Frustrating those who question the wisdom of expanding the South Texas Nuclear Project, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has accepted the application to build and operated two new nukes at the Matagorda site. That is, they accepted the application despite finding major gaps in it that have frozen the review process.

While that may delay the potential permitting by a year or so, NRC officials have not offered to leave the door open for the public to comment on the new information as it comes in. Smitty Smith, Public Citizen’s resident bulldog in the state, harped on the NRC reps repeatedly on this point at last week’s Bay City hearing.

Others were concerned that the application fails to identify alternatives to new nuclear power for San Antonio, Houston, and the deregulated market in the Lone Star State.

Austin, a 16-percent partner in STNP nuke plants 1&2, said the expansion it too risky to join.

Austin Energy will recommend to the City Council next week that Austin not participate, based on a consultant’s analysis of NRG’s proposal. Six members of the council said this week they will support the Austin Energy recommendation.

Nuclear power is a political hot potato in Austin. But Mayor Will Wynn said this decision was not about politics or the city’s policy on using nuclear power.

Having only 90 days to evaluate the option, Wynn said, “takes the politics out of it.”

Instead, it was a business decision stemming from the consultant’s determination that NRG’s cost estimate and timeline were “overly optimistic.” Austin would be assuming too much financial risk based on too little information, Wynn said.

NRG estimates the expansion will cost $6 billion and take seven to eight years to complete.

Austin’s consultant, Worley Parsons Resources & Energy of Houston, determined that the expansion’s cost could be at least $1 billion more than estimated and take two years longer, according to a memo to the City Council. The consultant was hired in December for $205,625.

u003cbru003eInstead, it was a business decision stemming from the consultantu0026#39;s determination that NRGu0026#39;s cost estimate and timeline were u0026quot;overly optimistic.u0026quot; Austin would be assuming too much financial risk based on too little information, Wynn said.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eNRG estimates the expansion will cost $6 billion and take seven to eight years to complete.u003cbru003eu003cbru003eAustinu0026#39;s consultant, Worley Parsons Resources u0026amp; Energy of Houston, determined that the expansionu0026#39;s cost could be at least $1 billion more than estimated and take two years longer, according to a memo to the City Council. The consultant was hired in December for $205,625.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eu003cbru003eThree days after the February 5 hearings, the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition (SEED), Public Citizen, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), Beyond Nuclear, and the Sierra Club called on the NRC to stop the clock on the publicu0026#39;s right to comment on the application.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eItu0026#39;s almost comical. NRG chose to go with an already-permitted, older model of power plant because they thought it would grease their way through the NRC. However, CPS officials told me months back that the NRC had reordered its staff with expectations that the rush for new nuke permits following the billions in incentives from Congress would naturally zero in on the safer, more reliable New Generation plants. Instead, the Feds had to scramble to reorder their seats again after the unexpected older plant model chosen by NRG. And now it appears the application was so rushed that it is deemed, if not technically u0026quot;incomplete,u0026quot; at least unworkable.u003cbru003e

According to the February 8 petition filed by Public Citizen and crew:u003cbru003eu003cbru003eNow, additional correspondence -- placed on the NRCu0026#39;s Agency Document Access and Management System (u0026quot;ADAMSu0026quot;) within the last eight days — shows that neither STPNOC nor the NRC Staff believes that the Staff has any basis for continuing its review of most of the application until STPNOC makes major changes to it â?¦ These changes may include modifications to the certified standardized design for the advanced boiling water reactor (u0026quot;ABWRu0026quot;) on which STPNOCu0026#39;s application relies. Id. The Staff does not intend to resume review of the greater part of the application, or even establish a schedule for its review, until STPNOC submits necessary revisions to the COL application. ",1` ); //-->Three days after the February 5 hearings, the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition (SEED), Public Citizen, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), Beyond Nuclear, and the Sierra Club called on the NRC to stop the clock on the public's right to comment on the application.

It's almost comical. NRG chose to go with an already-permitted, older model of power plant because they thought it would grease their way through the NRC. However, CPS officials told me months back that the NRC had reordered its staff with expectations that the rush for new nuke permits following the billions in incentives from Congress would naturally zero in on the safer, more reliable New Generation plants. Instead, the Feds had to scramble to reorder their seats again after the unexpected older plant model chosen by NRG. And now it appears the application was so rushed that it is deemed, if not technically "incomplete," at least unworkable.

According to the February 8 petition filed by Public Citizen and crew:

u003cbru003eSo the question is, how can the public understand, much less challenge or comment upon an incomplete application? Still the deadline of February 25 looms for any would-be challenge or request for a public hearing on the application.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eSan Antoniou0026#39;s Southwest Workeru0026#39;s Union u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.swunion.org/" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.swunion.org/u003c/au003eu003cbru003ejoined the legal resistance this week, urging the NRC to halt its license review and extend public comment through the summer, and maybe then some.u003cbru003e

Their attorney Lanny Sinkin writes:u003cbru003eu003cbru003eOverall, the course of conduct followed by the `Nuclear Regulatory` Commission suggests a concerted effort to thwart the efforts of citizens to become informed participants in a decision making process that has very serious potential impacts on their lives.u003cbru003e

As one of the first proposed reactors in what may be a large number of such applications, the process followed in this proceeding may portend a tactic to be used nationally to suppress or inhibit interventions.u003cbru003eu003cbru003ePetitioner is fully aware of the tremendous burden being placed on the NRC staff. The agency is dealing with (1) an aging group of operating reactors more prone to breakdowns, equipment failures, and accidents and, therefore, requiring heightened oversight; (2) a flood of new applications for construction and operating licenses requiring review of extensive materials submitted by license applicants; (3) large numbers of experienced staff retiring; (4) hiring large numbers of new staff; (4) training large numbers of new staff; (5) assigning major responsibilities to inexperienced staff; and (6) updating key studies and documents that are seriously out of date.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eUnder these circumstances, there is a natural tendency on the part of the agency to try to reduce its workload. Keeping out intervenors and their potential contentions would help achieve that purpose. Such a plan, however, would violate the rights of those excluded and the policies and rules the Commission claims to follow. In an endeavor where close observation of the rules is critical, the Commission should set the example of compliance.",1` ); //-->

Now, additional correspondence -- placed on the NRC's Agency Document Access and Management System ("ADAMS") within the last eight days – shows that neither STPNOC nor the NRC Staff believes that the Staff has any basis for continuing its review of most of the application until STPNOC makes major changes to it … These changes may include modifications to the certified standardized design for the advanced boiling water reactor ("ABWR") on which STPNOC's application relies. Id. The Staff does not intend to resume review of the greater part of the application, or even establish a schedule for its review, until STPNOC submits necessary revisions to the COL application.

So the question is, how can the public understand, much less challenge or comment upon an incomplete application? Still the deadline of February 25 looms for any would-be challenge or request for a public hearing on the application.

San Antonio's Southwest Worker's Union joined the legal resistance this week, urging the NRC to halt its license review and extend public comment through the summer, and maybe then some.

Their attorney Lanny Sinkin writes:

Overall, the course of conduct followed by the `Nuclear Regulatory` Commission suggests a concerted effort to thwart the efforts of citizens to become informed participants in a decision making process that has very serious potential impacts on their lives.

Petitioner is fully aware of the tremendous burden being placed on the NRC staff. The agency is dealing with (1) an aging group of operating reactors more prone to breakdowns, equipment failures, and accidents and, therefore, requiring heightened oversight; (2) a flood of new applications for construction and operating licenses requiring review of extensive materials submitted by license applicants; (3) large numbers of experienced staff retiring; (4) hiring large numbers of new staff; (4) training large numbers of new staff; (5) assigning major responsibilities to inexperienced staff; and (6) updating key studies and documents that are seriously out of date.

Under these circumstances, there is a natural tendency on the part of the agency to try to reduce its workload. Keeping out intervenors and their potential contentions would help achieve that purpose. Such a plan, however, would violate the rights of those excluded and the policies and rules the Commission claims to follow. In an endeavor where close observation of the rules is critical, the Commission should set the example of compliance.

The most appropriate relief is to rescind the improvident acceptance of the application for docketing and restore the application to tendered status, until such time as the application is complete and the applicant and NRC staff are prepared to initiate a comprehensive review.

u003cbru003eThe most appropriate relief is to rescind the improvident acceptance of the application for docketing and restore the application to tendered status, until such time as the application is complete and the applicant and NRC staff are prepared to initiate a comprehensive review.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eIf you havenu0026#39;t endured enough nuke legalese yet, check out the NRG/CPSu0026#39;s application (such as it is) online with the NRC. Scroll down until you see South Texas Project toward the bottom of the first column.u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing-license-applications.html" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.nrc.gov/about-nrcu003cWBRu003e/regulatory/adjudicatoryu003cWBRu003e/hearing-license-applicationsu003cWBRu003e.htmlu003c/au003eu003cbru003e

u003cbru003eOther energy news:u003cbru003eIn a kinder, gentler Texas, NRG is also pursuing wind energy in West Texas with British Petroleum.u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/15256" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.sustainablebusinessu003cWBRu003e.com/index.cfm/go/news.displayu003cWBRu003e/id/15256u003c/au003eu003cbru003e

u003cbru003eNRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG) through its wholly owned subsidiary, Padoma Wind Power LLC, has entered into a 50-50 joint venture with BP Alternative Energy North America Inc. to build the first phase of the Sherbino Wind Farm in west Texas.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eThe Sherbino I Wind Farm will be a 150-megawatt (MW) wind project, consisting of 50 Vestas 3 MW wind turbine generators, located approximately 40 miles east of Fort Stockton in Pecos County, Texas, according to a release.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003eOf course, they also canu0026#39;t keep their hands out of the coal (gasification) bin.u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.projo.com/massachusetts/somerset/content/EB_SOM_COAL12_02-12-08_MD8VR09_v8.3480d2c.html" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.projo.com/massachuseu003cWBRu003etts/somerset/content/EB_SOMu003cWBRu003e_COAL12_02-12-08_MD8VR09_v8u003cWBRu003e.3480d2c.htmlu003c/au003eu003cbru003e

u003cbru003eSOMERSET â?? With a man-sized penguin outside in the cold trying to draw people in, members of an environmental coalition tried to rally opposition to plans by NRG Energy to turn its coal-fired power plant into a facility that uses superheated gas to turn coal and biofuels into synthetic natural gas.",1` ); //-->

If you haven't endured enough nuke legalese yet, check out the NRG/CPS's application (such as it is) online with the NRC. Scroll down until you see South Texas Project toward the bottom of the first column.

In other energy news, two-fisted NRG, trying to whallop us with a left-handed nuke deal, is also pursuing a kinder, gentler, renewable Texas with a West Texas wind investment along with British Petroleum.

NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG) through its wholly owned subsidiary, Padoma Wind Power LLC, has entered into a 50-50 joint venture with BP Alternative Energy North America Inc. to build the first phase of the Sherbino Wind Farm in west Texas.

[newspack-popup id="28648"]

The Sherbino I Wind Farm will be a 150-megawatt (MW) wind project, consisting of 50 Vestas 3 MW wind turbine generators, located approximately 40 miles east of Fort Stockton in Pecos County, Texas, according to a release.

Of course, they also can't keep their hands out of the coal (gasification) bin.

SOMERSET — With a man-sized penguin outside in the cold trying to draw people in, members of an environmental coalition tried to rally opposition to plans by NRG Energy to turn its coal-fired power plant into a facility that uses superheated gas to turn coal and biofuels into synthetic natural gas.

Although the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has given the proposal a green light, environmentalists are appealing the decision, contending that NRG should be required to comply with its original promise to either shut the plant down or covert to clean natural gas by 2010.

u003cbru003eAlthough the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has given the proposal a green light, environmentalists are appealing the decision, contending that NRG should be required to comply with its original promise to either shut the plant down or covert to clean natural gas by 2010.u003cbru003e

u003cbru003e(Remember, NRG is Hillaryu0026#39;s campaign cash bundler of at least $100,000.)u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/candidate.cfm?CandidateIDu003dC0008" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.whitehouseforsaleu003cWBRu003e.org/candidate.cfm?CandidateIDu003cWBRu003eu003dC0008u003c/au003eu003cbru003e

And Obama is knee-deep with raging nuke pollutor u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/jan-june06/tritium_4-17.html" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.pbs.org/newshour/bbu003cWBRu003e/environment/jan-june06u003cWBRu003e/tritium_4-17.htmlu003c/au003eu003cbru003eExcellon pursuing a plant outside Corpus Christi.u003cbru003e

u003ca hrefu003d"http://www.caller.com/news/2007/dec/18/potential-nuclear-plant-near-victoria-announced/" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.caller.com/newsu003cWBRu003e/2007/dec/18/potential-nuclearu003cWBRu003e-plant-near-victoria-announced/u003c/au003eu003cbru003eu003cbru003eBoth Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were nastier than we thought.u003cbru003e

u003ca hrefu003d"http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0423-03.htm" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.commondreams.orgu003cWBRu003e/headlines06/0423-03.htmu003c/au003eu003cbru003eu003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.greens.org/s-r/10/10-05.html" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.greens.org/s-r/10u003cWBRu003e/10-05.htmlu003c/au003eu003cbru003e

u003cbru003eBut, hey, yu0026#39;all are the public. You get to decide all this stuff in the end. Just donu0026#39;t say no one warned you.u003cbru003eu003ca hrefu003d"http://www.success.co.il/knowledge/images/Pillar10-History-French-Revolution-Delacroix.jpg" targetu003d"_blank" onclicku003d"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"u003ehttp://www.success.co.ilu003cWBRu003e/knowledge/images/Pillar10u003cWBRu003e",1` ); //-->

Remember, NRG is Hillary's campaign cash bundler of at least $100,000. And Obama is knee-deep with raging nuke pollutor Excellon, now pursuing a plant outside Corpus Christi.

Both Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were nastier than we thought.

But, hey, y'all are the public. You get to decide all this stuff in the end.

Just don't say no one warned you.

This article appears in Feb 13-19, 2008.

Vote NOW for your Best of San Antonio® Finalists!

NRC-Saw