Riverkeeper contests NRC's conclusion that IP's aquatic impacts on Hudson "small"

As reported by POWERnews, in response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's FSEIS (Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement) finding that aquatic impacts from 20-year license extensions at Entergy's Indian Point Unit 2 and 3 atomic reactors would be "small":

'...One environmental group, Riverkeeper, has alleged that Indian Point violates the Clean Water Act and has devastating effects on the ecology of the Hudson River. "It leaks radioactive water, discharges heated water that damages river life, and its ineffective cooling water-intake screens do too little to stop the slaughter of more than a billion fish and other river organisms every year," the group says on its website...".

VT PSB rules it can and will hear issues surrounding Entergy VY's impacts on Connecticut River

NRC file photo of VY on the Connecticut River border of VT and NH, 8 miles north of the MA state lineAs reported by John Dillon at Vermont Public Radio, the State of Vermont has yet again asserted its right and authority to oversee operations at Entergy's controversial Vermont Yankee (VY) atomic reactor in Vernon near Brattleboro. VY is a Fukushima Daiichi twin design -- a General Electric Mark I Boiling Water Reactor.

This time, the State of Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) has ruled it does have the authority to hear issues involving VY's impacts, such as thermal hot water releases, on the Connecticut River. Such thermal discharges harm the river ecosystem, of course, including its fisheries.

The PSB is currently holding hearings on whether or not to grant Entergy a renewed Certificate of Public Good (CPG), needed in order to conduct business in the State of Vermont. VY is operating under an expired CPG, which expired on March 22, 2012 -- the first day of VY's U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rubber-stamped 20-year license extension. VY is also operating with an expired surface water discharge permit, which expired in 2006. The PSB has ruled that Entergy cannot rely on that expired discharge permit as supposed proof that its impacts on the Connecticut are acceptable.

Swan SONGS as Edison opts to permanently close San Onofre

Southern California Edison has decided to permanently shutter its Units 2 and 3 San Onofre Nuclear Generating Stations (SONGS) reactors in Southern Cal! Congratulations to all who fought so hard for this great victory! Read the Edison press release.

"This is very good news for the people of Southern California," said [a] statement from Friends of the Earth president Erich Pica. "We have long said that these reactors are too dangerous to operate and now Edison has agreed. The people of California now have the opportunity to move away from the failed promise of dirty and dangerous nuclear power and replace it with the safe and clean energy provided by the sun and wind."

And as FOE senior advisor S. David Freeman pointed out on a FOE press conference, San Onofre's closures means that the harmful impacts on aquatic life in the Pacific Ocean from reactor operations (such as thermal, radiological, and toxic chemical) now ends. 

Beyond Nuclear has compiled comprehensive media coverage on, and other reactions to, the San Onofre 2 & 3 closures at its Nuclear Retreat page.

Davis-Besse Intervention Looms Large as San Onofre Units 2 & 3 Terminated Because Of Faulty Steam Generators

Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer at Fairewinds Associates, IncOn May 20th, an environmental coalition, including Beyond Nuclear, petitioned to intervene against the steam generator replacement proposed at FirstEnergy's Davis-Besse atomic reactor in Oak Harbor, Ohio. The coalition's intervention petition, expert witness Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates, Inc's expert testimony, Gundersen's Curriculum Vitae, and a coalition press release are posted at this link.

Today, the coalition issued a media release, pointing out the similarities between their intervention at Davis-Besse, and the Friends of the Earth (FOE) intervention at San Onofre, CA. Earlier today, Southern California Edison threw in the towel, and announced the permanent shutdown of San Onofre Units 2 & 3, due to the fatal degradation of their replacement steam generators. Gundersen (pictured, above left) serves as FOE's expert witness at San Onofre.

On Dec. 27, 2010, an overlapping environmental coalition, including Beyond Nuclear, intervened against Davis-Besse's 20-year license extension. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in that proceeding has rejected all of the coalition's contentions, except for its Nuclear Waste Confidence Decision contention. That one has led to an inevitable two-year delay in NRC's finalization of the license extension, until the agency completes its court-ordered Environmental Impact Statement on the risks of long-term storage of high-level radioactive waste at on-site pools and dry casks.

Update on June 9, 2013 by admin

The Toledo Blade has reported on this story.

Palisades springs yet another leak into the control room: Failure of moisture barrier violates agreement with NRC

Beyond Nuclear and Michigan Safe Energy Future--Shoreline Chapter issued a media release on June 6thupon learning of yet another leak into Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor control room (see image, left). The leakage has been a recurring problem for over two years now.

Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps stated: “When I raised the SIRWT [Safety Injection Refueling Water Tank] leak into the control room at Entergy’s public open house in South Haven on May 14^th, and on an NRC [U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission] Webinar May 23^rd, I was told by company and agency spokespeople that that issue was a thing of the past, that an installed moisture barrier had taken care of the problem. But as William Faulkner famously said, ‘The past is never dead. It's not even past.’ If Palisades can’t even prevent basic leakage through the ceiling of the control room, which has now been going on for over two years, what does that say about its reactor and radioactive waste safeguards? Entergy’s use of buckets, tarps, and ineffective sealant against this leak into the safety-critical control room begs the question, is it prepared to prevent large-scale radioactivity releases into the environment from a long list of severely age-degraded, critical safety systems, structures, and components?”

The leak, which was detected on June 3rd, was made known to the public in an NRC document released on June 6th.

Update on June 12, 2013 by admin

Lindsey Smith at Michigan Radio has reported on this story, including the fact that the sand bed region, an integral componet of the SIRWT structure, was never put in place 40 years ago. Blueprints at Palisades were never updated to document this fact. Thus Entergy's and NRC's assumption, that ongoing leaks from the SIRWT even after repairs had been made last summer were coming from the sand bed region, were erroneous and based upon a fantom architectural feature that in fact did not even exist.

Update on June 13, 2013 by admin

WSJM has also reported on this story:

"A new leak at Palisades has led Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to the discovery of a design flaw at the nuclear plant. Consumers Energy did not put the water tank, which is now being repaired, on a grout ring as the original blueprints indicated, and the NRC says Palisades and Entergy are working to fix that with new fiberboard and reinforced concrete..."

Entergy is aiming to restart Palisades by late spring/early summer.

Update on June 13, 2013 by admin

Entergy has provided this explanation for the 45-year-old construction error recently discovered at Palisades:

[Entergy] Communications Specialist Lindsay Rose issued a statement, saying, "The discovery of a lack of sandbed refers to Palisades Safety Injection Refueling Water (SIRW) tank, not the control room. We are currently undergoing work in the SIRW tank to replace the tank’s aluminum flooring and sub-flooring. When we removed the pre-existing aluminum floor plates, the condition of the subflooring was not as we had expected. It became apparent that the sand subflooring had not been installed many years ago as we had thought. We have subsequently installed fiberboard subflooring that has asphalt embedded to provide a more robust and reliable system to support the aluminum floor...".