A multimillion-dollar plan to shore up extra safety equipment at U.S. reactors would sufficiently protect against disasters like the earthquake and tsunami that crippled Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant nearly a year ago, the nuclear power industry said today.

The Nuclear Energy Institute's proposal calls for the construction of warehouses reinforced against earthquakes and floods to store fire trucks, ventilation units, batteries and generators. Bolstering operators' access to safety equipment, along with prior steps the industry took in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, would protect reactors from attacks, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and other disasters, NEI said.

SPECIAL SERIES

An occasional series looking at the political and policy -- and literal -- fallout from the 2011 nuclear disaster in Japan.

Under NEI's "flexible mitigation capability" plan, plant operators would pay up to $100 million collectively to buy the equipment and build up to six regional warehouses across the country.

Anthony Pietrangelo, NEI's chief nuclear officer, said the plan -- which comes in response to last year's magnitude-9 earthquake and tsunami that triggered core meltdowns and radioactive releases at the Fukushima plant and evacuations of thousands of people from the surrounding area -- would also protect nuclear plants from unknown threats.

"I think we're not smart enough to think of every possible thing; that's why [the plan] is really predicated on the symptoms and the consequences of the 'what if' scenarios," Pietrangelo said. "Those worst-case consequences are loss of AC power and loss of the [ability to cool the plant], so we're trying to prepare for anything."

Under the proposed plan, plant operators would use the backup equipment to cool reactors and prevent overheating, hydrogen explosions and radioactive leaks like those that occurred in Japan.

NEI said that the number of regional warehouses would depend on the surrounding transportation routes for delivering the equipment and that the group is in talks with the National Guard and other federal agencies about flying equipment to specific sites.

An internal Nuclear Regulatory Commission task force last year recommended that U.S. plants be required to have secure backup generation that could keep cooling systems operating for eight hours after outside power was lost, as well as a plan to bring in backup power supplies to last up to 72 hours, when outside grid power would be restored. U.S. plants currently have either a four- or an eight-hour requirement, depending on their grid connections (ClimateWire, Dec. 21, 2011).

Pietrangelo said that equipment from the proposed regional centers would give operators an "indefinite" power supply and that backup equipment could be delivered even if radioactive material were released. "The Japanese brought equipment to the site in a real scenario where there was radiological effects on site, so you can still do it," he said.

David Lochbaum, director of the Nuclear Safety Project at the Massachusetts-based watchdog group Union of Concerned Scientists, said during a Nuclear Regulatory Commission meeting in January that such a plan might not work if a reactor's core were damaged and reactor buildings became uninhabitable from high radiation levels (Greenwire, Jan. 17).

NEI said the proposed plan could satisfy looming regulations expected out of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in coming days. The agency is working through a series of rulemakings, orders and information requests that could take years to finalize. Most recently, all five members of the commission voted to approve three top-tier NRC staff-proposed rules for spent fuel pool instrumentation and reliable vents, as well as a third provision that mirrors the "flex" plan.

Pietrangelo said that the industry group has gotten "very good receptivity" from each member of the commission on the industry plan and that he expects a final rule to be issued in coming days or weeks.

Industry representative Charles "Chip" Pardee of Exelon Corp. said that it's unclear how much the industry will ultimately be forced to pay to protect against future disasters but that NEI's "flex" plan doesn't threaten the U.S. fleet.

"On any given year, a nuclear plant may have $20, $30, $40 million worth of capital upgrades that are being done, so I anticipate that this will be in the band that you would typically see at a power plant, at any rate," Pardee said. "When we amalgamate the numbers, they'll look big, but these are not numbers that we anticipate are so large that they threaten the viability of a particular unit."

NEI will likely take the lead on establishing a cost-sharing mechanism through which the industry pays for the equipment, Pardee said. NEI also expects the NRC to inspect the industry's work, he said.