ML18296A314: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 9: Line 9:
| docket = 05000247, 05000286
| docket = 05000247, 05000286
| license number = DPR-026, DPR-064
| license number = DPR-026, DPR-064
| contact person = Buckberg P H
| contact person = Buckberg P
| case reference number = 2.206, LTR-18-0376-1
| case reference number = 2.206, LTR-18-0376-1
| package number = ML18261A298
| package number = ML18261A298

Revision as of 21:15, 14 June 2019

LTR-18-0376-1 - Supplement to 2.206 Petition October 23, 2018, Violations of Regulations at Indian Point Units 2 and 3
ML18296A314
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 10/23/2018
From: Blanch P
- No Known Affiliation
To: Perry Buckberg
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Buckberg P
Shared Package
ML18261A298 List:
References
2.206, LTR-18-0376-1
Download: ML18296A314 (4)


Text

From: Paul To: Buckberg, Perry Cc: Raspa, Rossana

Spicher, Terri

Subject:

[External_Sender] Fwd: NRC-2018-000820 Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 10:08:29 AM Perry Enclosed is additional information related to my recent 10 CFR 2.206 petition.

I believe the enclosed is self explanatory however if you desire, I can formalize the information via a letter to you. Please let me know your preference.

Paul Begin forwarded message:

From: Paul <pmblanch@comcast.net

>Date: October 23, 2018 at 9:48:56 AM EDT To: kim@saneenergyproject.org , Amy Rosmarin <

amyrosmarin@aol.com

>, eewgrassroots@gmail.com , Susan Babdolden <

svandolsen@gmail.com

>, Holian Brian

<Brian.Holian@nrc.gov

>, Brian Haagensen <

brian.haagensen@nrc.gov

>, Raspa Rossana

<Rossana.Raspa@nrc.gov

>, Terri Spicher <

Terri.Spicher@nrc.gov

>

Subject:

Fwd: NRC-2018-000820 The enclosed was received from the NRC last night. This communication confirms that the NRC analysis used by FERC to approve the AIM project was based on false information provided to Entergy by Spectra.

If one follows the links one will find the redacted NRC analysis and it is based on the three minute isolation time and the informal "back of the envelope" calculation that was unsigned unreviewed and undated. This is the only analysis used to approve the AIM pipeline.

This material false information, originating from Spectra propagated to Entergy, NRC, PHMSA, FERC and he State of New York resulting in the final FERC approval.

I will be supplementing my 10 CFR 2.206 Petition with this new information related to material false and inaccurate information provided to the NRC by Entergy.

Paul Blanch Home 860-236-0326 Cell 860-922-3119 Begin forwarded message:

From: "Stevens, Margo" <

Margo.Stevens@nrc.gov

>Date: October 22, 2018 at 2:02:48 PM EDT To: " pmblanch@comcast.net" <pmblanch@comcast.net

>

Subject:

RE: NRC-2018-000820 Good afternoon Paul. I wanted to drop you a quick email on the status of the above-referenced FOIA request.

As you'll no doubt recall, your request is looking for all of the records that NRC provided to FERC and PHMSA as discussed in a FERC Chairman's letter to Sandy Galef, dated 09/10/2018.

In that letter, in pertinent part, the FERC Chairman states that, as reflected in its final Environmental Impact Statement [EIS], FERC benefited from NRC's review of a safety evaluation prepared by Entergy (which owns and operates Indian Point). It goes on to say that NRC performed its own independent confirmatory analysis. Based upon these statements, the two NRC records to which the FERC Chairman's letter, and final EIS refer, appear to be records that have been the subject of multiple FOIA requests, including several submitted by yourself.

It would appear that the below two records correspond to the NRC staff's confirmatory analysis and ALOHA calculations, and Entergy's safety evaluation:

Your request, NRC-2015-0062, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1435/ML14358A446.pdf , and its appeal, FOIA-2015-00012A, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1506/ML15061A219.pdf , provided you with a redacted version of the NRC's Safety Review & Confirmatory Analysis.

In response to another of your requests, FOIA-2015-0189, you were provided a redacted version of the ALOHA calculations, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1513/ML15138A024.pdf

. As for Entergy's own safety evaluation submitted under 10 CFR 50.59, I believe it is the record found in public ADAMS as https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1425/ML14253A339.pdf

. However, my efforts to locate any communication, whether in letter or email format, from NRC to FERC that transmitted these, or any other records, wasn't successful.

I searched the offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), New Reactors (NRO) and Nuclear Material Safety & Safeguards (NMSS) here in HQ and in Region I.

None of these offices could locate any transmittal.

NRC staff, as well as myself, also searched ADAMS to see whether such a transmittal could be found; none was located. However, I did locate a memorandum from Ben Beasley, Chief, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, NRR, to Christopher Miller, Director, Division of Intergovernmental Liaison & Rulemaking, FSME [now NMSS], dated October 3, 2014, which reflects NRC's provision of public comments in response to FERC's publication of its draft EIS. In light of your request, I coordinated with NRR staff to make this memorandum publicly available.

This memorandum is now available in public ADAMS as ML14269A197, https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?

AccessionNumber=ML14269A197

. With regard to Entergy's safety evaluation and the NRC's confirmatory analysis and ALOHA calculation records, NRC staff has informed me that the items of information redacted from these records are still considered sensitive security-related information.

Moreover, in light of the recent Memorandum of Understanding between NRC and FERC regarding the designation of critical energy/electric infrastructure information (CEII), it is expected that some or all of this same information would be designated by FERC as CEII.

Under the MOU, I would need to consult with FERC's CEII Coordinator. This consultation process does take some time. So, before undertaking that next step, I wanted to reach out to you to let you know what I've learned, to ascertain whether what I've set forth herein meets your needs and you'd be amenable to withdrawing your request, or whether you'd prefer to keep your FOIA request open, and have us continue along the path I've outlined herein. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience (but I would appreciate hearing from you this week).

Thank you.

.Margo L. Stevens FOIA Analyst/Team Leader (Qual X Contractor)

OCIO/GEMS/Information Services Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-2F7 Rockville, Maryland 20555-0001 Telephone #: (301) 415-8148 From: Stevens, Margo Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 10:05 AM To: pmblanch@comcast.net

Subject:

NRC-2018-000820 Good morning Paul.

Acknowledgment letter signed by Stephanie Blaney, FOIA Officer. No hard copy to follow. If you are unable to open the document, please let us know by return email (FOIA.Resource@nrc.gov) or call 301-415-7169.

If you are interested in receiving information from the NRC FOIA program, subscribe to our distribution list Thank you.

Margo L. Stevens FOIA Analyst/Team Leader (Qual X Contractor)

OCIO/GEMS/Information Services Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-2F7 Rockville, Maryland 20555-0001 Telephone #: (301) 415-8148