DEMOS NEWSLETTER
CATEGORIES

CONNECT

SEARCH
RECENT POSTS
TWEETS
FACEBOOK

LOGIN
SPECIAL PROJECTS

« First Amendment Rights? Frack No. | Main | Now THAT'S A Minimum Wage Increase »
Thursday
Feb022012

NRC Backtracks on Fire Safety Loopholes

Today, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a major decision that hints at an end to one of its' most irresponsible and dangerous practices, the issuance of secret 'exemptions" to its own fire safety rules. The NRC denied 42 of 47 "exemptions" from safety requirements at Indian Point sought by Entergy, the plant's owner.

The most offensive example of this is the "exemption" issued in 2007 by the NRC that permits Indian Point to operate with defective fire insulation on the electric cables that allow the reactor to shut down in an emergency. We've brought suit against this in Brodsky v NRC, currently awaiting oral argument before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. 

For years, and in literally thousands of occasions, Entergy and other operators of nuclear reactors, including Indian Point, have been granted secret NRC "exemptions" from fire safety rules intended to prevent a reactor meltdown. The laws governing the NRC do not allow for "exemptions" to fire safety rules. This practice is illegal and dangerous. 

The NRC is to the nuclear industry today what the SEC was to Wall Street four years ago. We must reform the NRC by assuring that specific fire safety requirements are met, and by ending the Soviet-style practice of secret and dangerous "exemptions" being continually given to the nuclear industry.

The NRC's new action focuses attention on two ongoing crises. First, it illuminates the extent of Indian Points non-compliance with crucial fire safety regulations. Second, and even more importantly, it shows how the NRC use of illegal “exemptions” has undermined public safety, the rule of law and the NRC's reliability as the protector of public health and safety.

There's still much room for improvement. What the NRC has not done is to allow for public notice and participation in these decisions, and it has not admitted that it has been acting illegally. And so the fight continues.


Reader Comments (1)

This rhetoric attacking the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reveals a severe lack of understanding of the amount of time and effort that engineers associated with both the NRC and the industry as a whole commit to enhancing the overall safety and practice of nuclear power generation; an emission-free source of reliable energy generation with ever increasing potential to liberate the United States from the grips of the foreign energy markets. The inane comment likening the NRC to the SEC before the financial crisis is absolutely baseless and deliberately undermines thousands of hard-working individuals committed to the goals mentioned above. In addition, the regulatory practices of the NRC over the years offer a stark contrast to the "Soviet style practices" of yore. The NRC stands out internationally as the standard of nuclear regulatory framework.

As a nuclear engineer I cannot deny the risks involved with nuclear power generation. It would be grossly irresponsible to understate the potential consequences of these risks. However, the vigorous licensing (and re-licensing) processes in place accounts for these risks and provides extensive and detailed engineering analysis to support the findings contained in the licensing documentation, which is independently verified by the NRC. Built in to the licensing process are periods for direct public participation. These documents are also publicly available through the NRC ADAMS library.

Overall, energy generation in the near future requires an substantial shift toward sources that are clean and independent of foreign influence. This is attainable through a combination of renewable sources (solar and wind) together with responsible implementation of nuclear power. Ultimately, this diverse mix will propel the United States toward the goal of reducing global carbon emissions while providing the ever increasing energy needed to support growth.

I welcome any comments or questions regarding the aspects of nuclear power generation and the future of nuclear technology, and will be happy to provide any information I can to help those interested in learning more.

March 14, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterMatt - Nuclear Engineer

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>