Safety Questioned at Nuclear Plant -Reply

["CLAUDE A. FLORY" <FLORYCA@GWSMTP.NU.COM>]

Posting articles by critics offers one view of the state of nuclear power,
Millstone being the archetype.  But that is one view.  Let me offer an inside
view.  Two years ago I was quick to criticize my own management.  An email from
me meant for private ears inadvertently went out on the net containing the
phrase "management stinks."  But things have changed.  

A leaky Millstone value five years ago was repeatedly packed with ferminite
while the plant steamed on.  In the last month the Millstone management reduced
the plant state from Mode 2 to Mode 4 to repair a leaky valve.  This decision
was made despite the pressure to startup immediately upon NRC approval,
pressure created by the state utility commission's decision to remove the plant
from the rate base if not operational for 100 hours by July 1.

Five years ago we had many outside, and some local, activists loudly
proclaiming for permanent shutdown of Millstone (then others).  Last month
leaders from eight surrounding communities signed a document of support for
Millstone restart.  Meanwhile Long Island natives, if not worried about tritium
in their groundwater from Brookhaven,  are terrified about noble gases in air
from Millstone.  What if that valve brace doesn't hold!!  It's a generation
raised on Jane Fonda melting her way to China and Godzilla.  Sorry for the
theatrics.  It's just that news about disaster, even imaginary impending
disaster, will be read before news about a positive safety conscious work
environment at Millstone.  It may have even got you to read a few more lines on
the communication.

Look at how the media manipulates the information.  A paragraph from the AP
story reads:
"NRC Chairwoman Shirley Jackson has stressed that approval won't be granted
until the utility proves that it has changed its old ways. Those included
regularly emptying the entire reactor core to speed up refueling, a process
that should have been used only in emergencies."
Shirley Jackson was quoted correctly.  We shouldn't operate unless we have
changed.  But where was her quote about her satisfaction on the way the recent
leaky valve was handled.  Instead the article refers back to a practice which
will no longer occur.  And you must read carefully to realize that her quote
about changing old ways did not in the same message make any reference to the
old practice.

If you've had the patience to read this far, you've probably had the patience
to read the last two paragraphs in the AP story.  But that's only "the
utility's perspective."  This is my opinion, not my employer's.  Take my word
for it, Millstone is safe to run.  It may also prevent less burning of dirty
coal in the midwest, upstream of our air stream.

Claude Flory, CHP (Health Physicist first, utility employee second)
Northeast Utilities
floryca@gwsmtp.nu.com (W)
CAFlory@aol.com



>>> <GACMail98@aol.com> 06/01/98 07:14pm >>>
 Safety Questioned at Nuclear Plant
  .c The Associated Press
 
  By MELISSA B. ROBINSON
 
 WASHINGTON (AP) - Connecticut's Millstone nuclear power plant - shut down
more than two years ago and hit with a record $2.1 million fine - could soon
be producing power again. But critics say shoddy practices continue at the
plant, raising safety concerns.