San Francisco, James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, October 17, 2005: Today, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace and the Sierra Club, joined by former San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Peg Pinard, told a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals why the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) violated federal environmental law when it licensed a new facility for storage of spent reactor fuel at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. The Attorneys General of California, Washington, Utah, Massachusetts, and the San Luis Obispo County Council filed briefs in support of the lawsuit.

The groups’ attorney, Diane Curran, asked the judges to reverse the NRC’s 2003 decision refusing to hold a hearing on the question of whether a terrorist attack on the new facility is “reasonably foreseeable” and therefore requires preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). As Curran told the Court, “the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have removed any shred of credibility from the

NRC’s stance that terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities are ‘speculative’ events that cannot be predicted.”

Curran pointed out that 140 spent fuel storage casks are to be located on an exposed hillside overlooking the Pacific Ocean where they are vulnerable to airborne attack. “The effects of a terrorist attack on the steel casks could be devastating,” she warned. “Our expert study found that if only two casks were breached, an area more than half the size of the State of Connecticut could be rendered uninhabitable.”

Curran also said that although an array of design measures could be used to minimize the impacts of a terrorist attack on the new spent fuel storage facility, the NRC had refused to consider them.

“We asked the NRC to analyze the environmental benefits of fortifying the casks, or putting them in bunkers, or scattering the cask storage pads over the site so that they would not present one big target,” Curran said. “These are all feasible alternatives for minimizing the impacts of a terrorist attack on the Diablo Canyon facility. The NRC had no lawful basis to ignore them.” Jill ZamEk, Project Director for the Mothers for Peace, noted the group’s frustration that while the NRC routinely discusses its measures for protection against the threat of terrorist attacks with nuclear industry lobbyists, it has completely shut out citizen groups like the Mothers for Peace.

“The NRC only listens to the nuclear industry, which has a vested interest in minimizing the cost of environmental protection,” said ZamEk. “The NRC must protect the environment and consider our views on how that can be best accomplished. We have come to the Court of Appeals to vindicate our legal right to participate in government decisions that could drastically affect our lives and the health of our environment.”

The Petitioners’ Brief in its entirety can be found at http://www.mothersforpeace.org/data/2004-03-159thCircuitBrief.pdf