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)