Archive for the ‘Press Releases’ Category

Lessons We Must Learn and Actions We Must Take In Light of the Fukushima Disaster

Media Release
March 7, 2012

Contacts:
Karen Hadden, Sustainable Energy & Economic Development (SEED) Coalition
Rep. Lon Burnam, District 90, Ft. Worth
Chiaki Kasahara and Ivan Stout, a couple who lived in Japan, but left because of the Fukushima nuclear disaster
Robert V. Eye, Attorney, legally challenging proposed STP and Comanche Peak reactors,
Susan Dancer, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy

Austin, TX Concerned citizens in Texas are calling on U.S. leaders to do more to prevent a U.S. nuclear disaster. The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster that began nearly a year ago, on March 11, 2011, resulted in explosions, releases of radioactive materials and complete meltdowns of three reactors. 160,000 people were evacuated. Radioactive Iodine-131 and Cesium-137 was detected around the world and large amounts of radioactive materials were released into the Pacific Ocean. Only two of Japan’s 54 nuclear reactors are operating today and they are also expected to be shut down by the end of May. In light of the meltdowns, Germany now plans to shut down all 17 of its reactors and replace them with renewable energy. Post-Fukushima safety improvements have been recommended by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s task force.

"The lesson we absolutely must learn from Fukushima is that any nuclear reactor can have a meltdown. U.S. reactors are at risk from hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, floods, earthquakes, lack of cooling water and terrorist attacks, as well as accidents due to human error and mechanical failure," said Karen Hadden, Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition. "We’re urging Congress to halt nuclear licensing and nuclear loan guarantees, subsidies which would allow billions of taxpayer dollars to flow into dangerous new reactor projects. Old reactors get metal fatigue and accident risks increase. They should be retired, not re-licensed for another twenty years."

The group calls on Congressional leaders, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy to prevent a US nuclear disaster by taking action to:

• Halt licensing of new reactors
• Halt nuclear "loan guarantees" that would use billions of taxpayer dollars for new reactors
• Halt re-licensing of aging reactors, which should be shut down on or before their original retirement date
• Plan for a transition away from nuclear power to safer, more affordable and reliable means of electric generation
• Initiate more thorough and realistic disaster scenario testing of U.S. diesel generators
• Better information through EPA regarding Fukushima radiation releases, hot spots, food supply safety and exposure risks from radioactive transport and product importation here and around the globe. Cows shipped in July 2011 from Fukushima Prefecture to Tokyo had three to six times the legal limit for radioactive cesium.
• Demand that detailed and accurate public health information be made available in Japan and in the U.S., including more radiation monitoring, and ensuring healthy food and water supplies. More evacuations may yet be needed.

"We cannot afford to have a Fukushima style disaster here in the United States. Nuclear reactors are inherently unsafe and the nuclear disaster in Japan provides additional evidence of the need to transition away from nuclear power to safer forms of electric generation," said Ft. Worth Representative Lon Burnam. "There is still no safe way to store the waste generated by nuclear reactors and now much of the country wants to dump their radioactive waste on Texas, at a site that risks radioactive contamination of fresh water supplies for generations to come."

The number of lives that will be lost due to cancers as a result from the Fukushima explosions and meltdowns is unknown. Eighteen years later, a Russian study found that 985,000 people had died as a result of the Chernobyl nuclear accident, mainly from various cancers.

"In order to protect ourselves and our four-year-old son from radiation exposure, we had to leave the home we loved and had spent our adult lives working towards in Japan, and now live in Texas. We only had two hours to decide what to take with us and had to leave most of our belongings behind. It broke our hearts to leave family and friends that we loved without saying goodbye, but our health was at risk," said Chiaki Kasahara.

The nuclear industry and public officials minimized health risks, but the science is clear that exposure to radioactive contamination through the air, water or food leads to various illnesses that can take even decades to manifest." said Chiaki’s husband, Ivan Stout. "We worry about Chiaki’s mother, who stayed in Japan, and the many friends we left behind, especially the young children who may be impacted by radiation exposure. However, we understand the huge financial burden of moving out of a home no one is willing to buy. No one should be forced to decide between financial ruin and the health of their family."

The Comanche Peak and South Texas Project sites in Texas have two nuclear reactors each, but the counties in which they have operated for decades still have no paid full-time professional fire departments.

"What would happen if there were fires and explosions at the reactors here?" asked Susan Dancer, who lives eight miles from the South Texas Project reactors and is Director of the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy. "People were barely able to evacuate this area with several days notice of a recent hurricane, but there would be no advance notice for a nuclear disaster."

"The diesel generators didn’t hold in Japan and would probably fail here too. U.S. diesel generators aren’t tested for realistic disaster scenarios. They should started up quickly and run for two weeks or more to see if they could meet the demands of a real disaster, not simply tested for a matter of several hours."

"In the Comanche Peak, South Texas Project and other reactor cases, Information regarding nuclear reactor fire and explosion risks and the inadequate plans to address them is wrongfully being withheld from the public. Basic nuclear safety information is being labeled as classified, when in fact it is crucial information that the public not only has a right to know, but should know," said Robert V. Eye, attorney for intervenors opposing new reactors in Texas. "Congress should require that this most basic crucial safety information be made available to the public and not be kept hidden behind a veil of secrecy. The requirements put in place to protect against aircraft impacts and the Fukushima Task Force safety improvement recommendations have not been incorporated into new license applications. Issuing any new reactor license without doing so is irresponsible and likely to have consequences."

Texas events related to the anniversary of the Fukushima disaster include:

Austin – Saturday, March 10th at Noon, Prevent Fukushima Texas, to be held at the river (Lady Bird Lake) immediately across from the front of the Austin City Hall (301 W. 2nd St.) – just West of 1st Street. Speakers will include Chiaki Kasahara and Ivan Stout, who lived in Japan at the time of the nuclear disaster and had to leave their home, family and friends in order to protect their health and that of their young son. Sponsored by SEED Coalition and Nuke Free Texas. www.NukeFreeTexas.org

San Antonio – Candlelight Vigil, Saturday, March 10th at 6 pm, at the Federal Building at 727 E. Cesar Chavez Imagine a World Without Nuclear Disasters – www.EnergiaMia.org 210-667-5695

Dallas – March 11th at 3 pm at the Cancer Survivors’ Plaza, 635 N. Pearl. The Nuclear Free World Committee of the Dallas Peace Center will host an observation of the Fukushima Disaster Anniversary. www.DallasPeaceCenter.org

February 15, 2012
NEWS FROM NIRS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Michael Mariotte or Dominique French
301-270-6477

Thirty-seven clean energy groups today submitted a formal petition for rulemaking to the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission seeking adoption of new regulations to expand emergency evacuation zones and improve emergency response planning around U.S. nuclear reactors.

Calling on the NRC to incorporate the real-world lessons of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the proposed rules would expand existing emergency evacuation zones from 10 to 25 miles around nuclear reactors and establish a new zone from 25-50 miles around reactors for which utilities would have to identify and publicize potential evacuation routes. Another improvement would require utilities and state and local governments to practice emergency drills that includes a natural disaster that either initiates or occurs concurrently to a nuclear meltdown. Currently, utilities do not have to show the capability to conduct an evacuation during a natural disaster-even though, as seen at Fukushima, natural disasters can cause nuclear meltdowns. The petition would also expand the "ingestion pathway zone," which monitors food, milk and water, from 50 miles to 100 miles around reactors.

"80% of the airborne radiation released from Fukushima went directly over the Pacific Ocean," explained Michael Mariotte, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service, which initiated the petition. "Even so, the Fukushima evacuation zone extended more than 25 miles to the northwest of the site, and the NRC and U.S. State Department both recommended that U.S. citizens within 50 miles of Fukushima evacuate. Such evacuations could not be effectively conducted in the U.S. under current emergency planning regulations. We need to be better prepared and we can’t rely on favorable wind patterns to protect the American people."

Dominique French, who is leading NIRS’ campaign to improve emergency response planning, added, "The NRC has relied primarily on the 1979 Three Mile Island accident and subsequent computerized accident simulations to support its emergency planning rules. But first at Chernobyl in 1986, and now at Fukushima, the real world has trumped any possible simulation. The fact is that far too many Americans live near nuclear reactors, but outside existing emergency planning zones. Based on real-life experience, these people need better protection."

"There is no invisible lead curtain surrounding nuclear power plants. We need to incorporate lessons learned from previous nuclear disasters. At the very least, we should stop pretending that emergency evacuation zones of 10 miles are adequate, and expand planning to include residents living within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant," said Eric Epstein of Three Mile Island Alert in Pennsylvania. "On Friday, March 30, 1979–while school was in session–Governor Thornburgh recommended a ‘precautionary evacuation’ for preschool children and pregnant women living within five miles of Three Mile Island. The targeted population was estimated at 5,000, but more than 144,000 central Pennsylvanians from 50 miles away fled the area–further proof that a radiological disaster is not a controlled field trip."

"Indian Point, 24 miles from New York City, sits at the epicenter of the most demographically dense area of any nuclear reactor in the nation. Even under normal conditions, traffic is congested and regional infrastructure is highly stressed. During the severe snow, rain and wind storms of the past few years, large swaths of the region have been brought to a near standstill. And yet the NRC ignores all these realities, preferring to play with its computer models. This is a dangerous game," said Michel Lee, Steering Committee, Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition.

"In lieu of the recent activities around nuclear plants both in the United States and in Japan it had become obvious that a new Emergency Planning Zones be implemented. The Shell Bluff Community is asking that the NRC establish new guidelines that would expand the radius to protect the citizens that are in arms ways of these facilities. After all Japan is still experiencing unfolding occurrences that are taking place outside of their projected protected zone. The United States must move to protect her citizens who are in these dangerous pathways," said Charles N. Utley, community organizer for the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League.

"Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Diablo Canyon nuclear plant is seen as a poster child by the nuclear industry: it is in a "low population zone", and not visible from any roads. However, families and businesses downwind from the nuclear plant and waste storage site do not consider themselves expendable, nor does invisibility negate the threat from two reactors and the radioactive wastes accumulated since 1984 that are stored on a site surrounded by 13 earthquake faults," said Jane Swanson of California’s Mothers for Peace.

"Emergency plans of local and state government advise residents that in the event of a radiological release from Diablo Canyon nuclear plant there are two choices, depending on which way the winds blow: get in our cars in an attempt to evacuate, or "shelter in place". The former leads to congested traffic on the one freeway serving the central coast of California (Highway 101) as well-founded worries of families overload the freeway and bring it to a halt. Sheltering means using masking tape around doors and windows and turning off all air intakes into our homes for an unspecified time, in the hope that the emergency lasts only a few days rather than the many months as at Fukushima. Emergency plans need to be made effective. If this is not possible, then nuclear plants need to be shut down. Human lives cannot be traded for kilowatt hours," added Swanson.

A third of the population in the U.S., or roughly 120 million people, lives within a 50 mile radius of a nuclear reactor. Current emergency planning rules require utilities to develop and exercise emergency evacuation plans within a 10 mile radius around reactors. The "ingestion pathway" currently consists of an area about 50 miles in radius and focuses on actions appropriate to protect the food ingestion pathway.

At Fukushima, and earlier at Chernobyl, interdiction of contaminated food and liquids has occurred further than 100 miles from the accident sites.

Japan is already acting to improve its emergency response capability, in the event nuclear reactors ever are allowed to operate there again. Prior to the disaster at Fukushima, the emergency planning zones for nuclear emergencies in Japan was between 8-10 kilometers (5-6 miles). The zone is now being expanded to 30 kilometers (18 miles). The actual Fukushima evacuation zone was a 20 kilometer (12 mile) radius around the site, although areas to the northwest, where the heaviest radiation on land was measured, were evacuated more than 25 miles away.

The initial co-petitioners are: Nuclear Information and Resource Service (national and lead author), Bellefonte Efficiency and Sustainability Team (TN), Beyond Nuclear (national), Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (Southeast), Citizens Action Coalition (IN), Citizen Power (PA), Citizens Awareness Network (Northeast), Citizens Within a 10-Mile Radius (MA), Citizens Environmental Coalition (NY), Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes (Great Lakes), Concerned Citizens of Shell Bluff (GA), Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone, Council on Intelligent Energy and Conservation Policy (NY), Don’t Waste Arizona, Don’t Waste Michigan, The Ecology Party of Florida, Empire State Consumer Project Inc. (NY), Grandmothers, Mothers, and More for Energy Safety (GRAMMES) (NJ), Greenpeace (national), Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition (NY), Jersey Shore Nuclear Watch (NJ), Missourians for Safe Energy, New England Coalition, Nuclear Energy Information Service (IL), NC WARN, (NC), Northwest Environmental Advocates (OR), Not On Our Fault Line (VA), People’s Alliance for Clean Energy (VA), Promoting Health and Sustainable Energy (PHASE) (NY), Public Citizen Energy Program (national), San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (CA), SEED Coalition (TX), Sierra Club of South Carolina, Three Mile Island Alert (PA), Tri-Valley CARE (CA), Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah (HEAL Utah), Vermont Public Interest Research Group, We The People Inc. (TN).

The full text of the petition is available here: http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/emergency/petitionforrulemaking22012.pdf

–30–

Fort Worth Is the 10th Largest City in the Country with Water Supplies at Risk

News Release
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Environment Texas

AUSTIN – The drinking water for 1.2 million people in Texas could be at risk of radioactive contamination from a leak or accident at a local nuclear power plant, says a new study released today by Environment Texas Research and Policy Center and the Texas Public Interest Research Group (TexPIRG). See map here, key below.

"The danger of nuclear power is too close to home. Here in Texas, the drinking water for 1.2 million people is too close to an active nuclear power plant," said Luke Metzger, Director of Environment Texas. "An accident like the one in Fukushima, Japan or a leak could spew cancer-causing radioactive waste into our drinking water."

The nuclear meltdown in Fukushima, Japan last year drew a spotlight on the many risks associated with nuclear power. After the disaster, airborne radiation left areas around the plant uninhabitable, and even contaminated drinking water sources near Tokyo, 130 miles from the plant.

According to the new report, Too Close to Home: Nuclear Power and the Threat to Drinking Water, the drinking water for 1.2 million people in Texas is within 50 miles of an active nuclear power plant – the distance the Nuclear Regulatory Commission uses to measure risk to food and water supplies. With an intake within 50 miles of the Comanche Peak nuclear plant, the city of Fort Worth ranked 10th in the nation for cities with water supplies at risk.

Radiation from a disaster like the one in Fukushima can contaminate drinking water and food supplies, as well as harm our health. But disaster or no disaster, a common leak at a nuclear power plant can also threaten the drinking water for millions of people. As our nuclear facilities get older, leaks are more common. In fact, 75 percent of U.S. nuclear plants have leaked tritium, a radioactive form of hydrogen that can cause cancer and genetic defects.

Local bodies of water also play a critical role in cooling nuclear reactors and are at risk of contamination. In the case of the Fukushima meltdown, large quantities of seawater were pumped into the plant to cool it, and contaminated seawater then leaked and was dumped back into the ocean, carrying radioactivity from the plant with it. The Colorado River provides cooling water for the South Texas Project in Texas and could be at risk.

"With nuclear power, there’s too much at risk and the dangers are too close to home. Texans shouldn’t have to worry about getting cancer from drinking a glass of water," said Melissa Cubria, Advocate for TexPIRG.

The report recommends that the United States moves to a future without nuclear power by retiring existing plants, abandoning plans for new plants, and expanding energy efficiency and the production clean, renewable energy such as wind and solar power.

In order to reduce the risks nuclear power poses to water supplies immediately, the report recommends completing a thorough safety review of U.S. nuclear power plants, requiring plant operators to implement recommended changes immediately and requiring nuclear plant operators to implement regular groundwater tests in order to catch tritium leaks, among other actions.

"Our drinking water is too important to risk radiation contamination," said Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition. "Texas should immediately abandon plans to expand the Comanche Peak and Glen Rose nuclear plants".

Luminant has proposed building two new reactors at the Comanche Peak plant in Glen, Rose, Texas and NRG Energy has proposed building two new reactors at the South Texas Project in Bay City, Texas.

"There are far cleaner, cheaper, and less-risky ways to get our energy," concluded state Representative Lon Burnam of Fort Worth. "Texas and the United States should move away from nuclear power immediately and invest in safer alternatives such as efficiency and wind and solar power."

###

The Texas Public Interest Research Group Education Fund is a nonprofit, nonpartisan consumer advocacy group. Follow us online at www.texpirg.org/edfund

Environment Texas Research and Policy Center is a state-wide citizen-based environmental group working for clean air, clean water, and open spaces. www.environmenttexas.org

Contact:

Luke Metzger
512-479-0388

Media Release:
For Immediate Release

October 1, 2011

Contact:
Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition 512-797-8481
Brett Jarmer and Robert V. Eye, Attorneys, 785-234-4040
Susan Dancer, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy, 979-479-0627

Austin, Texas Opponents of two proposed South Texas Project nuclear reactors received a favorable order from Atomic Safety and Licensing Board judges allowing a full hearing to proceed regarding the project’s foreign ownership. Licensing efforts may be impacted as a result. In April, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told Unistar Nuclear Energy it could not get an operating license for its planned reactor at Calvert Cliffs in Maryland because it was fully owned by France’s Électricité de France (EDF)-a foreign entity.

"Federal law is clear that foreign controlled corporations are not eligible to apply for a license to build and operate nuclear power plants. The evidence is that Toshiba is in control of the project and this precludes obtaining an NRC license for South Texas Project 3 & 4," said Brett Jarmer, a lawyer for the Intervenors; SEED Coalition, Public Citizen and South Texas Association for Responsible Energy.

"Foreign investment in U.S nuclear projects is not per se prohibited; but Toshiba is paying all the bills for the STP 3 & 4 project. This makes it difficult to accept that Toshiba doesn’t control the project," said attorney Robert Eye.

"National security and safety concerns justify NRC’s limits on foreign ownership and control of nuclear reactors," said Karen Hadden, Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition. "What if a foreign company runs a U.S. reactor carelessly? What if a nation that’s friendly today becomes hostile toward the US in the future and tries threaten us with our own reactors?"

"Even if the reactors are operated by the South Texas Nuclear Operating Company, they will get their orders from foreign owners. What if their concerns are more about cost-cutting and less about safety?" asked Susan Dancer, President of South Texas Association for Responsible Energy. "Japanese investors would have us believe that they can come to America and safely build, own and operate nuclear plants, and that we should not concern ourselves with passé laws and regulations, but the Fukushima disaster has demonstrated the flawed Japanese model of nuclear safety. Our nuclear reactors should be controlled by the people most concerned about our country: fellow Americans."

Licensing hearing for South Texas Project reactors to be held in Austin, Aug. 17th – 19th

August 15, 2011

Media Release
Contact
Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition, 512-797-8481
Tom "Smitty" Smith, Public Citizen, 512-477-1155

Download this press release in pdf format for printing.

AUSTIN – A hearing on the application to expand the South Texas Nuclear plant will be held in Austin from Aug. 17th to19th. This hearing raises key issues, especially in light of the explosions, fires and meltdowns at Fukushima. We will raise the issue of whether it is possible to control multiple reactors after a fire or explosion at one of the units. We will question the need for more reactors since new federal energy efficiency laws are in place. Another major issue is that the applicant (Nuclear Innovation North America – NINA) doesn’t meet federal requirements prohibiting foreign ownership, control or domination of a U.S. nuclear facility.

The South Texas Project expansion has been hurting for investors. TEPCO, owner of the ill-fated Fukushima reactors, will no longer invest in the reactors. Austin Energy has chosen not to invest and City Public Service in San Antonio has reduced its 50% interest to only 7%. Even NRG, the major force behind the reactor project, is no longer investing. The nuclear license is still being sought by NINA- a partnership of NRG Energy and Toshiba – a foreign company. Opponents have called for a halt to licensing, especially since a license could be sold in the future.

"Fukushima shows just how dangerous it is to have a lot of reactors in one location. We will raise safety concerns about locating so many nuclear reactors close together," said Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition’s Executive Director. "We’re raising concerns about the legality of foreign ownership of the proposed reactors."

"Texas doesn’t need or want more nuclear power," said Tom "Smitty" Smith of Public Citizen’s Texas office. "We have safer, cleaner and more affordable energy options available today. New federal building codes and appliance standards will improve efficiency, making the two additional nuclear plants unnecessary. San Antonio’s reduced nuclear project share is being replaced through energy efficiency, wind and solar power and natural gas."

An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) panel–an independent body within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)–will hear oral arguments and conduct an evidentiary hearing beginning Aug. 17th in Austin, Texas. It will begin at 9:30 a.m. in Room 2210, Building F at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), 12100 Park 35 Circle in Austin. On the 18th and 19th the hearing will continue in Building E, Room 201 S at TCEQ.

The public is invited to the hearing, but participation is limited to the parties admitted to the proceeding: the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy, Public Citizen, the applicant, NINA, and NRC staff.

The South Texas Project COL application was submitted to the NRC on Sept. 20, 2007, the first such application in the United States in nearly 30 years. The license would allow construction and operation of South Texas Project reactors 3 & 4 at the existing Bay City, Texas site.

Over the past four years, the proposed nuclear project has experienced:

• Cost estimates that have skyrocketed from $5.6 billion to over $18 billion.

• A major pull-back by NRG’s partner, San Antonio’s CPS Energy, from a 50% stake down to 7%, which left a huge investor gap.

• NRG Energy and TEPCO will no longer invest in the project. Previously anticipated loan guarantees from Japan now appear unlikely. Despite the lack of further investment, NINA continues to seek a license for the proposed reactors. NRG will give Toshiba $20 million for this purpose.

Individuals or groups not admitted to the proceeding can submit "written limited appearance statements" to the ASLB. Anyone wishing to submit a written statement can email hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or fax to (301) 415-1101, or send mail to: Office of the Secretary, Attn. Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. In addition, copies of written statements should be sent to Michael.Gibson@nrc.gov and Jonathan.Eser@nrc.gov; by fax to (301-415-5599), or by mail to: Administrative Judge Michael M. Gibson, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop: T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

Documents related to the South Texas Project COL application are available on the NRC website. Documents pertaining to the ASLB proceeding are available in the agency’s electronic hearing docket. NOTE: Anyone wishing to take photos or use a camera to record the hearing should contact the NRC Office of Public Affairs beforehand.

###