Florida Power & Light, reiterating a 2002 commitment, said it would not help pay to build the site as long as progress is being made toward solving the nuclear waste problem.

“After carefully evaluating our goals, FPL has concluded that at this time PFS is no longer in our strategic interest and that for the foreseeable future we will put no further effort into developing that project,” said Lew Hay, CEO and president for the FPL Group in a letter to Hatch that was released by his office.

The Florida company's move could show a continue erosion of the PFS partnership. Last week, Southern Co. announced it was dropping out of PFS entirely and XCel Energy reaffirmed that it no longer needed the storage space and said it would not provide any money for construction.

Hatch said last week that the desertions indicated that PFS coalition was crumbling and that it was “the first nail in the coffin” for the plan.

PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said the plan was for the project to be developed in stages, and it is not a major setback if utilities that helped in licensing no longer want to be customers.

“We do have to have enough customers in order to make the project viable and start construction but there are other nuclear utilities out there in addition to the eight that are members” of PFS, Martin said.

Other PFS partners told The Tribune in September, after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted a license to the site, that licensing had taken too long and they no longer needed the storage space.

In a 2002 letter, six of the partners, including Southern and FPL, said they would not pay for construction as long as progress is being made on a permanent site in Yucca Mountain, Nev.

However, two of those companies that Hatch said have committed to stop backing PFS told The Associated Press this week they have no such plans.