UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: 

Allison M. Macfarlane, Chairman 

Kristine L. Svinicki 

George Apostolakis 

William D. Magwood, IV 

William C. Ostendorff 

In the Matter of 

CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR PROJECT, LLC 

(Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3) 

DETROIT EDISON CO. 

(Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3) 

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC 

(William States Lee III Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2) 

ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. 

(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) 

ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. 

(Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1) 

ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. 

(Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 3) 

EXELON GENERATION CO., LLC 

(Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2) 

EXELON NUCLEAR TEXAS HOLDINGS, LLC 

(Victoria County Station Site) 

FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. 

(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1) 

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. 

(Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7) 

LUMINANT GENERATION CO. LLC 

(Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 and 4) 

NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC 

(Seabrook Station, Unit 1) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 52-016-COL 

Docket No. 52-033-COL 

Docket Nos. 52-018-COL, 

 52-019-COL 

Docket Nos. 50-247-LR, 

 50-286-LR 

Docket No. 50-416-LR 

Docket No. 52-024-COL 

Docket Nos. 50-352-LR, 

 50-353-LR 

Docket No. 52-042 

Docket No. 50-346-LR 

Docket Nos. 52-040-COL, 

 52-041-COL 

Docket Nos. 52-034-COL, 

 52-035-COL 

Docket No. 50-443-LR 
- 2 - 

NUCLEAR INNOVATION NORTH AMERICA LLC 

(South Texas Project Units 3 and 4) 

PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. 

(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) 

PPL BELL BEND, LLC 

(Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant) 

PROGRESS ENERGY CAROLINAS, INC. 

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 2 and 3) 

PROGRESS ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. 

(Levy County Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) 

SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. 

(South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2) 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 

(Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 and 4) 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 

(Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2) 

UNION ELECTRIC CO. 

(Callaway Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1) 

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER CO. 

d/b/a DOMINION VIRGINIA POWER and 

OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE 

(North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket Nos. 52-012-COL, 

 52-013-COL 

Docket Nos. 50-275-LR, 

 50-323-LR 

Docket No. 52-039-COL 

Docket Nos. 52-022-COL, 

 52-023-COL 

Docket Nos. 52-029-COL, 

 52-030-COL 

Docket Nos. 50-498-LR, 

 50-499-LR 

Docket Nos. 52-014-COL, 

 52-015-COL 

Docket No. 50-391-OL 

Docket No. 50-483-LR 

Docket No. 52-017-COL 

CLI-12-16

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

We have received a series of substantively identical petitions to suspend final licensing 

decisions, and requesting additional related relief, in the captioned matters.1

 As discussed 

below, we grant the requests in part and deny the requests in part. 

 

1 See, e.g., Petition to Suspend Final Decisions in All Pending Reactor Licensing Proceedings 

Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings (June 18, 2012) (Petition). 

In addition, Friends of the Earth, and Eric Epstein, on behalf of Three Mile Island Alert, Inc., 

(continued . . .) 
- 3 - 

Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the 

NRC had violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in issuing its 2010 update to 

the Waste Confidence Decision and accompanying Temporary Storage Rule.2

 The court 

vacated both the Decision and the Rule, and remanded the case for further proceedings 

consistent with the court’s opinion.3

In response to the court’s decision, the petitioners request that we: (1) suspend final 

licensing decisions in reactor licensing cases, pending the completion of our action on the 

remanded Waste Confidence proceeding; (2) provide an opportunity for public comment on any 

generic determinations that we may make in either an environmental assessment (EA) or 

environmental impact statement (EIS); and (3) provide at least sixty days to seek consideration 

in individual licensing cases of any site-specific concerns relating to the remanded 

proceedings.4

 

submitted the identical petition to the Commission, without identifying a particular docket. For 

convenience, page references in today’s decision correspond to the Petition filed by Mindy 

Goldstein of the Turner Environmental Law Clinic, in the Turkey Point combined license (COL) 

matter. In response to the June 19, 2012, Order of the Secretary, we received answers from 

the NRC Staff, the applicants in all captioned matters, and a letter from the Nuclear Energy 

Institute (seeking to participate as amicus curiae). As we did in the Callaway matter, we 

consider the petitions, and take action, as an exercise of our inherent supervisory authority over 

agency proceedings. We need not, therefore, address procedural issues that would merit 

further consideration in adjudications. See Union Electric Co. d/b/a Ameren Missouri (Callaway 

Plant, Unit 2), CLI-11-5, 74 NRC __, __ (Sept. 9, 2011) (slip op. at 18-19 & n.65). 

2 New York v. NRC, 681 F.3d 471 (D.C. Cir. 2012). See generally Final Rule, Consideration of 

Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor 

Operation, 75 Fed. Reg. 81,032 (Dec. 23, 2010); Waste Confidence Decision Update, 75 Fed. 

Reg. 81,037 (Dec. 23, 2010). 

3

 In particular, the court struck down the Waste Confidence Decision’s “Finding 2,” (reasonable 

assurance exists that sufficient geologic repository capacity will be available for disposal of highlevel waste and spent nuclear fuel “when necessary”), and “Finding 4” (reasonable assurance 

exists that, if necessary, spent fuel can be stored safely without significant environmental 

impacts beyond a reactor’s licensed life for operation, in a combination of storage in its spent 

fuel pool and either an onsite or offsite dry cask storage system). 

4 See Petition at 3-4, 10-12. 
- 4 - 

Waste confidence undergirds certain agency licensing decisions, in particular new 

reactor licensing and reactor license renewal.5

 Because of the recent court ruling striking down 

our current waste confidence provisions, we are now considering all available options for 

resolving the waste confidence issue, which could include generic or site-specific NRC actions, 

or some combination of both. We have not yet determined a course of action. But, in 

recognition of our duties under the law, we will not issue licenses dependent upon the Waste 

Confidence Decision or the Temporary Storage Rule until the court’s remand is appropriately 

addressed.6

 This determination extends just to final license issuance; all licensing reviews and 

proceedings should continue to move forward.7

The petitioners seek assurance that they will be able to participate in future NRC 

proceedings on waste confidence. We hereby provide that assurance. The public will be 

afforded an opportunity to comment in advance on any generic waste confidence document that 

the NRC issues on remand—be it a fresh rule, a policy statement, an EA, or an EIS.8

 

5 See 10 C.F.R. § 51.23(b). 

6 See NRC Staff’s Answer to Petition to Suspend Final Decisions in all Pending Reactor 

Licensing Proceedings Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings 

(June 25, 2012), at 4 (Staff Answer) (pointing to a number of factors that bear upon 

consideration of the requested relief but also stating that no final decision to grant a combined 

license, or initial or renewed operating license should be made “until the NRC has appropriately 

dispositioned the issues remanded by the court”). 

7

 The petitioners expressly state that they do not seek suspension of ongoing adjudications. 

Petition at 4. Consistent with our ruling in Callaway, we agree that it is in the public interest for 

adjudications to proceed, except for contentions associated with waste confidence issues, as 

discussed infra. See Callaway, CLI-11-5, 74 NRC at __ (slip op. at 25-27). Petitioners also 

expressly state that they do not seek “any change in the schedules for the NRC Staff’s review of 

reactor license applications.” Petition at 4. Likewise, we see no need for the Staff to change its 

review schedules other than as may be necessary to address waste confidence issues. 

8 See Pa’ina Hawaii, LLC, CLI-10-18, 72 NRC 56, 93 (2010). See generally 10 C.F.R. § 51.73 

(requiring a comment period for draft EISs and supplemental EISs). See also Staff Answer at 4 

& n.4. 
- 5 - 

To the extent that the NRC takes action with respect to waste confidence on a case-bycase basis, litigants can challenge such site-specific agency actions in our adjudicatory 

process.9

 In this vein, we and the boards are now in receipt of a number of new contentions 

and associated filings concerning waste confidence.10

 

9 But see Potomac Electric Power Co. (Douglas Point Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 

2), ALAB-218, 8 AEC 79, 85 (1974) (“[L]icensing boards should not accept in individual license 

proceedings contentions which are (or are about to become) the subject of general rulemaking 

by the Commission.”). 

10 See Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage 

and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at Proposed Fermi 3 Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 

2012); Motion to Reopen the Record for William States Lee III Units 1 and 2, together with 

Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and 

Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at William States Lee III Units 1 and 2 (dated July 9, 2012, 

filed July 10, 2012 (additional declarations filed July 11, 2012); Beyond Nuclear Motion for 

Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of 

Nuclear Waste at Grand Gulf Unit 1 (July 9, 2012); Beyond Nuclear Motion for Leave to File a 

New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at 

Grand Gulf Unit 3 (July 9, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention 

Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at Davis-Besse 

Nuclear Power Station (July 9, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention 

Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at Turkey Point 

Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 2012); Citizens Allied for Safe Energy, Inc. Motion for Leave to File 

a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at 

Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant (dated July 9, 2012, filed July 10, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion 

for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of 

Nuclear Waste at Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion for 

Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of 

Nuclear Waste at Seabrook Station, Unit 1 (July 9, 2012); San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace 

Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate 

Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 2012); NC 

WARN’s Motion to Reopen the Record and Admit Contention Concerning Temporary Storage 

and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 

2012); Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage 

and Ultimate Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at Levy Nuclear Power Plant (July 9, 2012); 

Petition for Intervention to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate 

Disposal of Nuclear Waste at STP Units 1 & 2 (July 9, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to 

File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste 

at South Texas Units 3 & 4 (July 9, 2012); Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New 

Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at 

Bellefonte (July 9, 2012); Southern Alliance for Clean Energy’s Motion for Leave to File a New 

Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at 

Watts Bar Unit 2 (July 9, 2012); Intervenor’s Motion for Leave to File a New Contention 

Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at Callaway Nuclear 

(continued . . .) 
- 6 - 

In view of the special circumstances of this case, as an exercise of our inherent 

supervisory authority over adjudications, we direct that these contentions—and any related 

contentions that may be filed in the near term—be held in abeyance pending our further order.11

 

 

Power Plant (July 9, 2012); Motion to Reopen the Record for North Anna Unit 3, together with 

Intervenors’ Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and 

Ultimate Disposal of Nuclear Waste at North Anna Unit 3 (dated July 9, 2012, filed July 10, 

2012). 

The Petition was not filed in the Indian Point, Victoria County, or Limerick dockets. We have, 

however, received new contentions in those ongoing adjudications. See Hudson River Sloop 

Clearwater, Inc.’s Motion for Leave to Add a New Contention Based Upon New Information and 

Petition to Add New Contention (July 9, 2012); State of New York, Riverkeeper, and 

Clearwater’s Joint Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning the On-Site Storage of 

Nuclear Waste at Indian Point, together with State of New York, Riverkeeper, Inc., and Hudson 

River Sloop Clearwater’s Joint Contention NYS-39/RK-EC-9/CW-EC-10 Concerning the On-Site

Storage of Nuclear Waste at Indian Point (July 8, 2012); Texans for a Sound Energy Policy’s 

Motion to Reinstate Contentions TSEP-ENV-17 and TSEP-ENV-18, or in the Alternative for 

Leave to File a New Contention (July 9, 2012, amended July 10, 2012); Joint Motion to Dismiss 

Texans for a Sound Energy Policy’s Motion to Reinstate Contentions and for Leave to File a 

New Contention, and to Establish a Schedule for Future Submissions (July 13, 2012); NRDC’s 

Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate 

Disposal of Nuclear Waste at Limerick, together with NRDC’s Waste Confidence Contention

(July 9, 2012, errata filed July 9 and 10, 2012). These three cases have been added to the 

caption of this decision for the purpose of providing guidance on all new contentions that have 

been filed on this topic. Three licensing boards have issued case management orders relating 

to the new contentions. See Order (Extending Time to Answer Motion to Admit New 

Contention) (July 26, 2012) (unpublished) (Callaway license renewal); Order (Granting Joint 

Motion to Dismiss and Setting Schedule) (July 24, 2012) (unpublished) (Victoria County early 

site permit); Order (Extending Time to Answer Motion to Admit New Contention) (July 17, 2012) 

(unpublished) (Bellefonte COL). 

11 Should we determine at a future time that case-specific challenges are appropriate for 

consideration, our normal procedural rules will apply. See Callaway, CLI-11-5, 74 NRC at __ 

(slip op. at 32-36). 
- 7 - 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 For the Commission 

NRC SEAL /RA/ 

 

 Annette L. Vietti-Cook 

 Secretary of the Commission 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, 

this 7th day of August, 2012 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC ) Docket Nos. 50-352-LR and 50-353-LR 

(Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2) ) 

 ) ASLBP No. 12-916-04-LR-BD01 

(License Renewal) ) 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 

I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing COMMISSION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 

(CLI-12-16) have been served upon the following persons by Electronic Information Exchange 

and by electronic mail as indicated by an asterisk*.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Mail Stop T-3F23 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

William J. Froehlich, Chair 

Administrative Judge 

E-mail: william.froehlich@nrc.gov 

Michael F. Kennedy 

Administrative Judge 

E-mail: michael.kennedy@nrc.gov

William E. Kastenberg 

Administrative Judge 

E-mail: William.kastenberg@nrc.gov

Matthew Flyntz 

Law Clerk 

E-mail: matthew.flyntz@nrc.gov

 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication 

Mail Stop O-16C1 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

OCAA Mail Center: ocaamail@nrc.gov

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of the Secretary of the Commission 

Mail Stop O-16C1 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

Hearing Docket: hearingdocket@nrc.gov

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of the General Counsel 

Mail Stop O-15D21 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

Catherine Kanatas, Esq. 

Maxwell Smith, Esq. 

Mary Spencer, Esq. 

Joseph Lindell, Esq. 

Edward Williamson, Esq. 

Brian Newell, Paralegal 

catherine.kanatas@nrc.gov

maxwell.smith@nrc.gov

mary.spencer@nrc.gov

joseph.lindell@nrc.gov

edward.williamson@nrc.gov

brian.newell@nrc.gov 

OGC Mail Center: OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-362-LR and 50-363-LR 

COMMISSION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (CLI-12-16) 

2

 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC 

Exelon Business Services Company 

200 Exelon Way, Suite 305 

Kennett Square, PA 19348 

Donald Ferraro, Asst. General Counsel 

donald.ferraro@exeloncorp.com 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC 

4300 Warrenville Road 

Warrenville, IL 60555 

J. Bradley Fewell, Dep. General Counsel 

bradley.fewell@exeloncorp.com 

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) 

1152 – 15th Street, N.W., #300 

Washington, DC 20005 

Geoffrey H. Fettus, Sr. Project Attorney 

gfettus@nrdc.org

National Legal Scholars Law Firm, P.C. 

241 Poverty Lane, Unit 1 

Lebanon, New Hampshire 03766 

Anthony Roisman, Managing Partner 

aroisman@nationallegalscholars.com

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP 

1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20004 

Alex Polonsky, Esq. 

Kathryn Sutton, Esq. 

Anna Jones, Esq. 

Laura Swett, Esq. 

Edwin Villarico, Sr. Paralegal 

Mary Freeze, Legal Secretary 

apolonsky@morganlewis.com

ksutton@morganlewis.com

anna.jones@morganlewis.com

lswett@morganlewis.com

evillarico@morganlewis.com

mfreeze@morganlewis.com

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP 

1701 Market Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921 

Brooke Leach, Esq. 

bleach@morganlewis.com

Erich Pica, President* 

Friends of the Earth 

1100 15th Street, NW 

11th Floor 

Washington, D.C. 20555 

Email: mkeever@foe.org

 

[Original signed by Herald Speiser] 

 

 Office of the Secretary of the Commission 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland 

this 7th day of August, 2012