Chernobyl-Like Reactor in U.S. to Shut Down

The U.S. Department of Energy said Friday that it will shut down its trouble-plagued “Chernobyl look-alike” nuclear reactor near here for six months to deal with significant safety deficiencies.

But even as the DOE announced a $50-million effort to shore up the reactor’s safety systems, it said the modifications would be short lived and that the 23-year-old Hanford N-reactor will have to be decommissioned as early as 1990.

The safety-upgrading program, to begin in January, comes on the heels of a decision last October to temporarily close the government’s two plutonium processing plants, which also are located on the federal government’s 570-square-mile Hanford Nuclear Reservation, 30 miles north of here.

Lapses Disclosed

The DOE ordered the shutdown of the two plutonium plants after lapses in nuclear safeguards and security were disclosed.

Together, the aging N-reactor and the plutonium plants are major components of the nation’s nuclear weapons program, accounting for an estimated 20% of U.S. plutonium production. Their closure will temporarily halt the production of all weapons grade plutonium at Hanford.

The N-reactor became the focus of national attention last April after the disastrous explosion of the Soviet Union’s reactor at Chernobyl. Neither reactor has a containment building and both use graphite to moderate the nuclear reaction.

The safety steps announced Friday followed various reviews of the reactor both by DOE teams and a group of six outside nuclear experts.

The recommendations of the six consultants, disclosed Friday, were more critical than the DOE’s in-house reviews.

Two of the six experts, Louis H. Roddis Jr., former president of Consolidated Edison of New York, and Prof. Harold W. Lewis of the University of California, Santa Barbara, called for the permanent closure of the reactor in the near future.

But, in announcing an “accelerated” safety program, DOE Under Secretary Joseph Salgado rejected the recommendations to shut down the N-reactor permanently.

While Salgado said a six-month closure was acceptable, “I will tell you today that national security reasons do not allow the permanent shutdown of the N-reactor.”

Salgado’s remarks at a Washington press conference were transmitted live to a similar gathering here.

No ‘Profound’ Effect

Maj. Randy Morger, a Defense Department spokesman, said in an interview that the Pentagon agreed that a six-month closure “will not profoundly effect defense programs or national security.”

All six consultants were unanimous in warning that the DOE had failed to adequately assess the possibility of a catastrophic hydrogen-gas explosion and to take steps to prevent it.

Thomas H. Pigford, chairman of the nuclear engineering department at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote: “The amount of hydrogen that could potentially be formed in the N-reactor is greater than that at Chernobyl, over threefold greater than in a commercial boiling-water reactor, and about 16-fold greater than in a commercial pressurized-water reactor.”

Moreover, he said, in contrast to the large concrete containment domes found at most commercial nuclear power plants, the N-reactor’s confinement building could not withstand a hydrogen gas explosion as well as could a commercial nuclear plant.

‘Matter of High Priority’

Roddis wrote that unlike Chernobyl, the N-reactor had neither a hydrogen control system nor a hydrogen monitoring system. Rectifying that flaw, Roddis said, is “a matter of high priority.”

However, Salgado said, while the DOE is addressing the hydrogen issue, all safeguards will not be completed by the reactor’s scheduled restart next summer.

Salgado said that two other recommendations will also be rejected--a permanent, independent oversight of DOE nuclear operations and the construction of a containment dome over the reactor.

Salgado said a dome would not be cost effective since the reactor probably will be shut down in the 1990s. Asked if a permanent oversight group is in the DOE’s thinking, Salgado replied, “The answer is negative.” Unlike commercial nuclear power plants, the DOE’s nuclear operations are not monitored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The consultants also were alarmed by the DOE’s practice of dumping radioactive water into unlined pits that have leaked into the nearby Columbia River. The DOE said it is moving to correct that problem.

Modifications Needed

Overall, the six consultants agreed that the reactor could be operated until the 1990s in a safe manner, provided that the modifications are made.

But several warned against complacency among workers in light of the reactor’s relatively good safety record despite repeated breakdowns and problems with key components.

Each of the six consultants submitted a separate evaluation of the reactor along with their findings. The consultants endorsed a total of 88 recommendations for safety improvements made by various in-house DOE reviews.

One critic of the panel, Dan W. Reicher, a staff attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the decision to temporarily close the reactor is “a step in the right direction.”

He noted that his organization had unsuccessfully gone to court, contending that the Roddis panel was “pro-nuclear” and challenging its closed meetings. “I think (their findings) demonstrates that there are real problems at the N-reactor that do need to be addressed,” he said.

‘Significant Concerns’

Reicher said the shutdown might not be enough time to take care of “very significant safety concerns. . . . In the end, the only real solution to the problems of the N-reactor may be to close it permanently.”

The N-reactor, commissioned on Dec. 31, 1963, is one of the nation’s oldest operating plutonium production reactors. It was modified in 1966 to also generate 860 megawatts of electricity for the Washington Public Power Supply System, which sells the power wholesale to other distributors.

A review of official records by The Times last May found that the reactor has been troubled for years by equipment failures, poor workmanship and human errors that have compromised vital safety systems.

On Friday, the DOE announced the awarding of a $4-billion, five-year contract to Westinghouse Electric Corp. to take over and manage nearly all DOE nuclear operations at Hanford beginning next October. Currently, the various programs are managed by four separate contractors.

Westinghouse’s selection followed its intensive two-year competition with Bechtel Inc. of San Francisco, and a joint proposal by Rockwell International of El Segundo and UNC Nuclear Industries. UNC has operated the N-reactor since 1965 and Rockwell manages the two plutonium plants and nuclear waste disposal.

Not Selection Factors

However, Salgado said, problems at the N-reactor and the plutonium plants played no part in the selection of Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse.

“I reviewed their proposal, equipment and personnel on an independent basis. Essentially, I felt that Westinghouse had a superior proposal and was best suited to carry out our mission and goals,” Salgado said.

Westinghouse currently operates an experimental breeder reactor on the Hanford reservation. In addition, Boeing Computer Services has a computer contract at Hanford.

The three firms now employ about 9,300 workers, most of whom will be absorbed by Westinghouse. However, over the next five years, about 600 positions will be eliminated, mostly by attrition, the DOE said.