Suit seeks to halt PPL nuke plans

SCRANTON – Alleging regulatory agencies failed to fully address environmental concerns, the head of a nuclear power watchdog group has filed a federal lawsuit that seeks to prevent PPL from increasing the generation capacity of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station.

The suit, filed Wednesday by Eric Epstein of the Harrisburg-based group Three Mile Island Alert, seeks to halt all action by PPL until the company addresses “unresolved water use, water safety and interagency issues.”

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission in January approved PPL’s license application to operate the nuclear power plant in Salem Township, which consists of two reactors. It also approved a request to increase the power output of the reactors by 13 percent. The upgrade is scheduled to be complete at both units by 2010.

The modifications will result in an increased water draw from the Susquehanna River. The NRC and Susquehanna River Basin Commission each determined the changes would not have a significant environmental impact on the river.

Epstein’s suit, which he wrote and filed himself, challenges that determination. He claims various regulatory agencies passed off responsibility for investigating the environmental impact among each other. That resulted in an incomplete investigation.

“The SRBC and the NRC ignored most of the environmental and technical issues relating to water use, water chemistry and public health and safety raised by Mr. Epstein,” the suit says. “Mr. Epstein has demonstrated that aging equipment coupled with water shortages, water chemistry or invasive aquatic species could create safety challenges at the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station over the life of the license extension.”

Epstein initially challenged the license approval and increase in power generation through the NRC and the SRBC. Both agencies rejected his appeals. His lawsuit challenges those rejections and asks a federal judge to issue an injunction so that PPL’s applications can be more thoroughly reviewed.

“Certainly all parties can agree that unintentionally destabilizing a sensitive and important aquatic asset is not in the public interest and all sensible and proactive measures should be deployed to mitigate against this scenario,” the suit says. “It is imperative that other agencies, or at least a state or federal agency, review the water use, water safety and interagency issues identified.”