Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI.Please join us to help watchdog the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and nuclear power industry, specifically on pressurized thermal shock (PTS) risks due to pressurized water reactor (PWR) reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement: attend NRC's Webinar on Tuesday, March 19th from 5 to 6 PM Eastern!
NRC's public announcement of the March 19th Webinar instructs that "Webinar seats must be reserved before March 18, in order to participate, at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/576992376. See NRC's public announcement here.
Also, see NRC's March 7th press release announcing the Webinar here.
Embrittlement of the RPV (the structure which holds the nuclear fuel at an atomic reactor's core) afflicts all PWRs to a greater or lesser extent. It is due to neutron bombardment of the RPV metal over years and decades, which effectively introduces "fault lines" of microscopic cracks which could line up to become dangerously vulnerable to PTS. PTS involves the very high pressure of a PWR, around a ton per square inch of pressure, which is why PWR cooling water remains in liquid form, even though it is hundreds of degrees hotter than the normal 212 degrees Fahrenheit boiling point of water. If the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) were activated, this would introduce a sudden, dramatic temperature decrease into the mix as well. Like a hot glass under cold water, the brittle RPV metal could fracture. That would cause the liquid cooling water to instantly turn to steam and escape through the breach. There is no contingency in place to deal with such a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), as adding more cooling water to the core -- if this was even still possible -- would likely simply result in it leaking out via the breach, either as liquid water or steam. The core would then be at very high risk of melting down. If the meltdown were bad enough, it could melt through -- or its radiological releases otherwise escape from -- the surrounding containment structure.
At Palisades, the casualties and property damages that would result from such a catastrophic radioactivity release into the environment would be shocking. As reported by CRAC-II (Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences, commissioned by NRC and carried out by Sandia National Lab) in 1982, a catastrophic radioactivity release at Palisades would cause 1,000 "Peak Early Fatalities," 7,000 "Peak Early Injuries," 10,000 "Peak Cancer Deaths," and $52.6 billion in property damage in downwind areas.
However, CRAC-II (also known as the Sandia Siting Study, or NUREG/CR-2239) was based on 1970 U.S. Census data. But, as reported by AP in June 2011, populations have soared around U.S. nuclear power plants in the past 40 years. Thus, casualties today would be much worse. And, when adjusted for inflation, property damages downwind would surmount $123 billion in year 2012 dollar figures.
It is doubtful CRAC-II adequately accounted for the impacts of a catastrophic radioactivity release into Lake Michigan. After all, the Great Lakes comprise 20% of the world's surface fresh water. They provide drinking water to 40 million people in 8 U.S. states, 2 Canadian provinces, and a large number of Native American First Nations. The Great Lakes are the life blood of one of the biggest regional economies in the entire world.
NRC attempted to suppress its CRAC-II report at the time. But U.S. Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) brought it to light in congressional hearings. Rep. Markey has been a longtime nuclear power industry watchdog in general, and Palisades watchdog in particular. As but one of many examples, based on whistleblower revelations, in June 2012 Markey demanded an explanation from NRC on the safety significance of a leak into the control room at Palisades that had been ongoing for over a year. The leaks had been collected in "catch basins," more commonly known as buckets. The year-long leak had been concealed, by NRC staff and Entergy, even from NRC's own chairman, Greg Jaczko, as he toured the Palisades plant on May 25, 2012. A year ago, Rep. Markey's nuclear weapons and nuclear power watchdog work, spanning nearly four decades, was honored by the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability at its annual "DC Days" Capitol Hill awards ceremony.
This is the third Webinar NRC has conducted about Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor since October 2012. This is in addition to numerous in-person public meetings. Public pressure by concerned local residents and environmental groups is what has moved NRC to hold so many interactions with the public, and we have turned out large numbers to each meeting and Webinar. Please help us keep this drum beat of resistance going by attending the March 19th Webinar!
BACKGROUND
Entergy Nuclear's Palisades atomic reactor has the worst embrittled RPV in the U.S. Watchdogs forced NRC staff to admit this at a Feb. 29, 2012 public meeting in South Haven. So bad, in fact, that Reuters has reported it could force Palisades' permanent shutdown by 2017.
However, this has long been known. In fact, Palisades should have been forced by NRC to shutdown as early as 1981.
In 1982 -- on the third anniversary of the Three Mile Island meltdown -- NRC staff whistleblower, Demetrios Basdekas, warned in an op-ed to the New York Times that the next meltdown could well be caused by RPV embrittlement and PTS.
In 1993, Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes documented that by 1981 -- ten short years into Palisades' operations -- the embrittled RPV had already violated NRC PTS safety standards. However, rather than require that Palisades address its embrittlement problem or else shutdown the reactor, NRC instead simply weakened its PTS safety regulations, allowing Palisades to keep operating.
NRC has done this not once, but numerous times over the years and decades. In June 2011, in the first installment of his four-part series "Aging Nukes," Jeff Donn reported that "US nuke regulators weaken safety rules." His top example? PTS.
A broad coalition of concerned local residents and environmental groups opposed Palisades' 20-year license extension from 2005 to 2007, as chronicled on the NIRS website. The coalition's top safety contention was Palisades' embrittled RPV, vulnerable to PTS. In early 2007, NRC simply rubber-stamped Palisades' license extension in short order, the 48th such rubber-stamp just since the year 2000. That figure has now grown since to 73 such rubber-stamps. Not a single atomic reactor, no matter how age-degraded or otherwise risky, has been denied a license extension, despite fierce resistance -- as at Entergy Nuclear's Vermont Yankee atomic reactor, as but one example.
During the license extension proceeding in 2005-2006, Palisades rebuffed the environmental interveners by promising NRC's Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board (ASLB) a "plan for a plan" to deal with its RPV embrittlement by 2011, before the expiration of its then-current operating license. NRC staff supported this "plan for a plan," and ASLB bought and approved it, as did NRC staff and the NRC Commissioners, against the environmental interveners' objections. At the time, Palisades and NRC staff assured that the RPV was good to go until 2014.
But, "the plan" all along was to simply weaken PTS regulations, yet again. This happened just a few years later. All of a sudden, Palisades would no longer violate PTS safety regulations by 2014. Now the RPV was good to go till 2017!
On May 25, 2012, NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko toured the problem-plagued Palisades plant, and met with two dozen local environmental advocates afterwards. They again stressed their concerns about RPV embrittlement and PTS risks. Incredibly, Jaczko indicated that yet another NRC re-evaluation, the application of yet another new computer model -- also known as pencil-whipping -- could yet again show that Palisades was "good to go" even beyond 2017.
Jaczko said this, despite the environmental coalition's handing him a just-published article by Citizens Nuclear Information Center-Tokyo (CNIC), written by Hiromitsu Ino, showing that Japanese PWR RPV embrittlement was much worse than previously predicted. A warning included in the CNIC article was the lack of actual physical data being examined by industry and regulatory authorities. Computer modeling and mere extrapolations had proven woefully inadequate at predicting the actual severity of embrittlement in Japan.
Palisades is an extreme example of this problem. Palisades' RPV embrittlement got so bad so quickly, that the RPV metal coupons were blown through in short order. Metal coupons are sample of metal in the reactor core, removed for examination to keep track of the severity of RPV embrittlement. Palisades currently has a single metal coupon left in its core. NRC and Entergy attempt to justify not removing it, because it is the last sample. Many years have passed since Palisades' last metal sample was removed and examined. They rely instead on mere computer modeling and extrapolations, in an attempt to determine how bad the embrittlement is currently. However, as Ino revealed in Japan, actual embrittlement could be much worse than predicted. Examining Palisades' last remaining metal coupon is the only way to tell for sure.
In her statements to Reuters this month, NRC Midwest regional spokeswoman Viktoria Mytling also indicated that NRC could well simply re-evaluate the status of Palisades' embrittled RPV (that is, lower its PTS safety regulations yet again), and allow Palisades to operate even beyond 2017. After all, NRC has already rubber-stamped its operating license out to 2031. Recently, the industry's Nuclear Energy Institute has floated the idea of beginning to apply for 80 year operating licenses, clearly in denial of the extreme safety risks such extended "breakdown phase" reactor operations -- as due to PTS -- would represent.
Palisades, and other PWRs with embrittled RPVs, must be shutdown, before they melt down. Please hold NRC's feet to the fire on this issue, by attending its March 19th Webinar!
Update on March 21, 2013 by
admin
Like Entergy itself (see entry above), NRC is also on the defensive regarding Palisades' reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement and pressurized thermal shock (PTS) risks. On March 18th, NRC issued its own clarification "***FOR THE RECORD***", entitled"PRESSURIZED THERMAL SHOCK AND PALISADES" (all caps and emphasis in original). This was one day before NRC conducted a Webinar on the subject, well attended by concerned local residents and environmental group watchdogs.
NRC's Webinar slides can be viewed here.
Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps was one of many participants whose questions went largely to entirely unanswered by NRC during the Webinar.
Update on March 29, 2013 by
admin
On March 25, NRC Region 3 Administrator Chuck Casto confirmed that 119 people attended the Webinar, asking a total of 85 questions.
Figure by Hiromitsu Ino, CNIC-TokyoAs reprinted at Yahoo Finance, Entergy Nuclear's site vice president at its Palisades atomic reactor in Covert, MI, has issued a statement standing by the integrity and safety of his badly embrittled reactor pressure vessel (RPV), vulnerable to a catastrophic fracture due to pressurized thermal shock (PTS). Such a fracture would lead to a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) in the reactor core, and probable meltdown.
