Nuclear safety in the United States

In 1981, workers inadvertently reversed pipe restraints at the Diablo Canyon Power Plant reactors, compromising seismic protection systems, which further undermined confidence in nuclear safety.

[6] There are likely to be increased requirements for on-site spent fuel management and elevated design basis threats at nuclear power plants.

The recommendations include "new standards aimed at strengthening operators' ability to deal with a complete loss of power, ensuring plants can withstand floods and earthquakes and improving emergency response capabilities".

[10] In February 2011, a major manufacturer in the nuclear industry reported a potential "substantial safety hazard" with control rods at more than two dozen reactors around the USA.

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy said it had discovered extensive cracking and "material distortion," and recommended that the boiling water reactors using its Marathon control rod blades replace them more frequently than previously told.

The following nuclear power plants have a two percent or greater chance of having PGA over 0.15g in the next 50 years: Diablo Canyon, Calif. (Closure date of the two units: 2024/2025); Sequoyah, Tenn.; H.B.

When a person has lived in the area longer, they tend to worry less about the possibility of nuclear terror due to their awareness of what is happening within the power plant.

[26] In February 1993, a man drove his car past a check point at the Three Mile Island Nuclear plant, then broke through an entry gate.

But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in revising its security rules, decided not to require that plants be able to defend themselves against groups carrying sophisticated weapons.

One plant, Florida's Turkey Point NGS, survived a direct hit by Category 5 Hurricane Andrew in 1992, with no damage to the containment.

However, a highly similar test was done at Sandia National Laboratories and filmed (see Containment building), and the target was essentially undamaged (reinforced concrete is strongly resistant both to impact and to fire).

The NRC's Chairman has said "Nuclear power plants are inherently robust structures that our studies provide adequate protection in a hypothetical attack by an airplane.

The NRC has also taken actions that require nuclear power plant operators to be able to manage large fires or explosions - no matter what has caused them.

In a U.S. nuclear power plant, unlike in most other industries, approved procedures carry the force of law and to deliberately violate one is a criminal act.

In 1976 Gregory Minor, Richard Hubbard, and Dale Bridenbaugh "blew the whistle" on safety problems at nuclear power plants in the United States.

The new study will be based on actual test results, on probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodology, and on the evaluated actions of government agencies.

The existing studies are: Reactor vendors now routinely calculate probabilistic risk assessments of their nuclear power plant designs.

[citation needed] The NRC established a classification scale for nuclear power plant events to ensure consistency in the communications and emergency response.

Public protests and a combined Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raid in 1989 stopped production at the Rocky Flats Plant.

[43] As noted in a scientific journal, "Exposures of a large population in the Denver area to plutonium and other radionuclides in the exhaust plumes from the plant date back to 1953.

[48][49] Many of the early safety procedures and waste disposal practices were inadequate, and government documents have since confirmed that Hanford's operations released significant amounts of radioactive materials into the air and the Columbia River, which still threatens the health of residents and ecosystems.

[50] The weapons production reactors were decommissioned at the end of the Cold War, but the decades of manufacturing left behind 53 million US gallons (200,000 m3) of high-level radioactive waste,[51] an additional 25 million cubic feet (710,000 m3) of solid radioactive waste, 200 square miles (520 km2) of contaminated groundwater beneath the site[52] and occasional discoveries of undocumented contaminations that slow the pace and raise the cost of cleanup.

[60] On March 28, 1979, equipment failures and operator error contributed to loss of coolant and a partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant in Pennsylvania.

[61] The scope and complexity of the accident became clear over the course of five days, as employees of Met Ed, Pennsylvania state officials, and members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tried to understand the problem, communicate the situation to the press and local community, decide whether the accident required an emergency evacuation, and ultimately end the crisis.

The NRC's authorization of the release of 40,000 gallons of radioactive waste water directly in the Susquehanna River led to a loss of credibility with the press and community.

[68] The United States Government Accountability Office reported more than 150 incidents from 2001 to 2006 alone of nuclear plants not performing within acceptable safety guidelines.

[69] Seventy-one percent of all recorded major nuclear accidents, including meltdowns, explosions, fires, and loss of coolants, occurred in the United States, and they happened during both normal operations as well as emergency situations such as floods, droughts, and earthquakes.

[6] There are likely to be increased requirements for on-site spent fuel management and elevated design basis threats at nuclear power plants.

Also, the schedule for developing new requirements for protecting dry cask spent fuel storage from sabotage has been put back by five years, to the end of 2023.