Davis-Besse

The Davis-Besse (Almost) Disaster

by Sydney Ballish

Figure 1: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant in Ohio

Source: FirstEnergy, n.d. <https://www.firstenergycorp.com/content/fecorp/about/generation_ system/FENOC/davis-besse.html>

 

Overview

After the Three Mile Island Incident in Pennsylvania, planned construction of new nuclear power plants was halted across the United States. In fact, most nuclear power plants in commission today began construction before 1977, almost forty years ago (World Nuclear Association, 2015).

This would understandably raise concerns among people who live near nuclear power plants in the United States. After all, if a new nuclear power plant hasn’t been built in almost forty years, doesn’t that mean that the plants currently in commission are outdated? If so, are these old nuclear plants safe to be around?

In 2001, these concerns were seemingly justified when the nuclear power plant Davis-Besse, located in Oak Harbor, Ohio, experienced a near catastrophic incident. While an accident at Davis-Besse was narrowly avoided, this occurrence is still considered a “serious nuclear safety incident” (NRC, n.d.), and has caused a lot of mistrust among the public regarding nuclear power plants in the United States (Monikainen, n.d.).

 

Figure 2: Graph showing the cut off in nuclear power plant permits after Three Mile Island

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration (2011) <http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=2030>

 

About the Accident

In 2001, the United States Regulatory Commission, or the NRC, ordered an inspection of vital safety components on all nuclear power plants. This order was to be carried out by December of 2001. However, FirstEnergy, the company that runs the Davis-Besse plant, requested a delay on their inspection of Davis-Besse. The NRC allowed it. According to the Nuclear Information and Resource Center, known as NIRS, the NRC wanted to accommodate the nuclear power industry instead of forcing a an early shutdown of Davis-Besse. A shutdown would have been necessary to carry out safety experiments on the plant, but it would have been very costly (NIRS, 2002).

When the NRC finally carried out their inspection in February 2002, they discovered that the reactor pressure vessel head had degraded. The reactor pressure vessel holds the nuclear fuel in a nuclear power plant (NRC, n.d), so the fact that the vessel head was so degraded was cause for serious alarm. Given more time, this degradation could have caused the reactor pressure vessel to rupture, causing a potential plant meltdown.

 

Figure 3: Degradation of the Reactor Pressure Vessel Head at Davis-Besse

Source: FirstEnergy, 2002 <http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2007/04/new_report_davisbesse_nuke_pla.html>

 

If the NRC had conducted its inspection when it was supposed to, they could have discovered the degradation earlier and avoided such a narrow escape with a catastrophic accident. Paul Gunter, the Director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for NIRS, stated that “FirstEnergy pushed the reactor beyond all reasonable safety margins, and the NRC basically allowed them to do it” (NIRS, 2002).   By this account, if the NRC and FirstEnergy didn’t make the mistakes that they did, this near-accident at Davis-Besse could have been avoided, and the public wouldn’t have been placed in such danger.

 

What Went Wrong?

Inspectors at Davis-Besse and the NRC should have caught this corrosion earlier. So why didn’t they? As previously stated, the NRC allowed FirstEnergy to delay their inspection of the Davis-Besse plant. This in turn delayed discovery of the vessel head degradation.

However, there were also some underlying mistakes in the structure of the organizations, specifically the NRC, which caused this incident to occur. A task force created by the NRC in the wake of the Davis-Besse incident found that the NRC and the plant needed to address multiple issues within their respective organizations that contributed to the incident. For example, the task force found that Davis-Besse, along with the NRC, did not inspect the safety performance of the plant thoroughly enough, as they did not consider all available information (NRC, n.d.).

Overall, the corrosion of the vessel-head almost caused a catastrophic accident at the Davis-Besse plant, and when investigated further, both the NRC and Davis-Besse contributed to the incident through flaws in their organizations regarding safety policies.

 

Figure 4: Comic depicting negative views toward the NRC

Source: Nuclear News (2014) <http://nuclear-news.net/2014/09/08/nuclear-regulatory-commission-takes-another-gamble-on-nuclear-wastes/>

 

How this accident has affected current policy

The near-accident at Davis-Besse led to some major changes within the NRC to ensure that such oversights would never happen again. Changes made to NRC policy included improved and stricter guidelines for components susceptible to cracking and corrosion, procedures for monitoring plants’ inspection programs, higher professional standards for plant components, and additional training programs for plant inspectors.

The NRC worked closely with organizations like the American Society for Mechanical Engineers to create these stricter procedures and guidelines regarding plant inspection, all to ensure that they are as thorough as possible (NRC, 2002).

 

What still needs to be done

Ever since the incident at Davis-Besse, the NRC has done a lot to make sure their policies and inspections of nuclear power plants in the United States are up to par. With their more rigorous policies in place, they have made great strides in calming the fears of the public that these older nuclear power plants are being properly inspected.

The NRC still has a way to go though, especially regarding their safety culture. While the NRC has started to address the issue of safety with its stricter policies regarding plant safety inspections, more still needs to be done, and recent accidents prove this.

The NRC assesses its policies every year to make improvements. They obtain feedback from the nuclear power industry and other stakeholders, including public interest groups. The NRC takes the voices of the public into consideration. People who live in the vicinity of nuclear power plants can make their concerns heard by reaching out to nuclear power safety public interest groups (GAO, 2006). It is important that the NRC continues to improve its policies regarding the safety of nuclear power plants to prevent any more incidents like that at the Davis-Besse plant. The public needs to continue to advocate for this.

 

 

References

Cooper, M. (2013, June 18). Nuclear aging: Not so graceful. Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://thebulletin.org/nuclear-aging-not-so-graceful>

Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Comes Close To Disaster As Lax Regulator Places Company Interests Ahead of Public Safety. – NIRS. (2002). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <https://www.nirs.org/press/03-13-2002/1>

Davis-Besse Reactor Vessel Head Degradation. (2002). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head-degradation.html>

Monikainen, K. (2004). Davis – Besse.doc Case Study Davis – B e sse: Good practices in U.S. Nuclear Industry Communications. Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <https://www.iaea.org/nuccomtoolbox/documents/Davis_Besse.pdf>

Nuclear Power in the USA. (2015). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://www.world-    nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA–Nuclear-Power/>

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Oversight of Nuclear Power Plant Safety Has Improved, but              Refinements Are Needed. (2006). United States Governm Ent Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters.

 

Image References

At the Threshold of a Nuclear Fission Renaissance. (2013, January 14). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2013/01/14/at-the-threshold-of-a-nuclear-fission-renaissance/>

FirstEnergy Corp. (n.d.). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <https://www.firstenergycorp.com/content/fecorp/about/generation_system/FENOC/davis-besse.html>

FirstEnergy Corp. (2002). Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis–Besse_Nuclear_Power_Station>

Nuclear Regulatory Commission takes another gamble on nuclear wastes. (2014, September 8). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://nuclear-news.net/2014/09/08/nuclear-regulatory-commission-takes-another-gamble-on-nuclear-wastes/>

U.S. commercial nuclear capacity comes from reactors built primarily between 1970 and 1990. (2011, June 30). Retrieved July 30, 2015, from <http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=2030>