Search
JOIN OUR NETWORK

     

     

 

 

ARTICLE ARCHIVE

Safety

Nuclear safety is, of course, an oxymoron. Nuclear reactors are inherently dangerous, vulnerable to accident with the potential for catastrophic consequences to health and the environment if enough radioactivity escapes. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Congressionally-mandated to protect public safety, is a blatant lapdog bowing to the financial priorities of the nuclear industry.

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Entries by admin (362)

Monday
Apr012013

1 killed, 4-8 injured, offsite electricity lost due to drop of 500 ton load at Entergy's Arkansas Nuclear One plant

NRC file photo of Entergy's Arkansas Nuclear One twin reactor stationAs reported by Dow Jones Business News, a 24-year-old worker named Wade Walters of Russellville, Arkansas was killed when a crane dropped a 500-ton piece of equipment called a generator stator at Entergy's twin reactor Arkansas Nuclear One station (see photo, left), located six miles west-northwest of Russellville in London, Arkansas. Eight other workers were injured, one of whom remains hospitalized, the article reports.

In 2001, NRC rubber-stamped a 20-year license extension on top of Unit 1's 1974 to 2014 original operating permit, blessing its operation till 2034. In 2005, NRC followed suit at Unit 2, enabling it to run not from 1978 till 2018, but till 2038.

As the article reports: "When the generator stator fell, it damaged other equipment and a water pipeline used for extinguishing fires. Water spilled from the pipeline into the building that contains the power turbine, the NRC said. The water seeped into an electrical component, causing a short-circuit that cut off power to the plant from the electric grid, according to Entergy and the NRC."

Unit 1 was reportedly shut down for maintenance at the time of the accident, but Unit 2 was operating at full power. For a yet to be explained reason, Unit 2 "automatically" shut down after the accident. Emergency diesel generators are reportedly supplying electricity to emergency, safety, cooling, and other systems at both reactors.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) "Current Reactor Status Report" shows that both Arkansas Nuclear One reactors are at zero power levels. An Event Notification Report has been posted at the NRC's website. Note that the Event Notification Report filed by Entergy reports only four injuries. The extent of damage to Unit 1 facilities has yet to be determined.

Wednesday
Mar272013

Coalition of concerned citizens details concerns about Palisades with NRC Commissioner Magwood

NRC Commissioner William Magwood IVA coalition comprised of 20 concerned local residents and environmental group representatives, including from Beyond Nuclear, met with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Commissioner William Magwood IV (photo, left) for three hours on Monday evening, March 25th, in South Haven, MI, detailing their many concerns about safety, security, public health, and environmental protection -- or lack thereof -- at Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor on the Lake Michigan shoreline in Covert, MI (see the coalition's meeting agenda). NRC Commissioner Magwood toured the problem-plagued plant the next morning.

The coalition issued a press release.

The St. Joe Herald-Palladium has reported on the meeting, as did Fox 17 television Grand Rapids. Michigan Radio's "Environment Report" quoted Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps.

NRC Commissioner Magwood's career has been devoted to the promotion of nuclear power, first as an industry insider (including as a consultant to Tokyo Electric Power Company, infamous owner of the ravaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant), and then as head of the promotional Office of Nuclear Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under both Democratic and Republican administrations. The Huffington Post has published exposés on Magwood's attempted coups against his bosses in order to take their jobs -- successfully at DOE, unsuccessfully at NRC. As also reported by HuffPost, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has vowed to block Magwood's aspirations for the NRC Chairmanship, due to Magwood breaking his promise to Reid to not advocate for the controversial Yucca Mountain high-level radioactive waste dump as an NRC Commissioner.

Due to his career promoting nuclear power, Beyond Nuclear led the environmental coalition effort to block President Obama's nomination of Magwood for the safety-regulatory NRC Commission in the first place, as well as the U.S. Senate's confirmation of Magwood for the position (the Project on Government Oversight launched a separate effort to block Magwood's confirmation). At the end of 2011, U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) cited Beyond Nuclear's coalition letter opposing Magwood's confirmation as she, too, criticized his broken promises to her about Yucca during his Feb. 2010 Senate confirmation hearing as an NRC Commissioner. Beyond Nuclear has also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NRC after receiving an anonymous tip that NRC Commissioner Magwood has been holding regular, secretive meetings with leaders of the industry's Nuclear Energy Institute, in violation of open meetings laws and regulations. However, despite filing the FOIA request on Dec. 3, 2011, NRC has not yet responded.

NRC has issued a notice and press release about its upcoming April 2nd "End of Cycle" annual performance review public meeting to be held in South Haven about Palisades. See more info. from NRC about the Apirl 2 meeting here, including its slideshow to be presented (note NRC has loaded its slides sideways).

On April 11th, Beyond Nuclear is co-sponsoring west Michigan presentations entitled "Preventing an American Fukushima" by David Lochbaum of Union of Concerned Scientists. He will present at 12 noon Eastern at Western Michigan University in Kalamazoo, and at 7 PM Eastern at the Beach Haven Event Center in South Haven, less than 5 miles north of Palisades. In his annual report of near-misses at U.S. atomic reactors, Lochbaum has included incidents at Palisades (two separate incidents in 2011 alone) for the past two years, making it one of the worst-run reactors in the country.

Thursday
Mar212013

Entergy Nuclear on the defensive re: Palisades pressurized thermal shock risks

Figure by Hiromitsu Ino, CNIC-TokyoAs reprinted at Yahoo Finance, Entergy Nuclear's site vice president at its Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI, has issued a statement standing by the integrity and safety of his badly embrittled reactor pressure vessel (RPV), vulnerable to a catastrophic fracture due to pressurized thermal shock (PTS). Such a fracture would lead to a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) in the reactor core, and probable meltdown.

Anthony Vitale stated in a prepared statement:

"This is not a new topic or one that is unique to Palisades. In fact, for decades pressurized thermal shock has been well understood and well monitored by the owners and operators of the nation's pressurized water reactors."

What Vitale's statement failed to mention is that Palisades has the single worst embrittled reactor pressure vessel in the U.S. Environmental watchdogs forced NRC officials to admit this at a public meeting near Palisades on Feb. 29, 2012. NRC officials again acknowledged this fact on the March 19, 2013 Webinar (see entry below). 

Vitale's claims of PTS risks being "well understood and well monitored" are also highly dubious. After NRC officials admitted that the last metal coupons, or capsules, extracted from Palisades' reactor pressure vessel had been analyzed in the mid-1990s and 2000s, Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps asked the following question:

"If capsules were removed in the mid-1990s and 2000s, as NRC just said, that's a decade or two ago. Has NRC simply extrapolated to predict the severity of embrittlement? What if NRC's understanding is flawed? What if the extrapolation is non-conservative? How can NRC speak with any confidence, if the last physical data collected -- and very few data points at that -- are over a decade old? This is not science. This is guesswork. The safety risks are too high for this lack of science."

NRC did not answer the question -- but one of many questions Kevin and others asked that went unanswered.

An article by the Citizens Nuclear Information Center (CNIC)-Tokyo's Hiromitsu Ino calls into question Vitale's claims that PTS risks are "well understood." Ino's July 2011 paper, "Aging Nuclear Power Plants focusing in particular on irradiation embrittlement of pressure vessels," was published in two parts (see Part I here; see Part II here). The paper was also summarized CNIC-Tokyo's newsletter (Part I in the May/June 2012 edition; Part II in the July/August edition). Mr. Ino's figures and tables can be viewed here.

Ino included this alarming warning: the Japanese nuclear industry's understanding of reactor pressure vessel embrittlement and pressurized thermal shock risks are significantly non-conservative. This can be seen in the graph above. The Japanese nuclear industry and its governmental regulators thought they "well understood" embrittlement, but when they finally "monitored" Genkai-1, they found embrittlement worse than they had ever predicted.

Palisades has but two metal capsules left. Vitale said they would extract one this autumn for examination. Watchdogs are calling for genuinely independent, third party technical experts to review, verify, and authenticate all aspects of this test, due to deep distrust of not only Entergy, but also NRC.

Friday
Mar152013

Please join us to watchdog NRC and industry on PTS risk due to PWR RPV embrittlement: attend NRC Webinar on Tues., March 19th at 5 PM Eastern!

Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI.Please join us to help watchdog the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and nuclear power industry, specifically on pressurized thermal shock (PTS) risks due to pressurized water reactor (PWR) reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement: attend NRC's Webinar on Tuesday, March 19th from 5 to 6 PM Eastern!

NRC's public announcement of the March 19th Webinar instructs that "Webinar seats must be reserved before March 18, in order to participate, at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/576992376. See NRC's public announcement here.

Also, see NRC's March 7th press release announcing the Webinar here.

Embrittlement of the RPV (the structure which holds the nuclear fuel at an atomic reactor's core) afflicts all PWRs to a greater or lesser extent. It is due to neutron bombardment of the RPV metal over years and decades, which effectively introduces "fault lines" of microscopic cracks which could line up to become dangerously vulnerable to PTS. PTS involves the very high pressure of a PWR, around a ton per square inch of pressure, which is why PWR cooling water remains in liquid form, even though it is hundreds of degrees hotter than the normal 212 degrees Fahrenheit boiling point of water. If the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) were activated, this would introduce a sudden, dramatic temperature decrease into the mix as well. Like a hot glass under cold water, the brittle RPV metal could fracture. That would cause the liquid cooling water to instantly turn to steam and escape through the breach. There is no contingency in place to deal with such a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), as adding more cooling water to the core -- if this was even still possible -- would likely simply result in it leaking out via the breach, either as liquid water or steam. The core would then be at very high risk of melting down. If the meltdown were bad enough, it could melt through -- or its radiological releases otherwise escape from -- the surrounding containment structure. 

At Palisades, the casualties and property damages that would result from such a catastrophic radioactivity release into the environment would be shocking. As reported by CRAC-II (Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences, commissioned by NRC and carried out by Sandia National Lab) in 1982, a catastrophic radioactivity release at Palisades would cause 1,000 "Peak Early Fatalities," 7,000 "Peak Early Injuries," 10,000 "Peak Cancer Deaths," and $52.6 billion in property damage in downwind areas.

However, CRAC-II (also known as the Sandia Siting Study, or NUREG/CR-2239) was based on 1970 U.S. Census data. But, as reported by AP in June 2011, populations have soared around U.S. nuclear power plants in the past 40 years. Thus, casualties today would be much worse. And, when adjusted for inflation, property damages downwind would surmount $123 billion in year 2012 dollar figures.

It is doubtful CRAC-II adequately accounted for the impacts of a catastrophic radioactivity release into Lake Michigan. After all, the Great Lakes comprise 20% of the world's surface fresh water. They provide drinking water to 40 million people in 8 U.S. states, 2 Canadian provinces, and a large number of Native American First Nations. The Great Lakes are the life blood of one of the biggest regional economies in the entire world.

NRC attempted to suppress its CRAC-II report at the time. But U.S. Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) brought it to light in congressional hearings. Rep. Markey has been a longtime nuclear power industry watchdog in general, and Palisades watchdog in particular. As but one of many examples, based on whistleblower revelations, in June 2012 Markey demanded an explanation from NRC on the safety significance of a leak into the control room at Palisades that had been ongoing for over a year. The leaks had been collected in "catch basins," more commonly known as buckets. The year-long leak had been concealed, by NRC staff and Entergy, even from NRC's own chairman, Greg Jaczko, as he toured the Palisades plant on May 25, 2012. A year ago, Rep. Markey's nuclear weapons and nuclear power watchdog work, spanning nearly four decades, was honored by the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability at its annual "DC Days" Capitol Hill awards ceremony.

This is the third Webinar NRC has conducted about Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor since October 2012. This is in addition to numerous in-person public meetings. Public pressure by concerned local residents and environmental groups is what has moved NRC to hold so many interactions with the public, and we have turned out large numbers to each meeting and Webinar. Please help us keep this drum beat of resistance going by attending the March 19th Webinar!

BACKGROUND

Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor has the worst embrittled RPV in the U.S. Watchdogs forced NRC staff to admit this at a Feb. 29, 2012 public meeting in South Haven. So bad, in fact, that Reuters has reported it could force Palisades' permanent shutdown by 2017.

However, this has long been known. In fact, Palisades should have been forced by NRC to shutdown as early as 1981.

In 1982 -- on the third anniversary of the Three Mile Island meltdown -- NRC staff whistleblower, Demetrios Basdekas, warned in an op-ed to the New York Times that the next meltdown could well be caused by RPV embrittlement and PTS.

In 1993, Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes documented that by 1981 -- ten short years into Palisades' operations -- the embrittled RPV had already violated NRC PTS safety standards. However, rather than require that Palisades address its embrittlement problem or else shutdown the reactor, NRC instead simply weakened its PTS safety regulations, allowing Palisades to keep operating.

NRC has done this not once, but numerous times over the years and decades. In June 2011, in the first installment of his four-part series "Aging Nukes," Jeff Donn reported that "US nuke regulators weaken safety rules." His top example? PTS.

A broad coalition of concerned local residents and environmental groups opposed Palisades' 20-year license extension from 2005 to 2007, as chronicled on the NIRS website. The coalition's top safety contention was Palisades' embrittled RPV, vulnerable to PTS. In early 2007, NRC simply rubber-stamped Palisades' license extension in short order, the 48th such rubber-stamp just since the year 2000. That figure has now grown since to 73 such rubber-stamps. Not a single atomic reactor, no matter how age-degraded or otherwise risky, has been denied a license extension, despite fierce resistance -- as at Entergy Nuclear's Vermont Yankee atomic reactor, as but one example.

During the license extension proceeding in 2005-2006, Palisades rebuffed the environmental interveners by promising NRC's Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board (ASLB) a "plan for a plan" to deal with its RPV embrittlement by 2011, before the expiration of its then-current operating license. NRC staff supported this "plan for a plan," and ASLB bought and approved it, as did NRC staff and the NRC Commissioners, against the environmental interveners' objections. At the time, Palisades and NRC staff assured that the RPV was good to go until 2014.

But, "the plan" all along was to simply weaken PTS regulations, yet again. This happened just a few years later. All of a sudden, Palisades would no longer violate PTS safety regulations by 2014. Now the RPV was good to go till 2017!

On May 25, 2012, NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko toured the problem-plagued Palisades plant, and met with two dozen local environmental advocates afterwards. They again stressed their concerns about RPV embrittlement and PTS risks. Incredibly, Jaczko indicated that yet another NRC re-evaluation, the application of yet another new computer model -- also known as pencil-whipping -- could yet again show that Palisades was "good to go" even beyond 2017.

Jaczko said this, despite the environmental coalition's handing him a just-published article by Citizens Nuclear Information Center-Tokyo (CNIC), written by Hiromitsu Ino, showing that Japanese PWR RPV embrittlement was much worse than previously predicted. A warning included in the CNIC article was the lack of actual physical data being examined by industry and regulatory authorities. Computer modeling and mere extrapolations had proven woefully inadequate at predicting the actual severity of embrittlement in Japan.

Palisades is an extreme example of this problem. Palisades' RPV embrittlement got so bad so quickly, that the RPV metal coupons were blown through in short order. Metal coupons are sample of metal in the reactor core, removed for examination to keep track of the severity of RPV embrittlement. Palisades currently has a single metal coupon left in its core. NRC and Entergy attempt to justify not removing it, because it is the last sample. Many years have passed since Palisades' last metal sample was removed and examined. They rely instead on mere computer modeling and extrapolations, in an attempt to determine how bad the embrittlement is currently. However, as Ino revealed in Japan, actual embrittlement could be much worse than predicted. Examining Palisades' last remaining metal coupon is the only way to tell for sure.

In her statements to Reuters this month, NRC Midwest regional spokeswoman Viktoria Mytling also indicated that NRC could well simply re-evaluate the status of Palisades' embrittled RPV (that is, lower its PTS safety regulations yet again), and allow Palisades to operate even beyond 2017. After all, NRC has already rubber-stamped its operating license out to 2031. Recently, the industry's Nuclear Energy Institute has floated the idea of beginning to apply for 80 year operating licenses, clearly in denial of the extreme safety risks such extended "breakdown phase" reactor operations -- as due to PTS -- would represent.

Palisades, and other PWRs with embrittled RPVs, must be shutdown, before they melt down. Please hold NRC's feet to the fire on this issue, by attending its March 19th Webinar!

Tuesday
Mar052013

NRC will look the other way on Seabrook cracks (and wind energy potential and....)

In its determination to give the Seabrook nuclear plant in New Hampshire a 20-year license extension 20 years before the current operating license expires, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has decided to overlook the cracking in safety-related concrete structures at the plant. The cracks are dismissed as airily as the fact that offshore wind power, 20 years from now, could power all of New England's electricity needs, making Seabrook (and other area nuclear and fossil plants) redundant. But the NRC never met a license application it didn't like. Maine-based Friends of the Coast and the New England Coalition in Vermont had asked for the concrete cracking to be taken into consideration as a formal part of the licensing proceedings. Instead of viewing the merits of the argument, the NRC threw it out based on a technicality related to timeliness, hardly an indication of putting public safety first.