SUN Exposé Radioactive Leaks

The New York Times and the Washington Post are well known for their exposés of a cover-up operation in Washington, And now the Ann Arbor SUN joins in the journalistic tradition by exposing a cover-up right here in Michigan.

The cover-up involves a series of accidents and questionable practices by one of Michigan's largest corporations, Consumers Power Company. Consumers' Palisades nuclear plant has dumped radioactive wastes into the environment a number of times in the past six months.

Not only has the company denied most of these accidents at their South Haven plant publicly, but the media have refused to publish information on most the leaks, even after their own investigations confirmed the problems at Palisades.

Even more serious, Consumers Power Company has been slow to report the incidents to the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Commissioner Joan Wolfe of the DNR has called for a hearing on the Consumers nuclear plants (Consumers also has a plant, Big Rock, in Charlevoix), and the AEC has begun an intensive investigation into the situation. Because of its bad safety record, Palisades is one of 21 plants across the country involved in a snit begun by Ralph Nader to close these dangerous plants.

Consumers had claimed to generate more than half its electricity by nuclear power beginning in 1980 or '81. But that plan is now in trouble, as the company faces problems in all its plants, even those not yet built. The problems include:

–Another accident at Palisades last week following a series of problems which has kept the plant closed since last August 11.

–The closing of Big Rock last week for minor radiation leaks, leaving Consumers with both of its nuclear plants non-operative.

–A stop in construction at the Midland project, following the discovery by AEC inspectors that inadequate welding procedures were being used in the reinforcement of the buildings foundations. The AEC has issued a show-cause order on why construction should continue at the $770 million project.

–a hold up in the preliminary hearings on a proposed plant for Saginaw Bay until the company can provide more information. Part of the problem is the concern by the AEC over safety precautions.

Nuclear power plants across the country have run into problems. A U of M physics professor, and member of the Michigan Student Environmental Society, Dr. Mare Ross, put it this way after an accident at Palisades: "This event is like a hint a driver gets when awkward incidents start occurring in his driving. They show him that he is tending to drive dangerously. This is one of the many hints the nuclear industry has had that proper management of a reactor is much more difficult in practice than on paper. "

The "energy crisis" has been instrumental in protecting the nuclear plants from criticism, as alternate power sources must be developed to keep up with the increasing demands for energy. Nixon has attacked environmentalists for holding up such projects as the Alaskan oil pipe line, and it is not the fashion of the day to criticize any energy developments, no matter what their problems.

But current models for nuclear power plants are dangerous, and as Consumers officials indicate, technology can not yet solve all the problems. In addition, the closing of Palisades and Big Rock is further evidence that nuclear power is not yet to be relied on.

The Saginaw Valley Nuclear study group, organized to fight Consumers' Midland project, has taken the position that the halt in construction may actually help alleviate the energy crisis. In a press release, the group explained:

"We note that the problem of large nuclear plants that do not work is a national problem. Placing our available capital resources into plants that hare been proved not only dangerous and difficult to operate, but that are also unreliable, is closing our options to develop and build safe, clean alternate areas of power."

The problems of nuclear energy are documented in the following story, based on the investigative work of Pat Clawson, newsman at WHNE radio in Detroit. Clawson turned the story over to the Associated Press (AP), the United Press International (UPI), and the Detroit Free Press early in November. Each of them found an excuse for not carrying the full story. Even after the latest accident on December 6, and report that the DNR would hold hearings, the story was not made public.

The following is the story that no one else is willing to print.

The Palisades nuclear power plant has been the site of a number of nuclear accidents this year. Many have not been announced publicly and some were not properly reported to government regulatory officials.

Currently under investigation by the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) for a series of problems, the nuclear power plant has been closed since August 11th for leaks in steam generator tubes. By the time the plant re-opens sometime next spring, it will have been generating electricity little more than half the time since it became operative two years ago. While closed, Palisades is costing its owner, Consumers Power Company –and eventually the rate payers– $3 million a month.

A Minor Problem?

The leaks in the steam generator tubes are nothing to worry about, according to Consumers vice-president Russell Youngdahl, because all power plants, nuclear or not, experience them.

"I think what you've seen so far is a highly unusual situation and I certainly would not expect this to be repeated in reactors anywhere," says Youngdahl.

When reminded that only nuclear power plants discharge radiation when leaks occur, he continues to maintain there's nothing to worry about. He says the problems will probably reoccur until the technology is perfected.

The problem is that condenser tubes keep corroding, causing the leaks. Youngdahl blames water chemistry at the site, and more important, the way the tubes were designed.

"Pinhole leaks in condenser tubes" were the reason for the first closing of Palisades last January, too. At that time, according to an AEC report, there were over 600 of those pinhole leaks discovered, and Youngdahl has no estimate of how many will be found this time around.

Leaks in the Air Radioactive iodine was accidentally discharged into the atmosphere during a nine day period in August. The company notified the AEC of the incident, but made no formal public announcement. Company officials later said they thought letting the AEC know about the problem was sufficient public notice.

Company documents show that on August 15, shortly after the plant shut down with the leak problem, technicians were trying to dry out the tubes with air to permit inspection. The air which was used to flush out the tubes was discharged through the plant's ventilation stack.

Two hours after the discharge began, a sample was taken of the radiation being released. It was found that "higher than anticipated" amounts of radioiodine were being released.

Upon examination of the stack filters, company officials concluded that plant license limits were exceeded for four days on the discharge of Iodine-131 (a material which concentrates in the thyroid gland).

Company health physicists later claimed no health danger was posed, although the amount of radioiodine discharged was three times the limit permitted by the plant's license!

"It shouldn't have happened, we didn't want it to happen, but our procedures are such that there was no serious problem," Youngdahl pointed out.

Consumers blamed the accident on personnel failure: failure to pay attention to higher iodine levels in the plant since the last shut down for generator leaks; failure to recognize the problem which the high radiation levels meant; and failure to stop the discharge when high radiation levels were noticed.

According to Youngdahl, senior personnel who should have recognized the problems were on duty. Despite that, no employee was suspended, fired or even reprimanded.

Leaks in the Lake

Radioactive iodine was also dumped into Lake Michigan. Youngdahl originally denied that any liquid discharges had occured, and was joined in that denial by other company officials. No mention was made of any liquid dumps to the AEC.

Since then, the company has changed its story. Roger Sinderman. health physiscist for Consumers, reports that wastes from leaking steam generators were transferred to the radioactive waste system at the plant on August 8th. Four batches of this were released from turbine sump pumps between the 11th and 17th, with radiation at low levels.

Another series of liquid dumps were only discovered accidentally when AEC inspectors stumbled across them during a surprise inspection on August 16. Consumers claims it didn't know about the leaks until the AEC inspectors discovered them

AEC regulatory chief E. J. Jordan confirms that there were continuous discharges from other plant sump pumps for eight days. He says the AEC has learned the discharges were "unmonitored and unsampled before release." Jordan said the leaks had not been reported - and that's a violation.

Jordan estimates the unknown leak could have contained 30 per cent of the plant's quarterly limit for radioactive discharges.

Not So Good Vibrations

When Palisades shut down in August, Youngdahl said the plant would be back in operation in mid-December. He now says the plant will start up "sometime early next year." But the AEC officials say that it may be the middle of March or longer before all the defects are repaired.

The reason behind the longer closing is that excessive damage to the fuel core of the reactor was caused by a vibration problem. Large retaining bolts were found to have snapped in two, and some metal parts of the reactor were found to have worn down.

Engineers at Palisades first noticed excessive instrument readings in September, 1972, but didn't know until mid-December of last year what significance to attach to them. Tests were made to make sure the reactor could be operated safely. However, the AEC didn't receive word from the company about the vibrations until June 12, 1973.

This September, the AEC issued a violation notice against the company.

"We said from December of 1972, when they first became really concerned that they had a problem, until June, 1973, when they finally reported it, that was too long," AEC spokesperson Gary Pitchford said. "They should have told us within 24 hours."

Youngdahl carne to the defense of Consumers, saying the company interpreted the regulations on reporting differently.

"I think this is the current posture of the AEC, in attempting to either regain credibility or to get some teeth they think they need," said Youngdahl.

Dropping a Rod

Consumers also had trouble getting another report to the AEC, following an accident which led to a control rod being dropped into the reactor on the night of August 8-9. Control rods contain material which absorb neutrons, particles which continue a chain reaction of fissioning atoms. The rods regulate the rate of nuclear reaction, and keep them at a safe level.

Apparently, a rod was being inserted into the reactor core when control was lost, and the rod could not be withdrawn. The rod slowed the nuclear reaction, thus cutting the power output of the reactor from near 100 per cent to about 60 per cent, according to Edward Jordan.

The AEC is concerned because Consumers failed to report the incident immediately. Jordan says he is unsure whether or not a required oral (telephone) report was made as required within 24 hours of the incident, but he knows that the company did not submit its formal written report within the required ten days. The report came August 20, twelve days after the rod dropped.

Jordan says the company delayed because "it was a lack of recognition on their part that a report was required." However, he went on to say, "When the licensee fails to meet his reporting requirements, it's a violation and we cite it."

When Youngdahl was first asked about the incident, he denied that any control rod problems had cropped up at Palisaides, then qualified his answer later by saying he had no knowledge of the problem. Company documents show that Youngdahl is one of the first officials to receive notice of any incident of this type. Consumers now admits that a rod was dropped, but says the plant's generating capacity was lowered to 50 per cent.

Leaks from the Inside

The rod drop was first revealed by a former radioactive waste/chemistry technician at the Palisades plant, and was confirmed only last week by the AEC.

In an interview, the technician (whose identity is being kept secret) revealed a number of other in-plant accidents and problems, which the AEC is currently investigating. AEC and company officials have privately confirmed that a number of the alledged incidents have ocurred.

The technician reports that maintenance procedures are poor, and have led to low-level leaks in waste laboratories.

According to the technician, radioactive-waste decay tanks in the plant's "hot lab" (radiation laboratory) frequently leaked xenon gas, causing higher than normal background radiation counts.

"This would vary," he said, "dependent on just what time of day it was, which doors were open, and things like that. But at times, it made it impossible to really analyze [discharge] samples for radioactive content, because there was so much in the background, and it was constantly changing as a different batch of air went through so there was no way you could tell how much [radioactivity] there was in your sample."

Ernie Murri, a Consumers official in charge of radiation programs, says the problem really doesn't have anything to do with waste gas tanks. He went on to say that xenon leaks were noted frequently, with alarms going off, "I believe it was every couple of hours."

Murri blamed the levels on "an improperly operating ventilation system." He disputes the claim that background levels fluctuated and made it difficult to accurately assess the radioactivity of discharge matter.

The technician also told of the alarms going off frequently, and charged that detection limits on the monitors were adjusted so only higher amounts of radiation would trigger the alarms.

Murri denies that the limits were raised, but he does say, "It finally got to a point that it was happening so frequently that we decided to disable the audible alarm after a certain period of time."

Had a major radioactive release occured, technicians may not have noticed it in time because of silenced alarms.

Another problem began at the plant when a new radioactive waste analysis system was installed last August without personnel being properly trained in its operation. The technician cited numerous examples of times when excessive or unusual instrument readings were being obtained, and how supervisory personnel spent time looking through "operating manuals" trying to figure out the problem.

In another charge, the technician reports that some sampling points for radioactive wastes were not being labelled as radioactive, which would be a violation of AEC rules.

One sampling point "is just a pipe coming down the wall with a valve on it, no markings of any sort on it." according to the technician. "The pipe led directly onto the floor. There was no drain of any sort there, there was no protection against splattering or anything else. So whoever turned that valve on, the water would just come gushing out into a bucket – if you had a bucket – or onto the floor. That would be directly from the concentrate waste tank which would contain very concentrated radioactive waste."

The technician says he eventually refused to take further samples from that point, for fear of becoming contaminated.

He reports that several leaks did occur; on one occasion, a tank of concentrate was being filled and an overflow pipe began spewing liquid waste onto the floor.

Nuclear power was originally the promised land of quick, cheap and abundant energy. Now, the economics of continued breakdowns are putting this dream into a dubious perspective. Worse yet, technology can not yet solve all the problems.