ISP moves to moot only contention admitted by NRC ASLB in WCS CISF licensing proceeding

As made clear by postings at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) website on September 5, 2019, Interim Storage Partners (ISP) has moved to moot the only contention admitted by NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), in the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) licensing proceeding.

 

Sierra Club was the only intervenor to achieve both legal standing, and an admitted contention, in the proceeding. Sierra Club's contention has to do with two species of endangered lizards, which would be harmed if the ISP CISF for "temporary storage" of 40,000 metric tons of irradiated nuclear fuel and highly radioactive GTCC (Greater-Than-Class-C "low-level" radioactive waste) is constructed and operated. Sierra Club is represented by Cedar Rapids, Iowa attorney Wally Taylor. 

    

Other intevenors, including Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste Michigan et al., and Fasken Oil, did achieve legal standing, but the ASLB admitted none of their contentions for a hearing on the merits. Beyond Nuclear is represented by Washington, D.C. attorney Diane Curran, as well as Atlanta, Georgia attorney Mindy Goldstein.

 

A seven-group, national grassroots environmental coalition (Don't Waste Michigan et al.) did win legal standing, through its constituent group SEED (Sustainable Energy and Economic Development) Coalition of Texas. But the ASLB rejected any of the large number of proffered contentions for a hearing on the merits. The coalition is represented by Toledo, Ohio attorney Terry Lodge.

 

All environmental intevenors have committed to appealing the adverse rulings made by the ASLB, to the full Nuclear Regulatory Commission itself, just as they have in the Holtec International/Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance CISF licensing proceeding. Holtec/ELEA propose "interim storage" for a whopping 173,600 metric tons of highly radioactive wastes. ISP/WCS in Andrews County, Texas, and Holtec/ELEA in southeast New Mexico, are located just 39 miles apart.

 

As mentioned in a Yucca dump entry, U.S. House and Senate Energy & Water Appropriations bills currently propose $25 million+ in funding, and other support, for CISFs. (The Senate bill would fund significantly more than the $25 million in the House bill; the Senate bill also would allow the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to fund private CISFs, while the House bill does not.) Please contact your U.S. Representative, and both your U.S. Senators, and urge them to oppose any funding for CISFs, as well as any bill that would authorize the U.S. Department of Energy to take ownership of commercial irradiated nuclear fuel at a CISF. (See U.S. Congressional Switchboard phone number in entry above.) This is currently prohibited by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended -- the heart of Beyond Nuclear's legal challenge against both CISFs. Beyond Nuclear is committed to appealing anticipated adverse rulings by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission itself, to the federal courts. Learn more about this issue at our Centralized Storage website section.