Group items tagged

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued its final safety evaluation report (SER) for the proposed renewal of the operating licenses for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, and concluded that there are no open items that would preclude license renewal for an additional 20 years of operation. The report documents the results of the NRC staff's review of the license renewal application and site audits of the plant's aging management programs to address the safety of plant operations during the period of extended operation. It represents the culmination of NRC's comprehensive review of the application and inspection of the plant to verify license renewal implementation is consistent with the application. Overall, the results show that the applicant has identified actions that have been or will be taken to manage the effects of aging in the appropriate safety systems, structures and components of the plant and that their functions will be maintained during the period of extended operation. Issuing the final SER is a significant milestone in the license renewal review process. This process proceeds along two tracks - one for review of safety issues and another for environmental issues. The SER marks the completion of the NRC staff's safety review that is published and subsequently reviewed and publicly discussed by the agency's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). The staff concluded its environmental review in March of this year when it issued the final supplemental environmental impact statement.

Ameren is seeking to remove a barrier in state law that will allow it to increase rates while it is building a $6 billion nuclear power plant. Ameren is telling lawmakers that without a change to the law, it won't get financing. Speaker of the House Ron Richard addressed the issue in his opening statement. Gov. Jay Nixon has addressed the issue. Senators have spoken to Ameren's lobbyists and know what the issues are. But at the seminar designed to educate senators on the issue, Ameren danced around the issue, as Crowell pointed out.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued three Confirmatory Orders to the United States Enrichment Corporation's Paducah, Ky., facility as part of settlement agreements involving three unrelated issues. One issue involved operators concealing damaged equipment and falsifying records while moving a uranium hexafluoride cylinder. In the second issue, classified information was mishandled when a package was sent to an unapproved mailing address. The third issue stemmed from a U.S. Department of Labor decision that USEC retaliated against a former manager and an NRC concern for the potential influence this would have on the willingness of other employees to raise safety concerns. In each case, USEC requested the alternative dispute resolution process, which includes the use of a mediator, to resolve its differences with the NRC concerning the apparent violations and to discuss corrective actions. The confirmatory orders document USEC's commitments to the NRC reached as part of the NRC's ADR process, which can be requested in place of traditional NRC enforcement. Often, the ADR process is more effective in developing effective long-term corrective actions than traditional enforcement.

Increased scrutiny for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station after regulators say improvements coming too slowly Operators of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station still have not made enough progress addressing issues in the plant's operation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission charges, more than a year after revelations that a worker falsified records to hide that he'd skipped hourly fire patrols, and six months after an announcement that a battery on a backup generator had been inoperable for years. In a March 4 letter to the plant's primary owner, Southern California Edison, the NRC says San Onofre still suffers from an inability to understand and address the underlying causes of problems, and from human-performance issues. "We've not been happy with the progress they've been making in addressing the issues we've identified," NRC spokesman Victor Dricks said. He added none of the issues are directly related to safety at the plant, and that the NRC plans to step up oversight and inspections until the issues are corrected.

"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is citing Florida Power & Light Co. for three violations and has proposed a $70,000 civil penalty against the company for an issue with the Unit 3 spent fuel pool racks at the Turkey Point nuclear power plant near Homestead, Fla., about 20 miles south of Miami. In December 2009, the NRC became aware that the neutron-absorbing material called Boraflex in the Unit 3 spent fuel pool had degraded below the levels spelled out in the plant's design basis documents. Although FPL had taken compensatory measures including the addition of soluble boron, the regulatory requirements that ensure the spent fuel pool remains safe were not met. The company's actions ensured the pool's condition did not pose an immediate safety concern, but the NRC found that FPL did not promptly identify and correct the condition. The NRC issued the civil penalty because the agency felt the company did not report the condition in a timely fashion. The NRC has determined that the issue has low to moderate safety significance and may result in additional inspections. The NRC staff held a regulatory and enforcement conference with FPL in April, and the company disagreed with some aspects of the NRC's evaluation. After considering information provided by FPL, the NRC staff issued its final determination including the three violations and $70,000 fine."

USEC Inc.'s hope for a loan guarantee to complete work on the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon was given new life Tuesday. The U.S. Department of Energy announced late Tuesday afternoon that it plans to delay a review of USEC's application until several specific technical and financial issues have been addressed. Those issues had been cited in late July as reasons for DOE to request USEC withdraw its application for $2 billion in loan guarantees seen as critical to completion of the American Centrifuge Plant. The unspecified amount of additional time is intended to allow USEC to fully address issues identified by DOE relating to the readiness of the company's uranium enrichment technology. DOE indicated it sees promise in the centrifuge process, but that USEC's application for the loan guarantee does not meet all statutory and regulatory standards that would allow it to be accepted.

USEC Inc.'s hope for a loan guarantee to complete work on the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon was given new life Tuesday. The U.S. Department of Energy announced late Tuesday afternoon that it plans to delay a review of USEC's application until several specific technical and financial issues have been addressed. Those issues had been cited in late July as reasons for DOE to request USEC withdraw its application for $2 billion in loan guarantees seen as critical to completion of the American Centrifuge Plant. The unspecified amount of additional time is intended to allow USEC to fully address issues identified by DOE relating to the readiness of the company's uranium enrichment technology. DOE indicated it sees promise in the centrifuge process, but that USEC's application for the loan guarantee does not meet all statutory and regulatory standards that would allow it to be accepted.

Vermont Yankee technicians failed to address in an adequate manner a safety issue related to a high-pressure coolant injection system, stated a report issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this week. But, said Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the NRC, because of its very low level of significance, and because the company has already entered the issue into its corrective action program, the NRC is treating it as a non-cited violation. "We'll be following up on the company's corrective actions in this area through our routine oversight," said Sheehan. The report was a once-every-two-years inspection the NRC conducts to look at a plant's problem identification and resolution program -- it's system for catching problems early and then fixing them before they can develop into significant issues.

If the owner of Vermont Yankee, Entergy Corp, issued a warning about Vermont Yankee, would that warning have credibility? Of course it would. With the company long touting its safety, a shift to issuing a warning about Vermont Yankee would get attention. Well, Entergy has been issuing a warning -- but we've just not noticed it as a warning. At the legislative hearing on Dec. 2, Sen. Bill Carris, D-Rutland, questioned Entergy's Vice President, Jay Thayer, asking, "I don't think we understand the 'Why?'" But Mr. Thayer provided legislators with no satisfactory answer as to why Entergy was making such efforts to spinoff Vermont Yankee and five others of its aging nuclear power plants. There is a good reason, one found in Entergy's own recent history with another of its spinoffs. That history may be even closer to the mark than the analogy frequently made with Verizon's sale to Fairpoint and its subsequent bankruptcy. In light of Entergy's actual experience with this other spinoff, its efforts to spin off Vermont Yankee can best be understood as a serious warning. Entergy is the company that saved hundreds of millions of dollars by letting its New Orleans subsidiary go bankrupt after Katrina.

If the owner of Vermont Yankee, Entergy Corp, issued a warning about Vermont Yankee, would that warning have credibility? Of course it would. With the company long touting its safety, a shift to issuing a warning about Vermont Yankee would get attention. Well, Entergy has been issuing a warning -- but we've just not noticed it as a warning. At the legislative hearing on Dec. 2, Sen. Bill Carris, D-Rutland, questioned Entergy's Vice President, Jay Thayer, asking, "I don't think we understand the 'Why?'" But Mr. Thayer provided legislators with no satisfactory answer as to why Entergy was making such efforts to spinoff Vermont Yankee and five others of its aging nuclear power plants. There is a good reason, one found in Entergy's own recent history with another of its spinoffs. That history may be even closer to the mark than the analogy frequently made with Verizon's sale to Fairpoint and its subsequent bankruptcy. In light of Entergy's actual experience with this other spinoff, its efforts to spin off Vermont Yankee can best be understood as a serious warning. Entergy is the company that saved hundreds of millions of dollars by letting its New Orleans subsidiary go bankrupt after Katrina.

Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact for Modification of Exemption From Certain NRC Licensing Requirements for Special Nuclear Material for Waste Control Specialists, LLC, Andrews County, TX AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared an Environmental Assessment for the issuance of an Order under Section 274(f) of the Atomic Energy Act that would modify an Order issued to Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) on November 5, 2004. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.33, the NRC prepared a draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for public review and comment that was issued on July 9, 2009 (74 FR 34983). The public comment period closed on August 10, 2009. NRC received comments from one resident of Texas. The current action is in response to a request by WCS dated December 10, 2007. The November 5, 2004 Order was published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2004 (69 FR 65468). The November 5, 2004 Order, which modified an initial Order issued to WCS on November 21, 2001, exempted WCS from certain NRC regulations and permitted WCS, under specified conditions, to possess waste containing special nuclear material (SNM), in greater quantities than specified in 10 CFR Part 150, at WCS's facility located in Andrews County, Texas, without obtaining an NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70.

Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact for Modification of Exemption From Certain NRC Licensing Requirements for Special Nuclear Material for Waste Control Specialists, LLC, Andrews County, TX AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared an Environmental Assessment for the issuance of an Order under Section 274(f) of the Atomic Energy Act that would modify an Order issued to Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) on November 5, 2004. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.33, the NRC prepared a draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for public review and comment that was issued on July 9, 2009 (74 FR 34983). The public comment period closed on August 10, 2009. NRC received comments from one resident of Texas. The current action is in response to a request by WCS dated December 10, 2007. The November 5, 2004 Order was published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2004 (69 FR 65468). The November 5, 2004 Order, which modified an initial Order issued to WCS on November 21, 2001, exempted WCS from certain NRC regulations and permitted WCS, under specified conditions, to possess waste containing special nuclear material (SNM), in greater quantities than specified in 10 CFR Part 150, at WCS's facility located in Andrews County, Texas, without obtaining an NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70.

The UK nuclear safety regulator (HSE's ND), the French nuclear regulator (ASN), and the Finnish nuclear regulator (STUK) are currently working to assess the EPR Pressurised Water Reactor. In carrying out individual assessments, we have all raised issues regarding the EPR Control and Instrumentation (C&I) systems, which the proposed licensees and/or the manufacturer (AREVA) are in the process of addressing. Although the EPR design being developed for each country varies slightly, the issues we raised with the current C&I system are broadly similar, our aim being to collectively obtain the highest levels of safety from the EPR. The issue is primarily around ensuring the adequacy of the safety systems (those used to maintain control of the plant if it goes outside normal conditions), and their independence from the control systems (those used to operate the plant under normal conditions).

The UK nuclear safety regulator (HSE's ND), the French nuclear regulator (ASN), and the Finnish nuclear regulator (STUK) are currently working to assess the EPR Pressurised Water Reactor. In carrying out individual assessments, we have all raised issues regarding the EPR Control and Instrumentation (C&I) systems, which the proposed licensees and/or the manufacturer (AREVA) are in the process of addressing. Although the EPR design being developed for each country varies slightly, the issues we raised with the current C&I system are broadly similar, our aim being to collectively obtain the highest levels of safety from the EPR. The issue is primarily around ensuring the adequacy of the safety systems (those used to maintain control of the plant if it goes outside normal conditions), and their independence from the control systems (those used to operate the plant under normal conditions).

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

Bill Wickersham knows the look well. Eyes glaze over, feet start tapping and people begin to look at their watches. It's the overwhelmed or disinterested look he gets when he starts talking about the dangers of nuclear warfare. "Our tendency is to behave like the ostrich and stick our head in the sand," said Wickersham, an adjunct professor of peace studies at the University of Missouri. That attitude of avoidance for many in the nuclear movement has reached dangerous levels. Yesterday, Jonathan Schell, one of the godfathers of the nuclear issue, urged a crowd of about 100 in Fisher Auditorium at MU to bring the issue back to the fore of the nation's consciousness. He said the world today is as oblivious to nuclear issues as it was in 2004 to the looming financial crisis. And the pot is boiling.

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

The NRC has initiated a Special Inspection at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in response to a shutdown of the reactor early on July 12. The inspection got under way today at the plant, which is located in Lacey Township (Ocean County), N.J., and operated by Exelon. Among other things, the team of four NRC inspectors will be tasked with reviewing whether any equipment issues, design deficiencies, communication challenges and/or operator performance issues complicated the event. The Special Inspection will expand on reviews conducted by the NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to Oyster Creek immediately after the shutdown. Assisting the team on a part-time basis will be the NRC's Senior Resident Inspector at the plant. "While the plant was safely removed from service during the event, several equipment issues arose during the shutdown that we believe bear closer examination," NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said. "Through this Special Inspection we intend to gain a better understanding of these issues, including the actions taken by plant operators in response."

"Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin today expressed disappointment with Exelon Nuclear's response to a state order requiring the company to take more proactive steps to protect the public from a 2009 leak of radioactive tritium into aquifers beneath the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Lacey. A May 14 letter issued by Exelon downplays the DEP's concerns about the issue and contends the DEP order created public alarm, while also suggesting the DEP does not have authority over issues at Oyster Creek. "Exelon needs to stop making legal arguments about this issue and spend its time ensuring that tritium does not further contaminate New Jersey's drinking water supply,'' said Commissioner Martin. "The DEP is in charge of protecting drinking water in the state of New Jersey. Anything that would endanger a New Jersey aquifer is of great concern to us and demands an aggressive DEP response.''"

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a Request For Proposals (RFP) for the Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) of the former Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon. According to DOE officials the project's estimated cost is $2.5 -$3.2 billion over 10 years. "Based on comments received on the draft RFP, DOE has issued the final RFP to emphasize accelerated D&D completion within an increased funding profile assumption, DOE stated in a released statement about the issuance of the RFP.

Whether of the extremely radioactive high-level, long-lived kind or the short-lived, low-level type, the issue of nuclear waste and methods of its disposal remain one of the most pressing problems facing the nuclear sector. "Technical solutions for waste disposal do exist and they are certainly safe," explains Didier Louvat, who heads the IAEA´s Waste and Environmental Safety Section. "However, what has been missing so far is a uniform, international approach to this issue at a normative level."

Whether of the extremely radioactive high-level, long-lived kind or the short-lived, low-level type, the issue of nuclear waste and methods of its disposal remain one of the most pressing problems facing the nuclear sector. "Technical solutions for waste disposal do exist and they are certainly safe," explains Didier Louvat, who heads the IAEA´s Waste and Environmental Safety Section. "However, what has been missing so far is a uniform, international approach to this issue at a normative level."

Groups from Maryland Ally with 3 other States with Reactors Up for Loan Guarantees to Speak Out in Opposition; DOE Liberalization of Rules Would Expose Taxpayers to Billions of Dollars in New Defaults Taxpayers will be put at significant new risk for billions of dollars if the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) moves ahead in the coming days and weeks to issue its first set of controversial taxpayer-backed, conditional loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, according to 18 national and state-level public interest groups from Maryland, Georgia, Texas and South Carolina. In a joint statement issued today, the groups called on DOE to put the issuance of loan guarantees on hold given the unacceptable financial risks placed on the taxpayer, the poor track record of the DOE with past loan guarantees and the lack of transparency in the loan guarantee decision-making process.

Groups from Maryland Ally with 3 other States with Reactors Up for Loan Guarantees to Speak Out in Opposition; DOE Liberalization of Rules Would Expose Taxpayers to Billions of Dollars in New Defaults Taxpayers will be put at significant new risk for billions of dollars if the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) moves ahead in the coming days and weeks to issue its first set of controversial taxpayer-backed, conditional loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, according to 18 national and state-level public interest groups from Maryland, Georgia, Texas and South Carolina. In a joint statement issued today, the groups called on DOE to put the issuance of loan guarantees on hold given the unacceptable financial risks placed on the taxpayer, the poor track record of the DOE with past loan guarantees and the lack of transparency in the loan guarantee decision-making process.

"Issue #156 - July 2010 The Sunflower is a monthly e-newsletter providing educational information on nuclear weapons abolition and other issues relating to global security. Help us spread the word and forward this to a friend. Visit www.wagingpeace.org/donate to help sustain this valuable resource by making a donation. To receive our free monthly e-newsletter subscribe at www.wagingpeace.org/subscribe * Perspectives o British Petroleum, Imagination and Nuclear Catastrophe by David Krieger o Nuclear Deterrence Scam Blocking Progress to a Safer World by Commander Robert Green * US Nuclear Weapons Policy o US and Japan Reaffirm Nuclear Pact * Nuclear Disarmament o US Conference of Mayors Calls for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons * Nuclear Proliferation o China Bends International Rules to Sell Reactors to Pakistan o Myanmar May Have a Nuclear Program * Nuclear Labs o Plans for New Kansas City Nuclear Plant Move Forward * Nuclear Testing o US Tests Nuclear-Capable Missiles o Russia to Strengthen Nuclear Testing Capabilities * Nuclear Energy and Waste o Australian Union Bans Nuclear Work o Nature Preserve on Uranium Enrichment Site * War and Peace o Israel Stations Nuclear Subs Near Iran * Iraq War o US Opposes Effort to Include Aggression as a Crime * Resources o ICAN Report on the NPT Review Conference o 2010 Global Peace Index * Foundation Activities o Waging Peace Today: New NAPF Blog o Sadako Peace Day Commemoration: August 6 o NAPF Internship Program"

"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission set ground rules Wednesday for appeals of this week's ruling that sidetracked plans to scrap a Yucca Mountain nuclear waste license. The agency issued a one-page order setting a July 9 date for appeals and arguments on why the decision issued by an agency legal panel should not be overturned. Follow-up briefs are due July 16. Attorneys and officials who follow the Yucca Mountain case interpreted it as a sign that the commission wants to address the issue sooner rather than later. It was widely expected that the leaders of the regulatory agency would have the final word after the initial ruling. Based on the schedule for legal briefs and the amount of time taken for the commission to resolve a matter last year in the Yucca case, it is possible that a final decision could come around mid-August, according to Charles Fitzpatrick, an attorney representing Nevada."