Beyond Nuclear Files Comments on Point Beach Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Opposing a Second License Renewal

On December 29, 2021, Beyond Nuclear filed comments to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in response to a request by the agency to respond to the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSGEIS) for a second 20-year license extension (60- to 80-years) of the Point Beach nuclear power station.

The NRC staff is giving its preliminary approval for the environmental qualification to operate the two Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors on shore of Lake Michigan at Two Rivers, Wisconsin out to 2050 and 2053. The environmental "go-ahead" is based in large part on the "generic" approval of scores of environmental issues including by-passing a site-specific evaluation of what might be the consequences and environmental impacts of a severe nuclear accident on the Great Lakes. For example, the NRC staff has determined that the effects of a nuclear meltdown on the water quality of Lake Michigan would by "SMALL" and therefore does not warrant a site-specific examination with full hearing rights, disclosure of industry and government documents and expert testimony from public interest groups opposed to the reliciensing.

Beyond Nuclear's comments focus on a blatant "error of law" that has been repeated by variety of applicants thoughout the second 20-year license extension approval process for many reactors, including Point Beach's operator NextEra Energy, the NRC Atomic Safety Licensing Boards and the Commission.  Beyond Nuclear has charged that the NRC and industry have repeatedly misinterpreted and misrepresented a simple reading of the plain language of the law [10 CFR 51.53(c)(3)] governing the agency's issuance of "generic" approvals to environmentally qualify nuclear reactor license extensions for the "Subsequent License Renewal" period (60- to 80-years). The law, as written and codified, only applies to granting "generic" approval to a table of environmental issues identified , expressly and exclusively, for the "initial" license extension's 20-year period (40- to 60-years), not the "subsequent" 20-year extension period (60- to 80-years).

Beyond Nuclear has challenged this misinterpretation of the regulatory law at the Peach Bottom nuclear power station in Pennsylvania where the licensing board denied Beyond Nuclear a request for a hearing.  Beyond Nuclear lost its appeal to a majority vote by the five seated NRC Commissions. However, two of the five Commissioners, Commissioners Jeff Baran and Christopher Hanson, wrote in a November 13, 2020 dissenting opinion, agreeing with Beyond Nuclear should be granted a hearing because the Peach Bottom applicant, Exelon, the NRC staff and the licensing board had committed an "error of law" by ignoring Beyond Nuclear's finding that the letter of the law as written in 10 CFR 51.53(c)(3) does not apply the Subsequent License Renewal expension review and generic approval.  Beyond Nuclear subsequently raised the same contention and others in a seperate Subsequent License Renewal request for hearing  on an application filed Dominion Energy's North Anna nuclear power station in Virginia. Similarly, the NRC staff and licensing board ruled against Beyond Nuclear by denying a request for a hearing on the misuse of 10 CFR 51.53(c)(3). Beyond Nuclear has appealed the denial of a hearing and is currently awaiting a decision by the Commission where now Chairman Hanson and Commission Baran are the majority of the presently three seated Commissioners with two seats empty awaiting nomination by President Biden, vetting and approval the US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.