A board of three administrative judges with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects in January to hear arguments from groups that want to intervene in the review of the license application for interim storage of spent nuclear reactor fuel in southeastern New Mexico.
Most, but not all, of the 18 entities that have petitioned oppose the proposed Holtec International facility in Lea County. The New Jersey-based energy technology firm is initially seeking a 40-year license covering 8,680 metric tons of used fuel, but the site’s total storage capacity could reach 173,000 metric tons. It hopes to have the facility operational by 2022.
A three-judge board of the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, appointed on Oct. 31, will determine which organizations have standing for intervention and an adjudicatory hearing in the licensing proceeding. Authorized groups would then have an opportunity to make their formal case for or against the license application.
A pre-hearing conference is anticipated at an unspecified date in January for oral arguments on standing and contentions against the Holtec project, Administrative Judge Paul Ryerson wrote in a Nov. 7 order. Arguments could be held in New Mexico; at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md., possibly with remote participation; or at another location, he stated.
“This would be an opportunity for petitioners to argue that they have standing and to present their contentions,” NRC spokesman David McIntyre said Wednesday by email. “The board would then decide those two issues – if no one demonstrates standing, it’s over at that point. If they have standing … then the Board considers their contentions for admissibility. If any contentions are found admissible, the Board ‘grants’ a hearing, which would then proceed at a later date.”
Petitioners have until Monday to submit a one-to-two-page statement regarding their preferred location and method for oral arguments, Ryerson wrote.
The petitioners are the Alliance for Environmental Strategies; regional oil and gas concerns Fasken Land and Minerals and Permian Basin Land and Royalty Owners; the Sierra Club; NAC International; Beyond Nuclear; and a coalition of Don’t Waste Michigan, Citizens’ Environmental Coalition, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Nuclear Energy Information Service, Public Citizen, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, and the Nuclear Issues Study Group.
The Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance – a coalition of two cities and two counties in New Mexico partnering with Holtec on the project – petitioned to participate in the proceeding as an interested governmental body. Each individual body also petitioned separately: the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs and Lea and Eddy counties.
Congress in 1982 ordered the Department of Energy to begin removing spent fuel from U.S. commercial nuclear reactors by Jan. 31, 1998. The agency has not yet moved any of what is now nearly 80,000 metric tons of used fuel. Interim storage in a limited number of locations is seen as one option for DOE to meet its legal mandate until a permanent repository is ready.
Along with the Holtec application, the NRC is considering a license request from an Orano-Waste Control Specialists venture for a 40,000-metric-ton capacity facility in Andrews County, Texas.
Opponents emphasize the potential dangers of shipping radioactive material from nuclear sites around the country and then storing it for decades. Fasken and Permian Basin Land and Royalty Owners (PBLRO) have also warned of the potential impacts on oil and gas extraction operations in the region.
Holtec and its municipal partners have emphasized the historic safety of domestic spent fuel storage and transport activities, along with the anticipated economic benefits of the project. The Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance projects the storage facility will bring 200 jobs and $2.4 billion in capital investments to the region.
Holtec has urged dismissal of its critics’ requests for hearing and intervention, saying they lack standing in the matter and have failed to submit reasonable contentions against its application. Staff at the NRC in October recommended allowing only partial petitions from Beyond Nuclear and the Sierra Club, saying only those two groups had shown standing and submitted sufficient contentions to intervene in the proceeding.
That recommendation did not cover the Fasken-PBLRO filing, which at the time specifically sought dismissal of both spent fuel storage license applications. The agency in October rejected the dismissal petition (along with a similar request from Beyond Nuclear), but the filing has been converted into a petition to intervene in the Holtec license review.
The timing for rulings on the intervention requests will be based on the complexity of the issues and how many contentions are submitted, McIntyre said.
