ML101260572: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 05/06/2010 | | issue date = 05/06/2010 | ||
| title = 2010/05/06-NRC Staff'S Answer to Tennessee Valley Authority'S Motion to Dismiss Southern Alliance for Clear Energy'S Contention 1 as Moot | | title = 2010/05/06-NRC Staff'S Answer to Tennessee Valley Authority'S Motion to Dismiss Southern Alliance for Clear Energy'S Contention 1 as Moot | ||
| author name = Dreher M | | author name = Dreher M | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/OGC | | author affiliation = NRC/OGC | ||
| addressee name = | | addressee name = |
Revision as of 10:11, 11 July 2019
ML101260572 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Watts Bar ![]() |
Issue date: | 05/06/2010 |
From: | Dreher M NRC/OGC |
To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
SECY RAS | |
References | |
50-391-OL, ASLBP 09-893-01-OL-BD01, RAS 17847 | |
Download: ML101260572 (6) | |
Text
May 6, 2010 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
In the Matter of )
)
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ) Docket No. 50-391-OL ) (Watts Bar Unit 2) )
NRC STAFF'S ANSWER TO TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY'S MOTION TO DISMISS SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY'S CONTENTION 1 AS MOOT INTRODUCTION
On April 19, 2010, Tennessee Valley Authority ("TVA") filed a motion before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("Board") to dism iss admitted Contention 1 on mootness grounds.
Motion to Dismiss Southern Alliance for Clean E nergy's Contention 1 as Moot (April 19, 2010)
("Motion"). On May 6, 2010, Intervenors Southern Alliance for Clear Energy ("SACE") filed a
letter with the Board stating that SACE does not intend to oppose the Motion and considers
Contention 1 to be resolved. Letter from Diane Curran to the Board (May 6, 2010). The NRC
Staff supports the motion for the reasons discussed below.
BACKGROUND On May 1, 2009, the NRC published a Notice of Opportunity for Hearing on the
operating license ("OL") application of TVA for the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2.
1 On July 13, 2009, SACE along with several other entities, filed a single combined petition to intervene and 1 Tennessee Valley Authority [TVA]; Notice of Re ceipt of Update to Application for Facility Operating License and Notice of Opportunity for H earing for the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 and Order Imposing Procedures for Access , 74 Fed. Reg. 20,350 (May 1, 2009). Requests for a hearing and petitions to intervene were due by June 30, 2009.
Id. at 20351. Upon request, the Commission extended SACE's filing deadline without comment to July 14, 2009. Order (June 24, 2009) (unpublished).
hearing request ("Petition") for the operating license application of Watts Bar Unit 2.
On November 19, 2009, the Board granted party status only to SACE 2 and admitted two environmental contentions, including Contention 1, which alleges that TVA's Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement ("FSEIS") for the Completion and Operation of Watts Bar
Nuclear Plant Unit 2 3 failed to list and discuss the status of compliance with applicable permits, approvals, and environmental quality standards, as required by 10 C.F.R. § 51.45(d)
.4 In admitting Contention 1 as a "contention of omission," the Board held that "only the allegation
regarding the additional, unspecified and unlisted permits supports the admission of this
contention."
Watts Bar , LBP-09-26, 72 NRC at __ (slip op. at 19, 21). On April 9, 2010, in response to a Staff Request for Additional Information ("RAI"), 5 TVA provided Table G-5, "Federal, State, and Local Authorizations," which lists and describes "[a]ll federal, state, and
local authorizations, consultations, and environmental permits needed for operation of Unit 2
and the status of each." RAI Response at E1-6; Table G-5. Following its submission of the
requested information, TVA filed the instant Motion, seeking dismissal of Contention 1 on the
grounds that it has been mooted by TVA's April 9, 2010 RAI Response. Motion at 5.
2 The Board determined that the remaining parties had not adequately justified their late filing.
See Tennessee Valley Authority (Watts Bar Unit 2), LBP-09-26, 70 NRC __ (Nov. 19, 2009) (slip op. at 2-3), aff'd , CLI-10-12, 72 NRC __ (March 26, 2010)(slip op.).
3 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Completion and Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2, Rhea County, Tenn. (June 2007) (Agency-wide Documents Access and Management Systems ("ADAMS
") Accession No. ML080510469).
4 Watts Bar , LPB-09-26, 70 NRC __, slip op. at 15-21, aff'd on other grounds , CLI-10-12, 71 NRC
__ (Mar. 26, 2010)(slip op.); Petition at 6-8.
5 NRC Staff Watts Bar 2 RAI, at 8 (Dec.
3, 2009) (ML093290073) (requesting "a list of all authorizations, consultations, and environmental permits and approvals needed for operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2 and prov ide a status for each item").
DISCUSSION I. Legal Standard A contention alleging that required information has been omitted from an application for
an operating license must be modified or dismissed as moot where the information in question
is provided in response to a Staff RAI.
See Duke Energy Corp. (McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2; Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2), CLI-02-28, 56 NRC 373, 382-383 (2002).
II. Discussion The Board admitted Contention 1 as a "contention of omission,"
Watts Bar , LBP-09-26, 70 NRC at __ (slip op. at 21), to the limited extent that SACE alleged that TVA's application did
not include "unspecified permits that should have been listed and discussed by TVA" in the
application, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 51.45(d).
Id. at 19. With respect to two documents enumerated in its contention (i.e., the Interagency Agreement and National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES") permit), the Board held that SACE had not alleged facts
sufficient to raise a genuine dispute warranting admission of its contention. However, citing
TVA's FSEIS, the Board admitted SACE's contention because TVA "concedes that there are
other applicable permits and approvals but does not identify them or discuss the current
compliance status."
Id. at 21.
In its Motion, TVA states that in response to the Staff's December 3, 2009 RAI, TVA has now supplied "all federal, state, and local authorizations, consultations, and environmental
permits needed for operation of Unit 2 and the status of each." Motion at 3 (quotations omitted).
To the extent that TVA's response ameliorates the cited omissions in its original FSEIS, see Watts Bar , LBP-09-26, 70 NRC at __ (slip op. at 19), the Staff supports TVA's request that Contention 1 be dismissed as moot.
See McGuire/Catawba , CLI-02-28, 56 NRC at 382-383.
CONCLUSION In conclusion, the Staff supports dismissal of Contention 1 on the grounds that it is
rendered moot by TVA's submittal of additional information.
Respectfully submitted, /Signed (electronically) by/ Michael G. Dreher Counsel for the NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O15-D21 Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-2314 E-Mail: Michael.Dreher@nrc.gov Signed: May 6, 2010 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
In the Matter of )
)
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ) Docket No. 50-391-OL ) (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing "NRC STAFF'S ANSWER TO TENNESSEE
VALLEY AUTHORITY'S MOTION TO DISMISS SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN
ENERGY'S CONTENTION 1 AS MOOT," dated May 6, 2010, have been served upon the
following by the Electronic Information Exchange, this 6th day of May 2010:
Administrative Judge
Lawrence G. McDade, Chair
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop: T-3 F23
Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: lgm1@nrc.gov Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop: O-16G4
Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: OCAAMAIL.resource@nrc.gov Administrative Judge Paul B. Abramson
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop: T-3 F23
Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: pba@nrc.gov Office of the Secretary Attn: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff
Mail Stop: O-16G4
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov Administrative Judge Gary S. Arnold
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop: T-3 F23
Washington, DC 20555-0001
E-mail: gxa1@nrc.gov Edward Vigluicci, Esq.
Christopher C. Chandler, Esq.
Scott A. Vance, Esq.
Tennessee Valley Authority
400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT 6A-K
Knoxville, TN 37902
E-mail: ejvigluicci@tva.gov
ccchandler0@tva.gov
savance@tva.gov Kathryn M. Sutton, Esq.
Paul M. Bessette, Esq.
1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20004
E-mail: ksutton@morganlewis.com E-mail: pbessette@morganlewis.com Diane Curran Matthew D. Fraser
for Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE)
Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP
1726 M Street N.W., Suite 600
Washington, DC 20036
E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com E-mail: mfraser@harmoncurran.com
/Signed (electronically) by/ Michael G. Dreher Counsel for the NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O15-D21 Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-2314 E-Mail: Michael.Dreher@nrc.gov Signed: May 6, 2010