Oyster Creek News
Radio interview with Peggi Sturmfels, NJEF Program Organizer, and others from Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek (STROC), Aired on WOBM. Click on Oyster Creek to listen (first half proponents, second half opponents)
Groups seek to stop relicensing of nuclear plants, 1/3/2008, Originally published by Reuters
HOUSTON (Reuters) - A coalition of East Coast environmental and anti-nuclear groups filed a petition with U.S. regulators on Thursday to suspend all pending relicensing efforts by nuclear reactors in the United States.
A coalition called Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek joined with Riverkeeper to petition the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend the license renewal process "until objective and independent analysis" is used, the groups said in a release.
The coalition, six environmental and citizen's groups, initially joined together to oppose a 20-year extension of Exelon Corp's Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant in New Jersey. Without a license extension, Exelon would have to shut Oyster Creek, the oldest operating reactor in the nation, in 2009.
The petition filed on Thursday expanded the group's opposition to all pending relicensing efforts nationwide. The groups called for an end to pending license renewal proceedings until an independent investigation occurs and the NRC process is revised to ensure consistency and staff review of safety documentation, according to a release.
The coalition, Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek, includes the New Jersey Environmental Federation, Nuclear Information & Resource Service, New Jersey Sierra Club, NJ Public Interest Research Group, Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch and Grandmothers, Mothers, and More for Energy Safety.
Battle to shut Oyster Creek has just begun, 12/23/2007, Originally published in the Asbury Park Press
It has been 3-1/2 years since we ran an eight-part editorial series urging citizens and state and federal officials to fight a 20-year license extension for the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Lacey, the oldest such plant in the nation. Today, in the face of almost certain approval of license renewal by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, possibly as early as next month, our reservations are stronger than ever. The fight must continue. And it will, in a venue where opponents will get a more objective airing of the issues — the federal courts.
Last week, as expected, the licensing board of the NRC signed off on the safety of Oyster Creek's drywell, smoothing the way for approval by the full commission. Ironically, and somewhat symbolically, a pump failure at the reactor the following day forced a "hot shutdown" that resulted in the death of at least 3,300 fish and what is sure to be another hefty fine for plant operator AmerGen.
Today, there is still no viable long-term national plan for disposing of radioactive waste. The NRC continues to resist any attempts to fortify plants with vulnerable spent fuel pools against airborne terrorist attack. A new study in Germany, which plans to shut down all its nuclear power plants by the early 2020s, showed the incidence of childhood cancer was significantly higher among those living near nuclear plants. Oyster Creek's evacuation plan continues to be a work of fiction; if ever implemented in the event of a nuclear emergency, it would quickly become a horror tale. And Oyster Creek continues to kill fish, shocking them with releases of hot, or cold, water into the south branch of the Forked River.
The citizen activists who have worked tirelessly to bring the issues to the attention of state and federal officials deserve enormous credit for exposing the flaws of the license renewal process and the dangers posed by the plant. But their work, and that of elected officials, must not cease.
Reactor go-ahead given by 3 judges. Relicensing foes to appeal, By Alan Guenther and Todd Bates, 12/19/2007. Originally published in the Asbury Park Press
The Oyster Creek Generating Station in Lacey won another round Tuesday as a federal licensing board ruled it can operate safely for another 20 years, rejecting a challenge by opponents who said a corroded steel radiation barrier is not monitored often enough.
In a 64-page ruling, the three-judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel said that monitoring the steel dry well once every four years "is sufficiently frequent to ensure an adequate safety margin will be maintained."
But one of the three judges — Anthony J. Baratta — left the door open for a fresh challenge by writing a six-page additional statement that called for more analysis of the dry well's actual condition.
"We do not know what the actual safety factor is," he wrote.
"While I concur with the majority (judges) with their findings of fact," Baratta wrote, "I do not concur that we at this point have a complete understanding of the dry well shell state until a conservative best estimate analysis" is done.
The coalition of six environmental and other groups opposed to the relicensing of Oyster Creek will appeal the ruling, said Richard Webster of the Eastern Environmental Law Center.
Peggi Sturmfels, program organizer with the New Jersey Environmental Federation, a coalition member, said the fight to close the plant is "far from over."
She said she was not surprised by the ruling, saying the panel was too close to the nuclear power industry. Asking the panel, and the NRC, to monitor the nuclear industry was "like the fox watching the hen house," she added.
"Half of this is about Oyster Creek and how it's unsafe. And the other half is about how the NRC has dropped the ball in terms of their responsibility to the American public," Sturmfels said. Her group plans additional legal challenges, she said, to more closely examine the age of the plant and whether evacuation plans in the event of an accident are adequate.
Sheehan had said in an e-mail that the NRC's review of Oyster Creek's license renewal application has been extraordinarily thorough.
Oyster Creek foes want independent evaluation done, By Todd Bates, 11/27/07.
Originally published in the Asbury Park Press.
Gov. Corzine should request an independent evaluation of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, and congressional hearings are necessary on U.S. nuclear plant oversight in general, a leading Oyster Creek opponent said Monday.
The National Academy of Sciences should study the drywell liner surrounding Oyster Creek's reactor and all other issues at the plant, according to Peggi Sturmfels, program organizer with the New Jersey Environmental Federation in Belmar.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission doesn't believe that "an independent safety assessment of Oyster Creek or any other plant is warranted" because its reactor oversight process "more than adequately achieves the same objective," NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan said.
Sturmfels also said she wants congressional hearings on the NRC and its role in evaluating license renewal and new plant proposals.
"I think it's past time for congressmen to take a role in establishing who has oversight," said Sturmfels, who criticized the NRC's performance. NRC officials have said their oversight of plants is rigorous.
Sturmfels, Janet Tauro, a member of Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety, and plant opponent lawyers Richard Webster and Julia LeMense met with the Asbury Park Press editorial board on Monday to talk about issues surrounding the proposed 20-year license extension for Oyster Creek.
A federal Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel, an independent, quasi-judicial body within the NRC, held an unprecedented hearing on Oyster Creek in September.
The hearing focused on whether plant operator AmerGen Energy Co.'s plan to measure the thickness of the steel drywell shell, an important but corroded radiation barrier, every four years with ultrasound is often enough.
Sturmfels said she has talked with Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J., about the possibility of getting congressional hearings in New Jersey, and she's contacted the offices of Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, both D-N.J., "but there's no more movement."
"We need to get these federal issue guys to take a look at this and to step up to the plate and say "we're going to protect these people,' " she said.
Oyster Creek drywell corrosion raises concerns, By Danielle Medina, The Examiner, 10/4/2007.
Original article published in the Examiner
TOMS RIVER - Will the thickness of the drywell liner surrounding the reactor at the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Lacey Township last for another 20 years if the plant is relicensed?
That's the single question now before three judges from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), the judicial arm of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ASLB judges E. Roy Hawkins, Paul Abramson and Anthony Baratta recently listened to expert testimony on that question during hearings at the Ocean County Administration Building.
Officials from AmerGen and its parent company, Exelon Inc., brought 14 expert witnesses in an attempt to prove that the nuclear plant is safe, and placed five photographs and a small replica of the drywell shell into evidence. "There was no secret that there was corrosion in 1992, but the shell is not corroding now," Alex Polonsky, an attorney.
But Richard Webster, a Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic lawyer who represents a coalition of groups that oppose the relicensing of theWebster said there is an absence of data, including the thickness of the drywell shell in certain areas, along with what the corrosion rate will be in the future.
"Will it be 0.05 inches per year?" Webster asked. "Can we think that's appropriate when we're dealing with nuclear safety?"
Webster represents a coalition of citizen and environmental groups that include the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, the Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch Inc., Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety (GRAMMES), the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group (NJPIRG), the New Jersey Sierra Club and the New Jersey Environmental Foundation.
New Jersey congressmen Jim Saxton and Christopher Smith both questioned the thickness of the drywell shell and urged the panel to investigate the issue thoroughly in a Sept. 21 letter addressed to the ASLB.
Oyster Creek, which went online in 1969, is the oldest nuclear plant in the United States. Its 40-year operating license is due to expire on April 9, 2009. AmerGen applied to the NRC for a 20-year license extension in July 2005.
AmerGen has faced a series of setbacks this year in its quest to have the plant on Route 9 south in Lacey Township relicensed. The state Attorney General's Office petitioned the federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in May to contest the NRC's stance that the impact of a terrorist attack should not be part of a nuclear plant's relicensing review. The Attorney General's Office filed the petition on behalf of the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
And in early June, the DEP faulted both AmerGen and the NRC for relying on environmental studies that were up to 30 years old during the relicensing process.
Engineering code may not apply to existing N-plants, By David Benson, The Press of Atlantic City, 09/25/2007. Original article published in the Press of Atlantic City
TOMS RIVER - When a nuclear plant is being designed, engineers plan for the worst. But once it's operating and the stresses on it are known, it no longer has to meet national engineering codes, a federal scientist said Monday at a hearing about relicensing Oys-ter Creek.
"Once the structure is built, and the load is known, the code is no longer binding, but is a specification," said Mark Hartzman, an engineer with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC.
About 100 people jammed the courtroom at the Ocean County Administration Building and listened intently as Hartzman told the three judges of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that it's possible the huge steel liner surrounding the nation's oldest operating nuclear reactor in Lacey Township doesn't meet ASME code.
Rudolph Hausler, an expert hired by the Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek coalition, or STROC, said Monday the drywell shell has deteriorated more than expected. "I think there is high likelihood that it is currently below acceptance criteria," Hausler said.
Oyster Creek's current license to operate includes adherence to ASME code, Hartzman said. "That's fine for checking as-built structures," the engineer said. But once a structure is built - and the hazards are known - a lower standard can be applied, Hartzman said.
Peggi Sturmfels, a member of STROC, was in disbelief Monday afternoon. "Now the code is no longer a requirement," Sturmfels said. "Until last Wednesday, there was a specific code that we thought everyone had to meet, and now they've made it a provision."
Evacuation plan worries residents: Foes cite time needed to clear area near nuke plant, By Bob Vosseller & Keith Ruscitti, 04/25/07.
Originally published in the Ocean County Observer.
TOMS RIVER — With State Police estimating that it would take between seven and nine hours to evacuate the area following an accident at the Oyster Creek Generating Station, residents at last night's hearing were skeptical that such a plan would work.
"Route 9 is a two-lane highway and I think it's a fantasy, a fantasy if you think there will be an effective evacuation in the case of an emergency," said Joan Rubin of Pine Beach.
Last night's hearing was hosted by officials from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the New Jersey State Police. Its purpose was to hear concerns from the public about emergency response plans. About 80 people attended.
Peg Sturmfels of Jackson, New Jersey Environmental Federation program organizer and an opponent of the plant's relicensing, agreed that the evacuation plans were inadequate.
"Here we are again. What is different from last year? What has changed? The roads are older and the population has increased. After the forest fires (in Warren Grove) I am even more concerned about an evacuation which would involve relocating senior citizens with health problems and preschools. The State Police say it will take nine and a half hours but a radioactive plume could travel within an hour and a half."
Sturmfels questioned how such an evacuation on a large scale could be coordinated. "They would have to bring in buses in from the outside, close schools, close roadways and bring in emergency vehicles. Regular traffic is bad enough normally. Evacuating Long Beach Island is a big concern. In the summer there are over 2,000 people there who would have to cross that bridge..."
PSEG has a $700M plan to cut emissions, By Alex Nussbaum, 07/20/2007.
Originally published in theBergen Record.
PSEG Power will spend more than $700 million to cut pollution from its big Jersey City power plant -- a move that should improve air quality in Bergen County and beyond.
The company announced Thursday that it will upgrade the coal-fired plant over the next three years, rather than close it. The federal government's been pressuring PSEG to clean up the plant, calling it one of the dirtiest in the metropolitan area.
One environmental activist welcomed the health benefits the cleaner air will bring. Still, he noted the changes at the Hudson Generating Station will do little to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions. The plant is one of the region's largest sources of that pollutant, which scientists blame for raising temperatures worldwide.
Tackling global warming "will necessitate an end to reliance on coal and it would have been easier to meet that goal if PSEG had more vision on this particular site," said David Pringle, a lobbyist for the New Jersey Environmental Federation...
NRC personnel less than upfront with Oyster Creek critics, Op Ed by Peggi Sturmfels, NJEF Program Organizer, 06/19/07. Originally published in the Asbury Park Pres.
I have written to Lisa Jackson, commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection, to express my concern with the situation surrounding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Dennis Zannoni, supervising nuclear engineer with the DEP. I addressed the comments made in the Press regarding a complaint that might have been lodged against Zannoni by the NRC accusing him of questioning the expertise of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards panel during the Jan. 18 subcommittee review.
Our group, which consists of members of STROC (Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek), and officials from the DEP, at another location, were listening in to the hearing on the renewal of the license for the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey via phone lines set up for remote access by the NRC. There might have been others listening in, but they were never identified.
The experience was frustrating because we had such a difficult time with the audio, especially the testimony by witnesses giving presentations. During one of the breaks, a cross conversation between DEP folks and us ensued. We were trying to get their take on some of the statements made and also "who and what." Because of my continuing doubt that many of the people who are in charge of the process don't have the specific expertise in the areas that are of great concern, such as the corrosion issue, I have been known to rant a bit on that subject.
Zannoni's response to my rant was in no way derogatory or disparaging, rather just a matter-of-fact statement of who these folks were, and where they came from.
At that same meeting, after numerous phone calls to the NRC to try to get a better connection, we called our elected public officials' staffers who we knew were either listening in or attending, to see if they could help. During the lunch break, I heard NRC staffers in the hearing room, grumbling about us and complaining, referring to our "crappy phone" and "that bitch from New Jersey" that called in.
I immediately called my congressman, Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J., and reported the conversation to his office staffers, apprised them of the situation and then called the NRC headquarters to lodge a complaint. I left a detailed message on the voice mail of Michael Junge. I am filing a formal complaint about their treatment of us.
In all my dealings with Zannoni, he has never portrayed anyone as unprofessional or made detrimental personal comments about any of the parties involved.
He has raised publicly the issue that the NRC did not (and does not) make recordings or transcripts of its public meetings, like the one held last July in Lacey. It was at this meeting that an NRC employee acted in an extremely confrontational manner to questions from our attorney, Richard Webster, as well as others in the audience asking questions with regard to the water that was found at the Oyster Creek plant. This has been a continuing concern to the coalition because, absent a transcript or recording, the NRC and plant operator AmerGen can deny statements made.
We have found both Jill Lipoti and Kent Tosch of the DEP to be very professional in their dealings with us as well. By design or circumstance, these have been our "Jersey Guys." Whether we have agreed with them on every point or not, they have always treated us with respect and the deference.
Not so with the folks from the NRC. From the beginning, I have found them to be condescending, disingenuous and at times downright belligerent. At every step of the renewal process, the NRC has put roadblocks in our way.
At public hearings, we have been denied access to safety data that is public information under the guise that is "proprietary," it's too many pages to read and the infamous "you wouldn't understand it."
It is my belief, which gets stronger every day, that the NRC thought that this renewal was not only a slam dunk but part of its marching orders from the Bush administration and its pro-industry stance. The serious concerns and safety issues we and the DEP have raised are hindrances to their mission.
In all my interaction with Zannoni, he has acted as a true public servant and scientist. His conclusions about the plant, whatever they are, come from his long involvement with its operations and condition.
NRC not serving public by disregarding drywell dangers, By Peggi Sturmfels, NJEF Program Organizer, 06/13/07.
Originally published as aAsbury Park Press Op-Ed.
Blind faith. Never had it. Never will. I suppose it comes from being raised by a father who believes in data — he being a metallurgist.
So when I hear supporters and elected officials employed by AmerGen, the operators of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, talk about having a blind faith in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its ability to judge the safety of the plant — in particular, the corroding radiation containment vessel — I shudder.
The NRC has consistently used the highly technical nature of a relicensing as a shield to limit public participation. By tenaciously fighting our efforts to gain access to technical data for independent expert review, the NRC has proven it serves the industry and not the public.
Since November, our attorney, Richard Webster of the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic, repeatedly has asked the NRC to supply him with the raw data that led agency officials to decide that the drywell can withstand another 20 years of wear and tear. Water leaks, the source of which never have been discovered or rectified, has caused the drywell to rust. And in parts, it is as thin as a soda can.
If corrosion continues to take its toll, the drywell could thin to a point where it would buckle upon itself, severing a complex safety system of pipes, cables and electrical circuitry that prevents the nuclear reactor from meltdown.
One would think this data would be at the NRC's fingertips. Apparently not.
Even though Webster has made this request on our behalf by mail, e-mail, conference call and, finally, in person at last month's safety assessment meeting at AmerGen's emergency headquarters in Toms River, no data has been forthcoming. Instead, all we receive are verbal assurances that all is fine and dandy at the reactor.
However, internal AmerGen documents show it's not time to break out into a soft shoe. These documents show AmerGen is in possible violation of its own minimum safety standards, or Current Licensing Basis (CLB). These documents show the contiguous area in which the drywell has thinned is far greater than originally thought. These documents affirm conclusions by an independent nationally renowned laboratory hired by the NRC, Sandia Labs, that the drywell may have thinned to a point where it is no longer safe to operate.
If AmerGen is in violation of its CLB, it means that the NRC can tell AmerGen to cease operations until it figures out a plan to deal with a highly hazardous situation that has the potential to wipe out the Eastern seaboard. Those far-ranging effects are not exaggeration on our part. That is the area that would be affected by a nuclear meltdown at Oyster Creek as described by the National Academy of Sciences, a group of scientists and academics that advises Congress.
These documents have been forwarded to the NRC by Webster, who also has sent subsequent e-mails and has spoken on the phone with NRC officials. Webster has been told by the NRC that the drywell is just fine, and please don't send any more bothersome e-mails.
So where do we go from here? The information has been sent to Gov. Corzine, Reps. Christopher H. Smith and H. James Saxton, both R-N.J., officials at the state Department of Environmental Protection and to the Ocean County Board of Freeholders.
These officials should not only study these documents, but familiarize themselves with events at the Davis-Besse nuclear reactor in Ohio. The NRC's own inspectors warned of dangerous corrosion at that facility, yet the plant was allowed to continue to operate. When it finally shut for repairs, the reactor was about two months away from meltdown.
The NRC almost lost Toledo. Let's not lose the Jersey Shore.
Talk of 4th nuclear reactor on Del. River draws criticism, By Jeff Montgomery, 04/29/07.
Originally published in The News Journal.
The last time the federal government considered how dangerous the Salem County, N.J., nuclear complex could be, it came to this conclusion: In the unlikely case of a meltdown, 100,000 people in the region would die within one year, with 75,000 injuries and 40,000 later deaths to cancer.
That was 25 years ago.
Now the facility's owner, PSEG Nuclear, is preparing to apply for 20-year permit extensions for all three of its reactors -- Salem Units 1 and 2 and Hope Creek -- and is considering turning up the heat at its Hope Creek reactor to produce more electricity.
Jane Nogaki, South Jersey representative for the New Jersey Environmental Federation, said her group believes the complex already is a potential target for a terrorist attack. A fourth reactor, she said, would make PSEG's operation even more tempting.
"Nuclear plants are vulnerable targets. It's impossible to protect them fully. They're out there in the open, and the radioactive waste is located right there alongside," Nogaki said. "It's too great a risk for that kind of power. We would outright oppose it."
DEP keeps reactor foe away from relicensing, Nick Clunn, 04/22/07.
Originally published in theAsbury Park Press.
TRENTON--State environmental officials critical of a plan to keep the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant running for an additional 20 years continue to keep a veteran colleague with inside knowledge of the plant from rejoining their efforts.
Dennis J. Zannoni, the Department of Environmental Protection's top nuclear engineer for 15 years, remains reassigned to a team focused on reducing diesel soot emissions when the future of the Lacey plant could be decided next month.
It was not a coincidence that Zannoni's reassignment happened when Zannoni was becoming more and more outspoken about his concerns at the plant, said Peggi Sturmfels, program coordinator with the New Jersey Environmental Federation, a nonprofit environmental protection group that wants the plant to close.
"Isn't it convenient that he is no longer working on the project?" Sturmfels said. "I believe the the NRC strong-armed the DEP into doing this."
NRC disregarding signs of trouble at Oyster Creek,, Op Ed By Janet Tauro, NJEF Board Member and Member of STROC, 02/18/07.
Orignally published in the Asbury Park Press.
You are a federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission member. You are charged with overseeing safety at the country's nuclear reactors — the most costly, dirtiest and "most dangerous technology available for boiling water."
You must decide whether the nation's oldest reactor situated in the middle of a densely populated region can chug along until its 60th birthday without jeopardizing the lives of 630,000 people living nearby.
You have a list of problems that don't bode well for the plant, which is owned by a powerful company, Exelon:
A document written by an Exelon engineer surfaces cautioning that the support floor to the elevated pool, already packed with 450 tons of nuclear waste, was not built to design and not adequately attached to the walls.
State officials legally challenge your agency to assess the plant's vulnerability to terrorist attack — specifically that the radioactive waste is sitting in pools 70 feet above ground and protected only by a metal roof. That challenge is supported when the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to interfere with an appeals ruling mandating evaluation of terrorist risk before license renewal.
Oyster Creek License Extension Application Documents
NJ Environmental Federation co-leads Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek (STROC). Read about STROC and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service's efforts to ensure environmental, safety and security issues are addressed in the 20-year license renewal application of Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant.