The Nuclear Regulatory Commission told a federal appeals court yesterday that approving the country's first new reactors since 1978 without fully incorporating lessons learned from Japan's nuclear crisis did not violate federal environmental law.

The commission voted 4 to 1 in February to approve the construction of two nuclear reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant complex about 170 miles east of Atlanta. A consortium of utilities led by Southern Co. is now building the units, the first new nuclear construction in the United States in more than three decades (Greenwire, Feb. 9).

Environmentalists are challenging NRC's decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and have accused the agency of ignoring new safety information stemming from the nuclear crisis that erupted in Japan last year.

Eight groups, including the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, say NRC failed to apply recommendations from an expert panel within NRC that reviewed the Japanese accident before approving the license and therefore violated the National Environmental Policy Act.

The March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami crippled Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex, causing core meltdown in three reactors, radiological release and multiple evacuations.

The task force that reviewed the accident said NRC must ensure that U.S. reactors have enough backup power to withstand flooding, earthquakes and other natural disasters, and that spent fuel pools and vents on the reactors are adequately designed and secure (Greenwire, June 27, 2011).

The groups aligned with outgoing NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, who cast the dissenting vote opposing the Vogtle reactor license because he said the agency didn't have a "binding" agreement with the companies to ensure they will make safety upgrades related to the Japanese disaster.

Jaczko's colleagues -- two Democrats and two Republicans -- approved the license.

But NRC told the court in a filing yesterday that the groups' objections were too vague and that the task force recommendations don't necessarily trigger changes under NEPA that would alter the Vogtle license.

An NRC licensing board refused to hear the groups' concerns last year because they failed to bring "sufficient information and expertise to a hearing to make it a worthwhile commitment of scarce adjudicatory resources," the NRC added.

"This decision was not an abuse of discretion, but was correct and reasonable," the commission wrote. "Petitioners' proposed contention mentions seismic, flood, and environmental justice issues but did not provide specific facts underlying those claims or expert evidence supporting them."

The case could be heard this fall.