGENDA was deposited in the Electronic Information Exchange (the NRCs E-Filing System) in the above captioned proceeding and that pursuant to the protocols of that system, copies were served upon all registered parties and counsel of record.
/s/ Terry J. Lodge Terry J. Lodge, Esq.
Co-Counsel for Petitioning Organizations 5
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL Before the Licensing Board:
G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chair William J. Froehlich Dr. Sue H. Abreu In the Matter of NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC.
(License Amendment Application)
Docket No. 70-143-LA ASLBP No. 23-976-01-LA-BD02 December 6, 2022 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference)
The Licensing Board will conduct an initial prehearing conference in this 10 C.F.R. Part 70 license amendment proceeding on Monday, December 12, 2022, beginning at 1:00 p.m.
Eastern Time (ET) to hear oral argument on the admissibility of the four contentions proffered by petitioner Erwin Citizens Awareness Network, Inc., (ECAN).1 Set forth below are details on information technology and administrative matters relevant to the conduct of the conference.
A.
Information Technology Matters The oral argument will be conducted virtually using the Cisco WebEx web conferencing platform. The Boards law clerk, Noel Johnson, will contact the participants counsel by e-mail to (1) schedule a test session conducted by the Licensing Board Panels Information Technology staff to identify and mitigate any technical issues concerning access to the status
1 The question of petitioner ECANs standing will not be a subject of the argument.
conference; and (2) provide information about accessing the Cisco WebEx web conference to the participants counsel.
For the public and other interested persons, the Board will provide telephone listen-only access to the oral argument by dialing 800-982-7291 and entering the passcode 8332009, followed by the # sign.
B.
Administrative Matters The oral arguments primary purpose is to allow the Board to ask questions and obtain answers concerning the admissibility of ECANs four proffered contentions under 10 C.F.R.
§ 2.309(f)(1). Petitioner ECAN will have 30 minutes to present its arguments on contention admissibility issues, with applicant BWXT Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff each allotted 20 minutes to respond. Petitioner ECAN may reserve up to 10 minutes of its prescribed time for rebuttal. No other rebuttal will be permitted.
In their oral presentations, participants counsel should not merely repeat arguments presented in their written filings. Instead, they should focus on identifying the principal points in controversy and the information that supports or rebuts their claims. Because the argument is not an evidentiary hearing, the participants should not attempt to introduce evidence during the argument. Consequently, material that has not already been cited in the participants pleadings before the Board should not be used.
Further, given the scope of the issues before the Board and the time allotted to each of the three participants for argument, the Board does not anticipate hearing from more than one counsel for each participant. Those counsel will also be the only participant representative given WebEx video access to the argument per section A above, with all other counsel and participant representatives being afforded access via the listen-only telephone connection.2
2 The Board recognizes that because the conference is being conducted virtually, a participants counsel may not be in the presence of those individuals who might be able to provide information that would help frame the most accurate response to a Board inquiry,
Accordingly, on or before noon ET on Wednesday, December 7, 2022, each of the three participants should provide Board law clerk Noel Johnson, noel.johnson@nrc.gov, with an e-mail specifying the name of the single counsel who will be making a presentation on behalf of that participant.
Although the participants counsel will be appearing remotely, the Board encourages all those taking part in the oral argument to conduct themselves as if in a hearing room setting, including seeking to minimize outside noise and interruptions while the conference is ongoing.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chair ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland December 6, 2022
particularly regarding technical matters. If a participant believes it needs video access to the argument for more than one representative for consultation purposes, by the Wednesday deadline cited above it should provide a separate e-mail to the Boards law clerk, with a copy to all other participants, that identifies the additional individual(s) who should be given video access and explains why such access is necessary.
It should be noted that video access will not provide participants counsel with the ability to communicate with the designated individual(s). Accordingly, counsel should make other communications arrangements that will allow for prompt consultation in formulating a response to a Board question.
5$
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.
)
Docket No. 70-143-LA
)
(Application to Amend Special Nuclear
)
Materials License SNM-124)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference) 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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop: T-3F23 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge Dr. Sue H. Abreu, Associate Chief Administrative Judge (Technical)
G. Paul Bollwerk, Administrative Judge William J. Froehlich, Administrative Judge Noel M. Johnson, Law Clerk Emily G. Newman, Law Clerk Allison R. Wood, Law Clerk E-mail: roy.hawkens@nrc.gov sue.abreu@nrc.gov paul.bollwerk@nrc.gov william.froehlich@nrc.gov Noel.Johnson@nrc.goc Emily.Newman@nrc.gov allison.wood@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop - O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Adam S. Gendelman Travis C. Jones Mauri T. Lemoncelli Joseph D. McManus Nicolas P. Mertz Kevin C. Roach E-mail: Adam.Gendelman@nrc.gov Travis.Jones@nrc.gov Mauri.Lemoncelli@nrc.gov Joseph.McManus@nrc.gov Nicolas.Mertz@nrc.gov Kevin.Roach@nrc.gov Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.
1205 Banner Hill Road Erwin, TN 37650 Timothy A. Knowles Director, Safety and Safeguards E-mail: taknowles@nuclearfuelservices.com Counsel for Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC 1111 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20004 Ryan K. Lighty Molly Mattison E-mail: ryan.lighty@morganlewis.com Molly.Mattison@morganlewis.com
Nuclear Fuel Services 70-143-LA MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference) 2 Counsel for the Erwin Citizens Awareness Network Terry J. Lodge 316 North Michigan Street, Suite 520 Toledo, OH 43604 E-mail: tjlodge50@yahoo.com Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of December 2022.
Clara I. Sola Digitally signed by Clara I. Sola Date: 2022.12.06 09:22:23 -05'00'