ML12272A381: 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 14: Line 14:
| page count = 8
| page count = 8
}}
}}
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of  ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 
  )  50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.  )
  )
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3)  )
  ) September 28, 2012 ENTERGY'S ANSWER TO NEW YORK ST ATE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN ADDITIONAL EXHIBIT AND QUESTIONS ON CONTENTION NYS-12C I. INTRODUCTION In accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(b), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ("Entergy") files this Answer to the State of New York ("New York") Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Additional Cross-Examination Questions Concerning Contention NYS-12C
("Motion").
1  New York proffers one additional exhibit, referred to as the "FY13 Long-Term Research Plan," an e-mail chain and associated document authored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") Staff, which, according to New York, supports its arguments in NYS-12C on Entergy's severe accident mitigation alternatives ("SAMA") analysis.
2    As discussed below, although Entergy did not object to New York's submission of the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan as an exhibit, New York offers no reason why additional examination questions are necessary and why it should be the only party allowed to submit such questions to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("Board"). Accordingly, the Board should deny New York's unnecessary and inequitable request, or, in the alternative, grant Entergy a
1  State of New York Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Additional Cross-Examination Questions Concerning Consolidated Contention NYS-12C (Sept. 18, 2012) ("Motion"), available at ADAMS Accession No. ML12262A547.
2  Id. at 2.
2  reciprocal right and accept Entergy's supplemen tal proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C, which have been filed in camera as Attachment 1.
II. ARGUMENT  The Board has indicated that, to the extent relevant, newly-created or recently-obtained documents are identified prior to hearing, such documents may be proffered as new exhibits.
3  While Entergy disagrees with the conclusions New York draws from the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan and stands by its testimony demons trating that the MACCS2 inputs used in this proceeding were reasonable and subject to extensive peer review, Entergy recognizes that the "pedigree" of these inputs is at issue in NYS-12C.
4  Therefore, Entergy does not oppose New York offering that document as an exhibit.
Entergy does, however, oppose New York's submission of proposed examination questions associated with the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan. In accordance with the Scheduling Order dated July 1, 2010 ("Scheduling Order"), and subsequent Order dated July 12, 2012, 5 the Board provided the parties with an opportunity to propose examination questions for Track 1 Contentions by August 29, 2012. The Boar d's Scheduling Order pr ovided "all parties" with an equal opportunity to file proposed questions, 6 but New York now unilaterally seeks leave to submit additional questions based on a document that New York did not disclose until September 14, 2012 7-more than two weeks af ter the August 29 deadline for such questions. 
3  See Official Transcript of Proceedings, Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1 & 2 [sic -2 & 3] at 1220, 1245-46 (Sept. 24, 2012), available at ADAMS Accession No. ML12269A439.
4  See Testimony of Entergy Witnesses Lori Potts, Kevin O'Kula, and Grant Teagarden on Consolidated Contention NYS-12C (Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives Analysis) at 55-60 (Mar. 30, 2012) (ENT000450).
5  Licensing Board Order (Memorializing Items Discussed During the July 9, 2012 Status Conference) (July 12, 2012) (unpublished).
6  Scheduling Order at 15.
7  Motion at 6.
3  Because Entergy had no opportunity to address this document in its proposed questions, fundamental fairness dictates that Board deny New York's request to submit questions on the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan.
Furthermore, consistent with the Board's de nial of Entergy's request to submit relevant NYS-12C surrebuttal addressing new evidence presented for the first time in New York's rebuttal, the issues raised in the instant Motion "can be handled at the evidentiary hearing" without another round of pre-hearing submissions.
8  Specifically, after examining witnesses at the hearing, the Board can afford the parties an opportunity to sugge st additional follow-up questions for the Board to consider asking the witnesses and, to the ex tent that the Board determines those questions are necessary to ensure an adequate record, the Board can ask the witnesses those questions.
9  In light of these other proce dural options, New York fails to demonstrate good cause for the submission of additional questions.
In the alternative, if the Board accepts New York's proposed questions, fairness dictates that the Board grant Entergy a reciprocal right and accept Entergy's supplemental proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C, which have been filed in camera as Attachment 1.
8  Licensing Board Order (Denying Applicant's Motion for Leave to File Surrebuttal Testimony on NYS-12C) at 4 (Aug. 2, 2012) (unpublished).
9  See, e.g., Honeywell Int'l Inc. (Metropolis Works Uranium Conversion Facility), LBP-12-6, 75 NRC __, slip op. at 21-22 (Feb. 29, 2012) ("At the conclusion of the Board's witness questioning, the parties were given the opportunity to submit proposed rebuttal questions for the Board to ask. After reviewing the questions, the Board recalled the NRC Staff witnesses to respond to a question proposed by Honeywell.").
4  III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Board should deny New York's request to submit examination questions, or, in the alternative, grant Entergy the same right and accept Entergy's supplemental proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C.
Respectfully submitted,  Executed in accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)
William B. Glew, Jr., Esq. Kathryn M. Sutton, Esq. William C. Dennis, Esq. Paul M. Bessette, Esq.
ENTERGY SERVICES, INC. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 440 Hamilton Avenue  1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW White Plains, NY 10601    Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (914) 272-3202    Phone: (202) 739-3000 Fax:  (914) 272-3205    Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail:  wglew@entergy.com  E-mail:  ksutton@morganlewis.com E-mail:  wdennis@entergy.com  E-mail:  pbessette@morganlewis.com
Martin J. O'Neill, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1000 Louisiana Street Suite 4000 Houston, TX 77002 Phone: (713) 890-5710 Fax: (713) 890-5001 E-mail:  martin.oneill@morganlewis.com Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Dated in Washington, D.C.
this 28th day of September 2012 1  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of  ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 
  )  50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.  )
  )
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3)  )
  ) September 28, 2012 MOTION CERTIFICATION Counsel for Entergy certifies that he has made a sincere effort to make himself available to listen and respond to the moving parties, and to resolve the factual and legal issues raised in the motion, and that his efforts to resolve the issues have been unsuccessful.
Executed in accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)
Paul M. Bessette, Esq.      MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20004 Phone:  (202) 739-5796 Fax:  (202) 739-3001 E-mail:  pbessette@morganlewis.com
Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of  ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 
  )  50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.  )
  )
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3)  )
  ) September 28, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the "Enter gy's Answer to New York State' s Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Questions on Contention NYS-12C" was served electronically via the Electronic Information Exchange on the following recipients:
Administrative Judge
Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Mail Stop:  T-3 F23
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail:  Lawrence.McDade@nrc.gov)
Administrative Judge Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Mail Stop:  T-3 F23
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail:  Michael.Kennedy@nrc.gov) Administrative Judge Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Mail Stop:  T-3 F23
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail:  Richard.Wardwell@nrc.gov)
Office of the Secretary Attn:  Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 (E-mail:  hearingdocket@nrc.gov)
Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop: O-7H4M
Washington, DC  20555-0001 (E-mail:  ocaamail.resource@nrc.gov) Shelbie Lewman, Law Clerk Anne Siarnacki, Law Clerk Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Mail Stop:  T-3 F23
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail:  Shelbie.Lewman@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Anne.Siarnacki@nrc.gov)
Sherwin E. Turk, Esq. Edward L. Williamson, Esq.
Beth N. Mizuno, Esq.
David E. Roth, Esq.
Brian G. Harris, Esq.
Mary B. Spencer, Esq.
Anita Ghosh, Esq. 
Joseph A. Lindell, Esq.
Brian Newell, Paralegal
Office of the General Counsel
Mail Stop:  O-15D21
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC  20555-0001 (E-mail:  Sherwin.Turk@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Edward.Williamson@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Beth.Mizuno@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  David.Roth@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Brian.Harris@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Mary.Spencer@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Anita.Ghosh@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Joseph.Lindell@nrc.gov)
(E-mail:  Brian.Newell@nrc.gov) Melissa-Jean Rotini, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Office of Robert F. Meehan, Esq.
Westchester County Attorney
148 Martine Avenue, 6th Floor
White Plains, NY 10601 (E-mail:  MJR1@westchestergov.com) 
Phillip Musegaas, Esq.
Deborah Brancato, Esq.
Riverkeeper, Inc.
20 Secor Road
Ossining, NY 10562 (E-mail:  phillip@riverkeeper.org)
(E-mail:  dbrancato@riverkeeper.org)
Manna Jo Greene Karla Raimundi
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. 724 Wolcott Ave.
Beacon, NY 12508 (E-mail:  mannajo@clearwater.org)
(E-mail:  karla@clearwater.org)
(E-mail:  stephenfiller@gmail.com)
Daniel Riesel, Esq.
Victoria Shiah Treanor, Esq.
Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C.
460 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 (E-mail:  driesel@sprlaw.com)
(E-mail:  vshiah@sprlaw.com)
John J. Sipos, Esq.
Charlie Donaldson Esq.
Assistant Attorneys General Office of the Attorney General of New York of New York
The Capitol
Albany, NY 12224-0341 (E-mail: John.Sipos@ag.ny.gov)
(E-mail: Charlie.Donaldson@ag.ny.gov)
John Louis Parker, Esq. Office of General Counsel, Region 3 New York Dept. of Environmental
Conservation
21 S. Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, New York  12561-1620 (E-mail:  jlparker@gw.dec.state.ny.us)
DB1/ 71175473 Sean Murray, Mayor Kevin Hay, Village Administrator Village of Buchanan Municipal Building
236 Tate Avenue
Buchanan, NY 10511-1298 (E-mail:  smurray@villageofbuchanan.com) 
(E-mail: Administrator@villageofbuchanan.com)
Michael J. Delaney, Esq. Vice President -Energy Department New York City Economic Development
Corporation (NYCDEC) 110 William Street New York, NY 10038 
mdelaney@nycedc.com Janice A. Dean, Esq.
Kathryn M. Liberatore, Esq.
Teresa Manzi Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General of New York of New York
120 Broadway, 26th Floor
New York, New York 10271 (E-mail: Janice.Dean@ag.ny.gov)
(E-mail: Kathryn.Liberatore@ag.ny.gov)
(E-mail: Teresa.Manzi@ag.ny.gov)
Signed (electronically) by Jonathan M. Rund Jonathan M. Rund, Esq.      MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20004 Phone:  (202) 739-5061      Fax:  (202) 739-3001      E-mail:  jrund@morganlewis.com
Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.}}

Revision as of 21:53, 1 August 2018

Entergy'S Answer to New York State'S Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Questions on Contention NYS-12C
ML12272A381
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/28/2012
From: Bessette P M, Dennis W C, Glew W B, O'Neill M J, Sutton K M
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Entergy Services, Morgan, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
RAS 23531, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01
Download: ML12272A381 (8)
v • d • e


Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and

) 50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. )

)

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) )

) September 28, 2012 ENTERGY'S ANSWER TO NEW YORK ST ATE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN ADDITIONAL EXHIBIT AND QUESTIONS ON CONTENTION NYS-12C I. INTRODUCTION In accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(b), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ("Entergy") files this Answer to the State of New York ("New York") Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Additional Cross-Examination Questions Concerning Contention NYS-12C

("Motion").

1 New York proffers one additional exhibit, referred to as the "FY13 Long-Term Research Plan," an e-mail chain and associated document authored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") Staff, which, according to New York, supports its arguments in NYS-12C on Entergy's severe accident mitigation alternatives ("SAMA") analysis.

2 As discussed below, although Entergy did not object to New York's submission of the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan as an exhibit, New York offers no reason why additional examination questions are necessary and why it should be the only party allowed to submit such questions to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("Board"). Accordingly, the Board should deny New York's unnecessary and inequitable request, or, in the alternative, grant Entergy a

1 State of New York Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Additional Cross-Examination Questions Concerning Consolidated Contention NYS-12C (Sept. 18, 2012) ("Motion"), available at ADAMS Accession No. ML12262A547.

2 Id. at 2.

2 reciprocal right and accept Entergy's supplemen tal proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C, which have been filed in camera as Attachment 1.

II. ARGUMENT The Board has indicated that, to the extent relevant, newly-created or recently-obtained documents are identified prior to hearing, such documents may be proffered as new exhibits.

3 While Entergy disagrees with the conclusions New York draws from the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan and stands by its testimony demons trating that the MACCS2 inputs used in this proceeding were reasonable and subject to extensive peer review, Entergy recognizes that the "pedigree" of these inputs is at issue in NYS-12C.

4 Therefore, Entergy does not oppose New York offering that document as an exhibit.

Entergy does, however, oppose New York's submission of proposed examination questions associated with the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan. In accordance with the Scheduling Order dated July 1, 2010 ("Scheduling Order"), and subsequent Order dated July 12, 2012, 5 the Board provided the parties with an opportunity to propose examination questions for Track 1 Contentions by August 29, 2012. The Boar d's Scheduling Order pr ovided "all parties" with an equal opportunity to file proposed questions, 6 but New York now unilaterally seeks leave to submit additional questions based on a document that New York did not disclose until September 14, 2012 7-more than two weeks af ter the August 29 deadline for such questions.

3 See Official Transcript of Proceedings, Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1 & 2 [sic -2 & 3] at 1220, 1245-46 (Sept. 24, 2012), available at ADAMS Accession No. ML12269A439.

4 See Testimony of Entergy Witnesses Lori Potts, Kevin O'Kula, and Grant Teagarden on Consolidated Contention NYS-12C (Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives Analysis) at 55-60 (Mar. 30, 2012) (ENT000450).

5 Licensing Board Order (Memorializing Items Discussed During the July 9, 2012 Status Conference) (July 12, 2012) (unpublished).

6 Scheduling Order at 15.

7 Motion at 6.

3 Because Entergy had no opportunity to address this document in its proposed questions, fundamental fairness dictates that Board deny New York's request to submit questions on the FY13 Long-Term Research Plan.

Furthermore, consistent with the Board's de nial of Entergy's request to submit relevant NYS-12C surrebuttal addressing new evidence presented for the first time in New York's rebuttal, the issues raised in the instant Motion "can be handled at the evidentiary hearing" without another round of pre-hearing submissions.

8 Specifically, after examining witnesses at the hearing, the Board can afford the parties an opportunity to sugge st additional follow-up questions for the Board to consider asking the witnesses and, to the ex tent that the Board determines those questions are necessary to ensure an adequate record, the Board can ask the witnesses those questions.

9 In light of these other proce dural options, New York fails to demonstrate good cause for the submission of additional questions.

In the alternative, if the Board accepts New York's proposed questions, fairness dictates that the Board grant Entergy a reciprocal right and accept Entergy's supplemental proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C, which have been filed in camera as Attachment 1.

8 Licensing Board Order (Denying Applicant's Motion for Leave to File Surrebuttal Testimony on NYS-12C) at 4 (Aug. 2, 2012) (unpublished).

9 See, e.g., Honeywell Int'l Inc. (Metropolis Works Uranium Conversion Facility), LBP-12-6, 75 NRC __, slip op. at 21-22 (Feb. 29, 2012) ("At the conclusion of the Board's witness questioning, the parties were given the opportunity to submit proposed rebuttal questions for the Board to ask. After reviewing the questions, the Board recalled the NRC Staff witnesses to respond to a question proposed by Honeywell.").

4 III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Board should deny New York's request to submit examination questions, or, in the alternative, grant Entergy the same right and accept Entergy's supplemental proposed questions on Contention NYS-12C.

Respectfully submitted, Executed in accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)

William B. Glew, Jr., Esq. Kathryn M. Sutton, Esq. William C. Dennis, Esq. Paul M. Bessette, Esq.

ENTERGY SERVICES, INC. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 440 Hamilton Avenue 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW White Plains, NY 10601 Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (914) 272-3202 Phone: (202) 739-3000 Fax: (914) 272-3205 Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail: wglew@entergy.com E-mail: ksutton@morganlewis.com E-mail: wdennis@entergy.com E-mail: pbessette@morganlewis.com

Martin J. O'Neill, Esq.

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1000 Louisiana Street Suite 4000 Houston, TX 77002 Phone: (713) 890-5710 Fax: (713) 890-5001 E-mail: martin.oneill@morganlewis.com Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Dated in Washington, D.C.

this 28th day of September 2012 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and

) 50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. )

)

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) )

) September 28, 2012 MOTION CERTIFICATION Counsel for Entergy certifies that he has made a sincere effort to make himself available to listen and respond to the moving parties, and to resolve the factual and legal issues raised in the motion, and that his efforts to resolve the issues have been unsuccessful.

Executed in accord with 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d)

Paul M. Bessette, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 739-5796 Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail: pbessette@morganlewis.com

Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and

) 50-286-LR ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. )

)

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) )

) September 28, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the "Enter gy's Answer to New York State' s Motion for Leave to File an Additional Exhibit and Questions on Contention NYS-12C" was served electronically via the Electronic Information Exchange on the following recipients:

Administrative Judge

Lawrence G. McDade, Chair Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

Mail Stop: T-3 F23

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: Lawrence.McDade@nrc.gov)

Administrative Judge Dr. Michael F. Kennedy Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

Mail Stop: T-3 F23

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: Michael.Kennedy@nrc.gov) Administrative Judge Dr. Richard E. Wardwell Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

Mail Stop: T-3 F23

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: Richard.Wardwell@nrc.gov)

Office of the Secretary Attn: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 (E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov)

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop: O-7H4M

Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: ocaamail.resource@nrc.gov) Shelbie Lewman, Law Clerk Anne Siarnacki, Law Clerk Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

Mail Stop: T-3 F23

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: Shelbie.Lewman@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Anne.Siarnacki@nrc.gov)

Sherwin E. Turk, Esq. Edward L. Williamson, Esq.

Beth N. Mizuno, Esq.

David E. Roth, Esq.

Brian G. Harris, Esq.

Mary B. Spencer, Esq.

Anita Ghosh, Esq.

Joseph A. Lindell, Esq.

Brian Newell, Paralegal

Office of the General Counsel

Mail Stop: O-15D21

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 (E-mail: Sherwin.Turk@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Edward.Williamson@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Beth.Mizuno@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: David.Roth@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Brian.Harris@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Mary.Spencer@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Anita.Ghosh@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Joseph.Lindell@nrc.gov)

(E-mail: Brian.Newell@nrc.gov) Melissa-Jean Rotini, Esq.

Assistant County Attorney

Office of Robert F. Meehan, Esq.

Westchester County Attorney

148 Martine Avenue, 6th Floor

White Plains, NY 10601 (E-mail: MJR1@westchestergov.com)

Phillip Musegaas, Esq.

Deborah Brancato, Esq.

Riverkeeper, Inc.

20 Secor Road

Ossining, NY 10562 (E-mail: phillip@riverkeeper.org)

(E-mail: dbrancato@riverkeeper.org)

Manna Jo Greene Karla Raimundi

Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. 724 Wolcott Ave.

Beacon, NY 12508 (E-mail: mannajo@clearwater.org)

(E-mail: karla@clearwater.org)

(E-mail: stephenfiller@gmail.com)

Daniel Riesel, Esq.

Victoria Shiah Treanor, Esq.

Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C.

460 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 (E-mail: driesel@sprlaw.com)

(E-mail: vshiah@sprlaw.com)

John J. Sipos, Esq.

Charlie Donaldson Esq.

Assistant Attorneys General Office of the Attorney General of New York of New York

The Capitol

Albany, NY 12224-0341 (E-mail: John.Sipos@ag.ny.gov)

(E-mail: Charlie.Donaldson@ag.ny.gov)

John Louis Parker, Esq. Office of General Counsel, Region 3 New York Dept. of Environmental

Conservation

21 S. Putt Corners Road

New Paltz, New York 12561-1620 (E-mail: jlparker@gw.dec.state.ny.us)

DB1/ 71175473 Sean Murray, Mayor Kevin Hay, Village Administrator Village of Buchanan Municipal Building

236 Tate Avenue

Buchanan, NY 10511-1298 (E-mail: smurray@villageofbuchanan.com)

(E-mail: Administrator@villageofbuchanan.com)

Michael J. Delaney, Esq. Vice President -Energy Department New York City Economic Development

Corporation (NYCDEC) 110 William Street New York, NY 10038

mdelaney@nycedc.com Janice A. Dean, Esq.

Kathryn M. Liberatore, Esq.

Teresa Manzi Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General of New York of New York

120 Broadway, 26th Floor

New York, New York 10271 (E-mail: Janice.Dean@ag.ny.gov)

(E-mail: Kathryn.Liberatore@ag.ny.gov)

(E-mail: Teresa.Manzi@ag.ny.gov)

Signed (electronically) by Jonathan M. Rund Jonathan M. Rund, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 739-5061 Fax: (202) 739-3001 E-mail: jrund@morganlewis.com

Counsel for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML12272A381&oldid=932002"