Skip to main content

NRC Issues Supplement to Draft EIS for North Anna

The NRC issued a supplement to their draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) associated with Dominion's amendment to an Early Site Permit (ESP) application for the North Anna site. The amendment changed the design from a once-through cooling system (as the two existing units use) to a closed-cycle system that incorporates a cooling tower.

The supplement concludes
The staff's preliminary recommendation, in view of the environmental impacts described in the Draft EIS, and the impacts reviewed in this SDEIS in relation to the changes presented in ER Revision 6, is that the ESP for North Anna Units 3 and 4 should be issued. This recommendation is based on (1) the ER submitted by Dominion, as revised; (2) consultation with Federal, State, Tribal and local agencies; (3) the staff's independent review; (4) the assessments summarized in the Draft EIS and this SDEIS, including the potential mitigation measures identified in the ER and in both the Draft EIS and SDEIS.
I've heard some antinuclear groups claim that this change proves that their efforts can stop a new plant from being built, but I see the situation as proof that the new licensing process works. The entire point of the new process is to resolve safety, licensing, and environmental issues before significant capital is invested while still allowing sufficient regulatory and public review.

While the original once-through design was technically sound, especially considering that Dominion built Lake Anna to support four units, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and nearby residents had concerns about potential effects on the lake. Dominion evaluated the options and concluded that a re-design was a "reasonable accommodation." I'm sure the extra megawatts they'll get with the cooling tower doesn't hurt either.

So, to recap: Dominion submitted its plans, regulators and citizens voiced their concerns, and Dominion came up with a viable solution before a shovelful of dirt moved or concrete was poured. I'd call that a win-win situation.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…