Nuclear Fuel Pool Leaked
By GARY LIBOW
Courant Staff Writer
November 3 2005
HADDAM -- Radioactive water from the decommissioned Connecticut Yankee
nuclear plant's spent fuel pool once leaked into the surrounding soil,
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reported Wednesday.
The contamination appears to have remained on-site, and public health
and safety is not endangered, both the NRC and Connecticut Yankee stress.
Workers decommissioning the plant Monday discovered hairline cracks
in the 6-foot thick concrete walls containing the spent fuel pool, NRC
spokesman Neil Sheehan said.
But those cracks may not have been the reason for the contamination.
Instead, it appears an unknown quantity of contaminated water seeped
through seams in the concrete into a small area of soil, according to
Connecticut Yankee officials.
"[Contamination] is confined to a very small area on-site,"
Connecticut Yankee spokeswoman Kelley Smith said. "We are still
The spent fuel pool housed the nuclear plant's highly radioactive uranium
pellets for decades. The rods and radioactive metals have been removed
from the pool, but the water remains.
The Haddam Neck plant, which permanently shut down in 1996, produced
110 billion kilowatt hours of electricity over 28 years.
In reporting the discovery to the NRC, Connecticut Yankee stated that
while the quantity of water leaked is unknown, a review of historic
data indicates the it was "on the order of a few gallons per day."
Connecticut Yankee informed the NRC the leakage was discovered when
workers removed soil east of the spent fuel building.
Based on readings from monitoring wells, there was no travel of tainted
water beyond the plant's property line, the company told the federal
agency. Connecticut Yankee also notified the state Department of Environmental
Protection there appeared to be no contamination beyond the company's
The NRC's Sheehan said evidence of the leakage consisted of the hairline
cracks and the accumulation of a white powder around the cracks.
Sheehan said the spent fuel pool contains a stainless steel liner with
a leak-detection system, and Connecticut Yankee has stated that the
system has detected no significant leaks during the plant's operation
Smith said the company, in the midst of decommissioning, does not think
the hairline cracks traverse through the thick concrete walls.
"It does not appear that any water seeped through the hairline
cracks. It may possibly have seeped through the concrete construction
seams," Smith said.
"[Contamination] is confined to a very small area on-site,"
Smith said, noting it may be impossible to determine when the leak occurred.
Connecticut Yankee's investigation, to date, includes excavation of
a 10- by 30-foot area as part of its investigation.
Smith states that cesium, a by-product of nuclear plant operation, has
been found underground in a 4- by 4-foot area of soil east of the spent
fuel pool building. That localized contamination has been remediated,
First Selectman Tony Bondi said neither Connecticut Yankee nor the NRC
had informed him of the discovery.
"My God, it really surprises me something this egregious can happen,"
Bondi said. "We need to determine the extent of the leakage and
the consequences of it."
Local resident Sal Mangiagli, an anti-nuclear activist, also wants assurances
Connecticut Yankee will test extensively to determine the scope of contamination.
"It's really disheartening to think they had a leaking spent fuel
pool," said Mangiagli, a member of Citizens Awareness Network.
"A couple of gallons, if it was really radioactive, is a lot. And
if it was going on day after day, it's disturbing," he said.
Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant
Switching To ‘Clean Energy'
State agency signs up to receive electricity from renewable resources
By JUDY BENSON
Published in The Day on 11/3/2005
Starting today, turning on the lights at Department of Environmental
Protection offices around the state will be the agency's way of making
“The DEP has made the clean energy choice, and that, I think,
makes us the first state agency to do so,” said Commissioner Gina
McCarthy during a news conference Wednesday. “I hope other agencies
will take the hint and follow our lead.”
McCarthy announced that the DEP has signed up to receive all its electrical
power from so-called “clean” renewable sources — those
that don't burn fossil fuels that contribute to climate change, air
pollution and the country's dependence on foreign energy supplies. “Clean”
energy is derived from sources such as wind turbines, hydroelectric
generators, solar panels, fuel cells and methane captured from landfills.
“The DEP is all about protecting the environment and protecting
human health,” McCarthy said. “This reflects the agency's
core values and reflects our mission and our individual values.”
The DEP's action has been a choice available to residents, institutions
and businesses since April, when the two power distribution companies
that serve the state, Northeast Utilities and United Illuminating, began
offering Connecticut customers the option of receiving their power from
alternative sources. Both companies transmit power generated through
the New England Energy Grid, which is supplied by a variety of sources
including two that produce “clean” energy, Sterling Planet
of Norcross, Ga., and Community Energy of New York City.
Community Energy derives the power it sends to the New England grid
from wind farms in Atlantic City, N.J., and in Pennsylvania. Sterling
uses methane gas from landfills in Pennsylvania, Maryland and New Jersey
to produce power, and also purchases power from a small hydroelectric
plant on the Quinebaug River in Jewett City, said Robert Maddox, northeast
regional manager for the company.
The Griswold plant, Summit Hydropower, produces enough power for about
2,800 households, said Duncan Broatch, company president. He purchased
the plant in 1997 from Wyre Wynd, a wire manufacturer located next door
that had used it to generate its own power.
“There are many advantages to using hydroelectric power,”
Broatch said. “It reduces pollution, it stimulates the local economy,
and it's much better to be spending our money locally than sending it
to Saudi Arabia.”
Maddox said that as the demand for clean energy grows, companies like
his and Community Energy will generate more power by re-activating dormant
hydroelectric plants, adding more wind turbines and constructing other
types of “clean” energy production equipment.
“As more people sign up, we'll bring more on line,” he said.
Thus far 5,500 Connecticut residents have signed up for the clean energy
option, McCarthy noted, along with 16 municipalities and institutions
such as Wesleyan University. Making that choice raises the electric
bill for the average household by about $7 per month, according to Brian
Keane, president of SmartPower, a Hartford-based nonprofit group promoting
expansion of clean energy usage and markets. Oftentimes using energy
more efficiently and eliminating waste can cancel out the increase,
When an individual or agency such as the DEP signs up for the clean
energy option, the New England grid purchases an equivalent amount of
power from generators that use renewable sources.
“We consider this to be an investment in our future,” McCarthy
said. “What are the costs of maintaining our dependence”
on fossil fuels?
McCarthy said the DEP began its clean energy initiative by first increasing
its energy efficiency. It currently uses about 7.6 million kilowatts
of electricity yearly, at a cost of $1.2 million. The move to clean
energy, she said, will add about $125,000 annually to that bill.
The agency worked closely with the Office of Policy and Management to
make the switch at the least cost possible, said John Mengacci, undersecretary
“This is the first of many steps OPM plans on taking” to
help other agencies follow the DEP's example, Mengacci said.
McCarthy said that the DEP's decision will have a significant impact.
It will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by about 3,716 tons per
year, or the equivalent of taking 730 cars off the road.
“We can make smart choices,” she said.
© The Day Publishing Co., 2005
Jay M. Gould
We pause to mourn the passing of our friend and colleague, Dr. Jay M.
In the course of human history, societies are occasionally blessed with
the appearance of noble truthtellers who risk personal disdain to cut
through lies and deception of profiteers and government lackeys. In
time, they are revered for their prescience.
Jay Gould was one of these.
For two decades, Dr. Gould exposed the legacy of lies of the nuclear
and defense industries. He established through epidemiological research
that low levels of radiation from nuclear reactors are far more dangerous
than commonly believed and are quietly poisoning humanity.
In 1990, Dr. Gould published "Deadly Deceit: Low-Level Radiation,
High-Level Cover-Up.” In it, he used government and nuclear industry
records to argue that health officials had manipulated data to hide
the fact that radiation from atom bomb tests and nuclear power plants
kills. He also published “The Enemy Within “ and many scientific
Dr. Gould exposed the high levels of radiological emissions from the
Millstone Nuclear Power Station and evaluated official health records
to conclude that Millstone is a silent killer. Speaking at the “Mothball
Millstone” concert at the Garde Arts Center in 1998, Dr. Gould
implored the community to close Millstone and end its legacy of death
Writing in The Nation in 1993, Dr. Gould was among the first to voice
the conclusion, now widely accepted, that Soviet lies and deceptions,
concocted to cover up the truth of the devastation wrought by the Chernobyl
nuclear explosion in 1986, triggered massive public outrage that led
to the sudden break-up of the Soviet Union. Tourist guides to the former
Soviet republic of the Ukraine now record this cause-and-effect relation
as undoubted fact.
Dr. Gould was vindicated this past June when the conservative National
Academy of Sciences, in its BEIR VII Report, concluded that exposure
to low levels of ionizing radiation was far more dangerous than the
government had previously acknowledged. The effects are cumulative and
far more severe for women and children.
From the beginning of the Atomic Age, Dr. Gould wrote, the makers of
atomic weapons knew of the lethal effects on the immune system from
ingesting manmade nuclear fission products. They knew The Bomb was a
biological weapon. As an alternative to The Bomb, they considered dumping
strontium-90 on populations because they knew the radioactive strontium
would enter the food chain and ultimately be deposited in human bone
and kill or harm its recipients in large numbers. Because strontium-90
mimics calcium, it is readily absorbed by the human body. It causes
bone and lymph cancers and leukemia.
Today, Millstone routinely poisons us with radioactive strontium-90,
which it releases into the air and water. Millstone’s radioactive
strontium-90 is in the air you breathe and the milk and vegetables you
eat. If your children play outside where Millstone fallout has deposited
strontium-90, they are at risk.
In 1985, Dr. Gould founded the Radiation and Public Health Project.
The organization is best known for its "Tooth Fairy Project,"
which measures levels of strontium-90 in baby teeth to determine relative
levels in children living near nuclear power plants. Since 2001, the
group has released findings showing a high correlation between levels
of strontium-90 found in baby teeth of children living near nuclear
reactors and cancer incidences.
Dr. Gould appealed to humanists to end all forms of nuclear emissions
released into the environment.
Help us honor Dr. Gould and his legacy. If you are a parent of a child
living near Millstone, PLEASE preserve your child’s baby teeth
and send them to the Radiation and Public Health Project. Go to
www.radiation.org for details.
Good Reasons to Close Millstone
1. We Don’t Need Millstone Megawatts
Go to the State of Connecticut
Siting Council website, Read the numbers. Subtract Millstone megawatts.
What’s left: excess electricity. Think: conservation, solar, wind,
green, clean, renewable energy.
2. Millstone Kills
Millstone has made southeastern Connecticut the Cancer Capital of Connecticut.
Women and children are most vulnerable.
3. Millstone Kills
Millstone kills its own workers who die from leukemia, lung cancer,
brain cancer and other diseases directly traceable to their exposures
4. Millstone Kills
Millstone routinely kills billions of marinelife through suction at
5. Dominion Lies
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. was set up as a paper company without
assets to purchase Millstone from Northeast Utilities in 2001. Dominion
promised to run Millstone safely. Dominion operates Millstone ruthlessly
for profit, putting people last.
6. The NRC Lies
When Millstone Unit 3 tripped from 100 per cent power to zero power
in less than a second on April 17, 2005 and spewed steam for 10 hours
during a Class II emergency, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
said the steam was clean. The NRC waited for a month to go by before
they told the truth: the steam was very, very dirty. It contained “unusual”
levels of tritium. Krypton and xenon, all of which are known carcinogens.
7. Connecticut Is Still Corrupticut
The Rowland legacy of corruption in public office rules. How else to
explain why Millstone is allowed to operate under a Clean Water Act
permit, issued by the state Department of Environmental Protection,
when the permit expired in 1997. How else to explain why DEP “transferred”
the expired permit from NU to Dominion in 2001. How else to explain
why neither Governor Jodi Rell, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal,
the state legislature’s Public Health Committee, the state legislature’s
Environmental Committee, State Senator Andrea Stillman who heads the
Environmental Committee and sits on the Public Health Committee and
lives in Millstone’s backyard, nor DEP Commissioner Gina McCarthy
will take the time to meet Zachary Hartley and understand why he was
born with life-threatening cancer. How else to explain why DEP has never
opposed a license amendment proposed by Millstone to relax safety requirements
and remove barriers designed to protect the public health and safety.
8. Let’s Close Millstone Before a Terrorist Beats Us to It.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has named Millstone as Connecticut’s
#1 terrorist target. Millstone is vulnerable to terrorism at its intake
structures, its offsite power supply and it cannot be protected from
an airborne attack by evil people determined to destroy America. A successful
terrorist event at Millstone would destroy America.
9. Millstone Is an Accident Waiting to Happen
A “tin whisker” one-third the thickness of a human hair
caused an electric short on April 17, 2005 at Millstone Unit 3. The
tin whisker tripped the plant, triggering a Class II (on a scale of
4) emergency. The NRC allowed Dominion to restart Unit 3 two weeks later
even though it knew that Unit 3's circuitry had other tin whisker defects.
The NRC’s justification? Dominion dedclined to expend the $$$
to replace the circuit boards.
10. Let’s Close Millstone For Zachary
Millstone is a criminal enterprise. It is a silent killer. Our government
covers up the crimes.
SHUT IT DOWN!
Here in Connecticut we
have a unique opportunity to save the Climate Stewardship Act, the most
promising federal legislation to stop global warming. This bill by Senator
Lieberman and Senator McCain would set firm national limits on the majority
of global warming pollution sources.
Unfortunately, recent news reports indicate that Senator John McCain
and Senator Lieberman are considering including support for huge federal
subsidies to the nuclear industry to build a new generation of dangerous
nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants are prime terrorist targets
that generate tons of deadly radioactive waste annually. The federal
government should be pumping the money into safe, green, renewable energy
sources, not new nukes.
Take Action, call Senator Lieberman's office TODAY:
Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman's support is crucial to keeping nuclear
power out of the bill. Environmental groups across the nation are counting
on us as this bill could be radically changed to support nuclear energy
as soon as this week. We need you to call Senator Lieberman as soon
as possible, before we lose our last chance to have a global warming
bill without nuclear power.
See below for a sample phone message and for details.
Senator Lieberman's DC office: (202) 224-4041
The Climate Stewardship Act- the only real global warming legislation
Senator McCain and Senator Lieberman created the Climate Stewardship
Act which would set a national limit on greenhouse gas pollution.
This is the only viable federal legislation to stop global warming,
and has broad support from the environmental community.
In 2003 this bill surprised everyone when it got 43 votes in the Senate,
putting it within reach of passage and Senator McCain has vowed to reintroduce
the bill until it passes.
In a bombshell, this Sunday the New York Times reported that in an attempt
to win over Senators with ties to the nuclear industry, Senator McCain
is attempting to add explicit support for nuclear power to this bill.
As early as this Thursday - May 19 - the Climate Stewardship Act could
be changed to support nuclear power and once it is changed it sets a
very strong negative precedent that any national action on global warming
will have to support nuclear power.
If Senator Lieberman's makes this concession he will be lose support
from the environmental community as public health and environmental
groups like the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone will oppose
any bill with subsidies for nuclear power plants. Global warming is
bigger than all of us so we need to work together.
Take Action, call Senator Lieberman's office TODAY:
Please take a minute to call Senator Lieberman's DC office on Wednesday,
5/18 and leave a message that nuclear power is not acceptable to you
and should not be part of any global warming initiative.
Senator Lieberman's DC office: (202) 224-4041
Here is a sample message:
Please give your name, your address and town and ask to leave a message
for Senator Lieberman.
I am very concerned about the effects of global warming on Connecticut.
I support strong action by Congress to reduce our greenhouse gas pollution.
However, I do not want any support or subsidies for nuclear power and
ask Senator Lieberman to keep it out of the Climate Stewardship Act.
We should not trade one form of pollution for another, especially given
the costs and dangers of nuclear energy.
** Please mention why you are personally concerned about global warming
(rising sea levels, air pollution from fossil fuels, etc) and why you
are concerned about nuclear power (risk of accident/terrorist attack,
lack of a facility to dispose of radioactive waste, contamination of
the Long Island Sound with radioactive and chemical waste discharges,
health risks from routine releases of radiation, etc.) **
Julia Ward Howe
27 May 1819
then, women of this day!
Arise all women who have hearts, whether your baptism be that of water
or of fears!
Say firmly: "We will not have great questions decided by irrelevant
"Our husbands shall not come to us reeking with carnage, for
caresses and applause.
"Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn all that we have
been able to teach them of charity, mercy, and patience.
"We women of one country will be too tender of those of another
country to allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs."
From the bosom of the devasted earth a voice goes up with our own.
It says, "Disarm, Disarm!"
The sword of murder is not the balance of justice! Blood does not
wipe out dishonor nor violence indicate possession.
As men have often forsaken the plow and the anvil at the summons of
war, let women now leave all that may be left of home for a great
and earnest day of counsel.
Let them meet first, as women, to bewail and commemorate the dead.
Let them then solemnly take counsel with each other as the means whereby
the great human family can live in peace,
And each bearing after her own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar,
but of God.
Correspondence From Senator Lieberman
Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:36:28 -0400
April 27, 2005
Ms. Nancy Burton
147 Cross Highway
Redding Ridge, CT 06876
Dear Ms. Burton:
Thank you for contacting me regarding Ukraine President Victor
Yuschenko's request to fund a sarcophagus at the Chernobyl site. I
appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts on this important
issue, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
As you may know, a massive concrete sarcophagus was constructed around
the damaged Number 4 Reactor. This structure encases the damaged nuclear
reactor and was designed to halt the release of further radiation into
atmosphere. However, the sarcophagus is now cracking and leaking
radiation into the environment. By some estimates holes and fissures
the structure cover 1,000 square meters. These cracks and holes are
exacerbated by the intense heat inside the reactor which is still over
degrees Celsius. According to the United Nation's appointed Steering
Committee, scientists agree that this sarcophagus will collapse.
An Act providing Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense,
Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (H.R. 1268), which recently
passed the Senate with amendments by unanimous support will now go to
conference committee where members of the House of Representatives and
Senate will negotiate a final version of this bill. Contained within
1268 is a $5 million provision to initiate the Chernobyl Research and
Service Project to support the study of radiation effects during the
Chernobyl Shelter Implementation Plan within the Office of Environmental
Safety and Health.
My official Senate web site is designed to be an on-line office that
provides access to constituent services, Connecticut-specific information,
and an abundance of information about what I am working on in the Senate
on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. I am also pleased to let you
know that I have launched an email news update service through my web
site. You can sign up for that service by visiting
http://lieberman.senate.gov and clicking on the "Subscribe Email
Updates" button at the bottom of the home page. I hope these are
informative and useful.
Thank you again for letting me know your views and concerns. Please
contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our
Unit 3 Emergency – April 17, 2005
....The Millstone Unit 3 nuclear reactor
declared a Class Two – on a scale of one to four – emergency
and suffered an unplanned shutdown which released unusual levels of
radiation into the air on Sunday, April 17.
....The emergency was declared at 8:42
A.M. when the plant went from 100 per cent power to zero power. During
the incident, a steam generator safety relief valve lifted as intended
but failed to close, causing unusual venting of steam – visible
offsite - throughout the day.
....The reactor was declared stable at
7:03 P.M., when the alert was terminated. The reactor was being kept
in “hot shutdown” and not producing electricity while the
incident was being analyzed, according to the NRC.
....The New London Day newspaper reported
that Waterford town officials and representatives from the plant said
no radioactive material was released beyond the normal amounts associated
with regular plant operations.
....However, The Day also reported that
Dominion acknowledged that that “minor radioactive materials”
were released from the site during the emergency “but do not pose
a threat to the public or to plant workers.”
....A Dominion spokesman said the radiation
released during the emergency shutdown was below federally approved
standards and could not be detected at the site's boundary, according
to The Day report.
....The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
did not deny an unusual release of radiation may have occurred.
....However, an NRC spokesman said that
Millstone’s onsite station monitors failed to detect unusual radiation
releases during the incident.
....It is not known to what extent unusual
radiation releases occurred. Many types of radiation releases are not
sampled and are not regulated. As recently as 1997, measurements for
strontium-90 releases from the station stack were discontinued, according
to Millstone filings with the NRC. The long-range radiation monitor
at the station stack was found to be in a degraded condition during
a 2004 NRC inspection, and thus it is not known whether long-range releases
which may have occurred during the incident would have gone undetected,
according to the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone.
....Millstone Unit 2 has been shut down
for a refueling outage since April 8, 2005.
Millstone Unit 3 produces 1,150 megawatts of electricity at full power;
Unit 2 produces 870. Unit 1 was permanently shut down in 1996.
....Valve failures have long plagued the
Millstone nuclear reactors. NRC inspections in 1004 – the most
recent available reports - disclosed continuing valve malfunctions and
degraded conditions involving valves at both Units 2 and 3.
Donald W. Downes
Department of Public Utility Control
10 Franklin Square
New Britain CT 06051
Re: Millstone Nuclear Power Station
Application for Renewed Operating License
Dear Mr. Downes:
.....Your letter to Nils J. Diaz, Chairman
of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”), has come
to our attention. (The letter is not dated. However, a copy made available
on the NRC website has hand-written notations as follows: “Letter
postmarked 3/7/05” and “RDB received 3/28/05.”)
.....Your letter is seriously uninformed
and does a disservice to the people of the State of Connecticut.
.....The letter states in part:
.....“The Department [of Public Utility
Control][“DPUC”] believes that Dominion [Nuclear Connecticut,
Inc.] is one of the best nuclear plant operators in the country and
that it has demonstrated an excellent history of nuclear plant operation
.....We herewith submit a compilation of
“Degraded Conditions” which we have culled from inspection
reports filed by NRC inspectors concerning performance of the Millstone
Nuclear Power Station in 2004. The year 2004 was characterized by Dominion’s
repeated violations of Technical Specifications – Millstone’s
federal licensing requirements – and pervasive cost-costing which
exposed the public to heightened risks, malfunctioning equipment and
shortcomings on the part of operators such that NRC inspectors questioned
their basic familiarity with nuclear reactor system functions. We trust
that you will share our grave concern about Millstone’s degrading
conditions when you become aware of the facts at issue.
.....We also submit for your information
written comments the Coalition presented to the NRC on March 2, 2005
with regard to its draft Environmental Impact Statement on relicensing.
That letter addresses extremely high levels of strontium-90 - a potent
carcinogen which accumulates in human bones and interferes with biological
immune systems - found in goat milk sampled in the years 2001-2003 five
miles northeast of Millstone, according to Dominion’s filings
with the NRC. The data strongly suggest that Millstone releases excessive
levels of strontium-90 to the atmosphere, subjecting the surrounding
community – including children who are most vulnerable - to health
.....We are not aware that the Connecticut
Department of Public Utility has met in open session to address Dominion’s
accomplishments as a nuclear plant operator nor to consider its “history
of nuclear plant operation and safety.”
.....If we are mistaken, please advise
when such session occurred and please provide a copy of the minutes
of such session......
.....Regardless of whether such a session
occurred, please provide all the data, correspondence and documents
upon which the DPUC relied to reach the conclusions quoted above. This
request is submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Connecticut Freedom
of Information Act.
.....We also take issue with your statements
regarding the report entitled “Connecticut Energy Plan Framework,
2005” (Independent System Operator-New England)(“ISO-NE”).
That report identifies serious bulk power systems in southwestern Connecticut
– an area not served by Millstone-generated electricity because
of the nature of the present-day grid. To the extent that your letter
suggests that Millstone-generated electricity is a source of energy
for southwestern Connecticut, it is misleading.
.....We further take issue with your comments
concerning the ISO-NE report statement that “New England could
face a capacity shortage if there is high demand for electricity beginning
in 2006 and continuing into the future.” (Emphasis added.)
.....What your letter to Mr. Diaz fails
to note is that portion of the ISO-NE report which identifies Millstone
as an existing resource of “major concern.”
.....Indeed the report states as follows:
.....One major concern of ISO New England
is the continued viability of existing generating resources and the
impact on system and local reliability if any of these resources were
to become unavailable. Generating resources can suffer catastrophic
failures that lead to prolonged outages or deactivation, or premature
deactivation, as Connecticut experienced with certain of its nuclear
units [Undoubtedly referring here to the premature shutdowns of Millstone
Unit 1 and Connecticut Yankee in 1996 and the forced stationwide shutdown
at Millstone from 1996-1998 because of pervasive licensing violations].
. . . Furthermore, existing resources can become less competitive over
time as more efficient and more economic resources are added throughout
New England leading to attrition of existing units.”
.....If anything, the ISO-NE report implicitly
discourages future reliance on Millstone Units 2 and 3 as they age,
remain subject to catastrophic failures, encounter age-related defects
and become less competitive.
Moreover, we do not believe that the DPUC’s statutorily defined
jurisdiction extends to areas outside Connecticut. Within Connecticut,
there is presently excess electrical generating capacity which entirely
negates the need for Millstone Unit 2’s 870 megawatts and, with
modest gestures toward energy conservation, Unit 3’s 1150 megawatts
as well. We refer you to the Connecticut Siting Council’s current
forecasts of electrical generation.
.....Finally, your letter perpetuates a
myth that greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power plants are negligible.
If this were truly the case, Dominion would not be zealously litigating
against the Town of Waterford in pursuit of tax exemptions for employing
controls of greenhouse gas emissions. You do not take into account the
enormous amount of greenhouse gases released during the uranium fuel
fabrication process and in numerous applications throughout the nuclear
cycle, including projected transportation to deliver spent nuclear waste
to distant repositories. The low-level ionizing radiation continuously
emitted by Millstone to the air and water is an insidious carcinogen
your letter overlooks.
.....Finally, as the National Academy of
Science has recently reported, densely stored nuclear waste in spent
fuel pools – of which there are three at Millstone – pose
a realistic threat of terrorist attack. Elevated spent fuel pools –
such as serves Millstone Unit 1 – were identified as being highly
vulnerable to terrorist attack. Your letter makes no reference to Millstone’s
appeal as a terrorist target, although it has been identified as one
by the federal Department of Homeland security. We question how in good
conscience you and the DPUC can support relicensing of Millstone Unit
2 – which, as you will recall, the DPUC declared no longer “used
and useful” in 1998 because of its staggering array of licensing
violations - through the year 2035 and Unit 3 through the year 2045.
.....We encourage you to reconsider your
inaccurate comments and address corrections to Chairman Diaz without
.....We encourage you to visit our website,
HYPERLINK http://www.mothballmillstone.org www.mothballmillstone.org,
to obtain further information about current operations at Millstone.
Sincerely, Nancy Burton
cc: Nils J. Diaz
Please respond to:
147 Cross Highway
Redding Ridge CT 06876
Note: The Downes letter
is viewable at the NRC's Website, Adams Accession Number ML050900234.
Read CCAM's March 2, 2005
letter to the NRC about Millstone's unregulated emissions of strontium-90:
March 2, 2005
Rules and Directives Branch
Division of Administrative Services
Office of Administration
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington DC 20555-0001
Re: Millstone Nuclear Power Station/Draft Environmental Impact Statement
.....The Connecticut Coalition Against
Millstone submits herewith preliminary comments concerning the draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which the NRC staff has prepared
in support of relicensing of Millstone nuclear reactors Units 2 and
3 to extend their terms to the years 2035 and 2045 respectively. .....These
comments will be supplemented with a separate filing with attachments.
.....The Coalition strongly opposes Millstone
.....The data available to the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission in its environmental review establishes a clear
link between Millstone’s radiological and chemical discharges
to the environment and major health effects in the surrounding community.
.....The data reviewed by the NRC is alarming.
The data strongly suggests – and indeed does so almost to a certainty
– that Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. is operating and will
continue to operate the Millstone Nuclear Power Station in violation
of NRC regulations requiring limiting doses to the public of 15 millirems
per year to any organ.
Put another way, the data strongly suggests that Dominion’s Millstone
daily operations exceed the permissible dose of radiation to the public
and will continue to do so during the proposed relicensing period.
.....Based on Dominion’s own reporting
of radiation sampling in the environment, the Coalition believes the
available data reviewed by the NRC for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003
prove that routine operations of Millstone are in violation of federal
health standards and are illegal.
.....By its own admission, the NRC confined
its review of Millstone radiological releases, for Environmental Impact
Statement purposes, to the years 2001, 2002 and 2003. (“Radioactive
Waste Management Systems and Effluent Control Systems 2.1.4,”
DEIS at 2-9) (No explanation is provided in the DEIS as to why the years
1970-2000 and the year 2004 – with the most current data –
were excluded from review.)
The Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report submitted by
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. to the NRC for the year 2001 –
one of the few reports the NRC specifically identified that it had reviewed
in its EIS procedure - contains the following information:
.....On September 19, 2001, a concentration
of strontium-90 of 55.5 picoCuries per liter (pCi/l) was measured in
a sample of goat milk taken from a location 5.5 miles north-northeast
of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station. The uncertainty factor reported
was plus or minus 5.3 pCi/L.
.....A concentration of 55.5 picoCuries
per liter is an “extremely large concentration, close to twice
the highest concentration measured in Connecticut pooled milk at the
height of nuclear weapons testing in 1963 of 23 pCi/L,” according
to a report dated March 1, 2005 by Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass, Professor
Emeritus of Radiological Physics at the University of Pittsburgh School
of Medicine and an acknowledged pioneer in the field of the effects
of low-level ionizing radiation on living cells. The report appears
annexed hereto as Exhibit A.
.....Moreover, according to Dr. Sternglass,
since the measured value is ten times as large as the measurement uncertainty,
“this is an extremely significant result, with an astronomically
small chance that it is a statistical fluctuation.”
.....Put into perspective, an individual
drinking two eight-ounce glasses of the strontium-90-contaminated goat
milk on a daily basis would receive a maximum permissible dose of radiation
– under NRC guidelines – within 30 days.
.....This assumes no other radiological
contamination of the milk. However, strontium-90 never appears alone
in the environment. When the radiological effects of identified concentrations
of radionuclides also reported in the same goat milk sample - cesium-134,
cesium-137, iodine-131, barium-140 and others – are considered,
the effect is even more damaging and far less milk would need to be
consumed over fewer days before the maximum permissible radiation doses
established by federal law would be exceeded, according to Dr. Sternglass.
.....“The dose to bone or the bone
marrow when other fission products are present is some 5 to 6 times
greater than from strontium-90 alone, and the Dominion reports for goat
milk show significant concentrations of other fission products, such
as cesium-137, in significant concentrations,” Dr. Sternglass
states in his report, Exhibit A.
.....“Using the NRC NUREG 1.109 dose
factor of 0.0172 mrem/pCi/l [millirem] from Table A-5, a mere 2.4 pCi/l
daily intake results in the maximum permissible dose to any organ of
15 mrem per year set by NRC guidelines, 23 times the amount measured
in a single liter,” according to the Sternglass report.
.....Attached to Dr. Sternglass’
report are measurements, reported to the NRC by Dominion, of strontium-90
in goat milk sampled at locations within 5 miles of Millstone during
the years 2001, 2002 and 2003.
The reported samples of measurements show concentrations of 13 to 14
pCi/l on other days during the three-year period. According to Dr. Sternglass,
these are also significantly high readings since strontium-90, concentrating
in milk due to atmospheric nuclear weapons testing which ended in 1980,
has declined to less than 1 pCi/l in areas far removed from any nuclear
.....Since the samples are collected by
Dominion only twice a month, it is unknown whether actual concentrations
on other days exceeded the levels reported.
.....In 1997, Millstone’s previous
owner, Northeast Utilities, persuaded the NRC to permit it to discontinue
sampling for strontium-90 in its air filter monitoring program. As the
1997 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating report states:
.....Section 4.5 Air Particulate Strontium
.....Table 5 in past years was used to
report the measurement of Sr-89 and Sr-90 in quarterly composited air
particulate filters. These measurements are not required by the Radiological
Effluent Monitoring Manual (REMM) and have been discontinued. Previous
data has shown the lack of detectable station activity in this media.
This fact, and the fact that milk samples are a much more sensitive
indicator of fission product existence in the environment, prompted
the decision for discontinuation. In the event of widespread plant related
contamination or special events such as the Chernobyl incident, these
measurements may be made.
.....Strontium-90 is among the most deadly
byproducts of nuclear fission. Once ingested, its highly-energetic electrons
damage and cause mutations in nearby cells. Exposure to low levels of
strontium-90 and other bone-seeking radioactive chemicals routinely
released by nuclear power plants does not merely increase the risk of
bone cancer or leukemia, but it weakens the immune defenses provided
by the white cells of the blood that originate in the bone marrow. See
Declaration of Ernest J. Sternglass (August 8, 2004) submitted to the
NRC in In the Matter of Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Docket No.
50-336-LR, 50-423-LR, ASLBP No. 04-824-01-LR, annexed hereto as Exhibit
.....“As recently shown in the 2003
report by the European Committee on Radiation Risk, numerous epidemiological
and laboratory studies have shown that the risk of cancer and other
diseases produced by local internal doses to critical organs from fission
products that are inhaled or ingested have been underestimated by extrapolation
from high external doses by factors of hundreds to thousand of times,”
according to the Sternglass report, Exhibit A.
.....“This explains why it now appears
that releases from nuclear plants, often acting synergistically with
other environmental pollutants, are a major neglected reason for the
recent rise of illness and deaths both among newborns and the elderly
observed in the U.S. in the last two decades, as also discussed in the
ECRR report,” according to Dr. Sternglass. Id.
“For these reasons, it is my professional opinion that the Millstone
Nuclear Plant should not be relicensed,” Dr. Sternglass stated.
In his report, Exhibit A.
.....The Coalition has previously submitted,
in these and the related Atomic Safety and Licensing Board proceedings,
documentation from Joseph Mangano and Michael Steinberg which links
the Millstone radiological effluent releases – including strontium-90
- to significant negative health consequences in the community. These
documents are incorporated by reference herein.
CONNECTICUT COALITION AGAINST MILLSTONE
Please address correspondence to:
147 Cross Highway
Redding Ridge CT 06876
....On April 26, 1986, Ukraine suffered
the worst nuclear disaster in history when the Chernobyl Unit 4 reactor
exploded, releasing radiation estimated to be 100 times greater than
the radiation released by the Hiroshima bomb.
....The consequences were staggering. The
accident killed 30 plant operators and first responders in its immediate
aftermath. Ninety per cent of the 135,000 people permanently evacuated
from a 20-mile zone surrounding Chernobyl have been diagnosed with illnesses
related to high radiation exposures. Of the 600,000 people involved
in the clean-up (“liquidators”), all are dead or considered
ill, according to the Ukrainian Ministry of Health. It is estimated
that 15 million people or more were victimized by Chernobyl, requiring
health care costing $60 billion.
....In Ukraine alone, more than 2.32 million
people, including 452,000 children, have been treated for radiation-linked
illnesses, including thyroid and blood cancer and cancerous growths,
Ukrainian health officials. Hundreds of square miles of land have been
permanently contaminated. Plutonium, cesium, strontium and other deadly
materials drained into the Dnieper River system, a major source of drinking
water. A deadly cloud of radiation blanketed the earth for 10 days.
....Authorities in the then-governing Soviet
regime - who thought they could conceal the accident itself from the
Ukrainian people and the world - covered up the reactor with a makeshift
concrete sarcophagus to contain radiation dispersal.
....The temporary sarcophagus is now cracking
and leaking, allowing radioactive particles to escape. Structural supports
are vulnerable to collapse. It is feared that if the degraded conditions
are not addressed soon, a second tragedy may occur on a large scale.
....During the corrupt Leonid Kuchma regime,
the newly independent Ukraine ignored these problems. The people of
Ukraine and the whole world were put at grave risk.
....On April 6, 2005, Viktor Yushchenko,
Ukraine’s new President and hero of the Orange Revolution, addressed
an historic joint session of the U.S. Congress.
....Among his nation’s most pressing
needs, Yushchenko courageously told the Senators and Congressmen, is
a new sarcophagus to enclose the ruins of Chernobyl Unit 4 – one
of the most toxic sites on earth.
....A 1996 study put the cost of building
a new sarcophagus at $1 to $1.5 billion.
....In November and December, Ukraine’s
children of Chernobyl thronged to the streets of Kiev in the hundreds
of thousands. They put their lives at risk in the Orange Revolution
to forge a new nation, dedicated to the welfare of its people and purged
of government corruption. Their sacrifice has inspired millions across
the globe and has unsettled corrupt regimes everywhere.
....We honor Viktor Yushchenko and all
the heroes and heroines of the Orange Revolution. We hail their courage
....What more fitting gift can we as Americans
bestow upon them on the upcoming 19th anniversary of Chernobyl on April
26 than to begin work without delay to construct a new sarcophagus at
Chernobyl equal to the challenges posed.
....The truth is, we are all children of
....Write, email and fax to your Senators
and Congressmen to enact emergency legislation to protect the people
of Ukraine and the world from a second Chernobyl tragedy.
U.S. Sen. Christopher J.
448 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
E-mail via web site: http://dodd.senate.gov/webmail/
100 Great Meadow Road
Wethersfield, CT 06109
PH: 800-334-5341 (CT only)
U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman
706 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
One Constitution Plaza, 7th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons (R)
215 Cannon Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
E-mail via web site: http:www.house.gov/simmons/email.html
2 Courthouse Square
Norwich, CT 06360
Expose of Degrading Conditions
During the year 2004, Dominion routinely violated its licensing conditions
at its Unit 2 and Unit 3 nuclear reactors, cut corners on safety, misled
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and exposed the State of Connecticut
to a heightened risk of nuclear oblivion.
There is a rational response to this fiasco: MOTHBALL MILLSTONE NOW!
Close the plant, move the deadly tons of intensely radioactive waste
to safe onsite storage – in dispersed underground bunkers –
and convert the site to wind, solar and wavepower generation of electricity.
Below we list many – by no means all – examples of serious
errors and degrading conditions which occurred in 2004 and which your
government at every level tolerated. Any one of these conditions, combined
with others, could have contributed to a serious accident or worse.
Your public officials compromised your safety and your future. Call
them, email them, write to them. Wake them up! Contact numbers and email
addresses appear at the bottom of this item.
Millstone Unit 2 is a 870-megawatt nuclear reactor which went online
in 1975. It has one of the worst operational records in the entire U.S.
nuclear industry. The NRC ordered it shut down for three years (1996-1999)
because it was so unsafe. Connecticut’s Department of Public Utility
Control declared it “no longer used and useful” in 1998.
Unit 2 produces excess electricity which is not needed by Connecticut
consumers. Yet, one of former Governor John G. Rowland’s dubious
achievements before he pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges
was to return Unit 2 to service and keep it operating.
These events occurred at Millstone Unit 2 in 2004:
A spent nuclear fuel rod broke at Unit 2 on August 5 while operators
were inspecting fuel assembly failures. The lethal rod fragmented and
it took a week for Dominion to recover all the pieces.
Unit 2’s reactor trip breaker failed to shut remotely. This is
alarming, given Unit 2’s unusual propensity to suffer
unexpected and dangerous spontaneous “trips” or shutdowns.
Unit 2 suffered four reactor “trips” during the inspection
period due to equipment failures or personnel error.
Dominion allowed Millstone’s “high-range” radiation
monitor – key to measuring radiation doses to the public –
to become seriously degraded.
Atmospheric relief “housekeeping boots” ruptured with potential
to interfere with operability of the enclosure building filtration system.
On April 14, workers discovered that a fuel assembly “had
moved several inches upon coming out of the core and would
not travel into the mast without causing an overload condition.”
Unit 2 used materials from an unqualified vendor.
A reactor trip breaker failed to shut.
The spent fuel pool ventilation system was allowed to become degraded.
Inspectors discovered a critical modification was made to the spent
fuel pool water level indicator without documentation.
A loss of shutdown cooling occurred, resulting in an uncontrolled reactor
coolant system temperature increase of 14 degrees Fahrenheit.
Dominion repeatedly violated Technical Specifications (its formal licensing
conditions) throughout 2004. These “Tech Specs” are legal
requirements the public has a right to expect will be carried out and
During two unplanned emergency shutdowns, safety valves failed to operate
properly and Dominion failed to correct long-standing repetitive failures
of these safety valves. The NRC called this failure “more than
minor” because it undermined plant stability.
The emergency diesel generator was allowed to develop a “through-wall”
Dominion failed to follow procedures to properly test pressurizer level
control circuitry only when Unit 2 was in shutdown, resulting in the
inadvertent startup of both standby charging pumps with one charging
pump running. The NRC found “neither operators nor instrumentation
and calibration personnel identified these procedure requirements prior
to the conduct of testing.” As a result, both “redundant”
safety systems were adversely affected, causing a significant pressure
rise in the system which nearly exceeded the maximum pressure allowable
on the relief valve system.
The emergency building filtration system was allowed to degrade.
Multiple bolt failure due to corrosion buildup disabled one of two primary
circulating water pumps while Unit 2 was at full power on June 10.
On June 18, a reactor coolant pump system malfunction was brought about
by the failure of a pressure transmitter.
Water was discovered in charging pump oil.
A procedure to test the main steam code safety valve was not independently
reviewed by Dominion and supporting documentation was not available
to NRC inspectors.
Degraded conditions were found in the Emergency Building filtration
A “C” service water pump failed a testing program.
A turbine trip hook malfunctioned.
A flood door separately emergency diesel generators was left open in
violation of procedures.
Dominion violated its Technical Specifications when it failed to adequately
implement post-maintenance testing of a critical pressurizer level instrument;
a similar failure was a precursor to the failure to the charging system
on March 7, 2003.
Inspectors discovered that modifications to Unit 2’s charging
system were not supported by calculations or test data.
The post-incident recirculation fan timer failed.
Dominion’s failure to properly employ engineering controls led
to two workers who handled contaminated air filters to suffer serious
radiation exposures from “significant elevated airborne radioactivity
concentrations” in the work area on September 29.
Combustion gas leaked into the emergency diesel generator water system.
Dominion failed to follow procedures for ventilation function in the
Unit 2 suffered “excessive leakage” in the radioactive cooling
system because of a pump failure.
The Unit 2 intake structures suffered degrading conditions on November
5, potentially jeopardizing the critical reactor cooling system, due
to high winds and high seas.
Operators did not recognize the significance of several steam
generator code “safeties” that had lifted subsequent to
trips at Unit 2.
Operators and engineers at Unit 2 determined compensatory
cooling measures installed in a direct current switchgear room
at Unit 2 would ensure the availability of the switchgear, while
existing technical evaluations stated just the opposite.Unit 3
Millstone Unit 3 is a 1,150-megawatt nuclear reactor which went online
in 1986. It, too, has one of the worst operational records in the entire
U.S. nuclear industry. The NRC ordered it shut down for two years (1996-1998)
and put it on its notorious “Watch List” because it was
These events occurred at Millstone Unit 3 in 2004:
During a draindown of the vital reactor coolant system at Unit 3, the
worker assigned to monitoring the refuel pool level left his assignment
before completion; the reactor coolant draindown continued in his absence
for 1.5 hours. Operators were left to rely on the remote camera indication
of the refuel pool level – and they read it incorrectly. The NRC
correctly called this safety breach “more than minor” because
it “affected the likelihood of causing a loss of reactor water
inventory to the point that shutdown cooling could be lost.”
Millstone Unit 3 suffered repetitive failures of leakage tests for vital
water systems. Over a span of eight years – including three years
of Dominion operations – the same known failure mechanism resulted
in a 50 per cent failure rate for critical check valves.
Dominion allowed Millstone’s “high-range” radiation
monitor – key to measuring radiation doses to the public –
to become seriously degraded.
On April 4, while Dominion was preparing to remove the reactor vessel
head at Unit 3, an overhead crane malfunctioned, causing significant
damage to a critical lifting rig and damaging personnel safety equipment.
On April 14, workers discovered that a fuel assembly “had moved
several inches upon coming out of the core and would not travel into
the mast without causing an overload condition.”
Dominion repeatedly violated Technical Specifications (its
formal licensing conditions) throughout 2004. These “Tech
Specs” are legal requirements the public has a right to expect
will be carried out and enforced.
An emergency diesel generator output breaker malfunctioned.
A valve failure led to a high steam flow transient which led to a secondary
An error occurred in the steam generator flow, leading to alarm response
“Excessive” gas vented from the reactor heat removal system.
Leakage developed in a cooling water system relief valve.
An emergency diesel generator output breaker malfunctioned.
Serious discrepancies were noted in systems monitoring control rod positioning.
NRC inspectors discovered boric-acid buildup on the Unit 3 reactor vessel
head worse than what was reported by Dominion.
Dominion violated the Technical Specifications by failing to properly
vent the reactor coolant system and the residual heat removal system.
The NRC said the violation was “more than minor” because
it had potential to render vital charging pumps inoperable in an emergency.
Dominion violated its Technical Specifications when an electrical system
failure required it to stop reactivity additions to the Unit 3 nuclear
reactor; contrarily, operators increased reactivity and heat buildup.
The NRC Dominion’s failure to cease the reactivity addition with
a degraded electrical configuration was a “performance deficiency.”
Operators did not recognize that a failure of a vital inverter
made the electrical train inoperable.
Operators did not understand the potential significance of air
found in the discharge piping of the RHR (residual heat
removal) system at Unit 3 and their evaluation was not
Operators did not adequately consider the effects of small oil leaks
on high head safety injection pumps at Unit 3.
The NRC, in a scathing inspection report, concluded that Dominion failed
to address degraded conditions at Millstone in 2004.
The NRC inspectors “found a lack of rigor by Dominion related
to both the understanding of the effects of degraded conditions and
the technical bases used to evaluate degraded conditions . . . resulting
in violations [of Millstone’s licensing requirements].”
The blistering NRC inspection reports demonstrate that Dominion is routinely
operating Millstone in violation of its legal requirements and endangering
the public on a daily basis.
Nevertheless, despite these findings, the NRC praised Dominion’s
“good performance” during 2004 and said it warranted reduced
NRC inspections in 2005 and 2006.
The NRC’s conduct is beyond disturbing. Consider this:
On December 31, 2004, the NRC completed a special inspection of Dominion’s
fire protection system. The NRC inspectors randomly chose six areas
to inspect at Unit 2. One was the turbine building. The NRC reported
: “No findings of significance were identified.”
On January 14, 2005, just two weeks later, a fire broke out in the Unit
2 turbine building. That fire caused an unprecedented all-site evacuation
by non-emergency personnel. That fire also disabled Millstone site security:
as a result of the January 14 fire, Dominion lost control over its perimeter
fence and lost its ability to exclude intruders and keep track of personnel
movement within the nuclear plant. The fire – and the NRC inspectors’
failure to detect the fire hazard which led to the fire – exposed
the people of Connecticut to the worst known security breach in the
history of the state.
Dominion operated Millstone in the year 2004 as though no one was watching
and no one cared.
Join the Nuclear Watch! Join the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone.
[click to firstname.lastname@example.org]
Make your government keep watch over Millstone!
Contact your public officials:
U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D)
448 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
E-mail via web site: http://dodd.senate.gov/webmail/
100 Great Meadow Road
Wethersfield, CT 06109
PH: 800-334-5341 (CT only)
U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D)
706 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
One Constitution Plaza, 7th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons (R)
215 Cannon Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
E-mail via web site: http:www.house.gov/simmons/email.html
2 Courthouse Square
Norwich, CT 06360
Gov. M. Jodi Rell Tel. 800-406-1527. HYPERLINK mailto:email@example.com
Attorney General Richard S. Blumenthal Tel. 860-808-5318 firstname.lastname@example.org
President Pro Tempore of the Senate:
Sen. Donald E. Williams, Jr., D-29, (Brooklyn, Canterbury, Killingly,
Mansfield, Putnam, Scotland, Thompson and Windham), 800-842-1420, (e-mail
Williams@senatedems.ct.gov) How to contact your State Senators:
Andrea Stillman (D)(Waterford, East Lyme, Montville, New London, Old
Lyme, Old Saybrook, Salem), 800-842-1420, email Andrea.Stillman@po.state.ct.us
Catherine W. Cook, R-18, ( Griswold, Groton, North Stonington, Plainfield,
Preston, Sterling, Stonington and Voluntonw ), 860 536-4418, e-mail
Edith Prague, D-19, (Andover, Bozrah, Columbia, Franklin, Hebron, Lebanon,
Ledyard, Lisbon, Montville, Norwich and Sprague ), 1-800-842-1420, e-mail
Eileen M. Daily, D-33, (includes Colchester, Deep River, East Haddam,
East Hampton, Essex, Haddam, Lyme and Old Saybrook), 1-800-842-1420,
Anthony Guglielmo,, R-35, (includes Pomfret and Woodstock ), (860) 684-4878,
How to contact your State Representatives:
Michael Caron, R-44, (Killingly, Plainfield, Sterling) 1-800-842-1423,
Robert Congdon, R-42, (Ledyard, Montville, Preston) 860-240-8700, e-mail
HYPERLINK mailto:Robert.Congdon@housegop.state.ct.us Robert.Congdon@housegop.state.ct.us
Marilyn Giuliano, R-23 (Old Lyme) 860-240-8700, e-mail Marilyn Giuliano@housegop.state.ct.us
Shawn Johnston D-51, (Killingly, Putnam, Thomason) 1-800-842-8267, e-mail
Jack Malone, D-47, (Canterbury, Norwich, Scotland, Sprague) 1-800-842-8267,
Steven Mikutel, D-45, (Griswold, Lisbon, Plainfield, Voluntown), 1-800-842-8267,
Ted Moukawsher, D-40, (Groton, New London), 1-800-842-8267, e-mail Edward.Moukawsher@po.state.ct.us
Melissa Olsen, D-46, (Norwich), 1-800-842-8267, e-mail Melissa.Olson@po.state.ct.us
Linda Orange, D-48, (Colchester, East Haddam) 1-800-842-8267, e-mail
Gary Orefice, D-37, (East Lyme, Salem) 1-800-842-8267, e-mail Gary.Orefice@po.state.ct.us)
Walter Pawelkiewicz, D-49, (Windham, Willimantic) 1-800-842-8267m e-mail
Kevin Ryan, D-139, (Bozrah, Franklin, Lebanon, Montville), 1-800-842-8267,
e-mail Kevin.Ryan@po.state.ct.us)Diana Urban, R-43, (North Stonington,
Stonington) 1-800-842-1423, e-mail Diana.Urban@housegop.state.ct.us
Lenny Winkler, R-41, (Groton), 1-800-842-1423, e-mail Lenny.Winkler@housegop.state.ct.us
Cancer Blamed On Millstone
Mom's Exposure To Chemicals Alleged
By THOMAS D. WILLIAMS
Courant Staff Writer
March 11 2005
NIANTIC -- Seven-year-old Zachery M. Hartley has a rare, disfiguring
cancer of the jaw. His parents and an internationally known physician
blame the Millstone nuclear power plant.
Dr. Helen Caldicott, a co-founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility,
said Thursday that it is likely the rare disorder afflicted Zachery
because his mother swam in the ocean near the nuclear plant during her
At a bayside press conference, Caldicott said Tonia Hartley came in
contact with radiological compounds discharged from the plant into Niantic
Michael and Tonia Hartley and a state anti-nuclear group are demanding
that Millstone be shut down and that swimming in the bay be prohibited.
Although Millstone was closed at the time in 1997 when Tonia Hartley
went swimming, Caldicott said, the plant was "washing out with
volatiles [chemicals] and that had a synergistic effect" making
the water emissions extremely hazardous. She said anyone swimming in
the bay then could have been exposed to the chemicals by swallowing
or breathing them, absorbing them through the skin or eating contaminated
fish from the bay.
But, Peter Hyde, spokesman for Dominion Nuclear Connecticut Inc., the
plant's operator, said: "We've looked at this and we empathize
a great deal with this boy and his family. But we don't agree that there
is any evidence that Millstone caused this boy's cancer. We live here.
We swim in this water. We would never do anything consciously to cause
harm to our families or neighbors."
Hyde said Caldicott did not say she could definitively link the cancer
to the plant's emissions.
Invited to the press conference by the Connecticut Coalition Against
Millstone, Caldicott said 17 to 19 similar occurrences of rare cancers
have been reported among people living in the vicinity of Brookhaven
National Laboratory on Long Island, N.Y.
Brookhaven, begun in 1947 as a nuclear-science research center, conducts
research in the physical, biomedical, and environmental sciences, as
well as in energy technologies and national security for the U.S. Department
The Hartleys did not fully
link Tonia Hartley's swimming to her son's cancer until January while
viewing a public television broadcast of the coalition opposing Millstone's
pending re-licensing application, said Nancy Burton, a coalition leader.
Tonia Hartley, who swam regularly for seven months while she was pregnant,
was in Boston Thursday readying for Zachery's next major operation,
but sent a tape recording of her comments to the conference.
"Connecticut is not looking out for its children," she said.
"There were no signs posted on the beach by the state, the town
or the federal government that swimming in the water could be hazardous
to my unborn child.
"I'm sharing our story as a mother looking out for the community
so the community can make an educated decision knowing the price we
paid for being unaware. This has been a nightmare for my family for
seven years and it is continuing to be a nightmare for the rest of Zachery's
life," she said.
As his son stood by, Michael Hartley said he and his wife decided to
go public because "no one in town has said anything about this,
and if they know they are not talking. I want the public to vote on
it," he said.
An advocate of citizen action to remedy the nuclear and environmental
crises, Caldicott, 66, has spent the past 35 years on an international
campaign to educate the public about the medical hazards of the nuclear
Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant
Says Boy's Cancer Was Caused By Millstone Emissions
Judy Benson, The Day
Coalition Urging EL To Close Town Beaches
East Lyme — An organization seeking the shutdown of the Millstone
Nuclear Power Station is urging closure of town-owned beaches on Niantic
Bay and is linking a 7-year-old boy's rare facial tumor to radiation
and carcinogenic chemical emissions from the plant, located about 1.5
miles across the bay in Waterford.
The boy's mother, Tanya Hartley, is a former East Lyme resident and
swam regularly at the town's Hole-in-the-Wall beach during her pregnancy,
according to her husband, Michael, who took part in a news conference
called by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone on Thursday. The
family currently lives in Canterbury. The news conference was held in
the lobby of the Morton House apartment building on Main Street, across
the street from the bay.
First Selectman Wayne Fraser said he had no response to the group's
request and that he had not previously been informed about the boy's
tumor, which required extensive surgery to remove it. Michael Hartley
said part of the tumor was cancerous and part was benign, and that his
son will undergo facial reconstruction surgery this summer in Boston.
Fraser said he would seriously consider any health concerns raised by
the state Department of Public Health or other officials, but none have
been raised in conjunction with Millstone. The town has no plans to
close its beaches or post safety warnings, as the coalition requested
in a March 9 letter.
“We react to proper methods and officials,” he said. “East
Lyme strongly supports a safe Millstone for families and a safe working
environment for employees.”
The news conference included remarks by Dr. Helen Caldicott, a pediatrician,
author and nuclear disarmament activist who is also against nuclear
power and the health risks she believes it carries for those who live
near plants. Caldicott came at the invitation of Nancy Burton of Redding
Ridge, coalition leader.
Caldicott said that from her review of the boy's medical records, she
believes there is a strong possibility his tumor was caused by his mother's
exposure to the plant emissions in the air and water. The plant releases
chemicals that are “very carcinogenic,” she said.
“I wouldn't want to live here,” she said. “These plants
must be shut down for the health of the people in this area.”
Peter Hyde, spokesman for Millstone, said the plant is closely monitored
by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission and is within acceptable
limits for radiation and other emissions.
“We empathize with the mother and her child, but to make the leap
between Millstone operations and this poor child's illness is not supportable,”
The NRC has not been contacted with safety concerns about Millstone
related to the boy's illness, according to NRC Spokesman Neil Sheehan.
Members of the public can petition the NRC about safety issues, he said,
but that has not been done in this case.
Concerns about cancer rates around the plant were raised during recent
public hearings about plant re-licensing, he said, and results of several
studies were reviewed as part of that process, he said. The NRC concluded
there is no evidence linking cancer rates to the plant.
“It's certainly difficult to make some cause-and-effect relationship
between swimming and cancer,” Sheehan said.
waters?: Plant pollution may have sickened boy
By JENNY BONE MILLER
Norwich BulletinPhotos by Tali Greener/Norwich Bulletin
Zachary Hartley, 7, and his dad, Michael, both of Canterbury
walk along Hole-in-the-Wall Beach Thursday in Niantic. Zachary
Hartley, 7, and his dad, Michael, both of Canterbury, sit at
the Morton House Thursday in Niantic. Zachary has been diagnosed
with a rare facial cancer believed to have been the result of
chemical and radiological discharges from water around the Millstone
Nuclear Power Station. Caldicott
THE CALDICOTT FILE EAST LYME -- A Canterbury first-grader will
have painful surgery on his face for the fourth time because
of a tumor his mother said was preventable.
Tonia Hartley, 24, who lived on State Street in Niantic, swam
every day in the Niantic Bay during the summer of 1997, when
she was pregnant with Zachary, who is 7 now.
She and Zachary's father, Michael Hartley, 26, said Thursday
at a press conference organized by the Connecticut Coalition
Against Millstone, that cesium-137 and other chemicals emitted
into the water from the nearby Millstone Nuclear Plant caused
a rare benign tumor the size of an orange in Zachary's mouth.
That tumor contained another, cancerous tumor.
When Zachary was 14 months old, doctors removed part of his
jaw and the fetal rhabdomyoma, which had a fetal rhabdomyosarcoma
inside it, in a surgery that took 23 hours. Before that he had
Zachary, an active boy who takes karate lessons and likes monster
trucks, will have facial reconstructive surgery this summer.
Doctors will break his leg to take some bone to build a new
jaw for him. Despite the pain, his mother said, he is anxious
to have the surgery to end the constant teasing he has endured
from his peers. When asked if he was afraid of the surgery Thursday,
he quickly said no.
"It hurts me more than anything to know that if I hadn't
lived there, if I didn't swim there, he would be OK," Tonia
Hartley said in a taped message that was played at the news
conference. She was in Boston arranging for Zachary's next surgery
and left the tape to be played on her behalf.
In 1997, a fish contaminated with cesium-137 was found in the
bay. The family suspected the chemicals in the water might have
caused Zachary's problems when they were diagnosed, but their
fears were dismissed as paranoia, Michael Hartley said.
Shortly after Zachary's birth, they moved to Canterbury, where
Tonia had a second, healthy son, who is 3 years old.
In January, the family saw that the Northeast Nuclear Energy
Co., which owned Millstone in the 1990s, had admitted falsifying
environmental records and dumping hundreds of gallons of hydrazine,
a toxic chemical used to reduce the corrosion of pipes, into
Long Island Sound.
In February, they contacted the coalition and said the Hartleys
wanted to tell the public their story.
"Millstone has been dumping chemicals into the water for
years, and they say it's no big deal," Michael Hartley
said. He and Zachary visited the Hole-in-the-Wall beach where
Tonia swam so many years ago for the news conference. Red and
white striped Millstone towers were visible on the horizon as
Zachary walked along the shore.
"I'm here to say it's not safe," Michael Hartley said.
Dr. Helen Caldicott, well-known former Harvard instructor in
pediatrics and anti-nuclear activist, supported the family's
claims at the news conference. She said although there is no
way to know with 100 percent certainty what causes any cancer,
more than 17 rhabdomyomas were diagnosed in the immediate area
around the nuclear power plant in Brookhaven, N.Y.
"As a good physician, you'd have to suspect," she
said. "Cesium 137 causes tumors like this boy has."
The family has not filed papers for a lawsuit. Michael Hartley
said they want the power plant closed, but at the very least
the bay should be closed to swimming. He said they would consider
filing a lawsuit in the future if that's what it takes to close
the plant, but they have not hired a lawyer yet.
"I would like the state to do some real studies on this.
What they have now are based on the state tumor registry, and
those can't be accurate because Zachary's tumor wasn't registered,"
he said. "It wasn't 100 percent cancer, even though there
were cancer cells inside the tumor, so he wasn't counted."
Environmental factors have not been identified as causes of
fetal rhabdomyoma, Richard V. Worrell, vice chairman emeritus
of the department of orthopedics, University of New Mexico School
of Medicine, wrote in an article at www.emedicine.com.
"We have a lot of empathy for the family, but we absolutely
disagree with the correlation to Millstone Power Plant,"
Pete Hyde, spokesman for Millstone, said. "We emit only
a fraction of the radiation we are allowed by federal guidelines.
They make the claim that one fish was found with cesium-137.
Did they say how much? They have no scientific background and
they make the case that because one child had a tumor it must
be Millstone's fault."
He said Millstone employees raise their families near the plant
and swim in the water. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave
Millstone a glowing report this month, he said.
In the 1990s, the plant was owned by Northeast Utilities, and
there were some problems with environmental reports then. But
in 2001, it was bought by Dominion and has a clean record.
Hyde acknowledged the plant emits trace amounts of chemicals.
"By trace amounts, we're talking parts per million or parts
per billion, with a B," Hyde said. "The coalition
has one agenda, and that's to shut down Millstone Power Plant.
We just don't agree with their conclusions."
Originally published March 11, 2005
WHAT IS RHABDOMYOMA?
* Rhabdomyomais a rare tumor that develops in muscle tissue. It
is diagnosed most often in men ages 25-40.
* Fetal rhabdomyoma, however, chiefly affects boys between birth
and 3 years old.
Dr. Helen Caldicott.
* Fame:Activist for anti-nuclear and environmental causes for
* Background:Was instructor in pediatrics at Harvard Medical School,
specializing in cystic fibrosis, and on staff at Children's Hospital
Medical Center, Boston, until 1980. Founded Cystic Fibrosis Clinic
at the Adelaide Children's Hospital in 1975. Founded Physicians
for Social Responsibility, an organization of doctors against
nuclear arms and power.
* Honors:19 honorary degrees, nominated for Nobel Peace Prize,
author of five books, subject of several documentary films, including
Eight Minutes to Midnight, nominated for an Academy Award in 1982,
and "If You Love This Planet," Academy Award winner
for best documentary in 1983.
* Today:Divides her time between Australia and the United States.
President of The Nuclear Policy Research Institute (www.nuclearpolicy.org)
based in California.
from Ed Markey
United States Congress Massachusetts Seventh District
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Tara McGuinness
March 8, 2005 Michal Freedhoff
DID MILLSTONE NUKE TURN DOWN FREE SECURITY HELP?
Markey probes allegation that free nuclear reactor security device was
Washington, DC: Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA), a senior Member
of the Homeland Security Committee and the House Energy and Commerce
Committee, the panel which oversees the regulation of nuclear reactors,
today released a letter sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
regarding an allegation received by his office that Dominion Nuclear
Connecticut Inc., the licensee of the Millstone nuclear power plant,
refused the NRC's offer to install a free device that would greatly
enhance security at the facility because it didn't want to assume the
"I am deeply concerned that this information, if true, reflects
a lack of commitment for the security of the power plant on the part
of the licensee and a disregard for the health and safety of the nearby
communities," said Rep. Markey.
Many nuclear power plants which employ a "once-through" cooling
system, including Millstone, Pilgrim and Seabrook, pump in millions
of gallons of water per day through water intake structures located
on nearby bodies of water. In the case of the Millstone plant, these
structures are located on Niantic Bay, an estuary of the Long Island
Sound. The water is constantly circulated through complex systems to
cool the reactor and maintain the temperature where spent fuel is stored
in pools, among other functions.
If an interruption in the flow of water from the intake structures occurs,
there would be a serious threat to the safe operation of the facility,
and a catastrophic meltdown could ensue. Al Qaeda has long considered
U.S. nuclear facilities to be attractive terrorist targets, and a waterborne
attack is one method terrorists could use. There is currently no obstacle
in place at the Millstone facility water intake structures to impede
an attack by, for example, suicidal terrorists who drive a motorboat
laden with explosives into the intake structures at the facility.
Rep. Markey's office was informed that in 2004, the Commission offered
to install a device - at no cost - at the Millstone water intake structures
to serve the purpose of impeding and thwarting such a postulated waterborne
attack. However, Rep. Markey's office was also informed that the licensee
rejected the offer because it did not wish to assume costs to maintain
Rep. Markey's letter requested information regarding:
* Whether the information received regarding the Millstone facility
* Whether the Commission has made similar offers to install free security
equipment at other similar reactors such as Pilgrim and Seabrook, and
if so what the outcome was.
* Whether the Commission has made offers to install other types of security
equipment at any other reactors, and if so, what the outcome was.
For a copy of the letter released today, please go to http://www.house.gov/markey/
Disputes NRC Report
Says Millstone Data Show Illegal Operations
Courant Staff Writer
March 4 2005
A state coalition of environmental groups told the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission that past data released by the Millstone Nuclear Power Complex
shows that it emits "highly significant concentrations" of
radioactive, cancer-causing particles in the New London area.
Those findings, issued by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone
on Wednesday, the final deadline to oppose the Waterford plant's request
for a 20-year license renewal, are contrary to an NRC report on the
"Based on [Millstone's] reporting of radiation sampling in the
environment, the coalition believes the available data reviewed by the
NRC for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003 prove that routine operations
of Millstone are in violation of federal health standards and are illegal,"
said Nancy Burton, a leader of the coalition. The group was organized
in 1999 to challenge Millstone's application to the NRC to double its
spent fuel storage capacity.
Last year Millstone, about 21⁄2 miles from New London, produced
48 percent of Connecticut's electricity, said Peter Hyde, spokesman
for Dominion Nuclear Connecticut Inc., the plant's operator.
In December, the NRC reported, in a preliminary draft environmental
impact statement, that Millstone does not pose significant emission
hazards to the air, water or soil.
"Environmental impacts are not detectable or are so minor that
they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute
of the [surrounding environment]," the NRC report said.
The coalition disputed those findings in response to the NRC's request
for public comments on the December draft report. The coalition enlisted
Ernest J. Sternglass, a retired professor of radiological physics at
the University of Pittsburgh Medical School, to analyze Millstone's
Sternglass said a goat milk sample obtained by Millstone officials in
September 2001, taken 51/2 miles north of Millstone on the outskirts
of Waterford, revealed an "extremely large concentration"
of strontium-90, a cancer-causing radioactive isotope.
That concentration is "close to twice the highest measured in Connecticut
milk ... at the height of nuclear weapons testing in 1963," Sternglass
said. Hazardous levels of strontium-90 decline over time, he said.
Millstone's operators test goat's or cow's milk within a certain radius
of the plant once or twice a month. Milk is tested because it has high
calcium content, and strontium-90 is drawn to calcium in the bones of
humans and animals.
Exposure to low levels of strontium-90 and other bone-seeking radioactive
chemicals routinely released by nuclear power plants increases the risk
of bone cancer or leukemia, Sternglass said. It also weakens the immune
defenses provided by white blood cells that originate in bone marrow,
Sternglass said. But strontium-90, he said, is only one of several dangerous
cancer-causing hazards flowing into water, air and soil from nuclear
power plant emissions. He said data from 2002 and 2003 indicated unacceptable
levels of other radioactive emissions in those years.
Because the strontium-90 level was so high in the goat's milk tested
in 2001, Sternglass said, "there is an astronomically small chance
that it is a statistical fluctuation [or error]." That measurement
excludes the possibility it was due to past nuclear bomb testing because
it was so much higher than the readings from nuclear weapons testing
in the state in the 1950s and '60s, Sternglass said.
Hyde disagreed. Annual monitoring of Millstone's stack emissions and
the soil and the water next to the plant show strontium-90 levels had
declined for years before the September 2001 reading, and for years
after it, he said.
Sternglass said his review of the data confirms abnormally high readings
of radioactive hazards.
The NRC is expected to issue the final environmental impact statement
at the end of July.
Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant
Covering Up the Crimes?
Chuck Douton used to work in the site maintenance department at Millstone.
They never told him it would cost him his life.
Chuck’s job took him to hot and dirty areas of the plant. Chuck
was diagnosed with a brain tumor growing out of his brain stem in 1986.
At about the same time, two co-workers in site maintenance were diagnosed
with brain cancer. The three workers were dismissed from their jobs.
Northeast Utilities told the three workers if they signed a form pledging
not to sue NU for their injuries they could leave with double severance
pay. They signed but their lawyer said the agreement wasn’t worth
the paper it was written on.
Chuck is very lonesome these days. His two co-workers have
died of their brain cancers. Chuck is just waiting to die because his
doctors have told him his brain tumor is inoperable.
Chuck used to live a full and active life. But now because of his illness
most of his pleasures are gone. Even Chuck’s dog, Casey, a black
Labrador retriever, is gone. Chuck and Casey used to romp on the beach
where the tides and currents wash radioactive waste and toxic chemicals
ashore from Millstone’s discharge point across Niantic Bay. In
1996, Casey was diagnosed with osteosarcoma of the cervical vertebrae
– cancer of the spine. The veterinarians who treated him at a
teaching hospital said they had never seen such a condition in a dog
of Casey’s young age – 1 1⁄2 years.
On August 9, 2004 and again on January 11, 2005, the Connecticut Coalition
Against Millstone reported Chuck’s brain tumor and the brain cancers
of his co-workers to the NRC.
Yet, when we asked the NRC on January 24, 2005 to provide its records
of the Millstone site maintenance workers who were diagnosed with brain
cancer and dismissed in 1994, this is what the NRC’s Richard L.
Emch told us on February 23, 2005:
We have no such documents.
Did the NRC destroy the documents to cover up the crimes?
If the NRC admitted it knew about these brain cancers, it would have
to deny Millstone’s application for a 20-year license extension.
Because when it licensed Millstone Unit 3 to begin operations in 1986,
the NRC said only 11 nuclear workers out of every 1,000,000 would die
of cancer. To the NRC, 11 worker deaths was an acceptable number. Chuck
and his co-workers tipped the scales.
When it licensed Millstone to operate, the NRC licensed a killing machine.
Question: If you are a government regulator and you license a machine
that you know will kill those who work on the machine without telling
them, are you complicit in their deaths?
IS EVEN MORE UNSAFE THAN EVER!
NEW LONDON DAY: TELL THE TRUTH FOR A CHANGE!
The New London
Day, the newspaper that reaches all of southeastern Connecticut, ran
an editorial on February titled: “A Safer Millstone.” (The
editorial appears below.)
With this editorial, we nominate The Day for a new award in the annals
of journalism: First in the “Fiction” Category.
On a daily basis, the Day does a disservice to its community. It perpetuates
a myth that the obsolete, dirty and unsafe Millstone Nuclear Power Station
is good for southeastern Connecticut. More and more, it simply regurgitates
the lies of the greedy nuclear industry and conceals the truth.
Its February 18 editorial is a perfect example.
The Day wants you to believe that moving highly radioactive spent nuclear
fuel from an unsafe, overloaded pool at Millstone Unit 2 to an unprotected,
untested onsite above ground concrete pad onsite - so that the 30-year-old
Unit 2 nuclear reactor, long crippled with mechanical flaws and operational
malfeasance, can keep operating - will enhance safety for southeastern
The Day is trying to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge. Don’t buy it.
Here’s what you need to know to inform yourself about the health
and safety of your family and your community: You will be even more
unsafe if Dominion is permitted to make this move for the following
Dominion is creating a brand new additional unprotected terrorist target
– a weapon of mass destruction awaiting activation – which
cannot withstand a terrorist attack.
Dominion is creating a permanent high-level nuclear waste dump expressly
prohibited by Town of Waterford Zoning Regulations.
Dominion is creating an entirely new source of continuous radiation
to the environment even if the nuclear storage dump works as planned.
Dominion is operating recklessly under very unsafe conditions by over-packing
its spent fuel pools with high-level nuclear waste containing billions
of curies of radiation which, if unleashed, would dwarf the catastrophic
effects of Chernobyl.
The above-ground nuclear dump will only add to the problem by permitting
Unit 2 to continue creating more high-level nuclear waste to add to
the onsite nuke dump, making Millstone an even more attractive bullseye
target for airborne and landborne terrorists.
The administrative processes which led to approval of this nuclear dump
by the Connecticut Siting Council were corrupted by the participation
of Philip Ashton – who did not disclose to the public at the hearing
that he had worked as a vice president at Northeast Utilities and had
a pro-Millstone bias – and Edward Wilds, Connecticut DEP Director
of Radiation – who did not disclose to the public at the hearing
that he took a junket as Dominion’s guest to tour out-of-state
nuclear facilities and that he had a conflict of interest as well as
a pro-Millstone bias.
The political processes which led to approvals of this dump were corrupted
by Dominion’s payoffs (bribes?) to public and private entities
at the municipal, state and federal levels.
There is one way to achieve “A Safer Millstone” and one
way only: SHUT IT DOWN. The sooner the better for all of us.
Here’s The Day’s February 18, 2005 editorial.
Tell The Day what you think about it! Send a Letter to the Editor: email@example.com
or call and ask for The Editor himself! Tel. 860-442-2200.
Tell the New England Press Association what you think about The Day’s
coverage of Millstone. Send an email to Brenda Reed, Executive Director
of the New England Press Association, firstname.lastname@example.org
A Safer Millstone
Published on 2/18/2005/The Day
Dominion Inc., owner and operator of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station,
revealed recently a few of the steps it has taken to enhance security
at the plant. The site now has three new guard towers, more security
guards conducting more patrols, mechanical barriers in the power station's
access road, and the company has upgraded its radio system to one more
But one of the most important steps the company has taken is one which,
years ago, under a previous owner, Millstone was reluctant to begin:
seek permission for and install a system in which spent nuclear fuel
can be taken out of the plant and stored on site.
In many ways, Dominion had no choice but to gain permission to move
the fuel. It's running out of room in the deep cooling pools where nuclear
rods are now stored after they are removed from the nuclear core during
routine refueling. The increasingly crowded pools are a reminder of
the broken promises of the federal government. The government encouraged
companies to build nuclear plants, solemnly promising to take responsibility
for the storage of high-level radioactive waste. Forty years later,
we're all still waiting for that to happen.
The pools were never meant to store waste for decades at a time. When
the Millstone units were built, nobody ever imagined that the fuel would
still be sitting in the pools years later. The pools are, perhaps, the
most vulnerable areas of any nuclear plant, with no concrete-reinforced
containment to protect them. One bad accident, one calculated terrorist
attack that drained the water would expose the area to high levels of
Groups that oppose nuclear power fought the plant when it decided to
seek permits to store the fuel outside the pools of water in which it
now resides. Those who fought the company said that they didn't want
to see the site become a nuclear dump. Yet, because of the incredible
irresponsibility of the federal government, in effect the spent fuel
pools have become nuclear waste dumps.
The company is right on this one. It's good to store as much of the
fuel outside the pools as necessary, both to make more room in the pools
and because it makes the area safer. The fuel is put in tons-heavy,
reinforced concrete-and-steel bunkers of sorts, about the size of garages.
It's expensive, which is one reason why for years Northeast Utilities,
the previous owner of Millstone, refused to do it. But now the Connecticut
Siting Council has granted the plant permission, and the company has
prepared a two-acre site for the project. Storage may begin as soon
as this month.
Proper nuclear fuel storage in dry casks isn't as dramatic or visible
as watchtowers and patrolling guards. But it makes the plant less vulnerable
and southeastern Connecticut safer nonetheless.
SET TO MOVE MILLSTONE DEADLY NUKE WASTE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS; COALITION CALLS FOR HALT FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 17, 2005
was sought because the nuclear facility was unable to meet safety requirements
established under federal law, according to documents released by the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Coalition reported.
The federal requirements, appearing as 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), provide as
“Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any
one time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be safely
subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by unborated
On November 5, 2004, Dominion applied to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
for an exemption from the requirement.
The exemption was issued on February 15, 2005 by Victor Nerses, a senior
project manager with oversight over Millstone Unit 2.
Dominion obtained NRC approval to transfer spent nuclear fuel from the
storage pool at Unit 2 to an above-ground onsite facility. The approval
authorizes bundles of spent nuclear fuel rods to be placed inside metal
canisters and then be loaded into concrete canisters for transfer to the
above-ground concrete pad.
Dominion also obtained approval from the Connecticut Siting Council to
construct the dry storage facility. However, the Coalition appealed the
approval to the Connecticut Superior Court. The appeal is pending.
The Coalition filed a motion to stay the transfer and a hearing was held
before Judge George Levine in December. No decision has been issued on
the motion for stay and a further hearing has been scheduled on the motion
for stay on February 28 in the Superior Court in New Britain.
In a letter dated February 15, 2005 addressed to David A. Christian, Dominion’s
chief nuclear officer based in Glen Allen, Virginia, the NRC concluded:
“The licensee [Dominion] is unable to satisfy the above requirement
[10 CFR 50.68(b)(1)].”
The CFR requirement involves the use of boron to control criticality in
spent fuel pools.
In the event a proper level of boron is not maintained, the highly radioactive
spent nuclear fuel stored in the Unit 2 pool could go “critical”
– that is, undergo a spontaneous nuclear chain reaction which could
lead to catastrophic consequences, according to the Coalition.
When Dominion applied to the Connecticut Siting Council for approval of
the dry storage facility, it did not inform the Siting Council that its
plans did not meet federal requirements, nor that it would seek a waiver
of federal safety requirements, according to the Coalition.
The Coalition has called upon Gina McCarthy, newly installed Commissioner
of the Department of Environmental Protection, to take immediate action
in the matter.
On February 7, the Coalition requested McCarthy to vacate the designation
of the DEP’s Radiation Bureau head, Edward Wilds, as the Commissioner’s
representative on the Siting Council which considered the Dominion application.
Former DEP Commissioner Arthur J. Rocque, Jr. had designated Wilds to
be his representative on the Siting Council to review the application,
stating in an October 21, 2003 letter that Wilds had had no prior involvement
in the matter.
However, the Coalition discovered that Wilds had taken a trip on September
20, 2002 at Dominion expense to tour a nuclear storage facility in Pennsylvania
while the Dominion application was in its formative stages. Wilds withheld
that information from the public during the Siting Council proceedings,
even though the Coalition asked the Siting Council panel to reveal conflicts
of interest among its members.
Because of the undisclosed conflict, the Coalition said Wilds should have
his appointment to the Siting Council panel revoked “nunc pro tunc,”
that is, to strike his participation from the proceeding from its onset.
Wilds cast a critical vote which awarded approval of the application on
the terms Dominion requested, according to the Coalition.
If his appointment is revoked, the Siting Council approval will be legally
invalidated, the Coalition said.
“We hope DEP Commission McCarthy will demonstrate by revoking Wilds’
authority that she is dedicated to clean government and that she will
use her power to protect the safety and welfare of the people of this
state,” said Nancy Burton, a Coalition leader.
The Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone is an organization of statewide
safe-energy groups, individuals and Millstone whistleblowers which has
served as a watchdog over Millstone operations since 1998.
The documents referenced in this press release are available upon request.
FIRE: GOVERNMENT COVER-UP
A fire in a switchbox at Millstone Unit 2 nuclear reactor on January
14, 2005 disabled the nuclear power plant’s security system and
created a STATE OF EMERGENCY.
As a result, the perimeter security system could not keep out intruders.
As a result, the company lost control over personnel movements inside
Without security, Millstone was very, very unsafe and the public very,
And so the cover-up began.
Federal, state and local public officials joined forces with Dominion
to obscure the truth and fool the public once again.
Because if the public knew the whole truth about Millstone, Millstone
would be forced to shut down.
Consider the timeline:
10:09 A.M.: Fire discovered in switchbox of Unit 2 turbine building
10:11 A.M.: Dominion declares a state of emergency.
10:12 A.M. Dominion notifies Town of Waterford to dispatch two fire
engines to site.
10:16 A.M.: Fire engines dispatched to Millstone
10:19 A.M.: Millstone loudspeaker announcement: “This is not a
drill. All contractors and non-essential personnel – and you know
who you are – begin evacuating the site now.”
10:34 A.M.: Dominion issues an “Incident Report” of “Fire
in Building OR Areas Adjacent to Areas Needed for Safe Shutdown NOT
Extinguished,” later revised to add “OR Verification of
Control Room Alarms”
11:45 A.M.: Waterford Police Department notified that “some components
of the security systems were damaged/compromised” and an “exterior
perimeter patrol was to be immediately established.”
12:45 P.M.: Waterford police officers dispatched to provide perimeter
3 P.M.: Waterford police released from site perimeter patrol.
3:20 P.M. Waterford police begin one-car perimeter “control”
to continue on 24-hour basis until further notification and until repair
of plant security system completed
4:05 P.M. Dominion releases Incident Report acknowledging the fire constituted
“A[ny] condition for Which Judgment Indicates Potential degradation
in the Level of Safety of the plant.”
January 16/5:48: state of emergency declared over at 5:48 - 46 HOURS
after it began.
January 16, 2005/6 P.M. Waterford patrol officer and vehicle released
What You Were Told About the Fire:
January 14, 2005 - Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone receives
information from a source inside the plant that the fire disabled the
internal and perimeter security system. CCAM issues a press release
to the news media and posts it on its website.
January 15, 2005 - The “New London Day” disregards CCAM’s
press release and instead quotes Waterford First Selectman Eccard’s
assurances that perimeter security had not been lost.
January 17, 2005 – The “New London Day” revises its
earlier account of the fire and reports Dominion’s acknowledgment
that the fire “temporarily damaged the power supply to some of
the equipment used to monitor security tools and site access.”
Consider the statements of Dominion, echoed by public officials:
Dominion: The fire had “no safety significance. The fire posed
no danger to employees or the public.”
The NRC: The fire had “no safety significance.”
Connecticut DEP: The fire caused “no threat to the environment
or the public.”
Waterford First Selectman Paul C. Eccard:
“The perimeter security of the plant site and protected area were
always maintained.” At no time was the public’s safety “compromised,
jeopardized or in question.”
On February 3, 2004, the NRC admits a special inspection team went from
Washington to Millstone to survey the fire damage and repair. As of
February 3, 2004, the fire was still under investigation.
The Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone filed a Freedom of Information
complaint on January 25, 2005 against Waterford First Selectman Paul
C. Eccard after he slammed the door in our face, hid in his office and
refused to release public documents about the fire.
Mr. Eccard will be asked to explain under oath at a hearing before the
state’s Freedom of Information Commission why, when his own police
force knew the perimeter security around Millstone was disabled, he
told the New London Day: “The perimeter security of the plant
site and protected area were always maintained.” He will be asked
to explain under oath why he told the community that at no time was
the public’s safety “compromised, jeopardized or in question”
by the fire when he knew otherwise.
Although we provided a press release and a copy of the FOI complaint
to the New London Day, the Day refused to publish a news report about
You will have to visit this site to learn the truth about Millstone
and the real dangers it poses to the community every moment it is allowed
We will post the date and time of the FOI hearing as soon as it is scheduled.
You are invited to BE THERE to hold your government accountable to the
people instead of the nuclear industry.
Your Attorney General:
Richard S. Blumenthal
Connecticut’s Attorney General, Richard S. Blumenthal, argued
to the state’s highest court on January 22, 2005 that the Missionary
Society of Connecticut lacked “standing” to seek a stay
of execution of Michael Ross and therefore, he argued, the Missionary
Society’s emergency appeal on behalf of the public interest should
be dismissed. (Missionary Society of Connecticut v. Board of Pardons
and Paroles, SC 17344),
“Standing” is the legal concept which defines who has a
right to be in court in a particular case. The state’s Board of
Pardons and Paroles has not yet adopted regulations to define who has
“standing” to raise issues before it. Until the Board adopts
such regulations, it will be premature for the Connecticut Supreme Court
to review or determine whether or not the Missionary Society has legal
“standing” before the Board of Pardons and Paroles. The
Board could adopt regulations expressly granting standing to all citizens
and organizations, including the Missionary Society. Thus, the Connecticut
Supreme Court cannot legally dismiss the Missionary Society appeal on
grounds of lack of standing – the only argument presented by Blumenthal
to squelch their efforts to stay Michael Ross’ execution in the
From this, we can see that Blumenthal’s argument, against staying
the first execution by the State of Connecticut in 40 years, was legal
sophistry. Blumenthal contrived a specious argument against the Missionary
Society’s appeal, when he had other options available: as Attorney
General of the State, he could have brought the case himself to the
Board of Pardons and Paroles, or advocated on the Missionary Society’s
behalf as an intervening party, since his statutory responsibility is
to participate in legal actions involving the public interest. Whether
the State of Connecticut should kill one of its citizens without exhausting
due process is a matter of the highest public interest.
Blumenthal boasted to news media after his argument to the Connecticut
Supreme Court that he is an advocate of the death penalty and that he
will be in attendance to observe Michael Ross’s execution on January
26, although he is not legally required to be present. Perhaps his personal
enthusiasm for the death penalty clouded his sense of public responsibility.
Blumenthal’s advocacy against an organization advocating the public
interest on grounds of lack of “standing” is not without
As Attorney General, Blumenthal opposed legal actions brought by Fish
Unlimited and the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone to stop illegal
chemical discharges at Millstone, arguing that each organization lacked
“standing.” He could have instituted the actions himself
in the public interest. He could have intervened as a party in support
of the environmental plaintiffs. Instead, he contrived the argument
that the state’s Environmental Protection Act - which by its plain
terms bestows “standing” to any person or organization to
bring a lawsuit to protect the environment - does not apply to either
Fish Unlimited or the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone.
Similarly, as Attorney General, Blumenthal opposed a legal action brought
by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone to challenge the Millstone
sale to a paper company without assets and the transfer to it of water
discharge permits which had expired and were illegally issued. Again,
he argued that the Coalition lacks “standing” to raise these
Unquestionably, Blumenthal, as Attorney General, possesses legal standing
to bring such actions to protect the environment and the public health
and welfare. That is his statutory mandate. The question is: why has
he chosen to support the big polluters and not the environmentalists?
Connecticut has an attorney general who contrives specious legal arguments
to stifle the public interest.
Let him know that you want him on our side: the side of the public interest.
Send him an email at: email@example.com
FIRE AT MILLSTONE
FORCES SITEWIDE EVACUATION;
PLANT SECURITY LOST, ACCORDING TO SOURCE INSIDE PLANT;
NRC CONFIRMS EMPLOYEE EVACUATION
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JANUARY 14, 2005
Contact: Nancy Burton Tel. 203-938-3952
WATERFORD – A fire in a cable vault at the Millstone Nuclear Power
Station forced an unprecedented evacuation of all non-essential personnel
from the site today and it left the nuclear facility without security,
according to a source inside the plant, the Connecticut Coalition Against
An order over a station loudspeaker at 11 A.M. directed “All contractors
and non-essential personnel – and you know who you are –
begin evacuating the site now,” the source reported.
According to the source, the fire started at the Unit 2 turbine building
at 10:09 A.M. and burned through a cable bundle, leading to a loss of
power. The fire interrupted power to security alarms both within the
plant and along the periphery of the secured area, according to the
source, Burton said.
A spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission confirmed that
“non-essential” personnel evacuated the site after the fire
was reported at 10:19 A.M.
“Some non-essential employees were let go home to enable Dominion
to continue its assessment and repairs without having to worry about
directing other employees not needed,” said Bob Bores, NRC state
liaison officer for Region I based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Bores confirmed that “aspects of plant performance were affected.”
However, when asked if the fire affected plant security, he stated that
he would have no comment.
Bores stated that the NRC concurred with Dominion that the fire had
“no safety significance,” notwithstanding that the cause
and full extent of damage of the fire had not yet been determined.
- 30 -