US nuke regulators criticized for false safety methods

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net>]

US nuke regulators criticized for false safety methods
  
WASHINGTON, Aug 17 (Reuters) - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
was charged on Thursday with using faulty risk assessment methods in 
determining the safety of the nation's nuclear power plants, putting 
cost containment ahead of safety, according to the Union of Concerned 
Scientists. 

In a strongly worded report, the activist group detailed how in its 
opinion, NRC risk assessments ignore common sense and allow nuclear 
operators to use so-called "don't worry, be happy" methodologies that 
cloud the actual risks of plant failures. 

"The NRC is cutting safety margins based on counterfeit safety 
studies," said David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer at the Union 
of Concerned Scientists and author of the report, entitled "Nuclear 
Plant Risk Studies: Failing the Grade." 

"The agency is acting irresponsibly, increasing the risk to millions 
of people living near nuclear plants," he said. 

Nuclear power provides 20 percent of the country's energy needs, and 
is seen by the industry as a safe, and emissions free method to meet 
increasing demand for electricity. 

A spokesman for the NRC said the report was not given to them until 
Thursday, leaving the NRC no time to comment on the specifics of the 
25-page study. 

The agency had asked for the report last week, but now will have to 
wait until Friday to review the charges in detail. 

In general though, a NRC spokesman said the agency takes it safety 
charge "seriously" and does not risk public health. 

"Our principle mission is to protect the public health and safety," 
said William Beecher, NRC director of public affairs. 

Using data from as early as 1982 to the present, the activists' 
report says the advent of deregulation in the electric power industry 
has spurred cost cutting at nuclear plants, resulting in an erosion 
of risk protections. 

"An accident at a U.S. nuclear power plant could kill more people 
than were killed by the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki," Lochbaum 
said. "Yet, the NRC fails to establish minimum standards for plant 
owners to follow when calculating the probability of an accident." 

Some of the faults include assumptions in NRC risk assessments that 
nuclear plants always conform with safety requirements. "Yet each 
year more than a thousand violations are reported," the report said. 

Other factors ignored include no factoring in for the aging of 
plants, reactor pressure vessel failures, plant worker mistakes and 
health hazards of irradiated fuel in spent fuel pool on-sight at the 
nation's 103 operating commercial plants. 

The Union of Concerned Scientists want the NRC to halt current risk 
assessments, and establish minimum standards for all plants for 
public consumption. 

"Congress should then provide the NRC with the resources necessary to 
calculate the risks and fix any shortfalls," the report said. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle					Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100   				    	
Director, Technical				Extension 2306 				     	
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division		Fax:(714) 668-3149 	                   		    
ICN Biomedicals, Inc.				E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net 				                           
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  		E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com          	          
Costa Mesa, CA 92626                                      

Personal Website:  http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1205
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html