ML17317A489
| ML17317A489 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/2017 |
| From: | Taylor W L Law Offices of Wallace L. Taylor, Sierra Club |
| To: | NRC/OCM |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-458-LR, ASLBP 17-956-01-LR-BD01, RAS 54045 | |
| Download: ML17317A489 (9) | |
Text
1BEFORETHEUNITEDSTATESNUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSIONINTHEMATTEROF))DocketNo.50-458-LRENTERGYOPERATIONS,INC.))November13,2017(RiverBendStation,Unit1))SIERRACLUB'SREPLYTOANSWERSOPPOSINGSIERRACLUB'SPETITIONTOINTERVENEINTRODUCTIONSierraClubfiledapetitiontointerveneinthelicenserenewalproceedingregardingtheRiverBendStation.EntergyOperations,Inc.andtheNRCStaffhavefiledAnswersopposingSierraClub'sintervention.NeitherEntergynortheNRCStaffhaveobjectedtoSierraClub'sstandingtointervene.TheironlyargumentisthatSierraClub'scontentionsarenotadmissible.Forthereasonssetforthbelow,SierraClub'scontentionsareadmissible.CONTENTIONNO.1ISADMISSIBLEContention1states:TheenvironmentalreportsubmittedbyEntergyOperationsdoesnotproperlyandadequatelystateapurposeandneedfortherelicensingofRiverBendStation.AsexplainedinSierraClub'sPetitiontoIntervene,thebrieftwo-paragraphstatementofpurposeandneedinSection1.0oftheERsimplyquotesfromanNRCguidance 2document.RegulatoryGuide4.2,Supplement1,Revision1,PreparationofEnvironmentalReportsforNuclearPowerPlantLicenseRenewalApplications(NRC2013a,page10).Thatdocumentstatesthat"thepurposeandneedfortheproposedaction(i.e.,theissuanceofarenewednuclearplantoperatinglicense)istoprovideanoptionthatallowsforbaseloadpowergenerationcapabilitybeyondthetermofthecurrentnuclearpowerplantoperatinglicensetomeetfuturesystemgeneratingneeds."Inotherwords,basedonthatstatementofpurposeandneed,theissuanceoftherenewedlicenseisaforegoneconclusion.Furthermore,thestatementofpurposeandneedintheNRCguidancedocumentisagenericstatementwithnoreferenceorapplicabilitytothespecificcircumstancesofaparticularreactor.Theonlyinferenceofapplicabilitytoaspecificreactorisrelianceonotherstateandfederalagencies.Infact,thepurposeandneeddescribedbytheNRCStaffinitsAnswer(p.18-19)is"preservingcontinuedoperationofanuclearpowerplant."Theonlywaytointerpretthatstatementisthatthepurposeandneedpreordainslicenserenewalastheonlyalternativethatmeetsthepurposeandneed.Therefore,theNRC'spurposeandneedstatementissonarrowthatonlyonealternativewouldsatisfyit(renewing 3thelicense).Indeed,theNRCguidancespecificallysaysthepurposeandneedis"theissuanceofarenewednuclearplantoperatinglicense...toallow[]forbaseloadpowergenerationcapabilitybeyondthetermofthecurrentnuclearpowerplantoperatinglicense...."Thepurposeandneedstatementcannotbesonarrowastoprecludereviewofreasonableorrelevantalternatives.NewYorkv.U.S.D.O.T.,715F.2d732(2dCir.1983);Simmonsv.U.S.ArmyCorpsofEng'rs.,120F.3d669(7thCir.1997);FriendsofSoutheast'sFuturev.Morrison,153F.3d1059(9thCir.1998).Bytyingtheallegedneedforbaseloadpowertotherenewalofthelicense,allotheralternativesareeffectivelyprecluded.Nordoesthereferencetobaseloadpowersavethepurposeandneedfrombeingtoonarrow.AsexplainedindetailinSierraClub'sPetitiontoInterveneregardingContention2,renewableenergyandenergyefficiencycansupplyallthepowerthatisneededwhenitisneeded.Theterm"baseload"mustnotbeusedtolimitthediscussiontojustastationarycentralpowerplant.Furthermore,SierraClub'spositionthatrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyqualifyasbaseloadpowerisnotinconsistentwiththeaccepteddefinitionofbaseload.Entergycitesthedefinitionofbaseloadsetforthbythe 4U.S.CourtofAppealsfortheSeventhCircuitas"energyintendedtocontinuouslyproduceelectricityatornearfullcapacity,withhighavailability."ThatisexactlywhatSierraClubhasexplainedinsupportofContention2thatrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencywilldo.EntergyandtheNRCStaffclaimthatSierraClubischallengingNRCregulationsandthatsuchchallengeisoutsidethescopeofthisproceeding.Butarule,regulationorpolicyofanagencycannotbecontrarytoNEPA.Sincethepurposeandneedrequirementhasbeenheldtoprohibitapurposeandneedthatissonarrowastoprecludereviewofreasonableorrelevantalternatives,theNRC'sinterpretationofpurposeandneedcannotbeimmunefromquestion.InanyNEPAcaseapartycanalwayschallengethepurposeandneed.CONTENTIONNO.2ISADMISSIBLEContention2states:Inexaminingthenoactionalternative,theERimproperlyfailedtoincluderenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyasaconsequenceoftheRiverBendlicensenotbeingrenewed.AlthoughtheER,atSections7.1.2.2.1and7.1.2.2.2,purporttodiscusswindandsolarenergyasalternativestorenewingtheRiverBendlicense,Section2.6.2oftheERstatesthatEntergydidnotconsiderthesealternativesas 5reasonable.Therefore,theywerenotgivenseriousconsideration.NorwasenergyefficiencygivenseriousconsiderationinSection7.1.2.2.3oftheER.TherealproblemisthatrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencywerenotevaluatedincombinationasareplacementforRiverBend.Section7.1.2.2.1oftheERdiscussesthepotentialofwindbyitself.Likewise,Section7.1.2.2.2discussesthepotentialofsolarbyitself.AndSection7.1.2.2.3discussesdemandsidemanagement(includingenergyefficiency)byitself.SierraClub'scontentionmakesclearthatitspositionisthatallformsofrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyincombination,togetherwithanadequatetransmissiongrid,mustbeevaluatedasareplacementforRiverBend.Entergy'sandNRCStaff'sattempttoridiculeSierraClub'sdiscussionofalternativestorelicensingRiverBendasbeingthesameascommentsregardingthelicensingofTurkeyPoint6and7notwithstanding,SierraClubhaspresentedclearandextensivefactstosupportitscontentionthattheER'sdiscussionofalternativeswasinadequate.SierraClubwentintogreatdetail,includingextensivequotesfromtheauthoritiesreliedon,toensurethatitwasprovidingsufficientinformationtosupportitscontention.
6AsnotedwithrespecttoContention1,theauthoritiespresentedbySierraClubexplainthatrenewableenergyandenergyefficiency,togetherwitharobusttransmissiongrid,cansupplybaseloadpower.Andthiscanbedonewithoutanystorage.LackofstoragetechnologywasthereasonadvancedbyEntergyintheERastowhyrenewableenergywasnotareasonablealternative.Furthermore,theauthoritiesreliedonbySierraClubestablishthatrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyarecurrentlycommerciallyviable,orwillbecomesointherelativelynearterm.TheproblemwithEntergy'streatmentofrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyintheERisthateachelement,wind,solaranddemandsidemanagementaretreatedindependentlyinisolationoftheotherelements.EntergythenconcludesthateachelementbyitselfwillnotreplacethepowerfromRiverBend.SierraClub'scontention,however,makesclearthatifalloftheelements,wind,solar,energyefficiency,andarobusttransmissiongrid,arecombined,RiverBendcanbereplaced.ThisintegrationofrenewableenergyandenergyefficiencyshouldhavebeenconsideredasreasonableforfurtheranalysisandnotdiscountedasnotbeingareasonablereplacementforRiverBend.
7NEPA,through40C.F.R.§1502.14,requiresagenciesto:(a)Rigorouslyexploreandobjectivelyevaluateallreasonablealternatives,andforalternativeswhichwereeliminatedfromdetailedstudy,brieflydiscussthereasonsfortheirhavingbeeneliminated.(b)Devotesubstantialtreatmenttoeachalternativeconsideredindetailincludingtheproposedactionsothatreviewersmayevaluatetheircomparativemerits.AsshownbySierraClub'sdiscussiononContention2,renewableenergyandenergyefficiency,takentogether,areareasonablealternative.TheverybriefdiscussionintheERconcerningthesealternativesisnottherigorousevaluationrequiredby40C.F.R.§1502.14.CONTENTIONNO.3ISADMISSIBLEContention3states:TheLRAdoesnotundertakeanadequateagingmanagementreviewoftheconcreteonthecontainmentvessel.EntergyandtheNRCStaffassertthatalkali-silicareaction(ASR)wasaddressedinSections3.5.2.2.1.8,3.5.2.2.2.1,and3.5.2.2.2.3oftheLRA.Evenifthatistrue,thediscussioninthosesectionsoftheLRAisextremelybriefandsimplyreferstoEntergy'sStructuresMonitoringProgram.Thisdoesnotaddressthespecificconcernsexpressedintheinformationnotice,IN2011-20,referredtoinSierraClub'sPetitiontoIntervene.
8Furthermore,theinformationnoticereferencedseveraltechnicalstandardsthathavebeenupdatedandshouldnotbereliedupontodetermineconcretereactivity.Thenoticesays:Asnotedabove,ASTMhasseveralstandardsfortestingaggregatesduringconstructiontoverifythatonlynon-reactiveaggregatesarepresent,therebypreventingfutureASR-induceddegradation.However,ASTMissuedupdatedstandardsASTMC1260andASTMC1293andprovidedguidanceintheappendicesofASTMC289andASTMC1293thatcautionsthatthetestsdescribedinASTMC227andASTMC289maynotaccuratelypredictaggregatereactivitywhendealingwithlate-orslow-expandingaggregatescontainingstrainedquartzormicrocystallinequartz.Therefore,licenseesthattestedusingASTMC227andASTMC289couldhaveconcretethatissusceptibletoASR-induceddegradation.ThediscussionintheRiverBendLRAmakesnoreferencetoanyofthesestandardsoranyindicationthattheconcernssetforthintheinformationnoticearebeingaddressedatRiverBend.CONCLUSIONSierraClub'scontentionsshouldbeadmittedforadjudicationbytheASLB./s/WallaceL.TaylorWALLACEL.TAYLORAT0007714LawOfficesofWallaceL.Taylor1183rdAve.S.E.,Suite326CedarRapids,Iowa52401319-366-2428;(Fax)319-366-3886e-mail:wtaylorlaw@aol.comATTORNEYFORSIERRACLUB 9CERTIFICATEOFSERVICEPursuantto10C.F.R.§2.305(revised),IherebycertifythatcopiesoftheforegoingReplytoAnswersOpposingSierraClub'sPetitiontoIntervenedatedNovember13,2017,havebeenservedupontheElectronicInformationExchange,theNRC'sE-FilingSystem,intheabovecaptionedproceeding,onthis13thdayofNovember,2017./s/WallaceL.TaylorWALLACEL.TAYLORLawOfficesofWallaceL.Taylor1183rdAve.S.E.,Suite326CedarRapids,Iowa52401319-366-2428;(Fax)319-366-3886e-mail:wtaylorlaw@aol.com