ML24352A046
| ML24352A046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nuclear Energy Institute |
| Issue date: | 12/03/2024 |
| From: | Montgomery B Nuclear Energy Institute |
| To: | NRC/SECY |
| References | |
| NRC-2024-0135, PRM-50-125, 89FR76750 | |
| Download: ML24352A046 (1) | |
Text
!"#"$%"&'('
)*)+ ",-.,/0123 45* 6 78
9$:;<=1>;(?>>
@@ 7) A+ !"#"$%"&'('
+B@ 74CD E"%
A 6 )FGH;';'(
G"3I&,.,/J!"#1$$.22.1,.,/<J,331KL"&J3.,/M3J3I2
@@ 7) 7FGH;';'(;(
G;';G"3I&,.,/J!"#1$$.22.1,.,/<J,331KL"&J3.,/M3J3I2 A +@ 7)FGH;';'(;!GNOP;'
H1$$",31,OG!1#Q';'?(
+B@ )) 57 5@*) 7 R@* SJ3%T,".U1&/
58*7 V*) 7FI#<"J&W,"&/>X,23.3I3" Y 7 5*S @@ 7)
M""J33J#Z"-[.<"\\2]
))* ^@ 7)
;(;0FGH0FWXH1$$",3<"33"&1,G';
_`a_ba`cdcf`ghi jkljfmnnopfaaqqqrstuprvlwax_b_jyzz{lb_}{c~_?{~j~t{y}zl}ts?ggz_
jkljfmnnopfaaqqqrstuprvlwax_b_jyzz{lb_}{c~_?{~j~t{y}zl}ts?ggz_
_a_
Bruce Montgomery Director, Decommissioning and Used Fuel Phone: 202.406.0054 Email: bsm@nei.org December 3, 2024 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff
Subject:
NEI Comments on Petition for Rulemaking: Returning a Decommissioning Plant to Operating Status (Docket No. PRM-50-125; NRC-2024-0135)
Submitted via Regulations.gov Project Number: 689 On behalf of the nuclear industry, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)1 appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Petition for Rulemaking: Returning a Decommissioning Plant to Operating Status.
The petitioner states that the NRC staff lacks a specific Commission-approved and codified process for licensing, inspecting, and approving the return to service of a power reactor that has entered decommissioning. The petitioner requests that the NRC conduct rulemaking to include a codified process for returning a decommissioning plant to operational status. The petitioner points to the ongoing Palisades proceedings as examples for where new, codified processes are needed.
The industry does not believe that this rulemaking is warranted, thus the petition should be denied.
The petition does not identify any generic safety, security, or policy issue requiring rulemaking, nor has the petitioner identified any safety or security issues specifically related to the potential return of Palisades to commercial operation. The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized that the decision about whether to proceed by a general rule or individual case-by-case adjudication of issues lies primarily in the informed discretion of the administrative agency.2 In denying a previous petition for rulemaking on this topic, the 1 The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of generic operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.
2 See SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 202-203 (1947).
Office of the Secretary December 3, 2024 Page 2 Nuclear Energy Institute NRC concluded that this issue does not involve a significant safety or security concern, and the existing regulatory framework may be used to address it.3 Consistent with the NRCs conclusion in 2021, the existing regulatory framework is successfully being applied to the Palisades case. In addition, the owner of the Three Mile Island Unit 1 facility has initiated efforts to restore its authority to operate the plant as the Crane Clean Energy Center, also within the existing regulatory framework. Besides Palisades and Three Mile Island Unit 1, it is our understanding that there is only one other decommissioning reactor in the United States that remains sufficiently intact to permit any consideration of a return to commercial operation. This is the Duane Arnold Energy Center which is currently in SAFSTOR and is under consideration by its owner for a return to operating status.
Rulemaking in this case would be a complex and lengthy matter and would entail a significant expenditure of NRC resources that is not warranted given the above-mentioned limited population of reactors that such a rulemaking might serve.
Section 505 of the recently enacted ADVANCE Act4 requires the Commission to provide for the efficient and timely reviews and proceedings for the granting, suspending, revoking, or amending of any license or construction permit. The existing regulatory framework is adequate to ensure restarts of decommissioning reactors are accomplished in a safe, secure and timely manner.
Please contact me with any questions regarding our comments.
Sincerely, Bruce Montgomery Director, Decommissioning and Used Fuel c:
Mirela Gavrilas, EDO Andrea D. Veil, NRR John Lubinski, NMSS Chris Regan, NMSS/REFS 3 NRC, Criteria To Return Retired Nuclear Power Reactors to Operations, Petition for rulemaking: denial, 86 Fed. Reg. 24362; May 6, 2021.
4 PUBLIC LAW 118-67JULY 9, 2024