I have leveled complaints against the U.S. nuclear regulatory process in many previous blog posts. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the contradictory mandate to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy in the U.S. and also to regulate the nuclear industry in the U.S. These goals are bound to fall into conflict. There have been numerous charges that the NRC has been too lenient with violation of regulations. It has been said that the industry that the NRC is supposed to regulate has too much influence over it, a situation known as “regulatory capture.” One subject that I have not covered has been direct attempts by members of the U.S. Government to interfere with the proper function of the NRC.
In May of 2012, the chairman of the NRC, Gregory Jaczko, announced that he was stepping down. His resignation was seen as a victory by the pro-nuclear lobby in Congress and on the Commission. They had been fighting for years to get Jaczko to quit as Chairman. The U.S. Senate Majority Leader called a Democrat who led the campaign to oust Jaczko a “treacherous, miserable liar!”
A few weeks after his announcement, Jaczko visited the Palisades Power Plant on Lake Michigan. During the visit, there was a significant leak of potentially radioactive water into the control room at the plant but no mention of the leak was made to the visiting Jaczko. Two weeks after the visit, the plant was shut down so that the leak could be repaired. When Jaczko found out that the leak was occurring while he visited the plant, he asked the NRC Office of Investigation to find out why no one mentioned the leak during his visit.
NRC Commissioner William Ostendorff was opposed to the investigation. Witnesses state that Ostendorff shouted at the top NRC investigator, Cheryl McCrary, that any such investigation would be a waste of agency resources and that it should be stopped. The incident was reported to the NRC Office of the Inspector General by a witness to the exchange. This internal struggle between members of the U.S. Government who favor industry deregulation and those who believe that the nuclear industry need more scrutiny is a reflection of a more general debate on the proper role of government oversight of corporations.
I have a blog post that dealt with some of the problems at the Palisades plant. Activists have been calling for the plant to be closed as a danger to public safety. The Palisades plant has a defender in the U.S. Congress in the person of a Michigan Republican Representative named Fred Upton who is the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee in the House of Representatives. Upton is called the number one cheerleader for the nuclear power industry. His claim that the waste piling up on the shore of Lake Michigan at the Palisades plant is stable and safe is simply not true.
The situation at the Palisades plant is a microcosm of the U.S. nuclear power situation. On one side, you have activists who are rightly worried about the aging fleet of U.S. reactors and all the nuclear waste that is piling up. On the other side, you have industry boosters backed by billions of dollars who assure everyone that nuclear energy is safe and great for fighting climate change. This is a good debate to have and everyone should have their opinion heard. However, there are forces at work inside the U.S. Government who are trying to subvert the democratic process and cover up serious problems at U.S. nuclear power plants.
