Nuclear Power Industry
Wins First Site Approval in 30 Years
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2007/2007-03-09-04.asp
WASHINGTON, DC, March 9, 2007 (ENS) - The
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thursday approved the first Early Site Permit for
a nuclear power plant - demonstrating a new and previously untested licensing
process for locating new nuclear plants in the United States. Critics say new
nuclear plants are not needed if energy conservation is implemented.
The approval - for Exelon
Generation Company's Clinton site, in central Illinois - was hailed by U.S.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman as "a major milestone" in the Bush
administration's plan to expand the use of nuclear power.
"NRC approval of the
Clinton Early Site Permit represents a major accomplishment in this
administrationÕs effort to address the barriers and stimulate deployment of new
nuclear power plants in the United States," Bodman said.
"By demonstrating
effectiveness and predictability in the licensing process, utilities will have
the information they need to make sound business decisions that can lead to the
construction of new nuclear power plants," he said.
The Early Site Permit
resolves environmental, site suitability and emergency planning issues with
regard to the possible construction and operation of a new nuclear plant next
to the Clinton Power Station in Clinton, Illinois. Exelon has not decided to
move forward with building a new nuclear plant.
The Clinton Power Station is located in central Illinois with
Bloomington/Normal to the north, Champaign/Urbana to the east, and Decatur to
the south. Built on a 14,300-acre site, it began operating in 1987. (Photo © Kirby Vandervort)The Early
Site Permit process was established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC,
in 1989 for utilities to complete the site and environmental evaluations before
a decision is made to build a nuclear plant.
Once issued, the permit
is valid for 20 years and can be used in conjunction with a subsequent combined
Construction and Operating License application.
"This the last major
hurdle in the process. We are very pleased with how the early site permit
process has progressed," said Marilyn Kray, Exelon Nuclear vice president
of project manager, who has piloted the process for the company.
Exelon is now waiting for
the NRC staff to issue the permit, which must occur within 10 days of the
commission's vote.
The 20 year permit allows
Exelon to "bank" the site for a possible power plant, said Kray, but
it does not authorize construction of a new plant. Should the company decide to
build a power plant, it would need to apply for a combined operating license.
"Certain conditions
would have to fall into place before Exelon would consider building a plant - a
workable solution to the spent fuel disposal problem; community acceptance; the
right reactor technology; and the economics must be favorable," Kray said.
This Early Site Permit
approval is the culmination of a four year, cost shared project between the
Department of Energy and the Exelon Corporation, based in Chicago.
Exelon submitted their
Early Site Permit application, which includes a Site Safety Analysis Report, an
Environmental Report, and an Emergency Plan, to the NRC in September 2003.
The NRC issued the Final
Safety Evaluation Report in May 2006, the Final Environmental Impact Statement
in July 2006, and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings concluded in
early November 2006.
In addition to its
partnership with Exelon, the Energy Department has partnered with two other
companies, Entergy and Dominion Energy, to demonstrate the process.
A decision on the Entergy
Grand Gulf Early Site Permit is expected within the month, and later this year
the decision on DominionÕs North Anna Early Site Permit is expected.
The NRC vote supports the
Energy Department's Nuclear Power 2010 program, a joint government-industry
cost shared effort to identify sites for new nuclear power plants; develop and
bring to market advanced nuclear plant technologies; evaluate the business case
for building new nuclear power plants and; demonstrate untested regulatory
processes.
Energy
Secretary Samuel Bodman testifies before the House Appropriations Subcommittee
on Energy, Water, and Related Agencies about the department's FYÕ08 budget
request (Photo courtesy DOE)President
Bush's Fiscal Year 2008 budget requests $874.2 million, a 38.2 percent increase
over the FY'07 request, for theOffice of Nuclear Energy.
Of that request, $114
million has been allocated to complete the remaining Early Site Permit
demonstration projects and continue the New Nuclear Plant Licensing
Demonstration projects.
Paul Leventhal, the
long-time head of the nongovernmental Nuclear Control Institute, NCI, says
there is "ample evidence" that "conservation alone could
eliminate the need for the existing fleet of nuclear power plants, let alone new
ones."
Before establishing NCI,
based in Washington, DC, Leventhal held senior staff positions in the U.S.
Senate on nuclear power and proliferation issues. He served as co-director of
the bipartisan Senate Special Investigation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear
Accident, and helped to draft the 1974 legislation that established the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
"The public has yet
to be heard from," said Leventhal. "The NRC is going to grant permits
at existing sites assuming that these commmunities have already accepted
nuclear power plants. If there was an accident, that could change
overnight."
He is critical of the
NRC's close working relationship with the nuclear industry, saying that the
"NRC could be perceived as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Nuclear Energy
Institute," a nuclear industry association.
Nuclear Energy
InstituteÕs president and chief executive officer, Frank "Skip"
Bowman, said Thursday, "History will record this day as one of the early
milestones in the era of new nuclear power plant construction in the United
States. Approval of the Clinton early site permit application by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission – the first such siting permit in the agencyÕs
history – is a momentous occurrence."
"Site pre-approval
provided through the early site permit process holds the potential to shorten
the time required to bring a new nuclear power plant to market," said
Bowman.
"As our nation seeks
to increase its reliance on nuclear energy to strengthen U.S. energy diversity
and security with a reliable electricity source that keeps the air clean,
todayÕs action marks a promising day for a brighter energy future for the
American people," he said.
Leventhal said, "The
nuclear renaissance is in the eyes of the beholder. The administration has tried
to build a solid case for nuclear power based on global warming and electricity
needs beyond current capacity." But, in his view, the risks outweigh the
benefits.
"I'm not
anti-nuclear, and I have taken a neutral position on nuclear power,"
Leventhal said. "It can be accpetable if it is operated as safely as
humanly possible."
"But nuclear power
plants in today's security environment should be regarded as strategic targets
in the United States with the fullest protection the federal government can provide,"
Leventhal said. "They should be protected with ground to air missiles
integrated into both the military and the Federal Aviation Administration
systems with careful command and control systems. There may have to be
permanent troops or special federal protection forces."
But Leventhal says the
industry opposes the federal government stepping in because it might alarm the
public into recognizing that nuclear power plants are vulnerable. "So you
have nuclear power plants protected by rent-a-cops."
Energy Secretary Bodman
characterizes nuclear power as "clean" and "safe" and says
"nuclear power will play an increasingly important role as the demand for
electricity grows worldwide."
"Government's role
is to create an environment in which clean energy can flourish, and I'm proud
to say that we're helping doing just that," said Bodman Thursday.
But Leventhal is not
reassured. "There's lots of loosey, goosey stuff that makes plants
vulnerable to attack," he said. "The public doesn't want to know,
they're in denial."
"We cannot today
protect against an attack like 911," Leventhal warned. "If plants are
hit in the big metropolitan areas such as Chicago or New York, the effects
would be catastrophic, rendering these cities uninhabitable."