Expansionary Institute

Forum Admin
futurist3000@aol.com

U.S. companies eye early permits for nuclear sites

By Vibeke Laroi

 
SAN FRANCISCO, April 5 (Reuters) - Several energy companies are taking early steps that might lead to licensing the first nuclear power plant in the U.S. since the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979, although the plans appear likely to remain on the drawing boards for the next few years.

The move comes amid growing concern about safety and potential terrorist threats against the reactors.

Dominion Resources Inc. said Friday it told the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission this week it intends to seek an early site permit for a possible new reactor at its two-unit North Anna power plant in Virginia.

"We want to keep our options open, but we have no plans to build a new nuclear power plant," said Dominion Resources spokesman Richard Zuercher.

"We're more interested in demonstrating the process than building anything," he said, adding that Dominion plans to apply for an early site permit in autumn 2003.

An early site permit allows a company to "bank" the land for up to 20 years for possibly building a new reactor -- without having to specify the reactor type or committing

to construction.

The program, launched by the NRC in 1999 to smooth the way for new reactors, has not yet been tested.

Exelon Nuclear, the largest nuclear fleet operator in the country and a unit of Exelon Corp., has said it intends to submit an early site bid by June 30, 2003.

A company spokesman said Exelon will identify the site, or sites, by June 30 this year.

And a spokesman for Entergy Corp., the nation's second largest operator of nuclear plants, said the company is "actively" considering filing one or two early site permits.

"All three have indicated some interest in filing an early site permit, but nobody has formally done anything," NRC spokesman Victor Dricks told Reuters.

A LONG PROCESS

Although plans are preliminary, the fact that three utilities are considering permits is a big step for an industry that has been virtually in a deep freeze for decades.

No commercial nuclear power plant has been ordered in the U.S. since the 1979 Three Mile Island accident when there was a partial meltdown of the reactor core.

And new problems are raising questions about the future of atomic reactors.

Corrosion in a massive piece of carbon steel atop the reactor at FirstEnergy Corp.'s Davis-Besse plant in Ohio has alarmed regulators.

The NRC said today the problem represents an "unacceptable reduction of the margin of safety" at the plant. The NRC is reviewing 68 similar reactors in the U.S. fleet of 103 nuclear plants, which provide one-fifth of the nation's electricity.

Moreover, the NRC also said today it was stepping up its oversight of security risks at nuclear plants by developing contingency plans for emergencies and assessing potential terrorist threats in light of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Despite these concerns, the NRC's Dricks said "We think chances are very good that someone will choose to build a new nuclear plant, whereas a few years ago that didn't seem possible."

Dominion's Zuercher, who does not see anyone announcing plans to build a new nuclear plant in the next few years,  believes the euphoria of last summer, when there was talk of building new nuclear plants for the first time in decades, stemmed from unrealistic expectations.

To build new nuclear plants, costs would have to be competitive with those of other types of plants, a permanent storage facility for nuclear waste would have to be in place and the government would have to be committed to supporting new reactors, he said.

Even if companies decide to apply for an early site permit, the process could be lengthy and expensive. Zuercher said it would take about 18 months to produce an application, and an NRC evaluation could take one year to 18 months.

18:54 04-05-02

Copyright 2002 Reuters Limited.  All rights reserved.  Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.  Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.