The members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Monday affirmed an adjudicatory body’s decision not to recuse itself from ruling on petitions for intervention in the licensing proceeding for a planned spent nuclear fuel storage facility in Texas.
In their memorandum, the five commissioners said they concurred with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) that “Moving Petitioners did not provide a valid justification for disqualifying the Board or any of its members, and we affirm its ruling.”
The Sierra Club and a coalition of environmental organizations led by Don’t Waste Michigan are among the groups that have petitioned for hearings and intervention in the NRC review of Interim Storage Partners’ application for a 40-year license to store up to 40,000 metric tons of spent fuel in West Texas. In November, they said all three members of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board should step down because they are also adjudicating intervention petitions for licensing of Holtec International’s planned used fuel storage facility in New Mexico.
The recusal petition says having the same ASLB members rule on interventions in the separate but similar licensings “poses the appearance of bias.”
The board disagreed in December, but by statute was required to kick the matter up to the commission.
The NRC generally follows standards applied to federal judges on questions of potential recusals for ASLB members. In those situations, federal judges are directed to disqualify themselves if there is a clear conflict of interest or reasonable question about their ability to remain impartial.
The commission was not convinced that those standards are relevant in this case, according to their memorandum. “If two proceedings occasionally present overlapping legal issues, then consistency between the legal rulings of the two cases is to be expected, regardless of the composition of the boards.”
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has not yet ruled on the intervention petitions in either licensing.
