ML12089A675

From kanterella
Revision as of 17:39, 6 February 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Entergy Pre-Filed Hearing Exhibit ENT000365, Transcript of Adjudicatory Hearing in the Matter of: Entergy Nuclear Indian Point, Units 2 & 3, for a State Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit Renewal and Modification, Pages 2654, 273
ML12089A675
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 11/15/2011
From:
State of NY, Dept of Environmental Conservation
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
Shared Package
ML12089A671 List:
References
RAS 22137, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01, 3-5522-00011/00004, 3-5522-00011/00030, 3-5522-00105/00031
Download: ML12089A675 (3)


Text

ENT000365 Submitted: March 29, 2012 2654 1 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 2

3 In the Matter of:

4 Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, 5 and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC DEC No.:

6 3-5522-00011/00004 SPDES No.:

7 NY-0004472 8 For a State Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit Renewal and Modification 9 ___________________________________________________

10 Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, 11 Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

12 DEC App. Nos.

3-5522-00011/00030 13 (IP2) 3-5522-00105/00031 14 Joint Application for CWA § 401 Water Quality 15 Certification 16 ADJUDICATORY HEARING BEFORE:

17 DANIEL P. O'CONNELL, ALJ 18 MARIA E. VILLA, ALJ 19 20 NYS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 625 Broadway, 1st Floor 21 Albany, New York 12233 22 November 15, 2011 8:32 a.m.

23 M-F REPORTING, INC. (518) 478-7220

(KOLAKOWSKI CROSS ENTERGY) 2736 1 sub-paragraph 4.

2 Q. So, is it still your understanding of the 3 prohibition in section 0807 that section 1 prohibits the 4 discharge of all radiological materials?

5 A. No. It appears that it doesn't, on further read, 6 but -- and that's why I included the general prohibition 7 of I think it was 0501 when I took the stand.

8 Q. So, is it your testimony now that you're changing 9 your testimony with respect to whether 17-0807(1) 10 applies to Entergy's releases?

11 A. It doesn't appear to be the best fit for the 12 statement I made, correct.

13 Q. So, your understanding -- is it your 14 understanding that discharge of radiological, chemical, 15 or biological warfare agents, that means that the 16 radiological qualifies as a warfare agent?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And that's not what Entergy has released in this 19 case, right?

20 A. Correct.

21 Q. No radiological warfare agents?

22 A. Not that I'm aware of.

23 Q. Now, the second prohibition is 17-0807(1) is the

(KOLAKOWSKI CROSS ENTERGY) 2737 1 prohibition on the discharge of high-level radioactive 2 waste as such terms are defined by the act.

3 Is it your position that the materials that have 4 leaked in this case are high-level radioactive waste, as 5 those terms are defined by the act?

6 A. No.

7 JUDGE VILLA: Short break. So let's say 8 come back at 10 minutes after 10.

9 (Recess taken.)

10 JUDGE VILLA: Back on.

11 Mr. Trach, whenever you are ready.

12 MR. TRACH: Thank you, Your Honor.

13 EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. TRACH:

15 Q. Mr. Kolakowski, I would like to talk to you for a 16 bit about ECL Section 17-0807 4. We discussed your 17 current position with regard to the applicability of 18 section 1 prior to the break, and I believe you 19 testified that you still believe that section 4 applies 20 to the discharges in this case, correct?

21 A. Yes, I believe so.

22 Q. And if I am reading it correctly, actually, you 23 wouldn't have a copy of 17-0807 but it's mentioned in