TWO NEW DEVELOPMENTS FROM MOTHERS FOR PEACE: MOTHERS FOR PEACE TRAVELING TO WASHINGTON, D.C FOR ORAL ARGUMENTS NEW LEGAL CHALLENGE IN FEDERAL COURT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE PLANS
Two members of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP) will travel to Washington, D.C. to confer with the organization’s attorney and expert witnesses and to be present at oral arguments before a board of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
SLOMFP Spokespersons Linda Seeley and Jane Swanson will consult with attorney Diane Curran and two expert witnesses whose work supports new legal arguments against license renewal of the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant. Mark Cooper, Senior Fellow for Economic Analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School, is an expert in the field of economic and policy analysis with a focus on energy sources. David D. Jackson, Department of Earth and Space Sciences at UCLA, is an expert on earthquake faults, especially those in and off the coast of California.
On July 9, both Mothers for Peace Spokespersons will be present at oral arguments presented by attorney Curran before an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board at NRC Headquarters in nearby Rockville, MD. Ms. Curran will present evidence that PG&E has skewed a new analysis of energy alternatives to ignore or reject a wide range of renewable energy options available to replace the power generated by Diablo Canyon. She will also argue that PG&E’s program to protect against earthquake impacts is weak because PG&E has understated severe earthquakes risks.
More information about the economic issues challenged by SLOMFP are at http://mothersforpeace.org/data/2015/2015-04-07-press-release-new-environmental-contentions-filed
For the new seismic challenge go to http://mothersforpeace.org/data/2015/2015-04-16-new-seismic-contentions-filed
In a separate legal action dated June 29, 2015 and filed with the United States Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia, Attorney Curran charged that the NRC has violated the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) by proposing to license reactors without considering the environmental impacts of generating spent fuel or alternatives to avoid or mitigate those impacts.
Ms. Curran represents nine organizations in this case before the federal court, including SLOMFP and the National Resources Defense Council. The central argument is that the NRC should stop issuing or renewing licenses to nuclear reactors until and unless the problems inherent in long-term storage of radioactive wastes are resolved. “[The] licensing of new reactors and re-licensing of existing reactors would add tons of highly radioactive spent fuel to a very large and growing inventory of spent fuel that may need to be stored above-ground for many decades, if not centuries.”