Skip to main content

No, Indian Point Unit 2's License Has Not Expired

Allow us a moment to clarify.
Over the past few weeks we've seen a lot of chatter over Indian Point Unit 2 as it enters an NRC-approved period of extended operation (PEO) beginning on September 28.

On Twitter, we're seeing a lot of statements like this one from Elizabeth Douglas of Inside Climate News. The tweet inspired NEI media manager Tom Kauffman to send Douglas the following email:
Dear Ms. Douglass,

Indian Point Unit 2’s license has not expired.

Because Entergy Corp. filed timely and comprehensive license renewal applications for both Indian Point Units 2 and 3 in April 2007, more than five years ahead of IP2’s original expiration date of Sept. 28, 2013, and more than seven years ahead of IP3’s original expiration date of Dec. 12, 2015. The early applications satisfy the requirements of the Timely Renewal Doctrine, a well-established federal law that extends the current operating license until the license renewal process is complete.

The Timely Renewal Doctrine is law under the federal Administrative Procedures Act that is generally applicable to regulatory and administrative federal agencies including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and is available to all nuclear energy facilities that apply for a 20-year license renewal at least five years before the expiration of their current license. Indian Point 2 will become the first nuclear energy facility to operate with a license extended by Timely Renewal Doctrine because of the unprecedented number of challenges to its license renewal application that must be addressed by the NRC.

Indian Point 2 will enter the period of timely renewal on September 28, 2013 and has met all of the federal requirements under the Timely Renewal Doctrine. The continued operation of Indian Point 2 under the Timely Renewal Doctrine in no way reduces the level of safety of the facility. Indian Point 2 currently meets all federal regulatory requirements, will continue to be thoroughly inspected, and must continue to adhere to all regulatory requirements. Both operating units at Indian Point are very safe and have earned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's highest safety ratings over the past nine years and have maintained operational reliability higher than the nuclear industry’s national average. And Indian Point’s owner, Entergy Corp., has invested more than $1 billion to upgrade and enhance both operating facilities for continued safe operation.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Best,
Tom Kauffman
For more on the work being done at Indian Point during the period of extended operations, see the Indian Point website. Here at NEI, our news team has been covering the story for several weeks, including a story detailing the $1 billion in upgrades the plant has implemented over the past decade to help make it one of the most efficient in the nation.

Comments

Joffan said…
And why isn't the NRC directly rebutting this public nonsense?

In any case, the ridiculously drawn-out process of license renewal for Indian Point is in itself an indication that the NRC is simply not doing its job, certainly on a strategic level. It has become - whether through intent or spinelessness in the face of frivolous intervention - an expensive blocking mechanism for nuclear power.
Anonymous said…
What are you worried about? How is the agency "blocking" nuclear power in this process? NRC has NEVER denied a power reactor license renewal request. Not once.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous, you imply that the NRC is a spineless rubber-stamping machine, in bed with the nuclear industry. False, false, false.

Years of massive paperwork and evaluation are involved, License extensions are only issued when the plant is seen to have complied with all the required refurbishments.

Anonymous said…
You're putting words in my mouth. All I said is NRC has never denied a renewal request, so I don't understand how those reviews are functioning as "an expensive blocking mechanism for nuclear power."

They can continue to operate during completion of the renewal reviews if the application was filed on a timely basis, and ultimately the application will be approved. Where's the "blocking"?
Joffan said…
@Anonymous1: NRC does indeed put expensive blocks in the way of nuclear. The surmounting of those blocks is not free, not easy and not quick. Your apparent ignorance of the money value of time is either disingenuous or disqualifies you from serious debate on these issues.
Anonymous said…
@ Joffan --

Perhaps if you browsed online a little more extensively you'd realize the NRC was way ahead of you:

http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/2013/08/20/indian-points-timely-renewal-the-background/

You say "blocks," people who understand the process say "reasonable review requirements" that utilities have understood for more than a decade when applying for a renewed license.

Indian Point keeps on running during the review, so what was your point again?

Popular posts from this blog

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

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