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.

    

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.”

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.
 

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

Swarm of jellyfish shuts nuclear power plant in France

‘Massive and unpredictable’ swarm entered filter drums that pull in water, Gravelines operator EDF says

https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/2025/07/31/fpl-florida-power-light-nuclear-safety-afraid-rate-hike-bill/

Florida nuclear plant workers were too afraid to report safety concerns, records show

Lawmakers said utility regulators should examine issues at the Florida Power & Light plant.
 

By

 
Published July 31

A culture of fear has persisted at a Florida nuclear power plant owned and operated by the state’s largest utility, according to a federal inspection report completed last fall.

Workers were hesitant to report safety concerns to upper management lest they face retaliation. Inspectors came to this conclusion after interviewing more than 75 employees at the St. Lucie plant, located on a barrier island an hour north of West Palm Beach.

It wasn’t the only sign of trouble. A federal database showed workers’ anonymous complaints of wrongdoing at the plant skyrocketed last year.

These records cap years of issues surrounding the nuclear operations of the state’s largest utility, Florida Power & Light, most of which have been disclosed in highly technical reports that have escaped public notice. State and federal regulators have identified issues at Florida Power & Light’s two aging nuclear plants, largely focused on safety culture.

The findings, compiled for the first time by the Tampa Bay Times and nonprofit Jacksonville news outlet The Tributary, come as the utility asks regulators for permission to hike Floridians’ electric rates by billions of dollars over the next four years. The utility’s proposed increase represents the largest rate hike request in American history, according to affordability advocates. Because of the issues at these plants, consumers may be footing a higher bill, according to one expert who testified before regulators.

During the federal inspection last year, interviews with employees revealed multiple incidents that were widely known at the plant in which “senior management’s reactions to individuals raising nuclear safety concerns could be perceived as retaliation,” the report reads.

These incidents resulted in employees being too scared to file anonymous complaints online in case their IP addresses were recorded, records show. Instead, they funneled concerns through a union representative.

The majority of staff in the operations department told regulators they were reluctant to raise safety concerns to any managers above their direct supervisors because of these incidents, during which they believed top officials had “the singular focus of furthering production goals.”

Edwin Lyman, a physicist and director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said he found these issues to be troubling.

“The reason why these inspections were initiated in the first place is the recognition of how important good safety culture is,” he said in an interview. “Without that, it’s a toxic environment that contributes to potential for a more serious event to occur.”

Inspectors also found two mechanical issues at St. Lucie that they said had been left unaddressed by plant management for years. One resulted in an emergency shutdown.

The company has defended its management in testimony to state regulators, characterizing its plants as a source of safe, reliable, clean and cost-effective power for the utility’s millions of Florida customers.

The utility cut about a quarter of the jobs at both plants in the last few years, according to testimony from an expert hired by the state’s consumer advocate.

Richard Polich, managing director at the utility consulting firm GDS Associates Inc., said those job reductions, coupled with instances of workers facing penalties after reporting safety problems, indicate the safety culture at the plants may be lacking because staff are forced to do more with less.

“As a result, mistakes can occur, tasks may not be performed in accordance with company procedures, and projects are rushed to be completed, all of which can lead to avoidable … outages, and imprudent fuel costs for customers,” said Polich, who holds degrees in nuclear and mechanical engineering, in testimony submitted to the Florida Public Service Commission.

Florida Power & Light has disputed Polich’s testimony in filings to state regulators, characterizing his comments as “based solely on conjecture” and “irrelevant and incompetent.”

Ellen Meyers, a spokesperson for the utility, said that while fewer people work at its two nuclear plants than in 2017, that was because of a restructuring that centralized more staff at the corporate level.

“FPL’s nuclear fleet has been safely providing low-cost, reliable and emissions-free electricity to Floridians for decades,” Meyers wrote in a statement. “St. Lucie and Turkey Point help FPL deliver reliable electricity from a diverse energy mix to keep customer bills as low as possible.”

The nuclear units at St. Lucie and Turkey Point have been rated as green by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, she said, the highest rating for safety performance. Meyers also pointed out that while federal inspectors found evidence of a chilled work environment at St. Lucie last year, they did not cite the company with any formal violations because the company was working to correct the issues.

Nuclear safety advocates have, however, pushed for federal regulators to do more to enforce safety rules, saying their current system regularly gives utility companies the benefit of the doubt.

Inspectors are discouraged from escalating their findings, making it difficult for any plant to get slapped with a rating worse than green, Lyman wrote in an email to the Times.

“I think that makes the Green findings less meaningful — essentially, there has been grade inflation," he said.

An aging fleet

Florida has a bumpy history with nuclear energy. In 2009, in a do-it-yourself approach to a fix designed to save money, Progress Energy workers at the Crystal River nuclear plant cracked the reactor’s containment building. The plant, now owned by Duke Energy, has been shut down ever since, and Duke customers pay a small fee on each bill so the company can recoup losses from that costly disaster.

That has left St. Lucie and Turkey Point, which is south of Miami, as the only two operational nuclear plants in the state. Combined, the plants make up about a fifth of the utility’s enormous electricity generation, which overall keeps the lights on for 12 million Floridians in 43 counties.

The plants are also aging.

They have been operating since the 1970s, which means keeping up with maintenance is crucial, experts said. The federal government recently renewed the license for Turkey Point until at least 2052. Florida Power & Light expects federal regulators to approve renewals that will allow two of St. Lucie’s reactors to operate for decades.

But throughout the past year, there were indications that workers at a Florida nuclear power plant were clamoring to get the attention of regulators.

The number of anonymous reports of wrongdoing at Florida Power & Light’s St. Lucie plant skyrocketed in 2024, according to data from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which processes the complaints. On-site workers filed far more reports there than at any other of the nation’s 54 nuclear power plants, according to a federal database.

The spike in anonymous reports from Lucie raised red flags, Lyman said.

The substance of those anonymous complaints is secret to protect employee confidentiality, the federal agency said. Federal regulators told Florida Power & Light it began its inspection of work-safety culture because of a spike in anonymous reports.

But the sheer number of them stands out: On-site workers at St. Lucie filed 20 allegations last year, almost double the second-highest plant nationwide and five times the number of complaints from the plant the previous year, according to the data.

Those complaints were among the highest single-year totals of any of the nation’s power plants since 2020. About 425 people work at the plant on an average day, according to a company fact sheet. The pace could be slowing this year, as workers submitted zero complaints through June, the most recent data available.

Gay Henson, the secretary-treasurer of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, said she dealt with a similar situation of a chilled work environment at a Tennessee Valley Authority nuclear site, where workers who raised concerns were fired. It took years, she said, for the damage to the work culture to be undone.

“Coming out of something like that for a workplace is really difficult for employees and the company, because they have to rebuild trust,” Henson said.

She said it’s noteworthy for federal regulators to make the determination of a chilled work environment, as they did at St. Lucie.

“You have to be especially diligent at a nuclear plant because there’s just so many moving parts,” she said. “Every little concern can become something big if you don’t take care of it early. And if people don’t feel like they can bring something forward, you have a worse situation where people go silent.”

Multiple leaders of the union representing St. Lucie employees, which is a chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, did not respond to texts, calls and emails over several weeks requesting more information about working conditions at the plant, both from reporters and through intermediaries.

The moderator of a Facebook group for St. Lucie plant employees, whose identity was unclear, declined a request from a Times reporter asking to speak with current or former workers.

“No reason to tell you why,” the person replied. “Not interested.”

But public records indicate that Florida Power & Light grappled with dysfunction at St. Lucie and Turkey Point for years.

Old problems arise again

In 2017, a regional vice president for the utility canceled a contract employee’s job after the worker raised a safety concern about how many radiation-detecting devices they needed to wear during refueling, resulting in a federal fine. In 2019, Florida Power & Light mechanics at Turkey Point doctored a work order, inspectors found, falsely saying that a maintenance safety check had been completed.

After two other instances that year of falsifying information at Turkey Point came to light — including technicians performing maintenance on the wrong charging pump, and then “deliberately” failing to notify a manager that they’d “inadvertently manipulated a pressure switch” — the plant got slapped with a $150,000 fine, inspection records show.

Federal regulators said the three 2019 issues “did not cause any actual consequences to the plant” but that the potential ramifications were “significant and concerning.”

“Because the violations are interrelated to a common cause involving integrity issues among multiple FPL staff and inadequate management oversight, these violations have been categorized as a Severity Level III problem,” a federal report reads, referencing a medium-level safety risk.

By 2020, Florida Power & Light had formed an internal task force to “determine the extent of the wide-spread operational performance decline” at both of its nuclear plants, according to a Public Service Commission audit of the utility’s nuclear operations.

Utility leaders became highly critical of their own employees.

Commission staffers wrote that their review of the minutes from the management meetings revealed “unvarnished and often harsh observations and conclusions of FPL’s most senior managers.”

At one point, management concluded that St. Lucie had “the worst operational focus in the [U.S. nuclear] industry.” The state audit further found that some of the plant’s issues included “management being inadequately engaged, allowing erosion of high standards, failing to model appropriate leadership behavior, and failing to deliver acceptable operational results.”

Plant shutdowns are also happening almost twice as often as the national average at St. Lucie and Turkey Point, an analysis of federal records shows. Those shutdowns were the subject of an audit by state regulators last year.

They concluded that Florida Power & Light had addressed the problems enough to start to see a downward trend.

The company’s internal review had helped right the ship. and “no similar issues regarding FPL’s safety culture appear to have arisen since 2019,” regulatory staff wrote.

Then, shutdowns spiked again throughout last year, in tandem with the rise in employees’ safety concerns at St. Lucie.

Now, the same state regulatory staff are noting that the problems identified by the audit have returned.

Suzanne Brownless, a lawyer for state utility regulators, told the commission in remarks filed in November that issues related to Florida Power & Light’s “philosophy with regard to receiving concerns … may have come up again.”

That means that after being largely confined to obscure reports for years, these problems may soon get more attention.

Florida Power & Light recently filed what affordability advocates said was the largest rate hike request in American history, asking state regulators to allow it to charge its customers nearly $10 billion more over the next four years. The utility, which is the biggest in the country, has said the hike is necessary to reinvest in the grid and keep up with Florida’s population growth.

As that case proceeds, the company’s operations will be scrutinized by lawyers and experts in Tallahassee. The state public advocate can ask the utility for internal documents that are usually confidential.

Those records can be used by lawyers to help them argue against the rate hikes. And if the case leads to public hearings, more details about the nuclear problems could spill into the open.

Who pays for mistakes?

Nuclear plant outages are a safety issue — and a financial one.

Last year, Polich, the consultant hired by the state’s consumer advocate, filed testimony to regulators that a series of outages at St. Lucie and Turkey Point from 2020 onward each had associated replacement power costs — that is, the cost of finding electricity to replace the lost output from the nuclear plants when they’re shut down.

For that reason, the cost of a single shutdown can exceed $1 million, he found. What remains a subject of debate is who should pick up that tab: Florida Power & Light or its millions of customers?

Polich argued that regulators on the Florida Public Service Commission should closely scrutinize the outages at St. Lucie and Turkey Point over the last several years, many of which Polich concluded were preventable and the utility’s responsibility.

Florida Power & Light has challenged some of Polich’s conclusions and asked state regulators to strike portions of his past testimony.

The state’s consumer advocate, called the Office of Public Counsel, fought back, accusing the company of trying to hide unflattering evidence.

Last year, the commission approved a settlement between the company and the Office of Public Counsel on a series of nuclear outages from 2020 through 2022 in which the utility agreed to refund customers $5 million. The settlement also subjects Florida Power & Light to another audit of its nuclear program to “ensure that FPL continues to meet and improve its high nuclear power plant operational standards.”

Polich’s entire testimony also became a part of the public record.

In a statement to reporters, Meyers, the utility spokesperson, said Florida Power & Light was not seeking “any replacement power costs associated with FPL’s nuclear operations” in its request to hike base rates this year. Utilities can recoup costs from customers in multiple ways.

But the commission could still take up questions about Florida Power & Light’s management of its nuclear plants when it’s weighing the utility’s request for a rate increase.

State lawmakers who closely follow utility policy hope it does.

Sen. Don Gaetz, a Panhandle Republican who unsuccessfully tried to pass a bill to curb the profits of Florida Power & Light and other utilities, said in a text that the commission “should consider these issues.”

Rep. Anna Eskamani, a Democrat from Orlando, said the multiple problems raised in public documents merit further review.

“A ‘chilled work environment’ where employees fear speaking up about safety concerns is not just a red flag — it’s a siren,” she said in a statement. “When paired with expert testimony detailing years of preventable outages, operational mismanagement, and staff reductions at FPL’s nuclear plants, it’s clear we’re not talking about isolated incidents. This points to a systemic failure in oversight and serious public safety concerns.”

***

The Tampa Bay Times launched the Environment Hub in 2025 to focus on some of Florida‘s most urgent and enduring challenges. You can contribute through our journalism fund by clicking here.

The Tributary is a Florida nonprofit newsroom focused on accountability and investigative journalism.

Emily L. Mahoney is the energy reporter. Reach her at emahoney@tampabay.com.

NRC holds second public meeting on potential restart of Three Mile Island nuclear reactor

Virtual session draws voices from across the U.S. amid debate over safety, water use, and the future of clean energy.
Author: Sydney Nauman
Published: 10:20 PM EDT August 6, 2025
Updated: 10:20 PM EDT August 6, 2025

MIDDLETOWN, Pa. — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) hosted its second public forum on Wednesday for community members to voice their concerns about the Crane Clean Energy Center's potential restart of Reactor 1. 

The virtual meeting, designed to allow broader public participation, drew 150 voices from afar as Michigan, North Carolina, and Washington, D.C., and touched on topics ranging from nuclear safety and environmental impact to national energy needs. 

But for many, the date of the meeting itself struck a nerve—August 6th marked the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. One attendee called the timing “insensitive,” ending her remarks in silence in honor of the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The planned restart of the unit, shut down since 2019, has reignited long-standing public concerns about Three Mile Island, which many still associate with the 1979 partial nuclear meltdown at Unit 2.

“Obviously, there was a terrible accident in 1979,” Michael Ford with the Pennsylvania Building Trades acknowledged. “But I believe the industry has made leaps and bounds in every way to make sure that doesn't happen again.”

The NRC said it currently has two licensing applications under review to begin bringing the plant back online and expects more by the end of the year. Officials indicated the full suite of licensing actions needed to restart the plant would be released together instead of individually and may not be completed until late fall.

 

If the restart is approved, the NRC plans to ramp up inspections, with the first report anticipated in late 2025.

Still, many remain skeptical, especially when it comes to the plant’s environmental impact and cooling water needs.

“At Three Mile Island, there’s already 700 metric tons of radioactive nuclear waste on the site—forever, or until there is a national repository,” Jaquelyn Drechsler, a Berks County resident, warned. Drechsler added that restarting Unit 1 would create additional waste that would need to be securely stored.

Environmental advocates raised concerns about the facility’s dependence on the Susquehanna River, noting the massive volume of water needed for cooling.

“We set strict limits for the water levels,” Scott Burnell, a spokesperson for the NRC, stated. “If the Susquehanna were to drop below a certain point, the plant would not be able to operate.

Others emphasized nuclear power’s environmental benefits.

“Using nuclear power is far cleaner than natural gas, oil, or coal,” a participant noted. “You actually get more radiation exposure living near a coal plant.”

Beyond the environmental and energy debates, some speakers noted the economic opportunity the restart could bring to Central Pennsylvania.

“The revitalization of this facility will bring hundreds of skilled, family-sustaining jobs back,” said Matteo Wearden, a recent high school graduate pursuing a career in nuclear energy. “It will stimulate local economies, support union labor, and maintain a vital knowledge base in nuclear operations.”

But for those still haunted by the more than four-decade-old accident at Three Mile Island—the scars remain deep.

“The meltdown will never be erased from the public’s mind,” one resident said. “No matter what name you replace it with."

The NRC says it will continue to evaluate licensing requests and collect public input as the process moves forward.

The NRC previously held its first public meeting regarding the Crane Clean Energy Center, the rebranded name for what was once Three Mile Island Unit One on July . The reactor was permanently shut down in 2019, but its current owner, Constellation Energy, has begun exploring what it would take to bring the plant back online.

That effort is still in its early stages, but federal officials made clear it won’t move forward without substantial oversight and transparency.

“We expect to be performing up to 7,500 hours of inspections at the site,” said Ray McKinley, co-chair of the NRC’s Crane Restart Panel. “Our inspectors will be out there periodically through the course of the restart effort to ensure that systems are restored to service.”

According to the NRC, those inspections will focus on four critical areas:

  • Reactor Safety

  • Emergency Preparedness

  • Radiation Safety

  • Plant Security

NRC representatives also emphasized the importance of keeping the public informed throughout the process.

“Safety is our number one priority,” said Jamie Pelton, also a co-chair of the Crane Restart Panel. “Transparent communication with the public is part of that goal to ensure that people in the area understand what we’re doing.”

 

The restart proposal has sparked a mix of reactions from the community.

Supporters at Thursday’s meeting pointed to the potential economic benefits of reopening the plant, including a boost in long-term employment.

“You’re talking between 600 and 700 full-time jobs with Constellation at the plant,” said Joe Gusler, an apprentice outreach coordinator with the Pennsylvania Building Trades. “These are full-time jobs with retirement and healthcare.”

Others raised environmental and security concerns, including the long-term impact of nuclear waste and releases into the Susquehanna River.

“You can’t live with the nuclear waste forever, so we'd better stop making it,” said Scott Portzline, a Susquehanna Township resident and member of TMI Alert, a community watch group. 

NRC officials responded by emphasizing that no restart can occur unless all environmental, safety and legal requirements are met. The agency says safeguards are built into every phase of the process to ensure public and ecological safety.

If successful, Crane Clean Energy Center would become only the second nuclear plant in the U.S. to restart operations after a permanent closure. The first was the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan, which was granted federal approval to restart just last week.

But, officials say the path forward for Crane could take longer.

“Crane was further along in their decommissioning efforts, so it’s going to take a little bit longer for them to re-establish operating conditions,” McKinley noted. “They have some components they need to replace.”

Constellation is still in the process of submitting license applications and other required documents. Complicating matters is the ongoing decommissioning of Reactor Two — the site of the 1979 nuclear accident — which requires its own set of monitoring and coordination as work on Reactor One moves forward.

The NRC plans to continue hosting meetings to gather community input and provide updates on the review process. The next meeting will be held virtually on Aug. 6. 

Officials say the timeline for a full restart remains fluid and will depend on the complexity of inspections, necessary upgrades and regulatory approvals.

‘Feels like a charade’: Residents push back on feds over restart of Three Mile Island nuclear reactor

  • By Jaxon White / LNP | LancasterOnline
Jaxon White / LNP | LancasterOnline
Gene Stilp, a longtime Dauphin County activist opposed to the restart of the Crane Clean Energy Center nuclear reactor, raised concerns to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission during a hearing on July 31, 2025, in Middletown about the evacuation radius if there were an accident at the facility.
 

MIDDLETOWN — Five officials charged with ensuring the restart of a nuclear reactor at Three Mile Island meets federal safety and environmental standards faced harsh criticism from residents opposed to the project on Thursday night.

During a more than hour-long public meeting on Penn State Harrisburg’s campus, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials emphasized their commitment to ensuring the security and safety of residents near the Crane Clean Energy Center — formerly Three Mile Island’s Unit 1 reactor, which was renamed by owner Constellation Energy Corporation earlier this year.

“If challenges arise, we are the folks that bring the resources to bear, that bring the right technical experts to the table,” said Jamie Pelton, co-chair of the NRC Crane Restart Panel, “to make sure that as we’re conducting the reviews, conducting inspections, that we’ve got the right experts in place to ensure safety is the number one priority.”

But for some of the more than 120 people in attendance, the officials’ assurances weren’t enough to soothe their deep-rooted unease and skepticism of the project.

Many expressed fears over potential radiation leaks, lack of faith in government agencies’ emergency preparedness, and concerns over long-term nuclear waste management.

Middletown native Matt Krajsa told the panel he felt like the plant’s restart “is a done deal” and that residents cannot meaningfully sway the commission’s choice to provide the required government licenses to restart the reactor.

“It’s energy, it’s Microsoft, it’s profits — like always — and it certainly feels like a charade,” Krajsa said, referencing Microsoft’s 20-year agreement to purchase the 835 megawatts expected to be produced annually by the reactor.

Krajsa was born in 1980, one year after the infamous partial meltdown of Three Mile Island’s Unit 2 reactor. He said his mother, a two-time cancer survivor, was part of a federal government study evaluating the accident’s impact on local cancer rates.

Ray McKinley, one of three co-chairs of the NRC’s Crane Restart Panel, noted the government-led studies did not find significant evidence that the accident increased cancer rates in the region.

Still, memories and personal anecdotes surrounding the incident, considered the country’s worst commercial nuclear power accident in history, stole much of the spotlight during the meeting.

The officials said they are working to coordinate Constellation’s revitalization of the Crane Clean Energy Center with the ongoing decommissioning of Unit 2, owned by a separate company, Energy Solutions.

Gene Stilp, a longtime Dauphin County activist opposed to the restart, raised concerns to the panel about the evacuation radius if there were an accident at the restarted facility.

“Evacuation here is impossible,” Stilp, wearing a blazer that read “NO T.M.I. RESTART” across his back, said. “How do you evacuate the Children’s Cancer Center at Hershey?… How do you evacuate the 600 beds at Hershey Medical Center? It is impossible.”

Panelists responded by saying the NRC does not oversee evacuation plans put in place by the local and state officials. That responsibility falls onto the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The involvement of FEMA worried Elizabethtown resident Dave Allard, who said he retired from the Bureau of Radiation Protection just three years ago. Allard pointed to President Donald Trump’s recent layoff of FEMA staffers to tell the panel that the agency may be ill-prepared to address an issue on Three Mile Island.

Thursday night was the first of two NRC public meetings to hear public comment on the project. The second is a digital webinar scheduled from 4 to 6 p.m. on August 6.

STEP-BY-STEP

After purchasing Three Mile Island’s Unit 1 in 1999, Constellation closed it in 2019 for what its officials say were purely financial reasons.

The rapid growth of artificial intelligence has placed extra demand on electrical grids, and companies have turned to nuclear energy as a way to power the data centers needed to house the physical components of the technology.

That fact that the power generated by the Crane Clean Energy Center is slated to power data centers — not the neighboring homes — was heavily scrutinized by multiple speakers.

But the NRC officials made it clear that it is not their responsibility to influence what Constellation chooses to do with the electricity it generates at the plant.

Constellation’s project is the second instance of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission overseeing a former decommissioned site being brought back to operational standards. The first was the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan, which the NRC fully greenlit last week.

For similar approval, Constellation would need an exemption to current federal regulations and a host of other licensing approvals from the NRC, according to Licensing Project Manager Justin Poole.

Poole said Constellation has submitted its exemption application and several other applications; however, the NRC has not yet approved any of Constellation’s requests, except for the renaming of Unit 1.

Later this year, after Constellation’s last application is filed, the NRC will open the door for the public to request a legal hearing that could pull the plug on restarting the facility.

The legal case would be heard by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, according to Scott Burnell, a public affairs officer at NRC. Its three panelists would determine whether the case has any legal standing and issue a ruling, which could be appealed to the NRC’s five politically appointed members. The NRC ruling could then be appealed to federal court.

In 2022, the NRC denied Oklo Power’s application to build its Aurora compact fast reactor in Idaho. Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Andrea Veil cited “information gaps in (Oklo’s) description of Aurora’s potential accidents as well as its classification of safety systems and components.”


READ: 20 years after pay raise scandal, reformers say Harrisburg still lacks transparency and integrity


ECONOMIC UPSWING

Constellation estimates that roughly 3,400 direct or indirect jobs will be created from the plant’s restart, and it will raise more than $3.6 billion in local, state and federal tax revenue.

Leaders of trade organizations and Ellen Willenbecher, vice president of Middletown Borough Council, touted those statistics to say they welcomed the reopening of the facility.

And Democratic state Rep. Justin Fleming, of Harrisburg, said he had “faith” in the plant’s safety system. From 2004 to 2007, Fleming worked for the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency.

“The emergency procedures that we had in place in case of an emergency worked and worked well,” Fleming told the audience.

Yet, not every official who spoke seemed fully confident in the plant. One of those was Democratic Sen. James Malone, whose northern Lancaster County district has portions within the 10-mile-radius emergency planning zone designated by Constellation.

“Three Mile Island Unit 1 will be among a small handful of commercial reactors globally that were shut down and then reopened,” Malone said. “That should warrant extra caution and guarantees to neighbors that this will be done with safety as a number one priority.”

‘Do it right, do it safe’ outweighs ‘don’t do it’ at public meeting on TMI restart

Updated: Aug. 01, 2025, 6:29 a.m.|Published: Jul. 31, 2025, 11:44 p.m.

NRC holds its first public meeting about the TMI restart

By Charles Thompson | cthompson@pennlive.com

If there was any takeaway from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s first public meeting on the restart of the nuclear power station at Three Mile Island, it may be this:

Forty-six years out from the nation’s worst-ever commercial nuclear accident, the days of widespread opposition to the very idea of nukes in the midstate seem over.

But what has stuck is a well-informed, highly-concerned minority that will do its level best to make sure regulators hold plant operators to the highest standards of operational safety, environmental protection and emergency preparedness.

As one example, representatives of the NRC’s Crane Clean Energy Center Restart Panel were repeatedly grilled Thursday night at Penn State Harrisburg with concerns about how the growing Capital Region could be evacuated swiftly and safely in the event of another emergency.

Crane refers to the new name that plant owner Constellation Energy has bestowed on the generating station.

“We need to see a realistic evacuation plan when Crane restarts this reactor at Three Mile Island because we did not have a realistic evacuation plan on March 28th, 1979,” said Larry Arnold, of Susquehanna Township.

Anti-nuclear activist Gene Stilp went so far as to predict before the meeting that those safety concerns would be the Achilles’ heel that keeps the plant from reopening.

There were also repeated concerns about the ability of the NRC to play a watchdog role in a Trump administration that is prioritizing deregulation and its own version of governmental efficiency.

“I know you have a lot of job openings (at the NRC). You haven’t been able to fill those,” said Lebanon County resident Maureen Mulligan. “I’m concerned that you’re not going to be adequately staffed.

“The mission has changed under the (Trump) Executive Order and the Advance Act,“ she said, referring to a 2024 bill designed to expedite development of advanced nuclear technologies. “And it’s very concerning that you’re going to be able to meet all these goals, especially when there’s a shift from safety to licensing and relicensing.”

The NRC reps conceded they can never guarantee that there will never be another major accident at any nuclear plant.

But they were adamant that safety remains their top priority.

“We are not going to accept just paperwork,” said Erin Carfang, one of the co-chairs of the Crane restart panel and a director of plant inspection efforts.

She had earlier estimated that the reborn Three Mile Island Unit One would receive about 7,500 hours worth of on-site inspection and plan review. 

”We need evidence. ... We are going to go put our eyes on what is in the field to make sure the plant is ready to restart and it is safe for all of you.“

Carfang also tried to assure the room that the regional inspections division she heads has adequate staffing for the unique challenge ahead, noting some are actually delaying retirements to be part of the effort.

“These are some of the most senior people in the agency who have been with us for 40 years. They have a lot of experience, and they know this site very well, and they were there before, and they want to be there to ensure it is safe to restart,” Carfang said.

As for evacuations and emergency preparedness, the panelists noted there’s a lot of joint responsibility for that, starting with all-hazard emergency management plans developed by local and county governments, to be followed by a graded exercise.

Another undeniable takeaway from Thursday is that — safety concerns notwithstanding — there is a lot of support for the reopening.

“With the reopening of the island as Crane Clean Energy Center, hundreds of jobs are available again. And for some families who had to leave when the island closed, they are moving home,” said Ellen Willenbecher, a Middletown borough council member.

“Local businesses can welcome back old and new customers. And community projects who serve residents may receive critical support. And all with low-carbon energy. I love saying that.”

Union member Tyrone Thomas said, after more than 40 years of mostly safe operations at Unit One, the restart is a calculated risk worth taking for the hundreds of families who stand to benefit.

That 1979 accident, in a footnote that is of vital importance to anyone affiliated with Unit One, occurred at TMI Unit Two, a separate station on the island.

The Unit Two reactor has been closed since the accident, and is currently in the early stages of a long-term decommissioning project led by Energy Solutions, of Salt Lake City, Utah.

“There’s no hundred percent guarantee that we won’t have another accident, no. There’s no hundred percent guarantee that something won’t go wrong,” Thomas said. 

“But all we can do is plan based upon the knowledge we have to make it as safe as possible.”

Thursday’s was not a formal hearing; those will come over the next two years as Constellation Energy’s restart bid proceeds.

Constellation announced last year it wants to reopen the old TMI Unit One, which the company’s corporate forefathers shuttered in 2019 for economic reasons.

A technology-driven sea change in U.S. energy demand has changed that paradigm.

In TMI Unit One’s case, Microsoft signed a 20-year commitment to buy the equivalent of all the wattage produced by the restarted nuclear plant, guaranteeing Constellation’s projected $1.6 billion investment in the restart will be profitable.

Constellation has already held several public updates on its work toward the restart.

But Thursday’s meeting marked the first time the NRC - which ultimately holds federal government approval power over the project - held an open meeting expressly for the public on the restart.

Even here, the political and economic pressure surrounding the issue was unavoidable, as restart proponents organized a rally in support of restart on the Penn State Harrisburg campus, outside the meeting hall.

Inside, the commission used a ticket system to randomly select audience members for the chance to pose questions and/or comments to the NRC staff.

Federal regulators hear from the community about planned Three Mile Island restart

Constellation Energy is working to reopen the nuclear facility by 2027 to power data centers for Microsoft.

BY:  - JULY 31, 2025 11:10 PM

Constellation Energy plans to restart Unit 1 of the former Three Mile Island nuclear power plant as the Crane Clean Energy Center. (Capital-Star/Peter Hall)

 Constellation Energy plans to restart Unit 1 of the former Three Mile Island nuclear power plant as the Crane Clean Energy Center. (Capital-Star/Peter Hall)

On Thursday, community members had the chance to voice their hopes and concerns about the planned reopening of the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor. 

More than 100 people attended a public meeting held by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) at the Penn State Harrisburg campus near Middletown, less than five miles from the now-decommissioned reactor.

“Tonight, the reason we’re here is transparency and communication with the public,” said Jamie Pelton, acting director of the Division of Operating Reactor Licensing.

With increased energy demands, due largely to a construction boom of power-hungry data centers driven by advances in artificial intelligence, Constellation Energy is working to reopen the nuclear facility — renamed Crane Clean Energy Center — by 2027. That’s a year earlier than initially expected.

It is slated to power data centers for Microsoft. An agreement reached between the tech company and Constellation is reported to last 20 years, could create around 3,400 jobs and bring $3 billion in state and federal taxes.

It will also be one of the first shuttered nuclear plants in the United States to reopen, along with another plant in Palisades, Michigan.

Attendees offered polarized views, with some concerned about the potential of another failure like the one in 1979, or the impacts on the environment and public health. Others were hopeful that reopening the reactor could bring much-needed jobs and stimulate the economy in Londonderry Township and surrounding communities in Dauphin County. Each person was allowed around two minutes to speak.

One of Three Mile Island’s two reactors partially melted down in 1979. That accident captivated the country and changed the course of the nuclear energy industry in the United States. No injuries or deaths were reported to have resulted from the accident. But some attendees at the meeting recalled what is why like during the crisis.

“I had a metallic taste in my mouth, and so did so many other people,” said Maria Frisby, 61, who lives in Middletown. “How are you going to prevent all of that from occurring again?”

Maria Frisby of Middletown spoke at a public meeting in Middletown, Dauphin County, about the planned reopening of the former Three Mile Island nuclear plant. (Photo by Ian Karbal)

 Maria Frisby of Middletown spoke at a public meeting in Middletown, Dauphin County, about the planned reopening of the former Three Mile Island nuclear plant. (Photo by Ian Karbal)

The site’s other reactor continued operating until 2019 when it was shut down by Constellation Energy, the site’s owner, which deemed it more expensive to operate than it was worth. 

Mark Rodgers, a spokesperson for Constellation, said in a statement to the Capital-Star that the reactor that operated until 2019 “was one of the highest performing and safest nuclear reactors in the country until we had to prematurely retire the unit in 2019 due to market conditions.”

“Microsoft is enabling us to make the investment to restart the unit as the Crane Clean Energy Center, bringing back over 600 jobs and putting over 800 megawatts of clean, emissions free power back onto the grid where it will go into the homes, businesses, schools and hospitals throughout the region,” he added.

But despite the site’s history, many people supported its reopening.

“I stand before you in support of a responsible restart of the Crane Clean Energy Center,” said Jim Enders, president of the Central Pennsylvania Building and Construction Trades Council. “We’ve safely built and continue to maintain other nuclear facilities throughout the east coast and the Midwest, and we’re ready, willing and able to bring Crane back online in a safe manner. It’s time to turn the page.”

Others welcomed the impact new jobs and workers could have on the community.

“Middletown’s historic downtown is just minutes from the plant, and it has numerous small businesses that thrived over many years from the customers from the island,” said Ellen Willenbecher, vice president of the Middletown Borough council. “For some families who had to leave Middletown when the Island closed, they’re moving home. Local businesses will welcome back old and new customers.”

But the plan had detractors as well.

Patricia Longenecker spoke at a public meeting in Middletown, Dauphin County, about the planned reopening of the former Three Mile Island nuclear plant. (Photo by Ian Karbal)

 Patricia Longenecker spoke at a public meeting in Middletown, Dauphin County, about the planned reopening of the former Three Mile Island nuclear plant. (Photo by Ian Karbal)

Patricia Longenecker, who lives near the plant, raised concerns about the project’s environmental impact, and what it would mean to operate a reactor dependent on the Susquehanna River in an era of increased doubt and flood risk due to climate change. 

“My comments come from being a steward of Lancaster County farmland, with my family going back 200 years,” she said. “Last October, our area experienced a severe drought. One could walk across the river south of Three Mile Island on rocks. Where would 100 million gallons of water per day needed to operate the plant have been secured?”

The Capital-Star could not verify the amount of water required to operate the plant.

Maureen Mulligan, who lives in Lebanon, was particularly concerned about how the NRC, or any other group, could ensure safety amid President Donald Trump’s push to slash the federal workforce and deregulate the energy industry.

“There is a lot of pressure on the NRC to race to permit nuclear plants to enable these humungous, energy hogging AI plants to get built,” she said. “Our community, which has experienced the worst [nuclear] accident in U.S. history, deserves to be protected, and the NRC will have to earn our confidence back.”

In June, the Trump administration fired one of the five NRC commissioners. The move followed an executive order calling for “reform” of the independent commission, a “wholesale revision of its regulations,” and for the body to facilitate the expansion of the nation’s nuclear capacity.

Larry Arnold, 76, who also remembers the 1979 accident, put it more bluntly.

Larry Arnold speaks at a public meeting on restarting the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant on July 31 in Middletown, Dauphin County. (Photo by Ian Karbal)

 Larry Arnold speaks at a public meeting on restarting the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant on July 31 in Middletown, Dauphin County. (Photo by Ian Karbal)
 

“What happens when the current administration decides it doesn’t like what the NRC is doing, and cuts staff and budget?” he said. “What will you be doing then and how will we be protected?”

Arnold also raised concerns about evacuation plans, which will be created by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which has recently had its funding slashed.

“We did not have a realistic evacuation plan on March 28, 1979,” he said. 

Other speakers raised concerns specifically about the feasibility of evacuating nearby hospitals and senior centers.  

The NRC panelists said another virtual public meeting will be held on August 6 at 4:00 p.m. Information can be found on their public meeting schedule.

From DEP:
 
 
This message is just to make you aware that the Crane Clean Energy Center community information page is now live on DEP’s website.
  
 
Rm

Pages