nuclear-news

Is Edison planning to keep San Onofre nuclear plant permanently closed?

San Onofre layoffs raise questions about nuclear plant’s future LA Times, August 21, 2012 |  More than six months after a leaking steam generator tube prompted a complete shutdown of the San Onofre nuclear power plant, Southern California Edison officials announced plans to lay off nearly one-third of its workforce, leading many to wonder if the troubled plant would ever fully reopen. Continue reading →

August 22, 2012 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | 1 Comment

Fort Calhoun nuclear plant to be run by private company

Private firm to run nuclear plant Omaha.com By Erin Golden, 16 Aug 12,    BLAIR, Neb. — The Omaha Public Power District is planning to turn over control of Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station to a private company — a move the district’s board says is essential if the plant is to reopen.

In a meeting Thursday night at Blair City Hall, the board voted unanimously to allow OPPD officials to negotiate a 20-year contract with Exelon Corp. for day-to-day operations of the troubled plant, which is about 20 miles north of Omaha.

The plant’s reactor has been shut down since April 2011 because of concerns over Missouri River flooding and a series of safety violations. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which is overseeing the facility, has not set a restart date for Fort Calhoun.

One board member, John Green, said it has become clear that the NRC
was interested in outside management of the facility. “I’ve been convinced over the last few months … that we weren’t going to be able to open the plant without doing this,” Green said.

Gary Gates, the utility’s CEO, said the district has been considering looking to an outside company for some time and has been negotiating with Exelon for a month….. An NRC spokesman declined to comment….. http://www.omaha.com/article/20120817/NEWS/708179925/1685

August 17, 2012 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. Freezes All Nuclear Power Plant Licensing Decisions

most of the 19 reactor projects are already “essentially sidetracked by the huge problems facing the nuclear industry, including an inability to control runaway costs, and the availability of far less expensive energy alternatives.”

ongoing descent into fiasco of the bubble once known as ‘the nuclear renaissance,’”

WASHINGTON, DC, August 7, 2012 (ENS) – Federal nuclear regulators today froze at least 19 final reactor licensing decisions in response to a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit that spent nuclear fuel stored on-site at nuclear power plants “poses a dangerous, long-term health and environmental risk.”

In its ruling, the appeals court invalidated the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 2010 updates to the Waste Confidence Rule and also the Temporary Storage Rule and directed the commission to fully comply with federal law.

In response, the NRC today put a hold on nine construction and operating licenses, eight license renewals, one operating license, and one early site permit.

The court noted that, after decades of failure to site a permanent geologic repository, including 20 years of working on the now-abandoned Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada, the NRC “has no long-term plan other than hoping for a geologic repository.”

Therefore, it is possible that spent fuel will be stored at reactor sites “on a permanent basis,” the court said.

In its order today, the five-member NRC said, “Waste confidence undergirds certain agency licensing decisions, in particular new reactor licensing and reactor license renewal.”

“Because of the recent court ruling striking down our current waste confidence provisions, we are now considering all available options for resolving the waste confidence issue, which could include generic or site-specific NRC actions, or some combination of both,” the agency said. “We have not yet determined a course of action.”

“In recognition of our duties under the law, we will not issue licenses dependent upon the Waste Confidence Decision or the Temporary Storage Rule until the court’s remand is appropriately addressed,” the NRC said.

The NRC’s order extends only to final license issuance. “All licensing reviews and proceedings should continue to move forward,” the agency said.

The case was originally brought to the appeals court by four states led by New York State, as well as a native Indian community and several environmental groups.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman brought legal action against the NRC because of his concerns about Entergy’s relicensing application for two reactors at Indian Point power plant on the Hudson River at Buchanan, New York, just 24 miles north of New York City. Entergy’s license to operate Indian Point expires on September 28, 2013.

Schneiderman said today, “The storage of nuclear waste at nuclear power facilities poses long-term health and environmental risks, including the risk of leaks from spent fuel pools and fires. Despite this, the NRC has refused my repeated requests to address the serious risks of long-term, on-site storage of nuclear waste in Indian Point’s relicensing proceeding.” Continue reading →

August 9, 2012 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Budget of Nuclear Regulatory Commission – Incredible in the true sense of the word

Nuclear Agency Can’t Ensure Their Own Budget is Credible  http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2012/08/nuclear-agency-cant-ensure-their-own-budget-is-credible.html  By MIA STEINLE
The agency responsible for the nation’s nuclear weapons cannot ensure its own budget is credible, which may result in overspending, according to a federal investigative office.

The National Nuclear Security Administration “does not thoroughly review” the budget estimates it compiles from U.S. nuclear weapon sites before it draws up its annual budget request to Congress,  request to Congress, according to the Government Accountability Office    (GAO). The eight nuclear weapons sites are managed and operated by private contractors for the government.

Senior agency officials told the GAO that there is an “inherent trust” between the agency and the nuclear sites. Additionally, they said that a lack of “financial and personnel resources” mean a formal review of the budget is unrealistic.

The National Nuclear Security Administration is a semiautonomous agency within the Department of Energy. It is “responsible for the nation’s nuclear weapons, nonproliferation, and naval reactors programs,” according to the GAO. Its proposed budget for fiscal year 2011 is more than $11.5 billion, which is almost half of the entire Department of Energy budget.

Agency officials also told the GAO that they don’t follow a Department of Energy policy that requires a formal review of the budget because it expired in 2003. However, department officials told the GAO the policy still stands.

“By not adhering to these provisions,” the GAO said the agency “is reducing the creditability of its budget proposals.”
The GAO report comes at a time when rising costs of nuclear weapons projects are turning into “a serious liability for the [agency] as it tries to fend off criticism from Congress,” John Fleck reported for the Albuquerque Journal . He cited the proposed nuclear facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico as a point of contention. The GAO noted that the cost of this project has increased sixfold since its inception.

The GAO also cited the rising cost of the Uranium Processing Facility in Tennessee as a concern. Given the agency’s “record of weak management of major projects,” the GAO said improved oversight of the agency is necessary to ensure responsible spending.

August 8, 2012 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment