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 from August 1, 2013 - August 31, 2013

Monday
Aug192013

Joseph Mangano/RPHP report on radioactivity releases from Palisades and increased death rates in the surrounding area

Entergy's problem-plagued Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI, on the Lake Michigan shorelineJoseph Mangano, Executive Director of Radiation and Public Health Project, has published a report, commissioned and endorsed by Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future, and Nuclear Energy Information Service. Based on government data and documentation on radioactivity releases from Palisades, as well as area health statistics, the report's major findings raise serious questions about the connections between radioactivity releases and increased overall death and cancer mortality rates.

Palisades received a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rubber-stamp for 20 extended years of operations -- out to 2031 -- back in 2007, despite hard-fought resistance that sought to block it.

Press release

Full report: NUCLEAR CONTAMINATION AND HEALTH RISKS FROM THE ENTERGY PALISADES NUCLEAR REACTOR.

Beyond Nuclear pamphlet "Routine Radiation Releases from U.S. Atomic Reators: What Are The Dangers?" Note that the water discharge pathway photo was taken (by Gabriela Bulisova) at the Palisades atomic reactor, discharging into Lake Michigan. Although the atmospheric discharge pathway was photographed at the Callaway atomic reactor in Missouri, Palisades has a very similar vent attached to its containment building for aerial discharges of radioactive gases and vapors).

Beyond Nuclear report (published April 2010) by Reactor Oversight Project Director Paul Gunter, "Leak First, Fix Later," with a chapter on Palisades' tritium leaks into groundwater, first reported by Entergy Nuclear in 2007.

Friday
Aug162013

Latest incident at Palisades: Control room not protected against radioactive air inleakage in case of a radiological emergency

The cover of John G. Fuller's 1975 classic "We Almost Lost Detroit" -- about the partial meltdown of the Fermi 1 plutonium breeder reactor on Oct. 5, 1966 -- shows an artist's rendition of a typical respirator and radiation protection suit worn by nuclear workers in radiological contamination zonesAs described in an Event Notification Report posted at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) website, the problem-plagued Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI experienced its latest mishap on August 13th:

'BOTH CONTROL ROOM VENTILATION FILTRATION TRAINS DECLARED INOPERABLE

"At approximately 1102 [EDT], August 13, 2013, both control room ventilation filtration trains were declared inoperable in accordance with Technical Specification 3.7.10, Condition B, due to a control room boundary door not being fully closed. The door was unable to be closed for approximately nine minutes due to an apparent mis-operation of the door operating mechanism. The door's locking bolts fully extended causing interference between the door and door frame. The door was restored to operable status at approximately 1111 [EDT], August 13, 2013.

"Technical Specification 3.7.10 allows control room boundary doors to be opened intermittently, under administrative control for preplanned activities, provided the doors can be rapidly restored to the design condition. Previous evaluations of the door not being fully closed for a limited time concluded no loss of safety function had existed.

"This condition had no impact on the health and safety of the public.

"The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified."'

In a radiological emergency situation, however, the condition could well have a direct impact on the health and safety of Palisades control room workers -- which could have indirect, but catastrophic, consequences for the health and safety of the public downwind, downstream, up the food chain, and down the generations.

When Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps queried the Union of Concerned Scientists' Dave Lochbaum regarding the incident, Dave confirmed Kevin's understanding was accurate. Kevin asked if the issue involved the requirement to protect control room workers against radioactivity entering the control room during an emergency at Palisades.

Dave responded:

"That's the concern. The design provides for the control room to be maintained at a slightly higher pressure than neighboring areas and the air outside. This design forces clean air to leak out of the control room rather than potentially contaminated air leaking in. With this design functional, the operators need not wear respirators and clean suits while occupying the control room.

With the door not closed, the ventilation system cannot maintain the control room at a higher pressure. That inability is why both ventilation system trains were declared inoperable."

Lochbaum had previously written to NRC, pointing out that leaks of water into the control room from the ceiling above showed that the control room was also vulnerable to the inleakage of radioactivity in air during an accident.

Depending on the type and concentration/dose rate of the radioactivity entering the control room, Palisades operators could be forced to don radiation suits and respirators, complicating their communications and efforts to address the emergency situation, or could be forced to abandon the control room altogether. Gamma penetrating radiation, like X-rays, for example, would not be stopped by a thin plastic suit.

NIRS has a pamphlet for nuclear industry workers entitled "Your Nuclear Workplace: Know Your Risks, Know Your Rights," which shows a typical radiation protection suit, as well as respiratory protection equipment.

Whistleblowers at Palisades have confided in Kevin over the decades that their managers have instructed them not to wear radiation protection suits and respirators, even in radioactively contaminated areas, as it slows down their work!

Thursday
Aug152013

Orwell & Kafka roll in their graves: Federal appeals court rules for Entergy, against Vermont, in Vermont Yankee dispute!

Like a bizarre mix of 1984 and The Trial, on August 14th, a three-judge panel at the Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City ruled in favor of Entergy Nuclear, and against the State of Vermont, in the marathon battle over the fate of the Vermont Yankee atomic reactor. The appeals court judges agreed with a lower court's Orwellian determination that Vermont state legislators had really meant "safety" when they passed laws regulating energy economics, the need for (or lack thereof) Vermont Yankee going forward, and the atomic reactor's impacts on the Connecticut River from thermal water discharges, impacts on tourism and recreation, etc. 

While radiological safety has been deemed the "sole province" of the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission under the Atomic Energy Energy of 1954 (never mind the agency is asleep at the Geiger counter, derelict in its duty to protect public health, safety, and the environment!), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1983 PG&E case that states retain jurisdiction regarding nuclear power in all those other areas.

As documented in the classic 1975 book We Almost Lost Detroit by John G. Fuller (about the Oct. 5, 1966 partial meltdown at the Fermi 1 experimental plutonium breeder reactor in Monroe County, MI), a half-century ago, a strongly worded dissent in the U.S. Supreme Court case United Auto Workers v. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission described the Atomic Energy Act as a dark day for our democracy. Ironically, in spite of yesterday's New York City appeals court ruling, one of the judges pointed out that Congress probably didn't intend to so undermine state's rights when it passed the Atomic Energy Act six decades ago!

The silver lining, however, is that the court did not order Vermont taxpayers to pay for Entergy's multi-million dollar legal bills. Also, the authority of the State of Vermont's Public Service Board to rescind the "rogue corporation" Entergy's Certificate of Public Good, its license to do business in the Green Mountain State, seems to be retained intact. The PSB, which can consider the company's character in its deliberations, is set to rule in late autumn or early winter. Not only Vermont's Governor and Attorney General seem determined to fight on, but so does the grassroots environmental resistance. There are diverse manifestations of that grassroots resistance, from successful petitions urging NRC to investigate the financial shakiness at Vermont Yankee (as well as Pilgrim, MA and FitzPatrick, NY), flotillas on the Connecticut River to protest Vermont Yankee's harmful thermal discharges, and ongoing non-violent civil disobedience actions, such as the Shut It Down Affinity Group's latest action on August 6th.

To paraphrase U.S. Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), recently elected to the U.S. Senate, Franz Kafka is spinning so fast in his grave, he should be hooked up to a turbo-generator and connected to the electric grid!

Vermont Digger, Vermont Public Radio, the Brattleboro Reformer, and the Barre-Montpelier Times Argus have all reported on this story.

Saturday
Aug032013

"Attorney Generals Fight for Public Access in Nuclear Issues"

Environmental coalition attorney Terry Lodge of Toledo speaks out against Davis-Besse's 20-year license extension at a press conference in Oak Harbor, OH in August 2012An article written by Roger Witherspoon, "Attorney Generals Fight for Public Access in Nuclear Issues," begins:

"The Attorney Generals of New York and Vermont have joined the fight against California’s San Onofre Nuclear power plant in an effort to stop federal regulators from erasing all record of a judicial ruling that the public has a right to intervene before major amendments are granted to an operating license.

If the five-member Nuclear Regulatory Commission grants the request of their staff to vacate the ruling of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and expunge the record, it will eliminate a precedent that affects power plant operations and regulatory practices around the country. In particular, it will affect the six-year fight in New York to shut the Indian Point power plants 25 miles north of New York City; and Vermont’s ongoing effort to shut the Vermont Yankee power plant.

The cross country battle now being waged by NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell is an uphill fight against one of the most powerful professional staffs in the US government and an agency that has a unique view of its own independence.

“The Commission has stated that it is not bound by judicial practice, including that of the United States Supreme Court,” stated Schneiderman and Sorrell in a brief filed June 24 with the NRC challenging the staff request...". Continue reading Roger Witherspoon's article here.

The next proceeding most likely to be immediately and directly impacted by the survival or demise of Friends of the Earths' (FOE) San Onofre precedent involves the replacement of steam generators at FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company's (FENOC) problem-plagued Davis-Besse atomic reactor, located on the Lake Erie shoreline in Oak Harbor, Ohio just east of Toledo. A coalition of environmental groups -- Beyond Nuclear, Citizen Environment Coalition of Southwestern Ontario, Don't Waste Michigan, and the Sierra Club -- have challenged FENOC's attempt to avoid transparent, open, and publicly accessible license amendment proceedings, by arguing the new steam generators are "like-for-like" replacements of the old ones.

But the coalition's expert witness, Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Associates, Inc., has documented numerous major changes from the degraded old to the new replacement steam generators. Gundersen also serves as FOE's expert witness at San Onofre. Toledo-based attorney Terry Lodge (photo, above left) serves as the coalition's legal counsel.

An Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board (ASLB) panel heard pre-hearing oral arguments regarding the environmental interveners' standing, as well as the merits of its arguments, on July 24th. The ASLB indicated it would rule on the admissibility of the coalition's intervention petition this month.

Saturday
Aug032013

Nuclear revolving door gobbles up billions of dollars of ratepayers' money, threatening to move onto taxpayers next!

Commissioner Geoffrey Merrifield's NRC file photoWhile still a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Commissioner, Geoffrey Merrifield did the nuclear power industry a big favor. He spearheaded a seemingly simple, but significant, change in NRC regulations, which paved the way for new reactor construction, unfettered by bothersome environmental safeguards. Merrifield shephered through a change in the definition of the word "construction." Now, nuclear utilities could build any aspect of a nuclear power plant, save for the reactor and its containment building, without having to first complete an environmental impact statement, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Thus, large aspects of a new reactor construction job -- such as foundation excavations for the reactor complex, or construction of the turbine building -- could proceed apace, building "facts on the ground," and momentum that would be hard to stop.

 

Merrifield capped such corruption by leaving NRC immediately after his dirty work, and going to work for the Shaw Group, which specializes in -- you guessed it -- new reactor construction! This example of the nuclear revolving door between supposed government regulator and industry even made a number of senior managers at NRC uneasy about Merrifield's blatant, self-serving conflict of interest.

 

Now, as reported by the Atlanta Progressive News, to such corruption must be added incompetence, raising not only financial risks, into the billions of dollars, but radiological risks that could impact millions of lives:

'...Chicago Bridge and Iron (CB&I), formerly known as Shaw Modular Solutions, makes modules being used to assemble four Westinghouse AP1000 reactors being built at Plant Vogtle in Georgia and V.C. Summer in South Carolina.

“CB&I is unable to provide properly constructed modules... and [have demonstrated a] continued inability to reliably meet the quality and schedule requirements of the project," Barbara Antonoplos, a ratepayer, testified, citing a report from the utility's regulatory staff in South Carolina.

"These problems have existed from the beginning and been raised in every other CB&I hearing and still there is no fix... they [Georgia Power] still do not have a competent outfit making parts and once the new parts get delivered to Vogtle, they are repairing them to make them acceptable.  This alarms me because incompetence of this magnitude breeds disaster especially when it comes to construction of a nuclear device. There is no way these reactors can be considered safe... when ‘patch it together’ is the best construction model they are able to come up with," Antonoplos said.

"Ongoing failures of this sort result in escalating cost and I don't believe you should force ratepayers to foot the bill for such gross incompetence," Antonoplos said.

Southern Company’s projections do not include the cost of the lawsuit they’re engaged in with their contractor, The Shaw Group/Chicago Bridge and Iron, nor the full cost of not getting Federal Loan Guarantees, for which the negotiation deadline has been extended three times according to Georgia WAND's website...'

Alex Flint, NEI's Senior Vice President for Governmental AffairsSpeaking of nuclear revolving doors and federal loan guarantees, the top lobbyist for the nuclear power industry, Alex Flint at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI, photo left), has passed through multiple times. For one, he "served" as the staff director on the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) Committee, under Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), on whose personal staff Flint had previously "served." The ENR Committee hatched the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. In addition to the $13 billion of direct taxpayer subsidies in that bill aimed at promoting new atomic reactor development, Flint wrote the federal nuclear loan guarantee language. After the bill was enacted into law, Flint left "public service" and went to work at NEI, where he remains to this day.

In a very real sense, Flint wrote his own (likely high six-figure, if not more) paycheck, while "serving the public" -- up for dinner to the nuclear industry, that is!

In late 2007, $18.5 billion for new reactor loan guarantees, and another $4 billion in new uranium enrichment loan guarantees, were approved by Congress and George W. Bush. However, even though President Obama, in Feb. 2010, awarded $8.3 billion in new reactor loan guarantees for the proposed new Vogtle 3 & 4 reactors -- giving it the highest profile possible, by making the announcement himself -- Southern Co. has never agreed to the terms. Too much of its own "skin in the game" is being asked of it, for such a financially risky scheme. Thus, no nuclear loan guarantees have yet been finalized.