FR 2024-29066

The document in question is a notice from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) about a petition filed by several organizations, including San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, Friends of the Earth, and Environmental Working Group. This petition requests the immediate closure of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, citing concerns about the potential risk of a severe accident triggered by an earthquake. The petition was initially filed on March 4, 2024, and has since been supplemented twice with additional information and concerns.

General Summary

The document outlines the procedural steps taken by the NRC in response to the petition. The issue has been referred to the NRC's enforcement petition process, specifically under the agency's regulations governing such matters. The NRC's Petition Review Board (PRB) is reviewing certain concerns raised in the petition. These include issues related to the methods used by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), the operator of the nuclear plant, in assessing seismic risks. Specifically, the petitioners argue that PG&E's seismic assessments have not utilized modern modeling techniques and could potentially underestimate the risks.

Significant Issues or Concerns

One notable issue with the document is its technical language, particularly concerning seismic modeling and risk assessments. Terms such as "globally-calibrated strainrate-to-seismicity conversions" may be difficult for the general public to understand without additional explanation. Furthermore, while the document mentions specific concerns regarding seismic analyses, it lacks detailed evidence or examples to support the claims of unacceptable risks posed by the plant's operation.

Moreover, there is a lack of clarity on how the Petition Review Board is handling the specific concerns from the petitioners. The document does not fully outline the process by which the PRB decides which issues to review, potentially leading to perceptions of an opaque or arbitrary decision-making process.

The timeframe for the proposed director's decision on the petition includes issuing a decision for public comment within 120 days, but a more detailed breakdown of the expected timeline for these review processes could be beneficial for transparency.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, this document addresses an important issue concerning public safety and energy policy. If the petition's concerns about earthquake risks are valid, there could be significant implications for the safety of residents living near Diablo Canyon. Ensuring that seismic assessments are up-to-date and accurate is crucial, given the potential consequences of a severe accident.

For the general public, particularly those residing near the plant, there may be concerns about the adequacy of existing safety measures. Furthermore, the potential closure of the plant could impact local economies, electricity supply, and energy prices in the region.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), this petition and the associated review process present challenges, particularly from a regulatory and operational standpoint. The company might need to conduct further assessments, invest in additional safety measures, or potentially face operational changes if the petition results in regulatory action.

Environmental and advocacy groups supporting the petition may view this process as a vital step toward ensuring environmental and public safety. However, skepticism about the NRC's review process could arise if the evaluation appears lengthy or lacks transparency.

The nuclear industry and energy sector stakeholders might see this as a precedent-setting case, as decisions related to seismic risks and plant closure could influence future regulatory actions and industry standards.

In conclusion, this document highlights an ongoing regulatory process that balances safety concerns with energy needs and economic impacts. Transparency and clarity in this process will be critical to maintaining public trust and effectively addressing the concerns raised by the petitioners.