Nuclear powerU.S. nuclear industry resists stricter, post-Fukushima safety measures

Since the March 2011 Fukushima disaster, members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have been debating whether or not to impose even stricter safety measures on  the thirty-one U.S. boiling water reactors (BWRs).

Utility companies have been  fighting any new safety regulations, arguing that the security measures they have are more than enough.

The New York Times reports that one of the proposed new measures is putting filters on vents inside the nuclear facilities, which can cost as much as $45 million for each plant. The filters, which are required in Japan, can prevent radioactive particles from escaping into the atmosphere.

The nuclear industry  has held many meetings with the NRC staff, and has solicited dozens of letters of support from fifty-five members in Congress, letters which urge the NRC to reject the idea of requiring the expensive radiation filters.

“We all desire an ideal solution, but it needs to be an integrated one,” Maria  Korsnick, Constellation Energy’s chief nuclear officer told the  Times.

Korsnick and other industry officials say that putting filters on the vents isnot as effective as making sure that there is  an uninterrupted flow of water into the containment chamber to keep the fuel cool, reduce fuel damage, and absorb radioactive contaminants which escaped the fuel.

A method ensuring water flow  was demonstrated for two of the NRC’s five members earlier this year.

Commissioner William Odtendorff said in an interview that the demonstration was helpful. “I wouldn’t use the phrase lobbying,” Odentendorff told the Times. “I think there has been a high level of interest.”

Kritsine Svinicki, another member of the commission, had her reservations when it came to the filters at one point. “In order to feel that was needed,” Svinicki said last year of the filtered vents, “I would have to have a fundamental lack of confidence in so many other measures” before the staff had recommended in favor of filtered vents. “I simply haven’t been convinced of it.”

At this time it appears the industry is winning the battle, with two commissioners having questioned the necessity of  measures. Critics, however, are not convinced that the industry’s answer is the right one.

It is unclear whether the filters would be effective because the vents they would be attached to have never been used successfully in an accident at a modern commercial reactor, according to experts. During the Fukushima disaster, the vents failed.

During the demonstration by Constellation Energy, the owner of the Nine Mile Point plant on Lake Ontario, utility officials attempted to show commission members that  utility employees could handle emergencies without new devices, and that  emergency procedures were followed according to plan. NRC members, however,  are worried about an emergency which would  surprise reactor officials, or that something unexpected may happen during an emergency – something not covered by the elaborate emergency procedures developed by the utilities.

Representative John Barrow (D-Georgia) said in a letter which was signed by twenty-five other Democrats that the filters for the vents are “not justified on a cost-benefit basis,” something with which the commission agrees. The letter goes on to say the commission must “achieve the regulatory goal in the safest, most effective, and least costly manner.”

Instead of making across-the-board regulations, the nuclear industry wants the NRC to allow a plant-by-plant evaluation, leading to installing the filters  only in  reactors that do not meet safety standards.