ML23046A079

2-13-23 Texas Response to 28j Letter (Case No. 21-60743)

ML23046A079
Person / Time
Site:	Consolidated Interim Storage Facility
Issue date:	02/13/2023
From:	Abrams M State of TX, Office of the Attorney General
To:	Cayce L NRC/OGC, US Federal Judiciary, Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit
References
21-60743, Document: 188
Download: ML23046A079 (1)

Text

Case: 21-60743 Document: 188 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2023

MICHAEL R. ABRAMS (512) 936-1700 Assistant Solicitor General Michael.Abrams@oag.texas.gov February 13, 2023

Via CM/ECF Lyle W. Cayce Clerk of Court United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 600 S. Maestri Place New Orleans, Louisiana 70130

Re: State of Texas, et al. v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, et al.,

No. 21-60743

Dear Mr. Cayce:

Texas has set forth its jurisdictional arguments at length already and they apply with full force in response to the Tenth Circuits Balderas opinion.

But the Balderas opinion underscores one additional point. The court there recognized that the NRCs jur isdictional argument boils down to the theory that federal courts lack jurisdiction over the agencys orders unless parties comply with the agencys specific internal requirements for appropriate participation. Slip Op.

10. But it would require an extraordinary delegation of authority from Congress for an agency to be able to control federal court jurisdiction that way. Kucana v.

Holder, 558 U.S. 233, 251-52 (2010). And nothing in the Atomic Energy Act provides that delegation.

Pos t O f fic e Bo x 12548, Austin, Texas 7 8 7 1 1 - 2 5 4 8 * ( 5 1 2 ) 4 6 3 - 2 1 0 0

• ww w.texasatto r neygeneral.gov Case: 21-60743 Document: 188 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2023

Page 2 Respectfully submitted.

/s/ Michael R. Abrams

Michael R. Abrams Assistant Solicitor General Counsel of Record for Texas Petitioners

cc: counsel of record (via CM/ECF)

Pos t O f fic e Bo x 12548, Austin, Texas 7 8 7 1 1 - 2 5 4 8 * ( 5 1 2 ) 4 6 3 - 2 1 0 0

• ww w.texasatto r neygeneral.gov