« Government Memo Slams Bechtel for Malfeasance, Safety Violations at Hanford Nuclear Site | Main | Bluefin tuna contaminated with Fukushima Daiichi cesium documented on U.S. West Coast »

Beyond Nuclear files contentions against 4 atomic reactors based on NEPA nullifying NRC's Nuke Waste Con Game

NRC has sidestepped NEPA for decades, via the flippant assumption that Yucca Mountain would open as a high-level radioactive waste dump. But the Obama administration wisely canceled it. In this photo by Gabriela Bulisova, a Western Shoshone Indian ceremonial sweat lodge frames their sacred Yucca Mtn.Beyond Nuclear has filed intervention contentions against a total of four atomic reactors (proposed new reactors at Grand Gulf Unit 3, MS and Fermi Unit 3, MI seeking construction and operating licenses, as well as degraded old reactors at Grand Gulf Unit 1, MS and Davis-Besse Unit 1, OH seeking 20 year license extensions) based on a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruling gutting the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) "Nuclear Waste Confidence Decision." The court ruled that NRC's Nuke Waste Con Game is a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA.

It has ordered NRC to either carry out an Environmental Assessment (EA) that reaches a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) regarding indefinitely long storage of high-level radioactive waste at reactor sites (in indoor pools and/or outdoor dry casks), or else carry out a full blown Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), with opportunity for public comment. An EIS could take years to complete, during which time new reactor combined construction and operating license applications (COLAs), as well as old reactor 20 year license extension applications, could be put on hold.

The NRC nuke waste confidence game has been used against states, environmental groups, and concerned citizens for decades, blocking them from challening the generation of high-level radioactive waste in atomc reactor licensing proceedings, as the NRC has flippantly expressed "confidence" that storage on-site was safe for decades or even centuries, and that a geologic repository for permanently disposing of irradiated nuclear fuel was just over the horizon -- despite mounting evidence to the contrary.


Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.