The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) recently released a policy brief that expressed initial concerns with an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposal to redefine “waters of the United States” and how it could increase electricity costs without environmental benefit; but on closer inspection, NEI sees no real cause for concern.
Mainly, the proposal was an initial concern because the definition of waters of the United States was used “so broadly that the proposed definition appears to apply federal regulation to virtually all waters within U.S. borders.” The brief argued that the “agencies should withdraw the proposed rule and propose a revision that is clearer, is more consistent with the science and conforms to established jurisdictional limits.”
The initial NEI reaction was “to the proposed rule, which was more problematic than what ultimately emerged,” John Keeley, senior media relations manager at NEI, recently told Power News Wire. “Edison Electric Institute (EEI) took the lead in conveying utility concerns to EPA with the rule.
“Their principal finding was that, on balance, the final rule was improved in several areas important to utilities. Also, that there was nothing about the rule that was uniquely problematic to our technology.” Keeley said.
“Today, while we’ll monitor the litigation, we aren’t a party to any of it,”
Keeley said.
Keeley further explained that the EEI may have a different perspective than NEI, but he could not speak for them.
NEI’s mission is to foster the beneficial uses of nuclear technology before Congress, the White House and executive-branch agencies, federal regulators and state policy forums; to proactively communicate accurate and timely information; and to provide a unified industry voice on the global importance of nuclear energy and nuclear technology.
