Monday, December 13

Greenfield Sites: AEHI Not Tracking Nuclear Industry

I've been mulling over AEHI's latest press release:

First look at the title ("AEHI Receives Final P & Z Approval for Proposed Idaho Nuclear Power Plant"). That sounds to me as if some final approval had been received, at least for the rezoning request. Not so, this is only the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission to the County Commissioners who will have another public meeting and a vote next year. It's also hardly final since the recommendation can (and likely will) be appealed.

Just so you know, after the County Commissioners make a decision (which also can be appealed) the state needs to approve the plan. So we're a good distance away from local and state approval.

But now lets look at the subtitle ("Nationally Significant as First Proposed U.S. Green Field Site in 33 Years"). Hmm, that's a bit surprising! There are a bunch of other proposed US greenfield nuclear power plants:

For example there's Amarillo Power which has proposed a greenfield site in Texas. No NRC application yet. Then there's Levy County Station which already has state approval and a submitted COLA application. And lets not forget Victoria County Station, which had a COLA application submitted, but has now changed its approach and has an ESP application pending with the NRC. At least the last two are much further in the process than AEHI!

If we assume (boldly!) that this press release was put together in good faith, we do have to wonder how AEHI's leadership can be so ignorant of current trends in the nuclear industry. I mean, these are people about whom Martin Johncox has this to say:

"Every member of AEHI’s Board of Directors, Mr. Gillispie and even advisors to the board all have at least 40 years of experience in the nuclear industry, which includes building, operating, and maintaining nuclear power plants and utilities. Their reputations have been vetted by national and international governments, which is required to work at their level in the industry."

Which reminds me of another interesting slip-up of Gillispie on his blog:

"Every company that has undertaken the NRC application process has successfully completed it and received a construction/operation license."

As we've heard this claim has also been used when selling shares to investors. Now check out the following NRC FAQ. Check out 1.1.8:

"1.1.8 Has the NRC ever denied an application for a license?

During the 1980s, the NRC refused to issue operating licenses for the William H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station, in Ohio.  The NRC issued this ruling based on a charge that the plant had failed to meet construction and safety codes.  Because of the high cost of completing the Zimmer facility and the uncertainty that it would eventually meet the Federal regulations, the utility, Cincinnati Gas and Electric, decided not to continue to pursue an operating license.  In other cases, applicants elected to amend or revise their requests for approval in order to receive a license from the NRC and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission."

Hmm, strange.

But hey, we're talking about a guy who can't remember which reactor unit he worked on and in which capacity.


And who can't even be honest about his hair!

No comments:

Post a Comment