Partnerships and Information Sharing in President Obama's Executive Order on Cyber Security

President Obama at 2013 SOTU

Yesterday President Obama signed an Executive Order aimed at helping nation harden its critical infrastructure against cyber attacks, and introduced it to the nation as part of his State of the Union address.

The Order states, "We can achieve these goals through a partnership with the owners and operators of critical infrastructure to improve cybersecurity information sharing and collaboratively develop and implement risk-based standards."

The partnership model has a history of success, and it is prudent to continue and support this model.

The nuclear power industry has an active partnership with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security specifically geared toward enhancing the security of commercial users of nuclear materials.

Under HSPD-7, the industry established the Nuclear Sector Coordinating Council (NSCC), and the government established the Government Coordinating Council (GCC).  These groups meet quarterly under the Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council (CIPAC) framework.

The NSCC/GCC provides an instrumental forum for organizations engaging in civilian uses of nuclear materials in the U.S. to discuss security issues and work together with our federal partners to enhance security and resilience.

The order also discusses the importance of information sharing. I could not agree more. The nuclear power industry in the U.S. has a proven record of responding in a timely manner to identified threats to the safe operations of our facilities.


Information sharing is integral to establishing a robust cyber security program. As I discussed in a previous blog post on nuclear power plant cybersecurity, our plants have been actively addressing the cyber threat for over 10 years.

The first questions that must be answered when establishing a security program are:

1. What must be protected?
2. What must it be protected from?

Information sharing has been instrumental in helping us stay on top of what we must be prepared to defend against.

Under the NSCC/GCC framework, the nuclear sector receives quarterly threat briefings at the SECRET level. The DHS also conducts monthly sector-specific unclassified threat briefings.

So, at a high level, the EO is moving in the right direction. But we cannot lose sight of good work already done.

This new emphasis on the adoption of cyber security practices must consider the existing regulatory frameworks and voluntary initiatives that are already in place.Complexity is the enemy of security. Streamlining and minimizing burden on private entities ensures that resources remain available to respond to real threats.

Ensuring that any new cyber security guidance, practices, or policies does not overlap or duplicate existing practices is essential. For addition details, please consult the NEI backgrounder on Cyber Security.

POSTSCRIPT: The Nuclear Energy Institute’s chief nuclear officer and senior vice president, Anthony R. (Tony) Pietrangelo, made the following comment about the cyber security executive order signed Tuesday by President Obama.

Tony Pietrangelo

“Commercial nuclear energy facilities are well protected from possible cyber threats. The nuclear energy industry has been implementing and improving cyber security controls since 2002, and the federal agency that oversees the nation’s nuclear energy facilities—the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—has established regulations that thoroughly monitor and inspect cyber security at all U.S. reactors.

“To ensure our constant readiness, the industry participates with government agencies to be aware of and assess its readiness for emerging cyber threats. Our facilities are essentially cyber islands, in that safety and control systems are not connected to business networks or the Internet. Unlike industries for which two-way data flow is critical, nuclear power plants do not require incoming data flow.

“Nuclear plants also are protected from grid instability, with multiple backup power supplies that provide for safe shutdown of a reactor in the event of a power blackout. Given that the NRC appropriately exercises authority over the protection of nuclear plant systems from potential cyber threats, it would be counterproductive to have dual oversight of these facilities.”

Read More

Nuclear Energy Institute Comments on President Obama’s State of Union Address

Alex Flint

Alex Flint, Nuclear Energy Institute senior vice president of governmental affairs, made the following comment in response to President Obama’s State of the Union address to Congress.

“As the President and Congress work to return the economy to sound footing, it is worth remembering that sustained economic growth will require affordable, reliable energy supplies. For decades now, nuclear energy—with its added advantage of being the nation’s leading low-carbon source of electricity—has been one of the pillars of our electric sector. It is imperative that nuclear energy facilities continue to play a key role in the mix of electricity sources for U.S. energy, environmental and economic goals to be achieved.

“Beyond the massive amounts of electricity they generate, nuclear energy facilities create hundreds of millions of dollars in direct and indirect revenue for state and local economies. With five reactors being built in the United States and nearly 70 more under construction internationally, it’s important that American energy companies have a fair chance to compete in a global nuclear market that could be as large as $750 billion over the next 10 years. Every $1 billion of exports represents 5,000 to 10,000 American jobs.

“Because America’s leadership in this market provides strategic value well beyond the purely business aspects, the Nuclear Energy Institute will work with the administration and Congress to foster a high level of government agency coordination that is needed for success in the international markets. Among the issues that Congress and the administration should support are approval of bilateral trade agreements on nuclear energy technology and prompt review of export licenses by the Department of Energy for the sale of U.S. nuclear energy technology abroad.”

Read More

“The Nuclear Option is Still There”

This comment makes sense only if Crystal River’s closing can be seen to have wider application:

Despite increasing demand for carbon-free power generation, the future of nuclear plants is clouded by the abundance of domestic natural gas, which has led many utilities to embrace that fuel for power generators. That has eased the pressure on operators to keep nuclear plants open, especially if there are questions about their safety.

“There is more of a feeling that because you have very low natural gas prices, there is another alternative out there,” Mr. Dean said.

“This has eased the pressure on operators to keep nuclear plants open.” Pressure? If there are questions about their safety? Mr. Dean is John Dean, president of JD Energy, an energy and environmental forecasting firm based in Frederick, Md.

In this instance, the main reason Mr. Dean can say this is because Duke’s plan to close Crystal River provides a basis for saying it. As we explained a couple of days ago, it’s awkward to use Crystal River for this purpose. One particular closing doesn’t portend anything in itself unless it really is the leading edge of a trend – which Crystal River does not seem likely to be.

The Times’ Jon Hurdle tries a different version of this approach and has greater success with it. That’s because he casts his net wider and does not let Dean become the sole voice of authority.

The 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant has led to more stringent safety testing at nuclear plants in the United States under changes adopted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “It increased the level of scrutiny,” said Dave McIntyre, a commission spokesman.

This is unassailably true. But it doesn’t close the circle – the facilities passed their post-Fukushima stress tests and are currently working through a list of additional NRC safety measures. That counts for something.

---

And to be honest, the Times’ post isn’t trying to make hay out of Crystal River – it’s exploring a topic, not trend hunting. Facilities have closed for various reasons over the years. That’s one thing. These days, natural gas is the “natural” way to replace a nuclear facility closing during the tens. That’s another. It says something about the economics of energy today – so does the downturn that began in 2007 and so does the drop in electricity use that accompanied it. This is not a permanent state of affairs (though sometimes it may feel like it is.)

There are countervailing forces, too, with utilities taking different views based on the market forces they consider important. Take, for example, energy security, which is enhanced by maintaining a diverse portfolio.

“I’m agnostic on the fuel issue,” Fehrman said. “But what we need is a diverse mix. It’s not a good idea to put too many eggs in one basket.”

Fehrman is MidAmerican President William Fehrman. He goes on to say:

“We may propose nuclear at one of the sites or we may propose natural gas,” he said.

The article in the Des Moines Register points out that the trend is to natural gas, so what the heck is up with MidAmerican that it wants to consider new nuclear?

First, the natural gas angle:

Fehrman has been less eager to turn to natural gas. His reasoning: Natural gas looks good now when it sells for less than $3.50 per thousand cubic feet. But five years ago, gas sold for $10 per thousand cubic feet, and Fehrman said he has been unable to persuade natural gas companies to offer him long-term contracts.

Which would seem to mean that natural gas companies are not sure enough yet of the future to ensure they’ll make money under such contracts. Fair enough.

And nuclear:

“The nuclear option is still there,” said MidAmerican President William Fehrman, who said the Des Moines-based utility will add more color to its future generating plans in a report to the Iowa Utilities Board this summer.

All right, I admit that doesn’t sound incredibly enthusiastic, but MidAmerican needs the Iowa legislature to go along with a CWIP plan – which would allow the company to add a small upcharge to ratepayers to keep interest rates for the nuclear facility low - so far, no go. I cannot predict that MidAmerican will try again in the next session – but it may. Stay tuned.

The conclusion here is that one writes off nuclear energy at one’s own peril. The world isn’t participating in such a write-off and really, neither is the United States. You could argue, as the Times does, that nuclear energy is being scrutinized more closely on economic and even philosophical grounds. That’s something, but not the same as looking for excuses to write it off, whatever the future of natural gas and whatever the disposition of Crystal River.

---

Then again, from Power Engineering Magazine:

Is Crystal River a harbinger of nuclear power's future?

No. Clear enough?

Note: Thanks to friend Steve Skutnick for noting my replacement of CWIP with WIPP. One’s a concept, the other a place and don’t have much to do with each other. We could probably find a joke here, but it would probably be pretty saucy. Too many WIP’Ps.

Read More

Guest Post: Alex Flint Introduces NEI's Congressional Resource Guide

Alex Flint

The following guest post was submitted by Alex Flint, NEI's senior vice president, governmental affairs. 

One of NEI’s most important roles is ensuring that policymakers and their staffs have access to information they want about our industry. We pride ourselves in having on hand the technical expertise to answer any and all questions, and we are always willing to bring to Washington the experts with first-hand knowledge from our facilities.

But today, just having the information isn’t enough; we are also working to ensure that it is available whenever and however members and their staff want it. In past years, we would spend the first few months of each Congress delivering detailed three-ring binders to House and Senate offices. Those binders were crammed full of information about how reactors work, the uranium fuel cycle, and radiation, and included jobs and economic data broken down by state and district.

NEI President and CEO Marv Fertel

That's not how information works today. Members and their staffs don’t want information on our schedule; they want it on their schedule, and then they want it instantly. It is a Google world.

NEI's Congressional Resource Guide is our effort to respond to the new way Members and staff want information. We have organized it so that the issues we think policymakers may want are at their fingertips, and we will keep it constantly updated.

We’re not sure how this is going to be received. Some people appreciated the individual attention associated with sitting down to thumb through a binder, but we also know the majority of those binders were, shall we say, 'recycled.'

Let us know if the information we have posted is the right stuff – we’ve got plenty more where it came from – and let us know if making this information available on the web is enough. We want to meet your needs in this era of information overload, and your feedback is always appreciated.

POSTSCRIPT: Thanks to Alex for drafting this note to help us introduce our readers to the Guide. Below is a bulleted list of the main sections.

• Growing America’s Economy and Creating Jobs 
• Congressional Testimony, Speeches, Letters 
• Safety and Security at Nuclear Energy Facilities
• Reliable and Affordable Electricity
• Advanced Reactor Development
• Trade Policy
• Protecting the Environment
• Safely Managing Used Nuclear Fuel, Nonproliferation

Finally, we also put together this short video with NEI's Staci Wheeler and Derrick Freeman to introduce the guide:

If you have any questions or comments about the Guide and its contents, please click here.

Read More

Nuclear Facilities and “Whatever Wicked Weather Comes Their Way”

The storm bearing down on the northeast – not Washington, D.C. this time, for a change – has sent our friends at the Weather Channel into a tizzy. When I visit the channel on TV, it’s usually quite placid and useful for sleepy time.
Not lately: a tone of impending doom hovers over the reports and the channel has even named the storm Nemo. I don’t know if this is the fish or Winsor McCay’s dreamy little boy, but since the latter is one of the finest comic strips ever done, I pick that Nemo.
I like that an NRC public affairs officer has decided to address the preparation undertaken by nuclear energy plants in the path of the storm – it sort of forestalls the more sensational approach sometimes taken by newspapers.

NRC inspectors stationed at all operating plants on a full-time basis will likewise be busy, as they independently verify the facilities – particularly the Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts and the Seabrook plant in New Hampshire — are positioned for whatever wicked weather comes their way. To help guide those evaluations, the inspectors will follow a procedure and checklist focused on adverse weather protection.

It’s not snow itself that might cause a plant to go offline, but wind and water.

Once the storm arrives, plant operators have plans that guide their responses. For instance, if sustained wind speeds exceed a certain level, a plant would have to shut down. Also, if flooding were to be greater than pre-determined thresholds, an emergency declaration would have to be made and a shutdown may be necessary.

Also, of course, the grid into which the facility supplies electricity may be damaged – as happened during Hurricane Sandy – and make a shutdown prudent even if not strictly necessary.
Neil Sheehan, a public affairs officer from NRC's Region I,  does a good job explaining all this and it’s welcome.
---
But you know what? The panicked stories about nuclear energy plants have almost completely vanished. I saw some during Sandy, but really nothing in conjunction with this storm. There may be a couple of nuclear-plant-survives-Nemo type stories afterward, but I’d be surprised. If the storm as big as the Weather Channel predicts, people will have other things to worry about – including a quick restoration of electricity – from their local nuclear energy plant, if that’s where it comes from - if it is lost.
In that vein, here’s some perfectly obvious – and useful - advice from New York Newsday.
Newsday has the right spirit altogether. In addition to sensible lists of items to stock:

Grab your sled, skis, snowshoes or snowman-making kit and head outdoors. A garbage can lid or tray will always work in a pinch ... or just stick to making snow angels and pelting one another with snowballs. When the roads are cleared, head to one of six nearby ski destinations.

I’d add this. Some college friends made this mistake and landed in the hospital:

Never use your gas oven, range or outdoor barbecue to heat your home. They weren’t designed for that purpose. Using them as a source of heat can cause dangerous levels of carbon monoxide to build up in your home.

That’s from SCE&G. And here’s a lot of practical storm advice from Con Edison.
---
From oldtimers talking about the flood of 1947 to snowpocalypse a couple of years ago, weather events mark high points – or at least important reference points - in many people’s lives. My Georgia hometown was once caught in an ice storm and froze solid for five days – no electricity – we heard the transformers and wires crashing from the weight of the ice, as well as tree branches and entire trees, all very eerie at night  – it was impossible to move around – too slippery - and it was very cold, especially for Georgia. Days were spent reading comic books wrapped in blankets – nights huddled together in the living room, taking advantage of each other’s personal heat generators under big quilts.
A nightmare? Funnest week of my life, probably – but that’s because we were safe. So – stay safe.
---
Oh, and just to cross all the t’s, don’t think the idea of naming storms isn’t controversial. It is – The Weather Channel sees a commercial advantage in doing so – they’ll name storms based on public interest not potential intensity; that can leave a sour taste in some mouths, and it has.
NOAA or AMS might have been better candidates for naming storms with some rigor, but if they were so inclined, they haven’t shown it. There wouldn’t seem any harm in The Weather Channel taking the initiative unless it started charging others for using them – copyrighting them, in other words – or only did so for storms that hit areas with lots of cable-ready televisions. It could get crass really fast. Look here for more on the controversy.

Read More

Crystal River: End Days of Nuclear Energy?

Crystal River

When you hear that a nuclear power facility is closing, you may wonder if the end is nigh and all other facilities will close willy-nilly in rapid succession. Well, it could happen, just as anything could happen, but it seems far more likely that other factors play a role and are unique to the plant itself.

Following a comprehensive analysis, Progress Energy Florida, a subsidiary of Duke Energy, announced today that it will retire the Crystal River Nuclear Plant (CR3) in Citrus County, Fla. The plant has been safely shut down and offline since late 2009.

There’s no question this is not happy news. But Progress Energy Florida has been pretty straightforward about the whys and wherefores of it:

The company’s decision comes after a comprehensive, months-long engineering analysis of the damaged [Crystal River] containment structure. The nuclear unit, which began operating in 1977, had been shut down in the fall of 2009 for refueling and replacement of its steam generators when a delamination, or crack, occurred in the outer layer of the containment building’s concrete wall.

The process of repairing the damage and restoring the unit to service resulted in additional delaminations in other sections of the containment structure in 2011.

During the ensuing months, Progress Energy – and, more recently, Duke Energy – evaluated the ability to successfully repair the unit, the risks associated with any repair and the repair scope as well as the likely costs and schedule.

A report completed in late 2012 confirmed that repairing the plant was a viable option but that the nature and potential scope of repairs brought increased risks that could raise the cost dramatically and extend the schedule.

Of course, it’s regrettable. The press release notes that Progress will build a new gas-fired plant and has four coal units in the same county as Crystal River. That’s not as good a carbon emissions profile as there was with Crystal River running, but that’s how it goes. The economics of energy currently favors natural gas facilities, which at least better than building a new coal facility.
---
And Crystal River will never reopen, right? Sometimes, to paraphrase Stephen King, they come back.

The company intends to use the SAFSTOR option for decommissioning. Generally, this involves placing the facility into a safe storage configuration, requiring limited staffing to monitor plant conditions, until the eventual dismantling and decontamination activities occur, usually in 40 to 60 years.

That’s a lot of years, in which many decisions will be made down in Florida. Admittedly, it is more likely that a uncompleted reactor, such as TVA’s Bellefonte in Alabama, will be revived for completion than that Crystal River will be fully repaired and switched back on. But the future holds surprises, as it always has, and it doesn’t hurt to have alternative energy options at the ready.
---
But, what we know for sure:

Crystal River is closing, the reasons are easy to grasp, and they are unique to the plant. Even San Onofre, which has also been closed for technical reasons (steam generator problems there), is quite different in specifics and probable outcome. So – unfortunate, yes; a dire pox upon the industry, not so much.
---
PS: this post is based on Duke’s own press release, which we tend to avoid here (this one had some corp-speak in it, not a lot), but boy, has the Florida press been having fun with this news – and not very responsibly, I must say.


For example, here is the Tampa Bay Times’ view of Crystal River prior to the announcement of its closing:

It's time for Duke Energy to acknowledge that the broken Crystal River nuclear plant is not worth fixing and announce plans to permanently shut it down.

With Duke/Progress having decided to do this, the response from the newspaper?

On Tuesday came the announcement that [Crystal River] will never reopen.
The 1.6 million customers the plant once served will pay dearly for their utility's mistake, maybe $3 billion when the cost of building a new power plant is included. So will Citrus County and the city of Crystal River. Those governments, and their local economies, will take a thumping. Some of the 600 workers at the plant may lose their jobs.

I won’t go into the specifics offered here except to say they seem grossly oversimplified – there will be some insurance consideration here. I think we can let the finger pointing – Duke can take care of itself – remain a local issue. You really can’t win for losing in Tampa Bay, though. Yeesh!

Read More

Guest Post: Mothers in Nuclear Support CORE Education

Ginger Jones

The following guest post was submitted by Elizabeth McAndrew-Benavides, NEI's Senior Manager, Workforce Policy and Programs.

Educating the next generation of nuclear professionals begins early. How early? According to North American Young Generation in Nuclear (NA-YGN) member and fellow Mother in Nuclear Ginger Jones it begins in kindergarten. Jones, a chemist by training, full time nuclear utility employee and mother of three, is volunteering her time to serve on her local school board.

"I had always been a really active volunteer especially at my oldest son’s school," Jones said. "I had been the president of the Parent Teacher Organization at Saratoga School [Morris, IL.] for nearly three years when four school board seats came up for election."

The Saratoga school board has a strong track record for attracting Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) professionals, but this is not a normal occurrence across the United States. According to the National School Boards Association, 27.1 percent of school board members are fellow educators and STEM professionals are so rare they aren’t even tracked in the national survey.

“This is disappointing”, Jones said. “School boards need to be comprised of a diverse committee of professionals to ensure students are being provided a well-rounded education. We need to see more engineers, technicians and scientists participating in these important community activities.”

Jones was elected to the Saratoga school board District 60c in April of 2009 and has served as the chair of the Education and Curriculum Committee of the school board for the past two years. In her role as chair, she has been focusing much of her time on the Common Core Initiative, a state-led initiative to standardize curriculum for K-12 students nationwide.

“In recent years, we have seen the United States fall further and further behind other countries in the areas of mathematics and science,” Jones said. “We had not adapted our curriculum to fit in to our current technology-filled world. I think that the Common Core Initiative is trying to fill in those existing gaps.”

Advocates of the Common Core Initiative will provide students with a robust and relevant education that will help prepare them to compete in the global economy. “As a mother, I think the Common Core Initiative is a good step in the right direction to better prepare children for college and for entering the workforce,” Jones said. “But as a board member, it has been a bit of a struggle this year because some of the curriculum is significantly more challenging that it was last year and funding is scarce to support improvements.”

Jones is helping her district stretch itself by implementing the new curricula an entire year earlier than their state’s 2014-2015 mandate.

“We have ordered new reading and math texts that align with the standards and have provided extensive training for teachers on the implementation of these standards,” Jones said “We did this to allow students and teachers a period of adjustment as we want them to be successful.”

Jones believes she has derived a great deal of satisfaction as a result of volunteering for this position. “I would highly recommend getting involved in your school board. This is a position where you can directly see the impact that you’re making,” Jones said. And it has helped me with my responsibilities at the nuclear power plant because it has provided me opportunities to help plan, negotiate and budget.”

Resource on the Common Core Initiative
With 46 states having adopted the Common Core Standards, many have questions about this initiative. You can learn more about the Common Core Initiative by visiting these resources:

Proponents of the Common Core
• Common Core State Standards Initiative: http://www.corestandards.org/
• National Governors Association: http://www.nga.org/cms/home/nga-center-for-best-practices/center-issues/page-edu-issues/col2-content/main-content-list/common-core-state-standards.html

Opponents of the Common Core
• Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/04/23/why-states-should-hop-off-the-national-standards-bandwagon/
• Home School League Defense Council: http://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/hslda-speaks-out-against-common-core/

Read More