Piracy: Dumping Radioactive Regulations

In the MAGA rush to cut treaties, laws, regulations, taxes, federal employees, grants, humanitarian aid worldwide, etc., who will be making sure no one dumps toxic radioactive wastes?

According to the EPA, “more than 55,000 containers of radioactive wastes were dumped at three ocean sites in the Pacific Ocean between 1946 and 1970. Almost 34,000 containers of radioactive wastes were dumped at three ocean sites off the East Coast of the United States from 1951 to 1962.”

By the 1970s, the United States and other countries became increasingly concerned about the environmental impacts of human activities on the marine environment, including the uncontrolled disposal of wastes into the ocean. The Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter of 1972, known as the London Convention, is one of the first international agreements for the protection of the marine environment from human activities.

Currently, some very influential, powerful people see regulations as ‘red-tape’ and bureaucratic roadblocks. According to an article in the New York Times:

The regulatory process is often criticized as onerous and time-consuming and the idea of letting all government regulations expire periodically has been promoted in conservative circles for years. The idea may have gotten a recent boost from Elon Musk, the billionaire adviser to Mr. Trump. “Regulations, basically, should be default gone…And if it turns out that we missed the mark on a regulation, we can always add it back in.”

Wow. So little respect and understanding for how regulations are created to protect our lives and environment- usually after a major disaster occurs. So the “thinking” is to remove existing regulations until the next avoidable calamity occurs? Think again: it will be too little too late to reintroduce regulatory requirements after the next event. Maybe the MAGA people hope no one is watching or even cares about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; maybe they only want individual freedom - as in nothing left to lose?

Previously, I wrote a 10 part blog on the nuclear fuel cycle to share my experiences including working with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on the importance of regulations that help to mitigate hazards and keep us all safe. By the way, independent Commissions are created by Congress and are not located in the Executive Branch.

On another blog, I share news from my interview with ProPublica on how uranium mills have impacted groundwater including polluting drinking water for several Native American tribes.

Yesterday, I joined a public meeting held by NRC on Duke Power’s process for siting a new nuclear power plant in northwestern North Carolina. Without any regulatory requirements and oversight, the company could do whatever they want. Check out all the fines imposed by NRC even with a vigilant regulator according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. The $5.4 million fine to the owner of Davis-Besse nuclear power plant in Cleveland initiated a larger corruption settlement for $230 million due to fraud. For information on accidents and this ‘near miss’ meltdown, see my blog.

MSNBC’s Ari Melber on this week’s broadcast reported on efforts by Trump and Musk to cut federal regulations that agencies use to enforce numerous laws. He shows examples of how lax regulations led to the 2008 housing crisis, the Chernobyl nuclear accident, and industry polluting drinking water. CLICK TO SEE BROADCAST!

Also this week I checked Facebook and noticed my grad school geologist friend Janet reposted the following information from Curtis Mahon who’s a wildlife researcher and photographer and might not be aware of how the administration is cutting regulations for the nuclear industry as well:

“To my many friends who thought it wouldn't happen, guess what, it has happened! Donald Trump has dropped the environmental destruction nuke of an EO, planning to sunset ALL environmental regulations made in the last 100 years. And I mean ALL. https://www.whitehouse.gov/.../zero-based-regulatory.../

The Endangered Species Act. Gone. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Gone. The Marine Mammal Protection Act. Gone. The Anadromous Fish Conservation Act. Gone. The Bald Eagle Protection Act. Gone! You name it, it's gone.

To remind those friends why we have these laws, I'm going to try to put them into terms which anyone can understand, money.

The Endangered Species Act is literally the founding, central pillar of modern conservation globally. It's hard to list the accomplishments of this act as it is so vast. It directly protects and calls for plans to raise the populations of rare species. It's directly responsible for the comeback of many iconic species, such as the Bald Eagle, the Peregrine Falcon, the California Condor, and a host of others. Talk about return on investment, the amount of money spent vs the amount gained from people wishing to just see iconic rare species is in the billions of dollars. For what would a visit to the grand canyon be without seeing a conder soar over or a visit to Yellowstone without seeing wolves and bison. People do whole drives across the country just for these experiences and that's what the ESA is about. Lots of revenue there.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was one of the first environmental laws every made, and bans the harm or collection of all non-game birds in America. It was implemented in a time when hunters we shooting everything to turn them into hats, from songbirds to puffins to herons to albatross. The banning of this and subsequent restoration efforts lead to dramatic increases in bird populations and continue to protect them from harm. In just one example, consider a puffin. In Maine, every tourist I talk to wants to see two things, lobster and puffins. They were once hunted to near extinction in the US and are now a central pillar to the economy of an ENTIRE STATE. Thousands of people a DAY take expensive boat trips for puffins and that's at risk without these regulations, not to mention cuts to NOAA.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act protects whales from being killed or harmed and lead to the global war on whaling. Now because of it, America watches whales! You can go on a whale watch in nearly every coastal city in America and it generates HUNDREDS of millions of dollars in tourism and employs thousands of people. We hurt whales, we hurt our pockets and jobs.

The Anadromous Fish Conservation Act allows the government to enter agreements with states and plan and fund ways to increase the populations of migratory fish. It has direct benefits to anglers across the country, funding 50% of initiatives for things like stocking and habitat restoration in major fisheries such as both Atlantic and Pacific Salmon, Trout, Striped Bass, American Shad, and Sturgeon.

And removing the Bald Eagle Protection Act! I thought we loved eagle guys? What's more American than a Bald Eagle, and they want to remove protections for them? Many older Americans can probably remember a time when they never saw Bald Eagles. Now you can see them commonly in nearly every state! That's a direct result of the Endangered Species Act and Bald Eagle Protection Act.

These are just a few of the laws the Republican party wishes to remove. All have proven track records of benefiting Americans, both monetarily through supporting major American industries worth billions of dollars and employing hundreds of thousands of Americans and spiritually as corner stones of the country's wilderness. The removal of these protections is peak short term gains over long term profits.

If you don't like it, there's a lot you can do. Call your representatives. It feels like yelling to void but we've seen a handful of senators pushed to action by your voices. This matters regardless of the political party of your representatives. Also, get out and protest if you can. The next big one is April 19th. Search for your local 50501 group to see where the protests were at. It's incredibly empowering to get out and be a part of a movement with thousands of people in your town, and millions nationwide. See you in the streets.”

One correction that I found in the comments section:

“Yes, but it's actually the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. https://www.fws.gov/law/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act.”

Please also see my SOS blog from February 5th featuring the bald eagle before I could imagine all regs would be cut. We cannot allow pirates to steal everything away from us and the US!

Update: May 11, 2025

On Friday, NPR reported that Trump tightens control of independent agency overseeing nuclear safety:

“Going forward, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) must send new rules regarding reactor safety to the White House, where they will be reviewed and possibly edited. That is a radical departure for the watchdog agency, which historically has been among the most independent in the government. The new procedures for White House review have been in the works for months, but they were just recently finalized and are now in full effect.”

One of my Facebook groups includes former NRC employees who are responding to this very alarming news:

Here are some of the comments posted so far:

JW wrote: “I'm sure many folks in this group have seen reports regarding the order that all rules will now be reviewed and approved by the White House. I am curious what people here think of that plan. I was not a rulemaking expert, by any means, but questions like "how does the Administrative Procedures Act apply?" occur to me.”

GW replied: “Surely the public understands that rules for complex technologies requre expertise and extensive technical review and approval. Simple words like "should" and "shall" in a rule or regulation can mean the difference between a safe operating nuclear power plant and one that releases radioactive matterial to the environment. Relegating final review and approval of the kind or regulations promulgated by NRC, to a loyal Trump supporter or Trump himself would greatly reduce the confidence the public deserves when they agree to permit nuclear power plant in their jurisdiction.”

DP replied: “RIF the staff and issue licenses faster. Right. Today it’s rules, later it will be SERs. It’s a slippery slope. So much for independence. Staff will be afraid of filing a DPO concerning anything that comes from the WH for fear of losing their job. That is of course, if there remains a meaningful DPO process. I just hope that no matter what happens, that safety isn’t affected.”

JL replied: “This is clearly disappointing. Hope the Commissioners exercise their independence and refuse to comply with an illegal executive order recognizing they may be removed. Eventually the Supreme Court will need to address the independence issue and the standards for removing commissioners.”

JW replied: “For my own part, I can’t help but think of a couple times I stuck my neck out on what I believed to be misguided regulatory actions. What fate awaits a staff member who raises an uncomfortable issue in this new scheme? The agency has long had challenges with an “open and collaborative work environment,” or whatever they call it these days, and the intervention of the White House won’t improve that situation. I also wonder how they envision responding to emergent issues, like a late night emergency tech spec or temporary non-compliance.”

Former NRC Commissioner Stephen G Burns stated “I am deeply concerned about this move. Here's my post on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/.../urn:li:activity.../”

AR replied: “How does anyone in the White House, including the top brass there, know anything technical about NRC rules and the basis for them! What a farce having the White House reviewing and approving rules. But it doesn't surprise me, considering the myriad of other inane actions they are taking.”

WL: “There's a Commissioners office, a Staff Organization, 4 regional offices a Navsea Nuclear Reactors 08 Div and a USA Dept of Energy. Is there any duplication? How many times has the Staff been reorganized? Will our Federal Energy Policy permit Small Modular Reactors? Could the White House deal with the Intervenors like we did in the past? I remember the SRP, GDC, Part 50, Tech Specs, Sholly Notices, and the Reg Guides..will they all be reviewed in the Oval Office. Turn it all over to AI.”

JD wrote: “Having spent 20 years at the NRC, I can confidently say that overall NRC does a really good job of balancing reasonable public health and safety with that of efficiency and commercial needs. All of the great people I previously worked with at the NRC are passionate and highly technically competent individuals who try hard to make good decisions for all involved stakeholders.

That said, after having now spent nearly a decade on the industry side, I feel that industry doesn’t get enough credit for self-regulation of safety. Safety is a shared goal. After all, we need safe, reliable plants to deliver our electricity to our customers. It would not make good business sense to operate in an unsafe manner. In addition, the industry has the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) which continually challenges the industry to achieve higher and higher levels of excellence.

So, if done correctly and with the right technical conscience, there may be something to be gained by looking closely at some efficiency changes with a different set of eyes. In my opinion, if we are going to overhaul the regulations which have proved effective all these years, the DOGE should work with a coalition of NRC, industry, NEI, and INPO experts to carefully weigh the potential gains and/or consequences of such changes.

I worked as a contractor in the commercial nuclear field and at NRC for 31 years and completely agree that both industry and NRC pursue the same goal - safety. However, I think just knowing that there is an independent regulator who will be reviewing industry submittals contributes to the quality of industry safety analyses which leads to the industry having a good safety record.”

LC wrote: “Can you imagine them reading and understanding the complexity of the technical issues and regulatory complications etc. It has not been uncommon for the NRC to come under attack by both parties over the years-too much regulation or not enough regulation-so it goes. The NRC is the leading nuclear regulator in the world!”

CA stated: “Agree. Defense in depth; redundancy for safety's sake is important. It will be awkward to look a foreign regulator in the eye after all the times NRC has stressed the importance of an independent regulator.”

I added: “NRC has been the “gold standard” of nuclear regulators worldwide. We can all recall or revisit cases like Davis-Besse’s near-miss meltdown, corporate fraud and NRC fines. I suggest retired NRC employees compose an open letter to publicly share the essential facts about the “gold standard” as the President loves gold! I also recall our quick actions on increasing protections nationwide of all facilities after 9/11 and creating NSIR!”

DP replied, “you can add NRC’s role in investigating and requiring nation-wide improvements in: 1) fire protection after Browns Ferry fire; 2) maintenance after 1984 loss of feedwater event at Davis -Besse; 3) diesel-generator reliability of Transamerica Delaval diesel generators after crankshaft failure at Shoreham in the mid-1980s; and 4) site specific seismic upgrades at San Onofre 1 and Trojan. And our preemptive work preparing for Y2K in case something unforeseen happened.”

Linkedin Update June 14, 2025

From NRC Commissioner Christopher Hansen: This morning I released the following public statement:

“Late on Friday, President Trump terminated my position with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission without cause, contrary to existing law and longstanding precedent regarding removal of independent agency appointees.

My focus over the last five years has been to prepare the agency for anticipated change in the energy sector, while preserving the independence, integrity, and bipartisan nature of the world’s gold standard nuclear safety institution. It has been an honor to serve alongside the dedicated public servants at the NRC. I continue to have full trust and confidence in their commitment to serve the American people by protecting public health and safety and the environment.”

News Update June 17, 2025

Peter Behr with E&E News by Politico reports Trump firing of NRC commissioner jars agency’s leadership: Experts warn the dismissal of former Chair Chris Hanson could delay reviews of nuclear technology.

President Donald Trump’s abrupt firing Friday of Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner Christopher Hanson marks another move by the White House to gain control of the independent agency as it heads into a critical review of safety regulations governing a lineup of new reactors.

Hanson was appointed to the NRC by Trump in 2020 and named chair by then-President Joe Biden in 2021. His renomination by Biden was approved by the Senate in 2024 with a large bipartisan majority. Hanson, however, was notified of his dismissal in a terse, two-sentence email from the White House that concluded, “Thank you for your service.”

Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, told POLITICO on Monday that “all organizations are more effective when leaders are rowing in the same direction,” adding that Trump “reserves the right to remove employees within his own Executive Branch who exert his executive authority.” Hanson’s firing follows Trump’s removal of other leaders at independent agencies across the government, actions that are caught up in complex court actions.

Democrats in the House and Senate condemned Trump’s action, saying it violated the specific terms of the 1946 Atomic Energy Act that established the nation’s civilian nuclear energy program. The legislation, reaffirmed in 1954, says that a commissioner may be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Natural Resources, said Hanson’s removal was illegal. “Congress explicitly created the NRC as an independent agency, insulated from the whims of any president, knowing that was the only way to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the American people,” Pallone said in a statement.

Sen. Shelley Capito, (R-W.Va.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, did not respond to a request Monday for comment about Hanson’s firing.

“A competent, effective, and fully staffed U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is essential to the rapid deployment of new reactors and advanced technologies,” the American Nuclear Society said in a statement. “The arbitrary removal of commissioners without due cause creates regulatory uncertainty that threatens to delay America’s nuclear energy expansion.”

Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said his main concern is the quality of the staff’s ongoing technical safety reviews for the advanced small modular reactors now under development.

The NRC has been “racing through applications. They have an obligation to do a thorough review,” Lyman said. “If there are uncertainties that could potentially be safety issues, they can’t just drop the ball. I’m afraid the outcome of this is [going to be] a rubber stamp process.”

Trump, in a series of executive orders and statements last month, said the NRC has thrown roadblocks in front of the development of new reactor technologies with unnecessarily restrictive safety regulations and indefensibly slow processing of permits. But Hanson, in his term as chair, had led the commission staff in accelerating action on licensing issues, many observers conclude.

Former NRC Chair Stephen Burns, in an interview, said Hanson was in step with the directions enacted by Congress last year to streamline regulatory reviews. “He was undertaking those changes,” Burns said.

“It is unclear what the strategy here is in the long term,” Burns said, adding that the common speculation around the NRC now is that the commission’s remaining Democrats will soon follow Hanson.

Another former NRC chair, Richard Meserve, said in a statement, Trump’s action “reflects his intent to abolish the NRC as an independent agency,” he said. “Making the NRC subject to control by the White House means that questions will and should be raised as to whether its decisions on safety matters have been infected by political considerations.”

Meserve noted that Trump’s action comes after Trump’s executive order imposes new obligations on the NRC even as it’s reducing staffing. “Meeting the tight deadlines of the executive order was already going to be very challenging and is not facilitated by the needless disruption of the agency’s management,” Meserve said.

Adam Stein, director of nuclear energy and innovation at the Breakthrough Institute, a supporter of expanded nuclear power, had seen Trump’s executive orders as a positive accelerator of action on new reactor technologies. “The orders do not undermine safety,” he said then.

But on Monday, he expressed concern over the NRC’s ability to carry out the policy review if its leadership is uprooted. David Wright, the current NRC chair named by Trump, has not been renominated for a new term after his current one ends June 30, Stein noted. With Hanson gone, the commission membership will be reduced to three at the end of the month — two Democrats and one Republican.

Even if Wright is renominated, it is “virtually impossible” for him to receive quick Senate confirmation in the current political climate, Stein said.

His organization’s research reveals that the commission’s regulatory pace slows down when the membership drops to three representing different political parties, because a single commissioner can block a creation of a voting quorum, Stein said.

“The NRC remains critically in need of reform and modernization,” Stein said. “But those efforts will almost certainly fail if the result is to return to the partisan polarization around nuclear energy that crippled the industry over the last generation.”

Update June 24, 2025

Former NRC Officials sent a letter to key members of Congress in the House and Senate. The original is online in NRC ADAMS at ML25175A323

Update July 1, 2025

Mike King wrote on LinkedIn:

I’m honored to announce my promotion to Acting Executive Director for Operations at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the agency ensuring the safety and security of the nation’s civilian nuclear industry. This is a pivotal moment for nuclear energy, and I’m eager to lead the NRC in advancing innovation while upholding our commitment to public health and safety.

My deepest gratitude to Dr. Mirela Gavrilas for her exceptional leadership. Her dedication to excellence has strengthened the NRC, and I’m committed to building on her legacy.

As we navigate this transformative era, the talented and dedicated staff members at the NRC look forward to collaborating with our federal partners, industry leaders, and stakeholders to accelerate the safe deployment of advanced nuclear technologies. Let us shape a safe and secure energy future together.

Update July 8, 2025

First, the term for the NRC Chairman Wright has not been renewed effective July 1. NRC posted on LinkedIn:

As we wait for the U.S. Senate to act on former Chairman Wright’s nomination, we’ve instituted temporary changes to help us navigate this dynamic environment and – as always – meet our important mission. Last week, Wright delegated a variety of authorities to Commissioner Caputo, the longest tenured of the current Commission, and a few other authorities were assigned to career staff, including Acting EDO Mike King. Our three Commissioners then sent a statement to the workforce outlining their commitment to collegiality and the agency’s ongoing work in support of the Executive Orders and the ADVANCE Act. Together, the Commission and the staff are meeting all ongoing responsibilities at this critical time. You can find the delegation of authorities at: https://lnkd.in/ebeWWRDy.

Second, three former NRC Commissioners wrote an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:

Why the US must protect the independence of its nuclear regulatory

The NRC has protected the health and safety of Americans for 50 years without a single civilian reactor radiation-related death….We are concerned about the unintended safety consequences that a reduced NRC independence and a schedule-driven regulatory paradigm threaten to bring.

Third, did you know that NRC does not rely on taxpayer funds to operate and must recover fees from industry? When I worked there 20 years ago, the trade lobby Nuclear Energy Institute played a very heavy role in determining management promotions and how much we could bill for our labor to review applications. Here is the latest FY2025 Budget and Fees announcing a huge discount in NRC professional fees on new license applications. According to the law firm Morgan Lewis, who represented the company I worked with on the NuScale project):

The NRC recently published its FY 2025 final fee rule work papers detailing its budget requirements. The NRC’s FY 2025 budget is $994.1 million—no change from FY 2024. After accounting for excluded activities, the NRC must recover $808.8 million through service and annual fees. The NRC’s service and annual fees, codified in 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171, respectively, are essential components of its overall funding structure. One notable change in the FY 2025 fee rule is the reduced hourly rate of $148 per hour for advanced nuclear reactor applicants and pre-applicants for certain activities—a more than 50% reduction from the previous full-cost professional hourly rate of $318.

Yesterday and Today

“Today is the first day of the rest of your life.” That’s an expression I frequently heard while attending Guilford College in the late 1970’s with the goal of keeping in the present moment by letting go of past and future concerns which is a quote made popular by Charles Dederich. Yesterday, I visited my great friend Dave at Guilford for a stroll around campus which I planned to share in the blog today on this auspicious and arduous day. Auspicious for celebrating the birth and life of Martin Luther King, Jr. and arduous for the many changes occurring on this Inauguration Day.

I left home early yesterday morning with dense fog and misty rain in relatively warm 46 degree temperatures as an Arctic air cold front approached. The 1.5 hour drive from the North Carolina Triangle to the Triad required intense focus looking ahead with only about 500 feet of visibility in front of a wall of misty white fog. Eventually, I relaxed into a more peaceful mood while driving the empty road amazingly wondering if entering heaven would look like this.

Along the way on Highway 421 I reached 60,000 miles on our Rav4 Prime passing Liberty, NC where Toyota is building a multi-billion dollar battery factory with plans to begin production this year. Driving north to higher elevations going past Greensboro, the outside air temperature dropped down to 41 degrees with heavier rain and patches of unmelted snow remaining from the week before. First I visited the Belews Creek area to see the current coal-fired power plant where Duke Energy is proposing to upgrade to a nuclear power plant. The project would take about 10 years and currently the company is conducting surveys and preparing an early site (environmental) permit to submit to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. One contingency I heard last month during a public meeting with NRC and Duke Energy is that to convert the coal plant to nuclear they will needed the tax benefits proposed in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 for nuclear power production. These incentives will be uncertain after today as the new administration favors expanding oil, gas and perhaps coal sources/subsides for heating and energy production.

Located only about 20 miles north of Guilford College in Stokes County, I noticed the area around the steam plant is mostly rural agricultural farms growing tobacco, hay, and livestock. Piney Bluff Boat Ramp allows access to Duke Energy’s Belews Lake reservoir which is used as cooling water and part of the Dan River watershed. The kind lady at White’s Grocery (in Forsyth County) on Belews Creek Road, which is the closest store and gas station in the area (with an old Pur sign) to Duke Power only four miles away along Pine Haul Road, didn’t know about their plans and didn’t sell any local newspapers. She said I’d have to go to Stokesdale six miles away for a local paper. I noticed the coal smoke stack emitting steam and various pollutants is barely visible through the dense white clouds. I saw homes beginning just 0.4 miles away from the plant entrance and the Wither’s Chapel filled for the Sunday services. The closest home contains at least a dozen junk cars around the property but it did not seem to be a junk yard. Mountains of coal fly ash are buried around the power plant and Heidelberg Materials is involved with removal operations.

My friend Dave lives close by and we attended Guilford together with him two years ahead of me. We met through his roommate Tom who dated my high school friend and fellow geology major Becca. Meeting on campus at Founders Hall brought back fond memories of my youthful STUDent life where we could ponder our philosophical values and aspirations. We could joke occasionally using grand, highfalutin words like truculent and recall great professors and classes so long ago. The original buildings like Founders Hall, various classrooms and dorms all hold memories of yesterday’s trials and tribulations. I served on a concert committee and operated the spotlights for musicians including Bonnie Raitt, just 30 years old at the time, and annual serendipity celebrations to exchanging macroeconomics information with Professor Robert Williams about four years ago, to more recently hearing the Native American biology professor Robin Wall Kimmerer speak at Dana Auditorium, construction of the Paul and Evelyn Zopf Gazebo and adjacent coffee shop. Paul taught my sociology class so I donated to his project about two years ago and he, at 90 years old, wrote me a hand written thank you card. Learning for life and adapting to change is essential for our sustainability and I thank Guilford College and my friends and professors to instilling in me the curiosity to explore the world.

Our lives will never the same after today. We’ve enjoyed relative domestic peace and tranquility in our lifetimes with only experienced the civil war and guilded ages through text books, movies and experiences including the Guilford Woods which contain 240 acres of old growth forest where the Quakers, who founded the College in 1837, hid slaves in the “underground railroad” as well as “contentious objectors” against fighting previous wars. The Civil Rights movements led by Dr. King occurred when Dave and I were just young children just starting school and we greatly benefited from integration of races.

Today on the last day of the Biden Administration and first day of the Trump 2.0 Administration we in the American middle class are likely to experience a rollercoaster ride of changing priorities. Just like driving through the dense fog, the new President will blow smoke our way, burn more coal and oil and gas, build more walls and obstacles, help the rich get richer, remove ethical constraints of civil servants along with masses of dedicated employees.

Just as the fog limited my visibility making me much more focused and determined to move forward, perhaps more prayerful, not letting obstacles impede my progress, I couldn’t see far ahead but I wasn’t afraid. We do not need to change our values just as many spiritual and religious leaders have shown us the way. We must hold true to our values and know what we care about most such as: family, friends, peace and love, music and nature. We must continue on our journey. To quote Paul McCartney, “Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away…”

Disgusted with Democrats? Repulsed by Republicans? Scared of Socialists? Incensed by Industrialists? Outraged by Oligarchs? What can we do? I suggest we, as the Buddha wisely advised, seek a middle path. No longer taking sides of one political group but to find our own way and identity. What products can we buy that are beneficial to our lives? Can we reduce our consumption of food, energy, water and especially of fake news. Resist temptations and repeat some prayers and mantras. Plan for the best and prepare for the worst. Keep hope alive!

Efficient Nuke Licensing

In July 2024, President Biden signed the Fire Grants and Safety Act into law. According to DOE, the law is “chalking up a BIG win for our nuclear power industry. Included in the bill is bipartisan legislation known as the ADVANCE Act that will help us build new reactors at a clip that we haven’t seen since the 1970s.”

The ADVANCE Act is short for: ‘‘Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy Act of 2024.”

DOE states, “any of the advanced reactors under development use different coolants than what is currently used in our commercial light-water reactors—making the regulatory process more of a challenge. The ADVANCE Act directs the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reduce certain licensing application fees and authorizes increased staffing for NRC reviews to expedite the process.”

NRC expediting environmental reviews is discussed in Section 506 of Title V.

TITLE V—IMPROVING COMMISSION EFFICIENCY

Sec. 501. Mission alignment. NRC must update mission statement to include “efficient”
Sec. 502. Strengthening the NRC workforce.
Sec. 503. Commission corporate support funding.
Sec. 504. Performance metrics and milestones.
Sec. 505. Nuclear licensing efficiency.
Sec. 506. Modernization of nuclear reactor environmental reviews.

According to Section 506, NRC must submit a report to Congress within 180 days (due January 2025) with planned efforts to “facilitate efficient, timely, and predictable environmental reviews of nuclear reactor applications for a license…through expanded use of categorical exclusions, environmental assessments, and generic environmental impact statements.”

These new mandates are based on changes made to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in section 321 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act in 2023 as discussed in this blog from the American Action Forum. I previously wrote a blog about the history of NEPA and my submitting public comments to NRC.

According to the ADVANCE Act, NRC must report to Congress and consider:

A)      Using NEPA documents prepared by other Federal agencies

B)      Using previous NEPA documents prepared by NRC

C)      Using mitigated findings of no significant impact to reduce proposed impacts

D)      Relying on other Federal, State, and local government evaluations

E)      Coordinating development of NEPA documents with other Federal agencies

F)      Streamlining consultations with other Federal, State, and local agencies

G)     Streamlining analyses of alternatives including sites and power alternatives

H)     Establishing new categorical exclusions

I)       Amending 10 CFR Section 51.20(b) to determine if an EA can replace an EIS

J)      Authorizing use of applicant’s EIS as the NRCs draft EIS

K)     Adopting online and digital technologies to allow applicant and agency coordination

L)     Making other revisions to 10 CFR 51 that may be needed

Yesterday, I attended a virtual public meeting with NRC staff to take comments on the ADVANCE Act directive to be included in the report to Congress. About 60 people attended including 40 members of the public and 20 NRC staff. Some attendees strongly oppose nuclear energy while others represent the industry or academia which made for diverse and lively comments.

About 20 years ago, I worked for NRC conducting environmental reviews for relicensing operating nuclear power plants. Many of us felt the NEPA schedule of about 18 months was very aggressive and there was more than one Christmas-New Year’s holiday “break” we had to work to get the EIS completed on time! Here’s the basic process: the applicant submits an application then NRC issues the notice of intent (NOI) that gets published in the federal register (FRN) which starts the clock on the application process. NRC staff reviews the industry environmental report and starts the scoping process to conduct the NEPA study, site tours and audits, permit reviews, discussions with agencies/tribes and obtain public comments. This provides input into the draft EIS which involves obtaining and addressing public comments to prepare the final EIS. The NEPA review occurs parallel to the safety evaluation report and the total process to grant a license takes about 2 years.

I commented that for the above item F, NRC must also consult with Native American tribes which are sovereign nations as they are directly affected by uranium mining, mill sites, transportation routes, and more impacts that must be considered in NEPA analyses. I know NRC staff are well aware and are very involved in tribal consultations and the Congressional text must be updated. I could not identify anyone on the public meeting representing Native American tribes and many of the public attendees complained about lack of notification for the meeting. I randomly learned about the meeting by looking at new documents entered into ADAMS. I suggest NRC make more of an effort to engage the general public through social media announcements.

As I reported about 10 months ago, I worked preparing environmental reports to build small modular reactors (SMR) in Idaho. We were very close to submitting the application before the utility shut the project down so the NRC officially did not start the NEPA process. However, NRC became very involved in “pre-application” meetings and reviews of draft documents so there was close coordination between industry and the regulators to make the process very efficient.

Regarding the ADVANCE Act mandate of considerations, NRC will need to determine and justify if other NEPA documents previously prepared by NRC or other Federal, State, or local agencies are relevant, reliable, and adequate to meet all requirements. While NRC consults with Department of Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service and Department of Commerce NOAA, I recommend NRC obtain reviews from the U.S. Geological Survey which is often closely involved in local and tribal resource issues. For example, see the DOE project involving USGS on tribal land related to impacts from uranium mill sites which I coauthored.

I advocate that NEPA documents need to consider alternative siting and sources of power. How did the applicant objectively consider various locations for the project and arrive at the proposed site? For the Idaho SMR project, the Shoshone-Bannock tribe wanted to know the same thing and wondered how the site construction might affect their reservation’s view of the mountains or noise during construction as well many other disruptive concerns.

I believe one of the failures of the Idaho SMR project, beyond the proposed rapid inflationary construction cost increases to the project, was the lack of public outreach to engage ratepayers such as in Salt Lake City to counteract the misinformation regarding baseload and alternative energy sources needed for grid stability. As coal plants get retired or replaced with natural gas plants, the only other source of baseload power (where the electricity flows 24/7) is with nuclear power. While wind and solar power alternatives are increasingly popular, without very expensive battery storage — grid stability will be impossible. So the public, especially the anti-nuclear activists need to face the energy and climate change realities. Therefore, I recommend NRC keep the requirement for industry to provide alternative siting and need for power sources in the environmental report which NRC reviews and incorporates in the EIS. I also do not advocate that first of a kind power plants receive an exemption from considering alternatives.

Similarly, for category J, I do not advocate for NRC adopting the industry environmental report as the draft EIS. That will skip the scoping process involving the pubic. For the Idaho SMR project, we almost completed the environmental report and there was no public involvement. How can NRC plagiarize verbatim industry reports then claim it meets their nuclear ASME quality assurance practices (NQA-1)? When I worked for NRC and learned that our consultant took information directly from the industry report without referencing the source of information this became a serious breach of trust. How will the general public perceive any government report written by industry proponents?

With the U.S. not creating a nuclear waste repository and having to pay industry to store nuclear waste, it is not reasonable for NRC to expect industry will resolve these issues in the environmental report as would be needed if category J were adopted.

I suggest NRC prepare a nationwide programmatic or generic EIS that can be tiered to site specific EIS documents. I do not agree that EAs can be substituted for EIS documents (category I) as nuclear power plants are major federal actions and public involvement with meetings is necessary and might be excluded in the EA process.

Plans to conduct another NRC public meeting on the ADVANCE Act is planned for October 16. This blog will serve as my official public comments submitted to Mr. Lance Rakovan: lance.rakovan@nrc.gov.

Update October 16, 2024

Big news today- Amazon Web Services announced plans to partner with a company to build nuclear energy sites. Here’s a report from AP discussing Amazon and Google’s recent announcements.

Today, I attended another NRC meeting on the ADVANCE Act - this time focusing on the big picture as the first public meeting involving the entire organization. Here are my comments that I posted online:

“I attended public meetings today and on September 25th, 2024. So far at both meetings, the NRC requested public "scoping" comments on the ADVANCE Act but has not provided proposed decisions that must soon be provided to Congress. I submitted comments on Section 506 to modernize nuclear reactor environmental reviews on September 26. The report to Congress on Section 506 is due in early January 2025. Will there be an opportunity to review and provide comments to this draft report to Congress or will it be considered a final report? How can the public provide comments in the process to evaluate NRC recommendations?

At the meeting today, the NMSS Director responded to a question that the ADVANCE Act is being considered beyond the Congressional direction for "advanced nuclear reactors" and being considered for all parts of the agency. This increase in scope warrants an increase in public awareness to all programs nationwide and internationally with participation including from IAEA, other federal agencies, state and local governments and sovereign Native American tribal governments. For example, questions were asked at today's meeting about nuclear waste storage and disposal but no one from the Department of Energy responded. However, the Advance Act (Section 506 items D-F) directs NRC to coordinate with other agencies during the NEPA process. Before changes are made to the process, more public meetings are needed to involve these other groups with public engagement to understand what the NRC recommends.

I recommend NRC consider providing the draft report on Section 506 to Congress and offer a public comment period to review and incorporate comments as is typically done in the EIS process: scoping, draft EIS, final EIS. This would enable NRC to meet its obligation for submitting a report on time and for including additional public input. Support for carbon-free nuclear power is increasing and this is a timely opportunity to increase public pressure on Congress for finding a permanent geologic repository for high-level radioactive waste.

The statement that taxpayers will be subsiding about half of the increased mandates resulting from the Act needs to be detailed. What aspects of the pre-application and application process will be paid by the industry or by taxpayers? The public are not generally involved in pre-application meetings so using taxpayer dollars would be inappropriate.

While the current process of 25 tasks presented today is efficient for NRC to accomplish requirements on many different timelines over the next few years, a reasonable person will not be able to put the pieces together. Therefore, I recommend one overarching mission document is needed in responding to the ADVANCE Act.

Another question asked was how will these changes might affect Reg Guides and other documents. No answer was provided. The industry and public need clarity for what will be affected by regulatory changes and the timelines. For example, Reg. Guide 4.2 to prepare environmental reports will need to be updated for changes to the Act Section 506 and 10 CFR Part 51.

With the 50th anniversary of NRC and preparing for the RIC in March 2025, I suggest the EDO recommend to the Commission:

1) that the ADVANCE Act is vital for the nation's civilian nuclear program and necessitates demonstration as an independent regulatory, similar to the Federal Reserve

2) one holistic agency-wide document describing all functions of NRC will be prepared focusing on proposed changes

3) the NRC organize a panel for the RIC involving a wide number of agency experts to describe the changes being made from the Advance Act.”

UPDATE January 16, 2026

The NRC completed the report to Congress directed by Section 506 of the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy Act of 2024 (ADVANCE Act). Here are links to the letter and report. Based on my reading, the report proposes potential changes to the way NRC conducts environmental reviews for new power plants with the overall theme for industry to have a much larger role in the NEPA process. For example, utility consultants may take the lead in several areas including: 1) threatened and endangered species biological reviews and preparing assessments, 2) interactions with tribal governments, and 3) preparing environmental assessments (EA) as the preferred option over full environmental impact statements (EIS). Previously, NRC took the lead in all these areas including having industry submit the environmental report that fed into the expanded EIS. In addition, issues common to all future nuclear plants could be resolved in the Generic EIS for New Reactors in the same way NRC regulates other fuel cycle entities.

The use of “incorporation by reference” will expand where the applicant cites previous public information so the reader must track down information. The NRC focus will be on new and significant information as well as only consider alternative sources of energy as part of the no action alternative as related only to nuclear options. Therefore, NEPA documents will no longer consider various sources of non-nuclear energy which for adoption of future nuclear power and generating additional nuclear waste needs to become part of the national and international conversation. The report is very brief with summary tables provided in Enclosure 1. NRC acknowledged my previously submitting public comments along with eight other commenters as shown in Enclosure 2.

When I worked for NRC preparing EIS documents to relicense nuclear power plants, we needed several staff and about 15 experts from national laboratories to conduct environmental reviews. There are extensive data requirements such as for air and water that must begin several years before the application stage, so there will be much more burden on industry consultants to fully plan and execute the expanding requirements.

Please let me know if you are interested in discussing how these changes could impact your business when interacting with the NRC.

Updated June 27, 2025

I heard from a friend who worked with me at the NRC and he share this update:

“From the retiree luncheon gathering, I learned the NRC has a hiring freeze.  A number of employees have retired or taken the buy out and cannot be replaced.

The ADVANCE Act passed by the previous administration, changed NRC's mission.  

It is now, "The NRC protects public health and safety and advances the nation’s common defense and security by enabling the safe and secure use and deployment of civilian nuclear energy technologies and radioactive materials through efficient and reliable licensing, oversight, and regulation for the benefit of society and the environment".

The major changes are the addition of the words "enabling" and "efficiency". 

Chairman David Wright has stated that "The future of nuclear energy and radioactive materials in this country is at a crossroads, and the NRC should position itself to be a part of the solution.  Congress has directed the NRC to be an enabler to nuclear technologies while staying true to the core principles laid out in the Atomic Energy Act." 

In the ADVANCE Act; "efficiency" refers to timeliness and cost.”

POWERFUL!

Two books published in 2021 on related topics - by Katharine Hayhoe and Bill Gates - document sources of human-released carbon overheating our fragile earth and what they are doing and recommending to mitigate further catastrophes. Both books offer clear insights to understand the threat, communicate with other people possessing diverse opinions, and urgently act in the most effective and efficient way to achieve critical solutions. However, there is a major difference I found between the books that needs to be corrected!

In my previous blog, I discuss the cancellation of the Carbon Free Power Project in Idaho to build a small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) and losing my consulting job one month ago. Subsequently, I picked up these and other books at the library to see what authors said about all the sources of energy we need to solve our climate crisis.

Dr. Hayhoe, a Texas Tech climate professor, briefly mentions new developments in SMR projects in Idaho, the one that just got canceled, and others including by Bill Gates, founding investor of TerraPower, in partnership with GE Hitachi as well as advances in other countries. On page 198 of Saving US, the author states that solar photovoltaics covering an area of about 100 square miles in West Texas could provide all the power needed to supply the United States using present available technology.

Mr. Gates devotes an entire chapter titled “Five Questions to Ask in Every Climate Conversation” including how much power and space is needed? The U.S. consumes about 1,000 gigawatts and a mid-sized city needs about 1 gigawatt. He shows how much power can be generated from various energy sources like nuclear (500 - 1000 watts per square meter), solar (5 -20 w/m2), and wind (1 - 2 w/m2). So a solar farm needs between 50 to 100 times more land to generate power than a nuclear plant. As solar only provides intermittent power during the day and seasonal changes cuts light energy in half from summer to winter, expensive storage batteries must be factored into any comparison with baseload power plants.

Ultimately, we need all the clean energy power sources that we can build as we shut down coal plants by balancing the supply and demand of electricity with combinations of geothermal, hydropower, nuclear, solar, waves and wind.

SayoMaRa CFPP

In a major setback personally and for the future of all life on earth, this week I said goodbye to my environmental Fluor Corporation consulting job, as did many others receive “Reduction-In-Force” (RIF) notices, after the NuScale small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) project in Idaho got cancelled. For the past 13-months, I joined several consultants preparing permitting documents for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). We completed numerous pre-application activities including attending meetings around the country, submitting the first Limited Work Authorization for early construction and we were on track for completing the license application and an environmental report to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) this year. The project received significant federal funding and support including being remotely sited along with about 50 other nuclear reactor projects at Idaho National Laboratory (INL).

So what was the CFPP and why did we say sayonara or ‘SayoMaRa’ to the proposal? The Carbon Free Power Project (CFPP) planned to build six SMRs in a connected series of units that would have produced 77 megawatts (MW) each for a total of 462 MW. One MW can provide power for about 750 homes so the proposed CFPP at a 90% capacity would provide power to about 310,000 homes.

Increasing inflation and other factors caused the project to fail. Anticipated construction costs doubled so utility customers became reluctant to subscribe to the CFPP. With extensive research and working with other experts, I concluded the benefits far outweighed the potential costs comparing all the options available. Unfortunately, to my knowledge this information did not get shared with the public. Ironically, favorability of nuclear power is growing in America: currently at 57%, up from 43% in 2020, according to the Pew Research Center.

Many people think we can solve all our energy needs with renewables like wind, solar, hydroelectric dams, geothermal, or biomass. That’s like driving a car without understanding how and how often to add fuel. According to The Urbanist, a SMR needs only about 0.1 square mile of land mass as compared to hundreds of square miles for equivalent wind or solar farms producing only intermittent energy.

Obviously, there is not enough land space, continuous sunlight or wind, battery storage facilities, dammed rivers, hot rocks, or wood pellets to burn on the earth to meet our ever increasing energy demands. The only baseload power plants are from burning coal, natural gas or radioactive decay from elements like thorium and uranium. SMRs are designed to provide grid stability and work with alternative energy sources to keep the lights on consistently.

This is a global problem and what happened to America’s drive for energy independence? Microsoft founder Bill Gates knows the importance of nuclear power - he’s very involved in energy and climate issues such as creating advanced nuclear TerraPower designs starting with proposing to replace a coal plant in Wyoming.

NRC previously approved the NuScale design, originally developed at Oregon State University, for a larger 12-unit SMR plant which contains numerous advances in passive safety features. NuScale is the only SMR design currently approved by NRC.

Here are some additional new articles:

US News and World Report

NuScale Ends Utah Project, in Blow to US Nuclear Power Ambitions

Wired

“On Wednesday, NuScale and its backers pulled the plug on the multibillion-dollar Idaho Falls plant. They said they no longer believed the first-of-its-kind plant, known as the Carbon Free Power Project (CFPP) would be able to recruit enough additional customers to buy its power.”

“The Department of Energy, which was due to host the plant at Idaho National Lab, awarded $1.4 billion to the project over 10 years.”

“UAMPS spokesperson Jessica Stewart told WIRED that the utility group would expand its investments in a major wind farm project and pursue other contracts for geothermal, solar, battery, and natural gas projects”

Axios reported, “The Energy Department had provided $232 million for the project since October 2020. An agency spokesperson said the work will be valuable in the future, adding: "While not every project is guaranteed to succeed, DOE remains committed to doing everything we can to deploy these technologies to combat the climate crisis and increase access to clean energy."

Slow Down

On Memorial Day, in a nearby neighborhood of Apex, North Carolina, a 10-year old boy died when hit by a car. The boy was riding on his scooter by his home and perhaps the driver of the car was going too fast - the cause of the accident is still under investigation. The NHTSA.gov reports that in 2021 speeding killed 12,330 people in the United States.

This morning I was reminded of this accident while walking our dog on the sidewalk and a car came speeding past me. The street in our neighborhood is narrow with parked cars on one side of the road. As the speeding car flew by just a few feet away from me, I guess going at least 40 mph in the 25 mph speed limit, I waved my arm to slow down. The driver slowed and then stopped and backed up to see what happened. I asked, “do you know how fast your were going?” The driver replied no and said he was not paying attention. “You were going at least 40 mph and we have kids on scooters riding around here too.” The man apologized and I felt grateful he seemed receptive to my concerns and did not get angry.

The chart from NTSB shows that pedestrian fatalities increase with speed - just an increase from 20 mph to 30 mph increases deaths by 40% and getting hit by a car going 40 mph you only have a 15% chance of survival! Several years ago a friend of mine lost his wife- a school teacher and mother - when she got hit and run over in a supermarket parking lot — the car only traveled about 5 mph!

Our neighborhood obtained from the Apex Police Department a traffic speed monitor to remind drivers how fast they are traveling. The monitor functioned for about two weeks close to the location of the speeding car and then we recently requested moving it to a parallel street. Another neighbor mentioned the monitor slows most cars down but some of the teenage drivers like to test how fast they can cruise by the digital sign.

Another reason to slow down is the faster you drive the more money you’ll spend. Gas milage efficiency generally decreases rapidly at speeds above 50 mph. According to Fuel Economy.gov, you can assume that for each 5 mph you drive over 50 mph on the highway is like paying an additional $0.25 per gallon of gas. So on the many local highways with 70 mph speed limits, people are typically driving 80 mpg costing an extra $3.00 per gallon of gas.

Conserve your speed to save lives, money, and so much more!

Power Outage Tracker

This week I read an article discussing impacts to the electrical grid during the severe winter weather. PowerOutage.us provides regional information on electric customers without power. The U.S. map provides yellow labels for at least 10,000 customers currently without power in Colorado and Washington states. In addition, close to 60,000 customers are without power in Oregon. The interactive map allows for more information for each state and county.

The MSN news article describes how extreme cold weather in Texas caused excessive demand and under supply of electricity; so on Friday, the U.S. Department of Energy declared an emergency warning allowing the state regulator to boost energy generation from all sources including dirtier fuel oil releasing more pollution! So how much more?

The U.S. Energy Information Agency provides a list of carbon dioxide emissions indicating fuel oil like kerosene and diesel release an average of 162 pounds (of carbon dioxide per million BTUs) while natural gas releases about 117 pounds. This can result in many tons of carbon dioxide released to the air and other pollutants creating smog such as oxides of nitrogen, sulfur and organic chemicals.

The best way for consumers to help prevent or mitigate these emergencies is to reduce demand and support increases in clean energy supplies. We can turn our thermostat down by a few degrees, limit electric consumption, and add more layers of clothes.

The Climate Diet

I found The Climate Diet on the new book shelf at the public library. The author Paul Greenberg offers, “50 simple ways to trim your carbon footprint.” The small concise book is an easy and fun read with many practical ideas that are easy to implement. Many of these ideas are well known but it’s worth being reminded and during this COVID pandemic many people are being forced to change their habits by staying more at home, eating less meat and diary, buying energy efficient appliances and electric vehicles, riding bicycles, telecommuting, gardening and planting more trees.

Some of the ideas that I had not heard about include how much money banks fund the fossil fuels industry. JP Morgan Chase held the misdirected distinction of being the top money lender providing almost $270 billion from 2016-2019. The top four banks (Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi, and Banks of America) loaned about $811 billion to the industry that created and exacerbates the climate crisis. As consumers we make choices on our banks, credit cards, investments, and insurance. This reminds me of a blog I wrote almost six months ago on ESG.

Another useful idea for new construction or when the air conditioner needs to be replaced is to use a heat pump. The author adds a resource section including advice on heat pumps from NRDC.

Here is what the publisher says:

“ABOUT THE CLIMATE DIET

A celebrated writer on food and sustainability offers fifty straightforward, impactful rules for climate-friendly living

“Some strong and rational suggestions for reducing your personal impact here–and when you’re eating smart, you’ll have the energy to do the movement building we need to change systems too! This book integrates the individual and the societal in a powerful way.”–Bill McKibben

We all understand just how dire the circumstances facing our planet are and that we all need to do our part to stem the tide of climate change. When we look in the mirror, we can admit that we desperately need to go on a climate diet. But the task of cutting down our carbon emissions feels overwhelming and the discipline required hard to summon. With The Climate Diet, award-winning food and environmental writer Paul Greenberg offers us the practical, accessible guide we all need. It contains fifty achievable steps we can take to live our daily lives in a way that’s friendlier to the planet–from what we eat, how we live at home, how we travel, and how we lobby businesses and elected officials to do the right thing. Chock-full of simple yet revelatory guidance, The Climate Diet empowers us to cast aside feelings of helplessness and start making positive changes for the good of our planet.”

Going Solar

Today I applied to the Homeowners Association (HOA) to approve installing solar panels on our home. The process to choose installing solar has been much more challenging, although less expensive, than buying a PHEV car last year as I previously described in this blog. While I’ve bought many automobiles in the past, this is the first time choosing a solar company to purchase and install panels. With the new Inflation Reduction Act allowing for 30% tax rebates and declining costs of solar panels, the time for homeowners to install solar could never be better!

We purchased our home in February 2022. About a dozen neighbors out of a couple of hundred homes have installed solar panels so far. However, the HOA just took over the 5-year old community after the builder completed the development. Our next door neighbor, who needed to signoff on our request, was able to install panels on their rear south facing roof and some homes were “grandfathered” allowing them with panels facing the front of the house. The new HOA requirements do not allow panels to be visible from the front of the house which eliminates many homeowners from installing solar if the front of their home faces the south.

So we may be the first to test the new architectural review committee (ARC) process, which just this month added solar to the guidelines: “Solar Panels are allowed and should be installed by a licensed professional with the proper architectural application approval. Panels should be installed on the sides or back of the roof and not front street facing to appeal more to the overall look of the home.”

We are requesting the ARC to approve our plan for installing 18 panels on the west facing rear roof and 4 panels on the south facing roof. Our neighbor in charge of the ARC informally suggested we get the most efficient and install the fewest number of panels we can.

I spoke with several neighbors who’ve installed solar panels in our neighborhood by knocking on doors or checking the Facebook group learning they used at least four different companies. Before contacting companies I wanted to get better informed on the options so I found this book to be very helpful as an introduction:

How to Solar Power Your Home by Martha Maeda, 2015 Atlantic Publishing Group

The author describes motivations for going solar, active and passive systems, evaluating if solar is right for you depending on where you live, energy efficiency, designs and selecting components, rebates, and maintenance.

After reading the book and reviewing some helpful websites including energysage.com, solarreviews.com, solarpowertalk.com, and nuwattenergy.com, I compiled lists of solar providers, ratings, reviews, manufacturer technology, and costs. I then contacted companies on the top list and got estimates over the phone after providing our monthly electric usage.

I compared bids from six companies that proposed to install panels from several companies including AlphaPure, QCell, REC, Solaria, and SunPower. So it’s important to learn about the actual panel technology in addition to selecting the company to install the panels. Some of the installers were locally owned companies and some were national. I spoke with sales people from several other states and only one person wanted to meet in person. I looked at solar panel specs including efficiency, duration (panels lose power over time), cost per watt, and warrantees. Many of the installation companies were willing to share how they could beat the competition.

The process to select a solar company took me several weeks, it will take several more months to get the panels installed, and we probably won’t know for many years or perhaps decades if we made the right decisions so far. But we can feel good today that we are trying to make a difference in going green!

Nuclear Plant Community and Contacts

About three months ago we bought a home only three miles away (and 20 miles to Raleigh) from the Harris Nuclear Power Plant. We considered the many tradeoffs with benefits of living in a more rural area near lakes and forests while being mindful of extra unnatural radioactivity in the environment much less the fear of low probability-high consequence risks of a nuclear meltdown. If you saw the recent NETFLIX docudrama on Three Mile Island (TMI), I can understand how scary it might feel wondering if that could ever happen again? The series does reveal the scarcity and importance of honest corporate officials, vigilant regulators, accurate reporters, insider whistleblowers and community organizers.

So far, I feel safe living so close to Harris NPP based on what I know about building, operating, and regulating nuclear power plants. Power plants have improved tremendously over many decades as a direct result of lessons learned from accidents and world events like 9/11. In 2019, I published a series of eight blogs on Mitigating Nuclear Hazards examining my professional experiences with the nuclear fuel cycle including blog number 5 on Reactors.

Finding unbiased sources of information - people, especially experts, who are not pro-nuke or anti-nuke is essential for getting at the realities of safely living by a nuclear power plant. I highly recommend checking out the series of videos by University of Illinois Energy Professor Dr. David Ruzic including the 2021 overview Dispelling the Myths of Nuclear Power and a technical recounting of the history of TMI.

So I’m just beginning to learn specifically about the Duke Energy Progress Harris plant. I discovered that the sign in front of the closed visitors center (“open by appointment only”) provides an outdated phone number because the area code changed from 919 to 984 so the correct number is 984-229-6261. Some websites and customer service representatives still had the old number last time I checked.

So I reached out to the resident inspectors (who live in our community) with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to get the correct information. This led to my attending the first tour of the environmental center after the Covid pandemic ended public events. The Harris public affairs specialist is Michelle Burton who can be reached at 984-229-2160. She and Nathan Blanton, a senior scientist for radiation protection, provided an overview of the plant operations to a group of 10 people - mostly with the girl scouts.

I also joined a public meeting held by NRC one month ago on the phone focusing on annual safety inspections of the Harris plant. I was the only member of the public to ask questions on topics including cyber security, evacuation routes, upgrades to equipment, and nuclear waste.

I am hopeful to attend a tour of the plant inside the protected area if it’s offered later this fall. I’ve joined my neighborhood HOA safety committee to be a community organizer seeking and sharing accurate information on topics including the swimming pool, traffic, and the nuclear power plant.

For residents living within a 5-mile radius of the nuclear power plant, the company issues a public alert radio. To obtain the radio, I spoke with Dave Bell (984-229-2229) in the emergency preparedness department at the Harris plant who dropped a Midland weather alert radio off at my house. I found preset channel 7 with a broadcast frequency of 162.550 MHz provides the best reception. Now we’re getting many frequent alerts from the National Weather Service. The Harris plant sends weekly radio tests on Wednesday’s at noon according to the EP Booklet which provides abundant community information including on evacuation routes.

So if you’re in the area perhaps on the way to Harris Lake County Park and driving by the Harris Energy and Environmental Center please let me know if they update the visitors sign with the correct phone number to schedule tours. You may also enjoy the White Oak nature trail with short loops and numerous trees identified. Calling the company public affairs specialist and NRC to request public meetings is another way to show an engaged and informed community.

POWERful ECO-FILM

Michael Moore this Earth Day released a film Planet of the Humans on YouTube. I highly recommend watching the thought-provoking documentary that digs beneath the surface of the Green Energy revolution. I felt the film pays strong homage to the iconic Planet of the Apes series focusing on human behavior of greed and corporate deceit to show we cannot resolve our peril with old or new technologies. Planet of the Humans challenges conventional wisdom of green energy and electric vehicles as well as the promoters of Environmentalism to show that trade offs are not decreasing environmental impacts. Actually, most commercial solar and wind systems and corporations heavily rely on petrochemicals and mining industries as well as promoting biomass as renewable that burns trees and garbage including tires.

The film does not offer many solutions for saving Planet Earth and all species, specifically Primates, realizing that demands on energy, transportation, and natural resources are interconnected and unsustainable. The film briefly mentions the need the do less with what we have, i.e. conservation.

I am a strong advocate of finding a balance and taking a risk cost-benefit approach to all energy sources with assessing environmental impacts. We need local, national, and United Nations energy strategies that decrease impacts to human health (including workers) and the environment.

Here are a few ideas to consider that are not discussed in film and might make a good sequel:

If we must burn coal for decades to come, phase out high sulfur coal in West Virginia in favor of Wyoming coal.

If we must burn nuclear power, phase out unsafe and older power plants in favor of new modular reactor designs.

If we must use biomass and biofuels, ensure adequate local resources and transparent public health protections.

If we must build more wind generators, make sure we have a national supply of materials including rare earth elements.

If we must build more solar electric plants, make sure they will last more than 10 years.

We need to take a stronger look at waste as a resource! Here is a blog I wrote about collecting waste natural gas at the local sewage treatment plant to run biofuel vehicles.

Also, last week nuclear engineering students from the University of Michigan received an award for proposing that waste spent nuclear fuel be used to heat and transform sewage sludge into fertilizer!

Oil and Gas Wells in Colorado with Increasing Oversight

Colorado contains abundant oil and natural gas reserves. According to EIA, crude oil production increased by four times since 2010. The state is in the top five natural gas producing states in the U.S. The photo showing well field locations is from a GIS map provided by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, COGCC.

Despite vigorous attempts by industry to block new regulations, on April 16, 2019, Governor Polis signed into law SB 19-181 to increase regulatory oversight to of oil and gas development. According to the COGCC:

“One of the primary changes associated with Colorado’s new oil and gas law is that the mission of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) changes from “fostering” the oil and gas industry to “regulating” the industry, prioritizing public health, safety and environmental concerns. It also enables local governments to have increased oversight of land use related oil and gas activities in their communities.”

Hopefully, this is good news for the state and citizens to make oil and gas development safer for people and the environment. We need to be aware and concerned about the multiple chemicals produced including carbon dioxide, methane, formaldehyde, benzene and many other substances!

Middle East Oil Supply, Demand and Conflicts

The U.S. continues to develop independent sources of petroleum and alternatives but still depends on significant imports brought through the Strait of Hormuz (photo by NASA). Asia consumes about three-fourths of Persian Gulf oil. This week Iran attacked two tankers and an American drone. Last month four tankers were attacked in the Gulf of Oman. Will a new war be fought over oil or can war be avoided such as by us becoming less dependent on hydrocarbons?

The International Energy Agency states, “The United States will lead oil-supply growth over the next six years, thanks to the incredible strength of its shale industry, triggering a rapid transformation of global oil markets. By 2024, the United States will export more oil than Russia and will close in on Saudi Arabia – a pivotal milestone that will bring greater diversity of supply in markets.”

The U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) provides weekly, monthly, and annual updates on petroleum supply and demand. EIA reported that the Strait of Hormuz, “located between Oman and Iran, connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. The Strait of Hormuz is the world's most important oil chokepoint because of the large volumes of oil that flow through the strait. In 2018, its daily oil flow averaged 21 million barrels per day (b/d), or the equivalent of about 21% of global petroleum liquids consumption. Flows through the Strait of Hormuz in 2018 made up about one-third of total global seaborne traded oil. More than one-quarter of global liquefied natural gas trade also transited the Strait of Hormuz in 2018. EIA estimates that 76% of the crude oil and condensate that moved through the Strait of Hormuz went to Asian markets in 2018…the United States imported about 1.4 million b/d of crude oil and condensate from Persian Gulf countries through the Strait of Hormuz, accounting for about 18% of total U.S. crude oil and condensate imports and 7% of total U.S. petroleum liquids consumption.”

Capping the British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon Well

According to EPA, “On April 20, 2010, the oil drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, operating in the Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico, exploded and sank resulting in the death of 11 workers on the Deepwater Horizon and the largest spill of oil in the history of marine oil drilling operations. 4 million barrels of oil flowed from the damaged Macondo well over an 87-day period, before it was finally capped on July 15, 2010. On December 15, 2010, the United States filed a complaint in District Court against BP Exploration & Production and several other defendants alleged to be responsible for the spill.”

Working for the USGS, I got the honor to meet Dr. Paul Hsieh, the scientist who determined that the capped well would hold and not blowout causing significantly more damage. He served on a government task force and one of the biggest issues was obtaining the critical data to determine if capping the well could withstand the pressures. Here are two stories from the Daily Mail and NASA describing his heroic efforts! Luckily his scientific analysis and presentation prevailed over typical risk-adverse government politics.

In 2016, BP paid $20 billion in a global settlement according to the Department of Interior and NOAA is leading the restoration response.

Trump Tax Cut Opens Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to Petroleum Companies

After about 40 years of protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) from petroleum exploration and development, in December 2017, the Republican controlled Congress and Trump Administration hid within the tax cut legislation allowing oil leasing. According to the The Hill article, Mr. Trump boasted, “We’re going to start drilling in ANWR, one of the largest oil reserves in the world, that for 40 years this country was unable to touch. That by itself would be a massive bill…They’ve been trying to get that, the Bushes, everybody. All the way back to Reagan, Reagan tried to get it. Bush tried to get it. Everybody tried to get it,” he said. “They couldn’t get it passed. That just happens to be here.”

According to the Energy Information Agency EIA, In December 2017, “the passage of Public Law 115-97 required the Secretary of the Interior to establish and administer a competitive oil and natural gas program for the leasing, development, production, and transportation of oil and natural gas in and from the coastal plain (1002 Area) of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Previously, ANWR was effectively under a drilling moratorium.”

I still recall as a college student in 1980 the great excitement when President Carter announced protecting ANWR. Despite the Iranian oil embargo causing massive fuel shortages, he valued preserving wildlife and the environment leading to Mr. Carter’s announcement for energy independence using alternative sources and to restore American confidence. Protecting ANWR in 1980 is described by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:

“President Jimmy Carter signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). The Act re-designated the Range as part of the larger, approximately 18 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, designated eight million acres as Wilderness, and designated three rivers as Wild. It also called for wildlife studies and an oil and gas assessment of 1.5 million acres of the Refuge coastal plain. In addition, ANILCA allowed KIC to relinquish their selected lands outside the Refuge and instead to select the remainder of their Corporation lands within the Arctic Refuge. Section 1003 of ANILCA states that the "production of oil and gas from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is prohibited and no leasing or other development leading to production of oil and gas from the [Refuge] shall be undertaken until authorized by an act of Congress." The FWS website for ANWR describes the, “Arctic Refuge contains the largest area of designated Wilderness within the National Wildlife Refuge System, "where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man." [The Wilderness Act, 1964].”

This year, when Democrats took control of the House of Representatives, they and a few Republicans introduced the Arctic Cultural and Coastal Plain Protection Act. However, like most of the multitude of other bills passed by the House, this bill is stuck in the Republican-led Senate.

Update: On Thursday, June 20th, I caught C-SPAN when full House voted to block oil drilling and seismic exploration for one year as part of the Department of Interior’s spending bill for 2020.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in Alaska

On my blog yesterday regarding Mitigating Petroleum Hazards - Part 1, I mentioned a great book to read about the many activities of the oil and gas industry written by Steve Coll, Private Empire: Exxon-Mobil and American Power published in 2013.

The book begins discussing the Exxon Valdez oil spill ten years after the event. In 1989, the oil tanker ran into a reef along the coast of Alaska and spilled 11 million gallons of crude oil. There were many causes for the accident, including the crew, company and even the U.S. Coast Guard was found to be negligent.

Here is what NOAA learned from mitigating the oil spill based on a twenty-five year review:

“In the case of the Exxon Valdez spill, after two years we understood that aggressive shoreline treatment caused more harm than the oil itself; after three to four years, we saw those differences diminish as biological productivity at the most impacted places compensated; after four to six years, shoreline communities had mostly recovered from spill activities; and over five to ten years, we discerned that changes occurring on the shoreline appeared to be linked to subtle, much larger-scale processes that we would not have noted had we not had the long-term record.”

While natural processes may be more effective than human intervention in cleaning up oil spills, the death toll on wildlife can be devastating as reported by NOAA: “How many animals died outright from the oil spill? No one knows. The carcasses of more than 35,000 birds and 1,000 sea otters were found after the spill, but since most carcasses sink, this is considered to be a small fraction of the actual death toll. The best estimates are: 250,000 seabirds, 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 250 bald eagles, up to 22 killer whales, and billions of salmon and herring eggs.”

The ‘Private Empire’ book describes NOAA and other government scientists try to do their job conducting investigations of the oil spill assessment but running into confrontations with industry officials. Feds got fed up with the company’s intimidation tactics to suppress their work and many quit their jobs. I had no idea how powerful Exxon Mobil Corporation became until reading this book that mentions U.S. President George W. Bush, a former oil man himself, saying “no one tells them what to do!”

Another book I look forward to reading is Rachel Maddow’s Blowout, available on October 1st. Here’s a summary:

“Rachel Maddow’s Blowout offers a dark, serpentine, riveting tour of the unimaginably lucrative and corrupt oil-and-gas industry. With her trademark black humor, Maddow takes us on a switchback journey around the globe—from Oklahoma City to Siberia to Equatorial Guinea—exposing the greed and incompetence of Big Oil and Gas. She shows how Russia’s rich reserves of crude have, paradoxically, stunted its growth, forcing Putin to maintain his power by spreading Russia's rot into its rivals, its neighbors, the United States, and the West’s most important alliances. Chevron, BP, and a host of other industry players get their star turn, but ExxonMobil and the deceptively well-behaved Rex Tillerson emerge as two of the past century's most consequential corporate villains. The oil-and-gas industry has weakened democracies in developed and developing countries, fouled oceans and rivers, and propped up authoritarian thieves and killers. But being outraged at it is, according to Maddow, “like being indignant when a lion takes down and eats a gazelle. You can't really blame the lion. It's in her nature.”

This book is a clarion call to contain the lion: to stop subsidizing the wealthiest industry on earth, to fight for transparency, and to check the influence of predatory oil executives and their enablers. The stakes have never been higher. As Maddow writes, “Democracy either wins this one or disappears.”

Oil Spills and Mudlogging

In 1974, during a high school summer vacation, my parents took me on a cross-country drive from D.C. area to California. I fell in love with driving the car and scenery, especially when we visited Grand Tetons -Yellowstone National Parks. I got an early interest in geology by reading Geology of the National Park System. But my joy turned to sorrow when we visited Santa Barbara, California by finding the beaches were still covered by the black tar oil spill that occurred five years earlier.

Here are some specifics on the Pacific Ocean oil spill:

• A blowout on a Union Oil Co. well happened on Jan. 28, 1969.

• The well was under under Platform A, roughly 5 1/12 miles off the coast.

• An estimated 3.3 million gallons of oil spilled.

• The well was capped on Feb. 7, but oil continued to vent from cracks in the sea floor for months.

• On Jan. 31, the oil slick was reported to be 30 square miles.

• Oil was spotted onshore from Pismo Beach to the U.S.-Mexico border.

This event contributed to public outrage that resulted in the EPA begin created in 1970 and several new laws including the National Environmental Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Clean Water Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act and Endangered Species Act, all within a three year period.

My interest in college focused on environmental science issues but there were few prospects for jobs. After graduating with a geology bachelor’s degree in 1980, I found a job from a newspaper advertisement in Denver to work for an oil service company as a “mud logger.” The first day on the job we meet at the office at 8 am and spent the day gathering supplies. It was January, got dark early, and we didn’t leave town until late in the afternoon. I recall driving on Interstate 70 West, up past Eisenhower tunnel, and then heading north to the oil drilling rig site. We arrived around midnight and my “mud logging boss” said I must collect samples in bags off the shaker every 30 minutes and he would show me the next day what to do. He went to bed and I kept working along with the drilling crew that kept going 24/7. So my first day on the job I worked 24 hours straight. But I also learned that first night to drink lots of coffee to stay warm causing me to became wired. I learned the drilling site was an exploratory well to see if economical oil or gas existed by drilling over one mile deep at a cost of over $1 million.

We examined the samples making a descriptive log and checking for natural gas under an ultraviolet light. The primary environmental impacts included road construction and drilling pads, drilling solutions added in the well, diesel exhaust, noise, salt water disposal wells and mud pit wastes, This job lasted about two weeks and then we moved on to the next site. I worked in several Rocky Mountain states, eventually becoming the boss so I could work daytime and sleep nights. Working in the Rangely Basin in northwestern Colorado, I learned that the well field became highly fractured so many new wells would be needed to recovery oil. I also heard stories that earthquakes were caused by oil companies injecting water which USGS confirmed that close to 1000 minor earthquakes occurred in the 1960’s.

I worked “mud logging” for seven months before returning to graduate school at the University of Wyoming and knew that I wanted a career involving water quality more than working in the oil fields.

A great book to read about the many hazards of the oil and gas industry is by Steve Coll, Private Empire: Exxon-Mobil and American Power published in 2013.

I will write more about my direct and indirect experiences in coming blog posts.

Electricity Grid Cyber Insecurity

A cyber attack on the electricity grid is being considered as one possible reason for power lost to tens of millions of people in five South American countries this weekend. When the lights went out, so did train transportation, water supply pumps, food refrigeration, voting machines, and more.

Nearly coincidental is a report from the New York Times that the U.S. is becoming more offensive in cyber attacks of the Russian power grid. DHS and FBI issued an alert last year that Russians have been attacking nuclear power plants, water stations, and other critical infrastructure, “Russian government actions (are) targeting U.S. Government entities as well as organizations in the energy, nuclear, commercial facilities, water, aviation, and critical manufacturing sectors.”

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission takes prime responsibility for grid operations in the U.S. including mandatory cyber security reliability standards. The challenge is developing an interconnected smart grid to improving digital efficiencies while preventing cyber attacks.

The SmartGrid is being developed by Department of Energy to fulfill the promise by President Obama in 2009, "It will make our grid more secure and more reliable, saving us some of the $150 billion we lose each year during power outages. It will allow us to more effectively transport renewable energy generated in remote places to large population centers, so that a wind farm in rural South Dakota can power homes in Chicago. And by facilitating the creation of a clean energy economy, building this 21st-century energy infrastructure will help us lay a foundation for lasting growth and prosperity."

I can still recall the 2003 blackout in the Northeastern U.S. which also affected air travel in many countries. Some trees hit powerlines causing the fault on the grid. When this happens, power plants may need to shut down to stop producing electricity as supply must equal demand. You can read about this event and some of the largest that occurred in India (affecting over 500 million people) and other countries on the Wikipedia page.

Mitigating Nuclear Hazards - Part 8, Accidents

**It Happens! While the risk of nuclear accidents are rare compared to other power industries, like coal or oil and gas, when accidents do occur they make worldwide news. People must evacuate or shelter-in place. Plumes of radioactive fallout particles can enter the atmosphere and circle the planet spreading contamination in air, soil, food, and water that can last decades or longer. The photo shows the 1986 Chernobyl site after that accident. Reactor core meltdowns can leave the area around the nuclear power plant uninhabitable for generations. The current HBO series Chernobyl is generating tourist attention and today BBC reported on separating fact from fiction.

Union of Concerned Scientists provides a brief summary of 7 major accidents over the past 60+ years.

In addition, there have been many major safety incidents or lapses that could have caused major catastrophes, like the incident at Davis-Besse nuclear power plant located along Lake Erie between Toledo and Cleveland, Ohio. I was working for NRC when this occurred in 2002 and heard from several experts as well as later at commission hearings about the serious event that was discovered during an inspection. Corrosion of the reactor head vessel could have caused a meltdown. Fines of over $30 million were levied by the government against the utility, FirstEnergy. They are currently in bankruptcy and Davis-Besse is set to close next year.

The International Atomic Energy Agency tracks accident and incident information provides a scale from 0 (not significant to safety) up to 7 (like the Chernobyl accident) called the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale, INES. Here is a list of INES accidents and incidents “events” for the past 6 months with information from 74 participating countries rated between 1 (normal) to 3 (serious incident). These events include use of x-ray machines for medical and well field applications that caused harm to the operators.

Mitigating Nuclear Hazards - Part 5, Reactors

Nuclear reactors are used to generate electricity, make isotopes for medical diagnosis and to fight disease, and for research including space exploration and environmental science.

According to the World Nuclear Association, there are 454 operating nuclear reactors world wide and 54 under construction. In the U.S., according to the Energy Information Agency, 98 nuclear reactors operate in 30 states and 2 reactors are under construction in Georgia.

In addition to reactors still operating, many plants have retired or been dismantled, which is known as “decommissioned.” Again, according to the World Nuclear Association, 115 power reactors, 48 experimental reactors, and over 250 research reactors have been retired or decommissioned.

Uranium fuel pellets contained within rods and assemblies allow for the nuclear chain reaction of U-235 that releases neutrons and produces heat to boil water producing steam that turns a generator to produce electricity. The first nuclear reactor was built by Enrico Fermi known as the Chicago Pile-1 on December 2, 1942. The first commercial nuclear power plant to operate in the U.S. was built in 1958 near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Since 1961, NASA with support from DOE used radioisotope heat decay to power deep space rockets such as the Cassini mission to Saturn.

The most common radioisotope used in medical diagnosis is technetium-99 (Tc-99), with some 40 million procedures per year, accounting for about 80% of all nuclear medicine procedures worldwide. I had this “Tech-99” test done many years ago to see how well my digestive organs function, including gall bladder, as a result of Celiac disease that’s been alleviated by my becoming gluten free.

Between 2003 to 2005, I served NRC as a Project Manager on relicensing nuclear power plants. I coordinated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for license renewal applications of nuclear power plants. Here is a list of license renewal applications completed by NRC. For example, I led the team to produce environmental reviews of the D.C. Cook plant on Lake Michigan near South Bend, Indiana. We compared the environmental and socioeconomic costs and benefits of continued nuclear operations as compared with all other potential sources of power generation and environmental impacts. Getting inside the nuclear power plant for inspections was a highlight.

One of the environmental impact issues that I raised concerned releases of tritium into groundwater, that were evident at D.C. Cook because Michigan state laws required groundwater monitoring of tritium. But at the time not all states required tritium or other groundwater monitoring which eventually became required by NRC. After citizens complaints, the Associated Press investigated in 2011 and NRC began requiring quarterly groundwater monitoring all all nuclear power plants and for industry to provide annual reports. Radioactive effluent and environmental monitoring reports are discussed by NRC. Here are two annual reports, A and B, provided for the D.C. Cook plant by Indiana Michigan Power.

According to NRC, “The list only includes leaks or spills where the concentration of tritium in the leak source, or in a groundwater sample was greater than 20,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). A tritium concentration of 20,000 pCi/L is used as the threshold for inclusion in the list because it is the drinking water standard in EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Act…. Ten sites are currently reporting tritium, from a leak or spill, in excess of 20,000 pCi/L.”

Recently, I coauthored a paper on using the fission track method for identifying naturally-occurring uranium in soil by exposing thin section samples in a USGS research reactor. Here is link to the abstract.

Several new advanced reactor designs “Gen 4” are being proposed to be safer and produce less waste. On June 4th of this week, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing about advanced nuclear technology being developed world wide.

If you have basic questions about nuclear science and technology or live near a nuclear facility, here are some useful educational websites from NRC and EPA. The next blog discusses spent fuel storage.