Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Security Baseline Inspection Report 05000277/2026420 and 05000278/2026420

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Security Baseline Inspection Report 05000277/2026420 and 05000278/2026420 ADAMS Accession No. ML26187A105

Uranium mining grows as Trump seeks to feed a nuclear boom

By HANNAH NORTHEY | 07/09/2026 01:09 PM EDT 

The federal government recently approved a South Dakota uranium project that moved through the FAST-41 permitting process.

The site of the proposed Dewey‑Burdock uranium project in Fall River County, South Dakota.  Bureau of Land Management
​​​​​​​

The U.S. is beginning to see signs of a uranium mining boom as the Trump administration pushes to revive a nuclear power sector it believes is vital to feed the grid and power-hungry data centers.

Most of the uranium used in U.S. nuclear power plants today is imported primarily from Kazakhstan, Canada, Uzbekistan, Australia, Namibia and Russia, with federal analysts warning that owners and operators of U.S. reactors face possible uranium shortages over the next decade. While Russia dominates the global market for the nuclear fuel, the U.S. banned imports of that company’s uranium in 2024, although there are allowances for limited waivers until 2028.

Trump administration officials have fast-tracked mine approvals, deemed uranium a critical mineral and last week hailed the federal approval of the Dewey-Burdock uranium project in South Dakota as a new source of “domestically produced uranium.” 

“Increasing the domestic production of uranium is critical to national security and energy dominance, and will play a pivotal role in accelerating the deployment of nuclear energy to meet growing electricity demand,” Emily Domenech, executive director of Permitting Council, said in a statement.

But the new-found excitement for a nuclear heyday has done little to temper long-simmering environmental concerns tied to uranium mining in the drought-stricken West, from fears about water use and potential contamination to possible damage of tribal lands

“I think it’s climaxed to the point now where this administration is not looking at protection and conservation, water protection measures,” said Reno Red Cloud, the director of the Oglala Sioux Tribe Water Resources Department who’s fighting a uranium production project in South Dakota. “This is all ‘let’s get rich and make our money.’”

More domestic production

The U.S. is currently seeing an uptick in the domestic production of uranium concentrate in states like Utah and Wyoming, according to federal data.

Production tripled to more than 1 million pounds of uranium concentrate in the first quarter of 2026, three times the amount produced during the same time last year, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said in a quarterly reportreleased last month.

Uranium concentrate or “yellow cake” is produced across six facilities in Wyoming, Texas and Utah. It’s mined in underground or open pits or extracted through in-situ projects. That material is then processed and refined and made into reactor fuel.

Jonathan Hinze, president of UxC, a nuclear industry market research company, said there’s been an increase in domestic uranium production since 2024, mostly through in-situ recovery (ISR). That method involves injecting a solution underground through a series of wells into ore bodies to dissolve uranium and then pumping it to the surface for processing.

But market conditions — not administration policies — boosted production, he noted, and the U.S. still relies on imports. “There has been an increase in production, but it’s nominal … the U.S. is usually 1 or 2 percent of the global production,” said Hinze.

What projects are advancing continue to face legal and regulatory hurdles and local pushback.

In Utah, federal regulators last year signed off on the Velvet-Wood uranium and vanadium mine after just 11 days of review, citing President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national energy emergency.

“By streamlining the review process for critical mineral projects like Velvet-Wood, we’re reducing dependence on foreign adversaries and ensuring our military, medical and energy sectors have the resources they need to thrive,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said at the time.

A coalition of more than a dozen Democratic attorneys general suing the government over the emergency declaration are now citing the Utah mine in court documents as an example of “unlawful application of emergency procedures.” Canada-based Anfield Resources, which owns the mine, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In South Dakota, Trump officials have prioritized the so-called Dewey-Burdock project in the southern Black Hills. The proposed facility would be located on about 240 public acres of a 10,580-acre project area near Dewey in Fall River County.

The Dewey-Burdock project has moved through the streamlined FAST-41 process and secured approval from the Bureau of Land Management and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which recently issued a renewed license that expires in 20 years. Developers now need state approval.

“We are looking forward to coordinating with regulators to diligently complete this next step in the process so we can begin producing clean, affordable uranium to fuel America’s energy future,” William Sheriff, enCore’s executive chair, said in a statement.

Uranium from aquifer

The Dewey-Burdock project has faced years of pushback from environmental groups and the Oglala Sioux Tribe, which is concerned about the project’s potential environmental impact.

Powertech, a subsidiary of Texas-based enCore Energy, is proposing to use ISR to extract uranium from aquifers that EPA has deemed contaminated and unsuitable for drinking water by humans or animals, according to the company’s website.

While uranium has a long history of polluting water supplies, supporters of this type of mining have argued it would be safer than an open-pit mine, and that the process doesn’t affect water quality.

On its website, enCore Energy asserts that it’s not possible for uranium extraction to contaminate the Cheyenne River or drinking water supplies for nearby towns. “The contaminated aquifer containing the uranium (and vanadium in this case) is situated in a geological structure that is contained in a unique, isolated location that allows for In-Situ Recovery extraction of uranium,” the site states.

The company did not immediately respond when asked how it would protect local water sources, but enCore’s website states that there are 24 reclaimed projects in the U.S., and that its directors have worked on 10 of those. “Licensing of Dewey Burdock requires firm plans for not only development and operations, but also for total reclamation and restoration of both the site and the affected groundwater,” the site states.

But Jeff Parsons, a senior attorney with the Western Mining Action Project who represents the Oglala Sioux Tribe and nonprofits fighting the project, is appealing the NRC’s approval of the project and challenging EPA’s approval of injection wells in court.

“There are zero examples of a company being able to actually restore an aquifer after mining,” said Parsons. “It’s a sacrifice zone.”

Red Cloud of the Oglala Sioux Tribe said he’s worried the project could contaminate aquifers within the Black Hills, a sacred area and the birthplace of the Oglala Sioux people.

The area is already plagued with polluting open-pit mines, he said, and the federal government and South Dakota regulators aren’t focused enough on future generations, water protection, reclamation, safety or the tribe’s cultural resources.

“In our history, the Black Hills is our origin story,” Red Cloud said. “It’s an area where it’s sacred, and there’s a lot of things that need to be protected.”

Lawsuit against NRC (Politico July 2025 article)

July 23 2025    E&E NEWS BY POLTICO 
​​​​​​​

NRC lawsuit could hand states power over advanced reactors

By FRANCISCO "A.J." CAMACHO | 07/23/2025 06:30 AM EDT

Many in the industry fear a court win would hamper the nuclear sector and states, but plaintiffs say it would boost innovation.

 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission headquarters outside Washington. NRC

A high-stakes lawsuit against the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission could force the agency to relinquish some of its authority over licensing smaller nuclear reactors to individual states, at a time when the NRC’s role is already facing challenges.

The complaint, originally brought by nuclear developer Last Energy and the states of Texas and Utah, asserts that the NRC does not have licensing authority over some nuclear microreactors and small modular reactors, or SMRs. If that were the case, states would likely assume oversight of such reactors, barring further congressional action.

It alleges that the NRC’s regulations have stifled innovation and development in the nuclear industry at a time when growing electricity demand is fueling a surge in support for nuclear energy. A settlement could be in the works.

Advertisement

“Although the case is still in its early stages, a successful legal challenge could significantly reshape the regulatory landscape for some reactors in the United States,” said Judi Greenwald, president and CEO of the Nuclear Innovation Alliance. “A patchwork of state-level oversight would hinder the commercialization of new reactors at home and abroad.”

In a statement, the NRC said it had “no comment on ongoing litigation“ but highlighted that it was reviewing three advanced nuclear construction permits.

“The NRC remains aligned with our interagency partners in efficiently regulating and enabling the deployment of nuclear power for America’s energy security while upholding the highest standards of public health, safety, and environmental protection,” the NRC said.

The agency has been in upheaval since President Donald Trump issued a slew of executive orders May 23 aimed at expediting nuclear safety assessments. Shortly after issuing the orders, the Trump administration informed the NRC that it would be expected to grant “rubber stamp” approval to new reactors already tested by the departments of Energy or Defense and sent an email firing Democratic Commissioner Christopher Hanson.

Michael Buschbacher, a partner at law firm Boyden Gray and lead counsel for Last Energy, Deep Fission and Valar Atomics in the lawsuit, contends that the fears of a chaotic regulatory environment are unfounded. He says that under the plaintiffs’ reading of the law, only designs that fall within new NRC-approved safe reactor parameters would skirt the agency’s licensing review.

“No commercial reactor can get away from the federal licensing requirements if it is not safe. And so that, to me, solves almost all of this concern,” he said.

“In terms of implementing it and ‘Do we really want 50 regulators?’ I mean, we already do have that. All kinds of rules apply to all power generation, and different states have different approaches to that. But we’re not adding a new requirement for states to figure out whether a reactor is safe — NRC will still have to do that,” Buschbacher continued, though he acknowledged that some changes to federal nuclear materials regulation might also be necessary.

In any event, diverse state-level approaches could potentially foster regulatory innovation, Buschbacher said, by creating a “race to the top.”

As for what a new NRC regulation should say, “the point is not that it has to adopt this or that specific threshold or methodology,” he said. “Congress did give the NRC authority to figure out what the exact line should be and why, but it didn’t let them just ignore that and say that everything falls under their licensing authority.”

Startups Valar Atomics and Deep Fission, the states of Florida and Louisiana, and the Arizona Legislature joined the lawsuit in the spring. The NRC originally said that the lawsuit was frivolous and violated the federal rules of civil procedure.

But in June the NRC joined the plaintiffs in asking the court to extend a stay on the proceeding until Sept. 29 to pursue “a mutually agreeable resolution that could avoid or limit further litigation in this case.” The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas granted the motion on June 30.

In May, shortly after being detailed to the NRC, DOGE representative Adam Blake had a series of introductory meetings with NRC commissioners and senior staff in which the lawsuit was raised, a person who was present at one of the meetings, granted anonymity to speak about a private conversation, told POLITICO’s E&E News.

“He thought it was part of his mandate to bring the parties together to facilitate a settlement of that lawsuit,” this person said. “The fact that Blake was there to settle the lawsuit suggests that it was going to be expected for NRC to give them some of what they wanted. Otherwise, why would you settle?”

It was not clear if Blake continued to push the agency toward settling the case after the initial meetings. He did not respond to a request for comment.

Legal arguments

The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 grants the NRC licensing authority over commercial reactors that use fissile nuclear material “in such quantity as to be of significance to the common defense and security, or in such manner as to affect the health and safety of the public.”

The plaintiffs argue that many microreactors and SMRs, like Last Energy’s 20-megawatt design, fall outside the NRC’s licensing authority because they use only small amounts of uranium and have passive safety features.

The NRC’s predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, “issued a rule in 1956 that just completely ignored this and said that anything, any civilian commercial reactor, regardless of design or anything else, has to get a construction and operation license,” Buschbacher said.

“Our argument is: Congress drew a line, the agency ignored it. And we brought a suit to say, ‘No, you can’t ignore what Congress told you to do,’” he said.

The Department of Justice, representing the NRC, responded in March with a motion to dismiss the case. The defense’s arguments centered on civil procedure, contending that only federal appeals courts can review NRC rules under the Hobbs Act, that the plaintiffs’ claims are time-barred by the six-year statute of limitations under the Administrative Procedure Act, and that plaintiffs should have worked “cooperatively with the NRC to address their objections to this longstanding and unremarkable rule by petitioning the agency to change it.”

The states and startups counter that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System last year allows parties newly injured by existing laws to pursue legal challenges. The complaint is one of the first to cite the Supreme Court decision.

DOJ’s response ventured a brief attack on the complaint’s merits, too, arguing that Congress implicitly acknowledged NRC jurisdiction when it passed the bipartisan 2024 ADVANCE Act, which imposes “regulatory requirements for micro-reactors” on the commission and instructs it to streamline the permitting process for advanced reactors.

What exactly a settlement might look like is difficult to predict, said a former senior official with the NRC, granted anonymity due to connections to the parties.

“I think a settlement would likely be an effort to try to get the NRC to have an expedited, simplified process for the ultimate licensing of microreactors,” the former official said. “It could also potentially include some opportunity for state inspection activities.”

One possibility could be that the commission may be close to completing a revised regulation that addresses the key issues raised in the lawsuit, said Keith Bradley, a partner at the firm Squire Patton Boggs.

“It is quite conceivable that the NRC is saying, ‘We have something that’s really close to done, just let us finish it,’” he said.

The agency could also have a “real desire to change” its regulations and may be willing to accept a court order partially vacating the existing rule, Bradley said.

An industry divided

The nuclear industry is split over the lawsuit’s push, and the startup plaintiffs have had little experience with the NRC.

Deep Fission has been in pre-application proceedings with the NRC since May 2024, and Last Energy only engaged with the agency in spring 2025. Valar Atomics has still not contacted or met with the commission.

Valar CEO Isaiah Taylor defended his company’s participation in the lawsuit. “If you believe that the jurisdiction is wrong, why would you engage in the process?” Taylor told POLITICO’s E&E News in an interview.

“Our standing comes from the fact that we’re trying to build reactors here in the United States. We have active customers, we have a site in Utah, and the NRC is wrongly holding jurisdiction over that project. It would be inconsistent of us to be in an NRC process given that,” he continued.

But SMR developers that have longer records of interacting with the NRC tend to oppose the lawsuit’s goals.

“For new reactors to be deployed at a meaningful scale, it will be vital to maintain public trust in the regulator,” said one nuclear company with more than five years of engagement history with the NRC. “A patchwork regulatory environment with inconsistent codes from state to state would present a challenge to developers and reduce efficiency at a time when we should be expediting processes.”

The company, granted anonymity due to fear of political retribution, went on to defend the NRC. The agency’s review timelines have generally shortened in recent years.

“As the nuclear industry evolves, the regulator must modernize in parallel. In recent years we have seen that licensing advanced reactors with the NRC under existing frameworks is possible. We believe the agency is capable of continued innovation,” the company said.

NuScale Power waited 41 months to receive a design certification in 2020, but it waited only 22 months to get a certificate for its new design in 2025. Part of the reduction in time is attributed to similar features in the two designs.

Greenwald with the Nuclear Innovation Alliance thinks that a successful lawsuit would burden both nuclear companies and states.

“This fragmented approach would undermine the federal government’s and plaintiffs’ shared goal of enabling the efficient and streamlined deployment of advanced reactors. It would also be very expensive and inefficient to have states attempt to duplicate NRC’s highly technical expertise,” she said.

"Nuclear Power is Now Trump Power....What Could Go Wrong?"

Piece by Karl Grossman and Harvey Wasserman today on CounterPunch -- https://www.counterpunch.org/2026/07/10/nuclear-power-is-now-trump-power-what-could-go-wrong/

The Next Nuclear Renaissance? | Cato Institute

Very solid analysis of nuclear power costs and other practical considerations by the Libertarians at Cato. The arguments will be familiar to many on this discussion list, but the non-customary-suspect source should be a valuable addition to their impact

https://www.cato.org/regulation/fall-2025/next-nuclear-renaissance#reactor-life-extension

French nuclear & bon voyage (hope your travels go well!)

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-08/heat-wave-threatens-output-at-five-french-nuclear-reactors?embedded-checkout=true

Heat wave threatens output at 5 French nuclear reactors

With little time for rivers to cool between hot spells, each successive heat wave raises the risk of nuclear output restrictions.

By: | 07/09/2026 06:28 AM EDT

ENERGYWIRE | France’s latest heat wave is straining the country’s power system, with Électricité de France warning that as many as five nuclear plants could face output curbs in the coming days as soaring temperatures affect rivers used for cooling.

EDF is set to reduce production at two reactors this week, the first of a series of potential curbs as extreme heat spreads across Europe. France’s nuclear fleet is the backbone of the region’s power system, supplying low-carbon electricity that is routinely exported to neighbors including Germany and the United Kingdom.

Western Europe is in the grip of its third major heat wave so far this year. A high-pressure heat dome, similar to the one that saw record temperatures in June, is forecast to spread across the continent over the next week. Heat wave conditions are already affecting southeast England, France and Spain and are likely to develop in Switzerland and Italy, according to analysis from MetDesk.

Repeated bouts of really hot temperatures are increasing the risk of further disruption to the power system, according to Alessandro Armenia, an analyst at Kpler. With little time for rivers to cool between hot spells, each successive heat wave raises the risk of nuclear output restrictions, even if temperatures don’t surpass those seen earlier this summer, he said.

“We are accumulating extreme events,” Armenia said. “How many times can the system be resilient?”

The most extreme temperatures are forecast in France, where temperatures reached 41.4 degrees Celsius (106.5 degrees Fahrenheit) in the south and were forecast to climb to 42 C (107.6 F) near the Mediterranean on Wednesday, according to government forecaster Météo-France.

The dome, fueled in part by atmospheric changes from a developing El Niño and an unusually warm North Atlantic, is expected to trap heat over the region through next week, which is forecast to see temperatures rise 3 C to 6 C above normal in Western Europe.

Successive heat waves have baked soils, damaged crops and increased stress on livestock across southern Europe. Dry vegetation and low humidity have also heightened wildfire risk, prompting the European Union to deploy a record number of firefighters to support countries battling blazes.

Fires have broken out in Portugal, Spain, Greece and France. Near the Spanish border, about 800 firefighters are still working to contain a blaze that ignited earlier this week and has burned more than 49 square kilometers (18.9 square miles).

Switzerland amazes the world with its solar-powered train tracks: more than 11,000 trains running smoothly

FYI 🌅👍🏼👍🏼 — Switzerland amazes the world with its solar-powered train tracks: more than 11,000 trains running smoothly 👏👌🏽🙌🏼‼️

Source: Meristation
https://share.google/9MhlY0HqcpCIdODed

Scott Denman