[NukeNet] Nuclear Safety Rule Ignites Strong Reactions

[Diane Farsetta]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/14/ 
AR2008011402576.html

Nuclear Safety Rule Ignites Strong Reactions
By Cindy Skrzycki
Tuesday, January 15, 2008; D02


Federal regulators' narrow approach to solving one of the United  
States' biggest post-Sept. 11 fears -- a terrorist flying a plane  
into a nuclear power plant -- is under attack for adding to public  
safety concerns.

Comments filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last month said  
the agency's Oct. 3 proposal, which directs that only some new plant  
designs be assessed for risk to air attack, did not go far enough.

"By requiring only a limited subset of anticipated new reactors (less  
than half of the currently announced plants) to address aircraft  
impacts as part of the design, the NRC's proposed rule could  
undermine public confidence in new nuclear power plants," George  
Vanderheyden, president and chief executive of Unistar Nuclear Energy  
of Baltimore, told the agency in Dec. 17 comments.

Public acceptance of plant safety is considered critical to the  
rebirth of the nuclear industry, where there has been a de facto  
moratorium on new construction since the Three Mile Island accident  
in 1979.

The 104 existing reactors, which supply 20 percent of U.S.  
electricity, aren't covered by the proposed rule. Neither are unbuilt  
reactors whose designs already have been approved by the NRC.

Unistar intends to build a new reactor at Calvert Cliffs, Md., one of  
32 planned by 17 utilities. Its design hasn't yet been approved by  
the NRC, so it would need to assess the risk of a plane attack under  
the proposed rule.

Other nuclear industry officials agreed with Vanderheyden.  
Westinghouse Electric and GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, whose designs  
already have NRC approval and thus aren't covered by the proposal,  
said they would do the risk assessments anyway.

"We don't have to do it, but our customers would have had questions  
from the public on why that [plant] won't withstand an airplane  
crash," Ed Cummins, vice president of regulatory affairs and  
standardization at Westinghouse, said in an interview. The  
Westinghouse design is scheduled to be used in 14 reactors now in the  
planning stage.

The commission and the industry say security at nuclear plants has  
been increased since the 2001 terrorist attacks. The agency ordered  
operators to do more to respond to explosions, fires and other threats.

Adding protection from air attack, such as an extra containment  
structure, could cost more than $100 million per reactor, according  
to Adrian Heymer, senior director of new plant deployment at the  
Nuclear Energy Institute trade group in the District.

"This proposed rule is not necessary for adequate protection, but  
rather is an enhancement that will result in newly designed  
facilities being more inherently robust against aircraft impacts than  
the facilities not subject to this proposed rule," the agency said in  
introducing it.

"The NRC remains confident that even though the impact of a large  
aircraft would be a large industrial accident, the probability of a  
crash that would lead to radioactivity getting into the environment  
is very low," said spokesman Scott Burnell.

Nuclear activists scoff at the proposal.

"They are trying to conceal that they really aren't doing anything,"  
said Edwin Lyman, senior staff scientist for the Union of Concerned  
Scientists in the District.

The office of New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo filed  
comments saying: "It is folly to impose requirements necessary to  
fend off potential terrorist attacks only on new plants that won't be  
built for another 10-20 years, but to leave vulnerable to attack the  
existing fleet of 104 reactors."

New York has four nuclear facilities, including Indian Point Energy  
Center in Buchanan, about 50 miles north of New York City. It is  
owned by Entergy of New Orleans.

The comments from Cuomo's office noted that two of the hijacked  
planes on Sept. 11, 2001, flew near or over Indian Point on their way  
to the World Trade Center. They recommended that all aircraft be  
covered, not just the large jetliners cited in the proposal.

Opponents say it is imperative that a new generation of nuclear  
reactors be built to withstand an air attack.

"If you build in a post-9/11 world, you better damn well be able to  
withstand an airliner attack," said Jim Riccio, nuclear policy  
analyst for Greenpeace USA in the District.

Some critics, including one NRC commissioner, complained that the  
proposal doesn't compel reactor designers to take any specific action  
and lacks enforcement requirements.

"What if they do an assessment and it crumples like a pi¿ata?" Lyman  
said. "Does it have to be fixed? There is no requirement to take  
action on the results."

When the agency voted to go ahead with the proposal last April,  
Commissioner Gregory Jaczko cast the only "no" vote. He said the  
proposal didn't require applicants "to make one single design  
modification." And he criticized exempting already-approved designs.

In its comments, the Nuclear Energy Institute agreed that only new  
reactor designs should be required to do the risk analysis. The trade  
group said its members may voluntarily take part.

"Everyone will do an assessment," said Heymer.


Cindy Skrzycki is a regulatory columnist with Bloomberg News. She can  
be reached atcskrzycki at bloomberg.net.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.energyjustice.net/pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20080115/6e1d1c89/attachment.html