Lack of permission for dry cask storage of high-level radioactive waste generated after March 21st may be Vermont Yankee's last gasp

Citizens Awareness Network (CAN) has posted an analysis on its website ("The Worm Turns") on how Entergy Nuclear may have planted the seed of its own destruction when it filed a lawsuit against the State of Vermont, seeking to block Vermont's efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee (VY) atomic reactor at the end of its 40 year license on March 21, 2012.

The federal district judge in Brattleboro did rule that the State of Vermont's legislature cannot intervene agaisnt VY's operations, a ruling that Vermont has appealed to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City. But the district court ruling did not bar the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) from denying a Certificate of Public Good (CPG), which would also shut down the reactor. This has suddenly thrown Entergy Nuclear into a panic. It has "cross appealed" Vermont's filing with the 2nd Circuit, and incredibly, it has moved that the district judge "correct mistakes" in his January ruling -- namely, allowing the PSB to retain its authority to grant or deny a CPG, as it sees fit!

Specificially, the PSB must approve the dry cask storage of any irradiated nuclear fuel on the banks of the Connecticut River at VY. The PSB has asked some tough questions to Entergy about its plans -- or lack thereof -- for dry cask storage of irradiated nuclear fuel generated after March 21, 2012. Could this be the way that VY is finally forced to shut down, the desire of the vast majority of Vermont residents? Let's hope so. Ironically, the PSB will hear the parties on Friday, March 9th, in the very same building where Vermont's Act 160 was passed in the first place, the Vermont State House.

Lessons from Fukushima: new Greenpeace report a warning on nuclear risks

Jan Beranek blogs on a new report just published by Greenpeace International on the "Lessons of Fukushima." He provides links to a 12 page executive summary, as well as the full 52 page report.

"Fukushima in review: A complex disaster, a disastrous response"

Yoichi Funabashi and Kay Kitazawa are chairman of the Rebuild Japan Initiative Foundation, and staff director of the Foundation's Independent Investigation Commission on the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident, respectively. They have published an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BAS) entitled "Fukushima in review: A complex disaster, a disastrous response." It's an overview of a 400 page study on the lessons to be learned from the Fukushima Nuclear Catastrophe, first reported by the New York Times on Feb. 27. The BAS abstract reads:

"On March 11, 2011, an earthquake and tsunami crippled the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The emerging crisis at the plant was complex, and, to make matters worse, it was exacerbated by communication gaps between the government and the nuclear industry. An independent investigation panel, established by the Rebuild Japan Initiative Foundation, reviewed how the government, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), and other relevant actors responded. In this article, the panel's program director writes about their findings and how these players were thoroughly unprepared on almost every level for the cascading nuclear disaster. This lack of preparation was caused, in part, by a public myth of "absolute safety" that nuclear power proponents had nurtured over decades and was aggravated by dysfunction within and between government agencies and Tepco, particularly in regard to political leadership and crisis management. The investigation also found that the tsunami that began the nuclear disaster could and should have been anticipated and that ambiguity about the roles of public and private institutions in such a crisis was a factor in the poor response at Fukushima."

The article announces that the full report, in Japanese only, would be released at the end of Feb. However, the English translation will not be ready until sometime this summer.

"Demonic" reality of Fukushima, versus absurdity of NRC

NRC file photo of Peach Bottom 2 & 3, PennsylvaniaWhile top level Japanese government officials admit that they feared a "demonic chain reactor" of atomic reactor meltdowns not only at Fukushima Daiichi, but also at Fukushima Daini and Tokai nuclear power plants, which would have led to an evacuation of Tokyo and perhaps its permanent loss, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's SOARCA report absurdly claims that a reactor meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi identically designed Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 in Pennsylvania, surrounded by several other nuclear power plants, would cause few to no casualties. Read more.

Davis-Besse blames Blizzard of '78 for containment cracks, but critics charge that's merely a "snow job of convenience"

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)The long awaited First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) "root cause analysis" on extensive cracking of the Davis-Besse concrete containment shield building was published on Feb. 28th. Astoundingly, the nuclear utility blames a severe blizzard in January 1978, and the fact that it failed to apply weatherproofing to the exterior of its containment. Asked why FENOC and its predecessors had failed to apply sealant from 1971 (when the shield building was first constructed) and 2012, FENOC spokeswoman Jennifer Young said simply it had not been required. When asked why other safety-significant concrete structures on site had been sealed, Young said their concrete exteriors appeared splotchy, so a coating was applied for cosmetic purposes.

The Toledo Blade quoted U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH, pictured left) and Don't Waste Michigan's Michael Keegan:

"Every homeowner knows you paint a house not just for decoration, but to protect it from the elements," Mr. Kucinich said, repeating his assertion that the plant should be shut down until the shield building's strength is thoroughly assessed.

And Michael Keegan, a representative of Don't Waste Michigan -- one of several anti-nuclear organizations fighting FirstEnergy's petition for a 20-year license renewal after Davis-Besse's initial operating permit expires in five years -- called the Blizzard of 1978 explanation a "snow job of convenience."

"While it may be true that the extreme weather damaged the concrete, what other assaults have occurred since that time?" he asked. "How is it that [FirstEnergy] can suggest that they'll seal it now, and the damage will be arrested? The damage goes down to the rebar and is structural."

Kucinich has long watchdogged Davis-Besse. His assertive questioning of FENOC and NRC, his revelations to the public, and his success at winning an NRC public meeting on Jan. 5th -- with the backing of NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko -- have been the main sources of information about the significance of the cracking since it was first revealed in October. Based on this information, Beyond Nuclear and Don't Waste Michigan, allied with Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario and the Green Party of Ohio, filed a cracked containment contention on Jan. 10th against Davis-Besse's proposed 20 year license extension, which it defended on Feb. 14th.

Kucinich's  Feb. 8th revelation that the outer steel reinforcement rebar of the concrete containment shield building is now considered no longer structurally functional due to the severe, extensive cracking led to the environmental coalition, represented by Toledo attorney Terry Lodge, filing a supplement to its contention on Feb. 27th.

The Port Clinton News Herald also reported on this story, and the Toledo Blade's Tom Henry editorialized:

"Even if the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission accepts FirstEnergy Corp.'s explanation of the cracks in the outer containment shield of its Davis-Besse nuclear power plant, the agency must look more closely at the utility's request to extend the plant's operating license...

Whether or not Davis-Besse's cracks amount only to engineering artifacts, they suggest a larger problem with due diligence. The NRC should investigate concrete industry standards and codes to determine whether Davis-Besse complies with them. The commission also needs to review critically the plant's safety analysis report.

The NRC must drive home a point it has made to FirstEnergy before: Minimal compliance with nuclear industry standards is not good enough -- especially at a plant the utility wants to operate for another two decades."