Letter Sequence Other |
---|
|
Initiation
- Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request
- Acceptance, Acceptance
Results
Other: ML052280187, ML060410476, ML060410481, ML060720127, ML060720129, ML060720130, ML061500190, ML061500192, ML061580022, ML062160029, ML062550158, ML062890168, ML062930088, ML070100418, ML070110360, ML070110371, ML071620386
|
MONTHYEARML0607201271992-08-31031 August 1992 Update of Alternate Cooling Water System Study for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Volume 1 Technical and Economic Evaluation Project stage: Other ML0607201291992-08-31031 August 1992 Update of Alternate Cooling Water System Study for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Volume 2 Environmental Effects and Cost Analyses Project stage: Other ML0522801872005-10-12012 October 2005 Enclosure 1: Figure 2-2 6-Mile Vicinity Map, Enclosure 2: Figure 2-3 Oyster Creek Generating Station Site Boundary Project stage: Other ML0534003822005-11-0101 November 2005 Environmental Scoping Meeting Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and National Environmental Policy Act, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0534003712005-11-0101 November 2005 Official Transcript of Proceedings, NRC: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Plant Public Meeting: Evening Session, Toms River, Nj, Tuesday, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0534003612005-11-0101 November 2005 Official Transcript of Proceedings - NRC, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Plant Public Meeting: Afternoon Session, Toms River, Nj, Tuesday, November 1, 2005 Project stage: Meeting ML0531303872005-11-0909 November 2005 Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives (SAMA) for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: RAI ML0535401002005-12-19019 December 2005 - Summary of Conference Call with Amergen Energy Company, LLC (Amergen) to Discuss the Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative (SAMA) Requests for Additional Information (Rais) for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: RAI ML0601302382006-01-0909 January 2006 Oyster Creek, Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Related to Severe Accident Management Alternatives (SAMA) Project stage: Response to RAI ML0604104762006-01-18018 January 2006 Letter to the Honorable Jon Corzine from New Jersey Dept of Environment Protection, Recommendation Against Further State Funding of the Radiation and Public Health Project Report on Strontium 90 and Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Other ML0604104812006-01-31031 January 2006 New Jersey Dept of Environmental Protection'S Review of the Radiation and Public Health Project'S Report on Strontium 90 and Baby Teeth of New Jersey Children with Cancer, as Relates to the Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Other ML0607201302006-03-0202 March 2006 Determination of Cooling Tower Availability for Oyster Creek Generating Station, Final Report Project stage: Other ML0606704802006-03-0505 March 2006 2006/03/05- Telecommunication with Amergen Energy Company, LLC, to Discuss Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to NRC Staff'S Review of the Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative (SAMA) Analysis in the Oyster Creek License Renewa Project stage: RAI ML0607201262006-03-0808 March 2006 2006/03/08-Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding the Environmental License Renewal Review for the Oyster Creek Generating Station Project stage: Response to RAI ML0607603792006-03-15015 March 2006 Oyster Creek - Clarifications to Responses to NRC Request for Additional Information Related to Severe Accident Management Alternatives Project stage: Response to RAI ML0615001922006-06-0909 June 2006 2006/06/09-Request Initiation of an Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0615602302006-06-0909 June 2006 Letter to C.N. Swenson: Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Draft Other ML0615001902006-06-0909 June 2006 2006/06/09-Request Initiation of a Section 7 Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0621600292006-06-13013 June 2006 Letter from Ms. Dorothy Guzzo, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, Regarding Oyster Creek Ngs License Renewal Project stage: Other ML0615800222006-06-13013 June 2006 2006/06/13-Oyster Creek License Renewal Application Review (TAC No. MC7625) (HPO-J2004-7021) Project stage: Other ML0620604362006-07-0505 July 2006 Email from Dotty Reynolds Regarding Environmental Review of Oyster Creek Project stage: Request ML0622301292006-07-12012 July 2006 Powerpoint Presentation Associated with Oyster Creek Draft EIS Public Meetings ML0622205262006-07-12012 July 2006 Transcript of Oyster Creek Dseis Meeting 07/12/2006, (Evening Session) Pp. 1-118 Project stage: Meeting ML0622204582006-07-12012 July 2006 Transcript of Oyster Creek Dseis Meeting 07/12/2006, (Afternoon Session) Pp. 1-105 Project stage: Meeting ML0620604432006-07-13013 July 2006 Email from Pat Crocker Regarding Environmental Review of Oyster Creek Ngs Project stage: Request ML0624800412006-08-0909 August 2006 2006/08/09-Comment (2) of Jim Saxton Opposing Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Issued as Part of the Operating License Renewal Process for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Facility in Forked River, New Jersey Project stage: Request ML0622301392006-08-10010 August 2006 2006/08/10-Summary of Public Meetings on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station License License Renewal Review ML0625501662006-08-30030 August 2006 Comment (6) of Edith Gbur, Re Questions Regarding EIS Project stage: Request ML0625501582006-08-30030 August 2006 2006/08/30-Comment (3) of Michael J. Kennish on Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Geis) Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Project stage: Other ML0625501682006-09-0101 September 2006 Comment (7) of David J. Mckeon, Re Oyster Creek EIS - Question on Strontium-90 Emission Project stage: Request ML0626102342006-09-0707 September 2006 Comment (9) of Robert Scro on Behalf of Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program Opposing the Generic Environmental Impact Station for Oyster Creek, Project stage: Request ML0626104162006-09-0808 September 2006 Comment (10) of Raechelle Edwards on Behalf of Julia Lemense Huff Re Renewal of Oyster Creek License Project stage: Request ML0626102452006-09-12012 September 2006 Comment (19) of Edith Gbur Re Oyster Creek EIS Project stage: Request ML0628901682006-09-28028 September 2006 2006/09/28-NOAA - F. Gillespie - Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Regarding License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0629300882006-10-18018 October 2006 2006/10/18-Letter Received on October 16, 2006, Regarding the Essential Fish Habitat for License Renewal of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (TAC #MC7625) Project stage: Other ML0701004182006-11-14014 November 2006 E-MAIL: (PA) Extension for Efh Consult Oyster Creek TAC MC7625 Project stage: Other ML0633203462006-11-21021 November 2006 NOAA Biological Opinion for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Request ML0633803662006-12-0404 December 2006 Email from William Maher, Exelon Corp., Non-rad Wastes at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Request ML0701103602007-01-17017 January 2007 Notice of Availability of the Final Plant - Specific Supplement 28 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (Geis) Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0701103712007-01-17017 January 2007 Final Supplement 28 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal Nuclear Plants Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Project stage: Other ML0701002342007-01-31031 January 2007 NUREG-1437, Vol. 1, Supp. 28, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Supplement 28 Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Final Report - Main Report. Project stage: Acceptance Review ML0701002582007-01-31031 January 2007 NUREG-1437, Vol. 2, Supp. 28, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Project stage: Acceptance Review ML0716203862007-05-24024 May 2007 E-Mail: (PA) the Consolidated Record for Consistency Appeals Under the Coastal Zone Management Act (Czma) Project stage: Other 2006-03-08
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:Letter
MONTHYEARML23342A1162024-01-0909 January 2024 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Security Inspection Plan L-23-019, Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.152023-12-18018 December 2023 Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.15 IR 05000219/20230022023-11-0909 November 2023 EA-23-076 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty - $43,750 - NRC Inspection Report No. 05000219/2023002 ML23286A1552023-10-13013 October 2023 Defueled Safety Analysis Report (DSAR) ML23249A1212023-09-0606 September 2023 NRC Inspection Report 05000219/2023002, Apparent Violation (EA-23-076) ML23242A1162023-08-30030 August 2023 Biennial 10 CFR 50.59 and 10 CFR 72.48 Change Summary Report January 1, 2021 Through December 31, 2022 ML23214A2472023-08-22022 August 2023 NRC Inspection Report 05000219/2023002 IR 05000219/20230012023-05-31031 May 2023 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000219/2023001 IR 07200015/20234012023-05-16016 May 2023 NRC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Security Inspection Report 07200015/2023401 ML23114A0912023-04-24024 April 2023 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for 2022 ML23114A0872023-04-24024 April 2023 Annual Radioactive Environmental Operating Report for 2022 L-23-004, HDI Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Reports - 20222023-04-24024 April 2023 HDI Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Reports - 2022 L-23-003, Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations2023-03-31031 March 2023 Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations ML23088A0382023-03-29029 March 2023 Stations 1, 2, & 3, Palisades Nuclear Plant, and Big Rock Point - Nuclear Onsite Property Damage Insurance ML22361A1022023-02-24024 February 2023 Reactor Decommissioning Branch Project Management Changes for Some Decommissioning Facilities and Establishment of Backup Project Manager for All Decommissioning Facilities IR 05000219/20220022023-02-0909 February 2023 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000219/2022002 ML23031A3012023-02-0808 February 2023 Discontinuation of Radiological Effluent Monitoring Location in the Sewerage System ML23033A5052023-02-0202 February 2023 First Use Notification of NRC Approved Cask RT-100 ML23025A0112023-01-24024 January 2023 LLRW Late Shipment Investigation Report Per 10 CFR 20, Appendix G ML22347A2732022-12-21021 December 2022 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Security Inspection Plan Dated December 21, 2022 ML22297A1432022-12-15015 December 2022 Part 20 App G Exemption Letter L-22-042, Oyster, Pilgrim, Indian Point, Palisades and Big Rock Point - Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.152022-12-14014 December 2022 Oyster, Pilgrim, Indian Point, Palisades and Big Rock Point - Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.15 IR 07200015/20224012022-12-0606 December 2022 NRC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Security Inspection Report 07200015/2022401 (Letter & Enclosure 1) ML22280A0762022-11-0202 November 2022 Us NRC Analysis of Holtec Decommissioning Internationals Funding Status Report for Oyster Creek, Indian Point and Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station ML22276A1762022-10-24024 October 2022 Decommissioning International Proposed Revisions to the Quality Assurance Program Approval Forms for Radioactive Material Packages ML22286A1402022-10-13013 October 2022 NRC Confirmatory Order EA-21-041 IR 05000219/20220012022-08-11011 August 2022 NRC Inspection Report 05000219/2022001 ML22215A1772022-08-0303 August 2022 Decommissioning International (HDI) Proposed Revisions to the Quality Assurance Program Approval Forms for Radioactive Material Packages ML22214A1732022-08-0202 August 2022 Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 20, Appendix G, Section Iii.E ML22207B8382022-07-26026 July 2022 NRC Confirmatory Order EA-21-041 ML22130A6882022-05-10010 May 2022 Late LLRW Shipment Investigation Report Pursuant to 10 CFR 20, Appendix G L-22-026, Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Report - 20212022-04-29029 April 2022 Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Report - 2021 ML22118A6122022-04-28028 April 2022 Annual Radioactive Environmental Operating Report for 2021 ML22118A5822022-04-28028 April 2022 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for 2021 ML22091A1062022-04-0101 April 2022 Nuclear Onsite Property Damage Insurance (10 CFR 50.54(w)(3)) L-22-022, and Indian Point Nuclear Generating Stations 1, 2, & 3 - Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations - Holtec.2022-03-25025 March 2022 and Indian Point Nuclear Generating Stations 1, 2, & 3 - Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations - Holtec. ML22069A3762022-03-10010 March 2022 Late LLRW Shipment Investigation Report Pursuant to 10 CFR 20, Appendix G ML22032A0582022-03-0808 March 2022 EA-21-139; EA-150: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station - NRC Investigation Report Nos.. 1-2021-002 & 1-2021-014 ML22060A2202022-03-0202 March 2022 NRC Office of Investigations Case No. 1-2021-009 ML22049B2452022-02-19019 February 2022 Late Low Level Radwaste Shipment Report Pursuant to 10 CFR 20 Appendix G IR 05000219/20214022022-01-26026 January 2022 EA-21-041: Confirmatory Order Related to Oyster Greek Nuclear Generating Station - NRC Investigation Report I-2020-007; NRC Inspection Report Nos. 05000219/2021402 & 07200015/2021401 ML22025A3422022-01-25025 January 2022 and Big Rock Point - Changes to Site Organization ML22025A2182022-01-25025 January 2022 Late LLRW Shipments Investigation Report Pursuant to 10 CFR 20, Appendix G ML22021B5512022-01-21021 January 2022 Compensatory Measures Not Implemented Per Site'S Physical Security Plan Due to Multiplexer (Mux) Power Supply Failure L-21-134, and Indian Point Nuclear Generating Stations 1, 2, & 3 - Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations2021-12-17017 December 2021 and Indian Point Nuclear Generating Stations 1, 2, & 3 - Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations ML21349A5192021-12-15015 December 2021 Commitment Change Summary Report ML21285A1912021-11-30030 November 2021 Nrc'S Analysis of Holtec Decommissioning International'S Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station and Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Docket Nos 50-219 and 50-293 IR 05000219/20210032021-11-16016 November 2021 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000219/2021003 L-21-118, Changes to Signature Authority & Addressee for Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC Correspondence Re to Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, 3, & Palisades2021-11-0909 November 2021 Changes to Signature Authority & Addressee for Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC Correspondence Re to Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, 3, & Palisades IR 05000219/20214042021-08-26026 August 2021 NRC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Security Inspection Report No. 07200015/2021402 and Security Decommissioning Inspection Report 05000219/2021404 - (Public) 2024-01-09
[Table view] |
Text
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE cy National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fO Washington, O.C. 20230 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL May 24, 2007 VIA U.S. MAIL AND TELEFAX [(202) 739-3001]Mr. Kenneth A. Rubin, Esq.Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20004 Re: The Consolidated Record for Consistency Appeals under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
Dear Mr. Rubin:
This letter responds to your March 19, 2007, e-mail to David Kaiser, Senior Policy Analyst, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), regarding the consolidated record for CZMA consistency appeals. You asked four questions regarding the consolidated record in the context of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)'s consideration of a license renewal application submitted by AmerGen Energy Company. After reviewing, pertinent statutory and regulatory language, I will respond to your four questions in turn.I. Background In August 2005, Congress enacted the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Pub. L. No. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005) (Energy Policy Act). The Energy Policy Act in part amended the CZMA by requiring the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to meet strict deadlines for processing CZMA consistency appeals. The Act also identifies the "consolidated record" as the initial record for consistency appeals involving energy projects.
Energy Policy Act§ 382, 16 U.S.C.A. § 1466 (2006). Section 382 stated: For any Federal administrative agency proceeding that is an appeal or review under section 319 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 US. C. 1465), as amended by this Act, related to any Federal authorization for the permitting, approval, or other authorization of an energy project, the lead Federal permitting agency for the project shall, with the cooperation of Federal and State administrative agencies, maintain a consolidated record of all decisions made or actions taken by the lead agency or by another Federal or State administrative agency or officer. Such record shall be the initial record for appeals or reviews under that Act, provided that the record may be supplemented as expressly provided pursuant to section 319 of that Act.Id. (emphasis added).The Secretary took a number of steps to implement this language.
First, he defined an"energy project" as one "related to the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of any facility designed to explore, develop, produce, transmit or transport energy or energy resources that are subject to review by a coastal State under subparts D, E, F or I of this part." 15 C.F.R. § 930.123(c)
(2006). Second, he defined "consolidated record" to mean"the record of all decisions made or actions taken by the lead Federal permitting agency or by another Federal or State administrative agency or officer, maintained by the lead Federal permitting agency, with the cooperation of Federal and State administrative agencies, related to any federal authorization for the permitting, approval or'other authorization of an energy project." Id. § 930.123(d).
Third, the Secretary issued a regulation regarding the consolidated record in energy project appeals, stating: (i) Appeal Decision Record for Energy Projects.
The provisions of this paragraph apply only to appeals for energy projects.(1) The Secretary shall use the consolidated record maintained by the lead Federal permitting agency as the initial record for an appeal under this subpart for energy projects.(2) The appellant's notice of appeal required by § 930.125(a) and (b) must be accompanied by two copies of the consolidated record maintained by the lead Federal permitting agency. One copy of the consolidated record must be in an electronic format compatible (to the extent practicable) with the website maintained by the Secretary to provide public information concerning appeals under the CZMA. Notwithstanding
§ 930.125(e), the Secretary may extend the time for filing a notice of appeal in connection with an energy project for good cause shown to allow appellant additional time to prepare the consolidated record for filing.15 C.F.R. § 930.127(i).
I will consider your questions against this backdrop.II. Submission of the Consolidated Record in Electronic Form You first asked whether an appellant may submit both copies of the consolidated record in electronic form pursuant to 15 C.F.R. § 930.127(i)(2).
The answer is no.2 The Secretary and NOAA require appellants to submit one hard copy in addition to one electronic copy. One hard copy is necessary due to the strict deadlines the Energy Policy Act imposed for processing consistency appeals.Ill. Submission of the Consolidated Record in Index Form Your second question is whether an appellant may submit the consolidated record in index form. The regulation does not permit appellants to submit an index in lieu of the consolidated record. Rather, it states: "The appellant's notice of appeal required by §930.125(a) and (b) must be accompanied by two copies of the consolidated record maintained by the lead Federal permitting agency." 15 C.F.R. § 920.127(i)(2).
While indexing of the administrative record is encouraged to help increase the usability of the record, the submittal of an index alone, without the underlying record, is not acceptable.
As referenced above, the CZMA now imposes strict processing deadlines, and the Department of Commerce needs to be able to begin review of the record soon after receiving the notice of appeal to meet these deadlines.
Submitting an index without the record, and requiring the Secretary to later request hard copies from the parties, would create unnecessary delay and could undermine the ability of the Secretary to meet these deadlines.
IV. The Content of the Consolidated Record Maintained by the Lead Federal Agency Where the Lead Federal Agency is the NRC Your letter also seeks clarification as to what the consolidated record contains.Specifically:
- Your third question seeks confirmation that for an NRC license renewal, the consolidated record consists of the authorizations specifically required in connection with issuance of a renewed license. You also would like to know if the record would include other documents that may relate to the facility license.In this regard, you noted an application for renewal of an NRC Operating License for a commercial nuclear power plant can be filed anywhere between twenty and thirty-five years after the initial licensing.
Thus, you state the NRC record or docket for the facility normally covers hundreds of NRC decisions or actions and decisions or actions of other agencies -none of which are tied 'to renewal of an NRC Operating License. They are, in your view, unrelated to the coastal zone, and have no significance for a CZMA consistency review or an appeal of a denial of consistency.
- As part of your fourth question, you seek confirmation that if, at the time an appellant files its appeal, there are proceedings pending before agencies other than (a) the lead Federal permitting agency and (b) the State agency reviewing CZMIA consistency determinations, the records of those pending proceedings are not included in the consolidated record.3 In general, the contents of the consolidated record initially should be determined by the by the lead Federal permitting agency. This is because the CZMA vests with the lead Federal permitting agency responsibility for maintaining the applicable record. See 16 U.S.C.A. § 1466. However, because the Secretary must base his decision in part upon this consolidated record, the Secretary ultimately is responsible for determining the sufficiency of any consolidated record submitted and may seek to supplement the record submitted by the lead agency.In April NOAA informally discussed this issue with Mr. Robert G. Schaaf of the NRC and in May with Ms. Mary Baty of the NRC. We understand that, preliminarily, NRC intends to include the following documents and information in the consolidated record for an NRC relicensing decision: 1. NRC's Safety Evaluation Report (NRC's decision document);
- 2. NRC's Environmental Impact Statement compiled under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 43 21-4370f, for the relicensing decision;3. Publicly-available NRC documents referenced in the two above items;and 4. The application submitted to NRC for NRC's relicensing decision.In addition, NOAA discussed with these individuals at NRC that the following state documents should also be included in the consolidated record, based on the requirement of 16 U.S.C. § 1466 that the lead Federal licensing agency maintain a record of applicable federal and state records: 1. The State CZMA agency's objection letter and any documents the State includes with that letter supporting its CZMA objection; and 2. Any communications between an applicant and the State CZMA agency regarding the State's CZMA decision.This list may not be exhaustive.
NOAA does not take a position at this time on whether these documents would constitute the entire record needed by the Secretary to make a decision in a CZMA appeal regarding an NRC relicensing decision.
NOAA would, however, make several general observations.
First, the consolidated record should include the entire record associated with relevant decision documents, not merely the decision documents themselves.
Second, as to pending reviews by other State and Federal agencies, the consolidated record should include all documents generated by such agencies prior to filing of the notice of appeal, even though those reviews have yet to be completed, if those pending State and/or Federal reviews are relevant to NRC's relicensing decision.
Finally, because the consolidated record is the record "related to any authorization," NRC should include in the record all documents pertaining to the relicensing of the facility, but may reasonably limit the record concerning actions taken prior to the licensing renewal application.
4 V. Incomplete Consolidated Record Your fourth question was what acti'ons an appellant might take if, at the time of a State objection, the consolidated record has not been compiled by the lead or other agency, and is therefore incomplete, or, at the time of a State's CZMA objection, the licensing Federal agency has not completed its review process. You wanted to know what, if any, additional actions must the appellant take to meet the consolidated record requirement under these circumstances.
The appellant has the obligation to submit the consolidated record with its notice of appeal. 15 C.F.R. § 930.127(i)(2).
As NOAA has previously stated, "in order for the Secretary to have sufficient time within the 160-day decision record period [established pursuant to the EPAct] to evaluate the decision record, the appellant must submit the lead Federal permitting agency's consolidated record along with appellant's notice of appeal." NOAA, Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations, 71 Fed. Reg.788, 800 (Jan. 5, 2006). Failure to submit the consolidated record with an appellant's notice of appeal is grounds for dismissal.
15 C.F.R. § 930.129.NOAA recognizes, however, there may be situations where the lead or other agency has not compiled the consolidated record, and the appellant will have no control over this.For this reason, NOAA's regulations provide that "[n]otwithstanding
§ 930.125(e), the Secretary, for good cause shown, may extend the time required for filing a notice of appeal for an energy project to allow appellant time to prepare the consolidated record for filing." 15 C.F.R. § 930.127(i)(2).
Appellants wishing to avail themselves of this exception are urged to provide a detailed explanation as to why the consolidated record is incomplete.
Appellants should submit this request as soon as possible to allow ample time for the Secretary to consider the request.In the other scenario you described (i.e., where the State has objected under the CZMA and the Federal agency has not completed its review of the project), the licensing Federal agency's record would be the record as it existed at the time of the State's objection.
Please feel free to contact Brett Grosko of my staff at brett.grosko~noaa.gov or (301)713-7384, if you have any further questions.
Sincerely, Joel La Bissonniere Assistant General Counsel for Ocean Services cc: Robert G. Schaaf, NRC Mary Baty, NRC Ruth Ehinger, New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection 5