ML091480640
| ML091480640 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/2009 |
| From: | Jeremy Dean State of NY, Office of the Attorney General |
| To: | NRC/SECY/RAS |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 73FR03811, PR-20, PR-30, PR-40, PR-50, PR-70, PR-72, RIN 3150-AH45, TAC ME0020, TAC ME0021 | |
| Download: ML091480640 (9) | |
Text
PR 20, 30, 40, 50, 70 and 72 Rulemaking Comments (73FR03811 )
From:
Janice Dean [JaniceDean@oag.state.ny.us]
Sent:
Thursday, May 28, 2009 11 :00 AM To:
Rulemaking Comments Cc:
John Sipos; Teresa Fountain
Subject:
f\\lRC Docket No. RIN 3150-AH45: Supplemental Comment by the State of New York Attachments:
20090528 NYS Itr supp decommissioning.pdf To the Rulemaking Docket:
Attached please find a supplemental submission by the State of New York for Docket No. RIN 3150-AH45 on decommissioning planning. Thank you very much for your consideration.
Janice Dean Janice A. Dean Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau Office of the New York State Attorney General 120 Broadway, 26th Floor New York, NY 10271 (212) 416-8459 (voice)
(212) 416-6007 (fax) janice.dean@oag.state.ny.us DOCKETED USNRC May 28, 2009 (3: 15pm)
OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF 1
J)s /0
ST1\\TE OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW M. CUOMO DIVISION OF SOCIAL JUSTICE Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau May 28, 2009 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Re:
NRC Docket No. RIN 3150-AH45: Comments Submitted by the State of New York Concerning the NRC's Proposed Rulemaking to Amend 10 C.F.R. Parts 20, 30, 40, 50, 70 and 72 to Require Certain Changes in Decommissioning Planning
Dear Secretary:
On behalf of the People of the State of New York, the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York respectfully submits the attached May 13, 2009 Request for Additional Information (RAI) to supplement its May 8, 2008 comments and the record the above-referenced proposed rulemaking.
In the attached RAI, the NRC Staff substantiates many of New York's concerns by (1) observing that Entergy's October 23, 2008 cost estimate, submitted to the NRC pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §§ 50.75(£)(3) and 50.54(bb), is "short of the necessary funds to support both spent fuel management and decommissioning costs" (RAI at 1), and (2) observing that nowhere in the licensee's cost estimate is a reflection of the costs required to remediate the extensive subsurface contamination on the site, which in this case totals 1.26 million cubic feet at Indian Point Unit 1 and 379,000 cubic feet at Indian Point Unit 2 (RAI at 2). Stated differently, operations at two of the Indian Point reactors have resulted in 1.5 million cubic feet of contaminated soil, sediment, and bedrock. Moreover, this contamination extends hundreds of feet below the surface.
The questions raised by NRC Staff in its May 13, 2009 RAI support and add to the concerns New York expressed in its May 8,2008 comment letter. Thank you for your consideration.
120 Broadway, 26th FI. New York, N.Y. 10271-0332
- Phone (212) 416-8446
- Fax (212) 416-6007
Respectfully submitted, sf Janice A. Dean Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 120 Broadway, 26th Floor New York, NY 10271 212-416-8459 janice.dean@oag.state.ny.us 120 Broadway, 26th Fl. New York, N.Y. 10271-0332
- Phone (212) 416-8446
- Fax (212) 416-6007
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555*0001 May 13, 200g Vice President, Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 SUB~IECT:
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING DECOMMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE AND IRRADIATED FUEL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (TAC NOS. ME0020 AND ME0021)
Dear Sir or Madam:
In a letter dated October 23, 2008, Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML083040378, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy), submitted the preliminary decommissioning cost estimate and the irradiated fuel management program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (IP1 and IP2) in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Sections 50.75(f)(3) and 50.54(bb).
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is reviewing the submittal and has determined that additional information is needed to complete its review. The specific questions are found in the enclosed request for additional information (RAI). The Entergy staff indicated that a response to the RAI would be provided within 60 days of the date of this letter.
Please contact me at (301) 415-2901 if you have any questions on this issue.
Sincerely,
..... \\
.~
/'
(~.(A V'J.,V2
-h<Z~'~
J'/n P. Boska, Senior Project Manager lant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.50-003 and 50-247
Enclosure:
RAI cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING DECOMMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE AND IRRADIATED FUEL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.50-003 AND 50-247 In a letter dated October 23,2008, Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML083040378, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy), submitted the preliminary decommissioning cost estimate and the irradiated fuel management program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (IP1 and IP2) in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Sections 50.75(f)(3) and 50.54(bb), The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has determined the following information is needed in order to complete its review.
RAI NO.1: Attachment 1, Section 5. Financial Assurance In the submittal, Entergy referenced Table 7, "Funding Requirements for license Termination,"
and stated that a 2 percent real rate of return was applied to the IP2 decommissioning trust fund (DTF) balance of $347.2 million (balance as oT December 31.2007), and that Entergy would apply a portion of the balance from the DTF to support spent fuel management costs. Entergy acknowledged that an exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12 is required before the DTF could be applied to non-decommissioning costs such as spent fuel management costs. Based on Entergy's approach regarding spent fuel management costs, the NRC staff applied a 2 percent real rate of return to the DTF, and deducted the expenses identified in Table 3, "Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 2, Schedule of Annual Expenditures, Total Decommissioning Cost."
The NRC staff's analysis indicated the DTF balance was short of the necessary funds to support both spent fuel management and decommissioning costs, and the NRC staff was not able to reconcile the difference between the NRC staff's and Entergy's analyses. The NRC staff requests that Entergy reconcile the difference between the NRC staff's analysis and Entergy's analysis. In addition, the NRC staff requests that Entergy identify the mechanism that Entergy proposes to use to make up the shortfall in funding for IP2, if necessary.
RAI No.2: Attachment 1, Section 5. Financial Assurance The NRC staff request that Entergy address the impacts on its analysis based on the apparent
$25.81 million decrease in the DTF balance to $321.39 million for /P2 as of December 31, 2008.
The updated balance is identified in Entergy's letter dated March 30, 2009, "Status of Decommissioning Funding for Plants Operated by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.," ADAMS Accession No. ML090920~76.
In the March 31, 2009, submittal Entergy stated that the $321.39 million included the provisional trust balance of $29.39 million. Entergy's response should consider that if there is a change in the DTF balance that materially and significantly impacts a Enclosure
- 2 licensee's cost and funding analysis, the licensee may be under an obligation, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.9, to update any changes in projected cost, or available funds.
RAI No.3: Section 1.7.9., Site Contamination (Document E11-1583-003)
This submittal indicated that IP2 has approximately 379,000 cubic feet of contaminated soil; however, the cost to remediate or remove the contaminated soil was not identified in this section of the document. The NRC staff requests that Entergy identify what is the cost to remediate or dispose of the approximately 379,000 cubic feet of contaminated soil. In this section, Entergy indicated that for IP2, the sUbstructures of the discharge canal, fuel storage building and part of the turbine building would have to be removed to address the subsurface soil contamination.
Also in this section of the document, Entergy did not identify the additional cost associated with demolition of these structures. The NRC staff requests that Entergy identify the additional cost associated with the demolition of these structures. If these costs are provided in supporting documents, please provide the reference that addresses the total cost of the contaminated soil removal and disposal cost, including demolition costs. The reference should also include a discussion of the sequence involved in this process. The NRC staff requests that the licensee provide a detailed discussion that addresses the cleanup activities and supporting costs in detail.
RAI NO.4: Section 1.7.8., Site Contamination (Document E11-1583-004)
This submittal indicated that IP1 has an estimated 1.26 million cubic feet of contaminated soil; however, the cost to remediate or remove the contaminated soil was not identified in this section of the document. The NRC staff requests that Entergy identify the cost to remediate or dispose of the approximately 1.26 million cubic feet of contaminated soil. Also in this section, Entergy indicated that for IP1, the substructures of the reactor containment, H. T. switchgear, underground utility tunnel, chemical systems, fuel handling, nuclear services, superheater and the turbine building would have to be removed to address the subsurface soil contamination.
Table 1 listed the volumes of radioactive waste, but Table 1 did not list the disposal costs associated with the waste volumes. In addition, in this section, Entergy did not identify the additional cost associated with demolition of these structures. The NRC staff requests that Entergy identify the additional cost associated with the demolition and disposal of these structures. If these costs are provided in supporting documents, please provide the reference that addresses the total cost of the contaminated soil removal and disposal, including the building demolition, and transportation. The reference should also include a discussion of the sequence involved in this process. The NRC staff requests that Entergy provide a detailed discussion that addresses the cleanup activities and supporting costs in detail.
RAI NO.5: Attachment 1, Table 8 Decommissioning Funding Plan In its submittal, Entergy references Table 8, "Decommissioning Funding Plan, IP1 Coordinated with IP2, 2013 Shutdown and 60-year SAFSTOR." The NRC staff applied a 2 percent real rate of return to the DTF balance of $218.8 million for IP1 as of December 31, 2008, and the DTF balance for IP2 of $321.39 million as of December 31, 2008, for a total DTF balance of $541.4 million as of December 31,2008, and deducted the expenses identified in Column F of Table 8 since Entergy stated that it would use the DTF bal2:nces to support the spent fuel management costs. Again, Entergy acknowledged that an exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12 is required before the DTF could be applied to non-radiologicfd costs. The NRC staff's analysis indicated decommissioning costs, and the NRC staff was not able reconcile the difference between the NRC staff's and Entergy's analyses. The NRC staff's analysis was based on the DTF balances listed in Entergy's submittal dated March 30, 2009. The NRC staff requests that Entergy reconcile the difference between the NRC staff's analysis and Entergy's analysis. In addition, the NRC staff requests that Entergy identify the mechanism that Entergy proposes to make up the shortfall in funding for IP1, if necessary.
RAI No.6: Preliminary Decommissioning Cost Analysis for IP1 In its submittal, Entergy selected the SAFSTOR option for IP2 and stated that IP1 and IP2 would remain in SAFSTOR for up to 60 years and that the decommissioning of IP1 would take place at the same time as the decommissioning of IP2. Entergy stated it would complete the decommissioning of IP1 and IP2 within a 60-year SAFSTOR period following the expiration of IP2's operation license in 2013. In as much as the NRC issued an Order on June 19, 1980, revoking the authority of the Consolidated Edison Company, the licensee at that time, to operate IP1, the NRC staff request that Entergy explain how it proposes to address, for IP1, the requirement in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(3) that decommissioning be completed within 60 years of permanent cessation of operations.
May 13,2009 Vice President, Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249
SUBJECT:
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING DECOMMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE AND IRRADIATED FUEL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (TAC I\\lOS. ME0020 AND ME0021)
Dear Sir or Madam:
In a letter dated October 23, 2008, Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML083040378, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy), submitted the preliminary decommissioning cost estimate and the irradiated fuel management program for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (IP1 and IP2) in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Sections 50.75(f)(3) and 50.54(bb).
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is reviewing the submittal and has determined that additional information is needed to complete its review. The specific questions are found in the enclosed request for additional information (RAI). The Entergy staff indicated that a response to the RAI would be provided within 60 days of the date of this letter.
Please contact me at (301) 415-2901 if you have any questions on this issue.
Sincerely, IRAI John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.50-003 and 50-247
Enclosure:
RAI cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 RidsNrrPMJBoska RidsOGCRp LPL 1-1 Reading File RidsNrrLASLittle RidsAcrsAcnw_MailCTR Rids NrrDprPfpb RidsNrrDorlDpr RidsRgn 1MailCenter CPittiglio ADAMS ACCESSION I\\lO... ML091120544
- See memo dated 4/20/09 OFFICE LPL1-1/PM LPL1-1/LA PFPB/BC LPL1-1 /BC(A)
NAME JBoska SLittie RDudley for RCarlson*
DPickett DATE 4/23/09 4/29/09 4/20/09 5/13/09 OFFICIAL RECORD COpy
Received: from maiI1.nrc.gov (148.184.176.41) by OWMS01.nrc.gov (148.184.100.43) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.358.0; Thu, 28 May 2009 11 :00:32 -0400 X-lronport-ID: mail1 X-SBRS: 4.8 X-MID: 2561476 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.41,265,1241409600";
d="pdf'?scan'208";a="2561476" Received: from spam3.oag.state.ny.us ([74.203.228.43]) by maiI1.nrc.gov with ESMTP; 28 May 2009 11 :00:31 -0400 Received: from smtpgw2.oag.state.ny.us (alb-g3.oag.silvernet [172.16.100.57])
by spam3.oag.state.ny.us (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4SFOUXE007499 for
<rulemaking.comments@nrc.gov>; Thu, 28 May 2009 10:00:31 -0500 Received: from GATEWAY_B-MTA by smtpgw2.oag.state.ny.us with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 28 May 2009 11 :00:30 -0400 Message-ID: <4A1 E6EC7.8DBB.0043.0@oag.state.ny.us>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.3 Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11 :00:24 -0400 From: Janice Dean <Janice.Dean@oag.state.ny.us>
To: <rulemaking.comments@nrc.gov>
CC: "John Sipos" <John.Sipos@oag.state.ny.us>,
"Teresa Fountain" <Teresa.Fountain@oag.state.ny.us>
Subject:
NRC Docket No. RI N 3150-AH45: Supplemental Comment by the State of New York MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_Part83A8DA18.0_="
X-MessageScreenMessageID: 1243522831.329718.1608.1212121101 X-MessageScreenContentScore: Score of 0 assigned to Content X-MessageScreenUCEScore: Score of 0 assigned to UCE X-MessageScreen: Analyzed by IntelliReach MessageScreen(tm)
Return-Path: JaniceDean@oag.state.ny.us