Despite Fukushima demonstration, NRC task force ignores warning on dangerous Mark I reactors

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) “Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident” publicly released its 92-page well intentioned near-term review on the implications of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster for US reactors on July 13, 2011.  The federal agency proposes to improve its “patchwork of regulatory requirements” developed “piece by piece over the decades.” Beyond Nuclear remains concerned that many critical reactor safety areas are still dominated by industry “voluntary initiatives” where non-compliance continues to elude federal enforcement and  Capitol Hill pro-nuclear champions announced their resistance to any costly safety improvements.

Of most concern, the NRC is still ignoring warnings as did its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission,  in 1972 from their senior safety officer, Dr. Steven Hanuaer to “discourage all further use” in the US of the Fukushima-style General Electric Mark I boiling water reactor. The federal regulators instead issued three more construction permits and eventually 16 more operating licenses in the 1970s for this same dangerous design. There are now 23 Fukushima-style reactors operating in the United States as part of a total of 32 Mark I’s worldwide---counting the smoldering radioactive rubble at Fukushima.   The NRC task force report does not fundamentally address the most critical issue coming out of the Fukushima catastrophe, namely, the design vulnerability of all Mark I containment structures to catastrophic failure during a severe accident.

The NRC report further ignores that these same Mark I reactors, like Vermont Yankee and Oyster Creek, are not currently in compliance with their operating licenses that were originally required to have a reliable "leak tight" containment structure. If the NRC were looking for the most significant and meaningful safety upgrade to the US reactors directly impacted by the Fukushima disaster they would require that all Mark I reactor operators restore containment integrity to the original licensed leak tight condition. Or order that they be shut them down, permanently.  All of the Mark I reactors voluntarily installed retrofits to vent all a substandard and undersized containment to save it from rupturing during a severe accident. The same experimental vent was installed at Fukushima in 1991. The same experimental fix failed on three containments buildings to prevent the uncontrolled releases of radioactivity to the air and water that are still occurring now four months after the accident.

Instead, in order to keep these dangerous reactors operational, many now with twenty year license extensions, the NRC task force is recommending that rather than the industry volunteering a dubious containment vent system, the NRC should order the nuclear industry to take another try at an experimental venting fix which fundamentally compromises their own defense in depth philosophy.

It is even more telling that the NRC report’s preamble “recognizes that there likely will be more than 100 nuclear power plants operating throughout the United States for decades to come.” By contrast, the same day that the NRC  publicly released its report in the USA, Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan announced that the implications of Fukushima for nuclear power in Japan meant that “’We will aim to bring about a society that can exist without nuclear power,’ he said.” Perhaps, now too late for a society to live without the threat of increasing radioactivity levels.

Did earthquake begin meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi even before tsunami struck?

The Atlantic Wire, in an article entitled "Meltdown: What Really Happened at Fukushima?" by Jake Adelstein and David McNeill, reports -- based on interviews with eyewitnesses, as well as a careful review of the catastrophe's timeline and even documented admissions made by Tokyo Electric Power Company itself -- that major damage to piping and other safety significant structures at Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 -- the oldest reactor at the site -- may very well have begun the first meltdown, even before the tsunami hit. The article reports:

"The reason for official reluctance to admit that the earthquake did direct structural damage to reactor one is obvious. Katsunobu Onda, author of TEPCO: The Dark Empire, who sounded the alarm about the firm in his 2007 book explains it this way: 'If TEPCO and the government of Japan admit an earthquake can do direct damage to the reactor, this raises suspicions about the safety of every reactor they run. They are using a number of antiquated reactors that have the same systematic problems, the same wear and tear on the piping.' "

The article adds:

"On May 15, TEPCO went some way toward admitting at least some of these claims in a report called 'Reactor Core Status of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Unit One.' The report said there might have been pre-tsunami damage to key facilities including pipes. 'This means that assurances from the industry in Japan and overseas that the reactors were robust is now blown apart,' said Shaun Burnie, an independent nuclear waste consultant. 'It raises fundamental questions on all reactors in high seismic risk areas.' "

Tsunamis are even more rare than already rare earthquakes. Thus, tsunami risks -- including to U.S. reactors -- can more easily be portrayed by the nuclear establishment in industry and government as exceedingly improbable -- even though a radioactively catastrophic one has just happened in Japan. Not only Tepco and the Japanese federal government were quick to obscure earthquake damage at Fukushima Daiichi, focusing attention on the tsunami's impact instead. Exelon Nuclear's CEO, John Rowe, who "serves" on President Obama's and Energy Secretary Chu's "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future," was quick to downplay the earthquake's impact at Fukushima, instead highlighting the tsunami. An Exelon statement dated March 14th began:

"Exelon is closely monitoring the situation in Japan as it continues to unfold. While there is still a great deal we don’t know, from all information the company received so far, it appears that the damage to the Japanese plants was primarily related to the tsunami, not the earthquake."

A common "red herring" refrain of the U.S. nuclear industry since March 11th is that tsunamis are impossible at the many inland reactors across the U.S., while largely or entirely ignoring earthquake risks themselves, as well as other pathways (tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, fires, power outages, mechanical failure, human error, intentional attack, etc.) that could plunge reactors into station blackout, followed within hours by core meltdown and days by high-level radioactive waste storage pool fires.

Nukes, Floods, Fires and Alternatives

If the recent and frequent occurrence of the largest earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, tornados and wildfires has taught us anything, one important lesson is that nuclear power is more of a liability than an asset in times of natural disaster and national emergency.

The latest worries from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan focus on internal radioactive contamination in the urine of children tested. The radioactive contamination is still spreading in food, weather, groundwater and the ocean currents. The deleterious impacts and consequences can only be measured and realized over time.  Just how far reaching is as much guess work as it is science. But one report by a Japanese nuclear oversight agency predicts that the radioactive cesium plume released into the ocean will reach the West Coast of the United States in 3 to 5 years.

Here in the US, flooding on the Missouri River is now at the walls of the nuclear reactor at Fort Calhoun just north of Omaha, Nebraska after a makeshift rubber “Aqua-Berm” collapsed causing the reactor site to go to emergency diesel power for 12 hours to cool the reactor fuel. The safety risk is moderated by the reactor being shut down for refueling and maintenance in April and since kept shut down due to the threat of rising flood water.  The attention stays focused on more rain in the forecast and rising water behind the six aging dams on the Missouri River above Fort Calhoun and the Cooper nuclear power station below Omaha, Nebraska.  Building nuclear power plants on flood plains flaunts danger and hundreds of tons nuclear waste in casks sits on an island amid still rising water.   

Further scrutiny will need to focus on underground safety-related electrical cables now completely submerged beneath these reactors that were never qualified to stay wet and may not be accessible for inspection.

Elsewhere, Las Conchas wildfire has burned over 90,000 acres and surrounded New Mexico’s Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the nation’s oldest nuclear weapons facilities. Early air monitoring tests have not found radiation in the tons of smoke being lofted into the atmosphere and spot fires inside the DOE facility’s perimeter were being extinguished.  Moreover, 30,000 radioactive waste barrels are still sitting at the facility stand as a reminder of the vulnerability from the timeless legacy of nuclear power and weapons technology.  

We need an energy transformation beyond nuclear like the tremendous resource available in abundance in Nebraska.  According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory not only is there an abundance of wind but thousands of Cornhusker jobs in safe, renewable and durable to climate change energy.

Public Citizen's Tyson Slocum on Russia Today T.V. about flooding at Ft. Calhoun

Public Citizen's Energy Program director Tyson Slocum appeared on Russia Today T.V. on June 20th to discuss the risks of flooding at Ft. Calhoun nuclear power plant on the Missouri River in Nebraska. He pointed out that renewables such as wind and solar, as well as energy efficiency, are ready, safer, and cost-effective alternatives to nuclear power's many risks.

"Floodwater Flowing into Sewage Lagoon at Fort Calhoun Station"

As revealed by the sequential media releases posted below by the Omaha Public Power District at its website, the situation at Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant 20 miles upstream of Omaha is deteriorating due to historic flooding on the Missouri River, with sewage now flowing uncontrollably into the floodwaters, not unlike what's also occurring at Cooper atomic reactor 60 miles downstream of Omaha (see entry immediately below):

"Wastewater Bypass Put in Place at Fort Calhoun Station

June 16, 2011

A partial bypass has been put in place to divert groundwater from leaking into a sanitary wastewater lift station from the Administration Building at Fort Calhoun Station.

The bypass equipment will pump excess groundwater away from the lift station, used to transport sewage. Wastewater Treatment Lagoons are not flooded and are operating properly. The excess wastewater is being pumped from the lift station into Missouri River flood waters

The area around the Administration Building has been posted, warning personnel to stay clear while the lift station is bypassed.

For health and safety reasons, all individuals are cautioned to avoid contact with any flood water."

"Floodwater Flowing into Sewage Lagoon at Fort Calhoun Station

June 23, 2011

Rising water from the Missouri River has begun flowing into a sewage lagoon at Fort Calhoun Station. A partial bypass was recently put in place to divert water that had leaked into a sanitary wastewater lift station, allowing the continuation of most of the flow to the sanitary lagoons. The water overtopping the sewage lagoon this week will be considered a continuation of the previous bypass issue by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality.

A sign has been erected in the area around the Administration Building advising personnel to stay clear of the discharge that is occurring. For health and safety reasons, all individuals are cautioned to avoid contact with any flood water."