2/25/2013 BOARD OF SELECTMEN Minutes

Home Browse Search

0- the pools to maximum capacity rather could result in inadequate technical Key Recommendations than use dry casks. reviews of complex issues. Below we list our top eight recommenda- The NRC must strengthen its safety The president must appoint people to tions for changes the NRC should make requirements. For example, it does not the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who in its regulations and actions to improve require U.S. reactor owners to plan for will make public safety their top priority. U.S. nuclear power safety and security. and be able to cope with severe accidents This is not the case today. For example, The NRC should make these changes its like the one that occurred at the Fuku- four of the five commissioners recently top priority. shima Daiichi plant. Nor does it require voted to extend the deadline for nuclear A complete list of our recommen- new reactors to be safer than existing power reactors to comply with fire pro- dations, with additional explanation of tecrion regulations until 2016 at the each, follows this overview of the top earliest. eight. If the NRC does not implement If the NRC does not these changes on its own, Congress Change Is Needed Now should exercise its oversight role and change its regulations, Since its founding in 1969,the Union of require the agency to do so. new reactors will not be Concerned Scientists has worked to make nuclear power safer and more secure.We Extend Regulations to Cover significantly safer,and have consistently advocated most of the Severe Accidents measures listed below to address the seri- The NRC should extend the scope of as the number of ous shortcomings in U.S. nuclear plant its regulations to include the prevention reactors increases so safety and security against terrorist attack. and mitigation ofsevere accidents. So although most of these recommenda- The NRC defines "severe" accidents as will the chances of a tions are not new, the situation in Japan those more serious than the so-called catastrophic event. underscores their importance. We have "design-basis"accidents that U.S.reactors also developed several new recommenda- are designed to withstand.While unlikely, tions in response to the Fukushima crisis. severe accidents can occur—as in Fuku- We strongly urge the NRC to make shima—and can cause substantial dam- ones. Because additional safety features U.S.nuclear power safer and more secure age to the reactor core and failure of the generally entail additional costs, safer by adopting all the following mea- containment building, leading to large designs may lose out in the marketplace sures, and we urge Congress and the releases of radiation. However, NRC to those that reduce costs by cutting safety administration to ensure the NRC fol- regulations are focused on design-basis features.'If the NRC does not change its lows through on its commitments. accidents and are far less stringent in regulations, new reactors will not be significantly safer, and as the number of reactors increases so will the chances of a catastrophic event. The NRC must also consistently en- Trq� r force its regulations. Even when the agency has imposed strong standards, serious safety problems have continued to arise because of lax enforcement. For example, following a serious fire at an Alabama plant in 1975, the NRC issued . fire protection regulations in 1980 and C – again in 2004.Yet today,more than three dozen reactors still do not comply with either set of regulations (despite the fact , that fire remains a dominant risk factor for reactor core damage). Congress must take its oversight role , seriously and ensure that the NRC does its job well. Moreover, Congress should not order the NRC to further "stream- line"its regulations and processes,which ®AP PhotcMally Santana 2 UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS