July 16, 2025: The Water Cost of Electricity on the Susquehanna River

May 15, 2025: Data Centers and Nuclear Power on the Susquehanna River: More Questions than Answers

Sep 29, 2024: The case against restarting Three Mile Island’s Unit-1

Radioactive: The Women of Three Mile Island

Did you catch "The Meltdown: Three Mile Island" on Netflix?
TMI remains a danger and TMIA is working hard to ensure the safety of our communities and the surrounding areas.
Learn more on this site and support our efforts. Join TMIA. To contact the TMIA office, call 717-233-7897.

    

Environmentalists' Expert Witness Warns NRC of Yet More Cracking in Palisades Atomic Reactor's Primary Coolant System: Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen Fears Steam Generator Tubes and Tube Sheets May Fail Within Six Months

 NEWS FROM BEYOND NUCLEAR


  For immediate release 

  Contact: Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist, Beyond Nuclear, Kalamazoo, MI, (240) 462-3216, kevin@beyondnuclear.org

  Michael Keegan, chair, Don’t Waste Michigan, Monroe, MI, mkeeganj@comcast.net

Terry Lodge, attorney, Toledo, OH, tjlodge50@yahoo.com

Wallace Taylor, attorney, Cedar Rapids, IA, wtaylor784@aol.com

Arnie Gundersen, nuclear engineer/expert witness, (802) 238-4452

 

Environmentalists' Expert Witness Warns NRC of Yet More Cracking in Palisades Atomic Reactor's Primary Coolant System

Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen Fears Steam Generator Tubes and Tube Sheets May Fail Within Six Months

COVERT TWP., MI and WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPTEMBER 10, 2025--Arnold Gundersen, a nuclear engineer with more than 50 years of relevant experience who serves as expert witness for an environmental coalition opposing Holtec International’s unprecedented restart of the previously closed Palisades atomic reactor, has sent an open letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). 

Gundersen invoked the safety engineers who warned in 1986 that the cold temperature launch of the Space Shuttle Challenger was not safe, but were nonetheless overruled by NASA superiors more concerned about meeting the arbitrary launch schedule, with catastrophic consequences.

Gundersen wrote “Never in my 54-year professional career have I been more concerned about the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary than I am about the condition of Palisades.”

Gundersen added: “My concern initially started with the condition of the steam generators, but new Holtec relief requests have identified significant PWSCC [Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking] at eight other locations within the reactor coolant system.  The loss of the reactor coolant pressure boundary can lead to previously unimaginable impacts to the general public. I respectfully suggest that the ACRS imagine what could happen in the event of primary coolant system failure or a steam generator tube failure due to years of improper wet layup by Holtec at Palisades.  I pray that you will thoroughly question the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary caused by failure to meet Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) primary and secondary water chemistry standards before allowing Palisades to restart and set a new licensing precedent.”

The letter warns against inadequate analysis of steam generator tube degradation, the safety risk that has dominated attention for the past year. But Gundersen also warns about an additional degradation mechanism, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC), only recently revealed by Holtec, which appears to have impacted multiple locations in Palisades’ Primary Coolant System, also vitally important for safety.

Gundersen added “[t]his is a generic issue, as there are other decommissioned reactors now in the queue to be resurrected that have also not maintained adequate water chemistry during closure.”

Constellation Energy at Three Mile Island Unit 1 in Pennsylvania, and NextEra at Duane Arnold in Iowa, are following Palisades’ closed reactor restart precedent.

As cited by the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), “Wet layup consists of filling the steam generator completely with water that has been treated with hydrazine and ammonium hydroxide. The high steam generator level minimizes the amount of secondary metal that [sic] exposed to air during cold shutdown.” (United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Technical Training Center, Combustion Engineering Technology Cross Training Course Systems Manual at 2.3.9.1, Sept. 19, 2002, ADAMS Accession No. ML022840127; see footnote #59, on Page 14, of ASLB’s August 5, 2025 ruling.)

Gundersen has dubbed Holtec’s 2022-2024 neglect of such basic safety maintenance as taking precautions against corrosive chemical attack on vulnerable steam generator tubes as a “rookie error” that risks a reactor core meltdown, if enough cracked tubes fail in rapid, cascading succession.

Gundersen has warned the ACRS that “[i]t is not clear that the steam generator (SG) tubes or the SG tube sheet will survive for even half a year after Palisades’ ‘resurrection’ — Holtec’s word choice — is complete.” 

Gundersen also warned that in the event of even a single steam generator tube’s failure, “Palisades’ 60-year old design would use Atmospheric Dumps to discharge hazardous radioactivity directly into the atmosphere.”

Gundersen added: “Now, new information of degradation has become available. In addition to all the steam generator tube and tube sheet indications, on August 20, 2025 Holtec filed a series of relief requests (ML25232A195) indicating that it has discovered Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC) in numerous dissimilar metal welds in Palisades’ Primary Coolant System. The affected welds include indications in two hot leg welds, four cold leg welds and two pressurizer welds.”

Gundersen concluded: “Holtec has previously admitted that it did not analyze either primary or secondary water chemistry at Palisades for two years and that it was not in compliance with EPRI water quality guidelines.  Clearly the absence of adequate water chemistry control at Palisades and its effect on the primary coolant system boundary are issues that deserve the thorough attention of the ACRS before allowing Palisades to restart.” 

NRC staff and ASLB panels have already signed off on most, although not all, required approvals for Holtec to restart Palisades, perhaps yet this year the company still claims. This is despite the environmental coalition’s efforts to challenge safety shortcomings at every twist and turn in the ASLB proceedings for the past two years. ACRS sign off is among the very last hurdles before Holtec’s Palisades restart is officially approved by NRC, as is final approval by the NRC Commissioners. The agency’s normally five — but currently three — directors have yet to rule on the environmental coalition’s many appeals of adverse ASLB rulings, regarding multiple Holtec License Amendment Requests, an Exemption Request, a License Transfer Request, and the adequacy of agency environmental reviews, all of which the coalition has contested. 

The intervening coalition includes Beyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future, Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago, and Three Mile Island Alert of Pennsylvania. The coalition’s co-counsel are Terry Lodge of Toledo, Ohio, and Wallace Taylor of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Dr. Mark Z. Jacobson, Stanford University professor and author of a large number of technical publications on reducing greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming and climate change, also serves as an environmental coalition expert witness opposed to Holtec’s Palisades restart scheme.

For more information, see Beyond Nuclear’s “Newest Nuke Nightmares at Palisades, 2022 to Present” — a one-stop-shop of web posts dating back to April 2022, when Holtec CEO Krishna Singh first floated “Small Modular Reactor” construction and operation at Palisades, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer first floated restarting the closed-for-good reactor.

###
By admin at Thu, 09/11/2025 - 15:35

Can Trump team meet ambitious nuclear energy deadlines?

Can Trump team meet ambitious nuclear energy deadlines.docx

FileCan Trump team meet ambitious nuclear energy deadlines.docx

By admin at Fri, 09/05/2025 - 15:25

SUN DAY Campaign: 91% of New U.S. Electrical Generating Capacity in the First Half of 2025 Was Solar + Wind. Solar Has Held the Lead for 22 Consecutive Months as Renewables Continue to Grow

SUN DAY CAMPAIGN  
8606 Greenwood Avenue, Suite #2; Takoma Park, MD 20912-6656  

   

Brief News Update & Analysis  

91% OF NEW U.S. ELECTRICAL CAPACITY
IN THE FIRST HALF OF 2025 WAS SOLAR AND WIND
 
IN JUNE, SOLAR WAS THE LARGEST SOURCE 
OF NEW GENERATING CAPACITY 
FOR THE 22nd CONSECUTIVE MONTH
 
RENEWABLES ON TRACK TO EXCEED 40% OF TOTAL
GENERATING CAPACITY WITHIN THREE YEARS

 

For Release:  Wednesday, September 3, 2025 

Contact:         Ken Bossong, 301-588-4741

 
Washington DC – A review by the SUN DAY Campaign of data just released by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) reveals that the combination of solar and wind accounted for 91% of new U.S. electrical generating capacity added in the first half of 2025. In June, solar alone provided 82% of new capacity, making it the 22nd consecutive month in which solar has held the lead among all energy sources.
 
 
Solar was 82% of new generating capacity in June and 75% in the first half of 2025:
 
In its latest monthly “Energy Infrastructure Update” report (with data through June 30, 2025), FERC says 63 “units” of solar totaling 2,439 megawatts (MW) were placed into service in June, accounting for over 81.5% of all new generating capacity added during the month.
 
The new facilities include six solar farms with capacities of 199-MW or more: the 417.7-MW Ash Creek Solar Project and the 206.1-MW Mercury Solar & Storage Project both in Hill County, TX; the 300-MW Box Canyon Solar Project in Pinal County, AZ; the 250-MW Morris Solar Project in Adair County, MO; the 200.0-MW Big Star Solar & Storage Project in Bastrop County, TX; and the 199.0-MW Speedway Solar Project in Shelby County, IN.
 
The 14,567-MW of utility-scale (i.e., >1-MW) solar added during the first six months of 2025 was almost three-quarters (74.9%) of the total new capacity placed into service by all sources.
 
Solar has now been the largest source of new generating capacity added each month for twenty-two consecutive months: September 2023 – June 2025. During that period, total utility-scale solar capacity grew from 91.82 gigawatts (GW) to 151.73-GW. No other energy source added anything close to that amount of new capacity. Wind, for example, expanded by 10.53-GW while natural gas increased by just 2.73-GW.
 
 
Solar, wind and biomass were over 91% of new capacity added in the first half of 2025:
 
Between January and June, new wind has provided 3,139-MW of capacity additions – almost double the new capacity provided by natural gas (1,727-MW). Wind thus accounted for 16.1% of all new capacity added during the first six months of 2025. In June alone, the 144.0-MW Crossover Wind Project in Cross County, AR came on-line along with the 58.8-MW Moscow Wind Power Project in Somerset County, ME.
 
For the first half of 2025, the combination of solar and wind (plus 3-MW of biomass) was 91.04% of new capacity while natural gas provided just 8.88%; the balance came from oil (14-MW).
 
 
Solar + wind are almost a quarter of U.S. utility-scale generating capacity; all renewables combined are nearly a third:
 
Utility-scale solar’s share of total installed capacity of (11.34%) is now almost equal to that of wind (11.83%). Taken together, they constitute nearly one-fourth (23.17%) of the U.S.’s total available installed utility-scale generating capacity.
 
Moreover, at least 25-30% of U.S. solar capacity is in the form of small-scale (e.g., rooftop) systems that are not reflected in FERC’s data. [1] Including that additional solar capacity would bring the share provided by solar + wind to more than a quarter of the nation’s total.
 
With the inclusion of hydropower (7.62%), biomass (1.07%) and geothermal (0.31%), renewables currently claim a 32.17% share of total U.S. utility-scale generating capacity. If small-scale solar capacity is included, renewables are now about one-third of total U.S. generating capacity.
 
 
Solar remains on track to become the second largest source of U.S. generating capacity:
 
FERC reports that net “high probability” additions of solar between July 2025 and June 2028 total 92,660-MW – an amount more than four times the forecast net “high probability” additions for wind (23,136-MW), the second fastest growing resource. Notably, FERC’s most recent three-year forecasts for growth by both solar and wind are the highest they have been thus far in 2025.
 
FERC also foresees net growth for hydropower (583-MW) and geothermal (92-MW) but a decrease of 131-MW in biomass capacity.
 
Taken together, the net new “high probability” capacity additions by all renewable energy sources over the next three years - i.e., the bulk of the Trump Administration’s remaining time in office - would total 116,340-MW.  
 
On the other hand, there is no new nuclear capacity in FERC’s three-year forecast while coal and oil are projected to contract by 25,017-MW and 1,572-MW respectively. Natural gas capacity would expand by 8,748-MW.
 
Adjusting for the different capacity factors of gas (59.7%), wind (34.3%), and utility-scale solar (23.4%), electricity generated by the projected new solar capacity to be added in the coming three years would be more than four times greater than that produced by the new natural gas capacity while the electrical output by the new wind capacity would be 52% more than that by gas. [2]
 
If FERC’s current “high probability” additions materialize, by July 1, 2028, solar will account for over one-sixth (17.1%) of the nation’s installed utility-scale generating capacity. Wind would provide an additional one-eighth (12.6%) of the total. Thus, each would be greater than coal (12.1%) and substantially more than either nuclear power or hydropower (7.3% and 7.1% respectively).
 
Assuming current growth rates continue, the installed capacity of utility-scale solar is likely to surpass that of wind capacity this year and exceed that of coal by the end of next year. Installed solar capacity is already almost 50% greater than that of nuclear power. Thus, within two years, solar should be in second place for installed generating capacity – behind only natural gas.
 
 
The combined capacities of all renewables, including small-scale solar, could overtake natural gas within three years:
 
The mix of all utility-scale renewables is now adding about two percentage points each year to its share of generating capacity. At that pace, by July 1, 2028, renewables would account for over three-eighths (38.1%) of total available installed utility-scale generating capacity - rapidly closing the gap with natural gas (40.0%). Solar and wind would constitute more than three-quarters of the installed capacity of renewable sources. If those trendlines continue, utility-scale renewable energy capacity should surpass that of natural gas in 2029 or sooner.
 
However, as noted, FERC’s data do not account for the capacity of small-scale solar systems. If that is factored in, within three years, total U.S. solar capacity (i.e., small-scale plus utility-scale) could approach 350-GW. In turn, the mix of all renewables would then be about 40% of total installed capacity - or more - while natural gas’ share would drop to about 38%.
 
Moreover, FERC reports that there may actually be as much as 230,770-MW of net new solar additions in the current three-year pipeline in addition to 68,627-MW of new wind, 7,923-MW of new hydropower, 202-MW of new geothermal, and 27-MW of new biomass. By contrast, net new natural gas capacity potentially in the three-year pipeline totals just 30,251-MW. Consequently, renewables’ share could be even greater by early summer 2028.
 
 
Evidence of the energy transition grows stronger as renewables’ share of generating capacity continues to increase while that of fossil fuels and nuclear power shrinks:
 
A year ago, the mix of all renewables accounted for 29.95% of total generating capacity. Solar alone was 8.99% while wind was 11.75%. Over the course of twelve months - i.e., by the end of June 2025 - renewables’ share had risen to 32.17% with solar at 11.34% and wind at 11.83%.
 
On the other hand, natural gas’ share had slipped from 43.32% to 42.34% as coal fell from 15.76% to 14.82% and oil dropped from 2.77% to 2.71%. Similarly, nuclear power’s share of generating capacity decreased from 8.04% to 7.80%.  
 
 
"Notwithstanding the hostility towards solar and wind shown by the Trump Administration and its Republican supporters in Congress, both technologies are moving full-speed ahead," noted the SUN DAY Campaign's executive director Ken Bossong. "In fact, FERC’s latest data suggest growth by renewables may actually be accelerating." 
  
# # # # # # # # #  
   
Sources:  
FERC's 7-page "Energy Infrastructure Update for June 2025" was posted on September 2, 2025. It can be found at: https://cms.ferc.gov/media/energy-infrastructure-update-june-2025.
 
For the information cited in this update, see the tables entitled "New Generation In-Service (New Build and Expansion)," "Total Available Installed Generating Capacity," and "Generation Capacity Additions and Retirements."
 
Notes:   
[1] In a September 12, 2023 news release, EIA stated: “More than one-third of U.S. solar power capacity is small-scale solar. … We expect small-scale solar capacity … will grow from 44-GW in June 2023 to 55-GW by the end of 2024.”
 
[2] Generating capacity is not the same as actual generation. Fossil fuels and nuclear power usually have higher "capacity factors" than do wind and solar. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports capacity factors in calendar year 2024 for nuclear power, combined-cycle natural gas plants and coal were 92.3%, 59.7%, and 42.6% respectively while those for wind and utility-scale solar PV were 34.3% and 23.4%. See Tables 6.07.A and 6.07.B in EIA's most recent "Electric Power Monthly" report. 

 
# # # # # # # # # 
   
The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1992 to support a rapid transition to 100% reliance on sustainable energy technologies as a cost-effective alternative to nuclear power and fossil fuels and as a solution to climate change.
By admin at Thu, 09/04/2025 - 15:48

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Initial Operator Licensing Examination Report 05000277/2025301 and 05000278/2025301

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Initial Operator Licensing Examination Report 05000277/2025301 and 05000278/2025301
 
ADAMS Accession No. ML25240A003
 
By admin at Fri, 08/29/2025 - 15:16

Westinghouse welcomes NRC's licensing extension

Westinghouse welcomes NRC's licensing extension

Wednesday, 27 August 2025
 
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has revised the duration of its licensing design certifications from 15 years to 40 years, with Westinghouse's AP1000 approval now extended to 2046.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission noted that the change means "companies applying to build and operate reactors will have more time to reference already-certified designs by GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy, NuScale Power, Westinghouse Electric Company, and a Korean consortium. This change maintains our focus on safety with less regulatory effort and gives designers more time to gather operating experience before asking to renew a certification".

Design certifications are licensing approvals showing that a generic nuclear power plant design passes regulatory and safety requirements and is suitable to be built in the USA. Individual projects still have to get the usual site-specific permissions. The change will be effective from 15 September.

The Westinghouse AP1000 gained its original design certification in 2006 so the extension means that the design remains licensed, which will help with the overall permissions process for any proposed new units in the USA.

Dan Lipman, President, Westinghouse Energy Systems, said: "The expansion of the AP1000 design certification to 40 years further positions the advanced AP1000 modular reactor as the leading solution to meet the bold vision of the US to have 10 large-scale reactors under construction by 2030. In addition, the extension establishes a long-term licensing path to deploy our AP1000 technology abroad by providing international regulators with an established design that has already met rigorous safety standards."

The NRC's full list of design certifications it has issued comprises:

* Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) - General Electric (GE) Nuclear Energy

* Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) - Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd.

* ABWR Design Certification Rule (DCR) Amendment - South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company

* System 80+ - Westinghouse Electric Company

* Advanced Passive 600 (AP600) - Westinghouse Electric Company

* Advanced Passive 1000 (AP1000) - Westinghouse Electric Company

* Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR) - GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy

* NuScale Small Modular Reactor (US600) - NuScale Power, LLC

By admin at Fri, 08/29/2025 - 15:14

Nukewatch Summer 2025 Quarterly Newsletter

Image description
 
 

The Summer 2025 edition of the Nukewatch Quarterly is now ready for viewing online! Click here to read the whole newsletter "cover to cover" on our website!



If you'd like to help keep Nukewatch going, please consider a small donation.
Donate

Uranium Found in Bones of Fallujah Survivors - U.S. Depleted Uranium Munitions Blamed

Image description

A new study reports that among people who returned to bombarded homes and neighborhoods in Fallujah, Iraq, following the 2003 U.S. bombardment and invasion, bone sampling detected uranium in the bones of 29% of study participants.

Read More

Follow us on Facebook and Instagram!
Facebook
   
Instagram
 

Our mailing address is:
Nukewatch
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, WI 54853
By admin at Tue, 08/26/2025 - 16:39

Heart of energy in Europe is not in Europe — This country hides 3,500,000 solar panels

Heart of energy in Europe is not in Europe — This country hides 3,500,000 solar panels

by Anke E.   August 22, 2025  in Energy


There is a country that is home to the world’s most ancient known human settlement, as well as one of the oldest sweets in the world. It has also been the center of many debates, for a reason you will understand soon. It also homes the heart of energy in Europe, but it is not in Europe. The country capitalizes on its 3,500,000 hidden solar panels. Not only is it one of the biggest facilities in the world, but it is also one of the most innovative and uniquely designed facilities in the world.

One of the world’s largest hidden solar facilities

Humans, as a species, are naturally wired to be competitive, even when we are striving towards a common goal. Many nations across the world have signed the Paris Agreement to showcase their dedication to mitigating the effects of climate change. However, this noble joint attempt has resulted in many countries competing to come out on top as global leaders in renewable energies.

Solar power has been at the lead in installed renewable capacity globally, especially as many countries have set their own goals of increasing installed solar capacity by 2030, as per the International Energy Agency. The reason for this is solar’s versatile applications, which include, but are not limited to:

  • Utility-scale plants
  • Small-scale residential applications
  • Small-scale commercial applications

There is one country that has piqued our interest, as it has one of the biggest solar facilities in the world, and the biggest in Europe, but the facility itself is not in Europe.

It is Europe’s largest facility, but it is not in Europe

This solar facility comprises a vast area of solar panels. It also houses a central control building for Kalyon Energy, which is extremely unique, as it is covered in a facade of reflective solar panels, hiding the entire building between Earth and sky. There are nearly 3.5 million solar panels spanning an area of nearly 20 million square meters. The facility’s construction kicked off in August 2020, and within three years, it reached full operational capacity.

This impressive facility is called Kalyon Karapınar Solar Power Plant, and is located in the desert region of Karapınar, Turkey. This is where debate always starts. Turkey is geographically situated in both Europe and Asia; however, Karapınar is in Asia, more specifically the central region of Anatolia, as per Britannica. This marks Asia as a “top dog” in solar capacity, as we recall that China has carpeted the mountains in solar panels.

The heart of energy is about so much more than just power

Now, Kalyon Karapınar is massive and powerful. According to Kalyon’s website, the facility produces almost 3 billion kWh of power annually, which is enough clean energy for 2 million people. It has also significantly boosted Türkiye’s solar energy capacity by 15%. This capacity is reportedly the equivalent of removing nearly 1.7 million annual carbon emissions.

Additional unique features of the facility

  • The building is strategically situated to avoid shading of the solar panels
  • Its multipurpose hall and cafeteria are a hub for collaboration and learning
  • Sports a courtyard with low-maintenance native plants
  • The interior is significantly cooler than the surrounding harsh climate
  • The top facade of the courtyard is also covered with plants, boosting sustainability

The Kalyon Karapınar Solar Power Plant reminds us of the importance of integrating holistic and sustainable spaces into advanced renewable energy facilities. This unique and innovative facility brings the entire country, as well as Asia and Europe, one step closer to a more eco-friendly, sustainable power capacity. However, Asia has proven its dedication to remaining on top, especially as this Asian country has revealed the mother of all renewable plants. Competition is tough; thankfully, there is a bigger picture to keep in mind.

Disclaimer: Our coverage of events affecting companies is purely informative and descriptive. Under no circumstances does it seek to promote an opinion or create a trend, nor can it be taken as investment advice or a recommendation of any kind

By admin at Sat, 08/23/2025 - 23:30

Trump’s nuclear policy favors startups, widening industry rifts - E&E News by POLITICO

Trump’s nuclear policy favors startups, widening industry rifts

By Francisco "A.J." Camacho | 08/21/2025 06:38 AM EDT
Eight of 10 companies in a Department of Energy reactor program were founded in the San Francisco Bay Area or have tech veterans in executive positions.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and President Donald Trump listen in the Oval Office.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (second from right) speaks as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum (third from right) listens after President Donald Trump signed an executive order regarding nuclear energy in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on May 23. Samuel Corum/Sipa USA


The list of companies participating in the Department of Energy’s new nuclear reactor pilot program is the latest illustration of a growing divide in the industry, which is only intensifying as the Trump administration takes more strident action to boost the technology.

Last week, DOE chose 10 small nuclear reactor developers to compete for safety design approvals, aiming to advance the technology quickly and have at least three new pilot plants operating by July 4, 2026. Participants included startups like Terrestrial Energy and Aalo Atomics, but notably absent were established nuclear developers such as Westinghouse Nuclear and GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy.

President Donald Trump signed executive orders in May that set the program in motion. The orders also called for an “expedited pathway to approve reactor designs” that had been tested and certified either by DOE or the Defense Department. Under the Trump order, safety designs for new reactors approved by the two agencies could not be revisited by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Around the same time, a staffer affiliated with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency instructed the NRC to give “rubber-stamp” approval of reactor designs tested by DOE.

Industry watchers say the pilot program participants — companies that generally have less experience and have roots in Silicon Valley — are also more likely to support Trump’s shakeup at the NRC. Indeed, three of the pilot program participants have sued the NRC, asserting it should not have jurisdiction over some small reactors.

In contrast, the older and more experienced firms are more apprehensive about the instability stemming from the Trump administration’s overhaul.

“The companies with actual nuclear reactor experience that have built actual operating nuclear reactors are the ones that have been staying away and that value the regulator,” said Allison Macfarlane, a former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who is now director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia.

Participants in the pilot program believe there is room for improvement in the nuclear regulatory process. They characterize the administration’s actions as a positive way to speed up future license applications.

“This is for a pilot reactor. This is to collect data, demonstrate systems. This is not for a commercial plant,” Simon Irish, CEO of Terrestrial Energy, said of the pilot program. Terrestrial is a North Carolina-based developer of molten-salt reactor technology.

“The risk here is a misunderstanding of what the regulatory process is in the United States,” Irish continued. Critics of the administration’s actions, he added, “just see change. They go, ‘Change. Well, it’s going to compromise reactor safety.’”

Firms not in the pilot program still generally express support for the administration’s goals in public.

“We fully support the program’s intent, and the broader goals outlined in the president’s executive order,” said X-energy, a Maryland-based startup partnering with Amazon and Dow Chemical on developing small nuclear reactors, in a statement. X-energy chose not to apply for the program.

But in private, better-established companies that steered away from the pilot program are concerned that sweeping changes to the regulatory process might erode public trust in new nuclear technology. And that could have broader ramifications for future deployment.

“When I look back at the clients that I have, most of them are saying, ‘Yeah, we’re comfortable with the NRC,’” said Jeffrey Merrifield, an attorney with Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman and a former NRC commissioner.

Silicon Valley DNA

Participants in the DOE program share Silicon Valley DNA. Eight of the 10 companies were founded in the San Francisco Bay Area or have tech industry veterans in executive positions.

Macfarlane says the Trump administration has exaggerated this divide by listening primarily to Silicon Valley startups new to the nuclear industry. That includes companies with close ties to politically powerful tech entrepreneurs such as venture capitalist Peter Thiel and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Both boast close ties to the White House.

Thiel, an influential Trump backer, is helping to finance a California-based uranium enrichment startup called General Matter. He’s long pushed for a speedier deployment of cutting-edge nuclear technology. Altman was board chair at the advanced nuclear company Oklo until he stepped aside in April. Oklo has cultivated close ties to the White House since January.

Oklo was one of the companies chosen for the pilot program.

“I think these nuke bros have gotten the ear of the Trump administration, and they’ve muscled their way into power,” Macfarlane said.

Administration officials also acknowledge the division their policies create within the industry.

Jeff Waksman, acting assistant secretary of the Army for installations, energy and environment, said in July that he expects the Energy Department to be easier for first-of-a-kind reactor developers to work with.

Michael Goff, deputy assistant secretary for DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy, said where a company is in the process of getting a nuclear license probably shapes their view of what regulatory path to pursue.

“I wouldn’t expect a company — TerraPower, X-energy — that has submitted construction permits to the NRC and has been given really aggressive turnaround times … to change and go use a DOE authorization process,” Goff said at a July event at the National Press Club.

DOE and Pentagon authorizations would be alternatives to the traditional NRC process under Trump’s May orders.

But Macfarlane thinks that mixing unseasoned startups and a politically motivated DOE without independent expert review could lead to disastrous consequences. An accident, she added, could sour public opinion and political will and set the industry back by decades.

Goff with DOE insists that the agency has and will continue to ensure the safety of projects under its supervision.

“The Department of Energy does authorize reactors as well for the Department of Energy’s use,” Goff said. “When we look at our authorization process compared to the NRC licensing process, they’re very similar.”

By admin at Fri, 08/22/2025 - 15:31

NRC to Discuss Oyster Creek License Termination Plan, Gather Public Comments during Sept. 17 Meeting

Nuclear Regulatory Commission - News Release
No: 25-047 August 15, 2025
CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

NRC to Discuss Oyster Creek License Termination Plan,
Gather Public Comments during Sept. 17 Meeting

 
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a hybrid meeting on September 17 to describe the license termination process and to accept comments on the license termination plan for the remaining cleanup activities for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in Forked River, New Jersey.
 
The meeting is scheduled from 6-8:30 p.m. Eastern time at the Lacey Township Municipal Building, 818 Lacey Rd in Forked River. The public can also participate via Microsoft Teams; details will be available on the NRC’s public meeting schedule.
 
The license termination plan was submitted in August 2024 and supplemented through May 2025 by Holtec Decommissioning International, the company performing the decommissioning. The plan addresses the remaining dismantlement activities, including planned demolition of building structures and removal of equipment, and remediation of the remaining residual radioactivity to a level that complies with NRC criteria. Under the regulations, the plan must be submitted to the NRC at least two years prior to the planned license termination.
 
The NRC staff accepted HDI’s plan and subsequent supplements for a detailed technical review in June.
 
Written comments on the plan may be submitted through the federal rulemaking website, regulations.gov, under Docket ID NRC-2025-0907; or by mail to: Office of Administration, TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff. The deadline for filing comments is October 15.
 
Oyster Creek was a single-unit boiling-water reactor that came online in April 1969 and was permanently retired in September 2018. In July 2019, the NRC approved the transfer of the licenses for the plant and spent fuel facility from Exelon to Oyster Creek Environmental Protection LLC, for the purposes of decommissioning the facility. OCEP retains ownership of the plant, as well as control of the decommissioning trust fund for the site. HDI, as the licensed operator, is responsible for ensuring the decommissioning work is in compliance with all federal and state regulations.
 
By admin at Sat, 08/16/2025 - 08:37

Filed Peach Bottom Request for NRC Hearing & Intervention on 2024 GEIS

Greetings,

Attaching our placeholder for Beyond Nuclear & Sierra Club  NRC Hearing Request & Intervention for Peach Bottom subsequent license renewal environmental qualification with this bogus 2024 GEIS. 

 

It's some assurance that NRC and Constellation Energy sit tight until there's a ruling out of the DC Circuit, whatever and whenever that will be. 

Oral arguments are still unscheduled and the wait line is likely getting longer.  

 
Paul Gunter, Director
Reactor Oversight Project
Beyond Nuclear
By admin at Thu, 08/14/2025 - 13:10

Pages