Comments Document

Dear Chairman Sullivan, Bloom Energy appreciates the opportunity to offer the following comments in support of House Bill 403 regarding electric utilities and temporary power purchase agreements. House Bill 403 is intended to address a limited set of situations where an electric utility is unable to provide service to a customer utilizing traditional wires infrastructure in a timely way. Bloom Energy is a manufacturer of solid oxide fuel cell technology that utilizes an electro- chemical process to power non-combustion microgrids as well as high efficiency electrolyzer systems designed to convert renewable electricity into renewable “green hydrogen.” The company has installed over one thousand of its solid oxide fuel cell systems for customers in thirteen U.S. states as well as in Japan, South Korea, India and Italy. Bloom Energy fuel cells have proven resilient through outages caused by hurricanes, winter storms, and other extreme weather and are used by some of the world’s most reliability conscious customers to guard against the risk of power outages while simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions. HB 403 would allow for temporary power purchase agreements in situations where an electric distribution utility has advised a customer that they will be unable to provide new or expanded service for a period longer than six (6) months. The power purchase agreements authorized by proposed HB403 would require an advance determination by the State Corporation Commission (SCC), would be limited in duration, and would require five (5) years notice to the involved utility before the customer can again seek utility service. In light of the very limited circumstances in which the provision would apply, as well as the short duration and utility notice protections built into the bill, HB403 represents a targeted measure that is designed to address an existing threat to economic development in Virginia without adversely impacting the state’s electric distribution utilities. We support HB 403 and are hopeful that the Committee on Labor and Commerce will look favorably upon this important proposed legislation. Very truly yours, Charles Fox Vice President Bloom Energy Corporation

I think this is an excellent step forward to addressing simultaneous and contradictory movements. The existing efforts to increase demand on the power grid via electric vehicles while also reducing generation due to environmental and other concerns is fundamentally incoherent. I express my support for the bill and hope to see more technology developments from this and future sessions to ensure legislative infrastructures support societal changes as they occur. I can be reached at dmintz1732@gmail.com or 757 303 9938 if further discussion is desired.

I live in Scott County and am writing to voice my strong objections to the following bills: HB741 reduces the level of oversight and permitting requirements for siting small nuclear reactors (SMRs), classifying them as "clean renewable energy" projects when, in fact, they are not clean or renewable energy technologies -- they produce radioactive waste and, if there is an accident, they release radioactive material into our air or water. These are risks not associated with clean energy projects and small modular nuclear reactors should have the same level of permitting and siting scrutiny as full scale nuclear plants. HB741 would allow siting in previously undisclosed locations across Southwest Virginia without public input. SMR sites proposed in a LENOWISCO Planning Commission study are predominantly on disturbed mine lands, which are more likely to be structurally unstable from past blasting fractures. These sites should require greater scrutiny rather than less. Please vote NO on HB741. ******** HB1074 amends the definition of “renewable energy” to “zero-carbon”, which is not in keeping with Virginia's Clean Economy Act that was designed to encourage truly renewable energy sources, and which specifically excludes nuclear power. Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean energy nor renewable energy. Please vote no on HB1074. ********* HB1323 would allow utilities to recoup development costs for small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs), which may never be constructed or deliver power to ratepayers. HB 1323 would force Virginia  ratepayers to finance the development of SMR technology when there has never been a successful SMR facility built. It is the utility stockholders who should finance this risky and costly technology if they are so enthusiastic about it. Please vote no on HB1323. ************** HB1491 would force Virginians to pay the costs of planning, building, and operating a generating facility that is serving customers in another state. We, Virgina ratepayers, would be liable for all the costs, and the larger the capital addition to the rate base, the larger the profit for stockholders, the larger the bonus for utility executives, and the larger the utility campaign donations to Virginia legislators. Please vote no on HB1491 and instead support cheaper, faster, and far less risky solar and energy storage capacity.

I write to oppose bills, HB741, 1074, 1323, and 1491, which potentially take Virginia in dangerous directions. Nuclear power has not lived up to its predicted potential of being "too cheap to meter". Indeed, it has turned out to be expensive, dangerous, and unreliable: an excellent example of our technological CLEVERNESS outrunning our WISDOM to foresee negative consequences. Put more simply, just because we CAN do something, doesn't mean we SHOULD do it. Known unresolved problems include: Disposition of radioactive waste Environmental effects of Uranium mining Potentially unstable substrates for siting reactors, especially on mine sites. Energy "Demands" continue to be exorbitant and not consistent with a sustainable future.

There are many community meetings going on in the coalfields and many oppositional letters to the newspapers on this and related projects proposed by Gov. Yougkin. HB 741 is a shell game; it redefines all renewable energy sources in order to wedge new nuclear facilities (SMRs) into that category, but under a new name. This is not in keeping with Virginia's Renewable energy Portfolio Standard (RPS), designed to encourage renewable energy, and which currently excludes nuclear power. "New" small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean nor renewable energy. The bill attempts to greenwash nuclear power simply to include SMRs in Virginia's RPS calculations. The bill also requires that DEQ review up to 300 mW of nuclear power, utilizing the same level of scrutiny it applies to a few megaWatts of new solar farm capacity, granting SMRs preferential "permit by rule" before the SCC. Potential toxic releases in water or air by a nuclear plant are much more harmful than anything that could come from a solar project. Those promoting the SMRs are downplaying the risks financially, health wise and environmentally. The bill should be defeated because SMRs are neither clean nor renewable. The bill should also be defeated because of its cavalier approach to legitimate concerns regarding regulatory vigilance around nuclear power, particularly if SMRs come to be sited on unrestored mine lands as Governor Youngkin proposed at “Data Ridge” in Wise Co. on November 1st. Shockingly, this bill also extends the potential reach for siting SMRs to all of SWVA without public input into that proposition. Please vote “NO” on HB 741. (SB 561 is a companion Senate bill.)

HB 741 redefines all renewable energy sources in order to wedge new nuclear facilities (SMRs) into that category, but under a new name. This is not in keeping with Virginia's Renewable energy Portfolio Standard (RPS), designed to encourage renewable energy, and which currently excludes nuclear power. "New" small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean nor renewable energy. The bill attempts to greenwash nuclear power simply to include SMRs in Virginia's RPS calculations. The bill also requires that DEQ review up to 300 mW of nuclear power, utilizing the same level of scrutiny it applies to a few megaWatts of new solar farm capacity, granting SMRs preferential "permit by rule" before the SCC. Potential toxic releases in water or air by a nuclear plant are much more harmful than anything that could come from a solar project. The bill should be defeated because SMRs are neither clean nor renewable. The bill should also be defeated because of its cavalier approach to legitimate concerns regarding regulatory vigilance around nuclear power, particularly if SMRs come to be sited on unrestored mine lands as Governor Youngkin proposed at “Data Ridge” in Wise Co. on November 1st. . SMR sites proposed in a LENOWISCO Planning Commission study are largely on disturbed mining land, which presents potential structural hazards affecting stability of nuclear facilities, which requires greater scrutiny, not less This bill also extends the potential reach for siting SMRs to all of SWVA without public input into that proposition. Expanding the potential site to all of Southwest Virginia without public notice prior to an obscure bill shows a peremptory lack of concern for opinions of affected citizens. Please vote “NO” on HB 741. (SB 561 is a companion Senate bill.)

Please vote against this bill. A law that says so will not make nuclear power plants clean radioactive waste is not clean. DEQ should not treat nuclear power plants like solar or wind energy. They are much more dangerous. Southwest Virginia does not need to again be the dump for outside investors.

I am commenting to oppose HB 1323 which would permit American Electric Power and Dominion Energy to recover costs from small modular nuclear reactor development. This bill would force us ratepayers to finance SMRs. We never wanted these projects in the first place because we know how dangerous, how dirty and how expensive they are! NuScale, the only SMR to receive preliminary design approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, was canceled one week after Governor Youngkin’s heralded announcement of the “Data Ridge project” in Wise County, Virginia, which he has proposed to power with SMRs. The NuScale failure came, according to Reuters, despite $600 million in grants the U.S. Department of Energy spent on development of the NuScale SMR, and $1.35 billion more pre-approved for NuScale over the next 10 years! According to the nuclear-friendly Breakthrough Institute, “These developments suggest that current efforts are unlikely to be sufficient to deliver on the promise of advanced nuclear energy.” Delegate Marshall's bill would force Virginia residents to carry the risk of a nuclear project that's risky in every way- from the environment to the economy. We should never expose the Commonwealth’s residential, commercial, and industrial ratepayers to such extraordinary financial risk. Please vote No on HB 1323.

I am writing to oppose HB 1491. Delegate O'Quinn's suite of bills related to nuclear development is atrocious. HB 1491 pushes the cost of dangerous industry projects onto consumers who never wanted it in the first place! Delegate O'Quinn, through HB 1491 seeks to increase consumer energy costs- that's our energy bills!- to pay for the evaluation, design, engineering, environmental analysis and permitting, land option, and site permitting for small modular nuclear reactors. Virginia customers could be required to pay for projects in West Virginia too! Why would any delegate vote to force Virginians to pay the costs of planning, building, and operating a generating facility that is serving customers in another state? The risks of nuclear development are evident throughout the entire fuel chain. History shows that there is a strong correlation between new designs and cost increases and project delays. Indeed, costs of the latest nuclear project to come online (seven years late and among the first since the Three Mile Island meltdown), Georgia Power’s Vogtle Units 3 & 4, exceeded projections by 120% (https://apnews.com/article/georgia-nuclear-power-plant-vogtle-rates-costs-75c7a413cda3935dd551be9115e88a64). It’s unclear how much of the cost overruns customers will be forced to shell out. This bill put profits over people. Utilities win either way by scooping up front-end federal and state subsidies, then forcing ratepayers, as they have in the past, to take the risks and pay even if a nuclear SMR plant is never completed. What's more, nuclear power is not a climate solution: it is too dirty, too dangerous, too expensive and too slow. At every stage of production, it is rooted in environmental injustice and human rights violations. The fuel for nuclear power relies on a long chain of extraction, processing, enrichment, and generation of vast amounts of radioactive and toxic wastes. It contaminates air, land, and water, expanding the danger to ecosystems and essential sources of life and well-being. The likelihood of reactor meltdowns is increasing, due to rising sea levels, the increase in severe storms and extreme weather events, and warming water temperatures. Vote NO on HB 1491

I urge you to vote NO on this bill. This bill effectively lumps small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) into currently defined renewable energy projects such as solar, wind, and storage. SMRs are neither clean nor renewable. They produce high levels of toxic radioactive waste and methods to reuse or renew waste products do not seem feasible. To my understanding there is currently no way to recycle waste which is stored on site and transportation of waste to a recycling facility has inherent risks. The risks of producing electricity by nuclear energy poses potential risks that are far greater than the risks involved with the production of electricity using CURRENTLY available solar, wind, and storage facilities. To lump SMRs into the same permitting requirements as solar or wind projects seems a bit unfair to me. It appears to me that SMRs should have GREATER regulatory scrutiny. There has been little, or no, community input into the potential placement of these SMRs in the four Planning Districts named in this bill. The “potential sites” in Planning District 1 are located on abandoned mined lands which can be very unstable and potentially dangerous locations for construction of a nuclear module. I again urge you to vote NO on HB 741.

I am writing to oppose HB 1074. Delegate O'Quinn's suite of bills related to nuclear development is atrocious. HB 1074 seeks to redefine "zero carbon" nuclear and hydrogen projects as "renewable energy." Once again, this undermines and attempts to hoodwink legislators and residents. Calling nuclear renewable energy is a complete fallacy. We know better. Small modular reactors are neither clean nor renewable energy. They rely on uranium mining and processing and they produce high and low-level radioactive waste. At every stage of production, it is rooted in environmental injustice and human rights violations. The Nuclear Fuel Chain is not zero carbon and to focus only on the final product (or the output) is not an accurate representation of nuclear projects. This bill should be defeated. Uranium and fossil fuels should be left in the ground and Virginia should be a leader in real, clean and renewable energy. Redefining dangerous projects as such is an attempt to fool us. The bill should be defeated because new (SMR) nuclear and hydrogen electrolysis, potentially powered by SMRs and using fossil fuel feedstock, violate the intent of the RPS as enacted. Please vote “NO,” on HB 1074.

I am writing to oppose HB 741. Calling nuclear clean energy is a complete fallacy. It undermines Virginia's Renewable Portfolio Standards and it undermines the intelligence of Virginia residents. We know better. Small modular reactors are neither clean nor renewable energy. They rely on uranium mining and processing and they produce high and low-level radioactive waste. At every stage of production, it is rooted in environmental injustice and human rights violations. This bill should be defeated because not only is it an attempt to hoodwink legislators and residents, it makes it harder for residents to raise legitimate concerns regarding regulation of nuclear power. Vote no on HB 741 and its Senate companion

"My family lives close to where developers propose to put these SMRs. I don't want to live near SMRx - especially when this bill proposes to limit monitoring of them by the Department of Environmental Quality. Please vote "NO" on HB-741.

Greetings! I urge you to oppose HB-741, because I disagree that small modular nuclear plants are "clean" as this bill would claim to define SMRs. Renewable energy, solar, wind, energy storage are clean. Nuclear waste is not clean or safe, with no permanent storage solution. Limiting DEQ's supervision of such facilities is a sign that developers don't want scrutiny of their unproven technology. No SMR has been successfully built in the U.S. Please oppose HB-741

I am writing in opposition of this bill. As someone who is looking at moving back to far southwest Virginia, and who enjoys recreating and engaging in community events in the region, a nuclear energy facility or part creation plant would significantly impact my choices in this regard. I LOVE southwest Virginia, particularly districts 43,44, and 45, but the entire region overall. I feel invested in this place, and want to make it my home. The presence of a facility like this endangers the safety of that. Not to mention the natural world and human communities already in place. There is such a bright, renewable, sustainable future that is truly possible for this area, but nuclear has absolutely NO place in it. I disagree that small modular nuclear plants are "clean" as this bill would claim to define SMRs. Renewable energy, solar, wind, energy storage are clean. Nuclear waste is not clean or safe, with no permanent storage solution. Limiting DEQ's supervision of such facilities is a sign that developers don't want scrutiny of their unproven technology. No SMR has been successfully built in the U.S. Please oppose HB-741

Please oppose this 741 bill. The nuclear energy electric generation will give the most expensive electricity ever. It is not clean energy. The toxic wastes will have to be stored on site about as long as Homo sapiens have walked on earth. When NuScale had the only approved SMnR designed and collapsed financially on that with investors suing because of over promise, our state should have rocked on it's heels on this issue. Dominion that was such a major contributor to political races, wants to go with unproven SMnRs that sucks the oxygen from proven solar, wind projects, hydropower from rivers and promising research and breakthroughs in batteries. Why waste millions and billions even if it is in the pipeline. My call is for public hearing s be held by Senator Deeds on the SMnRs, Carbon Capture and Storage, blue hydrogen, and the unheard of recycling of nuclear wastes planned on the 65k AC in Wise Co. None of those projects will abate Climate Change. Dominion wants to put all the costs on their ratepayers rather than on their stockholders. Louisiana --oil friendly and cancer alleys can approve Carbon Capture and Storage. They have no regulatory powers after that. Come on. There are real risks with CCS. We have 50% cancer rate in SWVA. Adding nuclear power will tip us into a higher rate like it did in Unicoi Co. TN. and in California. When the nuclear plants shut down there, in certain age groups the CA deaths went down per CDC records. Our state is not up to the regulating that is needed. The citizens back here have had plenty of letters in the newspapers opposing the SMnRs. Sentiment is not with the "moon shot" of Governor. Why would you go with risks that no banker would take with little to no assured return. No transparency. Public not invited to the Presser when the Governor announced the plan.. There are many citizens here that need to be heard . Regulations in Virginia have been weak in recent years. The fish are gone for miles in a creek and a river in SWVA that I know of. The Supreme Court has bruised EPA regulation as they have Voters' Rights, Women's Rights and they may land another blow this year. Please don't back the energy facilities mentioned. Hold hearing, get more research, citizens participation...Electric bills here this winter are already breaking peoples backs. One had $1,100 electric bill, another $900 and it wasn't in the heart of winter. Pour some money into weatherization for the public or the like not down the drain, purely wasting it even it is in a money pipeline.

I oppose HB-741. I disagree that small modular nuclear plants are "clean" as this bill would claim to define SMRs. Renewable energy sources, like solar and wind, are better, cheaper options that have proven results! We should be investing in actually clean technology instead of changing the definition of clean. Nuclear waste is not clean or safe, with no permanent storage solution. Our great-grandkids would inherit the problem of nuclear waste. Plus, limiting DEQ's supervision of such facilities is a sign that developers don't want scrutiny of their unproven technology. No SMR has been successfully built in the U.S. Please oppose HB-741!

The plan to fast track SMR implementation, and to do so in a way in which they can “be effective as soon as practicable” is galling. Southwestern Virginia, comprised of your constituency, is not a sacrificial dumping ground for experimental technology just because some, who do not live in these hills and hollers, have decided it should be. This is shameful and shocking. There are no safety measures, no plans, no concrete evidence that SMnR placement, and waste storage, would be safe on the karsed, honeycombed land. Meanwhile these bills are in committee while our communities are left largely in the dark (not for lack of trying, on the part of our frontline neighbors, to bring things to light) about what our representation has planned. Expensive, ineffective. We want a JUST TRANSITION from the extractive practices and industries from which we have been wrought. What about this is just? What, in the grand scheme, could be lost?

"I urge you to oppose HB-741, because I disagree that small modular nuclear plants are "clean" as this bill would claim to define SMRs. Renewable energy, solar, wind, energy storage are clean. Nuclear waste is not clean or safe, with no permanent storage solution. Limiting DEQ's supervision of such facilities is a sign that developers don't want scrutiny of their unproven technology. No SMR has been successfully built in the U.S. Please oppose HB-741. "My family lives close to where developers propose to put these SMRs. I don't want to live near SMRx - especially when this bill proposes to limit monitoring of them by the Department of Environmental Quality. Please vote "NO" on HB-741.

I oppose this bill which Mr. Oquin has introduced without support from his constituents. It is a very expensive project that presents real and present dangers to our region, when there are far less expensive and reliable alternatives. Nuclear energy is not "clean" or safe. Nuclear waste especially is not safe. The proposed reactors should not be excluded from any and all permitting processes. I urge you in the strongest terms to reject this bill.

This bill applies ONLY to Nuclear as a source of electric generation facilities. If Virginia needs more electric generation in the SW, this bill should apply to ANY source of electricity (e.g. renewables, hydrogen). Why are we limiting ourselves in an energy future that is going to require FLEXIBILITY and not single mindedness......

Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) should not be added to this list of expedited permitting for energy projects. Virginia and the nation have yet to deploy any SMRs commercially, with detailed information on their environmental and safety considerations for their deployment unknown, particularly within the unique environmental contexts of Southwest Virginia. This bill is attempting to place policy ahead of the appropriate scientific and technical knowledge needed to make informed policy decisions. Officials, for example, have proposed locating SMRs on former surface mines in the Southwest Virginia coalfields, which are located in close proximity to low-income and vulnerable environmental justice communities and households. These properties present significant risks and considerations for any type of new construction and development, including but not limited to stability concerns and groundwater and surface water liabilities. These considerations are heightened for nuclear projects, particularly considering the current need to store radioactive waste on-site at nuclear generating facilities. Siting an SMR in the Southwest Virginia coalfields will therefore largely be an experimental step in energy development and land use policy for Southwest Virginia, with no robust empirical data existing to guide agencies’ determination of appropriate best practices for the construction and operation of nuclear facilities on post-mined landscapes within local environmental contexts and regulatory requirements. A broad and nonpartisan coalition of more than 800 Southwest Virginia residents has also called for increased transparency and opportunities for public involvement from officials surrounding SMR proposals (source: https://www.change.org/p/petition-to-provide-public-input-on-plan-to-put-nuclear-reactors-in-swva). Public officials have for nearly two years now declined to hold public listening sessions or gather public input to inform SMR policy proposals in response to those calls from their constituents, instead introducing bills like this one that would expedite SMR permitting and remove them from SCC review. A more - not less - rigorous permitting and public review process for SMRs is needed to ensure the environmental compatibility and equitability of SMR development for Southwest Virginia's vulnerable environmental justice communities. SMRs’ inclusion in the expedited environmental reviews provided by this bill should be rejected.

Here is the correct, full citation from HB1491, Del. O'Quinn's companion bill to HB741, which I allude to in my HB741 comment below. The companion bill details clearly the plan that, even with a failed SMR, Virginians would be on the hook for all costs, nearly in real time, whether the SMR is ultimately completed or never generates a single watt. HB741 greases the regulatory skids for HB1491, which reads: "At any time prior to the filing of an application for a certificate to construct a SMR to serve customers in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia, "Project development costs" = all capital and operation and maintenance costs associated with a potential small modular nuclear facility before issuance of a certificate for a SMR facility located in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia to serve customers in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia, including the costs of evaluation, design, engineering, environmental analysis and permitting, land option, and early site permitting. "Small modular nuclear facility" means a nuclear reactor with a generating capacity of not more than 500 megawatts, capable of being constructed and operated either alone or in combination with one or more similar reactors. All development costs incurred for a potential SMR shall be recovered through a rate adjustment clause filed pursuant to subdivision A 6 of § 56-585.1, amortized over a period equal to the period during which the costs were incurred or five years, whichever is greater. If a Phase I Utility serves customers in more than one jurisdiction, such utility shall recover all project development costs from customers located in the Commonwealth and all costs associated energy and capacity from the SMR, once in service, shall be assigned to the Commonwealth to the extent that such costs are requested but not recovered from any system customers outside of the Commonwealth." West Virginians may want to thank us for picking up their tab. However, the best idea is to defeat both HB1491 and HB741 so that our Virginia environment, our health and safety, and our wallets are not on the line for dubious SMR projects. Utility management and stockholders--not residents, businesses and industry--should bear the financial risk for traveling down the hazardous, expensive, rocky road trying to build and operate SMRs. Solar and energy storage is non-toxic,cheaper and far faster to permit, construct and interconnect.

HB741 would redefine small nuclear reactors as "clean energy" and lump nuclear in with currently defined "renewable energy systems" (solar, wind, energy storage). Then rename the new category, "clean energy." SMRs cannot be clean; they produce high and low-level radioactive waste, along with risks associated with accidental radioactive releases, transportation, and storage. Defining new nuclear as clean energy cannot make it so. SMRs and on-site high-level waste reprocessing - Governor Youngkin has proposed that - deal in highly toxic radioactive materials, releases of these deadly materials, hurting people, have happened both in the U.S. and around the world. On-site commercial reactor waste reprocessing has never been accomplished or even attempted in the U.S. There is no permanent storage system for high level nuclear waste. Who, if not DEQ, is going to be monitoring our air and water and requiring appropriate permits and compliance assurances? HB741 equates SMR pollution potential with that of a solar farm or a wind generating facility. That's just not reasonable. HB741 would be laughable, if it wasn't so potentially dangerous, proposing to eliminate environmental and public health protections Virginians expect and deserve under current law. Proceeding with SMRs, employing "permit by rule" simply eliminates DEQ input into highly important planning decisions, not just after the reactor goes critical. HB741 deserves an early death in subcommittee because DEQ must exercise it's full regulatory authority over any dangerous SMR industrial site, which would contain the most toxic waste material known to humankind - especially if an SMR plans on drawing cooling water from ground water - even more cautiously should the Governor Youngkin succeed in his drive to build an SMR on previously mined land at "Data Ridge." in Wise County. The proposed "Data Ridge" mega industrial site Governor Youngkin is promoting on 65,000 Wise Co. acres of previously mined land, was announced on November 1, without the first public hearing in that county. SIX days later, the only SMR in the nation to have achieved preliminary design approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the NuScale project, was CANCELED despite the promise of nearly $4 billion in federal subsidies. The dog just would not hunt! HB741 should be defeated because SMRs are simply a boondoggle for utilities to suck up federal funds, then pick ratepayers' pockets . You don't need to believe me. Read Del. O'Quinn's HB1491, "At any time prior to the filing of an application for a certificate to construct a SMnR to serve customers in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia, 'Project development costs' = all capital and operation and maintenance costs associated with a potential small modular nuclear facility before issuance of a certificate for a SMnR facility located in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia to serve customers in the Commonwealth or in West Virginia, including the costs of evaluation, design, engineering, environmental analysis and permitting, land option, and early site permitting." So Del. O'Quinn's companion legislation, SB1491, would assure utilities that that we'll pick up the tab for a failed West Virginia SMR, too, if for some reason West Virginians have the good sense not to pay for that failure. Let's stop this plan dead by defeating HB741. Then do the same to HB1491, if it comes before the subcommittee.

HB741 should be rejected. Nuclear energy has fallen far short of1950's expectations when the phrase "too cheap to meter" was coined. Radioactive waste accumulates globally with no solution in sight. Surface mined land, properly reclaimed, leaves little solid bedrock exposed where construction can be done without risk of accelerated shaking in the event of earthquakes or other disturbance. These and other considerations make the proposal to limit public and government oversite of nuclear reactor siting in southwest Virginia untenable. No consideration is being given to energy conservation. Energ y "demands" may increase, but real needs could be held constant or reduced by small changes in lighting, heating and transportation. Satellite images of Earth at night look like Christmas trees. Surely safe conditions can be maintained with less artificial lighting. Room temperature used to be 68 F. With proper clothing, 65 F is comfortable and healthy. Millions of homes with some rooms rarely used are kept at 72F year-round. Driving at or below speed limit saves fuel. Is every trip necessary? "Demands" are made by children; adults seek solutions.

Sorry...previous comment by BOONE should have said: Please do NOT pass this bill.

As a life-long member of a coal mining community in Wise County, Va, I strongly OBJECT to HB 741 for the following reasons: 1) It redefines all renewable energy sources in order to add nuclear to the category. This does not align with VA's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), designed to encourage renewable energy that currently EXCLUDES nuclear power. The new Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean nor renewable. This bill is an attempt to greenwash nuclear power to roll these calculations into the Commonwealth's RPS calculations. 2) DEQ is required to apply the same level of regulatory scrutiny to 300 mW of nuclear power as it does to a new solar farm of a few megawatts, granting nuclear SMRs preferential "permit by rule." This defies human logic. The fallout from these small modular nuclear reactors--toxic releases by air and water potentially-- are far removed from any environmental damage produced via the solar farm. 3) In addition, unreclaimed, unstable mine lands, commonly found in Wise County, VA where I reside, may present instability to the nuclear facility itself or the storage of its waste, dangerous to human health for multiple generations, almost into infinity. If nuclear were so safe, the Federal government would not have to underwrite their liabilities, well past a half century now. 4) Finally, this bill expands the area of siting these, far beyond what was originally introduced, and frankly, it seems undemocratic to not seek public input from the affected citizens. I would hope this Committee would consider the health and wellbeing of its southwest Virginia neighbors in your consideration and REJECT Bill No. 741. It is clearly meant to make nuclear green, expand the territory without consultation, and put the health of the residents of Southwest Virginia at risk, their longevity shortened, and their quality of life diminished.

Please do pass HB741. This bill will put a nuclear target on Southwest Virginia. Our communities do not need to bear the risk of nuclear contamination when the cost of nuclear power is more expensive than any other source. Small Modular Nuclear Reactors will only benefit the developers.

I believe HB 741 is a deception to cover ulterior (monetary) motives ; it redefines all renewable energy sources in order to sneak in new nuclear into the category. This is not in keeping with Virginia's Renewable energy Portfolio Standard (RPS), designed to encourage renewable energy, and which currently excludes nuclear power. "New" small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean energy nor renewable energy. The bill attempts to greenwash nuclear power simply to include SMRs in Virginia's RPS calculations. The bill also requires that DEQ review up to 300 mW of nuclear power, utilizing the same level of scrutiny it applies to a few megaWatts of new solar farm capacity, granting SMRs preferential "permit by rule." Potential toxic releases in water or air by a nuclear plant are not on the same scale as anything harmful that could come from a solar project. The bill should be defeated because of its disregard to legitimate concerns regarding regulatory vigilance around nuclear power, particularly if SMRs come to be sited on unrestored mine lands as Governor Youngkin proposed at Data Ridge in Wise Co. on November 1st. This bill also extends the potential reach for siting SMRs to all of SWVA. thank you

HB 741 is a shell game; it redefines all renewable energy sources in order to wedge new nuclear into the category. This is not in keeping with Virginia's Renewable energy Portfolio Standard (RPS), designed to encourage renewable energy, and which currently excludes nuclear power. "New" small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are neither clean energy nor renewable energy. The bill attempts to greenwash nuclear power simply to include SMRs in Virginia's RPS calculations. The bill also requires that DEQ review up to 300 mW of nuclear power, utilizing the same level of scrutiny it applies to a few megaWatts of new solar farm capacity, granting SMRs preferential "permit by rule." Potential toxic releases in water or air by a nuclear plant are not on the same scale as anything harmful that could come from a solar project. The bill should be defeated because of its cavalier approach to legitimate concerns regarding regulatory vigilance around nuclear power, particularly if SMRs come to be sited on unrestored mine lands as Governor Youngkin proposed at Data Ridge in Wise Co. on November 1st. This bill also extends the potential reach for siting SMRs to all of SWVA

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

The VA NAACP support HB 230,692,604,906

People, particularly renters, in my community often live in housing that is not energy efficient. I have talked to people living in mobile home parks that have holes in their walls and flooring and no insulation. Their energy bills are high because of the poor quality of their housing. They have to choose between paying their energy bills and paying for other necessities like food and medicine. This bill will at a minimum keep their utilities on when they can least afford to lose them. I cannot imagine people losing power these past two weeks when temperatures have remained at or below freezing. Maintaining access to essential utilities during extreme weather and on non-business days is a health and safety issue. Shutoffs should be the absolute last resort and ideally never used as a measure to get people to pay their bills, especially when less than a third of people eligible for bill assistance receive any. Thank you for considering this important bill!