Nuclear
Security Coalition
NRC
Rejects Public Petition Calling for More Protection of Nuclear Waste Stored in
Vulnerable Storage Pools on Reactor Roof Tops
Washington,
DC- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff issued its final decision on
The
NRC Staff Denial will hold unless the NRC 5-member Commission reviews and
overturns the staff’s decision within 25 days. The Coalition filed an appeal
to the Commission today asking for review.
The Nuclear
Security Coalition filed their original Petition for Emergency Enforcement on
“It
is disturbing that the NRC is more worried about security cost containment to
protect industry than radiation containment to protect people,” said Paul
Gunter, Director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for the Washington, DC-based
Nuclear Information and Resource Service.” The NRC is attempting to conceal
the fact that a large release of radioactivity as the result of a terrorist
attack on these structures is entirely possible according to a congressionally
mandated study by the National Academy of Sciences,” he added.
The petition called for immediate steps to decrease vulnerability and, like
the
Specifically, the Petitioners requested that NRC take 5 actions. The NRC
claims to have in effect granted 2 of those actions; however the Petitioners
do not see it that way – in substance, all actions were denied.
“Before
9/11 the Federal Government listed a hurricane strike on
Request for NRC Commission Review
The Coalition submitted an appeal today to the Commission to review
and overturn the NRC staff’s denial. The
appeal cited inherent procedural
and substantive flaws in the staff’s review process and decision; and also
asked the Commission to direct the NRC staff to hold a public meeting with the
Nuclear Security Coalition to review the basis for their decision.
Substantive Flaws: Standard of Review
The
Director’s denial is improper. The Petitioners contentions are factually
supported by the National Academy of Sciences recent report, Safety
& Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage a report
mandated by Congress and paid by taxpayers. Therefore it is now the
findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Academy, and by extension
those of the Petitioners, that are presumed to be correct - not NRC’s.
A standard of review requires that NRC demonstrate with facts, not as they did
in their denial with broad brushed opinions, that no reasonable person could
have reached the same conclusions as did the Academy’s panel of experts and
by extension the Petitioners.
Procedural Issues
The staff based
their final decision on a review of perhaps only some, not all, of the
comments submitted on the Proposed Director’s Decision. Nobody knows,
including the NRC, how many of the total submitted was reviewed by the staff
or how many were lost - a serious flaw.
_______________________________________________________________
The
NRC Director's Decision is available on NRC’s Electronic Library-
Accession Number “ML051960343;” the Petition is available on Adams
–Ascension Number “ML042370023,”and, the Coalition’s appeal is
attached.
APPENDIX
GE
Boiling Water Reactors - Mark I Containments (24 Units)
Browns
Ferry 1,2 &3 -
Cooper
-
Duane
Arnold -
Edwin
hatch 1&2 –
Fermi
2-
Fitzpatrick
–
Millstone
1-
Nine
Mile Point Unit 1-
Oyster
Creek- Lacey Township, NJ
Peach
Bottom 2&3- Delta, PA
Pilgrim
I –
Quad
Cities 1&2 –
General
Electric Boiling Water Reactor- Mark II Containments (8 units)
LaSalle
1&2 –
Nine
mile Point Unit 2-
Susquehanna
1&2 –
WNP-2
-