Skip to main content

Comments on Arkansas Nuclear One Plant Accident

By
Our prayers go out to our colleagues at Arkansas Nuclear One where an industrial accident claimed the life of one worker and injured eight others. The accident occurred yesterday morning at approximately 7:45 a.m. when a generator stator fell as it was being moved out of the turbine building. There was no radiological release and no impact on public health and safety.

We are greatly saddened by this loss, and offer our deepest sympathy to the family and friends of the employee who lost his life.

The nuclear industry is a close community, and we ask that you please keep our friends at Arkansas Nuclear One in your thoughts today. 
Labels:

Comments

jimwg said…
My heart and sympathies go out to the families concerned. Unfortunately, this non-nuclear accident is already making the rounds of (anti Indian Point) NYC-metro TV stations as a heart-stopping "nuclear plant accident", with very brief situation mention that a workman was "crushed" or "was struck" by a piece of equipment, leaving it to the jittery public's imagination as to what; i.e.. in a nuclear plant, what else could be the well-known dangerous cause of a "nuclear plant accident" than the reactor? It doesn't help when the facility shuts down a perfectly running unit as a "safety procedure" -- but the media asks/baits a wondering public, would a gas or oil or coal facility shut down a running unit from a "totally uninvolved" incident as this? Most all likely not. NRC rules or auto-triggered systems or not, the seeming illogical purpose of the running-plant shutdown (as pre-assumed by antis) could only generate more puzzlement and FUD and a harder hill for nuclear acceptance to climb, especially with no nuclear advocacy voices clearly explaining the situation in the media or YouTube. This is the time for mourning and immediately after a time to aggressively mobilize an adult public education nuclear energy campaign on TV and YouTube to counter the media and antis who are surely -- disappointed by Fukushima's deathless outcome -- going to strike FUD in the hearts of the public while the iron is red-hot.

James Greenidge
Queens NY
April 1, 2013 at 7:31 PM
Anonymous said…
ANO's online unit scrammed automatically due to damage to a switchgear caused by the fallen stator.
April 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM
Anonymous said…
This is an industrial safety accident and has nothing to do with the nuclear side of the plant. The same sort of accident could happen at a coal or nautral gas fired power plant or any other heavy industrial facitlity. The nuclear industry has a VERY good safety record, but accidents do happen. That said, having worked at nuclear sites before, I can tell you the biggest killer by far is stress. I have heard of far more fatalities at nuclear plants caused by heart attacks than everything else combined.
April 3, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Anonymous said…
I work at ANO, but before my career brought me here, I contracted. I have worked in nuclear plants around the world, as well as hydro and fossil plants. If this same event would have taken place in a fossil or hydro plant, I believe far more people would have been injured. My prayers go out to the family and friends of the young man that lost his life. And as with any challenges that the nuclear industry faces, the lessons that we learn from this will be implemented throughout the nuclear industry.
April 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM
Anonymous said…
Typically the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has intentionally failed to incorporate the Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR 50 Appendix B NQA-1 (Nuclear Quality Assurance) Program requirements into the licensing of Nuclear Power Plants across this country. This omission knowingly allows the safety of the plant to be subjective to an operations driven management structure. i.e. One of the primary functions of Nuclear Quality is the audit verification of items relied on for safety (IROFS) separate from operations e.g. Crane Load Tests before performing heavy lifts. Since the management structure has the VP of Operation and the Nuclear Safety Officer as one and the same person, this operation/safety conflict of interest has ultimately lead to this fatal accident and the NRC is ultimately the cause of this felony reckless endangerment.

May 13, 2013 at 1:38 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

By
You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...
1 comment
Read more

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more