[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 22, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63029-63033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25293]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 63-001; CLI-08-25]
In the Matter of U.S. Department of Energy (High Level Waste
Repository); Notice of Hearing and Opportunity To Petition for Leave To
Intervene on an Application for Authority To Construct a Geologic
Repository at a Geologic Repository Operations Area at Yucca Mountain
COMMISSIONERS: Dale E. Klein, Chairman; Gregory B. Jaczko, Peter B.
Lyons, Kristine L. Svinicki.
I. Notice of Hearing
By letter dated June 3, 2008, the Department of Energy (DOE)
submitted an application seeking authorization to construct a geologic
repository at a geologic repository operations area at Yucca Mountain
in Nye County, Nevada. The NRC published a notice of receipt and
availability of this application in the Federal Register (73 FR 34348,
corrected in 73 FR 40883 (June 17, 2008)). Notice is hereby given that
a hearing on the application will be held at a time and place to be set
in the future by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) or
an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board).
The hearing will consider the application for construction
authorization filed by DOE pursuant to Section 114 of the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10134, and pursuant to 10 CFR
Parts 2 and 63. The NRC Staff accepted the DOE application for
docketing on September 8, 2008 (73 FR 53284 (September 15, 2008)), and
the docket number established for this application is 63-001.
The NRC Staff determined that it is practicable to adopt, with
further supplementation, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and
supplements prepared by DOE. The Staff concluded that neither the 2002
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) nor the 2008 Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Repository Supplemental
EIS) adequately address all the impacts on groundwater, or from surface
discharges of groundwater, from the proposed action. The Staff
therefore found that additional supplementation is needed to ensure
that the 2002 FEIS and 2008 Repository Supplemental EIS are adequate.
The basis for the Staff's position is presented in the ``U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission Staff's Adoption Determination Report for the
U.S. Department of Energy's Environmental Impact Statements for the
Proposed Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain,'' which is available in
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) online
document system at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html,
at accession number ML082420342.
The NRC Staff will complete a detailed technical review of the DOE
application, and will document its findings in a safety evaluation
report. If the Commission finds that the DOE application meets the
applicable standards of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(AEA), the NWPA, and the Commission's regulations, then the Commission
will issue a construction authorization, in the form and containing
such conditions and limitations, if any, as the Commission finds
appropriate and necessary.
II. Opportunity To Petition for Leave To Intervene
A hearing on DOE's construction authorization application will be
held in the public interest pursuant to 10 CFR 2.101(e)(8). The hearing
will be governed by the rules of procedure in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart C,
``Rules of General Applicability: Hearing Requests, Petitions to
Intervene, Availability of Documents, Selection of Specific Hearing
Procedures, Presiding Officer Powers, and General Hearing Management
for NRC Adjudicatory Hearings''; Subpart J, ``Procedures Applicable to
Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level
Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository''; and Subpart G, ``Rules
for Formal Adjudications.'' The matters of fact and law to be
considered are whether the application satisfies the applicable safety,
security, and technical standards of the AEA and NWPA and the NRC's
standards in 10 CFR Part 63 for a construction authorization for a
high-level waste geologic repository, and also whether the applicable
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and NRC's
NEPA regulations, 10 CFR Part 51, have been met.
Any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and
who desires to participate as a party must file a written petition for
leave to intervene in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR 2.309,
including contentions that satisfy the admissibility standards
[[Page 63030]]
in Sec. 2.309. Petitioners seeking to intervene as parties must also
comply with the procedural case management requirements set forth in
the Advisory Pre-License Application Presiding Officer (PAPO) Board's
Memorandum and Order, LBP-08-10 (Case Management Order Concerning
Petitions to Intervene, Contentions, Responses, Replies, Standing
Arguments, and Referencing or Attaching Supporting Materials), dated
June 20, 2008, available at ADAMS accession number ML081720154, and the
Advisory PAPO Board's Order (Regarding Contention Formatting and Tables
of Contents), dated September 29, 2008, available at ADAMS accession
number ML082730764. In addition, as outlined further below, the
regulations in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J require electronic production,
filing and service of all documents in this proceeding.
In ruling on a petition to intervene in this proceeding, the
presiding officer shall consider any failure of the petitioner to
participate as a potential party in the pre-license application phase
under 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J, in addition to the factors on standing
to intervene outlined in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
A petition for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. A non-timely petition or contention will not be entertained
unless the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or a
presiding officer designated to rule on the petition determines that
the late petition or contention meets the late-filed requirements of 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
Certain hearing schedule milestones in Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 2,
as well as the 30-day hearing petition and contention-filing deadlines
set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(b)(2) and 51.109(a)(2) are superseded by this
notice. A revised hearing schedule with new milestones for actions
through the First Prehearing Conference Order appears in Section VI of
this notice.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and will have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of
the hearing.
The regulations in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J require electronic
document production (via the Licensing Support Network) and electronic
filing and service of adjudicatory documents via the Electronic
Information Exchange (EIE). This requirement applies to all documents
filed in the proceeding, including a petition for leave to intervene,
and any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the
submission of a petition to intervene. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.1012(b)(1),
a petitioner, including a potential party given access to the Licensing
Support Network, may not be granted party status under 10 CFR 2.309, or
status as an interested governmental participant under 10 CFR 2.315, if
the petitioner cannot demonstrate substantial and timely compliance
with the requirements in 10 CFR 2.1003 at the time of the request for
participation in the high-level waste proceeding.\1\ In addition, a
petitioner will not be found to be in substantial and timely compliance
unless the petitioner complies with all orders of the Pre-License
Application Presiding Officer (PAPO) regarding electronic availability
of documents. PAPO orders are available on the NRC's high-level waste
electronic hearing docket at: http://hlwehd.nrc.gov/Public_HLW-EHD/home.asp, under HLW-EHD, folder titled PAPO--HLW, subfolder titled
Orders--PAPO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A person denied party or interested governmental participant
status under 10 CFR 2.1012(b)(1) may request such status upon a
showing of subsequent compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR
2.1003. The subsequent admission of such a party or interested
governmental participant shall be conditioned on accepting the
status of the proceeding at the time of admission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A petition for leave to intervene, and all filings in the
adjudicatory proceeding, must be filed electronically in accordance
with 10 CFR 2.1013(c)(1). At least 30 days prior to the filing deadline
for a petition to intervene, the petitioner must contact the Office of
the Secretary (SECY) by e-mail at: [email protected] or by calling
(301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate, which allows
the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which
it is participating; and/or (2) creation of an electronic docket for
the proceeding (even in instances in which the petitioner, or its
counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital
certificate). Each petitioner will need to download the Workplace Forms
ViewerTM to access the EIE, a component of the E-Filing
system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is
available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.
Once a petitioner has obtained a digital ID certificate, has had a
docket created, and has downloaded the EIE viewer, the petitioner can
then submit a petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC is a
consolidated guidance document that sets forth the technical standards
for electronic transmission and formatting electronic documents, and
provides instructions on how to obtain and use the agency-provided
digital ID certificate. A person who holds a current digital ID
certificate for use in the proceedings before the PAPO or the Advisory
PAPO need not obtain a new certificate. That certificate will remain
valid for this proceeding.
Section 2.1013(c) defines service as completed when the filer/
sender receives electronic acknowledgement (``delivery receipt'') that
the electronic submission has been placed in the recipient's electronic
mailbox. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the
EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the
document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of
the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that
provides access to the document to the NRC Office of General Counsel
and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they
wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve
the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, the
applicant and any other participant (or their counsel or
representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate
before a petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access
to the document via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the
``Contact Us'' link located under the heading ``Additional
Information'' on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is
available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or locally (301) 415-
4737.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's high-level waste electronic hearing docket at http://hlwehd.nrc.gov/Public_HLW-EHD/home.asp , unless
[[Page 63031]]
excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board, or a presiding officer. Participants are requested not
to include personal privacy information, such as social security
numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in the filing. With
respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve
the purpose of the adjudicatory filing and would constitute a Fair Use
application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted
materials in their submission.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland, and will be accessible electronically through the ADAMS
Public Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The ADAMS accession number for the
ADAMS package containing the DOE application is ML081560400. The ADAMS
accession number for the ADAMS package containing DOE's Final
Environmental Impact Statement is ML032690321, and the accession number
for the ADAMS package containing DOE's Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement is ML081750191. The ADAMS accession number for the
ADAMS package containing DOE's Final Rail Corridor Supplemental EIS and
Rail Alignment EIS is ML082460227. The application is also available at
http://www.nrc.gov/waste/hlw-disposal/yucca-lic-app.html. Persons who
do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing
documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC Public Document Room
(PDR) Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737,
or by e-mail to [email protected].
III. Additional Matters Pertaining to the Hearing and Intervention
Requests
A. Standing as of Right
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309(d)(2)(iii), the Commission shall permit
intervention by the State and local governmental body (county,
municipality or other subdivision) in which the geologic repository
operations area is located, and by any affected Federally-recognized
Indian Tribe, as defined in 10 CFR Part 63, if the contention
requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(f) are satisfied with respect to at least
one contention. Section 2.309(d)(2) specifies that such State, affected
Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, and local governmental body need not
address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
In LBP-08-10, the Advisory PAPO Board requested that the Commission
clarify whether an ``affected unit of local government'' (AULG), as
defined in section 2 of the NWPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10101), also
need not address the standing requirements of section 2.309(d). Any
AULG seeking party status shall be considered a party to this
proceeding, provided that it files at least one admissible contention
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309. An AULG need not address the standing
requirements under that section.
B. Environmental Contentions
In addition to meeting NRC's regular contention admissibility
requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(f), environmental contentions addressing
any DOE environmental impact statement or supplement must also conform
to the requirements and address the applicable factors outlined in 10
CFR 51.109 governing NRC's adoption of DOE's environmental impact
statements. The requirements of section 51.109 should be applied
consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. v. EPA, 373 F.3d 1251,
1313-14 (D.C. Cir. 2004), a court decision discussing section 51.109,
and consistent with the Commission's denial of the State of Nevada's
petition to amend section 51.109 (73 FR 5762; January 31, 2008), and
the Office of the General Counsel's subsequent letter clarifying the
Commission's denial (Letter from Bradley W. Jones, Assistant General
Counsel to Martin G. Malsch, dated March 20, 2008, ADAMS accession
number ML080810175). Under 10 CFR 51.109(c), the presiding officer
should treat as a cognizable ``new consideration'' an attack on the
Yucca Mountain environmental impact statements based on significant and
substantial information that, if true, would render the statements
inadequate. Under 10 CFR 51.109(a)(2), a presiding officer considering
environmental contentions should apply NRC ``reopening'' procedures and
standards in 10 CFR 2.326 ``to the extent possible.''
C. Hearing Procedures
The construction authorization hearing will be conducted by one or
more presiding officers (licensing boards) that will be designated by
the Chief Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. The
Commission anticipates and authorizes the establishment of multiple
licensing boards throughout the proceeding. Notice as to the membership
of the board(s) will be published at a later date.
In 1991, the Commission suggested that it would use the notice of
hearing for a high-level waste (HLW) proceeding to announce detailed
case management procedures (56 FR 7787, 7793-94 (February 26, 1991)).
In the intervening years, however, the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board Panel has engaged in extensive case management planning for this
proceeding. The Commission therefore believes that the presiding
officer(s) in this proceeding will be in the best position to establish
and efficiently resolve case management issues, some of which the
Commission-authorized Advisory PAPO Board resolved in LBP-08-10.
D. Scope of the Hearing
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1027, in any initial decision on the
application for construction authorization, the presiding officer shall
make findings of fact and conclusions of law on, and otherwise give
consideration to, only material issues put into controversy by the
parties and determined to be litigable in the proceeding. The
Commission has determined that the scope of the adjudicatory proceeding
on safety, security, or technical issues is limited to litigable
contested issues. See State of Nevada; Denial of Petition for
Rulemaking, Docket No. PRM-2-14, available at ADAMS accession number
ML082900618. The presiding officer has no authority or duty to resolve
uncontested issues in those areas. See 10 CFR 2.1023(c)(2) and 10 CFR
2.1027.
Notwithstanding the provisions in 2.1023(c)(2) and 10 CFR 2.1027,
the presiding officer shall make the environmental findings required by
10 CFR 51.109(e), even on uncontested issues, ``to the extent it is not
practicable to adopt the environmental impact statement prepared by the
Secretary of Energy.''
E. Participation by a Non-Party
A person who is not a party may be permitted to make a limited
appearance statement by making an oral or written statement of his or
her position on the issues at any session of the hearing or any pre-
hearing conference within the limits and conditions fixed by the
presiding officer, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding.
IV. Access to Non-public information
Those petitioners who seek access to non-public information must
follow the access requirements contained in the PAPO Board's Third Case
Management Order (August 30, 2007), available at ADAMS accession number
[[Page 63032]]
ML072420327. This and other case management orders issued by the PAPO
Board govern protection of various categories of protected and
privileged information. The Board's case management orders are
available on the high-level waste electronic hearing docket, Docket No.
PAPO-00, at http://hlwehd.nrc.gov/Public_HLW-EHD/home.asp , under HLW-
EHD, folder titled PAPO--HLW, subfolder titled Orders--PAPO.
V. Motions
To avoid unnecessary disputes and filings, a party who files a
motion must certify, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.323, that he or she has made
a reasonable effort to consult with counsel for the applicant and
counsel for the NRC staff, as well as other interested counsel or
litigants, in an effort to resolve the matter in advance of filing the
motion. Motions must also meet all other section 2.323 requirements.
VI. Revised Hearing Schedule Milestones
In CLI-08-18 (August 13, 2008), available at ADAMS accession number
ML082261241, the Commission granted the State of Nevada, as well as any
other petitioner, an additional thirty (30) days in which to file a
petition to intervene, or a petition for status as an interested
government participant, in this proceeding. In addition, the Commission
proposed further modifications to the schedule codified in 10 CFR Part
2, Appendix D.
The Commission invited any party or potential party participating
in the matters before the PAPO Board to provide comments on certain
additional proposed extensions of time. The Commission also sought the
views of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel on the
reasonableness of current and proposed time frames. The Commission has
considered the comments received, and has determined that the revised
schedule below will replace certain hearing milestones set forth in
Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 2.
The Commission hereby doubles the time permitted to file answers
and replies, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1) and (2), respectively, to
fifty (50) and fourteen (14) days, respectively. The Commission also
extends the period for the First Prehearing Conference from eight (8)
to sixteen (16) days after the deadline for filing replies, and extends
the period for issuance of the First Prehearing Conference Order from
thirty (30) to sixty (60) days after the First Prehearing Conference.
The revised Appendix D schedule, reflected in the table below, replaces
only the milestones up to, and including, the First Prehearing
Conference Order. The presiding officer retains authority to grant
extensions of time of no more than fifteen days, and the Commission
retains authority to grant extensions of longer than fifteen days, but
in either case the litigant seeking the extension must follow the
requirements of 10 CFR 2.1026.
Partially Revised Appendix D Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0...................................... Federal Register Notice of
Hearing.
60..................................... Petition to intervene/request
for hearing, w/contentions.
110.................................... Answers to intervention and
interested government
participant Petitions.
124.................................... Petitioner's response to
answers.
140.................................... First Prehearing Conference.
200.................................... First Prehearing Conference
Order identifying participants
in proceeding, admitted
contentions, and setting
discovery and other schedules.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulatory requirements governing the balance of the Appendix D
schedule remain unchanged.
VII. September 9, 2008, Petition
On September 9, 2008, the State of Nevada submitted to the
Commission a ``petition'' directed to the content of this hearing
notice.\2\ In this petition, Nevada argues that the Commission cannot
issue a notice of hearing unless it first resolves ``at least three
important legal and procedural issues.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Petition to Publish a Fair and Reasonable Notice of Hearing
on DOE's Yucca Mountain Application (Sept. 9, 2008), available at
ADAMS accession number ML082550289 (September 9 Petition). The
procedural identity of Nevada's ``petition'' is not obvious. The
Commission addresses the issues Nevada raises as part of this notice
of hearing solely as a matter of expedience since they touch on
topics the Commission already addresses independently.
Both DOE and the NRC Staff responded to the September 9
Petition. See U.S. Department of Energy Response to State of Nevada
``Petition to Publish a Fair and Reasonable Notice of Hearing on
DOE's Yucca Mountain Application'' (Sept. 19, 2008); NRC Staff's
Response to the State of Nevada's Petition to Publish a Fair and
Reasonable Notice of Hearing on DOE's Yucca Mountain Application
(Sept. 19, 2008).
\3\ September 9 Petition at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada's first issue, now partially mooted, is the lack of final
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards and implementing NRC
rules for the post-10,000 year period. The EPA has now established
post-10,000 year standards, and the Staff is developing implementing
regulations.\4\ Nevada argued that potential parties cannot draft
contentions based upon standards that have not been finalized. As a
possible remedy, Nevada proposed that today's notice of hearing include
a delay--essentially a bifurcation of contention-filing deadlines--with
respect to all issues related to the EPA standards and the NRC's
implementing rules until some date to be determined after the standards
and rules are issued. Nevada argued alternatively that this delay could
be avoided if the Commission declined to be bound by its Staff's
decision to docket the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Final Rule, Public Health and Environmental Radiation
Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada 73 FR 61,256
(October 15, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission recognizes Nevada's concern but does not believe
Nevada's extraordinary remedies are necessary, especially since the EPA
has now issued the relevant standards, and the NRC's regulations are in
preparation. Under the NRC's ordinary practice, Nevada and other
hearing petitioners are free to file contentions arguing that the
Commission may not authorize construction in the absence of
implementing NRC rules. And they are also free to file contentions
maintaining that DOE's application does not meet EPA's standards. Such
contentions would require no change in the contention-filing schedule
set out in CLI-08-18. Nevada or other hearing petitioners may amend
their ``EPA standards''-related contentions later, after the NRC's
implementing rules are issued, if the new NRC rules establish fresh
grounds for contentions. Under the unusual circumstances of this case,
where controlling agency rules have been delayed, and to ensure that no
one is prejudiced, any contentions so amended--on EPA standards-related
issues only--will be deemed timely for admissibility purposes if filed
within sixty days after the Federal Register publication of the NRC
rules implementing the new EPA standards.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ NRC rules ordinarily call on licensing boards to balance
several factors in deciding whether to allow late-filed (or amended)
contentions. See 10 CFR 2.309(c)(i)-(viii). In the case of the yet-
to-issue NRC rules, however, the Commission is dispensing in advance
with all ``late-filed'' factors except the ``good cause'' factor. It
is obvious even now that promptly-filed and well-pled contentions
based on new, previously unavailable NRC rules--rules that will
govern important aspects of NRC's safety review--must be admitted
for hearing. There plainly would be ``good cause'' for filing such
contentions late, and no conceivable justification for rejecting
them at the threshold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second issue Nevada raises in its September 9 Petition concerns
a petition for rulemaking it filed regarding the specification of
issues for the mandatory hearing portion of this proceeding.\6\
[[Page 63033]]
That petition has now been ruled on, and the Commission's rulemaking
decision is reflected in the discussion of the scope of the hearing
addressed in Section III.D, above.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Petition by the State of Nevada for Rulemaking to Specify
Issues for the Yucca Mountain Mandatory Hearing (June 19, 2007).
\7\ See State of Nevada; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking,
Docket No. PRM-2-14, available at ADAMS accession number
ML082900618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the third issue Nevada raises in its September 9 Petition
concerns the status of security clearances and access to classified
information in the Yucca Mountain construction authorization
application. Nevada argues that its representatives have not been
informed of decisions on their security clearances and on access to
classified information, ``notwithstanding timely applications,'' so no
contentions based on classified information can be prepared.\8\ To
remedy this, Nevada again asks for a bifurcation of contention-filing
deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ September 9 Petition at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is the Commission's understanding that, as of the end of July,
one of Nevada's security clearance applications was complete and was
being processed, another application was incomplete, and two
applications had been withdrawn.\9\ From this, the Commission concludes
that the timeliness of Nevada's security clearance applications is
factually ambiguous. Moreover, it is not immediately clear that the
perceived problem could not be remedied by the provision of redacted
versions of classified documents that could provide a basis for the
formulation of contentions before the security clearance application
reviews are completed. The Commission directs the PAPO Board to resolve
both of these questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Letter from Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director, Licensing and
Inspection Directorate, Division of High-Level Waste Repository
Safety, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards to Robert
R. Loux, Executive Director, Agency for Nuclear Projects, Office of
the Governor, State of Nevada (July 31, 2008), available at ADAMS
accession number ML081910097.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of October, 2008.
For the Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E8-25293 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P