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.

    

Beaver Valley becomes data center target

Local leaders are weighing the hopes of future tax revenue and economic development against the small arsenal of tools they have to inform and protect residents

 

ANYA LITVAK AND CHLOE JAD
Got a news tip? 412-263-1601
 
FEB 8, 2026  4:00 AM
 

Early last year, Rich Urick drafted his first data center ordinance for Shippingport, a Beaver County borough with about 160 residents and a storied history of big things happening.

This was months before Mr. Urick, the borough’s solicitor, would learn about Aligned Data Centers’ plan to build a massive data center campus next to the shuttered Bruce Mansfield coal power station.

Borough leaders didn’t know the Texas-based developer was coming, he said — but they knew something was.

“Having an ear to the ground and seeing what’s happening in different parts of the country,” Mr. Urick said, “and here (we are), where there are two power plants, one operating and one not. … We just kind of wanted to get a jump on things.”

The operating plant is the Beaver Valley Power Station. And the plant is already tied into the data center universe. Last month its owner, Vistra Corp., signed a 20-year deal with Meta to offset the power demand from the tech giant’s data centers with electricity from Vistra’s nuclear plants, including Beaver Valley.

The defunct facility that Mr. Urick referenced is the Bruce Mansfield plant, which huffed its last coal-dusted breath in 2019 and was bought by Frontier Group of Companies in 2022.

Frontier cleared the coal piles, renamed the area Shippingport Industrial Park and began marketing its ground to data centers and large industrial clients. It plans to turn Bruce Mansfield into a natural gas power plant in the future.

Shippingport’s data center ordinance, which passed in March, got its first test last month, when borough council approved Aligned’s plan to build up to three data center buildings, totaling 2 million square feet. The plan, which Aligned has dubbed Project Phoenix, also includes its own natural gas power plant that will be built to serve the data centers. 

“Our goal is to be a great neighbor for years to come,” Aligned’s executive vice president of brand strategy, Joanna Soucy, said in an email. “If this project moves forward, we look forward to bringing high-quality jobs and significant economic opportunities to the area.”

Positioned for growth

Aligned told local officials that it is working to secure a customer for its data centers. The developer also hasn’t bought the land from Frontier yet.

As one economic development official put it, this isn’t a done deal.

But it is a serious one.

Of all the proposed data center projects in Western Pennsylvania, “that’s probably the one that’s moved furthest along right now,” said Dan Diorio, vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, an industry advocacy group.

But there are other stirrings in the Beaver Valley. An outfit called Fezzik Energy that counts land developer Chuck Betters, attorney Jonathan Kamin, and Joanna Doven as partners is working to attract data centers to former J&L Steel sites in Midland and Aliquippa.

Midland sits right across the Ohio River from Vistra’s Beaver Valley plant.

In August, a Vistra subsidiary bought a 74-acre farm in Hookstown, a mile from the boundary of Beaver Valley, for $4.2 million — more than 10 times its assessed value.

A Vistra spokeswoman, Meranda Cohn, declined to say what the company has planned for the parcel, but offered this: “We often expand the footprint of our real estate around our plants in order to position ourselves for growth, so that when the right opportunity comes along, we can move quickly — whether that opportunity is with a particular customer, expanding operations, or investing in next-generation advanced nuclear.”

As Aligned CEO Andrew Schaap put it in a recent article he wrote for Forbes.com, “One resource that isn’t in short supply: capital.”

“Funding is rapidly flowing into the industry,” he wrote, using his company as an example.

In October, Aligned was acquired by BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, with other investors that include chip maker Nvidia, Elon Musk’s xAI and Microsoft. The deal was valued at $40 billion.

Community engagement

Big names and hefty price tags not withstanding, news of the Aligned data center project came to Shippingport residents indirectly, when some received a notice about seismic testing to ensure their foundations weren’t impacted by blasting activity at the industrial park.

What blasting activity, they wondered. Borough officials wondered the same thing.

“Someone jumped the gun,” said Pat Lampe, Shippingport’s emergency services coordinator.

By Dec. 5, Aligned had filed a conditional use application with details of the project, and a few days later, at the borough’s public meeting, a company representative apologized for the confusion.

Mr. Urick, the solicitor, “emphasized that the project should proceed at a slower pace to allow proper review,” the meeting minutes said. In September, Mr. Urick showed his frustration with Frontier, the site developer, for “the lack of transparency shown by the company throughout the project.”

Frontier’s representative, Anthony Basil, apologized at that September meeting. He said Frontier was trying to navigate the “many moving parts and multiple interested parties, which has made it challenging to keep everyone fully informed as developments occur.”

Mr. Basil has declined interview requests from the Post-Gazette and most recently suggested that questions should go through Aligned.

The data center developer responded with a statement, but declined to answer questions beyond that.

Kept in the dark?

Shippingport is no stranger to industrial activity.

But like many small towns that find themselves potential data center hosts, it is weighing the hopes of future tax revenue and economic development against the small arsenal of tools at its disposal to inform and protect its residents.

As is common for data centers and other industries scoping out potential projects, local officials are sometimes asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, which typically mean they can’t publicly discuss these projects until public notice is filed.

“Too many of these projects have been shrouded in secrecy, with local communities left in the dark about who is coming in and what they’re building,” Gov. Josh Shapiro said during his budget address last week. “Developers must commit to strict transparency standards and direct community engagement.”

Companies that live up to these standards bring their own power, hire and train local labor and sign community benefit agreements, Mr. Shapiro said, are promised “speed and certainty in permitting and available tax credits.”

With data centers as the economic engine du-jour, companies and municipalities are cautious about jeopardizing real opportunities by speaking too soon, while at the same time looking for some attention to put themselves on the map. 

“In the beginning, you’re cloak and dagger,” said Dwan Walker, mayor of Aliquippa and borough manager at Midland, who is eager to see old industrial graveyards reborn, perhaps as data centers.

“You don’t want want to speak a blessing in the air because someone might snatch it,” his grandmother used to say. But as soon as something gets out, people wonder why they hadn’t heard about it before. “It’s a catch-22,” he said.

Community groups have sprung up to oppose proposed data centers, driven in part by concerns about noise and environmental impacts, but also by the feeling of being kept in the dark.

In December, as Springdale Borough Council voted, 5-2, to approve a conditional use permit to convert the former Cheswick Generating Station into a data center, the space was packed and each vote of yes or no brought an uproar from residents.

In Shippingport, a far smaller and much less rowdy crowd showed up for Aligned’s first information meeting in December, where the company flipped through a long slide show with renderings of long silver buildings.

Much-needed dollars

Ms. Lampe, the emergency services coordinator, was in the crowd, as were residents from nearby townships such as Potter and Raccoon. They came to learn, she said.

“A lot of people don’t know what a data center is — even though they have shown pictures, and they’ve explained (it) — some people, they’re not picturing it,” she said.

Some wondered how the development would impact their property values, she said. Others worried about landslides and stability issues in a hilly area that sits on top of mines.

One woman said she planned to live the rest of her life in the area, Ms. Lampe recalled. “She just wanted to know nothing was going to change.”

Tim Goughnour, a Shippingport resident, said last week that a new project could bring in some much-needed dollars.

“We’ve lost so much revenue, we haven’t been able to really care for the borough in the way we should have been able to all these years since … the loss of revenue from Bruce Mansfield,” he said. “So I think everybody’s looking forward to what’s going to come of this.”

Mr. Goughnour’s mother-in-law lives in a house right up against Bruce Mansfield’s property line, “and she’s been watching them dig out the giant dirt pile that they put in that parking lot.”

Rolling out the red carpet

One way or another, residents piece together what’s going on in their townships.

“If you put your ear to your own wall, you can hear all your neighbor’s business,” Mr. Goughnour said. “That’s how tight this community is.”

Constructing a data center is, and should be, a community effort, said Ms. Doven, executive director of the Pittsburgh-based AI Strike Team.

“There’s a natural process that takes place around community engagement, because data centers are a new-use case in many scenarios, so you have to change zoning,” she said.

For a project in Midland that she said is similar in scale to Aligned’s Shippingport plan, Ms. Doven said she’s been in frequent contact with borough council and the mayor, and they’ve had many questions.

“There’s many local communities and there’s many commissioners that are rolling out the red carpet for these investments,” Ms. Doven said. “It's up to local communities and commissioners to decide, A, if they have the the aligned assets, and then, B, if this is an investment that they want.”

She added: “Former industrial sites abound in Beaver County.”

First Published: February 8, 2026, 4:00 a.m.
Updated: February 9, 2026, 11:47 a.m.

 

 

NRC MastheadNuclear ReactorsNuclear MaterialsRadioactive WasteNuclear SecurityPublic Meetings & InvolvementNRC LibraryAbout NRCReport a Safety ConcernNRC FacebookNRC TwitterNRC LinkedInNRC InstagramNRC YouTubeNRC FlickrNRC NRC BlogNRC GovDeliveryNRC RSS FeedNRC Homepage

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 - Integrated Inspection Report 05000387/2025004 and 05000388/2025004

ADAMS Accession No. ML26040A025

 

Bookmark and Share


Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.

This service is provided to you at no charge by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

 


Stay Connected to the NRC!
 
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

 

NRC MastheadNuclear ReactorsNuclear MaterialsRadioactive WasteNuclear SecurityPublic Meetings & InvolvementNRC LibraryAbout NRCReport a Safety ConcernNRC FacebookNRC TwitterNRC LinkedInNRC InstagramNRC YouTubeNRC FlickrNRC NRC BlogNRC GovDeliveryNRC RSS FeedNRC Homepage

Constellation Energy Generation, LLC Fleet - Request to Use a Provision of a Later Edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI (EPID L-2025-LLR-0088)

Accession No. ML26016A628

ADAMS Public Search Application:

https://adams-search.nrc.gov/home

Bookmark and Share


Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.

This service is provided to you at no charge by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

 


Stay Connected to the NRC!
 
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

 ​​​​​​​

Gents,
 
Roger informed me that he has updated his article.  The technical aspect has been run by Alan Blind.  He has added some schematics.
 

Opinion: Gov. Cox is wrong about nuclear power

Nuclear power was born as an afterthought of manufacturing nuclear weapons. It should remain an afterthought

 
Dr. Brian Moench is the president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment. He is a former adjunct faculty member of the University of Utah Honors College, where he taught the public health consequences of environmental degradation. He is the author of two books on environmental contaminants and public health.
 
As a first grader in 1956, a routine classroom drill was “duck and cover,” i.e. how to respond to a nuclear apocalypse. Hiding under our desks to protect us from deadly radiation was obviously worthless and irrational. But “irrational” has been the constant companion of the nuclear industry since our government sprinkled Utahns with radioactive fallout nearly 1,000 times. And it still is, despite the latest cheerleading from nuclear lobbyists and Utah politicians.
 
Nuclear reactors were originally developed by the military to create plutonium for nuclear weapons. When the American public began questioning the sanity of nuclear weapons or “nuclear” anything, the Eisenhower Administration launched a PR campaign, “Atoms for Peace,” to soften public opposition toward “mutually assured destruction.” That’s when the idea emerged that nuclear reactors could generate electricity, “too cheap to meter.” Nuclear power was born as an afterthought of manufacturing nuclear weapons. It should remain an afterthought.
 
There are numerous reasons to oppose nuclear power, and they are the same ones that have existed for decades. Nuclear power is essentially one of the government’s biggest proverbial welfare queens. It’s the most expensive and dangerous way ever devised to boil water — over three times more expensive than renewables.
 
John Rowe, former CEO of Exelon, America’s largest owner of nuclear plants, said, “I’ve never met a nuclear plant I didn’t like ... (but) it just isn’t economic, and it’s not economic within a foreseeable time frame.” Claims that small modular reactors (SMRs), nuclear reactors in a shiny new mini box, will change the cost equation have been made for 15 years and are still disputed by numerous nuclear experts.
 
Those experts say SMRs will be even more expensive than large reactors per kilowatt of electricity produced. Initial capital and materials costs, secondary containment, control systems, instrumentation, and emergency management all increase as reactor size decreases. Uranium resource requirements and hence fuel costs and radioactive waste are expected to be higher than large reactors, and they would carry increased risk of nuclear weapons proliferation.
 
SMRs will not be safer. In fact, in scavenging for cost savings, the industry is proposing eliminating numerous standard safety features. Water consumption will still be intense, about the same as a coal-fired power plant and almost the same as large nuclear reactors, per kilowatt of electricity.
 
But the biggest reason for pouring cold water on this recurring nuclear fantasy is this simple scientific fact. There is no safe level of radiation exposure. Period. Radiation damage is cumulative — each successive dose builds upon the cellular damage and disease potential of previous exposures. Any exposure to radiation increases the risk of damage to key biologic infrastructure — tissues, cells, DNA, mitochondrial DNA and other essential subcellular structures — with the capability of causing genetic mutations, cancer, leukemia, birth defects, impaired brain development and reproductive, cardiovascular, endocrine and immune system disorders. Across all age groups, the most rapidly dividing cells are those most at risk for damage. Fetuses, infants, children and women are particularly vulnerable.
 
When millions of people are exposed to even slight increased risk, thousands of new victims are created. Radiation is released and public health is harmed by every phase of the nuclear fuel cycle, from mining uranium to radon-emitting mill tailings to routine operation of a nuclear plant to management of the waste and eventually to the decommissioning of the plant. Water vapor vented from the plant and the cooling water discharged to nearby water bodies contaminate air, water, soil and the food chain. Even without nuclear accidents, we are exposed in numerous ways that are being ignored by nuclear lobbyists.
 
Worldwide, people living near nuclear plants have increased rates of cancer and other diseases. For example, in Massachusetts there is an increased risk of cancer inversely proportional to the distance of a residence from a nuclear power plant. At 2 kilometers away, the increased risk varied from 52% to 253% depending on the sex and age of the residents. So when Utah Gov. Spencer Cox says he wants a nuclear power plant in Brigham City, maybe the residents should have a say about increasing their cancer risk.
 
Dr. John Gofman, an original Manhattan Project physicist who became one of the nation’s top cardiovascular researchers and arguably the nation’s most qualified person on the risks of nuclear power, said, “Each added amount of radiation causes damage to the health of human beings all over the world … The entire nuclear power program was based on a fraud — namely that there was a ‘safe’ amount of radiation, a permissible dose that wouldn’t hurt anybody.”
 
It’s still a fraud, even in fun size.
 
Ducking and covering won’t save us from the poor choices of our politicians. Instead, call them up and tell them what you think about more unnecessary, self-inflicted radiation exposure, making us victims once again of the nuclear industry.
 
Sampling of Additional Resources, earlier articles...
Inside the nuclear energy debate (don't be fooled - lays out why not nuclear energy but then blasts off into a full-throated advocacy as "the solution we need" complete with industry hyped claims )
 
Opinion: Not your grandparents’ nuclear energy (no surprise here - outdoes the previous article, telling us to ditch old fears 
or outdated narratives.)
 
Nuclear energy’s stylish comeback?  (Cox hobnobbing with "advocates, experts and lobbyists in the energy space" ) with what appears to be not even a token nod to concerns or challenges - as easy as putting on an old pair of shorts to prove how "stylish you can be...)
 
 
Should you be afraid of nuclear energy? Another cheer leading chorus complete with "making nuclear cool again" describing how "in Washington, D.C., this past June, a group of young nuclear energy enthusiasts bopped their heads along to electronic dance music at a “rave for nuclear energy” — in hopes the U.S. will go full throttle with nuclear power" 

Press Advisory 

Public Meeting to Discuss Holtec Relief Request on Palisades Pressure Spray Nozzles

Monday, February 9th @ 2:00 pm ET.  Several Months Delay Anticipated

For additional information please contact:
Michael J. Keegan, Intervenor with Don't Waste Michigan (734) 770-1441, mkeeganj@comcast.net 
Kevin Kamps, Intervenor with Beyond Nuclear (240) 462-3216, kevin@beyondnuclear.org 
 
Last week the NRC posted Palisades  'Revised Relief Request Number RR 5-9' (ML26019A041) in which Holtec concedes that unauthorized welding work not meeting ASME welding standards had been done on Pressure Spray Nozzles.  "These welds are completely out of compliance, with no simple fix. Holtec tried the quick and dirty approach of repair not replace. The existing reactor pressure vessel head is junk and needs to be replaced at a cost in the hundreds of millions, with a delay in excess of a year" stated Michael Keegan with Don't Waste Michigan.
 
Please follow Meeting Info link below to Register for this important Public Meeting on Palisades, Monday at 2:00pm ET
 
02/09/26
2:00PM -
3:00PM ET
Meeting info
Public pre-submittal meeting to discuss the potential for Holtec to submit Relief Request 5-14 for Palisades related to the Pressurizer Spray Nozzle Safe End and Safety Nozzles RV-1039 and RV-1040 Flange Welds. Members of the public are invited to provide comments to the NRC staff at the close of the business portion of the meeting. [more...]

Participation: Observation

 Teleconference
Webinar
Marlayna Doell
(301) 415-3178

Justin Poole
(301) 415-2048
 
Docketed 1/28/2026
Document Title:
Palisades Nuclear Plant - Revised Relief Request Number RR 5-9, Proposed Alternative Section XI Code Requirement for Modification of Reactor Pressure Vessel Closure Head, Control Rod Drive Mechanisms and Incore Instrmentation Penetrations
Document Type:
Letter
Request for Code Relief or Alternative
Document Date:
01/16/2026
 
For extensive information, please see Beyond Nuclear’s “Newest Nuke Nightmares at Palisades, 2022 to Present”.
Interviews with nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen can be arranged through Kevin Kamps.
 
--- end ---
N2
Michael J. Keegan
Don't Waste Michigan

Pages