Sen. Markey, federal nuke official battle over Plymouth nuclear plant closing, safety

PLYMOUTH – State and federal elected officials don’t want to see a million gallons of water from the shuttered Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth “dumped,” as they call it, into Cape Cod Bay. The same can be said about rule changes proposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that critics say only lessens oversight of the companies overseeing the decommissioning of plants like Pilgrim.

Both of those issues prompted Sen. Ed Markey, to host a field congressional subcommittee hearing at Plymouth Town Hall on Friday, May 6.

“We find ourselves here today with an agency that has consistently prioritized industry profits over public protections,” Markey said. “Our communities deserve to have their concerns accounted for.”

Markey is chairperson of the Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate and Nuclear Safety. He was joined by U.S. Rep. William Keating, D-9th.

The hearing comes just a few days before a public meeting with representatives of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission scheduled for 6 p.m. Monday, May 9, at the 1620 Hotel in Plymouth to talk about the potential amended regulations.

More: NRC public meeting in Plymouth, protest rally prior, rescheduled; Sen. Markey forum May 6

More: Testimony presented on Moran bill to prevent release of radioactive material into water

Keating and Markey did not receive assurance from Holtec CEO Kris Singh, whose company is overseeing the decommissioning following the plant’s closure and subsequent sale from Entergy in 2019, that the water being stored in the defunct spent fuel pool would not be trucked off site or evaporated, as opponents to the water release hope will be the case.They did receive confirmation that Holtec would make its testing data on the water available to other interested agencies and agreed to allow Wood’s Hole Oceanographic Institute to conduct an independent review to see what radiological and other elements remain in the water after being treated, and what impact, that would have on human and marine life.

The hearing begins

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said the proposed amendments seek to address concerns specific to plants undergoing, or planning to undergo, the decommissioning process.

“These (current) regulations do not have separate requirements appropriate for the significantly lower safety hazards associated with a permanently shut down and defueled reactor undergoing decommissioning,” the agency said in its March publication about the proposed changes.

The proposed changes would reduce the need for exemptions and amendments, streamlining the decommissioning process for both the agency and plant owners.

Markey and Keating each criticized the role the Nuclear Regulatory Commission plays in license termination agreements and the post-shut down decommissioning plans put forth by companies such as Holtec. The plans are reviewed by the agency, which can offer input, but it is not required to formally approve any plans from the outset.

“It’s like a glorified filing cabinet,” Markey said. “It’s like the NRC just checks to make sure all the necessary steps are in the report without having to approve the report.”

John Lubinski, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards in Washington, D.C., represented the agency at the hearing.

Lubinski defended his agency by noting public hearings are required throughout various stages regarding that and license termination plans. He also noted the agency maintains a presence at the sites

“We have not identified any issues that would lead us to believe we need to put more stringent issues in place.” he said. “We believe the current requirements are sufficient to protect public health and safety.”

“I did not convene this simply to pass blame and point fingers,” Markey said. “I’m hoping this hearing will serve as an opportunity to see what steps we can take to create opportunities for public engagement.

The formal public comment period for the proposal has been extended to Aug. 30.

More: Save Our Bay rally in Plymouth prior to hearing on nuclear plant decommissioning processes

More: Bills to ban water discharge at Pilgrim Station advance, BOH passes resolution in support

The hearing continues

Following Lubinski’s testimony, state Sen. Susan Moran, D-Falmouth, was joined by Seth Schofield, senior counsel from Attorney General Maura Healey’s office, Geoffrey Fettus, senior attorney for the Nuclear, Climate, and Clean Energy Program, Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, D.C., and Singh, who participated remotely from Florida.

Singh told the committee the Holtec parent company, and not just the limited liability companies created to handle various aspects of Pilgrim’s decommissioning, would stand behind the company's financial obligations in the event of any difficulties or issues.

Schofield noted the Attorney General's office negotiated financial assurance with Holtec about the use and potential reimbursement of the state’s decommissioning trust fund, along with more stringent environmental standards than the company would otherwise have had to follow, was only done because the decommissioning involved a license transfer from previous owner Entergy to Holtec.

Schofield and others agreed any new rules, which have not been updated in 25 years, should be codified in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations to save states the legal and financial drain of having to negotiate their own terms when a company looks to decommission a plant.

Singh said while the company has up to 60 years to fully decommission the plant, it is already far along in the process.

“Pilgrim is way ahead of this decommissioning schedule we had initially proposed,” Singh said.

Fettus said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission role in ensuring safe and cost-effective decommissioning has left much to be desired and the proposed rules changes are not adequate,

“It’s an extraordinary abrogation of regulatory oversight,” he said. “It should be withdrawn and reissued in much stronger terms.”

Schofield agreed the proposed regulations do not address the risks of decommissioning power plants,

Singh said several times the water, once treated, would no longer be contaminated according to any existing standards, and he said fear over releasing the water in the bay has no basis in scientific reality.

“It’s all emotion, no logic,” he said.

“We will not discharge it until we have consent from our stakeholders,” which includes local and national officials and agencies, he said, adding that shipping the water would still require treating it first.

“The role of the NRC is to keep a very close eye on all of these issues,“ Markey said. “In our experience, they are not.”

This article originally appeared on wickedlocal.com: Sen. Edward Markey brings federal nuclear hearing to Plymouth