- - - - - - - - - -

March 14, 2007

What good is NRC, Commissioner asks, if public thinks we're captives of industry

NRC Commissioner Jaczko sees lessons to be learned from ongoing resistance to Skull Valley and some northeast nuclear plant licensing actions. He discussed them in a speech this week at NRC's annual Regulatory Information Conference. Here's excerpt from speech:

We must keep our regulatory focus on ensuring we are meeting the needs of our true customers... The NRC's true customers are the public as a whole...: The public grants applicants the right to possess and manage potentially harmful substances when they earn it from us by demonstrating they can and will meet the rules and requirements we establish.

The agency has made tremendous strides in meeting this goal, but I believe we can do better. For instance, we organize signing ceremonies for license approvals at the end of what are detailed, technical, and sometimes emotional license review processes. Representatives of the agency and licensees attend, and sometimes even local officials are present. We should aim for a level of such true customer service that these events would be attended not only by those members of the public, but also by every intervenor in the proceedings. They may not be in perfect agreement with every decision made during the process, just as the applicant probably is not, but they would believe their concerns have been heard and really addressed, and have faith in us as their trustees that public health and safety will be protected. This should be our goal, and is a good way to look at whether our focus is on the right process.

Let me give you a couple of examples of what I mean. In 1997 a consortium formed by eight large electric utility companies called Private Fuel Storage (PFS) submitted a license application to the Commission with the hope of operating an away-from-reactor spent nuclear fuel storage facility in Utah. Nine years later, the Commission approved a license. One would think that after almost nine years of exhaustive work to get a license, the applicant would waste no time beginning construction leading to eventual operations.

It is over a year later, however, and the applicant is no closer to building the facility today than it was back in 1997. Instead, members of the public whom the Commission's license is supposed to benefit, largely rejected our decision to issue the PFS license for a host of reasons. Somehow our process failed because the license we issued did not provide adequate assurance of public health and safety in the view of the members of the public most affected by the action - those who live near the site and those elected to represent them, including the government of the State of Utah.

I am not saying the NRC necessarily erred in issuing the licence, but because the process was flawed, the end result of years of regulatory work is the same as if the license had been rejected. A license granted should be a license implemented, and if it is not, there is obviously a problem. Now, I am not arguing for a longer review time, or that it is necessary to appease every party involved. But a license review that does a better job of addressing our customer's needs would ultimately be more efficient and effective, and probably even faster.

Let us take a look at another region of the country. A license issued by a federal regulator under a consistent regulatory regime should be just as valid in one part of our country as in another. But in the Northeast, the customer is very different and there are other challenges to the validity of our licensing actions. Here the social contract has gone so wrong that a wide variety of stakeholders across the political spectrum have called for independent safety assessments at several nuclear power plants.

Independent of whom, you might ask? Independent of the independent safety regulator. And it is important to note that these concerned customers include not only members of public interest groups but also elected officials from all levels of government.

I am on record as saying I do not believe that the independent safety assessment model from ten years ago is the most effective way to address this issue. But the continued requests for this action, again by a wide group of stakeholders from different states, demonstrate to me that we are not doing a good job of serving our customer.

Again, I am not saying that every idea any member of the public has should be adopted by the NRC. We should have a stable regulatory regime and our decisions must be based on sound scientific, technical, and regulatory policy. But they must also be based on sound public policy. This requires a subtle shift that will have profound ramifications. It requires clear public communication and education. It requires that the Commission lead, and provide the staff with the resources to accomplish the additional customer service work. And it requires that the Commission clearly convey that we see this effort as being a high staff priority.

Full text of speech is available here.

April 16, 2005

* Groups running radioactive exposure tour
AAP/Sydney Morning Herald

Organized by environmental groups Friends of the Earth, in Melbourne, and Campaign Against Nuclear Dumping, in Adelaide, the Radioactive Exposure Tour aims to show people first hand what happens in and around a uranium mine. Tour organiser Ila Marks said the nine-day journey would take in two mines, as well as meetings with Aboriginal communities living near them. The group will also look at the environmental effects of one of the mines on a collection of mound springs 150 km away. The tour, which left Adelaide on Saturday, will travel through Woomera and learn about the effects of British atomic weapon testing at Maralinga. Next is Roxby Downs where a tour guide from WMC Resources will take the group through the company's Olympic Dam mine. The group of 34 people will also visit the Beverly uranium mine. The tour costs $400 per person or $350 concession, which includes travel, accommodation and organic vegetarian food, plus rent to Aboriginal communities.

January 4, 2005

* UK - 1974 - govt covered up nuclear plant weaknesses re security, emegency preparedness

December 7, 2004

* Licensing Board denies intervenors' request to delay because of ADAMS shutdown

June 3, 2004

* Greenpeace, NIRS and UCS petition NRC to issue confirmatory orders for all regulatory commitments by power reactors

* Catawba MOX fuel use - ASLB invites oral public comment (June 15)

* Browns Ferry 1, 2 & 3 - license renewal meeting (June 11)

* Yankee Rowe License Termination Plan - public meeting (June 24)

* Nine Mile Point 1&2 license renewal - public meeting (June 16)

* Indian Point - NRC reply to neighboring Villages' safety concerns

May 24, 2004

* Fusion - prospects hurt by anti-nuclear public opinion in Europe

March 27, 2004

* PWR containment sumps - draft Generic Letter available for public comment (60-day comment period begins after Federal Register notice, which is expected soon)

March 18, 2004

Radwaste Task Force co-chair urged to resign

An editorial in today's Salt Lake Tribune calls for resignation of co-chairman of Utah state legislature's Hazardous and Radioactive Waste Task Force (Sen. Curtis Bramble, Provo), due to his apparant partiality towards Envirocare Bramble told attendees at a meeting in Toole that the acronym HEAL should stand for "Help Educate Anal Liberals." Two members of HEAL, whose actual name is Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, took offense and left the meeting. Their departure was accompanied by applause from supporters of Envirocare, which is a principal firm in the industry that the legislative task force is studying.

[Source: Salt Lake Tribune, editorial, A question of bias, March 18, 2004]

March 13, 2004

* NRC tells staff to improve communications with licensees, public and Commissioners

December 31, 2003

* Oyster Creek - local Township Committee (Ocean NJ) and Township Council (Berkeley NJ) pass resolutions requesting April 2004 decommissioning, citing plant age and other factors. NRC demurs.

December 9, 2003

* McGuire/Catawba license renewal - BREDL petition denied

* BREDL petition seen as impermissible "discovery" effort re: PRA

* McGuire & Catawba - extensive PRA info has been made available, although Duke and vendor proprietary info precludes releasing entire PRA

* Petitioners may hate the timeliness requirements, but otherwise, there would be no end to NRC licensing proceedings

* License renewal - NRC conducts NEPA evaluation of severe accident probability, consequences, and mitigation

* BREDL scolded by NRC for bordering on the frivilous

October 10, 2003

* France will, inexorably, renew its dependence on n-plants, sez industry minister; PM notes govt hasn't actually made any such decision yet, however

* France - govt running roughshod over public and technology in push for new n-plant, sez opposition

* France - n-power should be subject to referendum, sez environmentalist Hulot

October 9, 2003

* France - public energy debate coming soon; Fontaine wants EPR

August 19, 2003

Sweden - criminal charges against Barsebaeck plant referred to prosecutor

Sweden's Act on Nuclear Activities codifies a central tenet for reactor safety: "This is a basic principle, that you shut down if something's not right and you cannot immediately find out why", is how Judith Melin, Director General of the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI) described the requirement at a press conference today. SKI has concluded that Barsebaeck-2 management violated this requirement when it allowed the plant to continue operating after an unsuccessful January 3, 2003 attempt to correct an abnormal flow condition in feedwater system. The flow problem had been noticed months earlier. When the plant finally shut down on January 16, it was discovered that some components called thermal mixers, which had been replaced during summer outage, had broken and pieces had come loose. Christer Viktorsson, director of SKI's Reactor Safety Office, told the press conference that there was a risk of eventual fuel damage and safety margins were compromised.

The regulators concluded that the continued operation in the face of uncertainty represents a clear violation of the law, at least for the post-January 3 period, and very possibly even during prior period. This is the first time that SKI has referred criminal charges related to reactor safety to a prosecutor. The regulators also have concluded that there's a safety culture problem at the plant, and will not allow Barsebaeck to restart until specified improvements are made.

Barsebaeck management disagrees with the regulator's conclusions. Their position is that neither regulations nor laws were broken.

Barsebaeck, which is visible from Copenhagen, has some pretty adamant opponents in Denmark. Criminal charges don't seem likely to make any Danes feel better about the nearby plant. The low INES scale rating of the feedwater flow event (INES 1) may temper reaction from Denmark. But not all. Here's how Copenhagen Mayor Jens Kramer Mikkelsen reacted to SKI's announcement: "We've said for years that it's complete stupidity to have a nuclear plant so close to a major city. The Swedes have always defended themselves by saying that Barsebaeck has such good safety", Mikkelsen told the Danish newspaper Politiken. "Now, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has to stand up and say to the Swedes: 'Keep your promise to everyone in the region and close Barsebaeck.'" His opinion was echoed in Danish tabloid B.T.: "It is difficult to accept that our sister nation has completely ignored Danish protests about Barsebaeck for many years... Shouldn't the Swedes take the opportunity to take Danish protests seriously and take steps to shut down the doleful plant?... The cocky attitude to nuclear power characterises Swedish society, which is hierarchical and politically correct to a degree that's almost painful."

[Refs: Associated Press, "Swedish prosecutors asked to investigate alleged violation of safety standards at nuclear plant", August 19, 2003; BBC News, "European press review: Nuclear no", August 20, 2003; Radio Sweden (Stockholm), "Criminal investigation into Swedish nuclear power plant", August 20, 2003; and Ariane Sains (Stockholm), "SKI files legal case against Barsebaeck", Nucleonics Week, August 21, 2003, p. 1]

August 13, 2003

Japan - City to tax spent fuel rods

Japan: Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) has reluctantly agreed to accept a new local tax on spent nuclear fuel. The tax will be assessed by the city of Kashiwazaki in Niigata prefecture on spent fuel rods from TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant as early as this October. Reports indicate that TEPCO's acceptance is largely due to its recognition of the economic difficulties faced by communities near nuclear energy facilities. (Nuclear Market Review, 8 August, p2; see also News Briefing 03.24-14)

[Source: World Nuclear Association, WNA News Briefing NB03.32-13, August 12, 2003]

Canada: There is continuing public support for nuclear energy, but concerns remain regarding the handling of nuclear waste and plant safety, according to a public opinion poll conducted by Environics Research Group on behalf of the Canadian Nuclear Association (CNA). A total of 2018 Canadian adults were questioned between 12 June and 6 July 2003. The survey found that half of Canadians support the use of nuclear power for generating electricity. However, most Canadians tend not to perceive any tangible benefits associated with nuclear technology. A summary of the poll's findings is available on the CNA website. (FreshFUEL, 11 August, p4; see also News Briefing 96.45-14)

[Source: World Nuclear Association, WNA News Briefing NB03.32-1, August 12, 2003]