COLUMBUS, OH — American Electric Power (AEP) is seeking federal funding to explore the potential development of small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) on two company-owned properties in the Midwest and Southeast. The utility’s plans, which aim to secure grants from the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), could mark a notable shift in how electricity is generated—and in how local communities engage with nuclear power—in Indiana and Virginia.
Two Sites Under Consideration
AEP’s Indiana Michigan Power (I&M) has identified the Rockport Plant property in Spencer County, Indiana, as a prospective SMR location. Meanwhile, its Appalachian Power subsidiary is considering the Joshua Falls site in Campbell County, Virginia. Both proposals are in the initial stages, with separate federal grant applications submitted to support the Early Site Permit (ESP) process.
-
Rockport Plant in Indiana
- I&M, partnering with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH), is requesting $50 million to conduct site assessments, licensing requirements, and community outreach.
- The potential reactor model is the GEH BWRX-300, which can produce 300 megawatts of electricity. -
Joshua Falls in Virginia
- Appalachian Power has filed for $35 million in federal funding to offset ESP-related costs.
- No specific reactor technology has been selected, but the company says it will evaluate options that fit Virginia’s energy demands.
Balancing Demand and Safety
AEP executives emphasize the growing need for electricity as key industries expand and more consumers rely on stable power supplies. Bill Fehrman, AEP president and CEO, says the company is exploring various sources—ranging from natural gas to fuel cells—to meet future demand. SMRs, smaller than conventional reactors, could be deployed in areas previously viewed as unsuitable for large-scale nuclear facilities.
Still, each potential project would require extensive regulatory review, with safety and long-term waste management emerging as central concerns. Nuclear power proponents point out that SMRs incorporate modern safety designs; critics stress that any nuclear accident, however rare, can have severe consequences. Storing radioactive waste for the long term also remains a persistent challenge.
Community and Official Response
Local officials in Spencer County, Indiana, have signaled early support, citing potential benefits such as high-paying jobs and increased local tax revenues. Some residents, however, remain wary of potential risks, including environmental impact and nuclear waste disposal.
In Virginia, the Joshua Falls site has drawn a similar mix of optimism and caution. In December 2024, more than 100 community members attended a public meeting to voice questions about health and safety, emergency preparedness, and the broader implications of nuclear waste storage.
Opposition: New Research on SMR Waste
Adding to public skepticism is a 2022 study from Stanford University and the University of British Columbia, which found that small modular reactors could produce higher volumes of certain types of nuclear waste per unit of electricity compared to conventional large reactors. This finding has fueled debate among environmental advocacy groups, who argue that scaling SMRs could exacerbate the challenges of secure waste disposal. Advocates of SMR technology counter that new reactor designs and more advanced waste management strategies could mitigate these risks.
Federal Funding and Timeline
Both of AEP’s site proposals were submitted under the USDOE’s Generation III+ Small Modular Reactor Program, which provides up to $900 million in grants for advanced nuclear initiatives. If either proposal receives funding:
- I&M in Indiana would begin the ESP process, focusing on environmental analyses, public input, and preliminary safety evaluations.
- Appalachian Power in Virginia would use the grant to further evaluate site suitability, pending approval from the Virginia State Corporation Commission under Code § 56-585.1:15.
Even with federal support, commercial operation of any potential SMR would likely be at least a decade away. Nuclear plants—of any scale—face extensive local, state, and federal reviews intended to ensure public safety and environmental protection.
Broader Industry Context
The push for SMRs reflects a shifting landscape in the U.S. energy sector, where nuclear power is receiving renewed attention amid pressures to lower carbon emissions. Some experts see smaller reactors as a flexible, carbon-free source of electricity. Others worry that nuclear safety, security, and waste challenges remain unresolved—concerns echoed in the Stanford/UBC study.
Globally, several SMR projects are in various stages of review. Each must contend with technological hurdles, cost considerations, and the realities of nuclear waste handling, among other challenges.
The Road Ahead
AEP says it plans to host more community forums in both Indiana and Virginia over the coming year, gathering local input and addressing questions about the SMR proposals. Regulatory bodies in both states will play a role in deciding whether these projects can move forward, while any construction permit would require approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other federal agencies.
At present, AEP awaits the USDOE’s decision on its grant applications—funding that could significantly influence whether these two sites move closer to becoming part of the next generation of nuclear power in America.
Add comment
Comments