[ RadSafe ] Potentially deadly nuclear leak hid from public, Tenn. plant’s violations kept secret in the name of national security

[Sandy Perle]

Potentially deadly nuclear leak hid from public
Tenn. plant´s violations kept secret in the name of national security
 
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) Aug 20 - A three-year veil of secrecy in the 
name of national security was used to keep the public in the dark 
about the handling of highly enriched uranium at a nuclear fuel 
processing plant - including a leak that could have caused a deadly, 
uncontrolled nuclear reaction.

The leak turned out to be one of nine violations or test failures 
since 2005 at privately owned Nuclear Fuel Services Inc., a longtime 
supplier of fuel to the U.S. Navy´s nuclear fleet.

The public was never told about the problems when they happened. The 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission revealed them for the first time last 
month when it released an order demanding improvements at the 
company, but no fine.

In 2004, the government became so concerned about releasing nuclear 
secrets that the commission removed more than 1,740 documents from 
its public archive - even some that apparently involved basic safety 
violations at the company, which operates a 65-acre gated complex in 
tiny Erwin, about 120 miles north of Knoxville.

Congressmen and environmental groups have criticized the policy, and 
now the commission staff is drafting recommendations that may ease 
its restrictions.

But environmental activists are still suspicious of the belated 
revelations and may challenge the commission´s decision not to fine 
Nuclear Fuel Services for the safety violations.

"That party is not over - the full story of what is going on up 
there," said Ann Harris, a member of the Sierra Club´s national 
nuclear task force.

Secret policy
Nuclear Fuel Services has been supplying fuel to the Navy since the 
1960s. More recently, it has also been converting the government´s 
stockpile of weapons-grade uranium into commercial reactor fuel.

While reviewing the commission´s public Web page in 2004, the 
Department of Energy´s Office of Naval Reactors found what it 
considered protected information about Nuclear Fuel Service´s work 
for the Navy.

The commission responded by sealing every document related to Nuclear 
Fuel Services and BWX Technologies in Lynchburg, Va., the only two 
companies licensed by the agency to manufacture, possess and store 
highly enriched uranium.

BWX Technologies has not experienced any problems as serious as the 
uranium spill at Nuclear Fuel Services, commission spokesman David 
McIntyre said. But its operations were included in the order to seal 
documents because it produces nuclear fuel for the Navy, too.

Under the policy, all the documents were stamped "Official Use Only," 
including papers about the policy itself and more than 1,740 
documents from the commission´s public archive.

Details of nuclear leak
The Associated Press first reported the policy in May after the 
commission briefly mentioned in its annual report to Congress a March 
6, 2006, uranium leak at Nuclear Fuel Services. The leak was one of 
three "abnormal occurrences" of license holders cited during the 
year.

Agency commissioners, apparently struck by the significance of the 
event, took a special vote to skirt the "Official Use Only" rule so 
that Nuclear Fuel Services would be identified in the report as the 
site of the uranium leak.

Some 35 liters, or just over 9 gallons, of highly enriched uranium 
solution leaked from a transfer line into a protected glovebox and 
spilled onto the floor. The leak was discovered when a supervisor saw 
a yellow liquid "running into a hallway" from under a door, according 
to one document.

The commission said there were two areas, the glovebox and an old 
elevator shaft, where the solution potentially could have collected 
in such a way to cause an uncontrolled nuclear reaction.

Power Play: New dawn for nuclear energy? 

"It is likely that at least one worker would have received an 
exposure high enough to cause acute health effects or death," the 
agency wrote.

"We don´t want any security information out there that´s going to 
help a terrorist," agency Commissioner Edward McGaffigan Jr. said in 
a newly released transcript from a closed commission meeting May 30. 
But "that´s entirely separate" from dealing with an event that could 
have killed a worker at the plant.

"The pendulum maybe swung too far," agreed Luis Reyes, the 
commission´s executive director for operations. "We want to make sure 
we don´t go the other way, but we need to come back to some 
reasonable middle point."

Congressmen blast policy
Agency spokesman David McIntyre said it may be difficult to separate 
Nuclear Fuel Service´s secret work for the Navy from its public work 
converting bomb-grade uranium to commercial reactor fuel. The leak 
happened on the commercial reactor side.

In a stinging letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman in 
July, two Democratic congressman from Michigan also blasted the 
policy.

"We agree that NRC should withhold from public view any sensitive 
security information of this nature. However, NRC went far beyond 
this narrow objective," read the letter from John Dingell, chairman 
of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Bart Stupak, chairman 
of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

McIntyre defended the commission´s decision not to fine Nuclear Fuel 
Services, even though the agency rated the uranium leak last year as 
its second most-serious violation.

Power Play: New dawn for nuclear energy? 
Instead, the agency ordered Nuclear Fuel Services to conduct a full 
review of its "safety culture" and make changes using outside 
experts.

"If we can get long-term permanent changes and improvements in their 
process it is better than slapping them with a fine every time 
something goes wrong," McIntyre said.

Lessons learned?
Nuclear Fuel Services Executive Vice President Timothy Lindstrom, a 
Navy veteran who joined the company in September, said the company 
had already made "significant progress."

"I think it is important that the public recognize that we do have a 
very robust safety program at NFS. We live in this community and take 
our stewardship very seriously," he said.

"I think if we were to have an event like this again, we would push 
to make it public," he added. "Clearly it would have been better to 
have this discussion 18 months ago than it is to have it now."

Meanwhile, NFS told its 700 employees this past week it will be 
"exploring the possibility of a sale" over the next 12 months - not 
because of the commission´s disclosure, but because of the company´s 
increasing value to a booming nuclear power industry.

"We are in a position of strength," company spokesman Tony Treadway 
said.

-----------------------------------------
Sander C. Perle
President
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614 

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714  Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1144

E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
E-Mail: sandyfl at cox.net 

Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/