Skip to main content

NEI Responds to Markey Letter on Nuclear Power Plant Loan Guarantee Program

Earlier today, Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) sent a letter to Representatives Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) demanding that they hold hearings into the implementation of the nuclear power plant loan guarantee program.

The following statement concerning Rep. Markey's letter is from NEI's Rapid Response Team:
In a Sept. 23, 2011, letter, Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) raises questions about the nuclear energy industry’s role in the process of developing the regulations that govern the clean energy loan guarantee program authorized by the 2005 Energy Policy Act.

Specifically, Mr. Markey raises questions about the issue of subordination, and the nuclear energy industry’s position on this issue. NEI has never suggested that the U.S. Department of Energy should accept a subordinate position with respect to any other lender under the DOE loan guarantee program.

Mr. Markey’s letter demonstrates convincingly that he does not understand financing or the rules governing the loan guarantee program. Here are the facts:
  • Many of the clean energy projects eligible for DOE loan guarantees have multiple sources of debt financing—some debt guaranteed by the Department of Energy, some from other sources. In the case of certain nuclear power projects, for example, it was expected that other countries’ export credit agencies would provide debt financing side-by-side with the DOE-guaranteed debt.
  • The original rule promulgated by the Department of Energy in 2007 reflected a flawed interpretation of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, and asserted that DOE must have a “superior right” (i.e., the department must be in a first lien position) on the entire project, whether or not it was the only provider of debt financing. Under the 2007 rule, other lenders would have been forced to accept a subordinate position to DOE. This runs counter to standard financing protocols and made financing impossible.
  • The nuclear energy industry drew DOE’s attention to this flaw in the rule, as did the other clean energy technologies eligible for DOE loan guarantees.
  • In a March 2, 2009, letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the American Wind Energy Association urged DOE to change the 2007 rule to “allow DOE to share collateral pari-passu (i.e., equally and without preference) with all non-guaranteed project lenders.”
  • In a May 19, 2009, letter to President Obama, seven clean energy trade associations (representing the wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, combined heat and power, nuclear energy, biomass energy and hydropower industries) urged DOE to “[c]orrect the current requirement under the 2007 regulations that DOE must have a first lien on all project assets … and permit DOE discretion as to the scope of a given project’s collateral package. The regulations must allow for more flexible collateral-sharing arrangements, including pari passu treatment of the collateral shared among co-lenders.”
In brief, the change to the rule governing the DOE loan guarantee program referenced by Mr. Markey was advocated by all the clean energy industries eligible for loan guarantees. This was not a nuclear energy industry initiative, but a broad-based effort to make the loan guarantee program workable.
Earlier this week, NEI President and CEO Marv Fertel wrote a piece in the National Journal concerning the importance of the DOE loan guarantee program. For an NEI issues brief on the federal loan guarantee program authorized under the 2005 Energy Policy Act, click here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …