Congressman Kucinich outs the truth at Davis-Besse

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH, pictured at left) has watchdogged the dangerous Davis-Besse atomic reactor not for years, but for decades. Most recently, he has played the essential role of pressuring both FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) and even the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to admit the truth about what is going on with Davis-Besse's cracked containment. With the backing of NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, Rep. Kucinich succeeded in winning a public meeting near Davis-Besse on Jan. 5th, where FENOC was forced to admit the cracking was not just in "decorative" elements of the concrete shield building, as it had deceptively held to for months, but rather was structural in nature.

On Feb. 8th, Rep. Kucinich revealed the full significance of cracking in the "outer rebar mat": NRC had concluded by Jan. 5th, if not weeks earlier, that the outer layer of steel reinforcement in Davis-Besse's concrete shield building has lost its functional effectiveness. Outrageously, at least up until Dec. 29, 2011, NRC continued to parrot FENOC's claims that the cracking impacted only "decorative" elements. And at the Jan. 5th "standing room only" public meeting attended by 300 people, including dozens of reporters, NRC failed to communicate to the public the full significance of cracking in the outer rebar mat. In fact, NRC still has not done so.

On Feb. 21st, Rep. Kucinich asked "The question for residents of Ohio is given FirstEnergy’s historical lack of credibility on issues at Davis-Besse, will anyone believe them?" He was referring to a "root cause analysis" by FENOC due by Feb. 28th about the cracking. Rep. Kucinich pointed out:

"FirstEnergy has hired highly-paid consultants to prepare its root cause report. If those consultants conclude that the cracking has occurred as a result of a slow, continuous deterioration of the concrete over the more-than-thirty-five years since it was originally poured, that would be bad for Davis-Besse and its current application to extend its operating license for an additional 20 years beyond its expiration in 2017. If those consultants conclude that the cracking occurred right after the initial drying of the poured concrete in the mid-1970’s and has not worsened since then, that would be good for Davis-Besse." Kucinich hints that the latter version of causation will likely be the finding reported by FENOC's highly-paid consultants.

Beyond Nuclear has co-led an environmental coalition challenging Davis-Besse's 20 year license extension. In fact, on Jan. 10th the coalition filed a cracked containment contention in the NRC's Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board proceeding, and has defended it ever since. If the cracking did occur right when Davis-Besse was built and hasn't worsened since, one has to wonder why it took FENOC 35 years to discover the cracking?!

On Feb. 16th, Kucinich gave FirstEnergy a "Corporation Fact Check Rating" of "Pants-on-Fire" regarding its dirty coal burners.  FENOC is also in hot water regarding nuclear fuel at its Beaver Valley nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, which could dangerously overheat in an accident; due to failure to properly inspect safety-significant structures, Beaver Valley may also have installed a defective Babcock and Wilcox-Canada replacement reactor vessel head in the aftermath of the 2002 Davis-Besse Hole-In-the-Head Fiasco. FENOC's Perry atomic reactor northeast of Cleveland is amongst the five worst in the U.S., according to NRC safety rankings. This is due to NRC findings having to do with recurring "weaknesses in the area of human performance," including an April 2011 incident in which workers risked radioactive overexposures due to poor planning and systemic mistakes.

Beyond Nuclear quoted on Palisades' radioactive risks

Anti-nuke watchdogs have long called for Palisades' shutdown. Here, Don't Waste Michigan board members Michael Keegan, Alice Hirt, and Kevin Kamps speak out at the Aug. 2000 Nuclear-Free Great Lakes Action Camp. Palisades' steam, and Lake Michigan, are visible in the background.In the past five days, Rosemary Parker at the Kalamazoo Gazette has quoted Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps in two articles focused on the radioactive risks of the Palisades atomic reactor on the Lake Michigan shoreline. On. Feb. 19th, in an article entitled "Is Southwest Michigan ready for nuclear emergency?", she reported:

'...But nuclear watchdog groups point to the hundreds of hours of additional oversight required by the NRC, the plant's aging equipment, the many glitches at the plant in recent months. The group Beyond Nuclear immediately responded to the change of Palisade's regulatory status with calls to "close it down before it melts down."

...Kevin Kamps, whose title is "radioactive waste watchdog" for the antinuclear group Beyond Nuclear, envisions a more unnerving worst-case scenario, akin to the disastrous 1986 explosion at  Chernobyl in Ukraine, where radioactive contamination was released into the atmosphere and traveled for miles.

In his view, disaster at Palisades could put the city of Chicago's drinking water supply at risk, wipe out Southwest Michigan's fruit belt orchards, destroy the area's tourism industry for years and make ghost towns out of thriving lakeshore communities.'

Parker also quoted Kevin's response to recent high-risk accidents at Palisades in a Feb. 16th article.

NRC recently downgraded Palisades' safety status after a series of accidents in 2011. The agency plans stepped up inspections till the end of this year. However, NRC's rubberstamp of Palisades' 20 year license extension -- despite intense environmental resistance -- is the only reason the 41 year old reactor is still operating at all.

Kevin was born and raised in Kalamazoo. His anti-nuclear power activism began at Palisades in 1992.

Update on February 21, 2012 by admin

Tina Lam at the Detroit Free Press also reported on NRC's safety downgrade at Palisades, mentioning: "Beyond Nuclear, an anti-nuclear group, said Palisades is risky to those who get drinking water from Lake Michigan, and it should be shut down."

Nuclear fuel at 11 Westinghouse PWRs at risk of dangerously overheating

As reported by Reuters, the NRC has issued a media release admitting that 11 pressurized water reactors (PWRs) using Westinghouse nuclear fuel are at risk of "thermal conductivity degradation" -- that is, they could dangerously overheat during an accident. The 11 PWRs are located at the following nuclear power plants: FirstEnergy's Beaver Valley in Pennsylvania, Exelon's Byron in Illinois, Duke Energy's Catawba in South Carolina and McGuire in North Carolina, American Electric Power's Cook in Michigan, and Dominion's Kewaunee in Wisconsin.

The NRC release stated:  "The NRC alerted the industry to this problem in 2009, and Westinghouse needs to do more to account for thermal conductivity degradation in its fuel performance codes," said Eric Leeds, director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. "We need assurances from a few nuclear power plants licensees to maintain assurance that they can continue to operate safely with sufficient margin." Despite already having given industry three years to respond, NRC is still giving them another month to do so now.

However, NRC's current limit of 2,200 degrees Fahrenheit for nuclear fuel cladding has been challenged by 10CFR2.206 emergency enforcement petitions filed by concerned citizens. They pointed to data from Germany that showed that ziroconium in fuel rod cladding is dangerously unstable at a significantly lower temperature

Along these lines, the NRC mentioned cryptically at the end of its release: "An additional 23 plants that use Westinghouse performance models also received information copies of the RFI [Request for Proposal], to ensure that they are aware of their obligations to address this error."

In early 2006, Toshiba of Japan acquired Westinghouse. In the early to mid-1970s, Toshiba was the reactor supplier and architect for Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3, the atomic reactor that suffered the worst explosion during the catastrophe; its reactor building now resembles a pile of twisted ruins.

Update on February 24, 2012 by admin

Nuclear researcher Lucas Hixson has analyzed NRC's action and commented upon it.

State of Vermont appeals federal district court ruling allowing Vermont Yankee to operate past March 21, 2012

State of Vermont Attorney General William H. SorrellAs reported by Reuters, the State of Vermont's Attorney General, William Sorrell, has appealed U.S. federal district judge Garvan Murtha's Jan. 19, 2012 ruling allowing Entergy Nuclear to continue operating the Vermont Yankee atomic reactor past the expiration of its original 40 year license on March 21, 2012.

In a media release posted on his website, Vermont AG Sorrell stated  “We have strong arguments to make on appeal. The district court’s decision improperly limits the State’s legitimate role in deciding whether Vermont Yankee should operate in Vermont beyond March 21, 2012. The court’s undue reliance on the discussions among our citizen legislators, expert witnesses, advocates, and their constituents has the potential to chill legislative debates in the future. Left unchallenged, this decision could make it harder for ordinary Vermonters to clearly state their views in future legislative hearings.”

Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin expressed support for the appeal, stating: 

“As I said when the court opinion was issued, I do not agree with Judge Murtha’s decision.  We as a state have had many important and legitimate concerns with Entergy Louisiana and its operation of Vermont Yankee that are not reflected in the opinion.  I support the Attorney General’s work in getting a positive result on appeal.  Meanwhile, my administration will be focusing on the state’s continuing authority over Vermont Yankee.”

Lawsuit filed against AP1000 reactor design certification and NRC's approval of Vogtle 3 & 4 COLA

A lawsuit filed by attorneys Diane Curran of Washington, D.C., Mindy Goldstein of Turner Environmental Law Clinic at Emory University in Atlanta, and John Runkle of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, challenges the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) approval of the Toshiba-Westinghouse "Advanced Passive" (AP) 1000 reactor design on Dec. 30, 2011, as well as the Feb. 9-10 NRC approval of the Vogtle nuclear power plants Units 3 and 4 combined construction and operating license application (COLA). The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an environmental coalition including: Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League; Center for a Sustainable Coast; and Georgia Women's Action for New Directions. Those environmental petitioners are joined by co-petitioners from the "AP1000 Oversight Group": North Carolina Waste Awareness and Reduction Network; Citizens Allied for Safe Energy; Friends of the Earth; Nuclear Information and Resource Service; and Nuclear Watch South (nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates has served as an expert witness for the AP1000 Oversight Group). Dr. Arjun Makhijani of Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) serves as the environmental coalition's expert witness on this lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleges that the NRC's failure to apply lessons learned from the Fukushima Nuclear Catastrophe before approving the AP1000 reactor design, as well as the Vogtle 3 and 4 COLA, is a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, as well as additional laws and regulations. The plaintiffs cite the dissenting opinion written by NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko in the 4-1 split NRC Commissioners decision to approve the Vogtle 3 and 4 COLA. 

The AP has reported on this story.

Beyond Nuclear and its environmental coalition allies have filed identical legal challenges against the Seabrook nuclear power plant's license extension in New Hampshire, the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant's license extension in Ohio, and the Fermi 3 atomic reactor's COLA in Michigan. However, those proceedings have not yet reached the stage that the Vogtle 3 and 4 proceeding has -- final approvals by NRC, now timely for legal action in federal court.