Search
JOIN OUR NETWORK

     

     

 

 

Centralized Storage

With the scientifically unsound proposed Yucca Mountain radioactive waste dump now canceled, the danger of "interim" storage threatens. This means that radioactive waste could be "temporarily" parked in open air lots, vulnerable to accident and attack, while a new repository site is sought.

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Entries by admin (702)

Saturday
Jun272020

Beyond Nuclear public comment #8, re: NRC's Holtec/ELEA CISF DEIS, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 -- re: the license for Private Fuel Storage, LLC, CISF -- targeted at Skull Valley Goshutes Indian Reservation in Utah -- is not terminated, contradicting NRC Staff assertions to the contrary

Submitted via: <holtec-cisfeis@nrc.gov>

Dear NRC Staff,

A colleague has spotted a significant error in the Overview attached to both the Holtec and the ISP/WCS NRC DEIS documents (ISP/WCS is a second CISF, targeted at west Texas, just 39 miles from Holtec's CISF in NM, according to Holtec's CEO, Krishna Singh):

Don Hancock of Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) in Albuquerque, NM has pointed out:

"The Overview (like the Holtec one) again repeats the factual error that PFS's [Private Fuel Storage, LLC] license is terminated (page 4)."

Here is the false statement, as printed in NRC's Overview:

"The NRC previously licensed one other away-from-reactor dry cask spent fuel storage facility, called Private Fuel Storage (NUREG-1714); however, that facility was never built and the license was subsequently terminated." (emphasis added) 

This is not true. The license was not subsequently terminated.

Thus, NRC's CISF DEIS Overviews, re: both the Holtec/ELEA and the ISP/WCS CISFs, are inaccurate as to NRC's own licensing decisions.

NRC made the same mistake in its Holtec/ELEA NM CISF DEIS summary/overview, first published on March 10, 2020, as it also has done in its ISP/WCS TX CISF DEIS summary/overview.

And the DEIS documents themselves do not state that the PFS license is terminated. So in that sense, the summaries/overviews contradict the DEIS documents, as well.

Significantly, if Holtec International/Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, Interim Storage Partners/Waste Control Specialists, and the nuclear power utilities, were serious about these CISFs being entirely private, then why not use the license already rubber-stamped by NRC at PFS more than a decade ago? Why seek news CISF licenses at Holtec/ELEA in NM, and at ISP/WCS in TX? Because the actual goal is to transfer title/ownership, and liability, onto the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) -- that is, federal taxpayers. Which is illegal, a violation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended. This illegality is at the heart of Beyond Nuclear's lawsuit against both CISFs. Don't Waste MI et al. (a seven-group national grassroots environmental coalition), Sierra Club, and Fasken Oil and Ranch, have also challenged this violation of the NWPA represented by these CISF schemes, and NRC's complicity in them, in violation of federal laws like the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended, and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Not that Beyond Nuclear and our environmental and environmental justice allies think the PFS CISF targeting the Skull Valley Goshutes was or is a good idea. Quite the opposite. It was and is a dangerously bad idea, and an outrageous violation of environmental justice. Learn more about the environmental movement's successful resistance to the PFS CISF, a victory won in close solidarity and collaboration with Native American partners, including Skull Valley Goshute dump opponents Margene Bullcreek and Sammy Blackbear, Indigenous Environmental Network, Honor the Earth, and others, posted online at this link: <http://archives.nirs.us/radwaste/scullvalley/skullvalley.htm>.

The following documentation shows that the PFS license was never terminated, as NRC Staff have falsely stated in their CISF DEIS Overviews:

PFS / NRC - Withdrawal Of License Termination Request.

Document Title: Withdrawal of Termination Request of NRC licence SNM-2513 for Private Fuel Storage, LLC.
Document Type: Letter
Document Date: 09/12/2014

Document Title: Letter To R. M. Palmberg re: Withdrawal Of License Termination Request.
Document Type: Letter
Document Date: 09/18/2014
Such glaring NRC Staff errors must be corrected in the Holtec/ELEA, as well as the ISP/WCS, CISF DEIS documentation packages, including the erroneous Overviews.
These comments are submitted on behalf of Beyond Nuclear's members and supporters in NM, TX, and across the U.S. along impacted transport routes.

Please acknowledge receipt of these comments. Thank you.

Saturday
Jun272020

Beyond Nuclear public comment #7, re: NRC's Holtec/ELEA CISF DEIS, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 -- re: Environmental Justice (EJ), Environmental Injustice, Environmental Racism, Radioactive Racism

Submitted via: <holtec-cisfeis@nrc.gov>

Dear NRC Staff,

This proposal is a severe violation of environmental justice. Holtec is targeting southeastern NM, where many of the surrounding communities in the area are majority Hispanic, or close to it. The Mescalero Apache Indian Reservation (itself previously targeted for a CISF, first by the U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Negotiator, and then by Private Fuel Storage, LLC, its container-provider none other than Holtec!) is not far away.

While a lot of money has been made in the Permian Basin from fossil fuel and nuclear industries, that wealth is not equitably distributed nor shared with the local population. Thus, any shenanigans involving average, median, or mean wealth levels in the area are inappropriate. There are serious pockets of poverty throughout the southeastern New Mexico region, and the rest of the state as a whole. In fact, New Mexico ranks towards the very bottom of all 50 states in numerous demographic measures of health, wealth, education, etc.

Thus, there are very significant environmental justice issues involving low income and/or people of color communities in southeastern NM being targeted for this dump.

As shown by a remarkable map by Deborah Reade of Santa Fe, NM, southeastern NM, and the rest of the state, bears a tremendous pollution burden from these fossil fuel (concentrated in the Permian Basin, in NM's southeastern corner) and nuclear (throughout NM, but with a particular concentration of significant polluting facilities in/near the southeastern corner) and other hazardous industries.

See this map posted online here:

http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/356082/28292760/1588368272923/2020-ThreatsMap_11x17-v2.pdf?token=oopcheAXONZota6%2Bd%2FqgHb87tEM%3D

It is entitled "Water, Air, and Land: A Sacred Trust."

Focusing just on southeastern NM, the map shows the following dirty, dangerous, and expensive nuclear industries present:

Waste Control Specialists (Texas dump) and proposed spent fuel rod storage site (the already present WCS dump is a national dump-site for so-called "low" level radioactive waste; its sibling irradiated nuclear fuel CISF would hold up to 40,000 metric tons of highly radioactive waste);

Eden radioisotopes (proposed reactor);

URENCO USA (uranium enrichment plant) -- this was stopped in Louisiana, and Tennessee, in the 1990s and early 2000s, due to its environmental justice violations, but unfortunately was rammed through, including by NRC rubber-stamp, despite best efforts by a broad environmental and environmental justice coalition, to stop it;

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (dump) -- WIPP had a supposedly impossible leak to the environment on Valentine's Day 2014, leading to a three-year shutdown, and $2 billion in recovery costs -- nearly two-dozen workers at the surface were exposed to ultra-hazardous alpha radiation inhalation doses, as are countless residents downwind, as plutonium and other trans-uranic pollutants are very long-lived hazards -- the highly controversial WIPP site was widely resisted in NM -- it is the only geologic repository for radioactive waste in the country -- a promise was made at the time of WIPP's opening, that if NM took military plutonium and TRU disposal at WIPP, the state would not be targeted for high-level radioactive waste disposal or even storage in the future -- the Holtec/ELEA CISF scheme breaks that promise;

International Isotopes (DU hexafluoride de-conversion facility--on hold) -- but the risk of its actual construction and operation is yet another potentially foreseeable cumulative impact that must be accounted for.

Gnome-Coach Experimental Test Site -- an underground nuclear weapon detonation!;

and of course the Holtec International proposed spent fuel rod storage site -- the subject of this very DEIS.

That is just in southeast NM, or immediately on the border in Texas. The Interim Storage Partners/Waste Control Specialists CISF should be included in this EJ analysis, and otherwise in the DEIS, as the two CISFs would be only 39 miles apart (this distance according to Holtec CEO Krishna Singh, at his license application unveiling press conference on Capitol Hill in early April 2017; this DEIS says 45 miles apart). So should the WCS national "low" level radioactive waste dump. In fact, the largely Hispanic community of Eunice, NM is only about five miles from WCS, TX. It is the nearest town. And certain surface, and perhaps even ground, water flow pathways, flow back into NM from the WCS, TX site.

Just the list above represents a tremendous nuclear pollution EJ burden for southeastern NM. The Holtec/ELEA (and ISP/WCS) would represent a major additional nuclear pollution and risk burden, on top of what is already borne by the low income and/or people of color communities in southeastern NM.

Of course, southeastern NM is also burdened with a very large fossil fuel pollution burden, as the map also shows. The Permian Basin oil and gas fields are the busiest/most concentrated in North America, and the second busiest/most intensive in the world, after only the Middle East. This is an additional, major EJ burden on southeastern NM.

But, as the map shows, the list of historic and still ongoing nuclear abuses of NM.

Los Alamos National Laboratory has been making a large-scale, concentrated radioactive and toxic chemical mess of its neighborhood since 1943. This is especially an EJ burden for the Pueblo Indian communities listed on the map, Los Alamos's neighbors who have lived there since time immemorial, long before 1943. Nowadays, as with the Trump administration proposal to expand plutonium pit production at Los Alamos for new nuclear weaponry, the nuclear abuses continue and expand there.

As shown on the map, the smoke plumes from the Cerro Grande Fire (May 2000) show the not only New Mexicans, but even people in other states downwind, were exposed to radioactive (including plutonium) and toxic fallout and inhalation doses. And the Las Conchas Fire boundaries (June 2011) shows that such risks continue, and worsen, in an age of global warming mega-droughts in NM.

The Trinity Test Site (first nuclear explosion), which occurred on July 16, 1945, haunts the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, 75 years later. They have never been compensated for their suffering and losses, as documented at their website: <https://www.trinitydownwinders.com/>

Sandia National Laboratories, and Kirtland Airforce Base's Kirtland Underground Munitions Storage Complex (1,900+ nuclear weapons) also puts Albuquerque at risk. The Mixed Waste Landfill puts Albuquerque's drinking water supply at risk.

Then of course, there is the uranium mining and milling region of northwestern NM, and the Four Corners area. This is of course a largely Native American region, including the Navajo/Diné, numerous Pueblo Indian tribes, and even Utes, as in Colorado. As the map lists, there are a large number of nuclear pollution sources just in this quadrant of NM:

Shiprock Mill and Disposal Cell;

Ambrosia Lake Mill and Disposal Cell;

UNC (United Nuclear Corporation) Mining and Milling, Church Rock Mill -- Church Rock was the scene, on July 16, 1979, of one of the worst radiological releases in U.S. history, when an earthen dam failed, releasing a large amount of radioactive and toxic uranium mill liquid waste into the Rio Puerco River, which traditional Navajo/Diné shepherds utilize for drinking and irrigation water (note that this marks the second mention of a nuclear disaster in NM that has happened on July 16th -- along with the Trinity blast, above; NRC's choice of July 16, 2018, to docket the Holtec/ELEA CISF application for licensing, and announce it in the Federal Register, marked a ghoulish new low of tone deafness and lack of compassion at the agency, itself an EJ violation);

(Quivira) Ambrosia Lake Mill & Disposal Site 2;

Phillips Mill;

Homestake/Barrick Gold [and Uranium] Mining Company Mill & Disposal Site;

(SOHIO) LBAR Mill Site;

Jackpile Mine;

Cebolleta Project (mines and mill);

Anaconda/ARCO Bluewater Mill & Disposal Site.

The open pit uranium mine located on the Laguna Pueblo is the largest on the planet. Its downwind and downstream pollution emissions have harmed the Laguna Pueblo, its immediate neighbors, as well as others downwind and downstream.

And as if the nuclear detonation site in southeastern NM was not enough abuse, there is also one in northern NM -- the Gasbuggy Experimental Test Site.

The Ute Mountain Ute tribe is mentioned in the extreme northwestern quadrant of the map. The Ute Mountain Ute have the dubious distinction of "hosting" (unwillingly) the White Mesa uranium mill, a highly polluting radioactive facility where many nefarious activities take place (radioactive waste "processing," storage, and even disposal, done under the supposed excuse of uranium extraction from waste streams imported from across the continents, and perhaps even overseas).

As I mentioned during my oral comments on the NRC webinar/call-in on June 23, 2020, such a list as the one depicted on the map above is nothing short of nightmarish. It represents a health, safety, environmental, and economic catastrophe for the indigenous peoples of NM, as well as other low income and people of color communities in the Land of Enchantment.

NM has already suffered a bad enough nuclear nightmare since 1943, one that continues to the present day. The Holtec/ELEA CISF (and the ISP/WCS CISF, for that matter) represent the straw that breaks the camel's back -- one more nuclear abuse and EJ violation too many.

Of course, as the map also shows, NM has suffered not only a nuclear nightmare. The fossil fuel pollution in the northwestern quadrant of NM is also concentrated and severe.

Just one more recent example of the eco-disasters this area has suffered includes the Gold King Mine toxic waste water release of 2015, epicentered near Silverton, CO. It was caused, ironically enough, by human error perpetrated by none other than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and its contractor, Environmental Restoration LLC of Missouri.

The trickery employed in Holtec's Environment Report and NRC's DEIS, in order to find no EJ impact, is to only compare southeastern NM (and only out to a radius of 50 miles from the Holtec CISF site, at that), with the rest of the State of NM. But of course, comparing s.e. NM near Holtec to the country as a whole, would show a much greater concentration of Hispanics and Native Americans, than is typical of the rest of the country as a whole. NRC's 50-miles out from Holtec's CISF radius focus, and then only in comparison to the rest of the State of NM, blinds it to the bigger picture of the country as a whole. Combined with the fact that NM as a whole ranks towards the very bottom of all 50 states on many socio-economic indicators, NRC's willful blindness to the EJ impacts of the Holtec CISF proposal is an outrage. NRC's own behavior is an EJ violation, as is Holtec's CISF proposal to begin with!

This is further underscored by the experience of Alliance for Environmental Strategies in the NRC ASLB licensing proceeding in this very case. AFES is a largely Hispanic EJ group in s.e. NM. It intervened against the Holtec CISF, raising EJ contentions. Incredibly, the ASLB and NRC never even clearly acknowledged or recognized AFES's legal standing to bring such contentions. But both ASLB and NRC did reject AFES's EJ contentions outright -- the supposed excuse for not having to ruling on AFES's legal standing. Such ASLB and NRC behavior is, in itself, a blatant EJ violation, on its face!

It is worth noting that Holtec's previous attempt at a CISF was targeted at the Skull Valley Goshutes Indian Reservation in Utah. Holtec would have been the container supplier -- 4,000 Holtec containers, to "temporarily store" 40,000 metric tons of irradiated nuclear fuel at the surface. A consortium of a dozen nuclear power utilities comprised Private Fuel Storage, LLC (PFS). Despite opposition by traditional Skull Valley Goshutes, such as Sammy Blackbear, as well as Margene Bullcreek, leader of Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia Awareness (or OGD Awareness, Goshute for "Mountain/Timber Setting Community"), a grassroots group of traditional tribal members opposed to the dump, the PFS license was rubber-stamped in the end by NRC. When that happened, flying in the face of opposition not only by the State of Utah, and a coalition of nearly 500 environmental and environmental justice organizations across the country, I dubbed NRC the Nuclear Racism Commission. These strong words were justified, for NRC had just commissioned a radioactively racist facility, committing a severe environmental injustice. More information on the ultimately successful resistance to the PFS dump is posted on-line here: <http://archives.nirs.us/factsheets/pfsejfactsheet.htm>.

In fact, before PFS targeted the Skull Valley Goshutes for a CISF, it had targeted the Mescalero Apache in southeastern NM. This followed the U.S. DOE Nuclear Waste Negotiator's own concerted but unsuccessful targeting of both Mescalero Apache, NM as well as Skull Valley Goshutes, UT for a CISF. Such shameful environmentally racist targeting of Native American reservations for CISFs is also documented at the website link provided immediately above.

NRC should engage, or be complicit, in no more such environmental injustice and radioactive racism, such as the Holtec/ELEA CISF.

These comments are made on behalf of our members and supporters in NM, and across the country along impacted transport routes (another aspect of EJ burden associated with this scheme).

Please acknowledge receipt of these comments. Thank you.

Saturday
Jun272020

Beyond Nuclear public comments #6, re: NRC's Holtec/ELEA CISF DEIS, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 -- re: Shirani and Landsman whistle-blowing about Holtec's quality assurance (QA) violations; Holtec engagement in bribery, lying about it, and resultant criminal investigation

Submitted via: <holtec-cisfeis@nrc.gov>

Dear NRC Staff,

Whistleblowers -- namely Oscar Shirani at Commonwealth Edison/Exelon, and Dr. Ross Landsman at NRC -- first revealed widespread quality assurance violations by Holtec in the design and fabrication of its containers in the early 2000s.

Here is a summary of Shirani and Landsman's allegations, contained within brackets below, which I wrote on July 22, 2004 (as posted online here: <https://web.archive.org/web/20160130044911/http://www.nirs.org/radwaste/atreactorstorage/shiranialleg04.htm>:

[Summary of Oscar Shirani’s Allegations of Quality Assurance Violations Against Holtec Storage/Transport Casks

Holtec storage/transport casks are the first dual purpose container for irradiated nuclear fuel certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). According to Holtec International's website ( http://www.holtecinternational.com), Holtec casks are already deployed at 33 U.S. nuclear power plants. Up to 4,000 rail-sized Holtec storage/transport casks would also be used at the proposed Private Fuel Storage interim storage facility in Utah. Given the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) recent decision to use “mostly rail” transport to the proposed Yucca Mountain repository, Holtec casks could very well become among the most used shipping containers for highly radioactive waste.

Exelon, the largest nuclear utility in U.S., uses Holtec casks for irradiated fuel storage at its reactor sites. In 1999 and 2000, Oscar Shirani, as a lead quality assurance (QA) auditor for Exelon, identified numerous “major design and fabrication issues” during a QA inspection of Holtec International (the cask designer), Omni Fabrication, and U.S. Tool & Die (the subcontractors responsible for manufacturing the casks). In fact, he identified a “major breakdown” in the QA program itself. The problems were so severe that Shirani sought a Stop Work Order against the manufacturer of the casks until the problems were addressed. Instead, he was run out of Exelon. According to Shirani, these design and manufacturing flaws mean that the structural integrity of the Holtec casks is indeterminate and unreliable, especially under heat-related stress such as during a severe transportation accident.

Although NRC has dismissed Shirani’s concerns, NRC Region III ( Chicago office) dry cask inspector Ross Landsman refused to sign and approve the NRC’s resolution of Shirani’s concerns, concluding that this same kind of thinking led to NASA’s Space Shuttle disasters.[1] He stated in September 2003, “Holtec, as far as I’m concerned, has a non-effective QA program, and U.S. Tool & Die has no QA program whatsoever.”[2] Landsman added that NRC’s Nuclear Reactor Regulation division did a poor follow-up on the significant issues identified, and pre-maturely closed them.

Shirani alleges that all existing Holtec casks, some of which are already loaded with highly radioactive waste, as well as the casks under construction now, still flagrantly violate engineering codes (such as those of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers [ASME] and American National Standards Institute [ANSI]), as well as NRC regulations. He concludes that the Holtec casks are “nothing but garbage cans” if they are not made in accordance with government specifications.[3]

Specific examples of the QA violations and related problems alleged by Shirani include:

  • Welding problems, such improper “fast cooling” of hot cask welds and metal using fans and air conditioning equipment, which are in violation of ASME and ANSI codes and risk tearing and cracking of the unevenly cooling welds and metal, in order to meet production goals. Welds on the casks were also performed by unqualified welders. Even NRC has acknowledged that “weld quality records are not in agreement with the code requirements.”[4]
  • Inadequate controls on the quality of materials used in the manufacturing process, risking brittleness and weakness in the casks.
  • Holtec’s failure to report holes in neutron shielding material (neutrons are especially hazardous emissions from highly radioactive waste).
  • US Tool & Die’s failure to use coupon (a small physical sample of metal) testing, and Post Weld Heat Treatment on a regular basis, as required by ASME code and in violation of the codes that were part of the license agreement with NRC.
  • Holtec and U.S. Tool & Die quality control inspectors’ bypass of hundreds of non-conforming conditions, departures from the original design during cask manufacture. The departures from the original design amount to design changes that require revised analysis to guarantee that manufactured casks actually live up to the structural integrity of the original design. The fact that this revised analysis was never done is in violation of ASME and ANSI codes, and thus NRC regulations, and means the actual manufactured casks' structural integrity is questionable, according to Shirani.
  • Holtec’s consent to allow U.S. Tool & Die to make design decisions and changes, despite the fact that U.S. Tool & Die does not have design control capability under its QA program.
  • Failure to conduct a “root cause investigation” of Holtec’s QA program, even though root causes are the main reason for repeated deficiencies.
  • Exelon’s obstruction of Shirani from performing any follow-up of the audit to confirm that problems had been solved, despite knowing that the fabrication issues identified would have a detrimental impact on the design.
  • Exelon’s falsified quality-assurance documents and the misleading of the NRC investigation, stating that Shirani’s allegations of QA violations were resolved when in fact they were not.
  • Lack of understanding in the NRC of the design control process and Holtec's QA program, relating to flaws in welding, design, manufacturing, and materials procurement control. NRC lacks a corrective action mechanism for repeated findings. Shirani alleges his audit findings embarrassed NRC because it had also audited the Holtec casks just a few months previously but found no problems whatsoever.

Shirani concludes that these numerous design and manufacturing flaws call into question the structural integrity of the Holtec casks, especially under heat-related stress such as during severe transportation accidents. He also warns that his eight-day audit showed him only a snap shot of problems, and that there could in fact be additional ones yet to be identified.

[1] Elizabeth Brackett, "Nuclear Controversy," " Chicago Tonight," WTTW Channel 11 Television, Chicago, Illinois, January 29, 2004.

[2] J.A. Savage, "Whistleblower Alleges PG&E Proposed Dry Casks Slipshod," California Energy Circuit, Vol. 1, No. 1, Berkeley, California, September 5, 2003.

[3]Ibid.

[4] April 2002 NRC review panel memo, cited in J.A. Savage, "Whistleblower Alleges PG&E Proposed Dry Casks Slipshod," California Energy Circuit, Vol. 1, No. 1, Berkeley, California, September 5, 2003.

* This summary was prepared by Kevin Kamps, Nuclear Waste Specialist at Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington, D.C. July 22, 2004.]

Neither Holtec nor NRC have rectified this problem much, or at all, since. Thus, Shirani questioned the integrity of Holtec containers sitting still, going zero miles per hour, let alone 60 miles per hour, or faster, down the railroad tracks, subject to the extreme forces of severe accidents. Dr. Landsman compared NRC's decision making to that of NASA's, which led to Space Shuttles hitting the ground.

Holtec CEO Krishna Singh also attempted to bribe Shirani and Landsman into silence. Shirani told me that Singh told him that he could name his own salary, into the many hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, to come and join Holtec. But of course he would have to shut up about the Holtec QA violations. Both Landsman and Shirani refused and rejected Singh's bribe offer, and continued to blow the whistle.

Singh was separately implicated in a $55,000 bribe made to a Tennessee Valley Authority Browns Ferry nuclear power plant official in Alabama, made in order to secure a contract there.

When asked on a tax break application form, under oath, by a State of NJ agency, Krishna Singh answered that Holtec had never been banned nor barred from doing business with a federal agency or state government. This was a lie. Holtec had been banned and barred from doing business with TVA, after the bribery scandal at Browns Ferry. Singh's falsehood on the tax break application form was uncovered by ProPublic and WNYC in May 2019. It has led to a major scandal in New Jersey (Holtec's home base), with ongoing investigations. Singh's lie secured a $260 million tax break for Holtec, which was used to build a brand new, major manufacturing plant in Camden, NJ, which bears Singh's name. Should a company like Holtec, and a CEO like Krishna Singh, be entrusted with 173,600 metric tons of highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel? The rogue behaviors they have exhibited would make that a resounding NO!

Relatedly, on June 25, 2020, Colin A. Young with the Statehouse News Service reported at WBUR (the Boston, MA NPR radio station), an article entitled "Report: Company Decommissioning Pilgrim Nuclear Plant Under Criminal Investigation." 

The article is posted online here: <https://www.wbur.org/earthwhile/2020/06/25/plymouth-nuclear-plant-decommissioning-company-criminal-investigation>

The article reports:

[Holtec International, a subsidiary of which owns and is decommissioning the inactive nuclear plant in Plymouth, is under criminal investigation, Politico New Jersey reported based on a legal brief filed by the New Jersey Economic Development Authority.

According to the report, New Jersey-based Holtec International sued the NJ EDA in March over the payment of $26 million of a $260 million New Jersey tax incentive, which the agency held up because Holtec allegedy gave a false answer on its 2014 tax credit application.

"Holtec's misrepresentations — which include its failure to disclose a prior government debarment by the Tennessee Valley Authority (the 'TVA') for bribing an official of that agency — first came to light during an investigation conducted by the Governor's Task Force on the Economic Development Authority's Tax Incentive Program, and they are now the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation," the brief read, according to Politico.]

Again, should NRC rubber-stamp a license for Holtec's CISF, when the company is under "an ongoing criminal investigation" in its home state of New Jersey? The answer is NO! Obviously, Holtec cannot be trusted.

These comments are submitted on behalf of our members and supporters in New Mexico, and across the country along impacted transport routes.

Please acknowledge receipt of these comments. Thank you.

Saturday
Jun272020

Beyond Nuclear public comment #5, re: NRC Holtec/ELEA CISF DEIS, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 -- re: simply assuming Yucca Mountain, Nevada on Western Shoshone land, is false, indefensible, and a violation of treaty obligations (that is, illegal)

Submitted via: <holtec-cisfeis@nrc.gov>
Dear NRC Staff,

Holtec and NRC assume that the Yucca Mountain dump in Nevada, targeting Western Shoshone Indian land, will open, allowing re-export of irradiated nuclear fuel from New Mexico to Nevada for permanent disposal. It's how Holtec and NRC attempt to justify calling the CISF "interim" or temporary. But the Yucca dump should not, and will not, happen, for a long list of reasons. This includes the Yucca dump's illegality (it would violate the Treaty of Ruby Valley of 1863, signed by the U.S. government with the Western Shoshone Indians), as well as the environmental injustice of opening the national high-level radioactive waste dump in the same state that "hosted" (unwillingly) full-scale nuclear weapons testing for several decades on end (1951 to 1992), resulting in disastrous radioactive fallout and health damage downwind. But it also includes Yucca's flagrant scientific unsuitability, as well as the fact that more than a thousand environmental groups have been actively opposing the scheme for 33 years. (A partial listing of the large number of these groups are listed below.) And it also includes that fact that the State of Nevada, and the Western Shoshone, have expressed their non-consent to the Yucca Mountain dump for several long decades now.

Holtec and NRC are entirely unjustified in assuming the Yucca dump will open someday, or year, or decade, or century. In fact, NRC's doing so reveals its bias in the Yucca Mountain licensing proceeding, in which it is supposed to be a neutral safety regulator, only sitting in judgment of the Yucca site's capability of meeting regulations, not advocating for its opening even in the face of its clear unsuitability. For this reason, there is a very high risk that the Holtec CISF in New Mexico will become de facto permanent surface storage, a parking lot dump, risking catastrophic releases of hazardous radioactivity directly into the environment when containers ultimately fail over a long enough period of time, due to loss of institutional control.

Partial listing of organizations opposed to the Yucca Mountain, NV dump proposal scheme:

These comments are submitted on behalf of Beyond Nuclear's members and supporters in New Mexico, and across the country along impacted transport routes.

Please acknowledge receipt of these comments. Thank you.
Saturday
Jun272020

Beyond Nuclear public comment #4, re: NRC's Holtec/ELEA CISF DEIS, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052 -- re: NRC Staff's internal contradictions

Submitted via: <Holtec-CISFEIS@nrc.gov>
Dear NRC Staff,

The NRC Staff has a glaring internal contradiction: it is willing to overlook this proposed Holtec/ELEA CISF's violation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended (which prohibits the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from taking ownership of commercial irradiated nuclear fuel at an interim site in the absence of an open permanent repository), while citing in the DEIS that the lack of a legally-binding decision by DOE and Congress re: highly radioactive Greater-Than-Class-C "low-level" radioactive waste, means NRC will choose to refrain from reviewing that aspect of the proposal any further at this time. NRC is talking out both sides of its mouth, to the benefit of license applicant Holtec, and to the disadvantage of the public interest! And the double standard re: rule of law is also outrageous NRC behavior. NRC must obey, and not violate, all federal laws, including the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended. To violate that law is itself a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Mindy Goldstein and Diane Curran, Beyond Nuclear's legal counsel in its opposition to the Holtec International consolidated interim storage facility for highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel targeted at southeastern New Mexico, have submitted a letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners regarding this matter. It addresses NRC Staff internal contradictions, as revealed in the NRC's March 2020 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, as compared to NRC Staff's assertions during the licensing proceeding, upon which the NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board relied when it ruled against Beyond Nuclear's intervention on May 7, 2019.

Diane Curran is a Partner at Harmon, Curran, Spielberg + Eisenberg, LLP in Washington, D.C.

Mindy Goldstein Director of the Turner Environmental Law Clinic at Emory University School of Law in Atlanta, Georgia.

The letter, dated April 7, 2020, entitled "Re: Holtec International (HI-STORE Consolidated Interim Storage Facility), Docket No. 72-1051," was sent to all four then serving NRC Commissioners: Commissioner Kristine Svinicki, Chair; Commissioner Jeff Baran; Commissioner Annie Caputo; and Commissioner David A. Wright.

The text of the letter, as contained with brackets below, states:

[On behalf of Beyond Nuclear, Inc., we write to alert you of a recent statement by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) Staff in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Holtec International’s License Application for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel and High Level Waste (NUREG-2237, March 2020) (“DEIS”), which bears on the legal issues now before you in this proceeding on appeal of LBP-19-04, 89 NRC __ (May 7, 2019).

In LBP-19-04, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (“ASLB”) stated:

             If Congress decides to amend the [Nuclear Waste Policy Act] to allow [the Department of Energy] to take title to spent nuclear fuel before a national nuclear waste
             repository becomes operational, the only difference would be that DOE could then lawfully contract with Holtec to store the same spent fuel that presently belongs to the
             nuclear power plant owners. The NRC Staff assures us that it is reviewing Holtec’s application in light of both possibilities: ‘[T]he Staff bases its safety and environmental
             reviews on the application as presented, which seeks a license on the basis that either DOE or private entities may hold title to the waste.

Id., slip op. at 34 (emphasis added) (cited in Beyond Nuclear’s Brief on Appeal of LBP-19-04 at 6 (June 3, 2019)). In the DEIS, however, the NRC Staff refuses to provide “a detailed evaluation” of the environmental impacts of an action related to the storage of spent fuel at the proposed Holtec facility, i.e., disposal of Greater-Than-Class-C (“GTCC”) waste at the Waste Control Specialist (“WCS”) Low Level Radioactive Waste disposal facility in Andrews, Texas, on the ground that it is not “feasible” until Congress passes legislation:

           [B]ecause disposal of GTCC at WCS would require completion of [an NRC rulemaking] and actions by DOE and Congress, a detailed evaluation of this reasonably
           foreseeable future action is not feasible at this time but is included here for completeness.

Id. at 5-5 (emphasis added). This statementin the DEIS runs counter to the NRC Staff’s assurances, relied upon by the ASLB in LBP-19-04, that the NRC Staff can ably assess the environmental and safety impacts of DOE ownership of spent nuclear fuel at the proposed Holtec facility, when such ownership would also require actions by both DOE and Congress (i.e.amending the Nuclear Waste Policy Act).]

The following press release, contained within brackets below, published by Beyond Nuclear on April 27, 2020, contains additional information about the NRC's violation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act, vis-a-vis the Holtec/ELEA CISF:

[U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission announces it will proceed with licensing of proposed high-level radioactive waste dump in New Mexico despite illegal license term

In violation of Nuclear Waste Policy Act, license applicant Holtec International contemplates federal ownership of 173,000 metric tons of highly radioactive spent reactor fuel to be stored at New Mexico site

Beyond Nuclear vows to challenge NRC and Holtec in federal court

WASHINGTON, D.C. and SOUTHEASTERN NM -- In an astounding ruling on April 23, 2020, the four-member U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) acknowledged that an application by Holtec International/Eddy-Lea [Counties] Energy Alliance to store a massive quantity of highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel in southeastern New Mexico violates federal law – and yet ruled that the unlawful provisions of the license application could be ignored and would not bar approval.

Beyond Nuclear has challenged the NRC’s authority to approve Holtec's license application because it contemplates that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) may become the owner of the irradiated reactor fuel. The federal Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) prohibits federal ownership of spent fuel, however, unless and until a federal repository for permanent disposal is operating.

The NRC Commissioners acknowledged that Federal law prohibits federally-sponsored storage of irradiated reactor fuel unless and until a repository for permanent disposal is in operation. Nevertheless the NRC threw out Beyond Nuclear’s legal challenge to the project on the ground that Holtec could be depended on not to implement the unlawful provision if the license were granted.

The Commissioners’ decision affirms an earlier ruling by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the storage facility may be licensed despite the illegal license terms contemplating federal ownership of the irradiated fuel. The Licensing Board accepted arguments by Holtec and the NRC’s technical staff that the license containing illegal provisions could be approved as long as it also contained a provision that would allow private ownership of the spent fuel.   

Mindy Goldstein, a lawyer for Beyond Nuclear, stated, “the NRC’s decision flagrantly violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which prohibits an agency from acting contrary to the law as issued by Congress and signed by the President.” Goldstein also stated that “the Commission lacks a legal or logical basis for its rationale that the illegal provisions could be ignored in favor of other provisions that are legal, or that an illegal license could be issued in ‘hopes’ that the law might change in the future. The APA gives the NRC no excuse to ignore the mandates of federal law.”   

Diane Curran, also a lawyer for Beyond Nuclear, said the group will pursue a federal court appeal of the NRC decision. “Our claim is simple,” she declared. “The NRC is not above the law.”

Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear, called the federal Nuclear Waste Policy Act “the public’s best protection against an interim storage facility becoming a de facto permanent, national radioactive waste dump at the surface of the Earth.” According to Kamps, “Congress knew, in passing the NWPA, that the only safe long-term strategy for care of irradiated reactor fuel is to place it in a permanent repository for deep geologic isolation.

Congress acted wisely in refusing to allow nuclear reactor licensees to transfer ownership of their irradiated reactor fuel to the DOE until a repository was up and running.  The carefully crafted Nuclear Waste Policy Act thus protects a state like New Mexico from being railroaded by the powerful nuclear industry, its friends in the federal government, and other states looking to off-load their mountain of forever deadly high-level radioactive waste."

Kamps added: "A deep geologic repository for permanent disposal should meet a long list of stringent criteria. These include legality, environmental justice, consent-based siting, scientific suitability, mitigation of transport risks, regional equity, intergenerational equity, and non-proliferation, including a ban on reprocessing. This is why a coalition of more than a thousand environmental, environmental justice, and public interest organizations, representing all 50 states, have opposed the Yucca Mountain dump targeted at Western Shoshone Indian land in Nevada for 33 years."

“On behalf of our members and supporters in New Mexico, and across the country along the road, rail, and waterway routes in most states, that would be used to haul the high risk, high-level radioactive waste out West, we will appeal the NRC Commissioners' bad ruling to the federal court,” Kamps added.]

And this press release, contained in brackets below, published on June 4, 2020, by Beyond Nuclear, sheds more light on NRC's violation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended, and the Administrative Procedure Act:

[BEYOND NUCLEAR FILES FEDERAL LAWSUIT CHALLENGING HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE DUMP FOR ENTIRE INVENTORY OF U.S. “SPENT” REACTOR FUEL   

Petitioner charges the Nuclear Regulatory Commission knowingly violated U.S. Nuclear Waste Policy Act and up-ended settled law prohibiting transfer of ownership of spent fuel to the federal government until a permanent underground repository is ready to receive it

[WASHINGTON, DC – June 4, 2020] -- Today the non-profit organization Beyond Nuclear filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit requesting review of an  April 23, 2020 order and an October 29, 2018 order by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), rejecting challenges to Holtec International/Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance’s application to build a massive “consolidated interim storage facility” (CISF) for nuclear waste in southeastern New Mexico. Holtec proposes to store as much as 173,000 metric tons of highly radioactive irradiated or “spent” nuclear fuel – more than twice the amount of spent fuel currently stored at U.S. nuclear power reactors – in shallowly buried containers on the site.   

But according to Beyond Nuclear’s petition, the NRC’s orders “violated the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by refusing to dismiss an administrative proceeding that contemplated issuance of a license permitting federal ownership of used reactor fuel at a commercial fuel storage facility.”

Since it contemplates that the federal government would become the owner of the spent fuel during transportation to and storage at its CISF, Holtec’s license application should have been dismissed at the outset, Beyond Nuclear’s appeal argues. Holtec has made no secret of the fact that it expects the federal government will take title to the waste, which would clear the way for it to be stored at its CISF, and this is indeed the point of building the facility. But that would directly violate the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA), which prohibits federal government ownership of spent fuel unless and until a permanent underground repository is up and running.  No such repository has been licensed in the U.S. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) most recent estimate for the opening of a geologic repository is the year 2048 at the earliest.

In its April 23 decision, in which the NRC rejected challenges to the license application, the four NRC Commissioners admitted that the NWPA would indeed be violated if title to spent fuel were transferred to the federal government so it could be stored at the Holtec facility.  But they refused to remove the license provision in the application which contemplates federal ownership of the spent fuel. Instead, they ruled that approving Holtec’s application in itself would not involve NRC in a violation of federal law, and that therefore they could go forward with approving the application, despite its illegal provision. According to the NRC’s decision, “the license itself would not violate the NWPA by transferring the title to the fuel, nor would it authorize Holtec or [the U.S. Department of Energy] to enter into storage contracts.” (page 7). The NRC Commissioners also noted with approval that “Holtec hopes that Congress will amend the law in the future.” (page 7).

“This NRC decision flagrantly violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which prohibits an agency from acting contrary to the law as issued by Congress and signed by the President,” said Mindy Goldstein, an attorney for Beyond Nuclear. “The Commission lacks a legal or logical basis for its rationale that it may issue a license with an illegal provision, in the hopes that Holtec or the Department of Energy won’t complete the illegal activity it authorized. The buck must stop with the NRC.”   

“Our claim is simple,” said attorney Diane Curran, another member of Beyond Nuclear’s legal team. “The NRC is not above the law, nor does it stand apart from it.”

According to a 1996 D.C. Circuit Court ruling, the NWPA is Congress’ “comprehensive scheme for the interim storage and permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste generated by civilian nuclear power plants” [Ind. Mich. Power Co. v. DOE, 88 F.3d 1272, 1273 (D.C. Cir. 1996)]. The law establishes distinct roles for the federal government vs. the owners of facilities that generate spent fuel with respect to the storage and disposal of spent fuel. The “Federal Government has the responsibility to provide for the permanent disposal of … spent nuclear fuel” but “the generators and owners of … spent nuclear fuel have the primary responsibility to provide for, and the responsibility to pay the costs of, the interim storage of … spent fuel until such … spent fuel is accepted by the Secretary of Energy” [42 U.S.C. § 10131]. Section 111 of the NWPA specifically provides that the federal government will not take title to spent fuel until it has opened a repository [42 U.S.C. § 10131(a)(5)].  

“When Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and refused to allow nuclear reactor licensees to transfer ownership of their irradiated reactor fuel to the DOE until a permanent repository was up and running, it acted wisely,” said Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear. “It understood that spent fuel remains hazardous for millions of years, and that the only safe long-term strategy for safeguarding irradiated reactor fuel is to place it in a permanent repository for deep geologic isolation from the living environment. Today, the NWPA remains the public’s best protection against a so-called ‘interim’ storage facility becoming a de facto permanent, national, surface dump for radioactive waste. But if we ignore it or jettison the law, communities like southeastern New Mexico can be railroaded by the nuclear industry and its friends in government, and forced to accept mountains of forever deadly high-level radioactive waste other states are eager to offload.”

In addition to impacting New Mexico, shipping the waste to the CISF site would also endanger 43 other states plus the District of Columbia, because it would entail hauling 10,000 high risk, high-level radioactive waste shipments on their roads, rails, and waterways, posing risks of radioactive release all along the way.

Besides threatening public health and safety, evading federal law to license CISF facilities would also impact the public financially. Transferring  title and liability for spent fuel from the nuclear utilities that generated it to DOE would mean that federal taxpayers would have to pay for its so-called "interim" storage, to the tune of many billions of dollars.  That’s on top of the many billions ratepayers and taxpayers have already paid to fund a permanent geologic repository that hasn’t yet materialized. 

But that’s not to say that Yucca Mountain would be an acceptable alternative to CISF. “A deep geologic repository for permanent disposal should meet a long list of stringent criteria: legality, environmental justice, consent-based siting, scientific suitability, mitigation of transport risks, regional equity, intergenerational equity, and safeguards against nuclear weapons proliferation, including a ban on spent fuel reprocessing,” Kamps said. “But the Yucca Mountain dump, which is targeted at land owned by the  Western Shoshone in Nevada, fails to meet any of those standards.  That’s why a coalition of more than a thousand environmental, environmental justice, and public interest organizations, representing all 50 states, has opposed it for 33 years."

Kamps noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has upheld the NWPA before, including in the matter of inadequate standards for Yucca Mountain.  In its landmark 2004 decision in Nuclear Energy Institute v. Environmental Protection Agency, it wrote, “Having the capacity to outlast human civilization as we know it and the potential to devastate public health and the environment, nuclear waste has vexed scientists, Congress, and regulatory agencies for the last half-century."  The Court found the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s insufficient 10,000-year standard for Yucca Mountain violated the NWPA’s requirement that the National Academy of Sciences' recommendations must be followed, and ordered the EPA back to the drawing board. In 2008, the EPA issued a revised standard, acknowledging a million-year hazard associated with irradiated nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Even that standard falls short, Kamps said, because certain radioactive isotopes in spent fuel remain dangerous for much longer than that.  Iodine-129, for example, is hazardous for 157 million years.] 


These internal contradictions by NRC Staff, described above, must be corrected in the DEIS. The correction must follow, and be faithful and obedient to, federal law, as described above.

I submit these comments on behalf of our members and supporters in New Mexico, and in all states along the impacted transport routes.

Please acknowledge receipt of these comments. Thank you.