Ocean County joins state in Oyster Creek petition

BY PATRICIA A. MILLER Staff Writer

BY PATRICIA A. MILLER
Staff Writer

The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant’s vulnerability to terrorist attacks should be considered as part of the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) relicensing process, Ocean County Freeholder Director John P. Kelly said.

“My stance is very simple,” Kelly said. “I want the NRC to do their job and to consider every aspect of relicensing that facility.”

The Board of Freeholders recently authorized county Counsel John C. Sahradnik to join the state Attorney General’s petition with the federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. The petition contests the NRC’s stance that the impact of a terrorist attack should not be part of a nuclear plant’s relicensing review.

The Attorney General’s Office filed the petition on behalf of the state Depart-ment of Environmental Protection.

“He [Sahradnik] is reaching out to the state to see what they want from the county,” Kelly said.

The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant is in Lacey Township.

Sahradnik said he has contacted the state Attorney General’s Office and the two deputy attorneys general representing the state in the petition.

“We will be coordinating with them and joining in with them,” Sahradnik said. “Whatever they feel would be the most helpful, the county has authorized me to do. We will be filing a brief on behalf of the county.”

The federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a June 2006 California case that the NRC erred in determining that the National Environmental Policy Act does not require the NRC to consider the impact of a terrorist act in a nuclear plant’s relicensing.

The commission will respond to New Jersey’s petition “in due course,” said NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan.

“We’ve made it clear we don’t agree with the 9th Circuit decision,” he said. “And the New Jersey petition relies heavily on the 9th Circuit decision. We will be responding to the legal challenge.”

Kelly also wants a public hearing on Oyster Creek security issues.

“It’s an obligation of the NRC to do their due diligence and make a decision whether this is a safe operating plant for the next 20 years,” he said. “Everything should be taken into consideration.”

Kelly and others have questioned the purpose of an NRC May 31 “limited hearing” on the nuclear plant’s relicensing. Only those who are not part of a coalition of groups that oppose the plant’s relicensing will have a chance to speak.

“There needs to be a public hearing on security,” Kelly said. “Limiting those who can talk doesn’t answer the need.”

Sheehan defended the limited hearing, which will be held by the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in room 119 of the Ocean County Admin-istration Building in Toms River.

Members of the coalition “already have a seat at the table,” Sheehan said.

“The parties have taken part in filings,” he said. “They’ve had legal representation on this, expert witnesses. They’ve had multiple ways of having their issues aired. This is for those who are not a party to the proceedings to offer their opinions and insights.”

The coalition organizations are the Nuclear Information and Resource Service; the Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch Inc.; Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety; the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group (NJPIRG); the New Jersey Sierra Club, and the New Jersey Environmental Federation.

The NRC will have the final say on whether the 38-year-old Oyster Creek plant – the oldest nuclear plant in the country – should be allowed to operate for another 20 years.

Oyster Creek’s current license will expire on April 9, 2009. The plant, off Route 9 south in Lacey, was granted its first license on July 2, 1969.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) is still considering a contention raised by the coalition about monitoring the corrosion level in the plant’s dry-well liner and the former sand-bed region.

If the ASLB rules favorably on the coalition’s contention, that could lead to a full public hearing in September. That would push the earliest possible relicensing back to January 2008, Sheehan has said.

AmerGen Energy Co., the plant’s owner, has filed a motion that seeks to have the coalition’s contention dismissed.

Critics of the plant’s relicensing contend that Oyster Creek’s spent fuel rods are a target for terrorists. The rods are stored in two areas at the plant – in an elevated pool in the reactor building and in dry cask storage units at ground level. The elevated fuel rod pool reached capacity several years ago.

“The NRC has the responsibility to answer the concerns,” Kelly said. “I don’t have the expertise to sit here today and guarantee anything. If the NRC does their job and due diligence, I will accept their decision.”