[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8570-8575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03156]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Intent and Request for Information Regarding 
Establishment of a Civil Nuclear Credit Program

AGENCY: Office of Nuclear Energy, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI); request for information (RFI).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA or the Act) 
directs the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) to establish a Civil 
Nuclear Credit (CNC) Program to evaluate and certify nuclear reactors 
that are projected to cease operations due to economic factors and to 
allocate credits to selected certified nuclear reactors via a sealed 
bid process. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is 
issuing this NOI to notify interested parties of DOE's intent to 
solicit applications for certification of nuclear reactors for 
eligibility to submit of sealed bids for CNC Program credits from 
nuclear reactor owners or operators that are at risk of ceasing 
operations due to economic factors and intent to request sealed bids 
from certified reactors for allocation of available credits. The NOI 
provides an opportunity for interested parties to submit to the 
Department a non-binding notice of their interest in submitting a 
confidential application for the CNC Program. The Department also seeks 
input from all stakeholders through this RFI regarding the 
establishment of a CNC Program including the application, 
certification, and selection processes.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested on or before 
March 17, 2022. The Department intends to develop initial draft 
guidance for the certification applications during the NOI/RFI comment 
period. It is strongly preferred that respondents comment on issues 
affecting certification directly via the email address below by March 
8, 2022. Comments relating to the certification received after this 
date may not be included guidance development.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments by any of the 
following methods:
    1. Email: [email protected] (Strongly Preferred). Submit 
electronic comments in Microsoft Word or PDF file format and avoid the 
use of special characters or any form of encryption. Please include 
``Response to RFI'' in the subject line.
    2. Online: www.regulations.gov. Submit all electronic public 
comments to www.regulations.gov. Click on the ``Comment'' icon, 
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
for this RFI. No facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. Any information 
that may be business proprietary and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should be submitted as described in Section IX.
    Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions 
through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier, DOE has found it necessary to make temporary 
modifications to the comment submission process in light of the ongoing 
COVID-19 pandemic. DOE is currently accepting only electronic 
submissions at this time. If a commenter finds that this change poses 
an undue hardship, please contact Office of Nuclear Energy staff at 
(202) 586-6231 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once 
the COVID-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates 
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission, 
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information 
may be sent to: [email protected]. Questions about the NOI may 
be addressed to Alden Allen at (208-526-7093). Questions about the RFI 
may be addressed to Kelly Lefler at (202-586-6231).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Advancing U.S. clean energy, energy security, and economic 
competitiveness enabled by reliable electricity generation is a 
priority of the Administration.\1\ As energy markets and economic 
circumstances continue to shift, multiple zero-emission nuclear 
generation assets are at risk for early closure, and several have 
already closed prematurely due to economic circumstances. Such closures 
have resulted in increased air pollution in communities, including 
disadvantaged communities, where fossil generation has replaced lost 
nuclear generation, materially impeded the national goal of carbon 
pollution-free electricity by 2035, and cost the nation thousands of 
high-quality union jobs. Further closures threaten to exacerbate these 
issues. Congress has appropriated funds to be allocated by DOE, using a 
credit allocation process, to certified nuclear reactors to prevent 
closure of carbon-free nuclear generation due to economic factors. DOE 
intends to execute the CNC Program in a manner that maximizes its 
contribution to the national objectives of clean energy generation, 
energy security and stability, and economic competitiveness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The White House, Fact Sheet: President Biden's Leaders 
Summit on Climate, April 23, 2021, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/23/fact-sheet-president-bidens-leaders-summit-on-climate/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The IIJA directs the Secretary to certify operating nuclear 
reactors under the CNC Program based on determinations that each 
reactor is projected to cease operations due to economic factors, that 
cessation of operations would result in a projected increase in air 
pollutants, and that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 
reasonable assurance that the reactor will continue to operate safely. 
Congress has appropriated $6 billion to fund credits awarded under the 
CNC Program and has authorized the Secretary to obligate up to $1.2 
billion in Fiscal Year 2022. Amounts in excess of $1.2 billion required 
to fund awarded credits for subsequent fiscal years can be disbursed 
subject to the availability of funds.
    As required by the Act, the Secretary will certify those reactors 
that meet the criteria for CNC Program eligibility, establish a process 
for submittal of sealed bids from certified reactors, and allocate 
credits to selected certified reactors, noting certain priority

[[Page 8571]]

considerations. Credits will be awarded over a 4-year period beginning 
on the date of the selection. Nuclear reactor owners or operators may 
apply for recertification after that time and additional credits may be 
allocated through September 30, 2031, subject to the availability of 
funds.
    To be certified by DOE for eligibility to submit a bid for credits, 
a nuclear reactor must meet certain economic and other criteria. The 
Act delineates specific eligibility criteria and provides discretion 
for the Secretary to define additional eligibility criteria for 
certification of a qualifying nuclear reactor. The Secretary intends to 
issue a detailed Request for Applications for Certification (Request 
for Applications) and, from certified reactors, request sealed bids. 
Such Request for Applications will explain the evaluation framework and 
criteria for certification. The requirements of the subsequent sealed 
bid auction for credits may be published either in the Request for 
Applications or a subsequent guidance document. In establishing and 
administering the CNC Program, DOE will comply with all applicable 
statutes and regulations, including those requiring environmental 
review processes.

II. Purpose

    This NOI/RFI provides notice of DOE's intent to establish and 
implement the CNC Program and solicits feedback regarding the proposed 
approach described in this NOI/RFI. DOE's proposed approach includes a 
Request for Applications to certify nuclear reactors for eligibility to 
submit bids for allocation of credits. DOE intends to evaluate such 
applications and certify reactors meeting the statutory requirements 
and then conduct a competitive bidding process for bids from certified 
nuclear reactors for allocation of available credits, and establish a 
periodic audit, as specified in section 40323 of the Act. In addition, 
DOE requests that interested parties submit to the Department a 
confidential, non-binding notice of their interest in submitting a 
confidential application for the CNC Program.

III. Proposed Approach

    DOE proposes the following key elements and related rationale to 
guide its evaluation of applications for certification. DOE intends to 
administer the CNC Program pursuant to the authority provided in the 
IIJA. Although DOE may develop a process that draws on concepts in the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation and Federal financial assistance 
regulations, those regulations do not govern the CNC Program. 
Therefore, terms such as ``application,'' ``proposal,'' or ``bid'' 
should be construed in the context of the CNC Program and not as 
commonly used in procurement or financial assistance actions. Feedback 
is solicited on each element, as well as the overall approach 
described.
    (1) Inclusivity. Pursuant to section 40323(e)(3) of IIJA, DOE 
intends to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, spending 
authority created by the Act to allocate credits to as many certified 
nuclear reactors as possible. DOE encourages the submission of 
applications for certification from all operating nuclear reactors that 
project ceasing operation due to economic factors and meet other 
criteria as specified.
    (2) Confidentiality. DOE will protect confidential, private, 
proprietary, or privileged business information from public release as 
allowed by statute and regulation unless otherwise approved by the 
applicant. Unless and until an applicant receives an award, DOE will 
treat the identity of each applicant and other identifying information 
as confidential business information for purposes of the Freedom of 
Information Act.
    (3) Acceptance of Applications. The Act directs that the Secretary 
accept reactor certification applications for 120 days following the 
Act's enactment, after which time the Secretary will evaluate and issue 
a decision on certification within 60 days. Reactors that receive State 
assistance including State zero-emission credits, State clean energy 
contracts, or other State program assistance may apply for 
certification beginning after the initial 120-day period. All non-
certified reactors may apply during subsequent annual application 
periods. DOE proposes that applications for certification should be 
submitted for each individual reactor seeking credits. An exception is 
offered if the applicant asserts that there are multiple units at a 
given site with substantially identical financial situations, 
operations structures, and costs in which case a single application can 
be made for multiple reactors. In this circumstance, DOE proposes that 
the applicant should delineate in the single application the attributes 
of each individual reactor.
    (4) Standards of Analyses and Representation. Recognizing that the 
economic factors facing each reactor are specific to each owner and/or 
operator, and further recognizing that operating and market assessments 
may be inherently uncertain, DOE proposes to request that applicants 
for certification make a representation of the economic situation of 
the reactor. Applicants may be required to provide their modeling 
approach, data, and methodology to support their claim of projected 
ceasing operations, and describe how its modeling approach, data, and 
methodology are consistent with those it makes for other business 
planning and filings, or fully explain any inconsistencies. DOE seeks 
comment on whether it should establish a standard modeling approach and 
methodology that each applicant must complete as part of the 
application for certification in addition to, or instead of, any 
modeling approach and methodology that an applicant may propose. DOE 
anticipates that applicants will provide both publicly available and 
privately held data to validate the assumptions, data and methodologies 
used. DOE also anticipates that the rules governing the protection of 
business proprietary and procurement sensitive information may apply to 
the documentation submitted by applicants. As such, applicants will be 
expected to mark all submitted documents appropriately as described in 
Section IX.
    (5) Evaluation of Applications for Certification. DOE proposes to 
establish a review process, using a review panel comprised of DOE 
personnel. The panel will verify that the applicant has addressed each 
relevant aspect of certification, consistent with requirements and 
evaluation criteria as specified in the Request for Application.
    (6) NRC Assurance. DOE intends to rely on the NRC to indicate 
whether they have reasonable assurance that a reactor will continue to 
be operated in accordance with the current licensing basis and poses no 
significant safety hazards.
    (7) Consultation with Heads of Other Agencies. The Secretary will 
establish a process for the evaluation of bids in consultation with the 
heads of other applicable federal agencies.
    (8) Terminology. For the purposes of the CNC Program, DOE proposes 
that the term ``credit'' describes a claim to funds appropriated by the 
Act and administered through the CNC Program to successful applicants. 
A ``reactor'' is defined as an individual unit.
    (9) Credit Allocation and Funds Disbursement. DOE intends to 
allocate credits to as many certified nuclear reactors as possible 
consistent with the intent of the Act. Each award is intended to cover 
a 4-year period, with funds distributed annually based on the 
allocation of credits. DOE may obligate up to $1.2 billion of 
appropriated funds in Fiscal Year 2022 for the CNC Program and amounts 
in excess of $1.2 billion

[[Page 8572]]

required to fund awarded credits for subsequent fiscal years will be 
subject to the availability of funds.
    (10) Audit. Market and operations circumstances may change over the 
award period, and the economic loss forecasted in the nuclear reactor's 
original bid may, in practice, be over- or underestimated. DOE intends 
to conduct a periodic audit of awardees, requesting a yearly 
operational and economic report from each awardee to assess any 
divergences from the projections made at the time of certification and 
the actual situation in each year with respect to economic 
circumstances and status of the awardee's contractual commitments, such 
as megawatt-hours produced and other applicable contractual 
requirements. The schedule for annual reporting and funds disbursement 
will be determined by DOE and will consider the awardee's business 
processes, to the extent practical.
    (11) Adjustment. In the event that actual economic performance 
during the period is such that the nuclear reactor did ``not operate at 
an annual loss in the absence of an allocation of credits,'' section 
40323(g)(2) of the Act requires DOE to provide for recapture of 
allocated credits. As a means to reduce the need for recapture, it may 
be appropriate for DOE to create an annual settlement mechanism through 
which the value of a reactor's credit allocation would be adjusted 
based on the bundle of market prices to which it is exposed. In this 
manner, several State zero emissions credits (ZEC) programs use market 
indices to adjust ZEC values. Applicants may be required to propose an 
index mechanism or a strike price against which market price values 
would be netted, or DOE may select a generic index or indexing 
methodology to be applied to all applications. If an indexing mechanism 
is employed, DOE proposes the index should be tied to economic factors 
related to the nuclear reactor's operating profit or loss, and might 
include, for example, change in energy and capacity prices and benefits 
received from federal and state programs such as tax credits that 
reduce economic loss. It may also be prudent to place a ceiling on the 
adjusted credit value, for example to ensure that falling market prices 
do not cause DOE to owe more in a given fiscal year than its total 
amount of appropriated funds available.
    (12) Recapture. If an adjustment to allocated credits as described 
above is not possible despite material changes in economic performance, 
or if the reactor terminates operations, DOE may recapture the 
allocation of credits in part or in whole in accordance with the Act. 
The Act directs the Secretary to provide for the recapture of an 
allocation of credits from a nuclear reactor if the nuclear reactor (a) 
terminates operations; or (b) does not operate at an annual loss in the 
absence of an allocation of credits.
    In addition to feedback on each element described, specific 
questions regarding the design of the CNC Program are provided in 
Section VI.

IV. Certification Criteria

    To implement the requirements of the CNC Program, DOE will 
establish a certification process to solicit applications from reactor 
owners and operators to establish eligibility for certification to be 
eligible to submit a sealed bid for allocation of credits. The 
applicant representing a nuclear reactor that is projected to cease 
operations due to economic factors will be required to submit to the 
Secretary information necessary to meet the minimum criteria to be 
certified. The Secretary will evaluate this information to determine if 
the nuclear reactor meets the minimum certification requirements to be 
eligible to submit a bid to be allocated credits, as established in 
section 40323(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act. DOE intends to evaluate seven 
certification categories as outlined in the Act. These categories 
include:
     Category 1--Competitive Electricity Market: The applicant 
must demonstrate that the nuclear reactor competes in a competitive 
electricity market.
     Category 2--Economic Factors: The applicant must 
demonstrate that the nuclear reactor is projected to cease operations 
due to economic factors. Applicants must include information on the 
operating costs necessary to make the certification determination, 
including, but not limited to, average annual operating loss per 
megawatt hour over the 4-year period for which credits would be 
allocated.
     Category 3--Emissions Impact: The applicant must estimate 
the potential incremental air pollutants that would result if the 
nuclear reactor were to cease operation. Applicants must demonstrate an 
increase in these emissions if operations of the nuclear reactor were 
to cease and the power generation were replaced with other types of 
generation.
     Category 4--Post-Support Operations Plan: The applicant 
must provide a plan to sustain operation of the reactor after the 4-
year award period, either without future credits or with a reduced 
level of credits.
     Category 5--Uranium and Fuel Source: The applicant must 
identify, to the extent known, where fuel for the reactor will be 
sourced over the 4-year period for which credits may be allocated, 
including the uranium, conversion, enrichment, and fabrication source. 
In determining whether to certify a reactor, priority will be given to 
a nuclear reactor that uses, to the maximum extent available, uranium 
that is produced, converted, enriched, and fabricated into fuel 
assemblies in the United States.
     Category 6--NRC Assurance: The NRC has reasonable 
assurance the reactor will continue to be operated in accordance with 
the current licensing basis and poses no significant safety hazards.
     Category 7--Other Criteria: Other criteria that may be 
identified by the Secretary to be considered in certification.
    A general description of DOE's proposed evaluation consideration in 
each certification category is described below. Feedback is solicited 
regarding the intent and rationale described in each category, and/or 
terminology used and other aspects of the proposed criteria or 
additional criteria that might be considered. Additional, specific 
questions regarding the proposed evaluation considerations are provided 
in Section VI.

Category 1--Compete in a Competitive Electricity Market

    To be eligible for certification, section 40323(a) of the Act 
requires that a nuclear reactor ``competes in a competitive electricity 
market.'' DOE proposes to interpret the Act as independent of reactor 
ownership. That is, a reactor may be deemed to compete in a competitive 
electricity market regardless of whether it is owned by a merchant 
generation company, a regulated utility, a public power utility, or 
another entity. DOE proposes the applicant should describe in detail 
how it competes in a competitive electricity market based on its 
exposure to market prices and other factors. DOE solicits comment on 
whether and under what circumstances the following commercial 
arrangements would qualify as competing in a competitive market:
     Market dispatch (i.e., based on bids) by an Independent 
System Operator or Regional Transmission Organization (e.g., ISO New 
England, New York Independent System Operator, PJM Interconnection, 
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Electric Reliability Council 
of Texas, Southwest Power Pool, and California Independent System 
Operator) in a real time energy market;
     Participation in another market-based selection mechanism 
for

[[Page 8573]]

electricity services such as a capacity market, ancillary services 
market, or day-ahead energy market;
     Sales from the nuclear reactor using Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission market-based rate authority;
     Merit order dispatch (i.e., based on economics and impact 
on total system costs) by a vertically integrated utility; and
     Selection in an all-source competitive solicitation 
process administered by a State public utility commission.

Category 2--Economic Factors

    Section 40323(c) of the Act sets out the requirements for 
certification of an eligible nuclear reactor. To be eligible for 
certification, the Act requires that the nuclear reactor is projected 
to cease operations due to economic factors. DOE proposes that:
    (a) Economic factors include, but are not limited to, the 
following: Anticipated cost of producing electricity; anticipated 
market pricing, including all out-of-market revenues; regulated 
revenues; monetization of risk using reasonable and appropriate methods 
for the specific market, which may include impacts of renewable and 
clean energy mandates, energy source and delivery mandates, and others; 
operations and maintenance costs; capital costs, including depreciation 
and amortization; administrative costs, including corporate and similar 
allocations; and accounting for the operational risk and market risks 
faced. The sum of these factors provides a projection of the average 
profit, or loss, associated with the ongoing operation of the reactor, 
for each year in the prospective 4-year award period. Information will 
be requested for each year of the 4-year period, showing anticipated 
yearly changes (e.g., outages, etc.). To be certified as eligible to 
submit a bid for credits, DOE proposes that the nuclear reactor must 
demonstrate that it projects an average annual operating loss over the 
4-year period for which credits would be allocated.
    (b) Consistent with the Act, DOE will consider all sources of 
revenue that a nuclear power owner or operator receives or expects to 
receive in the 4-year period during which credits would be allocated. 
For example, revenue may come from short-term power sales, power 
contracts, electricity and capacity markets, ZEC payments, revenue from 
other energy services (i.e., ancillary services), revenue from other 
products (e.g., heat energy, desalinated water, and hydrogen), and 
other federal and state programs, including tax credits. With respect 
to a regulated or public power utility (e.g., with cost recovery in 
retail rates) revenue would also include amounts collected in rates 
relating to or arising from the nuclear reactor for which certification 
is sought.
    (c) The representation of economic circumstance should be made by 
the reactor owner or operator, consistent with market analyses, 
operations cost assessments, risk (operations, business, market, or 
other) monetization and analyses, and other standards used by the owner 
or operator in their standard business process associated with the 
specific reactor(s).
    (d) The application for certification should clearly state what 
business, operational, and market risk is relevant to the operating 
unit profitability, and how those risks are monetized. DOE proposes to 
interpret the Act as considering a wide range of business, operational, 
and market risk factors. Any such risk that may result in the early 
closure of an operating nuclear reactor would be relevant. Applicants 
should explain each risk and provide estimates of the financial/
economic impact of the risk for the nuclear reactor. DOE is seeking 
comment on types of risk to consider and whether it should consider a 
wide range of risk factors.
    (e) The applicant should provide the analysis used to calculate its 
economic circumstance and a description of key factors and inputs used 
in these analyses, describe the sensitivity of the analyses to key 
factors, discuss uncertainties associated with the projections, and 
describe why the assumptions used in the analyses and the inputs are 
reasonable based on the applicant's market circumstance.
    (f) The revenue assessment used to calculate economic circumstance 
must include all payments projected to be received as a result of State 
and Federal support programs. If such funds, or a portion of such 
funds, would cease if an award is made by the CNC Program, then this 
expected change should be reflected in the assessment.
    (g) The applicant should describe how the method of analyses of 
economic circumstance is consistent with that used in other decision 
making (e.g., rate cases, tax filings, insurance statements, filings 
with the Securities and Exchange Commission), or why there would be a 
difference in the method or outcome of analyses.

Category 3--Emissions Impact

    To be eligible for certification, the applicant must provide an 
estimate of the impact of reactor closure on emission of air 
pollutants. The Secretary must assess this information and determine 
that emission of air pollutants would reasonably be expected to 
increase if the reactor ceases operations. DOE proposes to consider 
estimates containing the following information:
    (a) Assessment of the impact on emissions based on the six (6) 
criteria air pollutants (carbon monoxide, lead, ground-level ozone, 
particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide) defined by 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as carbon 
dioxide and methane.
    (b) Air emissions estimates based on the emissions characteristics 
of the capacity and electricity generation expected to replace the 
capacity and electricity generation supplied by the reactor.
    (c) A description of how the applicant arrived at the estimate of 
emissions impacts.

Category 4--Post-Support Operations Plan

    To be eligible for certification, the applicant must provide a 
detailed plan to sustain operations at the conclusion of the award 
period. The Act states that this plan may include a planning basis of 
either receiving additional support (credits) at a reduced level than 
anticipated for the initial award period or one where no additional 
support (credits) is received. DOE recognizes that at the time of 
application for certification, the applicant will not know what level 
of assistance may be provided through the CNC Program, and that post-
support operations plans will be uncertain because of this and other 
factors. DOE proposes that:
    (a) The required detailed plan to sustain operations post-support 
include an overview description of actions that may be taken by the 
applicant after the award period, possible changes in market conditions 
over the 4-year award period, or other circumstances or factors that 
may be anticipated during the award period that will alter the economic 
assessment provided and the level of requested assistance (credits).
    (b) The assessment of post-award planning should be consistent with 
analyses, assumptions, data, and methodologies used in declaring the 
economic circumstance of the reactor (Category 2 previously), while 
accounting for impact of receiving some level of assistance (credits).

Category 5--Uranium and Fuel Source

    The Act requires an applicant for certification to provide 
information on the source of the uranium and the location where it is 
processed and

[[Page 8574]]

manufactured into fuel. DOE proposes that:
    (a) The applicant includes in the application for certification 
information regarding the countries of origin of the uranium planned to 
be used in the award period, where it was/will be converted and 
enriched, and where the fuel was/will be fabricated, to the extent this 
is known or can be reasonably estimated.
    (b) The certification requirements do not include any specific 
sourcing requirement in determining whether to certify, but that 
priority be given to reactors that use, to the maximum extent 
available, uranium that is produced, converted, enriched and fabricated 
into fuel assemblies in the United States.

Category 6--NRC Assurance

    The Act requires that the NRC has reasonable assurance that the 
nuclear reactor will continue to operate in accordance with its current 
licensing basis and that it poses no significant safety hazards. DOE 
intends to rely on input from the NRC to meet this requirement.

Category 7--Other Information

    The Act provides the Secretary authority to require an applicant to 
submit other information the Secretary determines to be appropriate in 
meeting the fundamental objective of the Act--to enable clean and safe 
energy generation. This other information may include external and 
internal impacts to the applicant (i.e., owner or operator of a nuclear 
reactor) that may not be covered in the above-stated certification 
criteria. Relevant questions as to whether DOE should consider 
additional criteria for certification are included in Section VI.

V. Civil Nuclear Credit Program Process

    Key steps in the process that DOE proposes for the Civil Nuclear 
Credit Program are described below, including evaluation of 
applications for certification, bids for credits, credit allocation, 
and funds distribution. DOE requests feedback on each element of the 
process, as well as on the specific questions described in Section VI.
    a. Evaluation of Applications for Certification. As provided in 
section 40323(c)(1)(B) of the Act, certification applications from 
nuclear reactors not presently receiving assistance from State programs 
will be accepted during the initial application period. DOE will 
evaluate all submissions and determine eligibility for certification 
within 60 days, including notifying each applicant if the application 
was certified or describing the reasons why the certification was 
denied. DOE may request additional information after submission of 
initial applications. After the initial application period described 
above, DOE will conduct another application period for certification of 
nuclear reactors that are receiving State assistance, and others that 
had not previously applied. DOE intends to establish an annual 
application process following these initial application periods for all 
non-certified reactors.
    DOE intends to establish a review panel to evaluate applications 
for certification. The review will consist of an assessment of whether 
the information and data provided by the applicant are sufficient to 
meet the requirements for certification as stated in the Act and 
articulated in the Request for Applications of a nuclear reactor.
    The Secretary will make the final determination on certification. 
If a nuclear reactor is certified, the applicant will be invited to 
submit a sealed bid for credits.
    b. Bids for Credits. DOE proposes to establish a process for 
certified nuclear reactors to submit sealed bids for credits with a 
deadline that is not more than 30 days following notification of the 
nuclear reactor's certification. The sealed bids should include the 
information and data outlined in section 40323(d) of the Act. Bidders 
should submit bids for credits which describe a price per megawatt-hour 
and commitment to provide generation in megawatt-hours for a 4-year 
period.
    c. Allocation of Credits and Funds Distribution. DOE will establish 
a review panel, which may be comprised of the same experts as described 
in the Evaluation of Applications for Certification above, to evaluate 
submitted sealed bids for credits from certified nuclear reactors. The 
review panel will evaluate the bids and make its recommendation to the 
Secretary for selection of certified nuclear reactors to be allocated 
credits. DOE proposes to award credits by starting with the most cost-
effective bids and proceeding until available funds are exhausted. DOE 
intends to allocate as many credits as available funds allow over the 
lifetime of the program.

VI. Questions for Request for Information

    With this RFI, DOE seeks comments regarding all elements of the 
proposed approach for the CNC Program described in the previous 
sections. In addition, DOE seeks comment on the following specific 
questions:
    (1) Do the proposed approach and considerations for certification 
of a qualified nuclear reactor, including key aspects of CNC Program 
implementation and other aspects and outcomes of the CNC Program, as 
described in Section III, support the intent of Congress to assist 
nuclear reactors at risk of early closure? Why or why not? If not, 
please suggest alternative approaches to be considered.
    (2) Are the evaluation criteria being considered for certification 
as described in this RFI appropriate? If not, please suggest 
alternative criteria.
    (3) Is the information requested for the applications for 
certification appropriate and sufficient? Why or why not?
    (4) Is the proposed CNC Program structure, including timing, 
process, and evaluation approach for certification, acceptance of bids, 
credit allocation, and periodic audits appropriate? If not, please 
suggest alternatives.
    (5) Please identify any regulatory or business barriers that might 
impede the implementation of the CNC Program. Please propose solutions 
to eliminate or mitigate any identified barriers.
    (6) Should DOE establish a standard format and methodology for each 
applicant to present economic data, projections, analysis, and other 
information in support of an application for certification? If so, 
please address the components that should be included as part of a 
standard format and methodology and what information should be 
required.
    (7) What information should be considered by the Secretary in 
assessments of the marginal impact of projected reactor closures on 
emission of air pollutants? Should a standard methodology be adopted to 
address estimation of incremental air pollutants? Why or why not? What 
methodologies could be considered?
    (8) How should the certification methodology prioritize reactors 
that utilize U.S.-produced fuel and fuel constituents? Are there 
additional criteria that should be prioritized, and if so, how?
    (9) Is the use of an indexing mechanism to re-set annually the 
value of credits allocated to a nuclear reactor as described herein 
appropriate? Please consider the advantages and disadvantages of such 
an approach and the basis for such an approach. Should the indexing 
mechanism be subject to a floor and/or cap? How would an indexing 
mechanism interact with the recapture provision discussed herein?
    (10) Using the bid requirements in the Act of price per megawatt-
hour and megawatt-hour commitment for a 4-year

[[Page 8575]]

period, should DOE award credits starting with the lowest price bid and 
continuing until available funds are exhausted? What policy 
considerations or parameters other than bid price would inform the 
determination of which bids would most cost-effectively achieve the 
objectives of the Act? Should DOE use any other methodology or criteria 
for awarding credits to bidders?
    (11) How should DOE incorporate evaluation of the impacts of the 
closure or continued operation of nuclear reactors on disadvantaged 
communities?
    (12) Please provide any other input DOE should consider in the 
establishment and implementation of the CNC Program, including any 
other information and criteria that might be useful in DOE's approach 
for and implementation of both the certification process and the 
sealed-bid process for credits.
    DOE requests expedited submission of comments on the proposed 
approach to certification and the specific questions with respect to 
certification.

VII. Request for Statements of Interest

    DOE intends to solicit applications for certification and, for 
certified reactors, sealed bids. In order to provide advance notice of 
the number and type of nuclear reactors (i.e., those that are or are 
not receiving State support) that may wish to participate in the 
program, DOE is requesting non-binding statements of interest. 
Submissions that comply with relevant requirements outlined in Section 
IX regarding Business Proprietary Information will be kept 
confidential. Unless and until an applicant receives an award, DOE will 
treat the identity of each applicant and other identifying information 
as confidential business information for purposes of the Freedom of 
Information Act.

VIII. Response Guidelines

    NOI responses shall include:
     NOI/RFI title and reference number;
     Name(s), phone number(s), and email address(es) for the 
principal point(s) of contact;
     Institution or organization affiliation and postal 
address; and
     Your organization's non-binding expression of interest in 
the CNC Program.
    NOI responses shall be emailed directly to Alden Allen, DOE 
Contract Specialist, at: [email protected].
    RFI responses shall include:
     NOI/RFI title and reference number;
     Name(s), phone number(s), and email address(es) for the 
principal point(s) of contact;
     Institution or organization affiliation and postal 
address; and
     Clear indication of the specific question(s) to which you 
are responding.
    Responses including proprietary information will be handled per 
guidance in Section IX.
    RFI responses shall be emailed to [email protected] or 
submitted electronically to www.regulations.gov, as described 
previously.

IX. Business Proprietary Information

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information he or 
she believes to be business proprietary and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should submit via email two qwell-marked copies: One copy of 
the document marked ``Business Proprietary'' including all the 
information believed to be proprietary, and one copy of the document 
marked ``non-Proprietary'' deleting all information believed to be 
business proprietary. DOE will make its own determination about the 
business proprietary status of the information and treat it according 
to its determination. Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating 
requests to treat submitted information as business proprietary 
include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items 
are customarily treated as business proprietary within the industry; 
(3) whether the information is generally known by or available from 
other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made 
available to others without obligation concerning its business 
proprietary nature; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the 
submitting person which would result from public disclosure; (6) when 
such information might lose its business proprietary character due to 
the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be 
contrary to the public interest.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February 9, 
2022, by Andrew Griffith, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Fuel 
Cycle and Supply Chain, pursuant to delegated authority from the 
Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date 
is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in 
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the 
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to 
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as 
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative 
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon 
publication in the Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on February 9, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-03156 Filed 2-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P