ATTACHMENT 11

~-----------------

ELIOT SPITZER GOVERNOR

Jim Costedio Manager - Licensing Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093

Dear Mr. Costedio,

STATE OF NEW YORK

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE STREET

ALBANY. NY 12231-0001

January 10, 2008

LORRAINE A. CORTES-VAzQUEZ SECRETARY OF STATE

Re: F-2007-1155 (formerly F-2006-0788) Nuclear Regulatory Commission -Operating License Renewal for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Town ofScriba, NY

Necessary Data and Information to Commence Review

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) has requested the Department of State (DOS) to commence the coastal consistency review under the New York Coastal Management Program (NYCMP) for relicensing the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP). (See letter from Entergy dated December 6, 2007 that DOS received on December 14, 2007 appended here as Attachment 1).

Entergy initially submitted its consistency certification and request for concurrence in a letter dated July 31, 2006. (Attachment 2) Entergy then withdrew its consistency certification in a letter dated November 20, 2006 to await the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's issuance of the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for this activity. (Attachment 3) DOS responded in a letter dated November 27, 2006 that it would commence review of the consistency certification when it receives all necessary data and information, including the final SEIS. (Attachment 4)

DOS acknowledges receipt of your re-submitted consistency certification and supporting information regarding this activity on December 14,2007. The final SEIS, however, is necessary data and information that DOS requires to commence the six-month coastal consistency review period under the NYCMP and 15 C.F.R. Sections 930.58 (a) and 930.60 (a)(2).

DOS has learned that the final SEIS could be issued by January 30,2008 and anticipates commencing the consistency review for this activity upon receipt of the final SEIS. During the consistency review period, DOS may request Entergy to submit additional information. (see, 15 C.F.R. Section 930.63[c)).

Please note that DOS has updated your application file number to F-2007-1155. If you have any

WWW.DOS.STATE.NY.US • E-MAIL: INFO@DOS.STATE.NY.US

questions regarding this matter, please contact either myself or JeffZappieri at (518) 474-6000.

encl: (4)

cc: Alyse Peterson, NYSERDA Chris Hogan, NYSDEC Jessie Muir, NRC

Sincerely,

!2t- .~ Andrew Kasius Coastal Energy Facilities Specialist Consistency Review Unit

AttacBment 1

• -::::::- Entergy December 6, 2007 JAFP-07 -0135

Andrew Kasius New York State Department of State Division of Coastal Resources 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001

... ta\ Resources. t\tjC'(;1 Coa& .

OEC 1 41.001

RE: JAMES A FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Dear Mr. Kasius,

Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming. NY 13093 Tel 315 342 3840

Thank you for your attention to the application for a Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Consistency Certification that James A FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) previously submitted to your office on July 31,2006 (JAFP-06-0111) and subsequently withdrew from review on November 20,2006 (JAFP-06-0162). At this time Entergy requests that the examination of JAFNPP's application for a CZM Consistency Certification be re-initiated by the New York State Division of Coastal Resources: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) final Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), which is necessary for a CZM determination, wili be released in January of 2008.

Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Michael Rodgers, PE of the plant staff with any questions you may have or if you should require any additional materials to assist inyour review. He can be reached at 315-349-6571.

Sincerely,

/~~ Manager-Licensing

Attachment 2

Rec'd Coastal Resources • ~Entergy AUG 0 1 2006 Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093 Tel 3153496024 Fax3153496480

July 31,2006 JAFP-06-0111

New York State Department of State Division of Coastal Resources 4 I State St. 8th Floor Albany, NY 12231

Pete Dietrich Site Vice President - JAF

Entergy Nuclear Operations Inc. (ENO) is applying to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for renewal of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) license to operate for an additional 20 years beyond the current expiration date of October 17,2014. As part of the application process to the NRC, ENO must certifY that the proposed activities are in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. In conjunction with the license renewal process, ENO performed a review for JAFNPP's consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Act and has concluded that the proposed activity complies with New York State's Coastal Management Program.

In accordance with Federal regulations for license renewal (10 CFR 54), ENO has induded the Environmental Report with the license rene\h,al application. The report includes a description of the proposed action, the affected environment, and an analysis of environmental consequences and mitig~~ting ac~ions. Also included in the report is a cf1mplete list of licenses, permits, and other approvals from Federal, Stateo and local authorities tor current JAFNPP operations, i,l addi~ion to consultations and approval:; required for the approval of the license for the exiend~d period of JAFNPP operations. The license renewal application, which includes the Environmental Reporto and Federal Consistency Certification are included for your review.

I would appreciate a letter concurring with tile enclosed Coastal Zone Management Program Consistency Certification, following your review of the Federal Consistency Assessment Form. A copy of your response will be made available to the NRC during the NRC's environmental review • the license renewal application.

Pete Dietrich Site Vice-President James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant

Enclosures: Federal Consistency Certification JAFNPP License Renewal Application

Attachment 3

Rec'd C02S;2U ResourCes r-£QV ~- U '7 4'-0' A--~

NOV 2'1 2.006 • -===-Entergy Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A- Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093 Tel 315 3496024 Fax 3153496480

November 20, 2006 JAFP-06-0162

Andrew Kasius New York State Department of State Division of Coastal Resources 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001

RE: JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Dear Mr. Kasius,

Pete Dietrich Site Vice President - JAF

Thank you for your attention to the application for a Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Consistency Certification that James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) has recently submitted to your office. In light of the fact that the Nuclear Regulatory Agency's (NRC) draft Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) will not be released until August 2007, Entergy requests that at this time, the CZM application be withdrawn to allow the Division of Coastal Resources the ability to review the draft SEIS in concert with the JAFNPP CZM application. Within several weeks of the NRC SEIS being released for publication, Entergy will contact you regarding the JAFNPP CZM application.

Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Michael Rodgers, PE of the plant staff with any questions you may have_ He can be reached at 315-349-6571.

~ PO:inOr:jbh

Xc: D. Harrison R. Buckley J. Brochu

R. Plasse M. Stroud (ANO)

GEORGE E. PATAK I GOVERNOR

Pete Dietrich Site Vice President Entergy Nuclear Northeast James A. Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming NY, 13093

Dear Mr. Dietrich,

Attachment 4

STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE

41 STATE STREET ALBANY, NY 12231-0001

November 27th, 2006

Re: F--2006-0788

CHRISTOPHER L JACOBS SECRETARY OF STATE

Nuclear Regulatory Commission -Operating License Renewal for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Town of Scriba, NY Withdrawal of Consistency Certification

The Department of State received your letter dated November 201h, 2006 withdrawing the consistency certification regarding the above matter. The Department has, therefore, terminated its review of your consistency certification for this proposal. This action on the part of the Department of State is not and should not be construed as or presumed to be a consistency decision by this Department pursuant to 15 CFR Parts 930.62 or 930.63.

When you fe-submit a new consistency certification for this proposal, a copy of the federal application for authorization and a new Federal Consistency Assessment Form and certification should be provided to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of State at the same time. Our review of the proposed operating license renewal and the consistency certification submitted for it will commence once it is determined that all necessary data and information have been provided, including

. the Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement expected in August, 2007 .

. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (518) 474-5268 or email at akasius@dos.state.ny.us:

cc: Alyse Peterson, NYSERDA

~erelY, .'

~7L Andrew Kasius Coastal Energy Facilities Specialist Consistency Review Unit

~I'W YORK. ST,\TE DEPARTMENT or' ST,ITI'. COASTAL M,INAGEMENT PROGRAM

F.:dcrJJ CUllsistr:ncy J\SSI.!SSlll(:lIl J;urm

nec'd Coastal naSOlH(:t~ ~:

;\LI applicant. sco::king a p..:nnit, licC'n:::e, wlli\'r:r. ccrti th.::ttion or similar I)'p;,; \If;tpprovtll frUlII ;a Ii:dl!wl :Igcncy whidt is subj,.·c{ 10 the New l\lrk Statl! Coastal \lallagel1ll!lIl Prl)gr.lm (Ch·lr). !ihall complete this assessment limll t'or ;my IlfOposcd ;lctivity Ihal wtllllc(,lIr within ;1mV(II' directly aned the 51:l!c's Coast:11 An::!. This I'oon is inlcmll.'d 10 as:iisl :!tl ;tpplicilnl in cl:l1itYing Ihal Iht: I'roro

C. COASTAL ASSESSMENT Che~k dlher "YES" ~)r "NO" lor each or!h~·.st: questiuns. The IIIltllbcfS rullowing ~ach l.\uestiol1 rercor to the pulicil!s described in Ihe CMP document (SI,)C footnlltc 011 page 2) whidl may be alli:clet.i hy lhe propused activity.

I. WiIllhe proposed activity result in imy t)f the ti)lluwing:

i1. l.1rge pnysical change to 3 site within the COilslalarea which wilt require Ihi! pn:pill:llhm ofo.o ~nvirol1lTlr.:nl:.11 imp:Jcl :uutcll\em? (11,22,25,32, )7, J8, 41, oJ)) ......... , . l b. Physicalalteralian of more lhun Iwo I\crc~ I)f land "long the shorelim:, land under water or coas[ul wlllcr1'l (2, I I, 12,20,28. JS, 44-) ... ,............... . Jt c. Rcvitali7nlion/rct!cvclopmcnt of a dt!lcrior:ucd or undcrutilizeil w:'llcefron! ,jlc"l (1) JL J. Rctluction of existing ar potcnti:11 puhlic nee('ss 10 or ;lIang coastal water!? (19, 10) A c. Adverse cITl:d upon the commercial or rl!ac:Hional use of coa..~lnl Ii$h resources'! t9.1O) . . . .x.. r. Siting oro Ibcilily esscllliOillo [he c:tploriuion,

D. ADDITION,II. ~nJ:i'S

1. Ir:tll Ill' Ihe qw,:sliun:: in Sl!dil)J1 C OIre I copy of Jhi~ compkl\.'u form .tll1ng wilh hi:>ther :Ipplk:Jlioll/o Ihe Ii.!ucrul ugcncy.

J. I r ~ 1Ll!rc Me :Lny \ju.:stiUIl:i r.::~anli,·,g thl.< ~ llhlllissi(' Jl of this fOflll, ,;ol1t:u.:1 {hc DI.:pnnme\l1 ,If St.ll~ :1\ IS I,~) ·17.(.(,{)01).

~ J II.:,.: ~ l.Ilc .I1it! ItlL:d(hleIUllc lII~ ;'Ir.: avall"h!e jilr il1"'p"l' tillll ,llihe 111Ih-\!~ llflllallY (( 'lkr:ll :J!:I!U,:h:'1, fkl'anl1K'lll flJ\'u".ir

Attachment D

Jame:i A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Applicant's ErwirCinmerllai Repol1

Operating license Renewal Stage

Coastal Management Program Consistency Determination

D·1

Federal Consistency Certification for Federal Permit and License Applicants 1

This is Entergy Nuclear Generation Company's (Entergy) C81ilfication to the U, S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that the renewal of the James A, Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Station (JAFNPP) operating license would be consistent with enforceable policies of Ihe federally approved state coastal zone management program, The certification describes background requirements, the proposed action (i.e, license renewal), anticipated environmental impacts, New York State enforceable coastal resource protection policies, JAFNPP compliance status, and summary findings,

CONSISTENCY CERTIFICATION

Entergy certifies to the NRC that renewal of the JAFNPP operating license complies with the enforceable policies of New York's approved coastal zone management program and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program, Entergy expects JAFNPP operations during the license renewal term to be a continuation of current operations as described below, with no physical or operational station alterations that would change effects on New York's coaslal zone.

NECESSARY DATA AND INFORMATION

Statutory Background

The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1451 et seq,) imposes requirements on an applicant for a Federal license to conduct a review of any activity that could affect a state's coastal zone, The Act requires an applicant to certify to the licensing agency that the proposed action would be consistent with the state's federally approved coastal zone management program, The Act also requires the applicant to provide to the state a copy of the certification statement and requires the state, at the earliest practicable time, to notify the federal agency and the applicant whether the state concurs with, or objects to, the consistency certification, See 16 USC 1456(c)(3)(A),

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has promUlgated implementing regulations that indicate the certification requirement is applicable to renewal of federal licenses for activities not previously reviewed by the state [15 CFR 930,51(b)(1)], NOAA approved the New York coastal zone management program in 1982, In New York, the approved program is the New York State Coastal Management Program (CMP), 19 NYCRR Parts 600-601 and Executive Law, Article 42,

CMP regulations require review of federal activities that are lis led or that could reasonably be expected to affect the coastal zone (15 CFR 930,11). NRC licensing is a listed activity and since JAFNPP is at a coastline that withdraws from and discharges to coastal waters, it could reasonably be expected to affect Ihe coaslal zone, The State regulation requires certification of compliance with the CMP policies as identified in the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement, Seclion 6, August 1982. identifies the poliCies and the Entergy justification for certifying compliance,

This certification is patterned after the example cenification included as Appendix E 01 Ref o-t

0-2

Proposed Action

Entergy is applying to Ihe NRC for renewat of the JAFNPP license to operate for an additional 20 years beyond the current expiration date of October 17, 2014. Entergy expects JAFNPP operations during tI1e license renewal term to be a continuation of current operations as described in the following paragraphs, with no physical or operational changes that would affect the New York coaslal zone. Entergy certifies that license renewal complies with the program policies of the New York approved coastal management program and wiil be conducted in a manner consistent with such policies.

Background Information

James A FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) is located on a 702-acre site on the south shore of Lake Ontario, known as Nine Mile Point, in the Town of Scnba, Oswego County, New York. The site is in a rural area approximately five miles northeast of Oswego, 36 miles north-northwest of Syracuse, and 65 miles east of Rochester, New York. Syracuse is the largest city wilhin 50 miles of JAFNPP. Consteliation Nuclear's Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station is located immediately west of the site, The location of JAFNPP is shown in Figures 2-1 and 2-2,

JAFNPP is a single-unit plant with a boiling water reactor and turbine generator licensed lor an output of 2,536 megawatts-thermal (MWt), and an electric rating of approximately 881 megawalls-electric (MWe),

JAFNPP is equipped wilh a once-through heat dissipation system that withdraws cooling water from and discharges to Lake Ontario, Three pumps in the intake structure provide a continuous sLlpply (352,600 gallons per minute [gpmJ) of condenser cooling waler, After moving through the condensers, cooling water is discharged into a 1,400-foot long discharge tunnel. with the discharge nozzles being located 5 to 6 feet above the lake bottom, The design effluent flow rate to the discharge tunnel is 388,600 gpm. The maximum allowable increase in water temperature across the condensers is 32.4'F. Entergy holds a State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit (NY 00201 09) to regulate this activity and other planUstormwater discharges, In accordance with permit requirements, Entergy monitors effluent parameters from discharges and reports the resulls to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC),

JAFNPP has an onsite wastewater treatment plant that is regulated under SPDES Permit NY 0020109, Sanitary wastewater which has been processed in the wastewater treatment facility and does not contain radioactive materials is discharged in accordance With JAFNPP's SPDES permit.

Entergy employs a permanent workforce of approximately 715 employees (including baseline permanent contractors) at JAFNPP, The majority of the JAFNPP workforce (approximately 95,5%) lives in Oswego and Onondaga Counties, JAFNPP is on a 24-month refueling cycle, During refueling outages, site employment increases above the approximately 715 person permanent workforce by as many as 700 to 900 workers for temporary duty (30 to 40 days),

Environmental Impacts

TIle NRC has prepared a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Reference D-2) on impacts that nuclear power plant license renewal could have on the environment and has codified its findings (10 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1), The codification identified 92 potential

D-3

environmental issues, 69 of which the NRC identified as having small impacts and termed "Category 1 issues." The NRC defines "Small" as follows.

For the issue, environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they WIll neither destabilize nor noticeably aller any important aitribute of the resource. For the purpose of assessing radiological impacts, the Commission has concluded til at those impacts that do not exceed permissible levels in the Commission's regulations are considered small as ttle term is used in this table (10 CFR 51 . Subpart A, Appendix B, Table BI).

The NRC based its assessment of license renewal impacts on its evaluations of impacts from current plant operations. The NRC codification and Ihe Generic Environmental Impact Statement discuss the following types of Category 1 environmental issues:

Surface water quality, hydrology, and use Aquatic ecology Groundwater use and quality Terrestrial resources Air quality Land use Human heallh Postulated accidents Socioeconomics Uranium fuel cycle and waste management Decommissioning

In its decision making for plant-specific license renewal applications, absent new and significant information to the contrary, the NRC relies on its codified findings, as amplified by supporting information in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement, for assessment of environmental impacts from Category 1 issues [10 CFR 51.95(c)(4)1, For plants such as JAFNPP that are located in the coastal zone, many of these issues involve potential impacts to the coastal zone. Entergy has adopted by reference the NRC findings and Generic Environmental Impact

Statement analyses for all 50 2 Category 1 Issues applicable to JAFNPP.

The NRC regulation identified 21 issues as "Calegory 2," for which license renewal applicants

must submit additional site-specific information,3 Of these, 11 apply to JAFNPP, 4 and like the Category 1 issues, could potentially involve impacts to the coastal zone, The applicable issues and Entergy's impact conclusions are listed below,

2. The remaining 19 Category 1 issues do not apply to JAFNPP either because they are associ-~ted with desIgn or operation a! features that JAFNPP does not have (e.g., COOling towers) or to a refurbishment activity thai JAFNPP wil' not undertake.

3. 10 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix 8, Table 8-1 also identifies 2 issues as "NA" for which Ihe NRC could not come to a conclusion regarding categorization. Entergy believes that Ihese Issues, chroniC eHects of electromagnetic fields and environmental JlIstice. do nol affect "coasca! zone" as ~hat phrase is defined by the Coastal Zone Management Act [16 USC 1453(1)1.

4. The remaIning 10 Category 2 Issues do not apply to JAFNPP eIther because they are associ-ated with design or operational features that JAFNPP does not have (e.g., cooling towers) or to a refurbishment activity thai JAFNPP will not undertake.

o· ~

Aquatic ecology

a Entrainmenl of fish and shellfish in early life staqes - This issue addresses mOliality of organisms small enough to pass Ihrough the plant's circulating cooling water system. In August 2001, JAFNPP was issued a SPDES permit which concluded Ihnt the high frequency/high amplitude fish deterrent system installed at the offshore intake structure from April to October of each year is the best technology available (BTA) for reducing both entrainment and impingement impacts. In addition to Ihe BTA determination, JAFNPP also utilizes additional operational measures and technological design features to further minimize already small entrainment impacts. Entergy concludes that these impacts are small during current operations and there are no operational changes or plans which would affect this conclusion for the license renewal term,

a Impingement of fish and shellfish - This issue addresses mortality of organisms large enough to be caught by intake screens before passing through the plant's circulating cooling water system. The permit and additional operational measures and technological design features discussed above also address impingement. Entergy concludes that these impacts are small during current operations and there are no operational changes or plans which would affect this conclusion for the license renewal term.

a Heat shock - This issue addresses mortality of aquatic organisms by exposure to heated plant effluent. JAFNPP has a CWA Section 316(a) variance which concluded that the thermal effluent from JAFNPP woutd not result in long-term impacts to the fish and wildlife populations of Lake Ontario and that more stringent limits on the heated effluent are not necessalY to protect the aquatic environment. Entergy concludes that these impacts are small during current operations and there are no operational changes or plans which would affect this conclusion for the license renewal term.

Threatened or endangered species

This issue addresses effects that JAFNPP operations potentially could have on species that are listed under federal law as threatened or endangered. In analyzing this issue, Entergy has also considered species that are listed under State of New York law O. Several other terrestrial species could potentially occur on the JAFNPP site, or along associated transmission corridors, although none have been observed. Entergy's and NYPA's (owner and operator of the transmission lines) environmental protection programs have identified no adverse impacts to such species and Entergy's consultation with cognizant Federal and State agencies has identified no impacts of concern. Entergy concludes that JAFNPP impacts to these species are small during current operations and there are no planned physical or operational changes to the plant that WOliid affect Ihis conclusion for the license renewal term. Human health

Electromagnetic fields acute effects (electric shock) This issue addresses the potential for shock from induced currents, similar to static electricity effects, in the vicinity of transmission lines. Because this strictly human-health issue does not directly or indirectly

0·5

affect natural resources of concern wilhin Ihe Coastal Zone Management Act definition of "coastal zone" [16 USC 1453(1)J, Entergy concludes that the issue is not subject to the certification requirement.

Socioeconomics

a Housing - This issue addresses impacts that JAFNPP could have on local housing availability, as it relates to the employees required to support license renewal. Presently in Oswego and Onondaga Counties, the vacancy rates have remained stable with the number of available units keeping pace with or exceeding the low population growth in the area. In addition, as Entergy does not intend to add additional permanent employees to the JAFNPP workforce, Entergy has concluded that impacts during the JAFNPP license renewal term would be small.

a Public services' public utilities - This issue address impacts that JAFNPP could have on public water supply syslems, as it relates to additional permanent workers added during the license renewal period. As Entergy does not intend to add additional permanent employees to the JAFNPP workforce, Entergy has concluded that impacts during the JAFNPP license renewal term would be small.

a Offslte land use - This issue addresses impacts that local government spending of plant property tax doilars can have on land use patterns. JAFNPP property taxes comprise approximately 9 percent of the Town of Scriba's revenue and Entergy expects this to remain generally unchanged during the license renewal term. The NRC concluded, and Entergy concurs, that impacts to offsita land usa would be small if tax payments are less than 10 percent of total revenue. Entergy concludes that impacts during the JAFNPP license renewal tecm would be small.

o Public services' transportation - This issue addresses impacts that JAFNPP could have on local traffic patterns, as it relates to adding additional permanent workers during the license renewal period. As Entergy does not intend to add additional employees to the permanent workforce for the license renewal term, this would result in a small impact.

o Historic and archaeological resources - This issue address impacts that license renewal activities could have on resources of historic or archaeological significance. Entergy is not aware of any adverse or detrimental impacts to any historical or archaeological resources from current operations and there are no plans to change the plant site physically or operationally during the license renewal period that would disturb thesa resources. Entergy correspondence with the New York State Historic Preservation Officer identified no issues of concern. Therefore, Entergy concludes that impacts during the JAFNPP license renewal term would be small.

o Severe accidents - Results from the Entergy severe accident mitigation alternatives (SAMA) analysis have not identified additional cost beneficial alternatives to further mitigate risk to public health and the economy in the area of the plant, including the coastal zone, due to potential severe accidents at JAFNPP. The SAMAs, however, are unrelated to aging management issues that are the subject of the license renewal

analysis and, therefore are not reloted to this consistency certification for license renewal.

State Program

The New York Stafe Coaslal Management Program is administered by the New York Slate, Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources. The Division maintains a website Ihat describes the program in general terms (Reference D-3). The New York State Coastal Management Program (Reference D-4) conlains details abol/llhe state's coastal policies. IS the New York Slate Department of Slate, Coastal Management Program, Federal Consistency Assessment Program. Table 0-1 tists these policies and discusses for each item. the applicability to JAFNPP and, where applicable, the status of JAFNPP compliance. Tables and identify licenses, permits, consultations and other approvals necessary for JAFNPP continued operation and license renewal, respectively.

Findings

1. The NRC has found Ihat the environmental impacts of Category 1 issues are small. Entergy has adopted by reference NRC findings for Category 1 issues applicable to JAFNPP.

2. For Category 2 issues applicable to JAFNPP, Entergy has determined that the environmental impacts are small.

3. To the best of Entergy's knowledge, JAFNPP Is in compliance with New York licensing and permitting requirements and is in compliance with its State-issued licenses and permits.

4. Entergy's license renewal and continued operation of JAFNPP would be consistent with the enforceable provisions of the New York Coastal Zone Management Program.

STATE NOTIFICATION

By this certification that JAFNPP license renewal is consistent willl New York's coastal zone management program, the State of New York is notified Ihat it has six months from receipt of this letter and accompanying information in which to concur with or object to Entergy's certification. However, pursuant to 15 CFR 930.62 if the Stale of New York has not issued a decision within three months following the commencement of state agency review, it shall notify the contacts listed below of the status of the matter and the basis (or further delay. The State's concurrence. objection, or notification of review status shall be sent to the following.

Lesley Fields U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville. MD 02085-2738

0-7

Peter Dietrich Site Vice-Presidenl Entergy Nuclear James A. Fitzpatrick P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093

REFERENCES

D-l . U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations, LlC-203, Procedural Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments and Considering Environmental Issues, Revision 1, May 24, 2004.

0 -2. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GElS), Volumes 1 and 2, Washington, DC, May 1996.

D-3. NYS DOS Division of Coastal Resources, Coastal Resources Online, Consistency Review, available at http://www.nyswaterfronts.com/consistency asp.

D-4. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Threatened and Endangered Species System (TESS); Listings by State and Territory as of 12/08/2005: New York, 2005. Available at http:// ecos.fws.govltess_publicITESSWebpageUsaLists?state=NY.

D-5. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, List of Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern Fish & Wildlife Species of New York State. Available at htlp:llwww.dec.state.ny.us/websiteldrwmr/wildlifelendspec/etsclist.htmt, Accessed January 10, 2006.

D-6. U.S. Nuclear Regulalory Commission, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for license Renewat of Nuclear Plants, NUREG-143T, Supplement 24, Regarding Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Draft Report for Comment, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, DC, September 2005.

0 ·8

Table D,l New York Coastal Managoment Program's

State Coastal Policies

The New York Coastal Management Program requires persons seeking approval for activities whIch may Impact the Coastal Zone to demonstrate that Ihe activity is consistent with all applicable policies (Located in the Slate of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmenlallmpac! Statement, Section 6, August 1982, WIth changes made to incorpo,"!e routine program changes approved in 1983 and 2001) . Enlergy is seeking renewal of Ihe opera ling license for JAFNPP. The following table details the New York Coastal Management policies and provides Ihe Enlergy demonslration Ihat JAFNPP license renewal would be consistent with these policies.

,--_._---POLICY 1 JUSTIFICATION! CONSISTENCY

DEVELOPMENT POLICIES -. DEVELOPMENT POLlCY 1: Restore, revitalize, and JAFNPP is a previously developed redevelop deleriorated and underulilized walerfront property. ThiS policy does not apply to areas for commercial, industrial, cultural, JAFNPP. recreational, and other compatible uses.

'--" DEVELOPMENT POLICY 2: Facililate the siting of JAFNPP is a previously developed water dependent uses and facitities on or adjacent to property. This policy does not apply 10 coastal waters JAFNPP.

-DEVELOPMENT POLICY 3: Further develop the JAFNPP Is not tocated in a port area. state's major ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, This policy does not apply to JAFNPP. Ogdensburg, and Oswego as cenlers of commerce and industry, and encourage the siling, in these port areas. including those under Ihe jurisdiction of state public authorities, of land use and development which is essential 10, or in support of, the waterborne transportation of cargo and people

DEVELOPMENT POLICY 4: Strengthen the JAFNPP is a previously developed economic base of smaller harbor areas by property, This policy does not apply to encouraging the development and enhancement of JAFNPP. those traditional uses and activities which have provided such areas with their unique maritime identity

.. DEVELOPMENT POLICY 5: Encourage the location JAFNPP is a previously developed of development in areas where public services and property. This policy does nol apply to facilities essential to such development are JAFNPP adequate. - _._-_ .. .._-- - - ----DEVELOPMENT POLICY 6: Expedile permit JAFNPP is a previously developed procedures in order to facilitate Ihe siting of property. This policy does not apply to I development activities at suilable locations. I JAFNPP. _. .. .. . _- _-.-1

D, 9

, I

I

POLlCy----·------.-J-U-S-T-IF-IC- ATIONI CONSISTENCY J FISH AND WILDLIFE POLICIES

I FISH AND WILDLIFE POLICY 7: Significant coastal JAFNPP expects operations during ; fish and wildlife habitats will be protected, preserved, the license renewal term to be a I and where practical, restored so as to maintain their continuation of current operational I

viability as habitats. practices. There would be no I additional effects on coaslal fish and wildlife habilats as a result of JAFNPP I license renewal.

FISH AND WILDLIFE POLICY 8: Protect fish and Non-radiological effluent discharges wildlife resources in the coastal area from the Irom JAFNPP are regulated under its Introduction of hazardous wastes and other . New York State SPDES Permit

I pollutants which blo-accumulate in Ihe food chain or program. Radiological effluent which cause significant sublethal or lethal effects on discharges are regulated by the NRC. those resources JAFNPP is in compliance with its I

environmental permits, both state and federal and does not discharge hazardous wastes within the coastal zone. All hazardous wastes are disposed of in accordance with all applicable state and federal regulations.

- -....... ~ --FISH AND WILDLIFE POLICY 9: Expand Due to the heightened security recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in environment, there Is no public access coastal areas by increasing access 10 existing to the immediate shorefront area in resources, supplementing existing stocks, and the JAFNPP vicinity. developing new resources.

FISH AND WILDLIFE POLiCY 10: Further develop This policy Is not applicable to commercial finfish, shellfish, and crustacean JAFNPP. JAFNPP is not a state resources in the coastal area by encouraging the agency or an aquaculture facility construction of new, or improvement of eXisting on-' shore commercial fishing facilities, increasing marketing of the states seafood products, maintaining adequate stocks, and expanding aquaculture facilities

- -FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICIES _.- --.. ... -----.

FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 11: This policy is not applicable to Buildings and other structures will be sited in the JAFNPP. There are no plans to coastal area so as to minimize damage to property construct new buildings at the and the endangering of human lives caused by JAFNPP site.

I!0oding and erosion.

0·10

POLICY JUSTIFICATIONI CONSISTENCY I FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 12: This policy is not applicable to Activities or developmenl in Ihe coaslal area wili be JAFNPP, There are no plans for undertaken so as 10 minimize damage to natural construction or additional I resources and property from flooding and erosion by development at the JAFNPP site 'protecting natural proteclive features including during Ihe license renewal lerm, i beaches, dunes, barrier isla~~,~d bluffs, FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 13: This policy is not applicable to , The conslruclion or reconslruction of erosion JAFNPP, There are no plans for protection slruclures shall be undertaken only if they construction of erosion prolection have a reasonable probability of controlling erosion structures, for alleast Ihirty years as demonslrated in design and construction standards andlor assured

I maintenance or replacemenl programs, I FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 14: This policy is nol applicable to Activities and development, including Ihe JAFNPP. There are no plans for , construction or reconstruction of erosion protection construction of erosion proteclion structures, shall be undertaken so that there will be slructures or other structures at the no measurable increase in erosion or flooding al Ihe JAFNPP site, site of such activities or development, or at other locations.

FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 15: This policy is not applicable to Mining, excavation or dredging in coastal waters shall JAFNPP, There are no plans for not significantly interfere with the natural coastal mining. excavalion, or dredging In processes which supply beach materials to land coastal waters by JAFNPP. adjacent to such waters and shall be undertaken in a manner which will not cause an increase in erosion of such land.

FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 16: This policy does not apply to JAFNPP. Public funds shall only be used for erosion protective JAFNPP is an existing facility and no structures where necessary 10 protect human life, new erosion structures are needed. and new development which requires a location within or adjacent to an erosion hazard area to be able to function, or eXisting development; and only where the public benefits outweigh the long term I monetary and olher costs including Ihe potential for increasing erosion and adverse effects on nalural

I protective features. r-'---~" " --'-------; FLOODING AND EROSION HAZARDS POLICY 17: JAFNPP is not at risk of being nooded, Non-structural measures to minimize damage to ! All appropriate erosion measures are nalural resources and property from nooding and Ilaken when necessary, Natural erosion shall be used whenever possible, i erosion is not an issue of concern for

- - I JAFNPP, 0-11

-JUSTIFICATIONI CONSISTENCY I POLICY

GENERAL POLICY ! -- .~ GENERAL POLICY 18: To safeguard Ihe '1ital This policy is not applicable to I economic, social, and environmental interests of the JAFNPP. JAFNPP is an existing slale and of ils citizens, proposed major actions in facility for which no major the coastal area must give full consideralion to Ihose refurbishment is planned during the inleresls, and to Ihe safeguards which the stale has license renewal term. established to protect valuable coastal resource areas. ._----

PUBLIC ACCESS POLICIES -

PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY 19: Prolect, maintain, and This policy is not applicable to increase the level and types of access to water- JAFNPP. JAFNPP is not a water

! related recreation resources and Facilities, recreation resource or facility. PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY 20: Access to Ihe This policy is nol applicable to publicly-owned foreshore and 10 lands immediately JAFNPP. Due to Ihe heightened adjacent to the foreshore or Ihe water's edge that are security environment, access is not publicly owned shall be provided and it shall be allowed to the shorefront area provided in a manner compatible wilh adjoining llses. immediately adjacent to JAFNPP.

RECREATION POLICIES

RECREATION POLICY 21: Water-dependent and This policy is not applicable to water-enhanced recrealion will be encouraged and JAFNPP. JAFNPP is nol associated facilitaled, and will be given priority over non-water- with water dependent or enhanced related uses along Ihe coast. recreation. Due to the heightened

security environment, access is not allowed to Ihe shorefront area immediately adjacent to JAFNPP.

RECREATION POLICY 22: Development, when This policy is not applicable to located adjacent to the shore, will provide for water- JAFNPP. Due 10 the heightened related recreation, whenever such is compalible with security environment, access is not reasonably anticipated demand for activilies, and is allowed to the shorefront area compatible with the primary purpose of the immediately adjacent to JAFNPP. development

1---HISTORIC AND SCENIC RESOURCES POLICIES

.---- ---- -.. .-! HISTORIC AND SCENIC RESOURCES POLICY 23: I Protect, enhance and restore structures, districts, 'I areas or sites that are of significance in the history,

architecture, archaeology or culture of the state, its communities, or tho nation.

ll-12

.-This policy is not applicable to JAFNPP. There are no sites of historic significance on the JAFNPP property.

.

POLICY JUSTIFICATIONI CONSISTENCY HISTORIC AND SCENIC RESOURCES POLICY 24: This policy is not applicable to Prevent impairment of scenic resources of statewide JAFNPP There are no identified I significance scenic resources of statewide

significance at JAFNPP -- --HISTORIC AND SCENIC RESOURCES POLICY 25: This policy is not applicable to I Protect, restore, or enhance natural and man-made JAFNPP. There are no identified resources which are not identified as being of scenic resources of significance at stalewide significance, but which contribute to the JAFNPP overall scenic quality of the coastal area.

.----.. ~ AGRICULTURAL LANDS POLICY I AGRICULTURAL LANDS POLICY 26: Conserve and This policy is not applicable to ~rotect agricultural lands in Ihe slate's coastal area JAFNPP. There are no agricultural lands on JAFNPP property. -ENERGY AND ICE MANAGEMENT POLICIES

ENERGY AND ICE MANAGEMENT POLICY 27: This policy is not applicable 10 Encourage energy conservation and the use of JAFNPP. JAFNPP is an existing alternative sources such as solar and wind power in operating nuclear power facility. order to assist in meeting the energy needs of the State.

ENERGY AND ICE MANAGEMENT POLICY 28: Ice This policy is not applicable to management practices shall not interfere with the JAFNPP, The only ice management production of hydroelectric power, damage significant at JAFNPP which is conducted is for fish and wildlife and their habitats, or increase frazzle ice mitigation at the intake shoreline erosion or flooding. structure. -.. ENERGY AND ICE MANAGEMENT POLICY 29: This policy is not applicable to Encourage the development of energy resources on JAFNPP. JAFNPP is an existing the outer continental shelf, in Lake Erie and In other power production facility. water bodies, and ensure the environmental safety of such activities.

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICIES WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 30: All of JAFNPP's effluent discharges Municipal, industrial, and commercial discharge of are regulated by the SPDES Permit pollutants, including but not limited to, toxic and program (Permit NY 0020109). hazardous substances, into coastal waters Will JAFNPP is in compliance with SPDES L conform to state and national water quality standards Permit requirements . --. --- ____ _ _ '''0 _ _ -

0-13

I

r --,--_._--_ .•. _ .. _-----JUSTIFICATION! CONSISTENCY ; POLICY i WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 31: Stata Tllis policy is not applicable to

JAFNPP. JAFNPP is not involved in a local walerfront revitalization program.

, coastal arca policies and management objeclives of i approved local waterfront revitalization programs will I be considered while reviewing coastal water I classifications and while modifying water quality l i standards; however Ihose waters already i overburdened wilh contaminants will be recognized I as being a development constraint. Ii--W.-A-T-E-R-A-N-D-A-IR-R-ES-O-U-R-C-E-S-P-O-L-IC-Y-3-Z-: ---I This policy is not applicable to , Encourage Ihe use of alternative or innovative , JAFNPP. JAFNPP is an exisling I sanitary waste systems in small communities where ! industrial use facilily, nol a community , the costs of conventional facilities are unreasonably in the development stage. ! high, given the size of the existing tax base of Ihese 1 communities r-! WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 33: Besl JAFNPP stormwater runoff is I management practices will be used to ensure Ihe managed as a condition ofit's SPDES

control of stormwater runoff and combined sewer Permit. JAFNPP is in compliance with overtlows draining into coastal waters. Ihe SPDES Permit.

.- ... -.~ .. . . ----.. -. WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 34: This policy is not applicable to Discharge of waste materials into coastal waters from JAFNPP. JAFNPP is no\ a vessel.

I vessels subject to state jurisdictions will be limited so I as to protect significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreational areas and water supply areas.

I WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 35: This policy is not applicable to Dredging and filling coastal waters and disposal of JAFNPP. There are no plans for dredged material will be undertaken in a manner that dredging or filling of coastal waters by meets eXisting state permit requirements. and JAFNPP. protects significant fish and wildlife habitats, scenic resources, natural protective features, important agricultural lands and wetlands.

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 36: JAFNPP has internal plocedures and Activities related to Ihe shipment and storage of polices to ensure that all activilies petroleum and other hazardous materials will be related to hazardous materials are conducted in a manner that Will prevent or at least conducted in the safest manner. All minimize spills into coastal waters; all practicable policies and procedures are in efforts Will be undertaken to expedite the cleanup of compliance with state and federal

, such discharges; and restitulion for damages Will be , regulations. ~.qUlre~.",~en Ihese spills o_c_c_u_r. ________ t- :

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 37 Best This policy is not applicable to J' management praclices will be utilized 10 minimize Ihe JAFNPP as JAFNPP does not make non-point discharge of excess nutrients, organics such discharges. and eroded soils into coastal walers

0·14

,

,------------------------------_._--, JUSTIFICATION! CONSISTENCY POLICY

i WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 38: The This policy is not applicable to [ quality and quantity of surface water and JAFNPP as the facility does not use

I groundwater supplies will be conseNed and groundwater for either potable or protected particularly where such waters constitute ~.eNice water.

I the primary or sale source of water supply. !' •. - ------- ----------~ i WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 39: The JAFNPP has only temporary storage

transport, storage, treatment and disposal of solid of hazardous wasle onslle, which IS wastes, particularly hazardous wastes, within coastal regulated by applicable state and areas will be conducted in such a manner so as to federal regulations, permits, and protect groundwater and surface water supplios, authorizations. All activities which significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreation areas, involve hazardous wasles are important agricultural land, and scenic resources. conducted in a manner to minimize

Impacls on and protect the environment, including water supplies.

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 40: Discharge of effluent by JAFNPP Is Effluent discharged from major steam electric regulated under a SPDES permit (NY· generating and industrial facilities into coastal waters 0020109). JAFNPP is in compliance will not be unduly injurious to fish and wildlife and with requirements of the SPDES shall conform to state water quality standards. Permit.

-------+-----~---~~ WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 41: Land JAFNPP is in compliance with its air use or development in the coastal area will not causa emissions permit. national or state air quality standards to be violated.

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 42: Coastal management policies will be considered if the state reclassifies land areas pursuant to the prevention of significant deterioration regulations of Ihe federal Clean Air Act:

WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICY 43: Land use or development in the coastal areas must not cause the generation of significant amounts of acid rain precursors: nitrates and sulfates.

This policy is not applicable to JAFNPP. The land where JAFNPP is situated has not been reclassified.

JAFNPP is a nuclear operating plant that is in compliance with its air emissions permit

__________ -L ________________ ~

WETLANDS POLICY

Wetlands Policy 44: PreseNe and protect tidal and freshwater wetlands and preseNe Ihe benefits derived from these areas.

0·15

This policy is not applicable to JAFNPP. There are no tidal or freshwater wetlands at the JAFNPP site

Table 0-2 Endangered and Threatened Species that occur in Oswego County, NY

Federal Stilte Scientific Name Common Name

Status' Statusb, c

Reptiles and Amphibians

Crolalus horridus timber rattlesnake - T -Ambystoma jeffersonianum Jefferson salamander SC

Ambysloma laterale blue-spo~ed salamander - SC Clemmys gullala spo~ed turtle - SC Clemmys ;nsculpfa wood turtle . SC

- -------._-_._---.--_._--_ ..• _,,_ .. -- - --------Clemmys muhfenbergii bog lurtle T E

I Sisturus catenatus calenatu5 massasauga rattlesnake C E Birds

Accipiter cooperli Cooper's hawk - SC --" .•.

Accipiter slriatus sharp-shinned hawk · SC Ammodramus lIens/owN Henslaw's sparrow - T Ammodramus savannarum grasshopper sparrow · SC Aquila chrysaelos golden eagle - E Asia flammeus short-eared owl · E ____ _ 0 __ - ----Bartramla long/cauda upland sandpiper · T

Butao lineatus red-shouldered hawk · SC

Charadrius me/adius piping plover E E

Chfidonias niger black tern - E CllOrdelles minor common nighthawk · SC

Circus cyaneus northern harrIer · T

! Cis to/horus platensis sedge wren - T Oandro;ca ccru/sa cerulean warbler - SC Eremophila alpestfls horned lark - SC i

---_.- - - . ~ ' --' . Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon - E --I GaVI8 immer common loon - SC ~alia8etus 18Ucocophalus bald eagle E

0-16

;-------------,.------------ - ------cr---

1 ----.-

Scientific Name Cammon Name Federal Stat.

Statusa Statusb, ,

I - I T r- .. , - E Ixobrychus axilis least bittern

loggerhead shrike Lanius tudovicianus

red-headed woodpecker SC Meianerpes erythrocephtJlus I---------f--.. -- -.-------- _ .- - -,oandion haliactus osprey - sc -------_._ --- --j------ -----_ .- .. -. '.--_._ . .... - .. Padilymbus podiceps pied-billed grebe - T

POOBcetes gramineu5 vesper sparrow sc Slema IJirundo common tern T Varmivora chrysopfera golden-winged warbler sc .--.... ------'-------.-------'------'-------1 Mammals Myotis le,bii small-footed bat sc Myotis soda/is Indiana bat E E Fish ~-----------.---------_.---._--_1 Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon

Cottus ricel spoonhead sculpin

Erimyzon sucetta lake chubsucker

Hideon tergisIJs mooneye

Lylhrurus umbralilis tedlish shiner 1---------+--------- .... -- .----Myoxocephalus Ihompsonl deepwater sculpin Prosopium cylindraceum (ound whitefish

Plants

Asplenium scolopendrium var americanum

American Hart's-longue fern

Eloocharis quadrangulala angled spike rush

T

E

T

T

E

T

E ~----------------~-------------------- --------.--Eleocharis obtuse var. ovata blunt splkerush E isotria medea/aides small whorled begonia

- - - --+---Lycopodium camp/ana tum northern running pine • E , f---------------------I~---------------------~----~------·~ Polygonaf)1 .se!aCBtlm var swamp smartweed I E InlerjGctum t' , f--------------------+----------------- -- --'-1 Pofystichum archoslichoides Christmas fern • SC , Thelypteris noveboracel)sis .• - .p. -N~w-Y-o-rk-f-er-n---- ·----- --------,- .- sc-" ~" "i _ _ __ . ____ -J ____ -L ____ _

T

D-17

,--'" .... -..... -.. --r-----.. -.--.-- ---'--,---', I Scientific Namo Common Name Fedora~ Slate i I : Status Statusb. c: J, I '

Trillium ffexipes I' nodciing triliium E

rr;;~;~-~;;;ii,_~_--_' _. _____ -_-_-_-_-~,-to-a-d-.-s-ha-d-e-----···----,---f---E-frriJfiUm spp IlrilHum _- . _ _ l ___ ~c _ _

r a. R~ference 0-4 . b. Reference 0·6

iL _C,_R_c_f_e_rc_o_c_O_D_._5 _____________ .. _____ .. ____ ... ___ . ____ ___ -'

0,18

Agency 1

: DOT

Authority

49 CFR 107. Subpart G

Table 0-3 Environmental Authorizations for Current JAFNPP OperCitions

Requirement

Hazardous Materials Certificate of Registration

1- -Nu~b;;;' - -1 Expiration Date 060704551044 MN

June 30 . 2006

Authorized Activity

I Radioacbve and ! hazardous materials I shipments. NRC Atom,c Energy Act. License to operate DPR-59 I Odober 17. -20;:; _. - -- j op",;·;t,~~-;;i·JAFNPP. . 10 CFR 50

• j I [tfYSDEC \6 NYCRR Pan 201 Cenificate to Operate an 7 -3556-00201 Not Applicable ! Operation ot air ~ . Air Contamination 00012 i emission sources I' Source ! (diesel gener~tors . I 1 diesel fire pumps. and I I Doilers). __ I . r

, NYSDEC 6 NYCRR Pari 372 Hazardous Waste NYD00076507 Not Applicable , HazardOUS waste

•

I .

i Generator Identification 3

: generation 1- ---

i 1 NYSDEC 6 NYCRR Pari 675 Water Withdrawal NYGLWR-4004 November 20. 2006 ! Withdraw water irom !

Registration ; Lake Ontario. J , 'NYSDEC 6 NYCRR Pari 596 Hazardous Substance 7-000117 August 16. 2006 ---~O~;;;;;buik s;';~;;;i-'

! NYSLJcC 6 NYCRR Part 750

Bulk Storage 1 ' hazardous Registration Certificate I I State Pollutant NY-0020109 August 1. 2006 substances.

Discharge of wastewaters to waters of the State.

Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit

:-NYSDEctl6 NYCRR Part 613 Petroleum Bulk Storage 7-140600 November 20. 2010 Onsite bulk storage Of. i L Registration Certificate petroleum prod:,cts . __ .J

0·1 9

Agency Authority Requirement Number Expiration Date Authorized Activity NYSDEC I 6 NYCRR Part 750 Hazardous Waste

Interim Status Authorization

NY000765073 Not Applicable Accumulation and temporary storage onsite of mixed waste for >90 days.

-NYSDEC I 6 NYCRR P~rt 325 Pesticide Application 179632 1 July 31 , 2008 1 Pesticide application. , ! , BUSiness ReglstraUon CVDEM EF-SOI Auaust 31, 2007

Title 44. Code of Application for I EF-S0083107 August 31. 2007 i Transoortation of. -j Chapter 3.3, Hazardous Radioactive . the Commonwealth of i Virginia. Registration to Transport \. radioactive waste IOta \

SectIOn 44-146.30 Materials I Virginia 1 ~ I --~. ------~ SCDHEC Act No.429 of 1980, South Carolina 0031-3Hl6 December 31 , 2006 I Transportation of I

TDEC

South Carolina Radioactive Waste . radioactive waste into Radloaclive Waste Transport Permit I the State of South I Transportation and I Carolina I Disposal Act ,

Tennessee Radioactive Waste-License-for-Delivery

T-NY003-L06 I December 31, 2006 Shipment of radioactive material into TenneSSee to a

Tennessee Department of EnVironment and Conservation Repul I disposal/processing allons

fac1l1ty

0·20

Table D-4 Environmental Authorizations for James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Station

License Renowal

.. --- -- 'Ag-~~~y ·'----.---·- --A-u-th-o-r-ity----·'---A-c-ti-v-ity-C-o-v-e·r'e-d----,I U S. Fish and V'flldlife

, Service

New York Natural Heritage Program

New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation

New York Slate Department of State

Endangered Species Act Section 7 (t 6 USC 1636)

Endangered Species Act Section 7 (16 USC 1636)

Requires federal agency I issuing a license to consult with I USFWS.

II' Requires federal agency issuing a license to consull with I FWS.

National Histori~"'-" '-'-- ---I Requires federal agency Preservation Act issuing a license to consider Section 106 cultural impacts and consult

with SHPO.

Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1451 et seq.)

Requires an applicant to provide certification to the federal agency issuing the license that license renewal would be consistent with the federally·approved state coastal zone management program. Based on its review of the proposed activity. the state must concur with or object to the applicant's certification. f-------- ... --+~--------t---------_j New York State Clean Water Act, Section Requires New York

I Department of 401 (33 USC 1341) certification that discharge

/

EnVironmental would comply wilh CWA Conservation standards.

021

ATTACHMENT 12

07/24/2008 22:03

DAVID A. PATERSON GOVEf\NO~

Jim Costedio Manager - Licensing

5184732454

Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A . Fitzpatrick NPP P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093

Dear Mr. Costedio:

COASTAL RESOURCES PAGE 02/02

STATE OF NEW YORK

DEPARTMENT Or STATE ONE COMMERCE PLAZA

99 WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 12231-0001

LORRAINE A. CORTES-VAZQUEZ SECRii'u.IW Of $TA'I'E

July 24, 2008

Re: F-2007-1155 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission w Entcrgy Nuclear fitzPatrick, LLC Renewal of operating license Town of Scriba, Oswego County

Concurrence with Consistency Certification

The Department of State has completed its review ofyout consistency certification regurding the consistency of the above-referenced activity with the New York Coastal Management Program (CMP).

Pursuant to 15 CFR Part 930 .62, and based upon the project information submitted, the Department of State concurs with your consistency certification for this activity.

This concurrence is without prejudice to and does not obviate the need to obtain all other applicable licenses, permits, or other forms of authorization or approval that may be required pursuant to existing State statutes.

cc: Jess ie Muir, NRC Alyse Peterson, NYSERPA Chris Hogan, NYSDEC

uty Director Division of Coastal Resources

WWW.DOS.STATE.NY.US • E-MAIL: INFO@DOS.STATE . NY.US

ATTACHMENT 13

t ; ,,, . ..... , "

\,11' Ruhert (', Met:rl.!dy Vi, YL'IlLlI.! R OchL'slcr, N Y 14(,.:~1)

I )car MI', M,:t:n:dy.

S "r.\Tt! Of )-IEW '(om

ATTACHMENT 14

GEORGE E. P ATAKI GovaIHoR

Mr. Timothy J. O'CollilOr Plant General Manager Constellation Energy P.O. Box 63 Lycoming, New York 13903

Dear Mr. O'Connor:

STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE

41 STATE STREET ALBANY, NY 12231-0001

July 18, 2006

Re: F-2004-0194

C HRISTOPHER L. J ACOBS SECRETARY OF S TATE

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Dockets 50-220 and S0-410 Operating License Renewals - Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Units 1&2 Lake Ontario, Town of Scriba, Oswego County DEC #NY-OOOlOlS

General Concurreuce

The Department of State received your Federal Consistency Assessment Fonn and consistency certification and supporting information for this proposal on March 4,2004.

The Department of State has determined that this proposal meets the Department's general consistency concurrence criteria. Therefore, further review of the proposed activity by the Department of State, and the Department's concurrence with an individual consistency certification for the proposed activity, are not required.

This General Concurrence is without prejudice to and does not obviate the need to obtain all other applicable licenses, permits, other forms of authorization or approval that may be required pursuant to existing State statutes.

When communicating with us regarding this matter, please contact Andrew Kasius at (518) 486-1211 and refer to our file #F-2004-0194.

SCRlsm cc: U.S. NRC - N.B. Le

NYS DEC Region VII - 1. Feltman NYSERDA - Alyse Petersen

Sincerely,

~~~ Supervisor of Consistency Review Division of Coastal Resources

WWW.OOS.STATE.NY.US · • E -MAIL: INFO@DOS.STATE.NY.US

2~

.Y'~/ -'

ATTACHMENT 15

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

In the Matter of

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3

Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 50-286-LR July 25, 2012

DECLARATION OF JANE C. LUXTON

I, Jane C. Luxton, make this declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and 10 C.F.R. § 2.304(d), as an independent expert retained by attorneys for Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 1. Scope of Engagement. The scope of my engagement was first to review materials relating to the application of Entergy Nuclear Operations for renewal of licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3, in the context of the Consistency Review regime administered by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. § 1456, and NOAA’s regulations found at 15 C.F.R. part 930. I have attached a listing of materials I reviewed in forming my opinion. After conducting this review, my engagement was to render an independent expert opinion on whether a federal consistency review is necessary or appropriate for this license renewal. 2. Qualifications. I currently practice environmental law as a partner in the Washington, DC office of the national law firm Pepper Hamilton LLP. I chair the firm’s Sustainability, Clean Tech, and Climate Change Team. I have practiced environmental law for more than 20 years, and have been a practicing attorney since 1976, after graduating from Cornell Law School. Before law school, I graduated with honors from Harvard University in 1973. I am a member of the District of Columbia Bar and am admitted to practice before the local and federal courts in the District of Columbia, as well as the Fourth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. I have argued before the U.S. District Courts in the District of Columbia and Eastern District of Virginia, and the federal Courts of Appeal for the District of Columbia and Fourth Circuits. I have held leadership positions in the American Bar Association’s Section of Environment, Natural Resources, and Energy, including Chair of its International Environmental Law Committee, and currently serve as a Vice Chair of that Committee. I was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Mickey Leland National Urban Air Toxics Research Center, established under the Clean Air Act of 1990 (Congressional appointment, 2010-2011). I speak and write regularly on topical environmental law issues. 3. Early in my legal career, I served as an Attorney-Advisor to a Federal Trade Commissioner and then as a Trial Attorney and Senior Trial Attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice. While at the Justice Department, I received the Department’s highest award, the Attorney General’s

2

Award, in 1981. After leaving these government positions, I worked as an associate, and later partner, in national law firms. Starting in 1989, my principal practice area has been environmental law. 4. Prior to joining Pepper Hamilton, I served as General Counsel of NOAA from 2007 to 2009. As General Counsel, I was the chief legal officer for all NOAA activities and also a policy advisor to the Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (the NOAA Administrator). I was responsible for providing overall management and leadership to more than 100 attorneys. The legal issues under my responsibility included coastal zone management, protection of marine mammals and endangered species, operation of weather and environmental satellites, regulation of commercial fisheries, natural resource damage mitigation and restoration, and monitoring of oceanic, atmospheric, and climate data. During my tenure at NOAA, I received a Presidential appointment as Commissioner of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission and served as U.S. Head of Delegation to that international Commission. I twice was recognized for my NOAA work with the Commerce Department’s highest award (Gold Medal Award), in 2008 and 2009. 5. In the course of my work as NOAA General Counsel, I had senior NOAA legal responsibility for seven finalized CZMA consistency review appeals. Three of these -- Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency,1 AES Sparrows Point,2 and Weaver’s Cove3 – went through the full federal consistency appeal process and were decided by the Secretary of Commerce. In one of these appeals (Foothill), I conducted a day-long public hearing. Two appeals were dismissed on procedural grounds, and in another case the parties settled and the appeal was withdrawn. The seventh constituted the first use of a statutory exemption added to the CZMA in 1990, which authorizes the President to override a state’s finding that federal agency activity is inconsistent with its CZMA plan if the activity is in the paramount interests of the United States. The case involved the Navy’s use in critical submarine training exercises of certain frequencies of sonar that the state of California found to be inconsistent with marine mammal protections that were part of its CZMA management plan. Related aspects of this action were appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the Navy’s need to conduct the training, in Winter v. Natural

1 Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consistency Appeal of the

Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency and the Board of Directors of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency from an Objection by the California Coastal Commission (Dec. 18, 2008), available at http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/80c046c6489b95ba852575230077b0d2?OpenDocument.

2 Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consistency Appeal of AES Sparrows Point LNG, LLC and Mid-Atlantic Express, L.L.C. from an Objection by the State of Maryland (June 26, 2008), available at http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/3c230f7ca5e314e28525747400780be7?OpenDocument.

3 Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consolidated Consistency Appeals of Weaver’s Cove Energy, L.L.C. and Mill River Pipeline, L.L.C. from Objections by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (June 26, 2008), available at http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/c634d3c1aabdd7d08525747400775095?OpenDocument.

3

Resources Defense Council, 557 U.S. 7 (2008). For my work on this case, I received the Commerce Department’s Gold Medal Award, along with others on NOAA’s legal team and professional staff, including from its Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM). 6. Consistency Review Framework. In forming my opinion in this matter, I considered the way in which, in my experience, NOAA interprets the CZMA and its implementing regulations. As a starting proposition, NOAA looks to the statutory and regulatory language in seeking to manage the necessary “balance between State-Federal-private interests embodied in the CZMA.” Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations; Final Rule, 71 Fed. Reg. 788 (Jan. 5, 2006). 7. As the agency charged with mediating these different interests, NOAA has explained its approach to consistency issues in a CZMA Federal Consistency Overview guidance document (Overview Document) (Feb. 20, 2009), which it uses as its principal training guide; it is available at http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/consistency/media/FC_overview_022009.pdf. The Overview Document defines “federal consistency” as “the CZMA provision that federal actions that have reasonably foreseeable effects on any land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zone … should be consistent with the enforceable policies of a coastal state’s federally approved CMP [Coastal Management Plan].” Id. at 4. This goal is not an absolute, however, and the Overview Document notes that “[f]ederal consistency gives states substantial input into federal actions affecting the coastal zone. There are, however, provisions that balance state objectives with consideration of federal objectives and mandates to ensure that the national interest in CZMA objectives is furthered.” Id. at 8. Among the national interests specifically identified in the CZMA for priority consideration are those with greater than local significance, such as energy facility siting. Id. at 7, citing CZMA § 303(2)(D). In fact, NOAA’s OCRM, the office responsible for approving state Coastal Management Plans, offers as an example of unacceptable approaches a proposed state plan provision it rejected that would have opposed all offshore oil and gas development, saying “OCRM determined the policy would affect the state’s obligation to consider the national interest in energy facility siting.” Id. 8. The four enumerated types of federal actions subject to the CZMA consistency provision include federal license or permit activities – the issue in the Entergy Nuclear Operations license renewal. The NOAA CZMA Overview Document summarizes NOAA’s four-step checklist for determining whether license or permit activity must undergo a consistency review. To qualify, the federal license or permit activity must involve: (1) a federal law requirement that an applicant obtain a federal license or permit; (2) an applicant that is a non-federal party; (3) an activity that has reasonably foreseeable effects on a state’s coastal uses or resources; and (4) circumstances in which “the proposed activity was not previously reviewed for federal consistency by the state [Coastal Management Plan] agency (unless the authorization is a renewal or major amendment pursuant to § 930.51(b)).” (Id. at 12.) 9. The Overview Document does not discuss the workings of this fourth category or how it fits within the broader point that only proposed activities that were “not previously reviewed for federal consistency by the state CMP agency” are subject to review. At first glance, license renewals and major amendments would appear to be an exception to the “previous review”

4

consistency exemption, but the Overview Document does not resolve this question and a proper analysis must rely on the actual regulatory requirements set forth in § 930.51(b). 10. NOAA’s federal consistency regulations have undergone several revisions since their original promulgation in 1979, leading to the current version, adopted in 2006. One principle that has persisted throughout, however, is that federal license renewals governed by section 930.51(b) do not all trigger consistency reviews. In fact, the regulatory requirements are structured in such a way that they list the specific situations in which consistency reviews must occur, creating the necessary consequence that those not so identified fall outside the consistency review regime. 11. The regulations governing federal licenses and permits begin by broadly defining for purposes of consistency review the term “federal license or permit” in § 930.51(a) and then noting in § 930.51(b) that the term also includes specified “types of renewals and major amendments which may affect any coastal use or resource.” The three categories of renewals and major amendments that are subject to consistency review are: (1) those relating to licenses or permit activity not previously reviewed by the State agency; (2) those that were filed after and are subject to a state management program change that did not exist at the time the original license or permit was reviewed; and (3) those relating to previously reviewed licenses or permits that “will cause an effect on any coastal use or resource substantially different than those originally reviewed by the State agency.” 15 C.F.R. § 930.51(b)(1)-(3). 12. The Indian Point Nuclear Units licenses have previously received state consistency reviews, including reviews in 20004 and 2001,5 and nothing in the relevant facts indicates subsections 930.51(b)(1) or (2) would apply. Accordingly, the only basis for a consistency review would have to be paragraph (3), and it would apply only if the renewal involves coastal effects “substantially different” from those previously reviewed by the State agency. The key terms in paragraph (3) are further defined in subsections 930.51(c), (d), and (e). 13. Subsection 930.51(d) provides a straightforward description of a “renewal” as “any subsequent re-issuance, re-approval or extension of an existing license or permit,” and the Entergy license renewal would meet this definition. However, the other provisions require more analysis. Subsection 930.51(c) defines a “major amendment” for purposes of subsection 930.51(b)(3) as a modification to previously reviewed activity that “will. . . affect any coastal use or resource in a way that is substantially different than the description or understanding of effects at the time of the original activity.” It appears the activity here is a renewal, but even if it involved a modification significant enough to be classified as a major amendment, the applicability of the consistency review requirement in both paragraphs (b)(3) and (c) turns on the meaning of the term “substantially different coastal effects,” which is addressed in subsection 930.51(e).

4 Negative Declaration (Notice of Determination of Non-Significance) by the New York Power Authority (NYPA) with regard to the Sale of NYPA’s Indian Point 3 (IP3) & James A. FitzPatrick (JAF) Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) to Indirectly Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries of the Entergy Corporation of New Orleans (March 31, 2000).

5 Order Adopting and Approving Issuance of Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Case 01-E-0040 (Aug. 17, 2001).

5

14. Paragraph (e) explains that “the determination of substantially different coastal effects under paragraphs (b)(3) and (c) is made on a case-by-case basis by the Federal agency after consulting with the State agency and applicant.” The language goes on to state that “the Federal agency shall give considerable weight to the opinion of the State agency” and that “the terms ‘major amendment,’ ‘renewals,’ and ‘substantially different’ shall be construed broadly to ensure that the State agency has the opportunity to review activities and coastal effects not previously reviewed.” (Emphasis added.) 15. The use of the emphasized language and the approach laid out in paragraph (e) are consistent with historical principles that date from the original CZMA regulations. NOAA’s interpretive comment to the establishment of § 930.51(b) in its 1979 rule makes this clear:

Comment. Paragraph (b) is founded on the principle that an applicant does not have a vested right to receive approval of a renewal or a major amendment without first complying with the law existing at the time approval is sought. However, this principle must operate in the context of avoiding unnecessary State agency review….In the event the State agency has previously reviewed a license or permit activity further review is limited to cases where changes in [state] management program provisions necessitate reevaluation of the activity … or the activity will be modified substantially causing new coastal zone effects. [NOAA CZMA Final Rule, 44 Fed. Reg. 37,142, 37,150 (June 25, 1979); emphasis added.]

16. These themes – that consistency reviews are limited to situations not previously reviewed or so substantially changed that they represent activity not previously reviewed, and the avoidance of unnecessary state review -- appear again in NOAA’s Response to Comments in its 2006 final rule promulgating the current regulations. Discussing the change from the previous (December 2000 final rule) formulation of paragraph (e) -- in which the regulation provided that “the opinion of the State agency shall be accorded deference”-- to the new standard, in which “the Federal agency shall give considerable weight to the opinion of the State agency,” NOAA explained that this change was designed to provide a clearer process for the determination of whether a “renewal” or “major amendment” of a previously reviewed license will have “substantially different coastal effects” and therefore be subject to a consistency review. NOAA’s discussion is as follows:

The 2000 language did not establish a decision maker, but encouraged a joint consultation process to make this decision. However, NOAA now believes that there needs to be finality to this determination, requiring a decision-maker, and believes that the authorizing Federal agency is in the best position to make this determination. As provided for in the new section, the Federal agency must consult with the State agency and the applicant, give considerable weight to the State agency’s view, and shall broadly construe the effects test to ensure that States have the opportunity

6

to review activities with coastal effects not previously reviewed under the CZMA. [71 Fed. Reg. at 812; emphasis added.]

17. To underscore that the federal licensing authority makes the final decisions on these matters, the final rule emphasized that “NOAA did not intend to use the [previous regulatory] phrase [‘deference’] to have the State agency make the decision on whether coastal effects are substantially different.” Therefore, “to provide clarification, NOAA has amended the section so that the Federal permitting agency makes this determination after consulting with the State and applicant. If a State disagrees with a Federal agency’s determination concerning substantially different coastal effects, then the State could either request NOAA mediation or seek judicial review to resolve the factual dispute.” 71 Fed. Reg. at 795. 18. Opinion. After reviewing the relevant CZMA statutory language, legislative history, and evolution of implementing regulations, and based on my experience with consistency reviews, it is my opinion that federal license renewal activity relating to the Entergy Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3 would require a federal consistency review only if the activity will cause a coastal effect substantially different from those effects previously reviewed by the State agency. In forming this opinion, it is clear that the rule’s reliance on criteria such as “substantially different” and built-in allowance for change up to the point it constitutes a “major amendment” of a previous license reflect NOAA’s recognition of the necessary “balance between State-federal-private interests embodied in the CZMA” and the regulatory focus on “avoiding unnecessary State agency review.” Further, I note that the regulatory provisions use the standard “will cause,” which represents a significantly higher evidentiary threshold than a more speculative requirement such as “may cause” in considering whether a renewal or major amendment of a license or permit “will” produce a substantially different coastal effect. 19. It is also my opinion that the decision-maker on this issue, which NOAA’s current regulations conclude is in the “best position to make [the] determination on whether the renewal or other activity will cause a substantially different coast effect,” is the Federal licensing agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NOAA’s proposed rules in 2003 and final rules promulgated in 2006 made very clear that while the State agency’s view should be given “considerable weight,” the State does not “make the decision on whether coastal effects are substantially different.” Rather, NOAA recognized that to ensure finality, it was necessary to designate a single decision-maker: the authorizing federal agency. 20. Finally, after examining the previous consistency reviews of these operating units in 2000 and 2001, and the Declaration of Fred R. Dacimo, which states that the plants will continue operating in the same manner with respect to coastal effects as they have operated since Entergy’s acquisition, which prompted those reviews, it is my further opinion that there is no basis to find that license renewal will cause a coastal effect substantially different than the effects previously reviewed by the State agency. Based on these conclusions, I do not see any necessary or appropriate legal basis for requiring a consistency review of the renewal of the operating licenses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3.

7

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 25, 2012. Executed in Accord with 10 CFR 2.304(d) Jane C. Luxton Partner, Pepper Hamilton LLP 600 Fourteenth St., N.W. Washington, DC 20005-2004 (202) 220-1437 luxtonj@pepperlaw.com Attachment (List of Materials Reviewed)

ATTACHMENT TO DECLARATION OF JANE C. LUXTON

List of Materials Reviewed

Administrative Decisions and Orders Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consistency Appeal of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency and the Board of Directors of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency from an Objection by the California Coastal Commission (Dec. 18, 2008), http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/80c046c6489b95ba852575230077b0d2?OpenDocument (last visited May 31, 2012). Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consistency Appeal of AES Sparrows Point LNG, LLC and Mid-Atlantic Express, L.L.C. from an Objection by the State of Maryland (June 26, 2008), http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/3c230f7ca5e314e28525747400780be7?OpenDocument (last visited May 31, 2012). Decision and Findings by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce in the Consolidated Consistency Appeals of Weaver’s Cove Energy, L.L.C. and Mill River Pipeline, L.L.C. from Objections by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (June 26, 2008), http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.nsf/78f06a8fa89def138525717a0059de08/c634d3c1aabdd7d08525747400775095?OpenDocument (last visited May 31, 2012). Negative Declaration (Notice of Determination of Non-Significance) by the New York Power Authority (NYPA) with regard to the Sale of NYPA’s Indian Point 3 (IP3) & James A. FitzPatrick (JAF) Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) to Indirectly Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries of the Entergy Corporation of New Orleans (March 31, 2000). Order Adopting and Approving Issuance of Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Case 01-E-0040 (New York Public Service Comm’n Aug. 17, 2001) (Joint Petition of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC for Authority to Transfer Certain Generating and Related Assets and for Related Relief). Statutes Coastal Zone Management, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1451-1466. Regulations Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations; Final Rule, 71 Fed. Reg. 788 (Jan. 5, 2006) (to be codified at 15 C.F.R. pt. 930).

2

Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations; Proposed Rule, 68 Fed. Reg. 34,851 (June 11, 2003) (to be codified at 15 C.F.R. pt. 930). Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations; Final Rule, 65 Fed. Reg. 77,124 (Dec. 8, 2000) (to be codified at 15 C.F.R. pt. 930). Coastal Zone Management Act Federal Consistency Regulations; Proposed Rule, 65 Fed. Reg. 20,270 (April 14, 2000) (to be codified at 15 C.F.R. pt. 930). Consistency for Department of the Interior Outer Continental Shelf Prelease Sale Activities and for Other Federal Activities Directly Affecting the Coastal Zone; Final Rule, 44 Fed. Reg. 37,142 (June 25, 1979) (to be codified at 15 C.F.R. pt. 930). Federal Consistency with Approved Coastal Management Programs, 15 C.F.R. pt. 930 (2012). Coastal Zone Management Program Regulations, 15 C.F.R. pt. 923 (2012). Additional Materials Consulted Report of the National Energy Policy Development Group, National Energy Policy (May 2001), http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/nationalEnergyPolicy.pdf (last visited May 31, 2012). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, CZMA Federal Consistency Overview (Feb. 20, 2009), http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/nationalEnergyPolicy.pdf (last visited May 31, 2012). Declaration of Fred R. Dacimo, prepared for submission In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3, Docket Nos. 50-247-LR and 50-286-LR (July 24, 2012).

Attachment 11Attachment 12Attachment 13Attachment 14Attachment 15