NRC can’t document assertions made in denial of nuclear emergency planning petition

Traffic on New York's Tappan Zee bridge can be a nightmare under the best of circumstances. In a natural disaster--ice storm, snow storm, hurricane, earthquake, compounded by a nuclear accident, the transportation network may be nearly impossible to navigate. Yet the NRC doesn't require emergency drills to train personnel to attempt to cope with such situations.

Traffic on New York’s Tappan Zee bridge near the Indian Point reactors can be a nightmare under the best of circumstances. In a natural disaster–ice storm, snow storm, hurricane, earthquake, compounded by a nuclear accident, the transportation network may be nearly impossible to navigate. Yet the NRC doesn’t require emergency drills to train personnel to attempt to cope with such situations. Photo by Vincent DiSalvio, Journal News

Earlier this month, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission denied a petition for rulemaking submitted by Nuclear Information and Resource Service and 37 organizational co-petitioners that sought to increase the size of Emergency Planning Zones around nuclear reactors and improve training for emergency workers. The petition was based on lessons drawn from real-world nuclear accidents—most recently Fukushima, but also Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. The NRC chose to ignore the real-world implications of those accidents and denied the petition in its entirety.

One component of the petition would have required every other emergency drill (i.e. once every four years) to include a scenario involving regionally-appropriate natural disasters as either initiating causes of a nuclear accident or occurring concurrently with a nuclear accident. In its denial, the NRC rejected this component, stating: “The majority of nuclear power plant licensees currently incorporate natural or destructive phenomena into their drill and exercise scenarios.” (emphasis added).

In follow-up correspondence with NRC staff, NIRS asked for documentation of this statement. The resulting e-mail exchange, including our questions and NRC’s answers, can be viewed here:

To this question, the NRC Project Manager wrote, “I cannot provide documentation for this statement because documentation is not available for many drills.” He went on to say that the basis for using the word “majority” is that “Experienced NRC inspectors have indicated that nuclear power plant licensees regularly incorporate natural or destructive phenomena
into their drill and exercise scenarios.”

This hardly translates into documentation of the NRC’s assertion. And it also raises another question: how can it be that “documentation is not available for many drills?” What use is a drill that provides no lessons learned and leaves no trail of its existence? That statement itself lacks credibility.

The NRC was able to link to two emergency exercises (in Arizona and North Carolina) that included an earthquake as an initiating factor, and one that included a tornado (in Maryland, where a tornado nearly did hit the Calvert Cliffs nuclear site a couple years ago). However, in the Arizona case at least, while the scenario included an earthquake powerful enough to cause a steam generator tube rupture and offsite release of radiation, the earthquake apparently stopped at the plant gates, since there was no indication that any roads or transportation networks were damaged and the simulated evacuation proceeded as if under normal conditions.

The agency could not provide documentation of its assertion that a “majority” of emergency exercises include a natural disaster component nor could it provide evidence that any exercises involved disruption of roads and other transportation networks—which is highly-likely to be the case in a major earthquake, ice storm, hurricane, etc. While exercises do not, in fact, involve moving real people as if in an evacuation, the result of not including such scenarios means emergency workers are not receiving adequate training to handle transportation disruption. This reality leaves emergency personnel, at the utility and state and local government levels, unprepared and thus the American people less protected than they should be.

As we stated in announcing the NRC’s denial of our petition, “The NRC has failed the American people.” This remains true; not only are NRC’s emergency exercises apparently not the majority NRC asserted, they are not providing the level of training required to handle real-world nuclear accidents. Federal legislators should take note.

Note: this post is an expanded version of a press release issued by NIRS on April 30, 2014.

Michael Mariotte

May 1, 2014

Permalink: https://safeenergy.org/2014/05/01/nrc-cant-document-assertions/

You can now support GreenWorld with your tax-deductible contribution on our new donation page here. We gratefully appreciate every donation of any size–your support is what makes our work possible.

Comments are welcome on all GreenWorld posts! Say your piece above. Start a discussion. Don’t be shy; this blog is for you.

If you like GreenWorld, you can help us reach more people. Just use the icons below to “like” our posts and to share them on the various social networking sites you use. And if you don’t like GreenWorld, please let us know that too. Send an e-mail with your comments/complaints/compliments to nirsnet@nirs.org. Thank you!

Note: If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail daily, send your name and e-mail address to nirsnet@nirs.org and we’ll send you an invitation. Note that the invitation will come from a GreenWorld@wordpress.com address and not a nirs.org address, so watch for it.

Advertisements

One thought on “NRC can’t document assertions made in denial of nuclear emergency planning petition

  1. Buzz Davies Nuclear Quality Engineer, Retired

    On March 31, 2013 The Arkansas Nuclear was with out internal or emergency diesel or Grid power to run its cooling pumps for eleven hours and was venting superheated steam from SCRAMED Reactor 2 for that entire time. Fukushima with a same configuration reactor system, ran out of water, exposed the core, releasing Hydrogen gas and blew the top off its containment building after fourteen hours. This country was within a few hours of a nuclear catastrophy that would have contaminated the corn belt, disrupted our international grain trade and caused economic havoc with the stock market. The insurance that the NRC touts as protection from nuclear damages would collapse along with the monetary system.
    You need to know that the NRC has for decades been illegally licensing Nuclear Plants across this country to operate without inclusion of 10CFR50 Appendix B NQA-1 requirements. Without Nuclear Quality Assurance Programs there simply is NO Assurance of Safety at any Plant, Indeed what has been put in place is a fudalistic management infrastructure that has historically been prone to failures in all forms of operations e.g. Chemical Plants , Oil Companies , and Mines to name a few..
    These failures only get worse as Plants age and staff familiar with the idiosyncrasies retire.
    We then have a three year ago Concerned Nuclear Engineers report of 50 Nuclear Plants with significant problems. Two years ago 62 of 104 Nuclear Plants in this country experienced emergency shutdowns (SCRAMS) an astronomically unlikely statistic and certainly evidence of NO Nuclear Quality Programs at those Plants.
    Let’s not forget Three Mile Island which failed due to NO Emergency Training of Personnel (Emergency Training of Presonnel is a Quality Function) Twenty Five Years later the NRC with all its corruption has done nothing to mitigate management systems prone to failure.and that simple overlooked tertiary failure will be the straw that ends in nuclear catistrophy for our nation.
    The NRC as it currently is organized is unfit to license or regulate the commercial industry and is the primary Nuclear Threat to our National Security!
    .

    Reply

We welcome your comments here!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s