It could be two years before a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission board holds a hearing in the single contention it allowed against licensing of a consolidated interim storage facility in Texas for spent nuclear power reactor fuel.
The anticipated “trigger date” for parties to begin filing various paperwork and then the evidentiary hearing itself is May 2021 – the month staff at the NRC is expected to file a final environmental impact statement for the facility planned by Interim Storage Partners (ISP).
The company, a joint venture of Orano and Waste Control Specialists, is seeking a 40-year NRC license to build and operate a facility that could hold up to 40,000 metric tons of used fuel.
The Sierra Club and other advocacy groups petitioned for hearings to present contentions on licensing. However, an NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in August approved in part just one of the Sierra Club’s contentions and rejected the other petitions. The other groups are appealing the ruling to the full commission.
The accepted contention involved ISP’s failure to include five documents in its environmental report for the license application that support its case regarding impacts of the facility on the Texas horned lizard and the dunes sagebrush lizard. The paperwork fight on that item has continued since August: ISP appealed the board decision, saying it addressed the omission; the Sierra Club petitioned to amend the contention; and ISP and NRC staff argued against the amendment.
In an initial scheduling order on Oct. 8, the three-member, quasi-judicial ASLB said the Sierra Club would have 40 days after the trigger date to file written testimony, exhibits, and other material for the evidentiary hearing. Interim Storage Partners and NRC staff would have 30 days to respond to the filings, then the Sierra Club another 20 days for its reply.
“Although the specific time and date for the evidentiary hearing will be determined later, the Board currently contemplates that it will commence between 50 and 65 days after service of the last prehearing evidentiary submission,” according to the scheduling order.
