ML24093A275
| ML24093A275 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/2024 |
| From: | Mercer J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 56980, 50-275-LR-2, 50-323-LR-2, ASLBP 24-983-02-LR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML24093A275 (0) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL
Before the Licensing Board:
Jeremy A. Mercer, Chair Nicholas G. Trikouros Dr. Gary S. Arnold
In the Matter of: Docket Nos. 50-275 LR-2 50-323 LR-2 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ASLBP No. 24-983-02-LR-BD01 (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2)
April 2, 2024
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference)
The Licensing Board will conduct an initial prehearing conference in this license renewal
proceeding on Wednesday, May 22, 2024, beginning at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time to hear
argument on the standing of and admissibility of contentions asserted by San Luis Obispo
Mothers for Peace (Mothers for Peace), Friends of the Earth (Friends), and Environmental
Working Group (Group) (collectively, Petitioners). The oral argument will be conducted in-
person in the Panels Rockville Hearing Room, located on the third floor of Two White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 1 Members of the public are welcome to
1 The Board thanks counsel for their positions relative to when to hold oral argument (unanimous agreement) and whether the non-evident iary oral argument should be conducted in the Panels Hearing Room or at a location near the plant at issue. Each of the three submissions took a different position relative to where to hold the argument. Because all counsel who filed pleadings and all ASLBP judges and staff are located near the already equipped and secured Rockville, Maryland Hearing Room, and argument at a remote location would necessitate costs of obtaining, equipping, and securing a remote location (not to mention cross-country travel for all involved personnel), the Board has decided to hold the oral argument in the Hearing Room. But as discussed below, t he Board will webcast the oral argument so that those not able to attend in-person can view/listen to the argument.
attend and observe this oral argument. No signs, banners, displays, or other demonstration
materials will be permitted inside the Hearing Room.
No later than May 15, 2024, each counsel shall advise the Boards law clerk, Ms.
Newman, by email (emily.newman@nrc.gov), with copy to all other counsel, how many counsel
and experts (if any) will be attending the in-person hearing on behalf of each participant.
Anyone attending the oral argument in-person must enter through the main entrance of
the One White Flint North building (11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland). Visitors, i.e.,
anyone not an NRC employee, must have a valid government-issued picture ID and are
required to submit to a security screening process to gain entrance to the building. Given the
time needed for security screening and to be escorted to the Hearing Room, anyone attending
the oral argument in person should plan to arrive at the main entrance to One White Flint North
no later than 12:40 p.m. EDT.
The oral argument also will be webcas t on the NRCs website and a listen-only
telephone number will be provided. Additional details regarding viewing the webcast and
accessing the listen-only call-in number will be provided in a subsequent order. Please note,
though, that those who attend in-person (other than counsel), watch the webcast, or listen on
the phone line will be permitted only to listen to or observe the argument; they will not be
permitted to speak or participate in the oral argument.
The oral arguments primary purpose is to allow the Board to ask questions and obtain
answers concerning standing and the admissibility of the petitioners three proffered
contentions. See, e.g., 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(d), (e), & (f). The Board will hear from counsel for
Petitioners (we understand Ms. Curran will present argument on behalf of Petitioners jointly),
counsel for Applicant, and counsel for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff. Because the
argument is not an evidentiary hearing, the participants should not attempt to introduce
- 3 -
evidence during the argument. Material not cited and arguments not advanced in the
submissions should not be raised (with the exception of financial support of Groupsee below).
In addition to whatever preparation counsel believes is necessary for the oral argument,
counsel should be prepared to discuss two standing-related issues. First, counsel should be
prepared to discuss standing of groups without members but with supporters, in light of
Consolidated Edison Company of New York (Indian Point, Unit No. 2), LBP-82-25, 15 N.R.C.
715 (1982). That preparation should include, among other things, whether any of the three
supporters who submitted Declarations in support of Group, or whether any of its supporters
who may live within 50 miles of the Diablo Canyon plant, are financial supporters of Group.
Second, counsel should be prepared to address the discretionary intervention standards
cited by Group and how Group meets/does not meet those standards, especially in the context
of it being a joint Petitioner here who raises no contention not already raised by another
Petitioner.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY ANDLICENSINGBOARD
/RA/
JeremyA.Mercer,Chair ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
Rockville, Maryland April 2, 2024 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
In the Matter of )
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-275-LR-2
) 50-323-LR-2 (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, )
Units 1 and 2) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop: O-16B33 Mail Stop - O-14A44 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ocaamail.resource@nrc.gov Ian Murphy David Roth Susan H. Vrahoretis U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jeremy L. Wachutka Office of the Secretary of the Commission Caitlin R. Byrd, Law Clerk Mail Stop: O-16B33 Georgiann E. Hampton, Law Clerk Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ian.murphy@nrc.gov E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov david.roth@nrc.gov susan.vrahoretis@nrc.gov jeremy.wachutka@nrc.gov U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission caitlin.byrd@nrc.gov Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel georgiann.hampton@nrc.gov Mail Stop: T-3F23 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Jeremy A. Mercer, Chair, Administrative Counsel for Pacific Gas and Electric Judge Company Nicholas G. Trikouros, Administrative Judge Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC Dr. Gary S. Arnold, Administrative Judge 1111 Pennsylvania Ave NW Emily Newman, Law Clerk Washington, DC 20004 E-mail: jeremy.mercer@nrc.gov Paul Bessette nicholas.trikouros@nrc.gov Scott Clausen gary.arnold@nrc.gov Ryan K. Lighty emily.newman@nrc.gov Timothy Matthews E-mail: paul.bessette@morganlewis.com scott.clausen@morganlewis.com ryan.lighty@morganlewis.com timothy.matthews@morganlewis.com
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Scheduling Initial Prehearing Conference)
Counsel for San Luis Obispo Mothers for Counsel for Friends of the Earth Peace 1101 15th Street, 11th Floor Harmon, Curran, Spielberg, & Washington, DC 20005 Eisenberg, LLP Hallie Templeton 1725 DeSales Street, N.W. E-mail: HTempleton@foe.org Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 Diane Curran California Energy Commission E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com Chief Counsels Office 715 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Counsel for Environmental Working Group Devin Black 1250 I Street, NW. Suite 1000 E-mail: devin.black@energy.ca.gov Washington, DC 20005 Caroline Leary E-mail: cleary@ewg.org
Office of the Secretary of the Commission
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of April 2024.
2