Resources for
Change
FERMI
Dedicated to stopping another nuclear
reactor
Fermi thermal-pollutes Lake
Erie
Facilities kill fish, heat the waters
etc.
JOIN THE MAILING
LIST
If you would like to be included the Fermi 3
update and mailing list please send that request with your name and email
address using the comment form.
Your comments to stop a Fermi 3
nuclear power plant will be appreciated by all future
generations.
Although the official deadline for comment
has been reached, the NRC may still consider them.
Electronic
comments
may be still be sent by e-mail to the
NRC at Fermi3.COLEIS@nrc.gov
Dear Ms. Barnes,
As discussed in my February 9, 2009, email
below, the NRC will not be granting an extension to the Fermi 3 scoping period,
for the reasons expressed in the January 30, 2009, letter to Mr. Kevin
Kamps. However, as also stated in that letter, consistent with the NRC’s
“Detroit Edison Company Fermi Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 Combined License
Application Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and
Conduct Scoping Process”, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2009
(73 FR 75142), the NRC staff may, at its discretion,
consider comments submitted after the end of the comment period on February 9,
2009.
The public's next opportunity to
comment is anticipated to be in 2010, when the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is made publicly available; and another public meeting will be
held at that time. The public comment period and public meeting for the
Draft EIS will be announced by the NRC in a Federal Register notice, and the
public meeting will also be announced on the NRC's Fermi 3 web page at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col/fermi.html. Since you are on our mailing
list, you should be receiving a copy of the Federal Register
notice.
Regarding your difficulty in accessing the
documents, in my January 29, 2009, email to you on that matter (see attached), I
stated that if you continue to have such problems to please contact the Public
Document Room (PDR) Help Desk at 1-800-397-4209 or by email at
PDR.Resource@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
Stephen Lemont
Environmental Project
Manager
Office of New Reactors
Environmental Coalition Files Legal
Contentions!
BEYOND NUCLEAR
CITIZENS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO CHEMICAL
CONTAMINATION
CITIZENS ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF
SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO
DON’T WASTE MICHIGAN
SIERRA CLUB
Environmental Coalition Files Fourteen
Legal Contentions against Fermi 3 Atomic Reactor
Groups Cite Radioactive Waste Risks,
Harms to Lake Erie
Monroe, Michigan – An environmental
coalition comprised of Beyond Nuclear, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical
Contamination, Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don’t
Waste Michigan, and the Sierra Club has filed fourteen legal contentions with
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), intervening against Detroit
Edison’s proposed new Fermi 3 atomic reactor in Newport, Michigan. The
contentions against Detroit Edison’s application for a Combined Construction and
Operation License were due March 9. The coalition objected to Fermi 3’s
radioactive, toxic, and thermal impacts on Lake Erie’s vulnerable western basin,
especially considering the cumulative damage already occurring in the Great
Lakes due to the presence of 33 operating atomic reactors, and dozens of
additional coal fired power plants. These include Detroit Edison’s Fermi 2
atomic reactor and Monroe (Coal) Power Plant, one of the largest in North
America, Consumers Energy’s Whiting Coal Plant, and First Energy’s Davis-Besse
atomic reactor and Bay Shore (Coal) Power Plant, all located on Lake Erie’s
shallow western basin.
"Efficiency and renewable, such as solar
and wind, could readily replace the dirty, dangerous, and expensive Fermi 3
proposal," said Terry Lodge, the Toledo-based legal counsel to the coalition.
“And they could do so much more cleanly, safely, and affordably,” he
added.
"The track record of the Detroit Edison
Company is abysmal. The partial core-melt accident at Fermi 1 in October, 1966
and the 1993-94 Holiday dumping of millions of gallons of radioactively
contaminated water into Lake Erie by Fermi 2 speaks to this record," said
Michael Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan. "The proposed Fermi 3 would represent
another half-century of safety and security risks for the Great Lakes shoreline.
Many concerned local residents don’t want to play yet another round of
radioactive Russian roulette," Keegan added. Michael Keegan resides in Monroe
and has been following the Fermi reactors for three decades.
"It is incomprehensible that the NRC
failed to notify Walpole Island First Nation in the St. Clair River, or other
First Nations whose lands or fisheries lie within 50 miles of the proposed
reactor, about their right to take part in this proceeding," said Kay Cumbow of
Brown City, speaking for Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination.
"Great Lakes waters are protected both by treaties and by the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement. We share the obligation to protect these waters with other
nations. Indigenous Peoples' land and fisheries in Lake Erie would be harmed by
Fermi 3's radioactive, toxic, and thermal discharges," she
added.
"As Fermi 2’s storage pool is full to the
gills, and vulnerable to accident or attack, Detroit Edison proposes to generate
yet more radioactive waste it doesn’t know what to do with," said Kevin Kamps of
Beyond Nuclear, a national watchdog group in Takoma Park, Maryland. "With
President Obama indicating the end of the Yucca Mountain dumpsite proposal in
Nevada, forever deadly radioactive wastes generated by Fermi 2 and 3 would
continue to pile up on the Lake Erie shoreline with nowhere to go," he
added.
“Taxpayers and ratepayers should not be
forced to further subsidize the already heavily subsidized nuclear power and
coal industries,” said Ed McArdle of the Sierra Club. "We believe the
electricity from Fermi 3 will not even be needed," he added. McArdle resides in
Melvindale, Michigan, less than 25 miles from Fermi nuclear power
plant.
“We need to implement a 21st century
action plan for our energy and environmental needs in the Great Lakes basin.
Nuclear and coal are the dirty siblings of a previous century and we can no
longer afford to live in an environmentally destructive manner,” stated Derek
Coronado of the Citizens Environment Alliance in Windsor,
Ontario.
A copy of the 150 page contentions filing
is available upon request from Kevin Kamps at Beyond Nuclear, (240) 462-3216 or
kevin@beyondnuclear.org.
Fermi 2 plant closed after vibrations
were detected
Published: Saturday, April 18,
2009
"FRENCHTOWN TWP. DTE Energy shut down
its Fermi 2 reactor plant in Monroe County on March 28 after an unexpected
vibration in plant equipment was detected."
: "...DTE is moving ahead with a plan to
store spent fuel in dry containers that are a combination of steel and concrete,
similar to other plants across the country, Austerberry said."
"...Last month, a binational environmental
coalition filed 14 legal contentions with federal regulators against DTE’s plan
[to build a third reactor, Fermi 3, at the site], citing public health and
several environmental concerns...The environmental groups object to the proposed
plant’s possible radioactive and toxic impacts on the western basin of Lake
Erie’s as damage already is occurring in the Great Lakes due to 33 atomic
reactors and dozens of additional coal-fired power plants operating, they
said."
For more of this story, click
HERE
According to a plant report, the water
level in the reactor vessel fell to 162 inches during the March 28 shutdown but
a Fermi spokesman says he doesn't think that 'necessarily indicates that there
was any loss of water level at all.'
By Eartha Jane Melzer 4/7/09 5:17 PM
Online article
An incident involving a nuclear reactor
going into “hot shutdown” at DTE Energy’s Fermi II power generation station in
Monroe County late last month went largely unnoticed locally and is raising
questions about what exactly happened at the plant.
DTE officials have minimized the incident,
stressing that it’s dangerous to make assumptions about the safety of the
reactor after high vibrations from a bearing in the plant’s main turbine caused
operators to manually switch the reactor into shutdown.
According to a report by the plant to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the 1,100 megawatt boiling water reactor was
operating at 23-percent power on March 28 when at 1:46 a.m. the shutdown
began.
The plant was running at the reduced power
level as part of a ramping down of operations in advance of a planned shutdown
for refueling and maintenance.
“The cause of the high main turbine
vibrations is currently under investigation,“ according to the report. “There
was no maintenance or testing in progress that would explain the high turbine
vibration levels.”
The report went on to state that the lowest
reactor water level reached during the incident was 162 inches, and “[a]ll
isolations and actuations for reactor vessel water level 3
occurred.”
“As you shut down the reactor quickly the
pressure becomes higher and the water level goes down,” said Viktoria Mytling, a
Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokeswoman. “The reactor water level does go down
a certain amount as a consequence of a SCRAM [sudden shutdown]. What happened at
Fermi in terms of the water level going down was expected.”
Mytling said that the normal reactor vessel
water level is 197 inches and the minimum level is 150 inches.
Although the NRC reports that lowered
reactor vessel water levels are an anticipated result of sudden plant shutdowns,
DTE spokesman John Austerberry cautioned Michigan Messenger against reporting
about the drop in water levels during the incident.
Asked about the low reactor vessel water
level included in the shutdown incident report, Austerberry said: “I think that
was just a data point we were providing them. I don’t think it necessarily
indicates that there was any loss of water level at all. So I’d be very careful
about that.”
“The ’scramming’ of a nuclear reactor is a
little like hitting your breaks on the interstate,” said Paul Gunter, a policy
analyst with the nuclear watchdog group Beyond Nuclear. “It tests a lot of
systems and puts systems and components under a lot of stress. It does put a lot
of wear and tear on the system.”
Michael Keegan, a nuclear power critic who
lives near the Fermi II plant said that he learned of the incident through a
notice on the NRC website.
Keegan, who is among the individuals trying
to block the construction of an additional reactor at the Fermi complex, said
that locals are “salivating” at the prospect of jobs in building the new plant.
He said that he finds the lack of local media on the situation
disturbing.
“It’s kind of peculiar,” he said. “You see
[this incident] is picked up by Reuters and you can read about it in New York
but you can’t read about it in your home town.”
The Toledo Blade published an article about
the “erratic vibration.”
Keegan said incidents at the plant have led
to serious environmental issues.
In 1993, a turbine problem on Christmas Day
led to a fire which resulted in the radioactive contamination of more than a
million of gallons of water that was subsequently released into Lake
Erie.
Jim Riccio, a Greenpeace nuclear policy
analyst said he is not surprised that a utility spokesman would try to play down
a drop in reactor vessel water levels.
“He wants to make you believe that splitting
atoms is something safe, but its not,” Riccio said. “The risk is that if the
water levels go too low you uncover the core and you start to melt down, that is
what happened at Three Mile Island,” referring to the 1979 partial core meltdown
at the nuclear power station near Harrisburg, Pa.
Fermi 3 Wetlands Impact Largest in
Michigan History
According to the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality the proposed Fermi 3 would be largest impact on coastal
wetlands in Michigan history. On May 5th, 2009 the Atomic Safety Licensing Board
(ASLB) held a pre-hearing on the proposed Fermi 3 nuclear power plant in Monroe,
MI. The ALSB learned from the Interveners that the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality had stated February 3, 2009 that: "Based on the Wetlands
Identification Program report, a significant portion of the proposed Fermi 3
property contains regulated wetlands, with most of the wetlands on the site
being Great Lakes coastal wetlands. With historic losses of greater than 95
percent of the coastal wetlands of western Lake Erie, the wetlands on site
represent a very important and rare natural resource for the State of Michigan.
The Environmental Report (by the utility) describes the wetland impacts as
moderate. In fact, it appears that the project as proposed would be one of the
largest impacts to coastal wetlands in the history of Michigan's wetland
statute." There are seven endangered species on the proposed Fermi 3
site.
Fermi 3 Cooling Tower Must Be
Relocated
In an email memo from DTE to the NRC sent
May 20, 2009 Interveners learned that there will be COL Application changes to
minimize the environmental impacts that include movement of the cooling tower.
Because of concerns raised in the ASLB pre-hearing on May 5th, regarding
wetlands it now appears that the cooling tower must be relocated, these changes
are reported to "Impact the Schedule". (From: Mark Tonacci Sent: Wednesday, May
20, 2009 3:48 PM To: Jerry Hale, Subject: Fermi COLA Changes that Impact the
Schedule)
Fermi Schedule
Delayed
Because DTE is late with their responses on
Request Additional Information from the NRC. The schedule will be pushed back.
Request made May 12th, responses that were due June 30th will not be submitted
for review until December 30th. The proposed Fermi 3 is already behind schedule,
by as much as a year. The Final Safety Evaluation Review will not be completed
until March 22, 2012, if no further delays are incurred. DTE has already
acknowledged that there will be "site layout modifications" to the COLA later
this year.
In addition, review of the Economically
Simplified Boiling Water Reactor reference design may delay the proposed Fermi 3
schedule further. Early indication suggest that there are problems with the
ESBWR design. (Letter from Mark E. Tonacci, Senior Project Manager ESBWR
Projects Branch 1 Division of New Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors to
Mr Jack M. Davis, DTE June 30th, 2009)
Transmission Corridor Problems for Fermi
3
In a Request for Additional Information (RAI
No. 2168 Revision 0) the NRC indicates that the Transmission Corridor for the
proposed Fermi 3 is problematic, running 29 miles to a Milan. DTE writes: "There
are no single failures that can prevent the Fermi offsite power system from
performing its function to provide power to EF3." The NRC staff writes: "Failure
mode and effect analysis of the towers indicates that structural failure of one
tower could affect power distribution of the neighboring tower. The staff notes
that all three transmission lines are routed in a common corridor for 29.4
miles. Provide justification that a failure of one tower could not propagate and
cause the failure of the third tower lines in the same offsite power
transmission corridor." The letter lists a multitude of concerns regarding the
Transmission Corridor including: failure of the third tower lines; galloping
conductors; lightening strikes; loss of offsite power; grid
stability.
Quality Assurance Program Lacking at
Fermi 3
In a memorandum from the NRC to the DTE the
public learns that the Fermi 3 Application Quality Assurance (QA) Program is
virtually non existent. That the Combined Operating License Application
submitted in September of 2008 is totally lacking a Quality Assurance program.
NRC states: "These concerns will be assessed during an inspection, but in any
case, are of sufficient concern at this time that they might question the
quality of the overall application." (June 23, 2009, Memorandum to : Jeffrey
Cruz from: John A. Nakoski, )
The NRC writes: "The purpose of this
memorandum is to document a concern with the Fermi 3 COL application. No
response to this memorandum is required. As the result of my staff’s review of
the Fermi 3 Combined License Application, Part 2: Final Safety Analysis Report
(FSAR), Section 17.5, "Quality Assurance Program Description - Design
Certification, Early Site Permits, and New License Applicants," it is not
evident that the FSAR provides for a QA program that governs the design
activities performed in support of the FSAR."
Fermi 3 Radiological Doses for the Public
Established
n an NRC Request for Additional Information
(RAI No. 2884 Revision 0), the public learns that the proposed Fermi 3 is
establishing and scheduling radiological dose criteria for members of the public
due to gaseous effluent releases. GASPAR II computer code will generate dose
estimates to members of the public associated with the operation of Fermi 3. In
addition, criteria for members of the public due to exposure to radiological
liquid effluent is being established for the public. LADTAP II computer code
analyses will be generating dose estimates to members of the public associated
with the operation of Fermi 3 with calculations for liquid effluent discharges
for different intake locations including commercial fish and invertebrate catch
locations, drinking water intake locations.
 |
|
Fermi 3 Not Ready for Prime Time -
Systemic Quality Assurance Failures
Fermi 3 Opponents Reveal Serious NRC
Concerns about DTE Mismanagement
Monroe, MI-Opponents of the proposed new
Fermi 3 atomic reactor ripped into legal arguments by Detroit Edison and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff that recent charges by the NRC of
inadequate quality assurance (QA) cannot be put to a public hearing.
Citing multiple internal NRC staff emails,
the environmental coalition revealed that several key NRC staff people have
questioned whether Detroit Edison can truthfully guarantee that quality systems,
structures and components would be built into the proposed Fermi 3 General
Electric-Hitachi boiling water reactor. The intervenors have called upon NRC's
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for a suspension of the construction and
operating license application proceeding until such guarantees can be made.
The coalition submitted a 33-page
declaration from Arnold Gundersen, a career nuclear engineer, who quoted
internal NRC staff emails and analyzed the staff criticisms in light of federal
requirements. One NRC quality assurance overseer stated, "At this time [June 4,
2009], the application is not providing an applicant's QA program for these
activities as required by [Part] 52.79(a)(25) [of the NRC's regulations]." That
same staffer said on June 8, 2009 that "This issue puts into question the
quality of the overall application."
"This inadequacy of Detroit Edison's Quality
Assurance Program cannot be repaired simply by a quick fix. This gaping hole in
legally mandated QA must be addressed by the NRC and rectified by Detroit
Edison. The only way to resolve this breach is to start over with a fully
implemented QA Program and go back and look at every analysis since 2007.
The people of Michigan should not have to shoulder the cost of repeating these
studies," said Gundersen, Chief Engineer for Fairewinds Associates, Inc.
"A quality assurance program has to start at
the very beginning of the design for a huge project like Fermi 3," said Terry
Lodge, attorney for the public intervenors. "The utility has to guarantee that
they won't buy junk parts or electrical components from manufacturers who care
about making a quick buck and don't care if the plant can perform properly in an
emergency. This isn't just a 'paperwork' issue, it's about protecting the
public's health and safety."
"Given that quality assurance is the very
foundation upon which the entire Fermi 3 project is based, DTE might as well
build this new atomic reactor on quicksand in terms of its environmental and
radiological safety and its financial viability. This project places all
parties in peril," added Keith Gunter of Beyond Nuclear who lives in Livonia,
Michigan.
The environmental coalition opposing Fermi 3
includes Beyond Nuclear, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination,
Citizens Environmental Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don't Waste Michigan,
and the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter. Its latest filing on December 8 is in
response to arguments by both NRC staff and Detroit Edison's legal counsel,
submitted December 1, for the QA contention to be rejected. The environmental
coalition first raised its QA contention on November 6, 2009.
Documents associated with this intervention
are posted at Beyond Nuclear's website, www.beyondnuclear.org
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate
the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and
the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for
an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic. The Beyond Nuclear
team works with diverse partners and allies to provide the public, government
officials, and the media with the critical information necessary to move
humanity toward a world beyond nuclear.
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 400
Takoma Park, MD 20912
Tel: 301.270.2209 Fax: 301.270.4000
Email:info@beyondnuclear.org
Web site: www.beyondnuclear.org
Quick Links
Beyond Nuclear and its environmental coalition allies defended its
quality assurance contention against the Fermi 3
new reactor proposal targeted at Monroe, Michigan on Dec. 8th. Beyond Nuclear's
contention was based upon a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
"Notice of Violation" issued on Oct. 5th. Expert witness
Arnold Gundersen's declaration cited U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission safety staff internal emails raising serious concerns
about the lack of quality assurance in the Fermi 3 combined Construction and
Operating License Application (COLA). Beyond Nuclear's media release on its latest filing
quoted Gundersen, coalition attorney Terry Lodge, as well as Beyond Nuclear
Launch Partner Keith Gunter of Livonia, Michigan. Not only does Fermi 3's COLA
lack QA, but NRC's Office of Inspector General has questioned the QA competence of NRC's
own staff itself. Despite its challenges at enforcing its own QA regulations,
NRC staff have raised serious concerns about the QA of the
General Electric-Hitachi design itself for the "Economic Simplified Boiling
Water Reactor" proposed at Fermi 3. Beyond Nuclear's original QA contention
against Fermi 3's COLA, and Detroit Edison's and NRC staff's responses, are
posted at Beyond Nuclear's Nuclear Reactor
page.
June 6, 2010:Fermi sustained damage from a
tornado.
The tornado had an eight mile radius in Ohio, where it leveled some buildings
and killed people. At Fermi, in Monroe, Michigan, tornadic winds ripped away
siding from the auxiliary building and damaged the turbine building roof,
leaving a hole in it. Both buildings sit near the building housing the reactor.
The winds also damaged some of the cooling fins that ring the base of the
plant’s twin, landmark cooling towers. The reactor went into emergency shut down
and is being repaired.
(posted June 12,
2010)
Article published at MonroeNews.com on Dec
3, 2010
Contaminated water leaks from
Fermi
DTE Energy confirmed
Thursday that an undetermined amount of radioactive water flooded
some areas of its Fermi 2 nuclear power plant on Wednesday afternoon,
contaminated some workers’ clothing, and entered the plant’s sewer
system.
The problem occurred when a drain valve
stuck open on a system that filters water condensed from radioactive steam,
causing a holding tank to overflow. The overflow then filled a ventilation line
and spilled into portions of the plant’s turbine building and radwaste
building.
Some of the water also entered the plant
sewage system through a bathroom floor drain.
DTE officials and those with the federal
Nuclear Regulatory Commission still today were not sure of the total amount of
water involved in the overflow, however.
Some plant areas remained damp and were
cleaned and decontaminated Thursday and the utility had sealed and pumped out
the sewer pipe and series of holding tanks along the pipe where the water might
have traveled. A monitoring station at the end of the sewer pipe was checked to
determine if any of the contaminated water made it that far or to the Monroe
wastewater collection system beyond. A small amount, they determined, did reach
the wastewater plant, but the amount of radioactivity in the water was not
detectable by standard instruments.
The utility said no radiation dose was
received by any workers.
Viktoria Mitlyng, an NRC spokeswoman, said
neither the safety of the plant, the workers nor the public was
compromised.
“We don’t see that as an issue,” she said.
“Even though you have contamination, it’s far below regulatory
limits.”
She said for any of the workers to get a
dose, they would have to drink the water, not merely get it on their clothing.
The water contained “extremely low levels of radioactivity,” said Guy Cerullo, a
DTE spokesman at the plant.
Mr. Cerullo said a number of workers had to
surrender their boots and pants, but received no measurable body dose of
radiation. A source at the plant said at least six personnel were
affected.
The plant had been idle for more than a
month for maintenance and to load new nuclear fuel into the reactor. The reactor
was restarted at 1:45 this morning.
A formal report was not made to the NRC
because the reactor was not operating, the incident did not involve a high level
of contamination and did not affect the plant’s safety-related equipment, Ms.
Mitlyng said.
Nuclear Power:
Hope or Hoax?
9-part series: Professor Gordon Edwards speaking at U of Alberta 2008
9-part series: Professor Gordon Edwards speaking at U of Alberta 2008