Jaczko votes to certify AP1000, likely clearing licensing for four new reactors

by E. Michael Blake

Jaczko

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko has voted in favor of the final certification rule for Westinghouse Electric Company’s AP1000 pressurized water reactor design. His vote, dated December 6, was posted in the ADAMS document system on the NRC Web site, at 9:49 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on December 9; it can be downloaded from ADAMS with the accession number ML113430027.

The whole NRC has not yet taken formal action, and it was not known whether or how the other four commissioners voted. Jaczko often publishes his votes, and his comments explaining them, before the affirmation sessions held by the commissioners to record their votes formally. It has not been expected that the other commissioners would oppose AP1000 certification, but each member has his or her own decision-making process, and sets his or her own schedule for voting.

The AP1000 must be certified before combined operating licenses can be issued for the first two projects for new power reactors in the United States—Southern Nuclear Operating Company’s Vogtle-3 and -4 in Georgia, and SCANA/Santee Cooper’s Summer-2 and -3 in South Carolina. These projects are based on the standard AP1000 design. The license applications are also awaiting votes by the commissioners, who are acting as the licensing board for Vogtle and Summer. The licenses are for both construction and operation. So far, no safety-related construction has been allowed at either Vogtle or Summer.

The NRC has had a tentative schedule to approve licenses for Vogtle this month, and for Summer in January 2012. The licenses cannot be issued, however, until after the AP1000 is fully certified. The agency’s regulations stipulate that licenses cannot be issued until the design certification has gone into effect, and that would be 30 days after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The tentative schedule mentioned earlier anticipated publication in January, and thus an effective date in February.

Southern Nuclear has requested that the NRC waive the 30-day waiting period and allow licenses to be issued upon final rule publication. In an additional set of comments with his vote, Jaczko stated that he is generally not in favor of this (and indicated that there has been discussion among the commissioners, which he says “has not been transacted publicly and candidly”), but that he would not rule it out. He also said that he believes Southern Nuclear should have the opportunity to show good cause for a waiver of the 30-day wait.

The NRC often holds affirmation sessions prior to scheduled public meetings on other topics. The only meeting the commission has scheduled before the end of the year is on Tuesday, December 13, at 9 a.m. EST. At this writing, the NRC had not announced the addition of an affirmation session on that date.

Further information, and coverage of later events likely to occur, will be published in the January issue of Nuclear News, the American Nuclear Society’s news magazine.

_____________________________

Blake

E. Michael Blake is a senior editor of the American Nuclear Society’s Nuclear News magazine.

6 thoughts on “Jaczko votes to certify AP1000, likely clearing licensing for four new reactors

  1. Bob.M

    “Did Commissioner Apostolakis vote for the AP1000 or not ?”

    Yes he did. As did Chairman Jaczko. The difference is that Chairman Jaczko did not find good cause and did not think the NRC should be researching good cause to eliminate the 30 day delay on the COL issuance. He believes that is the petitioners job (in this case Southern Nuclear). Commissioner Apostolakis found good cause for eliminating the 30 day delay.

  2. E. Michael Blake

    Sorry, that should have been “already” instead of “also.” I’m going back to write for my monthly magazine now.

  3. E. Michael Blake

    Just for the record, Commissioner Apostolakis’ vote was posted on ADAMS two hours after Chairman Jaczko’s vote, and by that time this blog post was also in progress.

  4. Paul Dickman

    I also suspect that the fact there are two Congressional hearings scheduled next week was the motivator for the Chairman to get his vote out. Michael, you missed that Commissioner Apostolakis voted on 11/29/11, a week before Chairman Jazcko, but his vote was also released today. This would indicate that all offices have already voted but their votes are not yet posted It would be unusual for votes to be made public unless they are all in since it is common for Commissioners to amend their votes, some to add remarks of even modify their stance. Rod, please note that the notation vote (SECY-11-0145) was sent to the Commission 11/02/11 so final action could not have taken place before then.

  5. Rod Adams

    Here is my “good cause” for an immediate license issue – the Final Safety Evaluation Report for the AP1000 was issued in August. What in the world has been holding up the vote by the commission? Every day of delay now leads to a one for one delay in the ultimate start of operating the plant. Every day thus costs Georgia ratepayers about $1 – $2 million per unit.

    I also expect that there are more than a few workers currently on the site who would prefer to keep working instead of being temporarily laid off because there are no tasks left to do that can be done without violating the terms of the Limited Work Authorization. (That last is a guess pieced together by reading a number of separate hints from various sources, but I am pretty sure of its accuracy.)

    Rod Adams
    Publisher, Atomic Insights

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>