ML21355A425

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
12-15-21 Petitioners' Docketing Statement (DC Cir.)(Case No. 21-1229)
ML21355A425
Person / Time
Site: Consolidated Interim Storage Facility
Issue date: 12/15/2021
From: Lodge T, Taylor W
Don't Waste Michigan, Sierra Club
To:
NRC/OGC, US Federal Judiciary, Court of Appeals, for the District of Columbia Circuit
References
1926848, 21-1229
Download: ML21355A425 (97)
v • d • e


Text

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT SIERRA CLUB, et al., )

)

Petitioners, ) No. 21-1229

)

vs. )

)

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR )

REGULATORY COMMISSION and ) Date Docketed: November 12, 2021 the UNITED STATES OF )

AMERICA, ) PETITIONERS DOCKETING

) STATEMENT Respondents. )

Comes now the Petitioners, and hereby submit the following Docketing Statement:

TYPE OF CASE: Review of administrative action IS THIS CASE REQUIRED BY STATUTE TO BE EXPEDITED? No CASE INFORMATION:

a. Identify agency whose order is to be reviewed: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
b. Give agency docket or order numbers: Docket No. 72-1050
c. Give dates of orders: The Record of Decision was issued on September 13, 2021.
d. Has a request for rehearing or reconsideration been filed at the agency? No
e. Identify the basis of appellants/petitioners claim of standing:
1. Petitioner Sierra Club (Page 1 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 2 of 6 Sierra Club was accorded standing before the agency in the administrative proceedings below. The NRC has very strict requirements for standing, so Sierra Club had to make a clear showing, through its members who live in close proximity to the site of the proposed nuclear waste storage facility at issue in this case, that its members would be impacted by the construction and operation of the facility. Attached hereto are the declarations of Sierra Club members Shirley Henson and Fletcher Williams.

In those declarations Ms. Henson and Ms. Williams state that they live within 6 miles of the proposed waste facility and within one mile of the railroad line where high level radioactive waste would be transported. The declarants further explain that emergency responders in Eunice, New Mexico, where they live, are not adequately trained and equipped to deal with a situation involving a radioactive release.

The NRC, in Order CLI-2020-15, affirmed the decision of the licensing board that Sierra Club had standing in the administrative proceedings below. The Commission noted that the nature of the proposed action is to build and operate a facility to hold up to 40,000 tons of nuclear waste, which must be transported to the facility. Distinguishing this case from cases cited by ISP, the Commission noted the obvious potential for offsite consequences. Furthermore, in the case cited by ISP the petitioner lived 19 miles from the site. Here, Ms. Henson and Ms. Williams live within 6 miles of the site. Finally, contrary to ISPs argument that there can be no radiological impact from its proposed facility, the Commission said, The Commission has not held that there can be no offsite radiological consequences from a [waste storage facility].

Pursuant to the decision of this Court in Sierra Club v. EPA, 292 F.3d 895 (D.C. Cir. 2002), Sierra Club in this case has shown through evidence in the administrative record and the declarations of Ms. Henson and Ms.

Williams that Sierra Club members will be impacted by the proposed nuclear waste facility at issue in this case. The Sierra Club decision also cited with approval Horsehead Resource Dev. Co. v. Browner, 16 F.3d 1246 (D.C. Cir.

1994), where this Court said environmental organizations [whose members live in affected areas] clearly do have standing. That precisely describes Ms. Henson and Ms. Williams.

Sierra Clubs standing in this case is further supported by the Supreme Court decision in Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw, 528 U.S. 167, 120 S.Ct.

693 (2000). In Laidlaw the plaintiff organization had members who were concerned about pollution in a river into which Laidlaw had been discharging pollutants. The Laidlaw decision emphasized that the concerns (Page 2 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 3 of 6 expressed by the plaintiff members were injuries to persons who use and enjoy an area for whom the aesthetic and recreational values will be adversely affected.

The Laidlaw court also emphasized that the plaintiffs reasonable concern that pollution in the Tyger River would adversely impact their use and enjoyment of the river and its environs was not the general conclusory allegations that were alleged in Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, 497 U.S. 871, 110 S.Ct. 3177 (1990), nor the speculative some day intentions proffered in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 112 S.Ct. 2130 (1992). So, in this case, the reasonable concerns of Ms. Henson and Ms.

Williams about impacts from the nuclear waste facility confer standing on Sierra Club. And those concerns were echoed by the NRC in the administrative proceedings below (The Commission has not held that there can be no offsite radiological consequences from a [waste storage facility].).

2. Petitioner Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition Sustainable Energy and Development (SEED) Coalition - was accorded standing in the licensing proceedings before the NRC. Interim Storage Partners LLC (WCS Consolidated Interim Storage Facility), LBP-19-07 at p. 17 ((August 23, 2019). It was derived from the personal standing proven by Brigitte Gardner-Aguilar, a resident of Eunice, New Mexico, located 5 miles from the proposed WCS facility. The rail line that will deliver spent nuclear fuel and greater-than-Class-C radioactive waste to WCS passes through Eunice, and Ms. Gardner-Aguilar routine crosses that line on errands and lives a mile and a half from it. She expressed concerns at radiation exposure even from normal, supposedly contained spent fuel casks passing through her community. See Horsehead Resource Dev. Co. v.

Browner, 16 F.3d 1246 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (environmental organizations

[whose members live in affected areas] clearly do have standing).

3. Dont Waste Michigan, Citizens Environmental Coalition, Public Citizen, Inc., Citizens Against Chemical Contamination, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, Nuclear Energy Information Service and Leona Morgan These Petitioners based their standing claims on their members and Ms. Morgans geographical proximity to potential transportation routes by (Page 3 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 4 of 6 which spent nuclear fuel might travel to the proposed facility. The petitioning organizations and Ms. Morgan established causal connections between the licensing action and the threatened injuries. Injury-in-fact encompasses all radiation impacts, including those that do not necessarily amount to a regulatory violation. See Duke Cogema Stone & Webster (Savannah River Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility), LBP-01-35, 54 NRC 403, 417 (2001) (citing Yankee Atomic Electric Co. (Yankee Nuclear Power Station), CLI-96-7, 43 NRC 235, 247-48 (1996)). A minor exposure to radiation - even one within regulatory limits - will suffice to state an injury-in-fact. Id. The declarations of 19 organization members and Ms.

Morgan all describe their casual transportation in the vicinity of likely rail lines that will haul the spent fuel and their concerns that they will likely be exposed to unwanted doses of ionizing radiation from the passage of the waste through their communities. The threat of injury from radiation exposure is sufficient to satisfy the injury in fact requirement of traditional standing. See Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2), CLI-03-14, 58 NRC 207, 216 (2003) (A threatened unwanted exposure to radiation, even a minor one, is sufficient to establish injury-in-fact.).

Moreover, as the waste is transported by rail, or on highways or on the Great Lakes and other waterways, it will put may people physically close to a significant source of radioactivity producing an obvious potential for offsite consequences. Sequoyah Fuels Corp. and General Atomics (Gore, Oklahoma Site), CLI-94-12, 40 NRC 64, 75 n.22 (1994). In Shaw Areva MOX Services, LBP-07-14 (2007), petitioners opposed to a mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility were accorded standing by virtue of living from 20 to 32 miles from the facility site. The licensing board noted that a significant proximity radius was justified in cases involving large amounts of spent nuclear fuel. Here, tens of thousands of tons of inherently dangerous radiotoxic materials will travel in canisters, each of which will carry considerably more radioactivity (200 times or more) than was dispersed by the Hiroshima nuclear bomb. SNF poses a dangerous, long-term health and environmental risk. It will remain dangerous for time spans seemingly beyond human comprehension. Nuclear Energy Inst., Inc. v. EPA, 373 F.3d 1251, 1258 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (per curiam). Cesium-137, a very dangerous radioactive element if allowed to enter the atmosphere, is one of dozens of listed hazardous radioisotopes in SNF.

The harms and threats from SNF and GTCC that are set forth by the declarations include the potential for radiation exposures as a result of being (Page 4 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 5 of 6 physically stuck in traffic proximate to (principally) rail lines over which cargoes of SNF will be hauled; exposures to spills and water runoff from accidents or leakage from SNF transport vehicles; downwind airborne radioactive exposure from defective transport containers; and possible radioactive contamination of water resources from accidents. The petitioner does not have the burden of articulating a plausible means through which radioactive materials could cause harm to them. It is the inherent dangers of the radioactive materials that create the obvious potential for offsite consequences. U.S. Army Installation Command (Schofield Barracks, Oahu, Hawaii, and Pohakuloa Training Area, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii), CLI 20, 71 NRC 216, 218 (2010), citing USEC, Inc. (American Centrifuge Plant), CLI-05-11, 61 NRC 309, 311 (2005). Spent nuclear fuel and GTCC waste are highly radioactive wastes that hold obvious potential for offsite consequences for those who live a handful of miles from rail lines, highways or waterways in upstate New York, southeast, central and western Michigan, the Chicago region, southern California, or east central Texas, as Petitioners declarations suggest.

Twenty declarations from the seven grassroots groups and Leona Morgan accompany this docketing statement, demonstrating geographical proximity to the likely transport routes for the tens of thousands of tons of inherently dangerous radioactive waste that will be transported in tens of thousands of cargoes through most states in the nation.

f. Are any other cases involving the same underlying agency order pending in this Court or any other? Yes
g. Are any other cases, to counsels knowledge, pending before the agency, this Court, another Circuit Court, or the Supreme Court which would involve substantially the same issues as the instant case presents? Yes If YES, give the names and numbers of these cases and identify court/agency: State of Texas, et al. v. NRC, No. 21-60743, in United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; State of New Mexico v. NRC, No.

9593, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

h. Have the parties attempted to resolve the issues in this case through arbitration, mediation, or any other alternative for dispute resolution? No (Page 5 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 6 of 6

/s/ Wallace L. Taylor WALLACE L. TAYLOR AT0007714 4403 1st Ave. S.E., Suite 402 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 319-366-2428;(Fax)319-366-3886 e-mail: wtaylorlaw@aol.com ATTORNEY FOR SIERRA CLUB

/s/ Terry J. Lodge Terry J. Lodge, Esq.

316 N. Michigan St., Suite 520 Toledo, OH 43604-5627 (419) 205-7084 Fax (419) 932-6625 tjlodge50@yahoo.com lodgelaw@yahoo.com ATTORNEY FOR DONT WASTE MICHIGAN, ET AL.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This motion was served by the ECF electronic system on December 15, 2021.

/s/ Wallace L. Taylor (Page 6 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 1 of 87 APPENDIX 2 STANDING DECLARATIONS OF LEONA MORGAN, CITIZENS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION, CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, DONT WASTE MICHIGAN, NUCLEAR ENERGY INFORMATION SERVICE, PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC., SAN LUIS OBISPO MOTHERS FOR PEACE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (SEED) COALITION Leona Morgan Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination Chambre Beauvais John T. Benetti Citizens Environmental Coalition Lynda Schneekloth Charlie Bowman Thomas Ellis Joanne E. Hameister Dont Waste Michigan Hedwig Kaufman Martin Kaufman Michael Keegan Alice Hirt Jessie Pauline Collins Nuclear Energy Information Service Joyce Harant Arlene Hickory Patricia Walter Public Citizen, Inc.

Rev. James Caldwell San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Lucy Jane Swanson Jill ZamEk (Page 7 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 2 of 87 Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition Brigitte Gardner-Aguilar Patricia Mona Golden (Page 8 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 3 of 87 (Page 9 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 4 of 87 (Page 10 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 5 of 87 (Page 11 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 6 of 87 (Page 12 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 7 of 87 (Page 13 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 8 of 87 (Page 14 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 9 of 87 (Page 15 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 10 of 87 (Page 16 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 11 of 87 (Page 17 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 12 of 87 (Page 18 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 13 of 87 (Page 19 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 14 of 87 (Page 20 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 15 of 87 (Page 21 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 16 of 87 (Page 22 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 17 of 87 (Page 23 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 18 of 87 (Page 24 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 19 of 87 (Page 25 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 20 of 87 (Page 26 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 21 of 87 Charles L. Bowman (Page 27 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 22 of 87 (Page 28 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 23 of 87 (Page 29 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 24 of 87 (Page 30 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 25 of 87 (Page 31 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 26 of 87 (Page 32 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 27 of 87 (Page 33 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 28 of 87 (Page 34 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 29 of 87 (Page 35 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 30 of 87 (Page 36 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 31 of 87 (Page 37 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 32 of 87 (Page 38 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 33 of 87 (Page 39 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 34 of 87 (Page 40 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 35 of 87 DECLARATION OF MARTIN R. KAUFMAN I, Martin R. Kaufman, am the Declarant herein, and I hereby make the following statements under the penalty of perjury:

1) I am an adult citizen of the United States, am not under disability, and make the following statements voluntarily.
2) My residence address is 1515 East Hurd Road, Monroe, Michigan 48162.

3 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission considered and then granted a license to Interim Storage Partners for the construction and operation of WCS Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility in Andrews County, Texas. This radioactive waste facility will be developed for the purpose of storing up to 40,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in the form of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) wastes for at least 80 years, and possibly for centuries. The facility will receive delivery of at least 3,000 shipments up to 8,000 shipments of SNF-filled or GTCC waste-filled casks. These dangerous radioactive wastes will be transported by truck, barge and/or rail to WCS. I understand that the deliveries to WCS will take place over 20 years and literally will involve hundreds of thousands of miles of railroad travel.

4) All or nearly all of the planned deliveries of SNF and GTCC waste to WCS are presently planned to be via railroad. Some may involve barge shipment and highway transport over earlier stages of shipment. Figure 2.2-4 on p. 2-71 of the WCS Environmental Report (Rev. 3)1 which is a U.S. national map of main trunk line rail routes that will be used by WCS to transport SNF and GTCC. I note that the rail route spur into and out of Fermi 2 nuclear plant is within 2.5 miles of my home and where I recreate. The rail spur going into and out of Fermi 2 nuclear plant is to meet a rail corridor shared by Norfolk Southern Railway and Canadian National Railway and CSX Transportation before heading north through Detroit, then west toward Plymouth, Michigan. This route will be used to transport many cargoes of SNF and/or GTCC wastes to the WCS facility. The Fermi 2 nuclear plant is 5 miles from my home. In addition to the threat from Fermi 2 nuclear reactor, Fermi 2 has on site an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) containging SNF. My sole source of drinking water for family draws from water 1

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2005/ML20052E152.pdf Page 1 of 3 (Page 41 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 36 of 87 (Page 42 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 37 of 87 (Page 43 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 38 of 87 (Page 44 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 39 of 87 DECLARATION OF MICHAEL KEEGAN I, Michael Keegan, am the Declarant herein, and I hereby make the following statements under the penalty of perjury:

1) I am an adult citizen of the United States, am not under disability, and make the following statements voluntarily.
2) My residence address is 811 Harrison St., Monroe, Michigan 48161.
3) I have investigated into the case where the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considered and then granted a license to Interim Storage Partners for the construction and operation of WCS Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility in Andrews County, Texas. This radioactive waste facility will be developed for the purpose of storing up to 40,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in the form of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) wastes for at least 80 years, and possibly for centuries. The facility will receive delivery of at least 3,000 shipments up to 8,000 shipments of SNF-filled or GTCC waste-filled casks. These dangerous radioactive wastes will be transported by truck, barge and/or rail to WCS. I understand that the deliveries to WCS will take place over 20 years and literally will involve hundreds of thousands of miles of railroad travel.
4) All or nearly all of the planned deliveries of SNF and GTCC waste to WCS are presently planned to be via railroad. Some may involve barge shipment and highway transport over earlier stages of shipment. I have studied Figure 2.2-4 on p. 2-71 of the WCS Environmental Report (Rev. 3),1 which is a U.S. national map of main trunk line rail routes that will be used by WCS to transport SNF and GTCC. I note that the rail route spur into and out of the Fermi 2 nuclear plant is within 6 miles of my home and where I recreate. The rail spur going into and out of Fermi 2 nuclear plant meets a rail line shared by Norfolk Southern Railway, Canadian National Railway and CSX Transportation before heading north through Detroit, then west to Plymouth, Michigan. This route will be used to transport many cargoes of SNF and/or GTCC wastes to the WCS facility. The Fermi 2 nuclear plant is 4 miles from my home. In addition to the threat from the Fermi 2 1

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2005/ML20052E152.pdf Page 1 of 3 (Page 45 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 40 of 87 nuclear reactor, Fermi 2 has on site SNF. My sole source of drinking water for family draws from water intake pipes 1/4 mile and 1/2 mile from the Fermi 2 site.

An accident with SNF while loading could be catastrophic, and affect the entire Great Lake Erie and region.

5) I am concerned for my personal safety and that of my household from radiation exposure in the event of a serious transport accident, vandalism or a terrorist attack on a shipment. I believe that if there are airborne or waterborne emissions from a breached cask during transport that those in my household and I might be exposed to radiation and suffer health consequences and serious property damage. I disagree with the rosy projections of error-free transport predicted by ISP and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements and Safety Evaluation Report, which are parts of the ISP proposal.
6) There is no planned public health impact assessment of the effects on public health and the environment of the expected 20+ years of transports of SNF and GTCC waste, and only a superficial analysis of the risks from unbreached casks in transport.
7) I note that the NRC has approved a policy of start clean/stay clean, where if a cask is delivered to the facility with a radiation leakage problem, it will supposedly be wiped down and the rail car with the cask will be moved to a storage platform at the site for indefinite storage. There seem to be no provisions for dealing with casks with serious exterior radioactive contamination, leakage, structural damage or structural failure upon their arrival at WCS, or with casks where problems develop after theyve been received at WCS. I am concerned that actively-leaking or damaged casks or casks with damaged spent fuel in them will travel close to my home, place of employment and/or places where I seek recreation. I believe that the risks of a radiation accident from leaking, damaged or contaminated casks will be present. I note that the WCS application documents contain no analysis of the potential scenarios involving a breached cask in transit.

Further, there is no analysis in them that addresses the potential contamination of land, water and property resources or the threat to public health and the environment from such a practice.

Page 2 of 3 (Page 46 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 41 of 87 (Page 47 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 42 of 87 (Page 48 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 43 of 87 (Page 49 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 44 of 87 (Page 50 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 45 of 87 (Page 51 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 46 of 87 (Page 52 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 47 of 87 (Page 53 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 48 of 87 (Page 54 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 49 of 87 (Page 55 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 50 of 87 (Page 56 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 51 of 87 (Page 57 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 52 of 87 (Page 58 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 53 of 87 (Page 59 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 54 of 87 (Page 60 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 55 of 87 (Page 61 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 56 of 87 (Page 62 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 57 of 87 (Page 63 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 58 of 87 (Page 64 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 59 of 87 (Page 65 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 60 of 87 (Page 66 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 61 of 87 (Page 67 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 62 of 87

%  ! & ' (  !

)% * * +,- . (

/ + - 0 ! 12 33-)-

%1 4!  !

(  ! " 5 (

(" 6! ( 6 *  ! 1 7 1

" "! "  !" 8- ---

9  ! "  !  ! :(46% 9 9 9  :;1  % <- "  ! 1 (469 ;1 9 1  !

"  ! = 5 ( !

5 ( " )-  !  !

8% * " (46 ;1 5 ( " " ( "

" " 6 ! ) )98 " )93 5 ( > "  :  % '( "

!  !  ! 5 ( " (46 ;1

  1. !  !  : % 1  !

! " (46 = ;1 5 (

+% "  !

7" !  ! "

(Page 68 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 63 of 87

" $== = =. )--+=. )--+)> +) "

)

(Page 69 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 64 of 87 7"  !  ?!  ! " "

" # 9 " "

( 4!  ! 6 >

" ( ( >  ! " " (

@% 1 " "! "

"! 7" )-A " (46

1  !"  !

3% 4 "" " B = C

" 1 "

! 7

! !  ! !  !  !" 5 (

" " D 5 (

= "

" 5 ( ""  !

" 6!

<%  ! 7

" ( =5 ( ""  !  !

E  !

!  ?! "  !

,% 1 "  ! "

(46 ;1  !

(Page 70 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 65 of 87

" "  ! 1 " "  !

!  ! " (46 ;1 " "

-% 1 '( "  !  !

@-- )- ( 45 5 )---, "

" 4!  !

( " #  !

6 > " ( " #  ?!  ! &

?! "  !  ! & " "  !

)%  ! " " #!

,4 )-)

(Page 71 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 66 of 87 (Page 72 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 67 of 87 DECLARATION OF LUCY JANE SWANSON I, Lucy Jane Swanson, am the Declarant herein, and I hereby make the following statements under the penalty of perjury:

1) I am an adult citizen of the United States, am not under disability, and make the following statements voluntarily.
2) My residence address is 475 Squire Canyon Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
3) I have investigated into the case where the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considered and then granted a license to Interim Storage Partners for the construction and operation of WCS Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility in Andrews County, Texas. This radioactive waste facility will be developed for the purpose of storing up to 40,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in the form of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) wastes for at least 80 years, and possibly for centuries. The facility will receive delivery of at least 3,000 shipments up to 8,000 shipments of SNF-filled or GTCC waste-filled casks. These dangerous radioactive wastes will be transported by truck, barge and/or rail to WCS. I understand that the deliveries to WCS will take place over 24 years and literally will involve rail, highway and water transport.
4) I live near the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant in California. I have learned that all or nearly all of the planned deliveries of SNF and GTCC waste to WCS are presently planned to be via railroad. Some may involve barge shipment and highway transport over earlier stages of shipment. I have studied Department of Energy maps of rail and highway transportation routes identified for the Yucca Mountain geological repository case, and note that one or more rail transport routes are within 12 miles of my (home/place of work/place of recreation) and that such route will likely be used to transport many cargoes of SNF and/or GTCC wastes to the WCS facility. But it will be necessary to haul those wastes by truck from the Diablo plant to the railroad, and the intersection of the only road leading away from the Diablo Canyon plant to the Highway 101 freeway or its frontage roads is within three miles of my home, as verified by the map posted on the website of the San Luis Obispo County Office of Emergency Services at http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Office-of-Emergency-Services.aspx. It Page 1 of 3 (Page 73 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 68 of 87 appears that the hundreds of loads of SNF and GTCC waste will have to travel three miles from my home.

5) I am concerned for my personal safety and that of others in my household from radiation exposure in the event of a serious transport accident, vandalism or a terrorist attack on a shipment. I believe that if there are airborne or waterborne emissions from a breached cask during transport that those in my household and I might be exposed to radiation and suffer health consequences and serious property damage. I disagree with the rosy projections of error-free transport predicted by ISP and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements and Safety Evaluation Report, which are parts of the ISP proposal.
6) There is no planned public health impact assessment of the effects on public health and the environment of the expected 20+ years of transports of SNF and GTCC waste, and only a superficial analysis of the risks from unbreached casks in transport.
7) I note that the NRC has approved a policy of start clean/stay clean, where if a cask is delivered to the facility with a radiation leakage problem, it will supposedly be wiped down and the rail car with the cask will be moved to a storage platform at the site for indefinite storage. There seem to be no provisions for dealing with casks with serious exterior radioactive contamination, leakage, structural damage or structural failure upon their arrival at WCS, or with casks where problems develop after theyve been received at WCS. I am concerned that actively-leaking or damaged casks or casks with damaged spent fuel in them will travel close to my home, place of employment and/or places where I seek recreation. I believe that the risks of a radiation accident from leaking, damaged or contaminated casks will be present. I note that the WCS application documents contain no analysis of the potential scenarios involving a breached cask in transit.

Further, there is no analysis in them that addresses the potential contamination of land, water and property resources or the threat to public health and the environment from such a practice.

8) I understand the casks, once set on rail cars, will be extremely heavy and concentrated loads on the tracks, and similarly will be unusually heavy loads on the specially-built truck trailers used to transport them on highways. I am concerned Page 2 of 3 (Page 74 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 69 of 87 (Page 75 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 70 of 87 (Page 76 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 71 of 87 DECLARATION OF JILL ZAMEK I, Jill ZamEk, am the Declarant herein, and I hereby make the following statements under the penalty of perjury:

1) I am an adult citizen of the United States, am not under disability, and make the following statements voluntarily.
2) My residence address is 1123 Flora Road, Arroyo Grande, California 93420.
3) I have investigated into the case where the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considered and then granted a license to Interim Storage Partners for the construction and operation of WCS Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility in Andrews County, Texas. This radioactive waste facility will be developed for the purpose of storing up to 40,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in the form of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) wastes for at least 80 years, and possibly for centuries. The facility will receive delivery of at least 3,000 shipments up to 8,000 shipments of SNF-filled or GTCC waste-filled casks. These dangerous radioactive wastes will be transported by truck, barge and/or rail to WCS. I understand that the deliveries to WCS will take place over 24 years and literally will involve rail, highway and water transport.
4) At least 95% of the planned shipments to WCS in Texas will be railroad deliveries. I have studied Department of Energy maps of rail, water and highway transportation routes, and I have made some observations about the routes which will likely be used to transport dozens of cargoes of SNF and/or GTCC wastes from the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant to the WCS facility. The Diablo Canyon plant is approximately 12 miles from my home. If transport of SNF/GTCC is by rail, the only rail line for at least 10 miles in any direction from Diablo Canyon passes within 4 to 5 miles of my home. The major U.S. highway nearest the plant, on which truck transports of SNF/GTCC, passes within 2 miles of my home. If the SNF/GTCC is loaded on a barge to be sent elsewhere by water, the barge loading area for Diablo Canyon is 10 miles from my home.
5) I am concerned for my personal safety and that of others in my household from radiation exposure in the event of a serious transport accident, vandalism or a Page 1 of 3 (Page 77 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 72 of 87 terrorist attack on a shipment. I believe that if there are airborne or waterborne emissions from a breached cask during transport that those in my household and I might be exposed to radiation and suffer health consequences and serious property damage. I disagree with the rosy projections of error-free transport predicted by ISP and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements and Safety Evaluation Report, which are parts of the ISP proposal.

6) There is no planned public health impact assessment of the effects on public health and the environment of the expected 20+ years of transports of SNF and GTCC waste, and only a superficial analysis of the risks from unbreached casks in transport.
7) I note that the NRC has approved a policy of start clean/stay clean, where if a cask is delivered to the facility with a radiation leakage problem, it will supposedly be wiped down and the rail car with the cask will be moved to a storage platform at the site for indefinite storage. There seem to be no provisions for dealing with casks with serious exterior radioactive contamination, leakage, structural damage or structural failure upon their arrival at WCS, or with casks where problems develop after theyve been received at WCS. I am concerned that actively-leaking or damaged casks or casks with damaged spent fuel in them will travel close to my home, place of employment and/or places where I seek recreation. I believe that the risks of a radiation accident from leaking, damaged or contaminated casks will be present. I note that the WCS application documents contain no analysis of the potential scenarios involving a breached cask in transit.

Further, there is no analysis in them that addresses the potential contamination of land, water and property resources or the threat to public health and the environment from such a practice.

8) I understand the casks, once set on rail cars, will be extremely heavy and concentrated loads on the tracks, and similarly will be unusually heavy loads on the specially-built truck trailers used to transport them on highways. I am concerned that scenarios not contemplated by ISP/WCS in its application documents could occur, such as a radioactive cask being so overweight that it derails and sits for days or longer in an area in which I live/work/recreate; or a truck trailer load failure that requires transfer of the transport cask onto another trailer occurring near me or others in my household.

Page 2 of 3 (Page 78 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 73 of 87 (Page 79 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 74 of 87 (Page 80 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 75 of 87 (Page 81 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 76 of 87 (Page 82 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 77 of 87 (Page 83 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 78 of 87 (Page 84 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 79 of 87 (Page 85 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 80 of 87 (Page 86 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 81 of 87 (Page 87 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 82 of 87 (Page 88 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 83 of 87 (Page 89 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 84 of 87 (Page 90 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 85 of 87 (Page 91 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 86 of 87 (Page 92 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 87 of 87 (Page 93 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 1 of 2 DECLARATION OF FLETCHER WILLIAMS My name is Fletcher Williams. I am over the age of 18 years and I live iat 1800 E. Texas St, Eunice, New Mexico. My home lies about 2 miles west of the site where Interim Storage Partners (ISP) proposes to construct a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste.

I am a member of Sierra Club and wish to be represented by the organization in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding a petition for review of the decision of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission denying Sierra Clubs contentions challenging the ISP project and issuing a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the project.

ISP plans to ship the deadly reactor waste mainly by rail, in a process that would take over 20 years. The license would allow high-level radioactive waste to be stored above the ground in dry casks for 40 years, and extension for storage of 100 years have been discussed. Cracks or leaks could occur in the dry casks and the radioactive material from the casks would enter the groundwater. Furthermore, oil and gas companies have been drilling in the area of the ISP site using hydraulic fracturing (fracking). This has caused the creation of geologic faults that induce earthquakes. Those earthquakes could cause the casks in the ISP facility to crack and leak radioactive material.

I could be impacted if there is a leak or accident at the site. Winds would carry contamination towards my home in Eunice. My health would be impacted by exposure to radioactive materials.

I know that Figure 2.2-5 in the ISP environmental report shows a rail route to the proposed facility goes through Eunice. So I would be impacted by radioactive exposure from a rail accident with a train carrying nuclear waste to the proposed waste site. Every shipment would travel by my home, less than one mile from the rail line. I work in Hobbs, New Mexico on weekdays.

I drive east on Highway 176 and then turn north at the intersection less than 100 yards from my home towards Highway 18.

There are also risks from potential terrorist actions, which could be severe if such huge volumes of nuclear reactor waste from reactors around the country are stored at the ISP site. Large volumes of waste with high curie counts could be involved.

(Page 94 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 2 of 2 Emergency responders in our community are not adequately trained and equipped to deal with a situation involving a radioactive release.

I am also concerned that if a permanent repository for nuclear waste is not developed, the ISP site will become a de facto repository without the protections of a permanent repository. A permanent repository requires deep burial in impermeable rock. The ISP site is just the opposite.

I am a member of a minority group, African American. The disparate impact of discriminatory site selection by ISP, based on race and ethnicity, will have an adverse effect on me, my family, and friends, in terms of self-esteem and self-worth.

For my own health and safety, and for the sake of the health and safety of other people in the area, I oppose the ISP proposal and seek to be represented by Sierra Club.

My family, which includes my daughter of child bearing age and granddaughter, who is 13, live with me and my husband. I feel their health and well-being will be affected by the siting of high level nuclear waste so close to my home.

I state under penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Dated this _____ day of _______________________, 2021.

FLETCHER WILLIAMS (Page 95 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 1 of 2 DECLARATION OF SHIRLEY HENSON My name is Shirley Henson. I am over the age of 18 years and I live at 136 Legion Rd., Eunice, New Mexico. My home lies about 6 miles west of the site where Interim Storage Partners (ISP) proposes to construct a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste.

I am a member of Sierra Club and wish to be represented by the organization in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding a petition for review of the decision of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission denying Sierra Clubs contentions challenging the ISP project and issuing a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the project.

ISP plans to ship the deadly reactor waste mainly by rail, in a process that would take over 20 years. The license would allow high-level radioactive waste to be stored above the ground in dry casks for 40 years, and extension for storage of 100 years have been discussed. Cracks or leaks could occur in the dry casks and the radioactive material from the casks would enter the groundwater. Furthermore, oil and gas companies have been drilling in the area of the ISP site using hydraulic fracturing (fracking). This has caused the creation of geologic faults that induce earthquakes. Those earthquakes could cause the casks in the ISP facility to crack and leak radioactive material.

I could be impacted if there is a leak or accident at the site. Winds would carry contamination towards my home in Eunice. My health would be impacted by exposure to radioactive materials.

I know that Figure 2.2-5 in the ISP environmental report shows a rail route to the proposed facility goes through Eunice. So I would be impacted by radioactive exposure from a rail accident with a train carrying nuclear waste to the proposed waste site.

There are also risks from potential terrorist actions, which could be severe if such huge volumes of nuclear reactor waste from reactors around the country are stored at the ISP site. Large volumes of waste with high curie counts could be involved.

Emergency responders in our community are not adequately trained and equipped to deal with a situation involving a radioactive release.

(Page 96 of Total)

USCA Case #21-1229 Document #1926848 Filed: 12/15/2021 Page 2 of 2 I am also concerned that if a permanent repository for nuclear waste is not developed, the ISP site will become a de facto repository without the protections of a permanent repository. A permanent repository requires deep burial in impermeable rock. The ISP site is just the opposite.

For my own health and safety, and for the sake of the health and safety of other people in the area, I oppose the ISP proposal and seek to be represented by Sierra Club.

My family and other family members live close to each other and we rely on our water wells to grow our garden and water our domestic animals as well as our livestock, which include cattle, goats, pigs and chickens.

I state under penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Dated this _____ day of _______________________, 2021.

SHIRLEY HENSON (Page 97 of Total)

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML21355A425&oldid=3597087"