Skip to main content

NRC Dismisses Utah Appeal, Authorizes Licensing of PFS Facility

By Eric McErlain
For the past several months, we've been following the efforts of Private Fuel Storage (PFS) to open a private used fuel facility in Utah on the Reservation of the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians, about 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.

The facility is important, because many utilities are seeking an interim storage solution for used nuclear fuel as they begin to run out of storage space in their spent fuel pools.

Today, the project moved closer to reality. The following was just released by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today denied the state of Utah'’s final appeals in the adjudication on an application by Private Fuel Storage to construct and operate an independent spent nuclear fuel storage facility in Skull Valley, Utah, and by a 3-1 vote authorized the NRC staff to issue PFS a license once the staff has made the requisite findings under NRC regulations.

Utah petitioned for Commission review of a Feb. 24 decision by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which rejected the state's assertions that there is too high a probability of a radiation release resulting from an accidental crash of one of 7,000 flights over the Skull Valley each year by F-16 single-engine jets from Hill Air Force Base.

The Commission's memorandum and order also dismisses as moot petitions by PFS and the NRC staff for review of portions of an earlier ASLB ruling.

"“Our decision today concludes this protracted adjudication, which has generated more than 40 published Board decisions and more than 30 published Commission decisions," the Commission said in its memorandum and order. "The adjudicatory effort, plus our staff's separate safety and environmental reviews, gives us reasonable assurance that PFS's proposed [storage facility] can be constructed and operated safely," it said.

"“There are no remaining adjudication issues to resolve. Accordingly, once it has made the requisite findings pursuant to 10 CFR 72.40, the staff is authorized to issue PFS a license to construct and operate its proposed [facility]."”
Back in Utah, the decision wasn't unexpected:
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, conceded Wednesday that a ruling against the state is probable.

"They just want to get it off their hands, and that's always been the case," Hatch said.

Sen. Bob Bennett said the storage site would still face many obstacles.

"I wouldn't be surprised if they vote to license the facility, but as I said all along, licensing the facility doesn't mean it's going to get built," he said.
For a list detailing when American nuclear power plants will run out of space in their fuel storage pools, click here. More later.

UPDATE: Here's an account from the Las Vegas Sun, which quotes several anti-Yucca Mountain activists as saying the decision is a blow to their effort to prevent the opening of the facility.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...
6 comments
Read more