Stabenow told the Petoskey News-Review:

“The most important thing is that we have the very best safety regulations on those and that as they complete their operations, they aren’t allowed to do more. I do think there needs to be discussions between (the United States) and the Canadians about the safety provisions and the kind of oversight on the Canadian-side of the drilling they are doing. Personally, I prefer that we wouldn’t be doing any drilling in the Great Lakes.”

Stabenow told the News-Review that she is confident that the U.S. ban on Great Lakes drilling will remain in place despite pressures to develop more domestic energy sources.

She also said that the BP disaster is a “call” for the U.S. to develop a comprehensive clean energy strategy.

The Hill reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told Senate committee chairs that he will move comprehensive energy legislation in July.

According to The Hill, Reid told the committee chairs:

“I think it is extremely important that you each examine what could be included in a comprehensive energy bill that would address the unfolding disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.”

“Among the actions I think we need to explore are ensuring that the oil companies are held accountable for their actions and the damages caused by their operations.”

The Fermi nuclear generating complex in Monroe County (Nuclear Regulatory Commission photo)

Plans to create a long-term high-level nuclear waste storage site along Lake Erie at DTE Energy’s Fermi power-generating complex in Monroe County have triggered safety concerns by area residents who warn that the spent fuel could be vulnerable to accident or attack. So far federal regulators have dismissed their calls for enhanced oversight.

DTE Energy’s Fermi 2 plant is an 1122-megawatt boiling water reactor that has been in service since January 1988. The reactor is powered by uranium fuel rods, a portion of which must be replaced every 18 months. For decades the spent, but otherwise still highly radioactive, fuel rods have been housed in a temporary storage pool at the plant.

This year, DTE plans to begin the process of transferring the material into steel-lined concrete casks for long term storage on the property.

Company spokesman John Austerberry said that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission allows on-site storage of high level waste for 30 years after conclusion of operations at a plant. Fermi 2’s license expires in 2025. Austerberry said that dry cask storage is widely used by nuclear power plants and that there has never been an accidental release from the casks.

The Maryland-based nuclear watchdog group Beyond Nuclear learned of the plan to begin cask storage through an April notice in the Federal Register, said attorney Terry Lodge who represents the group, which has members near the Fermi plant.

Lodge said that his clients are concerned that nuclear waste will be less secure when it is transferred into casks and stored away from the reactor.

“Reactors themselves are usually within a containment-type facility that is thick and reinforced and might withstand a small plane collision,” Lodge said. “We think the casks themselves are sitting ducks. If one of them was targeted, radiation would become wind borne. It would be difficult and hazardous to contain.”

Government-sponsored tests have shown that anti-tank weapons and airplane crashes could damage the casks, he said.

In a May 7 petition to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, Lodge argued that regulators should hold a hearing on his clients’ concerns about DTE‘s storage plans.

People who live near the site are concerned that the plans do not provide adequate safety and security for themselves and the environment, he argued. The ASLB is the only body with the authority to review the Nuclear Regulatory Commission-approved plan.

The group said that there should be full review of the safety, security, and environmental impacts of the Fermi 2 dry cask storage installation.

They also demanded that “an independent quality assurance inspection on the design and manufacture of Holtec International high-level radioactive waste storage/transport containers be required before their deployment at Fermi.”

The group notes that a retired NRC staff member involved with cask inspections has warned of possible structural problems with the containers.

So far the ASLB has rejected the group’s efforts at involvement, even though some members live within a few miles of the plant.

In an Aug. 21 ruling, the commission stated that petitioners “cannot obtain a hearing by simply suggesting that the order should be strengthened in some way.”

The commission also downplayed the group’s concerns about potential radioactive release from the casks, saying that a cask “is essentially a passive structure rather than an operating facility, and there therefore is less chance of widespread radioactive release.”

“In general,” the commission stated, “petitioners will rarely be able demonstrate standing in a case such as this, where the Commission issues an order intended to improve safety conditions.”

“It doesn’t take a lawyer to understand the simple fact that there are certain risks to the public of operating a nuclear plant or, for that matter, a coal-burning plant, or an oil refinery or any number of other enterprises. Life is full of risks.” The Monroe Evening News editorialized Sept. 6: “The larger question seems to be whether those most exposed to those obvious risks should have a right to suggest ways of reducing those risks.”

Nuclear Regulatory Commission photo

The board that oversees the licensing of nuclear power plants has ordered a hearing on concerns raised by opponents of a new reactor planned by DTE Energy.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ruled July 31 that four of the concerns raised by environmental groups and people who live near DTE energy’s Fermi complex in Monroe County warrant further examination.

One issue that must now be addressed is how DTE plans to manage low-level radioactive waste produced at the plant.

The Barnwell disposal facility in South Carolina used to take most of the low-level waste generated at nuclear power plants but will no longer accept waste from Michigan, the board stated, and DTE has acknowledged that its plan involves only six months worth of storage capacity though it is requesting a 40-year license for the reactor.

“[T]he closure of Barnwell will force DTE to store its Class B and C wastes onsite unless it can develop an alternative solution, such as entering into a contract with an offsite facility to store the wastes indefinitely,” the ASLB wrote. “However, the [Environmental Review] neither discusses the need for extended onsite storage during the license term, nor analyzes the environmental consequences of extended onsite storage. It also does not reveal any plan for an alternative to extended onsite storage.”

The board ordered a hearing on the environmental and public health consequences of the need for extended onsite storage of low level radioactive waste.

The board also ordered further review of how DTE’s plans will impact the watershed.

Specifically, it ordered further examination of the possibility that releases from the plant could lead to “increasing algal blooms and the proliferation of a newly identified species of harmful algae in the western Lake Erie basin.”

The board ordered further review of what impact a new nuclear reactor at the Fermi complex might have on the local Eastern fox snake population.

The Eastern fox snake is listed as a threatened species by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

In testimony to the board DTE argued that no Eastern fox snakes are living at the site of the proposed project, however, a statement submitted to the ASLB by Michigan Department of Natural Resources biologist Lori Sargent said that MDNR records from 2008 show “a viable population of Eastern fox snake at the site of the proposed project.”

The board noted Sargent’s warning that “going forward with the construction would not only kill snakes but destroy the habitat in which they live and possibly exterminate the species from the area.”

The board dismissed concerns related to the possible health effects of radiation from the plant.

Issues such as “incidences of childhood cancers near nuclear power plants,” they said, do not “fall within the scope of this proceeding” and are not “material to a decision that the NRC must make.”

ASLB also rejected arguments that declining electricity demand in Michigan may render the project unnecessary.

Michael Keegan of the group Don’t Waste Michigan lives near the Fermi complex and is among those working to block new reactor construction.

Keegan said that his group plans to “vigorously argue” the contentions allowed by the ASLB and will appeal the many contentions that the board denied.

However, he said, “because the process is skewed heavily in favor of the facility we cannot appeal anything until after the hearing.”

The date for the hearing has not been set.

(Photo: mandj98 via Flickr.com)

But in order for these issues to be raised at the May 5 hearing, they must be approved by the ASLB. And the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and DTE Energy are urging the board to disregard virtually all of the coalition’s concerns.

The points of contention submitted by the group in March relate largely to the radioactive, toxic and thermal impacts they say the new reactor will have on Lake Erie’s western basin. Additional concerns relate to the potential for damage to people and wildlife and the inadequacy of evacuation and safety planning.

In responses submitted to the ASLB last week, DTE stated that the group’s concerns were without merit and characterized most of them as “outside the scope of this proceeding.”

NRC recognized only one element of one the 14 issues — that information regarding the soil and groundwater at the site of the proposed reactor is missing from DTE’s application.

Petitioners criticize the process as favoring the utility company.

While project opponents were required to file all contentions by March 9, DTE is still a year away from finalizing its design for the reactor, according to Michael Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan, a group opposed to Fermi’s expansion.

Obstacles to public participation in the reactor permitting process have been well documented.

Richard Webster of the Eastern Environmental Law Center was recently involved with raising contentions in the relicensing process for New Jersey’s Oyster Creek nuclear plant.

In an interview with Michigan Messenger, Webster compared the process of raising concerns with the ASLB to a game of shoots and ladders: “At every step there is a danger you can get thrown out.”

The utilities companies get years to prepare their applications and they can amend plans, he said. “There is a contrast in time and contrast in resources” between utility companies and people or groups raising concerns.

Getting the voices of citizens into the review process is very difficult, Webster said, because the ASLB petition process often necessitates raising funding for nuclear experts and attorneys.

Of the 104 currently operating nuclear power plants in the United States, Webster said, 45 have been relicensed without a public hearing.

“Hearings are mandatory for new plants,” he said. “Whether the public will be involved is the question.”

Outside groups can help regulators learn of important safety issues, Webster said. “At Oyster Creek we raised a safety issue and the NRC has instructed staff to enhance enforcement of issue we raised.”

Webster said that government studies conducted following the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979 recommended that public funding be set aside for citizens groups wishing to pursue safety concerns during the reactor licensing process. The nuclear industry has consistently blocked that recommendation.

“What is clear is that in the absence of meaningful public participation staff are willing to settle for too little, too early,” Webster said.

Concerns About Credibility of Nuclear Regulatory Commission Shared by ASLB Judge

Earlier this month Judge Alan Rosenthal, an administrative law judge newly appointed to the ASLB panel that is considering the controversial proposal to build a high-level nuclear waste repository at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, said that he was amazed that the NRC was taking the position that none of the 229 separate contentions filed by the state of Nevada was admissible.

“I found it difficult offhand to believe that Nevada counsel were so unfamiliar with the requirements of [the law] that they simple [sic] were unable to fashion a single contention that met those requirements,” Rosenthal stated during an April 1 hearing on the admissibility of contentions in that case.

Rosenthal went on to say that if it turns out that NRC staff was dismissing contentions improperly it would, “create the impression that it is not a disinterested participant in the licensing process but rather a spear carrier for [the developers]. Once such impression has been garnered, there would remain little reason to credit anything that the staff might have to offer.”

NRC spokesman Scott Burnell said that no statistics are kept on what portion of contentions are admitted for official review.

Detroit Edison officials today submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a combined license application for a possible new nuclear power plant next to Fermi 2 that would take six to seven years to complete and produce up to 3,700 jobs for the region.

Edison is a subsidiary of DTE Energy. A new 1,500-megawatt plant in Newport would cost about $10 billion. That’s about 35 percent larger than the cost of Fermi 2, a 1,130-megawatt plant that cost $4.5 billion to build, said Anthony F. Earley Jr., DTE Energy chairman and chief executive officer.

While supporters of the nuclear fuel option are quick to point out that nuclear power plants don’t emit any greenhouse gases, there are other facts that bear consideration when thinking of adding yet another nuclear plant amongst a civilian population.

Just as Britain decides to build new nuclear power stations, new research, commissioned by the German government, reveals that children under five who live within 5 km of a nuclear power plant, have twice the risk of suffering from the blood cancer leukemia.

In Britain, discussion of the health risks has largely been absent from the debate over new nuclear power stations, though it raged post-Chernobyl and in the late 1980s and early 1990s when cancer clusters were found around the village of Seascale in Cumbria, close to the Sellafield nuclear plant, and around the nuclear site at Dounreay in Scotland.

“What is very important about this study is its depth and rigour,” says Dr Paul Dorfman of Warwick University who was co-secretary of CERRIE, the independent committee established by the British government in 2001 to examine the risks of internal radiation.

As if the “normally” emitted radiation concerns aren’t troubling enough, did you ever take a gander at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Web site?

Any and all “events” at all nuclear power plants across the nation are required to file reports of incidents with the NRC, and the NRC is in turn required to post these events to the public. Not only are there reports on nearly any given day, every day of the year, but quite often the norm is multiple event reports on any given day of the year!

Elimination of greenhouse gases is a goal we cannot achieve soon enough, but certainly there must be alternatives that don’t sacrifice the most innocent among us?

(Matthew DeLong covers the McCain campaign for Michigan Messenger’s site, The Washington Independent.)