Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors: Appendices

Appendix 1. The Hazards of Using Energy

(Updated March 2017)

Some energy-related accidents since 1975

Place Year Number killed Comments Banqiao, Shimantan & others, Henan, China 1975 30,000 immediate

230,000 total hydro-electric dam failures (18 GWe lost) Machchu II, Gujarat, India 1979 2500 hydro-electric and irrigation dam failure Ortuella, Spain 1980 70 gas explosion Donbass, Ukraine 1980 68 coal mine methane explosion Israel 1982 89 gas explosion Guavio, Colombia 1983 160 hydro-electric dam failure Nile R, Egypt 1983 317 LPG explosion Cubatao, Brazil 1984 508 oil fire Mexico City 1984 498 LPG explosion Tbilisi, Russia 1984 100 gas explosion northern Taiwan 1984 314 3 coal mine accidents Chernobyl, Ukraine 1986 47+ nuclear reactor accident, massive radioactive pollution Piper Alpha, North Sea 1988 167 explosion of offshore oil platform Asha-ufa, Siberia 1989 600 LPG pipeline leak and fire Dobrnja, Yugoslavia 1990 178 coal mine Hongton, Shanxi, China 1991 147 coal mine Belci, Romania 1991 116 hydro-electric dam failure Kozlu, Turkey 1992 272 coal mine methane explosion Cuenca, Equador 1993 200 coal mine Durunkha, Egypt 1994 580 fuel depot hit by lightning Seoul, S.Korea 1994 500 oil fire Minanao, Philippines 1994 90 coal mine Dhanbad, India 1995 70 coal mine Taegu, S.Korea 1995 100 oil & gas explosion Spitsbergen, Russia 1996 141 coal mine Henan, China 1996 84 coal mine methane explosion Datong, China 1996 114 coal mine methane explosion Henan, China 1997 89 coal mine methane explosion Fushun, China 1997 68 coal mine methane explosion Kuzbass, Russia/Siberia 1997 67 coal mine methane explosion Huainan, China 1997 89 coal mine methane explosion Huainan, China 1997 45 coal mine methane explosion Guizhou, China 1997 43 coal mine methane explosion Donbass, Ukraine 1998 63 coal mine methane explosion Liaoning, China 1998 71 coal mine methane explosion Warri, Nigeria 1998 500+ oil pipeline leak and fire Donbass, Ukraine 1999 50+ coal mine methane explosion Donbass, Ukraine 2000 80 coal mine methane explosion Shanxi, China 2000 40 coal mine methane explosion Muchonggou, Guizhou, China 2000 162 coal mine methane explosion Zasyadko, Donetsk, E.Ukraine 2001 55 coal mine methane explosion Jixi, China 2002 115 coal mine methane explosion Gaoqiao, SW China 2003 234 gas well blowout with H2S Kuzbass, Russia 2004 47 coal mine methane explosion Donbass, Ukraine 2004 36 coal mine methane explosion Henan, China 2004 148 coal mine methane explosion Chenjiashan, Shaanxi, China 2004 166 coal mine methane explosion Sunjiawan, Liaoning, China 2005 215 coal mine methane explosion Shenlong/ Fukang, Xinjiang, China 2005 83 coal mine methane explosion Xingning, Guangdong, China 2005 123 coal mine flooding Dongfeng, Heilongjiang, China 2005 171 coal mine methane explosion Bhatdih, Jharkhand, India 2006 54 coal mine methane explosion Ulyanoyskaya, Kuzbass, Russia 2007 150 coal mine methane or dust explosion Zhangzhuang, Shandong, China 2007 181 coal mine flooding Zasyadko, Donetsk, E.Ukraine 2007 101 coal mine methane explosion Linfen city, Shanxi, China 2007 105 coal mine methane explosion Tunlan, Shanxi, China 2009 78 coal mine methane explosion Sayano-Shushenskaya, Khakassia, Russia 2009 75 hydro power plant turbine disintegration Hegang city, Heilongjiang, China 2009 108 coal mine methane explosion Sangha, Bukavu, Congo 2010 235 petrol tanker accident and fire Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico, USA 2010 11 Oil well blowout, over 4 million barrels of oil caused massive pollution in Gulf of Mexico Pike River, New Zealand 2010 29 coal mine methane explosion Taozigou, Sichuan, China 2013 28 coal mine methane explosion Soma, Turkey 2014 301 coal mine methane explosion and fire Zasyadko, Donetsk, East Ukraine 2015 37 coal mine methane explosion Dangyang, Hubei, China 2016 22 explosion and fire at coal-fired power station

LPG and oil accidents with less than 300 fatalities, and coal mine accidents with less than 100 fatalities are generally not shown unless recent.

Coal mining deaths range from 0.009 per million tonnes of coal mined in Australia through 0.034 in USA to more than 1 in China and in Ukraine. China’s death rate in 2008 fell to 1.182 per million tonnes of coal mined, compared with 1.485 in 2007, and 3.08 in 2005. (Source: IndustriALL Global Union, National Bureau of Statistics of China)

China's total death toll from coal mining to 2008 averaged well over 4000 per year – official figures give 5300 in 2000, 5670 in 2001 and 6995 in 2003, 6027 in 2004, about 6000 in 2005, 4746 in 2006, 3786 in 2007, 3210 in 2008, 2631 in 2009, 2433 in 2010, 1973 in 2011 and ‘over 1300’ in 2012. These data omit the small illegal collieries – Xinhua reports that authorities plant to close 20,000 small unlicensed collieries by 2015. However, the picture is improving: in the 1950s the annual death toll in world coal mines was 70,000, in the 1980s it was 40,000 and 1990s it was 10,000. Ukraine's coal mine death toll has been over two hundred per year (eg. 1999: 274, 1998: 360, 1995: 339, 1992: 459).

In Australia 281 coal miners have been killed in 18 major disasters since 1902, and there have been 112 deaths in NSW mines since 1979, though the Australian coal mining industry is considered the safest in the world. The USA, the world’s second-biggest producer, recorded 48 coal mining deaths in 2010.

Sources: contemporary media reports, Paul Scherrer Inst, 1998 report:, China State Admin. of Work Safety Bulletin.

Appendix 2. Serious Nuclear Reactor Accidents

Serious accidents in military, research and commercial reactors. All except Vandellos involved damage to or malfunction of the reactor core. At Vandellos a turbine fire made the 17-year old plant uneconomic to repair. For INES ratings, see Table in information paper.

Reactor Date Immediate deaths Environmental effect Follow-up action NRX, Chalk R., Canada (experimental, 40 MWt) 1952 Nil Nil, INES 5 Repaired (new core) closed 1992 Windscale 1, UK (military plutonium-producing pile) 1957 Nil Widespread contamination. Farms affected (c 1.5 PBq released), INES 5 Entombed (filled with concrete) Being demolished. SL-1, USA (experimental, military, 3 MWt) 1961 Three operators Very minor radioactive release, INES 4 Decommissioned Fermi 1 USA (experimental breeder, 66 MWe) 1966 Nil Nil, INES 4 Repaired and restarted, then closed in 1972 Lucens, Switzerland (experimental, 7.5 MWe) 1969 Nil Very minor radioactive release, INES 5 Decommissioned Three Mile Island 2, USA (commercial, 880 MWe) 1979 Nil Minor short-term radiation dose (within ICRP limits) to public, delayed release of 200 TBq of Kr-85, INES 5 Clean-up program complete, in monitored storage stage of decommissioning Saint Laurent A2, France (commercial, 450 MWe) 1980 Nil Minor radiation release (80 GBq), INES 4 Repaired, (Decomm. 1992) Chernobyl 4, Ukraine (commercial, 950 MWe) 1986 47 staff and firefighters (32 immediate) Major radiation release across E. Europe and Scandinavia (14 EBq or 5.2 EBq I-131 equivalent), INES 7 Entombed Vandellos 1, Spain (commercial, 480 MWe) 1989 Nil Nil, INES 3 Decommissioned Greifswald 5, E.Germany (commercial, 440 MWe) 1989 Nil Nil Decommissioned Fukushima 1-3, Japan

(commercial, 1959 MWe) 2011 Nil Significant local contamination (570 PBq I-131 equivalent), INES 7 Decommissioned

Criticality and chemical accidents releasing radioactivity

The well publicised accident at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 was at a fuel preparation plant for experimental reactors, and killed two people from radiation exposure. Many other such criticality accidents have occurred, some fatal, and practically all in military facilities prior to 1980.

There was a major chemical accident at Mayak Chemical Combine (then known as Chelyabinsk-40) near Kyshtym in Russia in 1957. This was then a military facility. The failure of the cooling system for a tank storing many tonnes of dissolved nuclear waste resulted in an explosion due to ammonium nitrate. It had a force estimated at about 75 tonnes of TNT (310 GJ). This ‘Kyshtym accident’ killed perhaps 200 people and released some 740-800 PBq of radioactivity, affecting thousands more. INES 6.

Appendix 3. Nuclear Energy Institute Briefing on Nuclear Plant Security

Extensive security measures protect US nuclear plants from sabotage. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations require nuclear power plants to take adequate measures to protect the public from the possibility of exposure to radioactive release caused by acts of sabotage. These measures include:

The physical construction of the containment building for the reactor.

Security personnel, procedures, and surveillance equipment.

Security clearance background checks and daily monitoring for plant employees.

Reactor containment buildings are designed to be impervious to catastrophes. Nuclear power plants containment buildings, in which the reactors are located, are extremely robust. Reinforced concrete containment structures, coupled with multiple, redundant safety and plant shutdown systems, have been designed to withstand the impact of hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and airborne objects up to a certain force. Design requirements with respect to aircraft impacts are specific to each facility.

Fortified physical barriers at nuclear plants resist penetration. For a release of radiation to occur, several layers of protection must be penetrated, including the containment structure, which is typically protected by about 1.2 metres (4 ft) of reinforced concrete with a steel liner, and the reactor vessel, which is made of steel that is about 150mm (6 inches) in thickness.

Armed security force and advanced surveillance equipment protect each nuclear plant. Every nuclear plant deploys armed security guards on the grounds of the plant around the clock. These highly trained security personnel are assisted in their work by sophisticated electronic surveillance equipment that scans the area surrounding the plant.

Nuclear plant security forces and procedures continually tested in mock drills. Federal regulations require that the industry demonstrate it can protect against a threat by a well-trained paramilitary force intent on forcing its way into a nuclear power plant to commit sabotage, armed with automatic weapons and explosives, with the assistance of an insider who could pass along information and help the attackers. In mock drills conducted periodically under NRC supervision and evaluation, highly skilled, professionally trained intruders make direct frontal attacks on the nuclear plants. They are provided with all information about the plant including the location of and pathway to vital equipment, as if they had been previously informed by an insider, and proceed to attempt to reach the equipment to disable it. If a drill the energy company chooses to stage is not sufficiently rigorous, the company would be cited for a violation of NRC regulations. The NRC evaluates the efficiency of the plant's security measures, and any necessary enhancements are implemented.

Nuclear plant personnel procedures protect from internal threats. All nuclear power plants have programs that protect against the potential threat that plant personnel may be, or may aid, terrorists. New employees and contractor employees must pass stringent background checks regarding employment, education, and criminal histories as well as drug and alcohol screening tests and psychological evaluations. Anyone appearing to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or exhibiting erratic behavior, will be immediately removed from the work area for evaluation. In addition, the NRC requires energy companies to conduct random drug and alcohol tests of at least 50 percent of all employees annually. Nuclear plant employees are also subject to continual behavioral observation programs by trained supervisors and are provided counseling for job-related issues or unusual behaviour.

FBI: nuclear plants are 'hardened' targets. Because of the industry's security programs and the defense in depth safety strategy, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation classifies nuclear power plants as 'hardened' targets. NRC Commissioner Edward McGaffigan said: "There are threats to the nation. But outside the military, [the nuclear energy] industry is probably the best at protecting its assets" (March 3, 1999).