ML25017A344
| ML25017A344 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/2025 |
| From: | Bollwerk G Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 57258, 50-287-SLR-2, 50-269-SLR-2, 50-270-SLR-2, ASLBP 24-985-03-SLR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML25017A344 (0) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chair Dr. Sue H. Abreu Dr. Arielle J. Miller In the Matter of DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC (Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3)
Docket Nos. 50-269-SLR-2, 50-270-SLR-2, and 50-287-SLR-2 ASLBP No. 24-985-03-SLR-BD01 January 17, 2025 MEMORANDUM (Notice Regarding Issuance of Decision on Intervention Petition)
In this proceeding concerning the June 2021 subsequent license renewal (SLR) application of Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke) seeking an additional twenty-year term for the 10 C.F.R. Part 50 operating licenses for Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) Units 1, 2, and 3, the Licensing Board today ruled on the April 29, 2024 hearing request (as corrected on May 1, 2024) filed by petitioners Beyond Nuclear, Inc., and the Sierra Club, Inc. (collectively Petitioners). That intervention petition challenges the adequacy of several aspects of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staffs February 2024 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) draft site-specific supplemental environmental impact statement that assesses the impacts of the proposed SLR for the ONS facility as well as the alternatives to SLR.
The Staff previously identified nonpublic Critical Energy/Electric Infrastructure Information (CEII), a type of Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI), in several documents associated with this case, resulting in their removal from the public record
and later resubmission with redactions. Based on those redactions, the Board has attempted to ensure its decision on Petitioners hearing request contains no SUNSI/CEII that would require nonpublic treatment. Nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, in issuing its ruling today the Board has provided a copy to the Staff as a nonpublic document subject to previously issued Protective Order A to permit the Staff to review and confirm whether the decision contains any nonpublic information that requires redaction.1 At the same time, because it has provided the required nondisclosure declarations, Duke has been provided with a copy of the decision as a nonpublic document subject to Protective Order A. But because Petitioners have declined to provide the nondisclosure declarations necessary to gain access to nonpublic information in this proceeding pursuant to Protective Order A, the Board has deferred serving them with a copy of its decision pending receipt of the results of the Staffs SUNSI/CEII review.
Given the delay in availability of this decision to Petitioners and to the public, the Board provides the following high-level, publicly available summary of its decision, LBP-25-01, 101 NRC __ (Jan. 17, 2025), albeit with the caveat that, like the summaries and headnotes that accompany licensing board and Commission published decisions, this synopsis has no legal significance:
The Board determines that each of the Petitioners has established its representational standing to intervene in this proceeding. Id. at __ (slip op.
at 9-12).
With regard to Petitioners Contention 1, Erroneous, Incomplete, and Misleading Information Regarding Whether Duke Has Provided the Oconee Reactors with Adequate Protection From Failure of the Upstream Jocassee Dam, the Board determines that the various elements of this contention are inadmissible as (1) being outside the scope of this SLR proceeding contrary to the dictates of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f)(1)(iii); and (2) failing to establish the existence of a genuine dispute on a material issue of law or fact as required under section 2.309(f)(1)(vi). Id. at __ (slip op. at 13-27).
1 So that the Board can monitor the progress of the Staffs SUNSI/CEII review, in its decision the Board has established a requirement that the Staff provide a publicly available weekly status report that includes a good faith estimate of the specific date by which that review process will be completed. LBP-25-01, 101 NRC at __ (slip op. at 57-58).
Concerning Petitioners Contention 2, Draft SEIS Risk Estimates Fail to Meet NEPA Requirements for Rigor, Accuracy, Completeness, and Consideration of Uncertainties, the Board concludes that this contentions six claims are inadmissible as failing to establish the existence of a genuine dispute on a material issue of law or fact as required under section 2.309(f)(1)(vi). Id.
at __ (slip op. at 27-46).
Relative to Petitioners Contention 3, Draft SEIS Fails to Address the Effects of Climate Change on Accident Risk, the Board rules that the various aspects of this contention are too speculative or fail to establish the existence of a genuine dispute on a material issue of law or fact so as to be admissible under section 2.309(f)(1)(v)-(vi). Id. at __ (slip op. at 47-55).
Once the NRC Staff has completed its SUNSI review of the Boards decision and provided the Board with the results of that review, the Board will ensure that a publicly available version of its decision is placed on this proceedings docket and served on all the participants to this proceeding, thereupon terminating the proceeding before the Board.2 FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chair ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland January 17, 2025 2 As the Board notes in its decision, consistent with 10 C.F.R. § 2.311(b), the 25-day period within which Petitioners may submit an appeal of the Boards decision does not begin to run until the Petitioners are served with the publicly available version of its ruling. If, however, at any point Petitioners are concerned that this document review procedure will not afford them a fair opportunity to file a timely appeal, they are free to seek an appropriate extension of time from the Commission. Id. at __ (slip op. at 56, 57 n.90).
/RA/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC,
)
Docket Nos. 50-269 SLR-2
)
50-270 SLR-2
)
50-287 SLR-2
)
(Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2, and 3)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing MEMORANDUM (Notice Regarding Issuance of Decision on Intervention Petition) 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 G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman, Administrative Judge Dr. Sue H. Abreu, Administrative Judge Dr. Arielle J. Miller, Administrative Judge E-mail: Paul.bollwerk@nrc.gov Sue.abreu@nrc.gov Arielle.miller@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop - O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 David Roth Susan H. Vrahoretis Mary Frances Woods Megan Wright Kevin Bernstein E-mail: david.roth@nrc.gov susan.vrahoretis@nrc.gov mary.woods@nrc.gov megan.wright@nrc.gov kevin.bernstein@nrc.gov Counsel for Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC 1111 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20004 Paul Bessette Ryan K. Lighty Scott Clausen Molly Mattison E-mail: paul.bessette@morganlewis.com ryan.lighty@morganlewis.com scott.clausen@morganlewis.com molly.mattison@morganlewis.com
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2, and 3, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287 SLR-2)
MEMORANDUM (Notice Regarding Issuance of Decision on Intervention Petition) 2 Duke Energy Corporation 525 South Tryon Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Tracey M. Leroy E-mail: tracey.leroy@duke-energy.com Counsel for Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club Harmon, Curran, Spielberg, &
Eisenberg, LLP 1725 DeSales Street, N.W.
Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 Diane Curran E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com Beyond Nuclear Reactor Oversight Project 7304 Carroll Avenue #182 Takoma Park, MD 20912 Paul Gunter E-mail: paul@beyondnuclear.org Office of the Secretary of the Commission Dated at King of Prussia, PA this 17th day of January, 2025.
RUSSELL CHAZELL Digitally signed by RUSSELL CHAZELL Date: 2025.01.17 15:02:10
-05'00'