
Outgoing NRC Chmn. Jaczko testified before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last year.
The Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Gregory Jaczko, submitted his resignation Monday morning. Chairman Jaczko, a former aid to Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) who holds a PhD in particle physics, was originally appointed to the NRC in 2005, and elevated to chairman in 2009. Jaczko said he will relinquish his post upon confirmation of a replacement.
Jaczko’s announcement is hard to separate from pressing questions about the safety of commercial nuclear power in the United States–especially in the context of the ongoing crisis in Japan–the debate over the future of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, signs of shifting power dynamics in Washington, and, perhaps most importantly, the influence of wealthy and well-connected private industry on public policy.
As has been discussed here before, Greg Jaczko has been at the center of an orchestrated controversy for much of the last year, with nuclear industry lobbyists, Republican members of Congress, and other NRC commissioners pressing for the chairman’s ouster. Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), head of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has been an especially dogged critic of Jaczko, holding hours of hearings and serving as the driving force behind two inspector general reports on the allegedly hostile workplace environment at the NRC.
Issa, it must be noted, represents a district that includes the extremely troubled San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). The plant is currently offline as regulators try to determine the root causes of radiation leaks and rapid degradation of copper tubing used to move radioactive steam in and out of the reactors. The Orange County Republican has received copious campaign contributions from the companies that operate and maintain San Onofre.
Issa called hearings (while calling for Jaczko’s head) last year after the four other commissioners made public their letter to the White House complaining about Jaczko’s managerial style. The complaint revolved around a handful of issues that help explain the apparent urgency behind the anti-Jaczko putsch.
First, critics were upset about the way that Jaczko helped end work on the Yucca Mountain nuclear storage site. Yucca had proven problematic for a number of reasons–environmental, economic, security, and social–and had long been the target of Nevada politicians (most notably, Senate Majority Leader Reid), who felt their state had been dealt with unfairly in the original selection process.
The Obama administration had seemed to agree, and had the Department of Energy withdraw a request for the licensing of Yucca Mountain. In addition, very little money remained in Yucca’s budget, and no more has been approved.
But the nuclear industry desperately needs an answer to the problem (crisis, really) of long-term nuclear waste storage, and Yucca Mountain is the only site that has even been started. (It is nowhere near finished.) Without a place to move “spent” fuel and the other dangerous detritus of the process, nuclear power cannot realistically expand the number of rectors in the US, nor can it long continue to maintain and refuel those already in operation.
The nuclear industry, through its proxies in Congress and on the NRC, has complained that Jaczko didn’t allow advocates for Yucca to perpetuate the process. Most recently, a fight went public when President Obama nominated NRC Commissioner Kristine Svinicki for another term over the vocal objections of Senator Reid and his colleague Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Of special contention, the role Svinicki played in drafting the documents that called for the construction of the Yucca repository.
Second, the dissenting NRC commissioners complained that Jaczko used his emergency powers as chairman to guide US policy in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami that caused a triple-meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power facility. Complainants seem especially upset that Jaczko recommended evacuation of American citizens from a 50-mile radius around the crippled nuclear plant–a call he made with the support of NRC experts and in coordination with the State Department. Radioactive contamination from Fukushima has, of course, been found across Japan, even beyond the 50-mile limit. (In the US, 65 percent of the population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear plant, and late in December, federal regulators moved to scale back requirements for evacuations and emergency drills around commercial reactors.)
In the wake of the initial accident, Jaczko sought recommendations for US nuclear safety. The Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Accident produced a collection of basic (and, as discussed here, rather weak) recommendations last summer. Chairman Jaczko tried to start the process of turning those recommendations into rules–a process that could stretch beyond five years–but met objections from each of the other four commissioners. Jaczko also wanted lessons learned from Fukushima included in construction and licensing permits granted to four AP1000 reactors (two to be built in Georgia, two in South Carolina), but the chairman was outvoted four-to-one by his fellow NRC members.
The third (and most often referenced) complaint fired at Jaczko was that he had created a “hostile work environment,” especially for women. Though Svinicki, the only woman on the commission, lamented Jaczko’s tone, the specific “charge” (if it can be called that) was brought by Commissioner William Magwood. Magwood said there were female staffers that Jaczko had brought to tears, though none of those women personally came forward (because, it was said last year, they did not want to relive the humiliation).
The story gained extra prominence when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY; Kentucky, by the way, home to a nuclear waste nightmare called Paducah) attempted to use this alleged incident to disrupt the rising narrative of the Republican “war on women.” McConnell and others from his side of the aisle took to the microphones to denounce the administration’s treatment of whistleblowers and praise the apparently brave and much put-upon Svinicki.
In what seems to be a rare case where the public’s relative lack of interest in nuclear regulation can be called a positive, McConnell’s gambit failed. . .
. . . at least in derailing the “War on Women” story. (It also probably owes much to the GOP actually continuing its war on women.)
But when it came to serving the nuclear industry, McConnell’s contribution to the ouster of Jaczko will likely be rewarded. . . with industry contributions of the monetary kind.
Chairman Jaczko’s resignation comes just before issues of his workplace demeanor would likely again dominate headlines (if, again, any story regarding nuclear regulation can be imagined to dominate this year’s headlines), as a second IG report on the NRC work environment is due next month, and Issa had already promised more hearings. But Jaczko’s announcement would likely not have come without the intervention or, at least, tacit blessing of Senator Reid. As mentioned, Reid has been Jaczko’s best friend on the Hill, and Jaczko has helped Reid and the Obama administration move away from making Nevada the final resting place for a country’s worth of hazardous nuclear waste.
After President Obama defied Reid’s private and public requests, and nominated Kristine Svinicki for another term as NRC commissioner, the Senator had a choice to make–and some political calculations to do.
While, to the nuclear industry, Jaczko represented an insufficiently pliant regulator–be it concerning NTTF recommendations, fire safety rules, or waste storage–to Harry Reid, the NRC chairman is most importantly a staunch opponent of the Yucca project. And Jaczko is the only one of the five NRC commissioners who meets that description. With Jaczko’s public image under attack and his ability to function as chairman challenged by the other commissioners and nuclear-friendly forces in Congress, questions of how much longer he could survive would have continued throughout the year. With that baggage, and with Senator Reid’s Democratic majority and possibly even his leadership position up in the air come November, there seems little chance that Obama would have shown Jaczko the same deference he did Svinicki and offered to nominate him for another term when the chairman’s current one expired in 2013.
As it is custom for NRC commissioners to be nominated in pairs–one from the Democrats, one from the Republicans–to smooth their paths to confirmation, Reid likely looked at Jaczko’s predicament, Svinicki’s nomination, and his own future and saw this as a moment to make some lemonade out of a crate of rotting lemons.
Act now, and Reid would play a prominent role in choosing Jaczko’s replacement–who could theoretically get confirmed alongside Svinicki for a full, five-year term–wait, continue to back Jaczko and fight the administration and the GOP on Svinicki, and the best Reid could hope for is a year of controversy over NRC personnel and an uncertain amount of influence in shaping the future of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Indeed, current reporting is that the White House will move quickly to nominate Jaczko’s replacement (and rumors are it will be a woman), and that the administration is in consultation with Reid to choose someone he will help move through the Senate confirmation process. It is hard to believe Reid will look kindly upon any nominee interested in re-starting the Yucca Mountain process.
. . . timing
It is said that, in life, timing is everything. In politics, money probably keeps timing from cornering the be-all-end-all market, but timing has played a part in the NRC’s saga. As Reid hopes to use this moment to keep his objectives on course, the nuclear industry is trying to desperately to turn back time to an era where the term “nuclear renaissance” wasn’t said with a smirk and a glance eastward toward Japan.
As with Yucca Mountain, where atom-loving electeds and regulators scramble to get the federal government to take their waste–with its risks and expense–off of the nuclear industry’s hands, the threat of new safety rules (and their perceived expense) emerging from the post-Fukushima review also motivated a profit-centric industry to step up their efforts to remake the NRC in their own image.
As noted here in December, Darrell Issa’s public release of the commissioners’ letter complaining about Jaczko was oddly timed:
[T]hough the commissioners’ complaint was written and delivered to the White House in October, it was only made public by Rep. Issa last Friday. A slot usually reserved for news dumps seems like bad timing if Issa and his allies wanted to create a splash, unless you consider that Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) had planned to release a report on Monday showing how NRC commissioners had coordinated with pro-nuclear legislators to slow or stop post-Fukushima safety reforms. Markey’s report (PDF) includes emails revealing commissioner Magwood and staffers for pro-nuclear Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) worked together to discredit Jaczko for taking the lead on the US regulatory response to Fukushima.
And as reported in October, this behavior was not new for Magwood. During his time at the Department of Energy, Magwood held private meetings with top nuclear industry lobbyist Marvin Fertel. In December, Ryan Grim of The Huffington Post detailed–in a scenario eerily similar to what culminated this week–how Magwood and his industry friends worked behind the scenes to oust his superior at DoE.
It also deserves mentioning that between his time in the George W. Bush Energy Department and his appointment to the NRC by President Obama, Magwood formed the consulting firm Advanced Energy Strategies, whose clients included not only TEPCO, the nominal owner of Fukushima Daiichi (until the Japanese government finishes its bailout/buyout), but a veritable who’s who of the Japanese nuclear elite.
As discussed above, Jaczko was the only NRC commissioner who voted to include future post-Fukushima rules in the licensing requirements for new reactors in Georgia and South Carolina. Both those projects are still wanting for full financing, and Georgia’s reactors are already behind schedule and, as revealed recently, nearly $1 billion over budget. The last thing the industry wants to see are demands for pricy safety upgrades or reminders of all that can go wrong at a nuclear plant. Jaczko’s desire for inclusion of Fukushima “lessons learned” held out a threat (however weak) of both.
Weak in review
But it was the rather weak recommendations, the glacial pace of change, and the seemingly futile lone votes against four other commissioners in the nuclear industry’s hip pocket that also helped end Jaczko’s run as NRC chair.
Theoretically, election cycles are when elected officials are most responsive to public pressure, but what part of the public felt particularly compelled to fight on Jaczko’s behalf? As stated during an earlier act in this power play, the nuclear industry and its acolytes were never going to see Jaczko as anything but the enemy, but the chairman’s “moderate” response to the Fukushima moment, along with the continued granting of license extensions to aging nuclear plants, and his oft-repeated statements of faith in the broken regulatory process left Jaczko with no strong allies in the anti-nuclear movement. Between the ongoing Fukushima disaster and the dynamics of an election year, the timing could have been favorable for a regulator bold enough to dare to regulate.
Instead, Chairman Jaczko, who no doubt saw his split-the-middle path as a reasonable one, was left alone to watch as his colleague, Bill Magwood, helped orchestrate a coup, and as his benefactor, Harry Reid, moved to cut his losses. For America, however, losses have not been cut–nuclear power is still a perpetual economic sinkhole and a looming ecological disaster–and no matter how the politicians try to massage the regulatory process, the science that makes nuclear power so untenable remains constant.
Constant, too, is the global trend–most of the industrialized world is turning away from this dirty, dangerous, and exorbitantly expensive way to boil water. Jaczko’s chairmanship of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may be at its dénouement, but that does nothing to magically create a nuclear renaissance. The good and bad news here is that all of nuclear power’s problems are just as real and just as pressing, with or without Greg Jaczko.



20 Comments

Rec’d abundantly, Gregg. This is one of the most dangerous possible areas in which to play the politics-and-profit game out.
Of course, these two sentences stand out in your post:
“The last thing the industry wants to see are demands for pricy safety upgrades or reminders of all that can go wrong at a nuclear plant.”
“For America, however, losses have not been cut–nuclear power is still a perpetual economic sinkhole and a looming ecological disaster–and no matter how the politicians try to massage the regulatory process, the science that makes nuclear power so untenable remains constant.”
The risks can’t be over-stated no matter ‘how they massage’ them, either.
Thank you.
radio active moolah,they still love it…recccd
Read this book “Triumph” long ago; synopsis(substitute nuclear plant failures for nuclear in synopsis):”Triumph (1963) – Nuclear war story involving a worst-case USA/USSR “spasm war” where both sides empty their arsenals into each other with extensive use of “dirty” bombs to maximize casualties, resulting in the main characters (in a very deep bomb shelter) being the only survivors in the entire Northern Hemisphere. An excerpt from this novel (or perhaps the whole thing) was serialized in the Saturday Evening Post magazine.”
Silly me wonders if the .001 per cent have already made their ‘very deep bomb shelters.
Oh, and from my local birdcage liner:
NRC head: San Onofre could prompt review of safety rules
“if, again, any story regarding nuclear regulation can be imagined to dominate this year’s headlines”
We have to wait for America’s upcoming nuclear meltdown for this to happen.
Thanks for the education Gregg.
I dunno. Was Obama hoping to win in Nevada this cycle?
You may be right about Reid’s thinking here … but the question if Reid is on board w/ Jaczko or if this is being forced by a WH seeking industry cash is still open in my mind.
Of all the games Obama has played with all the people who helped him get to the top, I see alienating Reid as one of the most dangerous things he could possibly do for his reelection prospects.
Thanks, wd.
There were a couple of quotes in some of the news stories about this (I must have read 20 of them–amazing subtle differences in the reporting, btw) that are apropos, but were anon, so I left them out of my post–but I will include them here:
Reuters:
Ryan Grim/HufPo:
I think they are starting with compounds in the southern hemisphere, but yeah, basically. I think the 1% always assumes there is a gate high enough to keep the trouble out.
From your link on SONGS:
That’s the kind of “diplomatic” language that pisses off the industry while doing nothing to rally the nuclear opponents; it is consistent with Jaczko’s language throughout, and it is what gets us to this point today.
You don’t need to “think,” Gregory–you just quit–go for it already!
Well, sadly, we’re due. Isn’t that what ET posted yesterday? But even then I wonder. The San Bruno gas line explosion is still in recent memory, but the FERC just approved running a gas pipeline under the densely populated West Village here in Manhattan. It is madness to me.
Yeah, Reid is evaluating the situation with WH pressure in mind. I cannot overstate how big a deal it was to see a public split over the nomination of Svinicki–and sure, you can see all the (fucked up) reasons Team O did this, but to choose to alienate Reid when NV is still in play. . . amazing.
I think O is confident enough to assume that choosing the wise fundraising move over the base will counter any fallout over an issue most people don’t pay much attention to. But for Reid, though he is not up for reelection this cycle, I think he sees trouble for his leadership–either by losing his majority, or because the WH is tired of having to play ball and will help someone like Schumer challenge him next Congress.
Ah, so he’ll be there until he dies, in other words. Unless the Republicans have a hardcore industry stooge they plan to order Obama to nominate.
Thank you for letting us know that the other show has finally dropped. We now live inside a nation which operates with all the flaws of the system of government that the Old Soviet Union held. A politburo of politicians that care little about the public safety issues, that care little about sensible administration of financial policy, and that care little about food safety.
And all those above issues will fall to the side should any of the American nuclear plants so similar to the GE Fukushima plant implode or get affected by the earthquakes, terrorists or the possible hit by a tsunami.
Not much we can do either. Like the average German of the 1930′s, we can make a fist and keep it hidden in our pocket. The fact that our voting choice has been reduced to Obamney says it all
This is really pretty amazing, it doesn’t have much about noocluar, but it sure tells the truth about our political system. The guy got fired for it, so……
The 5-Minute Speech that Got Judge Napolitano Fired from Fox News
don’t agree about Ron Paul but he’s got some great points. The emperor has no clothes after sixths guy gets thru with him
A lot of it has to do with what Reid’s primary objectives are.
No idea of the math, but I get the sense that he’s feeling pretty good about holding the majority in the Senate. If so, it’s a question of caucus leadership. IMO, Schumer would not necessarily beat Reid in a leadership struggle if he decided to fight it. And assuming an Obama win, a fight like that sure could consume the start of his lame-duck term.
I honestly believe that killing Yucca is more important to Reid than his leadership post – certainly more important than money; if he could be bought, he would have been purchased long ago (at least on this issue). I think the danger is in if Reid decides, like many others who have given up counting on Obama, that he will have better leverage to fight for his goals with a a Democratic caucus newly converted to the holy purpose of co-equal branches of government providing a check for a Republican president than a having a president joining the other side to marshal the caucus to fight against Nevada’s interests. There are very few people who understand and can wield the levers of power in the Democratic party as well as Reid. It just seems like he’s one person who could do one hell of a torpedo job if he decided the war was internal.
Reid can honestly hold up a replacement indefinitely … even in the minority. As long as Jaczko agrees to hang in, I imagine Reid will slow-walk at this point and dare Obama to put Yucca funds in the next budget. Either way, looks like we’re going back into procedurals to oppose yesterday’s failed ideas rather than seeking a better way forward … a game Nevadans know pretty well by now.
pretty sure you’ve covered this:
“Joke is on Progress customers stuck paying nuclear tax
Beth Kassab, Local News Columnist
2:50 p.m. EST, May 5, 2012″
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-05/news/os-progress-energy-rates-beth-kassab-050612-20120505_1_nuclear-plants-nuclear-reactors-progress-energy
On the matter of the Fukushima NRC 50 mile evacuation, Jatzco and his staff/information were wrong. The congressional testimony relied not on facts but on hearsay. You will find how uncertain the testimony is if you read the minutes of the NRC’s staff meetings which are just sad in terms of lack of content and any appearance of data and facts. The basis of the warning was the emptying of water in #4 SFP which at this point can only be said to be rumored as it could not have been observed. Both concurrent observations and subsequent analysis show that this did not occur. While it can be argued that the evacuation zones that the Japanese government setup was wrong (mostly in terms of direction and as opposed to concentric distance), it was not the best thing for US officialdom to second guess Japanese domestic decisions regarding warnings to its citizens particularly as it was not based upon facts.
Despite foregoing, it is probably a case that Jatzco has better priorities than the rest of the NRC from which he is resigning.
That does not make him a hero though.
Add this from Greenpeace…
International concern about the precarious safety of the damaged spent fuel pool at Fukushima Daiichi’s reactor #4 is growing, including in the United States and Switzerland. The spent fuel pool there was heavily damaged when a hydrogen explosion destroyed the walls and roof of the building, leaving 1,331 spent fuel rods exposed. Experts are increasingly concerned that another large earthquake, tsunami, or terrorist attack could cause the structure to collapse, releasing immense amounts of radiation into the atmosphere. An explosion or fire at the pool could also affect the nearby common spent fuel pool, which is only 50 meters away, and contains 6,375 fuel rods. The results would be catastrophic. Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) will not admit the magnitude earthquake at which the structure would be at risk. Senior Vice-Minister for Reconstruction Ikko Nakatsuka conceded that there is no real definition of safety when talking about nuclear power: “When we say ‘safe,’ we have to say at what [risk] level.”
While I agree with the general alarm about spent fuel storage, the beat up of SFP#4 is getting exceedingly tiresome and probably of negative effect to those who would like to get rational messages across. Exposure of the pool (to rain?)is not in and of itself anything but symbolic of destruction. The roof and walls were blown off by explosion and not destroyed by seismic/tidal action.
If we have to fear the ability of a fairly basic engineering exercise in keeping a pool full and not spilling over in earthquakes (of which there have been many since 3/11 at site), then we may as well give up on any technology for any more complex purpose such as boiling water. The entire SFP#4 alarm defies all common sense as to basic competence of organizations/people and logic. It gains traction by exaggerating the dire consequences of events that, while in realm of possibility of say California falling into the sea, are pessimistic beyond what can be expected of normal human behavior parameters.