The Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel will move forward with a presentation from epidemiological experts following a contentious debate over whether historical cancer data remains relevant to the ongoing cleanup of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. In a 13-3 decision, the panel invited Dr. Richard Clapp and State Epidemiologist Alicia Fraser to discuss the 1990 Southeast Massachusetts Health Study and the local cancer registry, signaling a pivot toward public health concerns as the site enters its next phase of demolition.

The move was championed by M. Lambert, who argued for a comprehensive review of past studies alongside modern data. I am proposing a review of studies including the 1990 Southeast Massachusetts Health Study and recent Harvard soil studies, Lambert said, identifying multiple researchers who have agreed to present. Motion Made by M. Lambert to schedule a future agenda item featuring Dr. Richard Clapp and a DPH epidemiologist to discuss historical health studies and the cancer registry. Motion Passed 13-3.

Not all members agreed that looking backward would benefit the decommissioning process. C. Little questioned the utility of revisiting decades-old data, asking, How does this fulfill our mission of overseeing decommissioning? The 1990 study is not a standalone study and has been followed up by the DOE and DPH. It's not conclusive. J. Priest of the Department of Public Health echoed these sentiments, stating he would rather focus on monitoring residual radioactivity during building removal. However, the panel rejected a secondary proposal to hear specifically about 2025 Harvard soil studies. Motion Made by M. Lambert to schedule a presentation on 2025 Harvard studies regarding residential proximity and soil radionuclides. Motion Failed 7-9.

The meeting also shed light on Holtec’s financial standing as it navigates the complex decommissioning process. D. Noyes reported that Holtec spent $63.1 million in 2025, exceeding the initial $55 million estimate by $8 million. We spent $8 million higher than planned because we pulled work forward, Noyes explained, noting that the decommissioning trust fund currently holds $465.9 million. Despite the spending spike, Holtec projects a $125.3 million surplus will remain by the time the license is terminated in 2063.

The technical progress report highlighted that reactor segmentation is underway, with vessel demolition scheduled for 2027. Noyes noted that the site currently holds 794,115 gallons of water, though evaporation rates have slowed because the heat from recently discharged fuel is no longer providing the energy to facilitate it. This prompted questions from H. Dubois, who asked if the current seven-year projection for water management remained realistic given the 800,000 gallons already evaporated since 2019.

Transparency regarding Holtec's corporate structure became a primary point of friction. A. Gottlieb raised alarms over a license transfer application intended to create Holtec Holdings (HHI), describing the move as a black box that limits local oversight. With this license transfer application, who has the obligations and the financial means to deal with it? Gottlieb asked. It sounds like we're mushrooms and we're getting... there's no way for this panel to evaluate the impact of these changes. Motion Made by A. Gottlieb to include a future agenda item for Holtec to explain the new corporate structure and compliance layering. Motion Passed 16-0.

Public commenters expressed ongoing skepticism regarding safety and corporate motives. R. Shields questioned the Department of Public Health on the risk of cancer clusters, prompting J. Priest to respond that the current calculated dose of 0.73 millirem is extremely low. A dose of 0.73 millirem over an entire year is exaggerating the risk. An X-ray is 10 millirem, Priest said. Resident A. Darling warned of the risks of transporting waste, while a resident named Susan questioned if Holtec was using decommissioning funds to develop small modular reactors elsewhere. Noyes clarified that Holtec does not have plans to site SMRs at Pilgrim, though the company is looking at other locations like Michigan.

Throughout the session, Chair K. Canty reminded participants that the panel shall serve in an advisory capacity only, while M. Potvin suggested that future technical sessions focus on dry casks, noting that a subject matter expert from Ohio State University is available to present. M. J. Gatslick contributed to the oversight by requesting specific technical corrections to records regarding borings and casks to ensure accurate documentation of the site's progress. J. Kerr, D. Bryant, and G. Wade also participated in the proceedings as the panel looks toward a License Termination Plan submission this December.