Obama fronts for US nuclear power industry

[Karmadillo]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/nucl-m30.shtml

Obama fronts for US nuclear power industry
By Tom Eley
30 March 2011

<edit>

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has insisted there is no need for new regulation or oversight, and there will be no moratorium on either the continuation of old plants or the construction of new ones. It has even granted a 20-year extension to a problem-riddled nuclear Vermont Yankee plant, whose reactor is a replica to that of the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

The White House position is indistinguishable from that of the US nuclear energy industry itself. As was the case in the BP Gulf oil disaster, its overriding concern with the unfolding catastrophe in Japan is the defense of the multi-billion dollar energy firms that control the US nuclear industry—including Exelon, to which Obama’s two closest political associates—former Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel and top adviser David Axlerod—are intimately linked.

<edit>

These and other revelations paint a clear portrait of a nuclear energy industry that is dangerously mismanaged and virtually unregulated by government agencies, which consistently bow to its profit interests.

The NRC has responded with indifference. The extension of the Vermont Yankee license was announced in a form letter and without further comment. In response to the inspector general’s report that more than 25 percent of plants were not reporting safety problems, the NRC responded by calling the issue an “administrative” problem.

more...

[ReggieVeggie]

1. kick and rec

[leveymg]

2. Presidents come and go, but Plutonium is forever.

The half-life of this industry is about 80 million years. It will continue poisoning American politics until after all the marble in Washington turns to dust. Only the roaches will outlive it.

[Octafish]

22. Ahem. There is something more long-lived than roaches, my friend.

Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep.

[tahrir]

3. It's very apparent were our leaders interest are - their corporate masters

it's like a sick joke, that everyone in power thinks is as right as rain.

[Buzz Clik]

4. So... the NRC and the nuclear industry are one and the same? And Obama is the NRC?

:silly:

[kristopher]

14. What do you think the relationship is between the NRC and the industry they regulate?

Perhaps incidents like this cause you no concern, but it doesn't give most people confidence when a football sized hole in a reactor head is discovered when it is a literally a fraction of an inch from disaster. Do you see how thick the reactor head is? How long do you think it took the boron to eat through that much high grade steel?
Why did that happen?



http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head-degradation/images.html

Davis Besse: Incident history

Over the years of its operation, the plant has experienced several incidents, none of which have resulted in exposure to dangerous levels of radiation.


On September 24, 1977, the reactor, running at only 9% power, shut down because of a disruption in the feedwater system.<4> This caused the relief valve for the pressurizer to stick open. As of 2005, the NRC considers this to be the fourth highest ranked safety incident.<5>

Loss of feedwater event
On June 9, 1985, the main feedwater pumps, used to supply water to the reactor steam generators, shut down. A control room operator then attempted to start the auxiliary (emergency) feedwater pumps. These pumps both tripped on overspeed conditions because of operator error. This incident was originally classified an "unusual event" (the lowest classification the NRC uses) but it was later determined that it should have been classified a "site area emergency".<6>

Tornado
On June 24, 1998 the station was struck by an F2 tornado.<7> The plant's switchyard was damaged and access to external power was disabled. The plant's reactor automatically shut down at 8:43 pm and an alert (the next to lowest of four levels of severity) was declared at 9:18 pm. The plant's emergency diesel generators powered critical facility safety systems until external power could be restored.<8><9>


Erosion of the 6-inch-thick (150 mm) carbon steel reactor head, caused by a persistent leak of borated water.



Reactor head hole

In March 2002, plant staff discovered that the boric acid that serves as the reactor coolant had leaked from cracked control rod drive mechanisms directly above the reactor and eaten through more than six inches<10> of the carbon steel reactor pressure vessel head over an area roughly the size of a football (see photo). This significant reactor head wastage left only 3/8 inch of stainless steel cladding holding back the high-pressure (~2500 psi) reactor coolant. A breach would have resulted in a loss-of-coolant accident, in which superheated, superpressurized reactor coolant could have jetted into the reactor's containment building and resulted in emergency safety procedures to protect from core damage or meltdown. Because of the location of the reactor head damage, such a jet of reactor coolant may have damaged adjacent control rod drive mechanisms, hampering or preventing reactor shut-down. As part of the system reviews following the accident, significant safety issues were identified with other critical plant components, including the following: (1) the containment sump that allows the reactor coolant to be reclaimed and reinjected into the reactor; (2) the high pressure injection pumps that would reinject such reclaimed reactor coolant; (3) the emergency diesel generator system; (4) the containment air coolers that would remove heat from the containment building; (5) reactor coolant isolation valves; and (6) the plant's electrical distribution system.<11> Under certain scenarios, a reactor rupture would have resulted in core meltdown and/or breach of containment and release of radioactive material. The resulting corrective operational and system reviews and engineering changes took two years. Repairs and upgrades cost $600 million, and the Davis-Besse reactor was restarted in March 2004.<12> The U.S. Justice Department investigated and penalized the owner of the plant over safety and reporting violations related to the incident. The NRC determined that this incident was the fifth most dangerous nuclear incident in the United States since 1979.<3>

Criminal prosecutions
On January 20, 2006, the owner of Davis-Besse, FirstEnergy Corporation of Akron, Ohio, acknowledged a series of safety violations by former workers, and entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice. The deferred prosecution agreement relates to the March 2002 incident (see above). The deferment granted by the NRC were based on letters from Davis-Besse engineers stating that previous inspections were adequate. However, those inspections were not as thorough as the company suggested, and as proved by the material deficiency discovered later. In any case, because FirstEnergy cooperated with investigators on the matter, they were able to avoid more serious penalties. Therefore, the company agreed to pay fines of $23.7 million, with an additional $4.3 million to be contributed to various groups, including the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Habitat for Humanity, and the University of Toledo as well as to pay some costs related to the federal investigation.
Two former employees and one former contractor were indicted for statements made in multiple documents and one videotape, over several years, for hiding evidence that the reactor pressure vessel was being corroded by boric acid. The maximum penalty for the three is 25 years in prison. The indictment mentions that other employees also provided false information to inspectors, but does not name them.<13><14>

2008 discovery tritium leak
The NRC and Ohio EPA were notified of a tritium leak accidentally discovered during an unrelated fire inspection on October 22, 2008. Preliminary indications suggest radioactive water did not infiltrate groundwater outside plant boundaries<15>

2009 unintentional discharge of firearm
In November 2009, a plant security officer was using the restroom and his firearm discharged while in the holster. The officer sustained a non life threatening wound to his calf. No cause was found for the discharge.<16>

2010 Replacement reactor head problems
After the 2002 incident, Davis-Besse purchased a used replacement head from a mothballed reactor in Midland, Michigan. Davis-Besse operators replaced the original cracked reactor head before restarting in 2004. On March 12, 2010, during a scheduled refueling outage, ultrasonic examinations performed on the control rod drive mechanism nozzles penetrating the reactor vessel closure head identified that two of the nozzles inspected did not meet acceptance criteria. FirstEnergy investigators subsequently found new cracks in 24 of 69 nozzles, including one serious enough to leak boric acid. Root cause analysis is currently underway by the Department of Energy, First Energy, and the NRC to determine the cause of the premature failures.<17> <18> Crack indications required repair prior to returning the vessel head to service. Control rod drive nozzles were repaired using techniques proven at other nuclear facilities. The plant resumed operation in 2010. The existing reactor vessel head is scheduled for replacement in 2011.<19>


Future

The facility's original nuclear operating license expires on April 22, 2017. On August 11, 2006 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) submitted a letter of intent (Adams Accession No. ML062290261).<20> The submission date for the application is August 10, 2010. This initiates a long process that results in an application approval or revocation. Public hearings<21> are a vital part of any application review and information on this process can be found on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) website at NRC.gov. <4>. The site map contains many valuable links <22>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis-Besse_Nuclear_Power_Station#cite_note-21


This page was last modified on 16 March 2011 at 22:20.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

That is a sketch of the facts. Below, the is the 28 page policy analysys by the Union of Concerned Scientists puts them into a meaningful framework built around the relationship between the industry and its regulators.

Davis-Besse: One Year Later
Nearly one year ago, on March 6, 2002, workers repairing a cracked control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) nozzle at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in Ohio discovered a football-sized cavity in the reactor vessel head.1 Their finding is linked to two other discoveries 15 years earlier. On March 13, 1987, workers at Turkey Point Unit 4 in Florida discovered that a small leak of borated water had corroded the reactor vessel head. Their revelation prompted the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to require all owners of pressurized water reactors,2including Davis-Besse, to take specific measures to protect plant equipment from boric acid corrosion. On March 24, 1987, the NRC learned that control room operators at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in Pennsylvania had been discovered sleeping while on duty. That revelation prompted the NRC to issue an order on March 31st requiring Peach Bottom Unit 3 to be immediately shut down.3

The three findings spanning 15 years are intertwined. Turkey Point demonstrated that a small amount of boric acid leaking onto the reactor vessel head corrodes carbon steel at a high rate. Had the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, the owner of Davis-Besse, remembered Turkey Point’s lesson, the serious damage at Davis-Besse would have been averted. Peach Bottom demonstrated that a pervasive safety culture problem creates unacceptable conditions for operating a nuclear power plant. Had NRC remembered either Turkey Point’s or Peach Bottom’s lesson, they would have issued the order they drafted to shut down Davis-Besse. It would have been the first shut down order issued by the agency since the Peach Bottom order. But both FirstEnergy and the NRC forgot the past and relived the wrong event from March 1987 by having yet another reactor vessel head damaged by boric acid corrosion.

Many individuals, from both within and outside the NRC, have accused the agency’s move towards risk- informed decision-making as the reason for its failure to issue the order to shut down Davis-Besse. On the contrary, the NRC’s handling of circumferential cracking of control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) nozzles as reported by the Oconee nuclear plant in February 2001 was a successful demonstration of proper application of risk-informed decision-making with the sole and significant exception of its mistake in not issuing the shut down order for Davis-Besse. But even that mistake, as bad as it was, does not impugn the risk-informed decision-making process for the simple reason that the NRC deviated from that process. Had the NRC adhered to its risk-informed decision-making process, it would have issued the shut down order for Davis-Besse and capped off a stellar example of how this process can and should be used.

In February 2001, the NRC learned of a new aging mechanism, the circumferential cracking of stainless steel CRDM nozzles based on inspection results from Oconee. The NRC properly reacted to this finding by revisiting the nuclear industry’s inspection regime for CRDM nozzles. It determined that the existing inspection regime did not provide adequate assurance that circumferential cracks would be identified and repaired. The NRC did not require all plant owners to immediately address this inspection shortfall, which would have imposed an unnecessary regulatory burden on those plants with low susceptibility for the problem. Nor did the NRC allow all plant owners to address the shortfall at their next regularly scheduled refueling outage, which would have imposed an unnecessary challenge to safety margins at those plants with high susceptibility. Instead, the NRC applied risk-informed decision-making by issuing Bulletin 2001-01 in August 2001 to all owners of pressurized water reactors. This Bulletin required the high susceptible reactors to resolve the inspection shortfall by December 2001, the medium susceptible reactors to resolve the inspection shortfall at their next regularly scheduled outage, and merely collected information from the low susceptible reactors.

Only two reactors with high susceptibility for circumferential cracking of CRDM nozzles did not conform to the inspection requirements...

At this point, the NRC abandoned its risk-informed decision-making process.....

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nuclear_power/davis-besse_retrospective_030303db.pdf

[Buzz Clik]

21. Incompetence equals corruption, and the NRC is guilty? And Obama is guilty by association?

Yikes.

:tinfoilhat:!!

[kristopher]

25. So you can't even be bothered to READ the evidence?

Yeah, you *really care* about the issue.

[Buzz Clik]

27. More infallible logic: I disagree with your conclusions, so I must be ignorant.

Brilliant!

Try to wrap your brain around this: you and I have examined the same evidence and come to different conclusions. I know, I know -- this is the first time in the history of mankind that such a thing has happened, but what can I say?

Let's go way overboard and give you the NRC as guilty as hell on this issue -- they have been bought and paid for by the nuclear industry, and the will do their bidding no matter what. Where's your evidence that Obama is part of this scheme?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

31. Obama and Exelon

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_backroom_deal.html

Both the Obama campaign and Exelon strongly deny these charges, while acknowledging "contacts" between Obama staffers and Exelon officials on the nuclear bill. For the record, Obama has not received any corporate contributions from Exelon. But senior Exelon executives have contributed more than $160,000 to Obama's presidential campaign and $46,000 to his 2004 Senate run.

[kristopher]

33. Part of what "scheme"? Are you saying that Obama isn't in bed with the nuclear industry?

Clinton is the one that made the charge, and it is turning out that she knew what she was talking about.

I have no problem at all with disagreement, all you need to do is support your position with solid evidence. That isn't too much to ask. You say you've examined the same evidence and come to different conclusions, then show where in the evidence WE'VE examined there is support for your assertions. It isn't hard if there actually is merit to your position.

Of course, if your position has no merit, then evasions and "sour grapes" are just what would be expected, no?

[Buzz Clik]

34. I have to provide solid evidence that Obama is NOT held hostage by the nuclear industry?

Brilliant.

I swear. DUers grow dumber every day.

[kristopher]

39. You can't have a straight discusssion, can you?

Obama is only part of the discussion - the other part is the regulatory apparatus and its inability to prevent major problems within the industry that Obama is promoting.

He came in promising to follow the science, and he has instead turned out to be a devotee of political expediency.

[Buzz Clik]

46. Sorry, but there's just something about baseless conspiracy theories that I find laughable.

This one is my latest muse.

[defendandprotect]

45. Take a look at Rahm Emmanuel confirming how "grateful" big business s/be to Obama --!!

Here's Rahm Emmanuel crowing about how much they've done for big business!!

Rahm .... crowing about preserving "private health care industry" ... business s/b grateful!+

”In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care

preserved the private delivery system;

the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18...



The Rightwing Koch Bros. Funded the DLC --

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

[Buzz Clik]

47. Errr... the nuclear industry is now selling health care insurance?

Focus.

[defendandprotect]

48. Forgive me -- when you make back room deals with health care robbers it, of course,

doesn't mean that you'll also make back room deals with nuclear industry!!


:rofl:

if it weren't so sad -- !!

[defendandprotect]

44. Where's the evidence that corporate money has bought our government ???

Then why are we all so concerned about the SC Citizens United decision?

It's meaningless, right?


Monsanto isn't running the FDA -- ?

EPA isn't hiding pollution?

BP is just another friendly corporation -- nothing to do with oil being

part of "national security state" ?

Sugar industry not trying to influence decisions from government?

Nothing unusual going on in the banning of marijuana?

Obama didn't make back room deals with Big Pharma and private health care industry -- ??

Obama simply didn't think the nation wanted or needed MEDICARE FOR ALL -- !!

Except by 76% and more the nation supported single payer, government run health care!!

Here's where the trampling of citizens rights enters the picture ...


Here's Rahm Emmanuel crowing about how much they've done for big business!!

Rahm .... crowing about preserving "private health care industry" ... business s/b grateful!+

”In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care

preserved the private delivery system;

the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18...



The Rightwing Koch Bros. Funded the DLC --

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

[defendandprotect]

40. Same with all government agencies now ... Monsanto's FDA ...

Polluters' EPA --

No more Labor in Labor Dept?

When you buy candidates and elected officials, eventually you own government!!

Corporatism is fascism!!

[inna]

5. painful

[SidDithers]

6. Unrec for wsws...nt

[inna]

7. gladly re-rec for ya, thanks for for reminding

good job

:thumbsup:

[SidDithers]

9. Ain't democracy grand...nt

Sid

[Le Taz Hot]

10. And another.

For once, perhaps you can actually offer a counter argument. Blind devotion doesn't count.

[SidDithers]

13. My counter argument is that I don't believe wsws is an appropriate source for this website...

IMO, they publish agenda-driven articles with the goal of defeating Democrats. They're, in effect, engaging in 3rd party advocacy.

YMMV.

Sid

[kristopher]

15. Let me guess, you heartily approve of groups like "The 3rd Way" though, right?

Is their material more suitable for a progressive website than wsws?

[SidDithers]

17. You'd guess wrong...nt

Sid

[Le Taz Hot]

16. You know, this is my fault.

I wasn't clear in my request. I assumed it was understood that counter arguments would be supported by actual citations so, if you will. . .

[SidDithers]

18. I'm expressing an opinion, that's all...

That's still allowed, isn't it?

You're free to disagree, or try to convince me that my opinion is wrong. But I'm not terribly inclined to attempt to justify my opinion to you.

Sid

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[closeupready]

19. "for once, perhaps you can" - unlikely.

Considering.

[closeupready]

20. If you're unreccing, I'm reccing.

:hi:

[Octafish]

23. Rec for truth.

The country could use some, seeing how the capitalist stooges of Corporate McPravda have yet to tell the truth on just about anything of import to We the People for the longest fucking time.

[dionysus]

24. whatchu got against the comrades bro?

:P

[Forkboy]

28. Yesterday you agreed with my post about paid trolls...

...and how we should take each individual opinion for what's it worth. You agreed that the merit of an idea stands or falls on it's own, yet here you don't care about the idea, just where it comes from. It totally undermines what you said in your own post about paid trolls yesterday. Which is it? Do you take each idea and weigh it on it's own merits or not? You said one thing yesterday but now demonstrate the complete opposite today.

[SidDithers]

29. Articles at wsws are not posts at DU...

at DU we have no way of knowing the the motivation of posters, so speculation is useless. We have to rely only on what they post.

At wsws, we clearly know the biases and agenda of the site. They make no bones about who they are and where they're coming from.

Different responses to different situations.

Sid

Edit: added "We have to rely only on what they post".

[Forkboy]

32. Sounds a lot like trying to have your cake and eat it to, Sid.

Neither you or I make any bones about where we're coming from, either. Should I discount everything you say from here on in because it's not my personal starting point?

Edit to add - It's not my favorite source either, but the point remains. :)

[girl gone mad]

49. I think it's safe to assume that you do have biases..

and perhaps even an agenda of your own.

[Catherina]

8. The cynicism is painful. Rec'd n/t

[Generic Other]

11. when does the government plan to hand out suicide pills?

We ought to have the option of killing ourselves rather than waiting for them to get around to it. FUCKING MURDERERS.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

30. Wait until someone thinks of a price for it and if it will be sold at Walmart.

[defendandprotect]

41. You mean the cynanide tablets? We're not allowed to know -- !!

[amborin]

26. In Illinois, Obama

watered down waste disposal regulations protecting the aquifer......

this after promising to strengthen those same regs

in between, came campaign donations from Exelon Corp......

[in_cog_ni_to]

36. YEP! As soon as Obama received his HUGE campaign donation, he watered down that bill

to NOTHING. He left the decision to report leaks up to the Nuclear Industry (because they're all so forthcoming), where he initially called for an IMMEDIATE report of any nuclear plant leak.

[Cascadian]

37. Mr. Obama......why?

Didn't what has taken place in Japan give you a reality check? Didn't it give anybody a reality check? Wake up!



John

(The Cascadian is back!)

[defendandprotect]

42. What about Obama's own children and family? Can you really NOT care about citizens ....

but still say you care about your family? I don't think so!!

We need a humanist in the White House -- and we damned well better

be sure about what we're doing with the next president --

How about Helen Caldicott? Oops! She's Australian --

Hey, we have tons of dems who can run on a Democratic ticket --

and many humanitarians among them!!

[upi402]

38. Two facts for nuke supporters again again

1) You can't make even a simple mechanical system that will not fail

2) If you think you've made a thing fool-proof, you seriously have no idea who you're dealing with


No 'Nuke-Away!', no nukes.

[defendandprotect]

43. Come on...Why do we all fear corporate $$, because we know what it does ... !!