U.S. NRC Blog

Transparent, Participate, and Collaborate

Tag Archives: NRC

Heeding the Sirens – Despite A Few Mishaps

Victor Dricks
Senior Public Affairs Officer
Region IV

sirenResidents of St. Charles Parish, Louisiana, who live within the 10-mile emergency planning zone for the Waterford 3 nuclear plant, got an unexpected benefit last week when 37 emergency sirens were sounded for a tornado warning.

St. John Parish is similarly protected by 36 sirens. But thousands of other residents who live in surrounding parishes have no sirens.

The reason: The NRC and FEMA work together to make sure the commercial nuclear power plants in this country have sirens around their sites to alert the public in the event of a serious incident. Various federal, state and local agencies also have emergency notification systems they can use to alert the public to a variety of emergencies — including one at a nuclear plant.

“The people of St. Charles Parrish got the benefit of the emergency sirens that surround Waterford 3,” said Ron Perry, the Director of Emergency Preparedness for Homeland Security in St. Charles Parish.

Each nuclear plant is required to exercise its emergency plan with offsite authorities at least once every two years – which includes checking the siren systems. This helps make sure the plant operator, and state and local authorities, can implement their emergency plans if needed. If all goes according to plan, the interface among all these agencies is seamless.

But things do not always go as planned.

Last year, while preparing for an upcoming emergency exercise at the plant, the National Weather Service inadvertently alerted the public around the Cooper Nuclear Station in Brownville, Neb., of an unspecified emergency at the plant. The weather service was updating the wording of messages stored in a computer system when someone pushed the wrong button. This sent an advisory to various news media organizations and some members of the public.

The weather service quickly realized what happened and sent a message explaining the error to the media 13 minutes later. But, the mishap received plenty of news coverage.

Unfortunately, this was the second recent incident about emergencies at the Cooper nuclear plant. On July 24, Nebraska Public Power District workers were working on a computer system that controls sirens in Nemaha County when a false alarm was broadcast.

There have been two other similar incidents at Region IV nuclear plants in recent memory:

Last summer, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. workers were upgrading their siren system around Diablo Canyon when they inadvertently activated one at 3:30 in the afternoon. It sounded continuously for 14 minutes before workers were able to deactivate it remotely. It took 10 minutes before county officials sent out an advisory noting the error. Some people vented their anger about all the confusion on the county’s Facebook page, and several local TV stations and the Associated Press carried reports about the incident.

sirenNot a week later, something similar happened in Washington State. During a training class at the state Emergency Operations Center, a staffer inadvertently faxed a partially filled out form for an Alert (the second lowest level of nuclear emergency) at Columbia Generating Station. The fax went to nine different emergency management agencies, including one in Canada. A second fax was quickly sent out correcting the error.

The NRC is primarily concerned with the reliability of sirens. The NRC tracks the performance of licensee alert and notification systems by measuring the number of successful siren tests conducted quarterly at each plant. These types of incidents are embarrassing to all involved and in each instance corrective actions have been taken to minimize the chance of future mishaps.

But the bottom line is that residents in the communities around nuclear power plants need to heed the warning, and trust the emergency alert systems. A few false alarms should not change their response. If you hear a siren, or get a text message on your phone announcing an emergency, please heed the warning.

Plenty of Progress to Report on Fukushima-related Enhancements

Scott Burnell
Public Affairs Officer

fukushimaThe NRC’s technical staff, industry executives and a public interest group will brief the Commissioners Thursday on the agency’s efforts to implement what we’ve learned from the Fukushima nuclear accident. The bottom line is the NRC is ahead of schedule on several fronts.

Some of the best news involves U.S. reactors meeting requirements from two of the NRC’s Fukushima-related Orders issued in March 2012. By the end of this spring, almost a quarter of the U.S. fleet will comply with the Mitigation Strategies and Spent Fuel Pool Instrumentation Orders. We expect more than half the fleet will meet those Orders by the end of December, which is a full year before the Orders’ deadline.

Every U.S. reactor will comply with the instrumentation requirements by the December 2016 deadline. Every reactor will also comply by that time with a major Mitigation Strategies requirement – additional, well-protected onsite portable equipment to support key safety measures if an extreme event disables a plant’s installed systems. The U.S. industry has already set up two response centers with even more equipment that can be transported to any U.S. reactor within 24 hours. By the time we say good-bye to 2016, almost every reactor will also have made all modifications needed to use those portable systems. In preparing to meet the deadlines, U.S. reactors have already enhanced their ability to keep the public safe.

About a dozen plants will have made all those modifications except changes closely related to the third Order, which requires Hardened Vents for reactors with designs similar to those at Fukushima. These vents would safely relieve pressure in an emergency and help other systems pump cooling water into the core. All the reactors subject to the Order have completed plans for the first set of vent enhancements or installation of new vents.

The NRC staff finished reviewing these plans earlier this month, ahead of schedule, and issued written evaluations to each plant. The agency is also about ready to issue guidance on how these plants can meet the second part of the Order, which involves an additional vent or other methods to protect the structure surrounding the reactor.

The staff’s presentation will also cover topics including revising the NRC’s rules in these areas, as well as the ongoing effort to re-evaluate flooding hazards for all U.S. nuclear power plants. The NRC’s regional offices will provide their perspective on the overall implementation effort’s progress.

NRC & Your Community – The Video

Ivonne Couret
Public Affairs Officer

Every work day, 3,000+ of your friends, neighbors, relatives and community members head to their jobs at the NRC. They’re headed to one of four regional offices, our large headquarters site, our teaching facility in Tennessee or are stationed at one of the nearly 100 nuclear power plants around the country. They’re managers, technical staff, nuclear experts, lawyers, librarians, inspectors, accountants and more.

NRC & your community logo_clrThis “people” perspective is often lost in larger conversations about rulemaking, concerns about radiation, and the risks and benefits of nuclear power. But the NRC is much more than a large regulatory body. It’s an organization made up of people who care – people just like you.

So a class of the next generation of NRC leaders – called the Senior Executive Service Candidate Development Program – decided to make a video focusing on the people behind the NRC seal, and how they help support society as a whole and the communities in which they – and you – live.

So, please take a few minutes to watch the video. We’ll also be presenting this at public meetings, making it available to schools and community groups, and augmenting it with other materials as part of a broader information campaign.

Throwback Thursday — The First Swearing-In

hpfirstswearinginThe first NRC Commissioners were sworn in during a ceremony at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 23, 1975. In addition to the NRC Commissioners, the photo includes Vice President Nelson A. Rockefeller and what other high-ranking dignitary?

Western U.S. Reactors are Completing Their Seismic Picture

Lauren Gibson
Project Manager
Japan Lessons-Learned Division

An ongoing lesson from 2011’s Fukushima Dai-ichi accident involves U.S. reactors better understanding their earthquake hazard. Reactor owners in the Western parts of the country have had to assemble a particularly complex jigsaw puzzle of seismic information. They’ve just sent the NRC their detailed re-analysis.

seismicgraphicThe graphic shows the three pieces of information U.S. reactor owners have used to analyze their specific hazard:

  • Where quakes are generated (seismic source)
  • How the country’s overall geology transmits quake energy, (ground motion/attenuation) and
  • How an individual site’s geology can affect quake energy before it hits the reactor building (site amplification).

Central and Eastern U.S. reactors benefitted from region-wide updated earthquake source information and a model of quake energy transmission for the first two pieces. Plants west of the Rockies, however, had to deal with the West’s more active and interconnected faults.

Columbia, Diablo Canyon Part I and Part II and Palo Verde used the Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) approach to develop site-specific source models and ground-motion models. This group of independent seismic experts develops guidance on major seismic studies such as this. The group has met several times the past few years to ensure the Western plants properly conduct and document their seismic activities.

The NRC carefully considers SSHAC comments and recommendations before the agency comes to its own conclusions on seismic issues. We’re currently evaluating the Western plants’ reports and will issue our short-term screening and prioritization review later this spring.

As for the Central and Eastern U.S. plants’ March 2014 submittals, we screened them to determine what other actions the plants might have to take. Plants that have more to do were grouped into three priority groups with staggered deadlines. Many of those plants submitted additional analyses in December 2014, and the NRC continues reviewing both that information and the March 2014 submittals.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,669 other followers

%d bloggers like this: