Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant Unlikely To Restart Before Fall

BLAIR, Neb. (AP) — Federal regulators said Wednesday it's unlikely the Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant will restart before fall because of the extensive inspections and repairs needed.

Officials from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Omaha Public Power District met in Blair, a few miles from the plant that's about 20 miles north of Omaha. The meeting is part of the strict oversight regulators have imposed on Fort Calhoun because of problems at the plant.

The NRC's Troy Pruett said he expects the agency will be conducting detailed inspections at Fort Calhoun through the summer. After that, NRC officials will review the situation before deciding whether the plant is ready to restart safely.

"I've got a summer's worth of inspections to be done," Pruett said.

OPPD Chief Nuclear Officer Dave Bannister said the utility knows there is more work to do to get Fort Calhoun ready to restart.

"We clearly understand our need to improve our performance," Bannister said.

Fort Calhoun has been shut down since last April when OPPD began performing routine refueling maintenance. The plant remained closed last summer because floodwaters surrounded the plant for months amid massive flooding along the Missouri River.

Regulators are watching Fort Calhoun closely because it has been closed so long and because several problems were found at the plant over the past couple years unrelated to last summer's flooding.

OPPD officials faced several pointed questions from people in the audience who are concerned about the plant. Jane Heinrich said she wants to know what the utility will do to regain her trust and the trust of everyone else who lives in Blair.

"It's unsettling to live just a few miles from the plant," Heinrich said.

Bannister said his family also lives close to the plant, and he is working hard to make sure it is well run.

"The safety of the plant is first and foremost to me," Bannister said.

OPPD hired a new plant manager for Fort Calhoun from Exelon, which is the largest U.S. operator of nuclear power plants. Mike Prospero started in February.

Prospero said Fort Calhoun is ready to handle any flooding that might come this spring and summer along with Missouri River. Most of the damage from last year's flooding has been repaired, and OPPD's flood plans have been updated to reflect the lessons.

Utility officials said earlier this year that they expected to be able to restart Fort Calhoun sometime this spring. Now the restart date is unknown because the NRC will have to sign off on all the repairs and changes OPPD makes to Fort Calhoun before it can restart.

The problems at the plant don't represent a public safety threat, according to regulators and utility officials, but additional scrutiny is required because of them.

The operational problems that regulators have found include a fire last spring that briefly knocked out power to the cooling system for used fuel. That fire started in an electrical breaker that had been replaced about 18 months earlier.

During the fire, smoke and soot spread into Fort Calhoun's backup electrical system and knocked that out as well.

The NRC said OPPD officials were also too slow to notify state emergency response officials about the fire when it happened.

Regulators also found flaws in the utility's analysis of how the plant would withstand different accident conditions such as earthquakes, tornadoes or loss of coolant.

A key electrical part failed during a 2010 test at Fort Calhoun. That same year the NRC identified deficiencies in flood planning at the plant.

Recently, OPPD officials have had problems with the sirens Fort Calhoun uses to warn area residents about problems. The utility said it also has backup notification plans.

The NRC will determine whether the siren problems should also be considered a safety issue.

___

Online:

NRC page on Fort Calhoun: http://1.usa.gov/GBq2TF

Omaha Public Power District: www.oppd.com

Also on HuffPost:

From our partners

• Widespread Greenland Melting A Sign Of Things To Come - Climate Central
• Limiting Methane Leaks Critical To Gas, Climate Benefits - Climate Central
• 11 Images And Facts About A Misunderstood Creature - Mother Nature Network

Comments

[Rob2tall]

12:14 PM on 05/28/2012

I'm all for responsible nuclear power-but building near rivers,oceans,and large natural bodies of water is totally irresponsible and ought to be avoided at all costs to prevent massive environmental damages as well as far removed from urban populations.
In the early 1980s I worked in engineering in piping design for a nuclear design corporation and was astounded at how many plants are built on fault lines and the oceans edge,major rivers etc.
The intent was clear-a readily accessible supply of water to cool a reactor during failure to prevent a major meltdown-all at the cost of destroying major water supplies and everything in them.

[mdinoregon]

03:13 PM on 04/06/2012

Fukushima Daiichi Site: Cesium-137 is 85 times greater than at Chernobyl Accident

........I was asked to make a statement at the public hearing of the Budgetary Committee of the House of Councilors on March 23. I raised the crucial problem. of N0.4 reactor of Fukushima containing1535 fuel rods. It could be fatally damaged by continuing aftershocks. Moreover, 50 meters away from it exists a common cooling pool for 6 reactors containing 6375 fuel rods!

It is no exaggeration to say that the fate of Japan and the whole world depends on NO.4 reactor. This is confirmed by most reliable experts like Dr. Arnie Gundersen or Dr. Fumiaki Koide.

http://akiomatsumura.com/2012/04/682.html

Fukushima region was Japans breadbasket, now contaminated for about 500 years.
Luckily nobody farms in Nebraska.......oh, wait.....

[Jtt]

04:45 AM on 04/06/2012

And :

I believe there are almost no residents of Fukushima Prefecture who have reached the level of 20 millisieverts per year. The estimated dose in Fukushima over 30 days, according to personal dosimeter calculation values from when I carried out my surveys, was 1.0 millisieverts or less in the 20-kilometer area around the plant and its surrounding area from April to May, and also from June to July, while the dose in the area between Aizu and Fukushima City was 0.10 millisieverts or less. From the above, I estimate that the annual external exposure for citizens of Fukushima Prefecture in 2011 will be 10 millisieverts or less, while most people will be exposed to five millisieverts or less. ( http://www.yokosojapan.net/article.php/fukushima0123_life_en )

If these are correct the people of japan have been done a horrible disservice by the press and anti nuclear groups.

[ibsteve2u]

04:50 AM on 04/06/2012

A "horrible disservice"? Are you suggesting that they should have remained within the environs of the Fukushima nuclear facility and just kept absorbing nucleotides? Perhaps the good doctor's measurements are low because the people got the [....] out of there?

[Jtt]

11:24 AM on 04/06/2012

There has been a many problems with mental illness and suicides. I am suggesting not making people live in fear in what was already an extremely stressful situation would have been better.

[Jtt]

11:39 AM on 04/06/2012

Evacuation was mandatory.

Inflating the numbers in the press - extending point readings to larger samples (which is a form of introduced error) dashed hope and caused people to give up in related situations they should not have - the stress being FAR more detrimental to health than the actual radiation.

There.

[stephengn1]

04:06 PM on 04/06/2012

That must be why so many children are already showing early symptoms in the development of thyroid cancer

[Jtt]

04:36 PM on 04/06/2012

A SINGLE SOURCE to back up your claim?

To lie and mislead about something so serious is despicable.

[Rob2tall]

12:26 PM on 05/28/2012

It takes many years to actually develop cancer from exposure to this radiation.Japan Radiation Survey Conducted In March Shows 1 In 20 Fukushima Children Will Develop Thyroid Cancer
Japan has finally released a nuclear radiation survey that reveals that 45% of Fukushima children had sustained thyroid radiation exposure by the end of March. Despite government attempts to downplay the survey results the data shows that at least 1 in 20 children will develop thyroid cancer.
But you need to realize this is down the road-it does not occur right away.Children and seniors are at high risk.Due to their immune systems tolerances. Many will suffer.A majority who are showing signs of cancers now received a larger dose of radiation and were closer to the plants.This could also be from consumption of foods and teas that were thought to be safe-but as studies emerged later-were proven otherwise.

[ibsteve2u]

04:45 AM on 04/06/2012

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/04/lots-of-radioactivity-but-little-risk-in-oceans-seafood-near-fukushima.ars

Quote:

Although the land near the Fukushima nuclear reactors was heavily contaminated by the aerial release of radioisotopes, the majority of the radioactive releases drifted out over the Pacific. There, they were joined by substantial amounts of water that were discharged from the reactors directly into the ocean. A new study, based on data from a NOAA research vessel, takes a look at radioactivity levels near Japan a few months after the disaster. The data suggests that the highest estimates of radioactive discharges are likely to be accurate, but the rapid dilution of the water has kept the levels from Fukushima's isotopes below those of the naturally occurring radioactivity.

[...]

134Cs was present at levels that produced 325 becquerel (325 decay events per second) per cubic meter as far as 600km offshore. A small eddy in the prevailing currents, located closer to shore, had activities of 3,900Bq per cubic meter. In general, however, there had not been sufficient time for the radioisotopes to mix vertically; the vast majority of the hot cesium was present within 100m of the surface. Sampling the sea life, including plankton and fish, also revealed the presence of radioactive cesium, although not consistently, and at levels substantially lower than seen in the seawater. Radioactive cesium isn't normally present in seawater, so these numbers are above a baseline that's essentially zero.

End quote.

[Jtt]

04:41 AM on 04/06/2012

So if these tests are correct I wonder if we will see more press on the matter:

Reality of Low Fukushima Doses

Within one month of the accident, the maximum thyroid dosage of 66 individuals whom I tested, including those tested in Namie-machi, was 8 mSv (the proper specialized unit would actually be milligray), or between one-thousands and ten-thousandth of Chernobyl victims. These levels preclude thyroid cancer caused by radiation.

I tested 87 individuals for total body cesium radioactivity in the cities of Minami Soma, Koriyama, Iwaki, Fukushima and Nihonmatsu and across all of Fukushima Prefecture, from newborns to adults. Out of this number, 83% were below the detection limit (10 Becquerels(Bq) or less per kilogram).

For the remaining 17%, the individual with the largest reading was 165 Bq per kilogram—an estimated annual dose of 0.4 mSv, which is completely within the range of safety, because the annual average dose for internal exposure globally from natural radiation is 1.3 mSv. The value is lower than that. ( http://www.gepr.org/en/contents/20120220-01/ )

[Genders]

12:12 AM on 04/19/2012

No you did not test anybody. what a fantasy....Go upstairs and tell you mom you have been a bad boy....

[Jtt]

04:31 AM on 04/06/2012

Then look at this by an ACTUAL RADIATION EXPERT on the human exposure:

Professor Dr. Jun Takada of Sapporo Medical University is a specialist in Radiation Protection. He earned his doctorate in Physics at Hiroshima University Graduate School of Science in 1990. He went on to conduct research at the James Franck Institute at the University of Chicago; the Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine (RIRBM) at Hiroshima University; and the Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute (RURRI). He has been working at Sapporo Medical University since 2004. He has studied the effects of radiation in multiple locations in the world including Hiroshima, Chernobyl, the Marshall Islands, Kazakhstan, and Kroraina on the Silk Road.

First, let me tell you about the areas outside the 20 kilometer radius around the Fukushima reactor including places like Iitate Village, from which people were forced to evacuate. I was able to confirm that neither external radiation that hit people from the outside nor internal radiation consumed in the form of food or drink was at a level that would be harmful to human health.

The biggest concern was internal radiation in the form of cesium. Between June 2011 and February 2012, I examined 87 people, and even those with the highest levels of radiation showed as little as 0.4 millisieverts per year. ( http://global.the-liberty.com/2012/1691.html )

[Jtt]

03:55 AM on 04/06/2012

Hmmmmmm

"the amount of iodine-131 escaping from all the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi was less than 10 percent of the amount released at Chernobyl, and the release of caesium-137, the next most important fission product, was less than 15 percent of the Chernobyl total." (article on slate mid march)

[Jtt]

03:41 AM on 04/06/2012

The Pacific ocean ( http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm ) has, naturally occurring,

600000000 Ci Uranium
200000000000 Ci Potassium 40
10000000 Ci Tritium
80000000 Ci Carbon 14
19000000000 Ci Rubidium 87

219690000000 Ci Total.

60000000 Ci were released from Fukushima. But a good deal of that has decayed. (
131 I decays with a half-life of 8.02 days )

[Jtt]

04:14 AM on 04/06/2012

Probably Fukushima is more like 10 million. Or less. 60 was too high. Thats what I get for listening to posters around here and not checking the scientific estimates myself.

[Jtt]

04:22 AM on 04/06/2012

Experts say its less - Even in japan now it was less.

According to estimates by the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency and the Nuclear Safety Commission, the cesium released from Fukushima is one-sixth to one-eighth the level of Chernobyl's fallout

Such levels of contamination were found 250 km from the Chernobyl plant, or eight times farther than from the Fukushima plant, the report said.

In 1986, some parts of Norway as far as 1,700 km from Chernobyl saw radiation spike to 40,000 becquerels of cesium per square meter, a condition seen only within 250 km of the Fukushima No. 1 plant, the report added.
( http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120315a4.html )

Thats the problem with people who are trying to hype and push an agenda that don't follow up and check anything.

"ENEnews" what a total load.

[idyl]

11:03 AM on 04/06/2012

You do realize you are commenting (and arguing) with your own post ... do you not? One comment is enough, not five on the same topic (and arguing with yourself in the same thread).

[Jena Jena]

02:11 AM on 04/06/2012

Unfortunately the close-minded individulas who only educate themselves through information fed to them from the same corps running the plants are convinced nuclear power is safe are too ignorant to realize otherwise because they can't physically SEE the radiation, plutonium and tritium that is being released from EVERY nuclear power plant. Cancer stats alone should indicate something is wrong. Man-made radiation is damaging cells and DNA.

Residents should just be asked to use 20% less electricity (unplug electronics and appliances when not in use) and we'd all cancel out the little contribution nuclear power generates for the entire U.S. Nuclear power was never intended to produce anything more than the materials the gov needed to make bombs. We have enough bombs now, we don't need nuclear power.

[Jtt]

02:36 AM on 04/06/2012

[citation needed]

BTW electric use grows 1 percent per year in the US.

There are about 600 coal powered plants in the US:

At one extreme, the scientists estimated fly ash radiation in individuals' bones at around 18 millirems (thousandths of a rem, a unit for measuring doses of ionizing radiation) a year. Doses for the two nuclear plants, by contrast, ranged from between three and six millirems for the same period. And when all food was grown in the area, radiation doses were 50 to 200 percent higher around the coal plants. ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste )

The radiation released is the least of your worries.

[idyl]

04:04 PM on 04/06/2012

Correct ... it's the risks of an accident, high environmental and social/political costs, national security, long-term fuel availability, and the waste storage practices around coal and nuclear that should concern us more.

[Genders]

12:17 AM on 04/19/2012

electrical use down last couple years. efficiency up.

All radiation is different. Coal ask is no where near as deadly as reactor waste.

We don't need fossil nor nukes.

rooftop pv is cheaper than nukes and clean coal, wind and waste are half that.

faster to install, cleaner forever, 24/7 using the waste in fossil plants.

Cancers caused by radioactive particles from nuclear power has kill million of people.

\that's worth worrying about....

[maslin]

02:51 AM on 04/06/2012

Safety is a concept that works best by comparison. Here's a comparison for you.

Coal power (which generates about 50% of electrical power in the US, as well as by far the largest CO2 emission) kills 13,200 Americans every year from microparticulate emissions alone, or if you prefer, about 35 Americans a day. Coal has other emissions as well, such as radiation from fly ash, and CO2 that is warming the climate (which in turn holds a non-zero chance of making the Earth uninhabitable for us).

By contrast, nuclear power in the US generates about 20% of electricity, emits no CO2 (and therefore is not contributing to climate change) and has killed zero civilians in its 40 year history from emissions. Again, that number is zero.

[idyl]

04:18 PM on 04/06/2012

Zero deaths at power plant from acute radiation exposure (for the US). But tell that to Lucy Knorr on the Navajo Reservation, or 23,408 other claimants who have received compensation as part of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act in the US:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/us/uranium-mines-dot-navajo-land-neglected-and-still-perilous.html

Try and also tell that to the workers and families surveyed in the largest epidemiological study of power plant workers to date, and reporting on evidence of health risk from low dose exposure to 20 mSv/year (and below).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1667/RR0553.1

If you folks with to report the truth, why not start with some actual facts for once?

[Jtt]

10:22 PM on 04/05/2012

I missed this from last year - I imagine most did:

Northwest Oyster Die-offs Show Ocean Acidification Has Arrived

It was here, from 2006 to 2008, that oyster larvae began dying dramatically, with hatchery owners Mark Wiegardt and his wife, Sue Cudd, experiencing larvae losses of 70 to 80 percent. “Historically we’ve had larvae mortalities,” says Wiegardt, but those deaths were usually related to bacteria. After spending thousands of dollars to disinfect and filter out pathogens, the hatchery’s oyster larvae were still dying.

For the past six years, wild oysters in Willapa Bay, Washington, have failed to reproduce successfully because corrosive waters have prevented oyster larvae from forming shells. Wild oysters in Puget Sound and off the east coast of Vancouver Island also have experienced reproductive failure because of acidic waters.

ocean acidification continues apace, which makes understanding what’s been happening to Whiskey Creek oysters vital to grasping what will eventually threaten every ocean organism that builds a shell or coral branch. ( http://e360.yale.edu/feature/northwest_oyster_die-offs_show_ocean_acidification_has_arrived/2466/ )

[Jtt]

10:50 PM on 04/05/2012

We are approaching a extinction event not seen in the history of mankind. Perhaps one not seen in tens of thousands of years if not more.

[Jtt]

12:16 AM on 04/06/2012

Make reactors safe and clean as you can, install thousands of windmills and rooftop solar everywhere. Dont shutter nuclear capacity if is viable and dont do anything to increase C02.

[mdinoregon]

08:37 PM on 04/05/2012

World is ignoring most important lesson from Fukushima nuclear disaster

Fukushima's most important lesson is this: Probability theory (that disaster is unlikely) failed us. If you have made assumptions, you are not prepared. Nuclear power plants should have multiple, reliable ways to cool reactors. Any nuclear plant that doesn't heed this lesson is inviting disaster.

A year has now passed since the complete core meltdown of three boiling water reactors at Tokyo Electric Power Company’s Fukushima No.1 plant. Because of the limited information issued by the Japanese government – and its insistence that the disaster was only a result of the unanticipated magnitude of the earthquake and tsunami – the world does not know what really happened and will thus draw the wrong lessons.

The most critical lesson for the global nuclear industry to learn, since most plants around the world do not face tsunami or earthquake risks, is that no one imagined that the external electricity supply from outside the plant that would cool the reactors could be disrupted. That assumption, just like the assumption that a natural event of the size that took place was unlikely, was based on “probability theory” taught to all nuclear engineers. It is the basis – wrongly – for telling the public that nuclear power generation is “safe.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Global-Viewpoint/2012/0405/World-is-ignoring-most-important-lesson-from-Fukushima-nuclear-disaster

[Jtt]

10:18 PM on 04/05/2012

Actually its still the safest means of base-load generation. AND CLEANEST - Thats whats sad. There could be a Fukushima every other year for the next 20 and it still would be true.

Thats how out of touch the anti nuclear movement is.

[Jtt]

10:24 PM on 04/05/2012

far far cleaner and less environmentally destructive.

[Jena Jena]

02:14 AM on 04/06/2012

Do some research. You might find otherwise. Thats how out of touch the pro nuclear ignorants are.

[mdinoregon]

08:34 PM on 04/05/2012

NRC Pilgrim Plant Hearings Appealed by Massachusetts AG

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s decision to proceed with hearings on a 20-year license extension for Entergy Corp. (ETR)’s Pilgrim nuclear power plant was appealed by Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Coakley’s appeal, filed in the U.S. Appeals Court in Boston, challenged the commission’s decision to go ahead before considering lessons from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, according to a statement from her office today.

“The NRC needs to understand the lessons learned from Fukushima and apply those lessons to Pilgrim before granting the plant a 20-year license extension,” Coakley said. An earthquake and tsunami wrecked Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima Dai- Ichi station last year, causing radiation leaks.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-05/nrc-pilgrim-plant-hearings-appealed-by-massachusetts-ag-1-.html

Maybe Fort Calhoun should think about a few upgrades after last year too. Did they ever do that study about dams breaking up stream? Or all the new seismic studies that NRC ordered? Near enough to the New Madrid fault.

[mdinoregon]

08:25 PM on 04/05/2012

How funny!!!!

America's 2 new nukes are on the brink of death
April 5, 2012

The only two US reactor projects now technically under construction are on the brink of death for financial reasons.

If they go under, there will almost certainly be no new reactors built here.

The much mythologized "nuclear renaissance" will be officially buried, and the US can take a definitive leap toward a green-powered future that will actually work and that won't threaten the continent with radioactive contamination.

As this drama unfolds, the collapse of global nuclear power continues, as two reactors proposed for Bulgaria have been cancelled, and just one of Japan's 54 licensed reactors is operating. That one may well close next month, leaving Japan without a single operating commercial nuke.

Georgia's double-reactor Vogtle project has been sold on the basis of federal loan guarantees. Last year President Obama promised the Southern Company, parent to Georgia Power, $8.33 billion in financing from an $18.5 billion fund that had been established at the Department of Energy by George W. Bush.

Until last week most industry observers had assumed the guarantees were a done deal. But the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group, has publicly complained that the Office of Management and Budget may be requiring terms that are unacceptable to the builders.
http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/7/2012/1924

[oahutrading]

08:42 PM on 04/05/2012

Wow, the CM thrown off the project, financial woes too....

at 1.666% annual rate of return these nukes make no sense.

http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2012/03/nuke-makes-no-economic-sense.html

[Jtt]

08:09 PM on 04/05/2012

If the anti nukes were around in the Star Trek Universe the federation wouldn't have made it as far as Toledo.

This is ridiculous.

[Jtt]

08:12 PM on 04/05/2012

We wont survive with such fear and anti science sentiment.

[idyl]

03:52 PM on 04/06/2012

You don't need nuclear power to film and broadcast a TV series.

And if you know how nuclear energy can be used to bend space/time and create a warp bubble for faster than speed of light transport ... please have at it. I'm not going to try and stop you.

[Jtt]

06:47 PM on 04/05/2012

A few days ago to take the anti nuclear cake Helen Caldicott "If Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 collapses I am evacuating my family from Boston."

After no new fuel has even been added for over a year. (there would be plenty of time to install more cooling - move debris - even IF some of the rods had enough energy to burn and even the entire pool of fuel burning magically away, which is impossible but nonetheless has been simulated had a 4000 sq mi max contamination area. Northern hemisphere is 100 million sq mi. )

Its so mind numbingly ridiculous I shouldn't even have to put in the last part but HP has posters and some "journalists" that might be gullible enough to believe it. As I saw it here first folks.

[idyl]

07:20 PM on 04/05/2012

People say silly things all the time (look at our own politics). "Agitprop" has a very long and distinct tradition in global media and politics from both a left and right perspective. The people using her statements to raise alarm (whatever side of the issue they fall on), are having the effect they wish: to keep certain issues in the spotlight and generate talk. It's not argumentation by rational means, but illustration, provocation, and emotional communication. What picture does her statement leave in your mind? If you don't agree with her, and think her statements are silly, the best thing to do is ignore her, and not buy any of her books. Rationalizing to the contrary only gives Caldicott additional power and authority (and in ways you do not originally intend).

[Jtt]

07:31 PM on 04/05/2012

Caldicott is no longer respected in scientific circles. She had respect but lost it. The anti nuclear movement gave in to extremism, did/do nothing for safety and they are being locked out of academic circles as we speak.

There is no serious energy proposal that does no include nuclear power.

Thats just how it is.

[Genders]

07:34 PM on 04/05/2012

It's you pro nuke folks who claimed safety when we now know there was great danger.

Why do you expect us to believe you know?

Fuels rods grow in activity for the first few years, right? Or did you forget that?

[Jtt]

08:07 PM on 04/05/2012

Thats just the most substandard post ive ever seen. Genders you know nothing about energy and don't bother to check.

No wrong. They have energy left from the reactor. They start cooling once removed.

[Jtt]

08:11 PM on 04/05/2012

TRY to say something you can be proud of. k?