DOE Issues Final Regs For Loan Guarantee Program

From DOE:

Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today announced that the Department of Energy (DOE) has issued the final regulations for the loan guarantee program authorized by Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). DOE’s action today will pave the way for federal support of clean energy projects using innovative technologies and will spur further investment in these advanced energy technologies.
DOE also today invited 16 project sponsors, who submitted pre-applications last Fall, to submit full applications for loan guarantees. These projects include advanced technologies involving the uses of biomass, fossil energy, solar, industrial energy efficiency, electricity delivery and energy reliability, hydrogen, and alternative fuel vehicles. Projects supported by loan guarantees will help fulfill President Bush’s goal of reducing our reliance on imported sources of energy by diversifying our nation’s energy mix and increasing energy efficiency.

“Loan guarantees aim to stimulate investment and commercialization of clean energy technologies to reduce our Nation’s reliance on foreign sources of energy,” Secretary Bodman said. “Finalizing this regulation for the Department’s Loan Guarantee program puts Americans one step closer to being able to use new and novel sources of energy on a mass scale to reduce emissions and allow for vigorous economic growth and increased energy security.”

The final regulation provides that the Department may issue guarantees for up to 100% of the amount of a loan, subject to the EPAct limitation that DOE may not guarantee a debt instrument for more than 80% of the total cost of an eligible project. Under the final rule, if DOE issues a guarantee for 100% of a debt instrument, the loan must be issued and funded by the Treasury Department’s Federal Financing Bank. While Congress must provide authority in an appropriations act for the loan guarantees that the Department will issue, DOE’s intent is to only issue loan guarantees if borrowers and project sponsors pay the “credit subsidy cost” for any loan guarantee they receive. Therefore, DOE does not plan to use taxpayer funds to pay for the credit subsidy costs of these loan guarantees.

Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) issued the following statement in wake of the news:

“I am very pleased that DOE has issued the final regulation for its Loan Guarantee Program. At last, we now know that the program will proceed in a way consistent with our intent in the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

“In particular, I would note that the Administration has kept its commitment to me to guarantee up to 100 percent of a loan, subject to the overall cap of 80 percent of the project cost. This represents a significant and important change from the proposed draft rule.

“While alternative energy projects have attracted strong interest and growth, they have not yet secured the stable debt financing necessary to ensure their long term success. It is my belief and hope that a robust loan guarantee program will provide these projects the stability that will allow them to flourish, starting with the 16 pre-applicants that will now be invited to submit full applications.”

More later. When the regs get published online, we'll have the link.

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog