711 F.3d 1382
Fed. Cir.2013Background
- NWPA imposes unconditional statutory obligation to begin accepting SNF by Jan 31, 1998; utilities paid for storage and DOE accepts SNF under Standard Contract; DOE faced repeated delays and sought to invoke Unavoidable Delays clause; D.C. Circuit held DOE's 1998 deadline unconditional and mandamus barred avoidance via delays; Nebraska Public Power en banc held the mandamus precludes use of the delays clause for liability and damages; Entergy suits allege DOE partial breach and seek damages; trial court struck the defense based on Nebraska Public Power, later citing Southern Nuclear; court en banc affirms denial of reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nebraska Public Power en banc bars use of the unavoidable delays clause for liability and damages. | Entergy argues the en banc Nebraska Public Power controls. | Government argues delays clause may limit damages but not liability. | Yes; en banc Nebraska Public Power precludes both liability and damages defenses. |
| Whether Southern Nuclear undermines Nebraska Public Power’s scope. | Entergy relies on Southern Nuclear to limit the ruling. | Government argues Southern Nuclear allows a damages- only defense. | No; Nebraska Public Power controls despite Southern Nuclear. |
| Whether the mandamus order in Northern States affects damages recovery. | Entergy claims mandamus supports damages recovery. | Government asserts mandamus only addressed liability. | Mandamus precludes reliance on unavoidable delays to excuse delinquency; affects liability and damages. |
| Whether the government’s attempt to separate liability from damages by using the delays clause is permissible. | Entergy contends separation cannot excuse breach. | Government seeks to reduce damages via delays. | Not permissible; delays clause cannot excuse statutory obligation or narrow liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, LLC v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 739 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (discusses waiving/unavailable delays defense under Nebraska Public Power framework)
- Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, LLC v. United States, 101 Fed. Cl. 464 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (addresses reconsideration and the scope of the defense to damages)
- Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. v. United States, 225 F.3d 1336 (1st Cir./Fed. Cir. 2000) (NWPA unconditional duty to begin disposal by 1998)
- Northern States Power Co. v. Dep’t of Energy, 128 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (mandamus directing unconditional obligation; respect for statutory duties)
- Indiana Michigan Power Co. v. Dep’t of Energy, 88 F.3d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (DC Circuit on statutory obligation to accept SNF by 1998)
- Nebraska Public Power Dist. v. United States, 590 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2010 (en banc)) (en banc: mandamus precludes unavoidable delays defense to liability and damages)
- Southern Nuclear Operating Co. v. United States, 637 F.3d 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (panel held delays defense waived after trial; discusses Neb. Public Power)
- Texas American Oil Corp. v. Dep’t of Energy, 44 F.3d 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1995 (en banc)) (en banc decision on contractual and statutory obligations)