Japanese Nuclear Accident And U.S. Response May 17, 2011
Dec 25, 2015
Japanese Nuclear Accident
And U.S. ResponseMay 17, 2011
Tsunami Initiates Nuclear Accident
On March 11 a magnitude 9.0 earthquake occurred off the east coast of Japan– All operating nuclear
power plants shut-down safely
An hour later a massive tsunami—about 45 feet high—struck the east coast– Critical equipment at
Fukushima Daiichi plant was destroyed
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Before the Accident
Unit 1Unit 2
Unit 3
Unit 4
Units 5, 6
At the time of the earthquake
Reactors 1, 2 and 3 operating
Reactors 4, 5 and 6 shutdown for maintenance, inspection,
refueling
Tsunami Damage Looking Toward the Plant
No Backup Power for Cooling Systems at Fukushima Daiichi 1-4
Cooling systems eventually stopped working due to lack of off-site power and back-up power systems
Fuel in reactor heated up– Fuel cladding reacted with water at high temperature,
generating hydrogen gas
Containment pressure increased; TEPCO vented hydrogen in containment to atmosphere to prevent overpressure
Hydrogen explosions occurred in secondary containment
Plant operators injected sea water into reactors to cool fuel, prevent further damage
Boiling Water Reactor Design
Spent Fuel Pool
Reactor Vessel
Suppression Pool (Torus)
Primary Containment
Steel Containment Vessel
Secondary Containment
Boiling Water Reactor DesignAt Fukushima Daiichi
Continual Recovery Efforts
Continue to cool and stabilize reactors 1-3 Provide additional cooling water to used
fuel pools in reactors 1-4 Provide long-term cooling systems Process radioactive water Conduct detailed evaluation of event Decommission Fukushima reactors
U.S. Nuclear Plants Are Safe
“Our nuclear power plants have undergone exhaustive study, and have been declared safe for any number of extreme contingencies. ”
President Barack ObamaMarch 17, 2011
“All the plants in the United States are designed to deal with a wide range of natural disasters, whether it’s earthquakes, tornados, tsunamis, other seismic events. We require all of them to deal with those.”
NRC Chairman Gregory JaczkoMarch 17, 2011
U.S. Nuclear Energy FacilitiesPrepared for Extreme Events
Maximum credible earthquakes, floods, other natural events
Total loss of power Hydrogen generated as a result of fuel damage
is removed from the plant through special vent Post 9/11: response for aircraft impact, loss of
large areas of the plant Industry is prepared for the unexpected…
exceeds NRC requirements U.S. industry dedicated to continuous learning
Emergency Planning for U.S.Nuclear Energy Facilities
10-mile emergency planning zone (evacuation or sheltering); 50-mile monitoring zone for environment and food.
Comprehensive industry/local/state and federal response to emergency events
Radiation monitoring by plant site, NRC, and state and local personnel
Decisions on public protective action measures made by state or local authorities based on recommendations from plant operator and NRC
Emergency response exercises coordinated with state, local, and federal officials, evaluated by the NRC and FEMA
U.S. Government Response
Multi-agency task force (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy, Department of Defense) supporting Japan recovery efforts
President Obama directed the NRC to perform a comprehensive review of U.S. reactors
NRC established agency task force to develop lessons learned from Fukushima Daiichi accident to provide short-term and long-term analysis of the events
NRC Task Force to Review the Events in Japan
NRC is currently reviewing seismic, flooding, station black out, severe accident management and other guidance
Task force will provide recommendations for near-term action and framework and topics for longer-term review
Final task force briefing on July 19 and near-term report issued in July
“To date the task force has not identified any issues that undermine our confidence in the continued safety and emergency planning of U.S. plants” – NRC Task Force, May 12, 2011
Photo courtesy of the NRC
Examples of Differences Between U.S. and Japanese Reactor
OperationsUnited States
1. Post 9/11/01 actions to address large fires and explosions
2. Independent regulatory agency with 4,000 employees and $1 billion budget
3. Industry organization for oversight and sharing operating experience
4. Site-specific simulator for each reactor
Japan1. No similar action taken
2. Regulator is part of Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
3. No similar industry organization
4. Shared simulators for multiple plants
NRC Licensing Actions after March 9, 2011
Power uprates approved for Limerick and Point Beach reactors
License renewals granted for Vermont Yankee and Palo Verde 1, 2 and 3
Final Environmental Impact Statements for new reactor construction at Vogtle plant in Georgia and Summer plant in S.C.
Design certification for the GE-Hitachi advanced reactor design (ESBWR) issued for public comment
Outlook for U.S. Nuclear Industry
Nuclear energy remains vital part of U.S. and global electricity portfolio
Updates to equipment, training and operational procedures to address lessons learned from Fukushima
Four to eight new reactors operational by 2020
Demand for electricity will continue to increase– Nuclear energy will remain an option to provide low-
carbon, affordable electricity– U.S. reactor manufacturers and suppliers will
continue to participate in the $400 billion global market for nuclear energy
Nuclear Industry Policy Priorities
Stability at the NRC: renomination and confirmation of two commissioners this year
Full response to Fukushima accident Ensure loan guarantee program is
workable financing platform for new reactors
Alignment of U.S. government agencies to support export of U.S nuclear energy technology and services
Constructive congressional oversight
Used Fuel Management Requires National Policy
Used fuel is safely stored at reactor sites
Older used fuel rods pose little additional risk due to declining heat and radiation over time
Federal government responsible for used nuclear fuel disposal
Temporary fuel storage at 1 or 2 locations important step toward moving fuel from reactors
U.S. Industry Taking Steps to Make Safe Nuclear Energy Facilities
Safer Nuclear energy industry committed to take
short-term and long-term actions Short-term action : Verify readiness to manage
extreme events Long-term action:
– Exhaustive analysis of Japanese accident and how reactors, systems, structures, components, fuel and operators performed
– Incorporate lessons learned into U.S. reactor designs and operating practices
Short-Term IndustryActions to Ensure Safety
Verify each plant's capability to respond to major challenges, such as aircraft impacts, loss of large areas of plant due to natural events, fires or explosions
Verify each plant's capability to manage loss of off-site power
Verify capability to mitigate flooding and the impact of floods on systems inside and outside the plant
Inspect important equipment needed to respond to extreme events
Information Sources
Nuclear Energy Institute (www.nei.org) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (www.nrc.gov) U.S. Department of Energy (www.energy.gov) International Atomic Energy Agency (www.iaea.org) American Nuclear Society (www.ans.org) Health Physics Society (www.hps.org) Japanese Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency
(http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/) Japan Atomic Industrial Forum (www.jaif.or.jp/english/) Tokyo Electric Power Company
(http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/index-e.html)