Legalectric

A BIG thanks to Joyce Vance for the link to the Trump N.Y. criminal trial transcripts.

LIVE LINK: https://ww2.nycourts.gov/press/index.shtml

In October, while Xcel Energy’s Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant’s reactor 2 was out for refueling, there was an outage at reactor 2 that shut down that unit also for months. It was shut down for so long that the Mississippi River FROZE! Here’s the scoop on that outage that I’d not gotten around to posting.

OOPS!

The real cause of Xcel’s lengthy Prairie Island nuclear outage: Workers drilled through cables

The company said it did not use ground radar that would have shown where the underground cables were in the Red Wing plant and admitted its excavation planning and oversight was inadequate. 

By Walker Orenstein Star Tribune April 12, 2024 — 8:02am

Xcel Energy initially pinpointed the cause of a lengthy outage at its Prairie Island nuclear power plant as an equipment issue between the turbine and the electric grid.

But that didn’t quite tell the full story: Xcel workers at the plant actually cut a bundle of power cables when drilling sideways underground in October, interrupting power to some of the Red Wing plant’s equipment and causing one of the two reactors to shut down.

Xcel told federal nuclear regulators last month it did not use ground radar in an area that would have shown the cables’ location. The company also said its excavation planning and oversight was inadequate, admitting to “procedural weaknesses and poor communications” between departments.

https://www.startribune.com/nuclear-power-plant-xcel-energy-prairie-island-red-wing-outage/600358326/

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now they say “evacuation planning and oversight was inadequate.”

Remember when the Red Wing City Council approved Xcel’s PINGP Emergency Plan in a consent agenda vote?

How are the inadequacies going to be corrected?

This morning was a quick Public Utilities Commission rubber stamp of Xcel Energy’s application for additional casks at Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, declaring the application “complete.” It’s being forwarded to Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case hearing. The Prehearing Conference is already scheduled for May 13!

Meanwhile, notice is out for the EIS Scoping “Meeting” NEXT WEEK, April 24th & 25th!

Here are all the documents that go with it, lots of busy work for the next 6 days. The most important one is the Scoping Environmental Assessment Worksheet:

What strikes me about this, well, two things, one, that this application is NOW when they don’t “need” additional storage until 2033; and two, that if the Public Utilities Commission grants this Certificate of Need, we’re locked in until 2053-2054, with all the waste that will be generated through that time, and all the waste from decommissioning, which includes what’s in the reactors at that time, AND all the associated radioactive stuff, and there’s a lot of that. Where will that go? And when? I think the term now, rather than “temporary,” is indeterminate. And not only the waste, but there’s also the cost… in additional to costs of the casks and maintenance, because there are also casks that need to be “replaced,” and where and what that will entail, and again, that radioactive junkyard.

Oh, what a mess. And in addition to that, the timing problem looms large, because things CHANGE. For example, Xcel alludes to planning/hoping to “move” nuclear waste to an “interim” storage facility in either Texas or New Mexico, ones that could/would accept the type of casks they’re using. But things change… a while ago, the one in Texas was found unconstitutional:

Federal appeals court blocks plan to ship nuclear waste to West Texas

From the article:

That decision in August 2023 effectively killed the proposal by Interim Storage Partners to house used nuclear fuel from power plants across the U.S. at the existing Andrews County waste facility, on the Texas-New Mexico border.

West Texas nuclear waste plan remains blocked after federal appeals court ruling

… federal appeals court “killed the proposal,” and so much for that, which leaves New Mexico:

Law to ban high-level nuclear waste storage facility effective June

That law is Senate Bill 53. And just last month:

Court blocks proposed Holtec International nuclear waste site in New Mexico

From the article:

The ISP license was vacated in August 2023 by Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana which on March 27 found Holtec’s license was “materially identical” and should also be vacated for the same reasons. In both cases, the court found the NRC “lacked statutory authority” to issue the licenses under the Atomic Energy Act.

So now what? Is Xcel’s reliance on “interim” storage realistic? With “interim storage” in flux, is it reasonable, rational, to move forward with additional storage of nuclear waste that will sit at Prairie Island forever?!?! Particularly where they don’t need it until 2033? Makes no sense to me!

Today at 4:20 p.m. I received the Dept. of Commerce a scheduling proposal for the Xcel Energy cross-country greenfield transmission project with the stated purpose of preserving Xcel’s “valuable” transmission rights at the Sherco substation at a cost of $1.114 BILLION to be paid by ratepayers. Whew, so I took a look at it and at the PUC proposal, which came through earlier.

Looking at it, the left out some important things, so I fired off a pissive, and filed it a few minutes ago. These omissions of public comment, of scheduling the Draft EIS so late, and the Final EIS so much later, JUST NO! They didn’t even acknowledge that there may be parties to file Direct Testimony — only the Applicant is on schedule to file Direct. And the Final EIS isn’t on schedule to be released until after Initial and Reply Briefs are in. WTAF?!?! How about reading the rules, folks? So needless to say, yes, I fired off a pissive:

The Prehearing Conference is at 10 a.m. on May 1, 2024, where some of these issues will be ironed out:

Here it is, sent around by PUC Executive Secretary Will Sueffert:

And it’s been sitting here too long, without review… but April 15 is almost over and it’s time to have a look.

Some background info:

Minnesota Office of Legislative Auditor Report:

Public Utilities Commission’s Public Participation Processes – OLA-Report

Rulemaking for Minn. R. ch 7849 & 7850 that was tossed aside by Commission. Go to eDockets (https://mn.gov/puc/edockets/), and at bottom of screen, click on “eDockets” again, and search for 12-1246:

And of course the Reports from the Power Plant Siting Act Annual Hearings:

And I’ve not kept up with the annual report filings, so here they all are:

2000 Summary of Proceedings

2000 Report EQB

2001 Summary of Proceedings

2001 Report EQB

2002 Summary of Proceedings

2002 Report to EQB

2003 Summary of Proceedings

2003 Report to EQB

2004 Summary of Proceedings

2004 Report to EQB

2005 Report to PUC

2006 Report to PUC – Docket 06-1733

2007 Report to PUC – Docket 07-1579

2008 Report to PUC – Docket 08-1426

2009 Report to PUC – Docket 09-1351

2010 Report to PUC – Docket 10-222

2011 Report to PUC – Docket 11-324

2012 Report to PUC – Docket 12-360

2013 Report to PUC – Docket 13-965

2014 Summary Report– Docket 14-887

2015 Summary Report – Docket 15-785

2016 Summary Report – Docket 16-18

2017 Summary Report – Docket 17-18

2018 Summary Report – Docket 18-18

2019 Summary Report_Docket 19-18

20202-160679-01 Summary Report – Docket 20-18

2021 Summary Report – Docket 21-18