New reactor 'may not withstand high winds'

south west | the environment | press release Sunday October 18, 2009 22:12 by Jim Duffy - Stop Hinkley stophinkley at aol dot com 07798 666756

The US safety regulator has deemed that the containment structure of a reactor, possibly destined for Oldbury and other UK sites, 'may not withstand a tornado, earthquake or even high winds'.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has directed the designers, Westinghouse, to strengthen the outer shell which protects the reactor's containment structure as it does not meet their requirements for safety.

E.ON, who are currently drilling ground at Oldbury in Gloucestershire to investigate its suitability for a new nuclear reactor, have said they would consider the Westinghouse AP1000 in question, alongside the French European Pressurised Reactor (EPR). The reactor designs are the only two being studied by the UK safety regulators the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII). Two other designers dropped out of the assessment process.

The AP1000 was so called because of its novel 'Advanced Passive' systems which cut out about three-quarters of the valves, pipes and cables required by previously proven Westinghouse reactors such as Sizewell B. But these cost-saving measures alongside a 50 percent reduction in concrete, have never been tested in a full-scale reactor.

The NII have already questioned the safety of the EPR's Control and Instrumentation system which governs all the key actions of the reactor and which may mean a delay in licensing while the complicated system is redesigned. The regulators were unhappy with a complex computerised system which could not be manually overridden. The NII have predicted their licensing process will be finished in June 2012 but have said the licence may allow 'exclusions' which would only be passed at a later date with complete information.

The EPR is also the subject of disputes between its French designers Areva and the Finnish builders who are jointly constructing the first of its kind in Olkiluoto, Finland. The project was due to be complete in 2009 but Areva now say it may not be complete till 2012. The Finnish regulators have also queried the control and instrumentation systems and raised questions over the wrong mix of concrete in the foundations and faulty welding of key components. Cost overruns have mounted to 3 billion euros.

Similar problems were exposed in the second EPR being built in Flamanville, Normandy.

Jim Duffy from Stop Hinkley said: "These findings are not just glitches. Westinghouse have made a virtue of their cost-cutting. To think they'd put forward a design that couldn't withstand high winds makes you stand back and wonder about their integrity. The French reactor which EdF are pushing for Hinkley Point is having equally bad luck abroad. Getting their foundations wrong twice is very worrying. Time for a major rethink on the UK nuclear project."

Jim Duffy
Stop Hinkley Coordinator
07798 666756
www.stophinkley.org

Notes:
(1) Associated Press: safety concerns over Westinghouse AP1000
(2) Reuters: safety concerns: Westinghouse response
(3) Greenpeace: safety concerns over EPR

(1) NRC raises concern about new reactor design
By H. JOSEF HEBERT (AP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is raising safety concerns with the design of a proposed new reactor to be built by Westinghouse, saying a key part of the reactor may not withstand a tornado, earthquake or even high winds.

The NRC staff has directed Westinghouse to make changes in the reactor design so that its outer shell, which is supposed to protect the reactor's containment structure, is strengthened. The staff concluded the steel and concrete structure does not meet the design requirements for safety.

The reactor, called the AP-1000, is the choice of seven utilities that have filed applications to build a new nuclear power plant. NRC officials said it is now up Westinghouse to figure out how the design problem will be resolved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hc6n8...OIH84

(2) Reuters report on US regulators safety concerns:

NEW YORK, Oct 16 (Reuters) - After U.S. regulators raised safety concerns about the design of a new Westinghouse nuclear reactor, a company that owns part of Westinghouse said on Friday it did not expect a delay in certification of the reactor design.
Shares of Shaw Group Inc , a construction and engineering company based in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, fell nearly 10 percent Friday on the New York Stock Exchange, a day after the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission told Westinghouse it had some safety concerns about the AP1000 shield building.
Shaw, which owns 20 percent of Westinghouse Electric Co, said Westinghouse does not expect a delay in NRC certification of the AP1000 nuclear design and still expected the first new units to enter service by 2016.
Several major U.S. utilities, including subsidiaries of Tennessee Valley Authority, Duke Energy Corp, Progress Energy Inc, Southern Co, SCANA Corp and FPL Group Inc, plan to use the AP1000 design in new nuclear plants.

The NRC said Westinghouse has not demonstrated that certain structural components of the revised AP1000 shield building can withstand design basis loads. The shield building protects the reactor's primary containment from severe weather and provides a radiation barrier during normal operation.
Shaw said in a release all issues outlined by the NRC could be addressed and the remaining steps to certify the AP1000 design should continue as scheduled.
Shaw owns Westinghouse along with majority owner, Toshiba Corp of Japan and others.
Westinghouse said its goal was to obtain certification of the AP1000 in 2011.
Shaw Group shares closed on Friday at $28.20, down $3.05, or 9.76 percent.
The NRC said Westinghouse will have to modify the design of the shield building and perform testing to demonstrate the building will perform its intended safety function.
"We've been talking to Westinghouse regularly about the shield building since October 2008, and we've consistently laid out our questions to the company," Michael Johnson, director of the NRC's Office of New Reactors, said in the release.
"This is a situation where fundamental engineering standards will have to be met before we can begin determining whether the shield building meets the agency's requirements," Johnson added.
The NRC said the impact on the AP1000 certification schedule would be determined after staff and Westinghouse discuss the company's plans to address the agency's concern.
A Westinghouse spokesman said the company was cooperating with the NRC. Westinghouse said in a release it "fully expected that the NRC would require additional analysis, testing or design modifications to the shield building."
Florida utility regulators meeting to approve pre-construction cost recovery for two utilities that want to build reactors expressed frustration with the NRC.
"The NRC process is supposed to be new and improved, but I'm not so sure it is," said Nathan Skop, a member of the Florida Public Service Commission.
"The NRC has said it would streamline its processes and bring us off-the-shelf plans they would approve," said PSC Chairman Matthew Carter. "It's time for them to expedite the process. We have ratepayers' dollars on the line."
(Additional reporting by Eileen O'Grady; Editing by David Gregorio)

http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid=75789...ticle

(3) Greenpeace summary of problems at Olkiluoto in Finland and calls for cancellation of the project:

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/...ellat