Georgia moved one step closer to getting more electricity from nuclear power Thursday as federal regulators approved the design for what could be the first newly permitted reactors the nation has built from scratch in three decades.
The decision helps clear the path for two reactors to be built at Georgia Power's Plant Vogtle, near Augusta, and signals the return of the nation's nuclear power industry, which was stalled for nearly 30 years because of high costs and a protracted regulatory process.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of the design means it can be used as a template for other utilities wanting to build nuclear plants, saving time and money. Each of the nation's existing 104 reactors has its own unique design, which had made the approval process longer and more expensive.
Thursday's 5-0 vote will be published in the federal register in seven days. After that the NRC can meet to decide whether to approve the final license needed to start heavy construction at Vogtle.
"It's really very significant and a big reversal of a trend here," said Cham Dallas, head of the University of Georgia’s Institute for Health Management and Mass Destruction Defense.
Executives from Georgia Power and its parent, Atlanta-based Southern Co., first went public with plans to add reactors at Vogtle in 2005. The utility is part of a group of power companies that want to add two reactors at Vogtle. The company is responsible for $6.1 billion of the estimated $14 billion in costs. Georgia Power's sister company, Southern Nuclear, which will operate the reactors, filed an application to expand Vogtle in March 2008.
Georgia Power's customers already are paying for the project's financing costs through a fee on monthly bills. That fee -- currently $3.88 a month but set to increase incrementally to $8.74 a month by 2015 -- will go away once the reactors start producing power in 2016 and 2017, but it will be replaced by the amount of the construction costs.
Company executives have said it's too early to estimate how much of an impact the construction costs would have on customer bills. Any change in rates would have to be approved first by the Georgia Public Service Commission.
The controversial fee for the financing costs was approved by the state Legislature and the PSC. Stan Wise, PSC chairman, said Georgia Power's project would not have gone forward without it.
"The financing of the next generation of nuclear plants is so expensive that Wall Street wasn't going to give its blessing to anybody that didn't have some way to prepay expenses in advance of the turn-on date," Wise told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "We heard that from Washington with the [Department of Energy]; we heard that from Wall Street."
The NRC signed off on a modified version of the AP1000 reactor from Westinghouse. The design, originally approved in late 2005, is one of four designs in front of the NRC for review. The others are from GE Hitachi Nuclear, AREVA and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.
Besides Georgia Power, four other utilities -- Florida Power & Light, Progress Energy Florida, Progress Energy North Carolina and SCANA -- want to use the AP1000 for nuclear projects.
"The NRC's action confirms the AP1000 design is safe and meets all regulatory requirements. The commission now has all of the technical information needed to issue the Vogtle [combined operating license]," said Tom Fanning, Southern Co. chairman, president and chief executive officer.
NRC rules typically have to be published in the register for 30 days, but the agency has agreed to make the rule effective immediately -- which means the NRC can decide whether to approve Southern Nuclear's construction license at any time after it is published.
Southern executives had expected the NRC to complete its safety review of the reactor by September, but the agency stalled the procedure after Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.
Some critics say even Thursday's approval is too soon.
“We don’t see what the rush is for design certification for any reactor without reviewing the lessons of Fukushima,” said Ed Lyman, a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists.
The “AP” stands for “advanced passive,” which roughly describes the safety aspects. Some reactor designs include a series of motors and valves that push water over the reactor core to cool it if an accident happens. In the case of the AP1000, the “passive” design relies on automatic valves, gravity and the natural circulation of air to dump water onto the reactor to cool it in case of an emergency.
“In the existing plants, those safety features rely on redundancy: layer upon layer upon layer of protective safety features,” said Cheri Collins, general manager of external alliances for Southern Nuclear. “The AP1000 incorporates more than 50 years of operator lessons learned. The safety features that were designed into the plant are reliable ... they will keep that plant safe in the event of the loss of all electrical power.”
About the Author
