Amy Hewes’ recent commentary, “A pact with the devil” (Feb. 22), makes several false contentions. What New Times readers should know is that the dry cask system used to store spent fuel at Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) is safe and robust, and that the transportation of spent fuel to a potential offsite storage facility would be a safe, well-managed and highly regulated activity.
At our dry cask facility, spent fuel is safely stored in stainless steel canisters, which are then placed inside thick steel and concrete shielding casks that are bolted into robust pads built on top of bedrock to safely withstand the effects of an earthquake. The system we employ is in use throughout the world, and we selected it several years ago following an in-depth public participation and regulatory oversight process.
If one of the inner canisters were to be transported offsite to a storage facility, it would be placed in a transportation cask that is designed to withstand impacts, puncturing, or other potential hazards that could be faced in travel.
For an example of how robust the current transport cask system is, take a look at an online video of a scale test where a projectile traveling at 600 miles per hour is unable to breach the outer cask that protects the inner, sealed canister.
To be clear, the storage system we employ is safe and nothing is more important to PG&E then ensuring the safety of our employees and surrounding communities.
The question we should be asking is not whether spent fuel can be safely stored onsite (it is) or can the fuel be safely transported to another location (it can). The real question is why should we have to continue storing spent fuel onsite at all?
The fact is that the federal government made a commitment to accept and store spent fuel, and it is important to our customers, and our host communities, that the government fulfills this commitment. We strongly support policies and legislation to achieve this goal, and individuals and groups that are engaged in this issue would serve this region well by offering similar support.
We encourage the community to learn more about this issue and the plant in general. Public tours of DCPP, which include a visit to the dry cask storage facility, are available, and information to schedule a tour can be obtained at diablocanyonpge.com.
Members of our community should also know that we recently announced the application process for the Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Engagement Panel, which is being created to foster open dialogue between members of the local community and PG&E on topics regarding the decommissioning of the plant, including fuel storage. Please visit the panel website at pge.com/engagementpanel to obtain more information.
Tom Jones
director of strategic initiatives
PG&E
This article appears in Spring Arts Annual 2018.
NRC facts PG&E didn’t tell you:
The thick wall shielding casks have air vents for cooling of the thin-wall canister and fuel, so do not provide protection if the 1/2″ thin-wall canisters leak.
A 2-year old Diablo thin-wall canister was found to have all the conditions for cracking. The NRC states that moisture will dissolve salts — one of the major triggers to start cracks. Once a crack starts it will grow through the wall in 16 years.
PG&E has not plan in place to find cracks, repair cracks or stop leaking canisters.
At a recent Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee (DCISC)meeting, PG&E’s Strickland stated the reason PG&E didn’t select thick-wall metal casks [10″ to 19.75″ thick instead of 1/2″ thick] is because thick-wall casks are too heavy. The opposite is true. Thin-wall canisters must be stored in thick wall transport casks before they can be moved. The Holtec high burnup transport cask weights up to 225 US tons when loaded. The thick-wall storage casks weight about 125 tons.
Peter Lam, the former NRC judge who approved the Holtec thin-wall Diablo Canyon canisters, said at a recent DCISC meeting he was not aware of the cracking issues with these thin-wall steel canisters at the time he approved them.
PG&E should recognize the error of their ways and switch to proven thick-wall metal casks that can be inspected, repaired, maintained and monitored to PREVENT leaks. Casks that providing continuous pressure monitoring and continuous radiation monitoring. PG&E thin-wall cans provide neither.
We do not need a repeat of San Bruno, but we’re heading for much worse if PG&E doesn’t change their inferior standards for storing this lethal waste. What will it take for PG&E to do the right thing?
Holtec and the NRC admit if unborated water reaches the fuel in the canisters, it will go critical.
If 5% air reaches inside the canisters, the fuel can explode do the hydrides from the higher burnup fuel PG&E uses. PG&E knows all this. Why are they ignoring these problems?
Regarding HR3053, PG&E likes this bill because it will legally allow the federal government to own and have all liability for their nuclear waste — right where it sits at Diablo. It also removes our right to input, transparency and oversite. It takes away our democratic rights while removing existing critical storage and transport safety requirements. The main sponsor of this bill, Sen. Shimkus, knows all this, but does not share this information with the elected officials when he educates them on his bill. That is just a small list of problems with this bill. Critical transport risks are ignored. Problems with cracking canisters, brittle fuel rods, and inadequate transport infrastructure are ignored.
Recommendations:
Oppose HR3053
Use proven thick-wall casks that can be inspected (inside and out), maintained, monitored, repaired to PREVENT leaks. Store in a reinforced concrete building for additional environmental and security protection. Must have a plan in place to maintain and replace containers and ensure fuel assemblies and fuel baskets do not fail.
No container will last as long as we need, but existing thin-wall canisters cannot even be maintained to prevent leaks.
Don’t believe false promises of future solutions. Would you buy a car that could not be inspected, maintained and repaired and had no early warning systems to prevent failure? Even the cheapest car meets those requirements. These multi-million dollar thin-wall Holtec canister systems meet NONE of those basic critical requirements. These are features that should be built into any design. Instead, the NRC is approving inferior thin-wall canister systems because they are another captured agency. PG&E can do better and must do better.
See government and scientific sources and learn more at http://SanOnofreSafety.org
Anyone who disagrees with my comment should include their scientific sources for their disagreement — not nuclear industry talking points.
No one has ever been hurt by this type of storage. Whereas, if you burn stuff, like fossil fuels, it goes into the air for all of us to breathe.
Look up your own source Donna.
The fact there are millions of pounds of toxic radioactive waste at Diablo that needs to be stored for tens of thousands of years, means there is little consolation when a nuclear industry cheerleader and employee tells us nobody has been injured during the first few decades of storage.
Also, considering the nature of radioactivity, it is premature to say that nobody has been harmed yet. The complete results are not yet in.
One thing that is clear: experts within the nuclear Industry have stated repeatedly in official documents and elsewhere that the storage methods used at Diablo Canyon are temporary at best and are absolutely Unsuited for safe permanent storage. There is no arguing this fact. Experts across the industry agree.
The other troubling factor is we have no alternative storage plans approved to be used.
That means the millions upon millions of pounds of toxic radioactive waste at Diablo remain a BIG problem with no adequate solution at this time and few prospects for the future.
It seems the height of irresponsibility to continue to pile on the radioactive waste when there is no adequate plan for dealing with it in the long run. Serious safety concerns remain and are certain to increase with each new year bringing degradation to the temporary storage facilities in our community and putting us all,and our beautiful and sacred central coast, at grave risk in the long term.