ML20199M148
| ML20199M148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | HI-STORE |
| Issue date: | 07/16/2020 |
| From: | Andrew Averbach, Leidich A, Silberg J, Walsh T Holtec, Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman, LLP |
| To: | NRC/OGC, US Federal Judiciary, Court of Appeals, for the District of Columbia Circuit |
| References | |
| 1851986, 20-1187, 20-1225 | |
| Download: ML20199M148 (5) | |
Text
USCA Case #20-1187 Document #1851986 Filed: 07/16/2020 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
)
BEYOND NUCLEAR, INC., )
Petitioner, )
)
- v. ) No. 20-1187
) consolidated with UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY ) No. 20-1225 COMMISSION and the UNITED STATES )
OF AMERICA, )
Respondents. )
_________________________________________)
HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENTS MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE As explained in Holtec Internationals (Holtec) June 26, 2020, Motion for Leave to Intervene in the above-captioned case, Holtec is the applicant in U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Docket No. 72-1051, the NRC licensing proceeding at issue in the above-captioned case. As the applicant, Holtec is entitled to intervene as a matter of right in this case and has a direct and substantial interest in the resolution of this case.
Holtec opposes the NRCs July 6, 2020, motion to the extent that it seeks to hold Case No. 20-1187 in abeyance. In that case, petitioner Beyond Nuclear raises the specific legal issue as to whether or not the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 4850-8196-4995.v1
USCA Case #20-1187 Document #1851986 Filed: 07/16/2020 Page 2 of 5 (NWPA) prohibits the storage of spent nuclear fuel at Holtecs facility. 1 This particular purely legal question regarding the NWPA has been finally and correctly resolved in the proceeding below, and it is not dependent on or related to any of the claims still pending before the NRC. In the interest of efficiency and in fairness to Holtec and Beyond Nuclear, this issue should not be held in abeyance but should be resolved by this Court now. To the extent that the NRCs motion relies on the concept of prudential ripeness, Holtec would note that Supreme Court cases subsequent to the jurisprudence relied on by NRC have called into question the validity of the prudential ripeness doctrine. See Susan B. Anthony List v.
Driehaus, 134 S. Ct. 2334, 2347 (2014). And as far as hardship to the parties, whether or not Beyond Nuclear is correct that there is a jurisdictional bar to Holtecs proposed facility - we think not - it is in all the parties interests for that question to be decided sooner rather than later.
The matters brought forth by Dont Waste Michigan in Case No. 20-1225 are not limited to this narrow legal question and may overlap with matters still pending before the agency. As such, the issues to be raised by Dont Waste Michigan should be treated separately from Beyond Nuclears narrow legal issue.
1 Movants for intervention, Sierra Club and Fasken Land and Minerals, Ltd. and Permian Basis Land and Royalty Owners, seek to address in this case the same specific legal issue regarding the NWPA that Beyond Nuclear seeks to raise.
2 4850-8196-4995.v1
USCA Case #20-1187 Document #1851986 Filed: 07/16/2020 Page 3 of 5 Holtec supports that part of the NRCs motion that would hold Dont Waste Michigans case in abeyance.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Jay E. Silberg Jay E. Silberg PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, LLP 1200 Seventeenth St., NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 663-8000 jay.silberg@pillsburylaw.com
/s/ Timothy J. V. Walsh Timothy J. V. Walsh PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, LLP 1200 Seventeenth St., NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 663-8000 timothy.walsh@pillsburylaw.com July 16, 2019 /s/ Anne R. Leidich Anne R. Leidich PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, LLP 1200 Seventeenth St., NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 663-8000 anne.leidich@pillsburylaw.com Counsel for Holtec International 3
4850-8196-4995.v1
USCA Case #20-1187 Document #1851986 Filed: 07/16/2020 Page 4 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the electronic original of the foregoing Opposition to Respondents Motion to Hold Case in Abeyance was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on this 16th day of July, 2020, through the Courts CM/ECF electronic filing system, and thus also served on counsel of record.
Courtesy copies have also been sent by email to counsel for Beyond Nuclear, Dont Waste Michigan, Sierra Club, Fasken Land and Minerals, Ltd. and Permian Basis Land and Royalty Owners, and the NRC.
/s/ Timothy J. V. Walsh Timothy J. V. Walsh PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, LLP Counsel for Holtec International 4
4850-8196-4995.v1
USCA Case #20-1187 Document #1851986 Filed: 07/16/2020 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE The foregoing Motion Response complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5); the type-style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6);
the length limitation set forth in F. R. App. P. 27(d)(2)(a); and the applicable rules for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Motion Response was prepared in 14-point, double spaced Times New Roman font using Microsoft Word 2016. The Motion Response contains 527 words.
/s/ Timothy J. V. Walsh Timothy J. V. Walsh PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, LLP Counsel for Holtec International 5
4850-8196-4995.v1