Narrative:

I was providing flight instruction to a student pilot and reviewing the maneuvers for the required airmen certification standards. The flight was conducted in VFR conditions 6 miles east of the plymouth airport (kpym) and 2-4 miles northwest of the plymouth nuclear power plant over plymouth bay and duxbury bay. We flew from the airport to a practice area over the water between 3;000 and 4;000 ft. The flight began with simulated IFR training and unusual attitudes. Stalls; slow flight; steep turns; emergency descents and turns around a point were maneuvers conducted after the simulated IFR training.upon completion of the training flight; I was advised by my FBO the FAA; cape TRACON (K90); wanted to speak with me. I contacted the person via phone and was asked if I had been operating over the power plant. The person stated the facility's primary radar was out of service and boston TRACON (A90) tracked my aircraft on radar. A90 subsequently contacted K90 in an effort to determine the aircraft's identity. A us coast guard aircraft apparently flew near my aircraft and photographed my call sign relaying it to the FAA.the FAA official I spoke with indicated to me that the FAA wanted me to be aware I was operating over a nuclear power plant. I was operating northwest of the power plant over plymouth bay and duxbury bay. There was no indication that action would be taken by the FAA in the form of a pilot deviation.since instructing at this FBO for the last 9 years in this area; this is the first inquiry made to me regarding flights in that area. Bordering this practice area is V141; 2.5 miles east of the power plant and fredo; a holding fix; 2 miles south of the power plant. Also; the area lies near the boundary of K90's and A90's airspace and is approximately 10 miles from the boston class B airspace.the wording of fdc 3/1655 'special notice' states in part;' pilots conducting flight operations are advised to avoid the airspace above or in proximity to all nuclear power plants. Pilots should not circle or loiter in the vicinity of such facilities.' 'proximity and vicinity' are ambiguous at best. In an effort to resolve any misunderstanding of the applicable NOTAM I recommend the FAA clearly review and redefine restrictions near a nuclear power plant. A pro-active stance in defining 'proximity' and 'vicinity' would remove any subjectivity of their definition. However; the simplest solution would be the creation of prohibited airspace around all nuclear power plants and publishing them on all navigation charts.it is unclear at the time of this report if the tsa has been notified and if it would be involved in an investigation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA flight instructor reported that K90 TRACON was concerned about his flight lesson near a nuclear power plant.

Narrative: I was providing flight instruction to a student pilot and reviewing the maneuvers for the required Airmen Certification Standards. The flight was conducted in VFR conditions 6 miles east of the Plymouth Airport (KPYM) and 2-4 miles northwest of the Plymouth Nuclear Power plant over Plymouth Bay and Duxbury Bay. We flew from the airport to a practice area over the water between 3;000 and 4;000 ft. The flight began with simulated IFR training and unusual attitudes. Stalls; slow flight; steep turns; emergency descents and turns around a point were maneuvers conducted after the simulated IFR training.Upon completion of the training flight; I was advised by my FBO the FAA; Cape TRACON (K90); wanted to speak with me. I contacted the person via phone and was asked if I had been operating over the power plant. The person stated the facility's primary radar was out of service and Boston TRACON (A90) tracked my aircraft on radar. A90 subsequently contacted K90 in an effort to determine the aircraft's identity. A US Coast Guard aircraft apparently flew near my aircraft and photographed my call sign relaying it to the FAA.The FAA official I spoke with indicated to me that the FAA wanted me to be aware I was operating over a nuclear power plant. I was operating northwest of the power plant over Plymouth Bay and Duxbury Bay. There was no indication that action would be taken by the FAA in the form of a Pilot Deviation.Since instructing at this FBO for the last 9 years in this area; this is the first inquiry made to me regarding flights in that area. Bordering this practice area is V141; 2.5 miles east of the power plant and FREDO; a holding fix; 2 miles south of the power plant. Also; the area lies near the boundary of K90's and A90's airspace and is approximately 10 miles from the Boston Class B airspace.The wording of FDC 3/1655 'SPECIAL NOTICE' states in part;' PILOTS CONDUCTING FLIGHT OPERATIONS ARE ADVISED TO AVOID THE AIRSPACE ABOVE OR IN PROXIMITY TO ALL NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. PILOTS SHOULD NOT CIRCLE OR LOITER IN THE VICINITY OF SUCH FACILITIES.' 'Proximity and vicinity' are ambiguous at best. In an effort to resolve any misunderstanding of the applicable NOTAM I recommend the FAA clearly review and redefine restrictions near a nuclear power plant. A pro-active stance in defining 'proximity' and 'vicinity' would remove any subjectivity of their definition. However; the simplest solution would be the creation of Prohibited Airspace around all nuclear power plants and publishing them on all navigation charts.It is unclear at the time of this report if the TSA has been notified and if it would be involved in an investigation.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.