It’s no work of art, but in the scenario this proceeding is in, with Prairie Island Indian Community and City of Red Wing deep in it with or working on agreements with Xcel Energy, there’s not much we can do, little impact, as they’re the players, and also, AAAAACK, I just didn’t have time.

The DEIS did grossly misrepresent the history and status of Xcel’s Utility Personal Property Tax payments to local governments, so I did include the City of Red Wing comment in the IRP (below page 13, Attachment A).

The main purpose of this is to push for reworking of the “low-dose” radiation exposure modeling using Aaron Datesman’s cutting edge Three Mile Island “shot noise” work to correct for the GIGO current modeling and more accurately characterize the risk.

Sooooooo, anyway, here’s what I filed:

I know I’ve been preoccupied, struggling to keep up and not doing a very good job of it, but how did I not know that the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant was shut down for the winter and the river has completely frozen over?? Granted this is proof positive that we don’t “NEED” this generation, but what does it mean for the river and those dependent on that open water? Fish, eagles, other wildlife??? Maybe the plant closure is why the 2024 nuclear notice came out late (no calendar)?

That’s from MPR on November 22, 2023 about this shutdown on October 19, 2023, over a month later:

Electrical trouble shuts down Prairie Island reactor

Odd, it took the STrib that long too, November 22, 2023. Guess Xcel belatedly sent out a press release?

Xcel’s Prairie Island nuclear plant will be out of commission until January

So something between generator and substation? Something similar may have happened to Unit 2 last May:

Nuclear reactor at Xcel’s Prairie Island plant remains offline after ‘unusual event’ reported Saturday

Turned out it wasn’t “just” a transformer — there was a problem with the “main feed water pump” that had to be fixed too: “The licensee determined that the fire alarms were caused by the electrical transient which occurred due to the fault on the Unit 2 main transformer” and then:

From NRC reports:

And here’s the Notification:

More info needed. It’s a cold winter Sunday, good for googling.

It’s out, the Prairie Island Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, here are the pieces from the Commerce-EERA site. Check it out and register your comments by May 10, 2022:

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) — Prairie Island Nuclear Plant

• SEIS Text
• Appendix A – Scoping Decision
• Appendix B – Safety of Spent Fuel Storage
• Appendix C – Cask and Canister Handling Processes
• Appendix D – Safety of Spent Fuel Transportation
• Appendix E – Comments on the Draft SEIS and Responses
  • Pages 1 – 18
  • Pages 19 – 34
  • Pages 35 – 37
  • Pages 38 – 40
  • Pages 41 – 58
  • Pages 59 – 78
  • Pages 79 – 98
  • Pages 99 – 118 

There doesn’t seem to be a link to a “one stop shopping” pdf of the entire thing.

You can also find the SEIS at the Red Wing Library.

Next steps? Comments on adequacy of the SEIS.

COMMENTS DUE MAY 10, 2022

Grant Merritt in the STrib:

Counterpoint: Case still powerful against nuclear energy

It would be unsafe and costly for Minnesota to reverse the moratorium. 

By Grant J. Merritt April 13, 2022

In response to “Times change. Minnesota nuclear moratorium must end” (Opinion Exchange, April 11), there are five reasons to retain Minnesota’s moratorium on building any more fission nuclear power plants.

The first is that ever since the Atomic Energy Commission began promoting them back in the post-World War II days, and over the ensuing 75 years, no acceptable storage locations have been found for the radioactive wastes.

The second reason is that these plants are prone to accidents, such as we had at the Monticello NSP nuclear plant on Nov. 19, 1971, when 50,000 gallons of radioactive water flowed into the Mississippi River. This caused the commissioner of the Minnesota Health Department to close the water intakes in the metro due to the threat to human health. That catapulted the accident into national news. Serious accidents occurred at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant followed by the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear plants.

The third reason to oppose any more of these plants here or elsewhere in the U.S. is the threat of terrorism, now being experienced at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine.

The fourth reason is that licensing nukes is difficult due to opposition by many people, even though the U.S. government has preempted state regulation of potential exposure to water discharges. Thanks to action by former Gov. Wendell Anderson when he was a U.S. senator, air emissions are not preempted, so the state can hold hearings on air emission permits, which would no doubt be hotly opposed.

The final reason for continuing the moratorium is that building nuclear power plants is so excessively costly that the nuclear plant that was well underway to being built on the Savannah River in South Carolina was abandoned by voters.

For these reasons the Minnesota Legislature should not reverse the nuclear moratorium.

Grant J. Merritt, of New Hope, is a retired attorney. He was executive director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 1971-75.

In-person meeting tonight — MASK UP!

READ THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND REGISTER YOUR THOUGHTS!

Xcel still has not disclosed what cask they plan to use. They also have said they don’t need a NRC license amendment, but the Xcel testimony in the rate case says otherwise. See p. 56-58:

Be there, or be square!