[PASSED] Nuclear Power Safeguards Act

[The Dark Star Republic]

Clover shook her head. "I cannot support this. Section 2 reads like a nuclear safety manual, not like a WA resolution. I am not a nuclear scientist, I dont vote for that which I dont understand.

"If you don't understand something, ask! Do some research! But just blindly opposing something because you don't understand it isn't very helpful."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Pharthan]

The representative of the Pharthanian Nuclear Regulatory Agency stood and cleared his throat. "We understand your concerns, but please rest assured that these modifications would only be expensive to reactor plants that were poorly designed in the first place. This resolution requires four methods of decay-heat-removal, and it is not uncommon for reactor plants to have over ten. Furthermore, simply for the massive structures many require to deal with their temperatures, pressures, and ability to prevent radiological release, many more reactors also are already capable of meeting the structural standard requirements.
"Also, note that the tsunami requirement is not for the structure, which we understand would take a massive beating, but the protection systems themselves. As such, all that many plants, especially coastal ones that already have to deal with high humidity, must do is to route additional ventilation for emergency diesel generators and ensure it is properly sheltered." He cleared his throat again and began to collect his thoughts for a moment.
"I... We also realize that much of this resolution reads rather technically - this is very much necessary. Some things in life can be taken care of with vague statements, but others must be directly tackled. This is one such case. Undoubtedly many nations who've had nuclear meltdown believed their methods of decay heat removal or quality assurance were "adequate," but were not because they were not properly screened.
"Most nations will have to do little more than open themselves up to outside investigations. Others - those who likely do not deserve the right to operate nuclear power plants," he emphasized the last statement very seriously and forcefully, "will need to completely renovate themselves. We completely understand the need of cheap nuclear power - for most nations, any necessary change made will be very cheap, and may require little more than pouring a hundred feet of concrete with steel ventilation. Those who should have never delved into it will have to give it up or completely altered themselves. Older plants, those long past their due dates for closures, will also be forced to close down with this bill. We understand this issue, but we also understand the necessity of keeping everyone around us safe. We've had previous resolutions which should have, at least at the time, paved the way for this one to have absolutely minimum impact."
"We very much understand that most delegates will have little knowledge on the subject. That is to be expected; we are in an age of specialization. I would expect you all to know as much about nuclear power as you should expect me to know about politics. However, just as I would expect you to know enough about nuclear power to understand we must regulate it to some degree, I too know something about politics: If the World Assembly only passed resolutions based on what we know and what we don't, we'd still be discussing our first resolution."

He chuckled a little. "And this reads nothing like a nuclear technical manual. This resolution doesn't have twenty pages of frontmatter and is far too easy to understand."

[Separatist Peoples]

"I'd scrap the particular measurements you've included in 2.a.3. Its better to simply require nations to take into account natural disasters. I'm not sure what a 9.0 earthquake is, but I imagine that the scale you use isn't necessarily universal. Likewise, depending on the environment a nation exists in, a 100 foot tsunami may or may not be very severe, comparatively. It doesn't hurt to leave it open ended or even leaving the specifics to the committee you've created.

"I wonder how useful it really is to have a facility inspected every two years. Would not the term "regularly" work, and, again, leave the frequency unaddressed and therefore to the committee to decide? You'd save on character count.

"I also balk at the idea of the WA issuing exams to test the knowledge of our professionals. It seems draconian and condescending, as people are likely not to forget the training and education they use every single workday."

He chuckled a little. "And this reasons nothing like a nuclear technical manual. This resolution doesn't have twenty pages of frontmatter and is far too easy to understand."

"Its not truly a manual until somebody includes a pictogram that takes an incredibly complex and potentially dangerous action and ensures the illiterate can do it."

[Pharthan]

OOC: It'd have been really nice if I'd gotten all of this critiquing in the weeks before I submitted it, as opposed to the couple days after.

"We thank you for pointing out the error with our natural-disaster clause. We will rectify this. As for inspections, the two-year requirement is born out of one of the reasons why the last nuclear safety resolution was repealed - it wasn't strong enough or direct enough in it's phrasing. 'Regular' can hold a quite different meaning to many people and is far too vague."

"As for the exams: The WA would not be issuing them, it would be the national nuclear safety organization which would do so. However, the requirement of it is by no means condescending, especially on a two year basis; most nuclear safety organizations issue their own tests much more frequently, some as often as monthly. You are correct in assuming people are not likely to forget the training and education they use every single workday - but operations done in a nuclear power plant that are done every single workday are few and far between. If you expand the statement to 'weekly,' even then you do not encompass all operations which even the power plant itself would consider 'day-to-day operations,' as it also depends on whether or not the plant is critical or not. Then one must consider casualties - which are very much intentionally not regular, and are largely the reason to have operators in the first place. Some operators might not experience a casualty for months or even over a year, and there are more than just one type of casualty each individual power plant can have. Most of them are not 'serious,' as to mean they won't cause a meltdown, but make cause damage to equipment or prolonged operation, or even just short-term operation. Other operations a power plant must do often do not occur on the order of several years, but must be trained for, particularly in the initial qualification process, so that the operator is familiar with the terms and concepts prior to the actual event occurring, so that they themselves may be a source of knowledge and be able to back up whoever might be giving the training on how to perform these procedures, which they undoubtedly would have extensive training on such procedures if they occur on a greater-than-annually-basis."

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: I'm sorry, I've been heavily involved on my own projects the last few days. I didn't even notice that you had changed the title, I just felt bad that I hadn't weighed in yet. A true rules-lawyer might argue that your implied use of the Richter scale is a RW Violation to have it taken down. I have no idea how much water that would actually hold to the mods (that's getting increasingly hard to predict), but you should be aware of that possibility. If you are worried, you could always ask to have it pulled if it worries you, but I don't expect it to be an issue.

[Pharthan]

OOC: I'm sorry, I've been heavily involved on my own projects the last few days. I didn't even notice that you had changed the title, I just felt bad that I hadn't weighed in yet. A true rules-lawyer might argue that your implied use of the Richter scale is a RW Violation to have it taken down. I have no idea how much water that would actually hold to the mods (that's getting increasingly hard to predict), but you should be aware of that possibility. If you are worried, you could always ask to have it pulled if it worries you, but I don't expect it to be an issue.

OOC: You are correct on that. When you mentioned it, I practically facepalmed at the stupidity.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: I'm sorry, I've been heavily involved on my own projects the last few days. I didn't even notice that you had changed the title, I just felt bad that I hadn't weighed in yet. A true rules-lawyer might argue that your implied use of the Richter scale is a RW Violation to have it taken down. I have no idea how much water that would actually hold to the mods (that's getting increasingly hard to predict), but you should be aware of that possibility. If you are worried, you could always ask to have it pulled if it worries you, but I don't expect it to be an issue.

OOC: You are correct on that. When you mentioned it, I practically facepalmed at the stupidity.

OOC: it's really not stupidity. It's the only technical metric most people ever use to measure earthquakes. That you didn't consider it isn't a bad thing at all. Keep up with the GA and you'll start seeing the world in a whole new, twisted way that useful only in this game and for driving you steadily to the brink of madness. Sorry again for missing your submission.

[The Dark Star Republic]

"Seeing as you're engaging in a bit of redrafting, I have a couple of cosmetic touches that don't affect the substance but would at least improve the presentation.

"You vary a lot between "nuclear safety organization" and "NSO". My suggestion would be to spell it out in full at the first mention, then use the acronym at every mention thereafter. It's more consistent that way, and saves you some character space too.

"In terms of BBCode, you're mixing bullets and manual numbering. I would suggest changing it to:

Code: Select all

[list=1][*]Ensure that all reactors must have available:[list=a][*]Four provided methods of Decay Heat Removal (DHR) with two methods to implement each[list=i][*]One DHR method may be the same as normal power-operation heat-removal

"That way there's no confusion when you reference numbers: Arabic for top level, letters for next level, Roman for next level.

Mandate and advise the national nuclear safety organization on how to correct deficiencies to maintain the organization operational

"This is either missing a word or has a grammar error: it makes no sense as written.

REQUIRES reactor plant agencies to abide by guidelines and mandates of the nuclear safety organization

"Change this to 'mandates and advisories', as that matches the designated purpose of the NSO listed above.

"Good luck."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

AM-M reactions ; however, do emit silly amounts of high energy photons, therefore the material the reactor is made of will become quite radioactive, and therefore generate heat when the reactor is offline as in nuclear fusion. And yes, AM-M reactions are nuclear.

Really? M/A-M reactions emit photon? And you know this how? Have they ever actually annihilated matter with anti-matter? The math says they will annihilate, but we don;t actually know for sure, so how the hell would you know it gives off high energy photons? And no, M/A-M reactions are not nuclear. They are quantum reactions.

I don't even need to see to know that. E=mc², and the law of energy conservation. Being that matter = energy proportionally, and that energy cannot be created or annihilated, it follows logically that it has to go somewhere once matter and antimatter annihilates eachother, and that is most conveniently expressed in emitting lots of high energy photons. And yes, we've been theorizing positrons from 1928 and then watching them annihilate since 1932.

[Pharthan]

OOC: Fifth draft has been updated.
And, true, AM-M Annihilation is a rather basic nuclear interaction one learns in beginner nuclear-physics. It's pretty well verified, especially as a consequence of pair-production from a high-energy photon moving in the vicinity of a charged particle.

[Greater Louisistan]

"Pending input from the Confederate Office on Energy Safety and Security (especially on Section 2), we offer careful support."

[Pharthan]

OOC: This resolution is no longer submitted, thanks to the help of the NS Mods who removed the submission at my request. I will leave it open to discussion for several more days. Thank you all for your support.

[Pharthan]

OOC: The resolution has been cleaned up a bit, thanks to some of the advice of Dark Star and others. (I learned new BBCode for more precise lists, too, so thanks for that.) Some grammar has been fixed. Still on Revision 5, though.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: It'd have been really nice if I'd gotten all of this critiquing in the weeks before I submitted it, as opposed to the couple days after.

OOC: Not through any fault of your own, I just haven't had time to comment much on NS lately. You showed something by removing it from queue however....

"If you don't understand something, ask! Do some research! But just blindly opposing something because you don't understand it isn't very helpful."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

OOC: That was my IC way of stating that the particular section mentioned did not have to be so specifically laid out.

IC: "I don't need to do any research, and I have asked our nuclear technicians about this draft. They have assured me that, aside from the since removed tsunami requirement, that we already more than compliant. They have told me though, the section regarding 'resistance to natural disasters' is still impossible to implement. Perhaps re-wording it to specify some sort of emergency shutdown mechanism in the case of such disaster would be more generalized, and easier to comply with. After all, a natural disaster is impossible to predict the severity of, and as such, prepare hard-target safeguards against."

[Pharthan]

OOC: That was my IC way of stating that the particular section mentioned did not have to be so specifically laid out.

OOC: You might actually be surprised as to how very generic and vague that section truly is. It is, however, as specific as it needs to be.
As well, the tsunami requirement was not at all ridiculous. Even the ~60 year old Fukushima Dai-Ichi plants would have met the requirement had they added longer ventilation piping to their intake/exhaust ports of their diesels and installed a bit more insulation for electrical wiring. It would have entirely saved the plant, too. The requirement wasn't that the structure or entire facility be able to withstand a tsunami, only that the methods of decay heat removal still be functional. Depending on the type of reactor and method of DHR, some of them could even work better after the plant was flood.

Also, I'll reply to this later with IC when I have time, but FYI, your "emergency shutdown" recommendation is... well... not a good recommendation. It's not a valid statement; it wouldn't help. Shutdown isn't the problem. It's DHR.

EDIT:

"Ambassador," the Pharthanian Nuclear Regulatory Agency began, "if your nations do not meet the more specific tsunami requirement, I would highly recommend to begin renovations to susceptible facilities, to include shutting them down. Guarding against a tsunami is not as difficult as you seem to think. Again, it's not about the structural integrity of the entire facility; only the reactor compartment itself, which should already be able to take a heavy beating, and the decay heat removal and protection system components need to truly be able to withstand natural disasters. The measures outlined are by no means impossible to implement, though we may edit the clause further to specify specific area requirements.
Furthermore, I recommend your nuclear technicians educate themselves further on the basics of nuclear power operation, as I should expect every nuclear reactor to have a method of emergency shutdown. Find me a nuclear power plant designer or operator who expects a nuclear power plant to operate without one, and I will physically assault them, as should any good reactor operator. That is how dire the requirement is, which is also outlined in the resolution under Section 2c.
An emergency shutdown system is not sufficient; if you aim to make such suggestions, I would have to say that I beg to differ on your statement of 'Not needing to do more research.' The issue at hand is not shutdown - most any nuclear power plant can perform an emergency shutdown in a matter of minutes, to including aligning all necessary systems to change power-plant operative states. The reactor can be made to cease producing power in a matter of seconds, and that's only if by operator action, much of the time being the operator actually reaching up to flip the switch to cause the shutdown.
The real problem, ambassador, is decay heat generation, hence why it takes up such a large section of this proposal, and why it is outlined so 'specifically' as you would refer to it, but, to anyone properly nuclear trained, it would actually seem sufficiently vague to cover a large variety of reactors, as it should be, and many might even consider it too lax, like many of my colleagues. Pharthanian requirements far outstrip this resolution.
Decay heat generation refers to thermal energy produced after reactor shutdown; this is the cause of every nearly every meltdown you've ever heard of. Many of the plants were shutdown at the time, even, and hadn't operated for some time. Merely, the method of DHR was lost, and the remaining fission-products produced during at-power-operations continued to heat up the plant until such heat had been accumulated in the core that the fuel began to blister and melt, causing it to clump together in larger masses, burn off and sift out excess nuclear-poisons and other materials, and continue to further it's own meltdown through achieving a higher reactive state."

[Pharthan]

OOC: 2aIII. Now reads " Methods described in (2) must be resistant to natural disasters and their magnitudes they are susceptible to, to be determined by the NSO."

[Normlpeople]

OOC: I'm just gonna claim compliance anyway, however I don't believe you have any idea how powerful a large tsunami is, or how they work...

IC: "So, the gnome committee will be predicting exactly what natural disasters may strike a plant and what magnitude? I think I will have to speak with this committee, maybe poach its members, since such psychic powers would serve the governments disaster response teams well.

I've seen enough to know that I won't be supporting this legislation"

[Pharthan]

OOC: I'm just gonna claim compliance anyway, however I don't believe you have any idea how powerful a large tsunami is, or how they work...

IC: "So, the gnome committee will be predicting exactly what natural disasters may strike a plant and what magnitude? I think I will have to speak with this committee, maybe poach its members, since such psychic powers would serve the governments disaster response teams well.

I've seen enough to know that I won't be supporting this legislation"

OOC: I don't believe you have any idea how sturdy and robust a reactor compartment is, or how they work.

I'm aware of the power and force of a tsunami. It is, indeed, vast. I'm also much more keenly cognizant of what a nuclear power plant can take (as reitterated, the Fukushima dai-ichi plants had initially survived the 100ft tsunami, but DHR systems only failed when flooded; they were not destroyed by force. Diesels, which were being used, simply had their air intakes and exhausts being far too low; had they been higher, the plant would not have melted down; you seem to be forgetting the fact that I've said this several times), and I'm aware that a 100 foot tsunami will destroy a good portion of the facility, but the likelihood of it destroying many of the decay heat removal systems is highly unlike, as they are by-and-large contained within the reactor compartment; most modern (and even older) reactor compartments can withstand a 747 ramming them and are some of the most sturdy structures on the face of the planet; many of them are also rounded, meaning the force of impact of a tsunami would be largely dispersed into the earth around the structure.

And, fine, having the determination to be based on "historical and geographic data."

IC:

"Ambassador, your sarcasm is quite unbecoming. Instead of offering snarky, snide comments, would you care to enlighten us on exactly how you believe this legislation should read? I ensure you, protecting against a tsunami is by no means impossible. If you feel it is not possible, and if an investigation shows you have any coastal nuclear power plants, I should think the international community should begin to actively and aggressively condemn your nation and force the 'retirement' of your nuclear operators, who, if they believe as you do, should be arrested and jailed for sheer negligence; if they are so ignorant as to the potency of nuclear power, or if you designers are so ignorant as to the concepts of engineering, and you still operate in this manner, the negligence involved on someone's part, within your nation, would be downright criminal."

[Chester Pearson]

Nuclear Power Safeguards Act
Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: All Businesses

Proposed by: Pharthan

AIMS to set definite preventative measures for safety in regards to nuclear power;

HEREBY defines for the purposes of this resolution:

1. Nuclear power as the use of sustained nuclear reactions of fission to generate heat and do useful work,
2. Radiological disaster as a loss of control of radiation or radiological material, hazarding the safety of the public and environment or exceeding of exposure limits due to ionizing radiation,
3. Decay heat as thermal energy from the fission or decay of fission products or fuel of reactors,
4. Nuclear safety as the ability to prevent a nuclear meltdown or excess decay heat generation resulting in harm to the environment or public or unintended release of fission products.

LIMITS the resolution to facilities not mobile under their own power to protect facilities which may have other means of protection.

REQUIRES nations operating nuclear reactors applicable to this resolution to maintain their own the nuclear safety organization (NSO), to protect national and international populations, with the power and duty to:
1. Mandate shutdown of reactors deemed to not meet reactor safety standards until deficiencies are corrected and the facility is certified safe by the NSO.
2. Ensure that all reactors must have available:

1. Four provided methods of Decay Heat Removal (DHR) with two methods to implement each.
   
   1. One DHR method may be the same as normal power-operation heat-removal.
   2. In addition to 2aI, one method must be able to account for Design Worst Case Decay Heat Generation (DHG) and still prevent a radiological disaster, without an external power source.
   3. Methods described in (2) must be resistant to natural disasters and their magnitudes they are susceptible to, to be determined by the NSO based on historical and geological data.
   4. One remaining DHR method may be heat loss to ambient.
   5. If (2) cannot be met, the reactor plant must stop operations which promote DHG.
2. Requirements of 2a need not be met if 2aII may be met by 2aIV.
3. Two methods of ceasing DHG processes are available capable of compensating for maximum possible reactor power at operation.
   
   1. One method must not require an external power source to the facility.

3. Inspect reactor plants at least once every two years to of evaluate nuclear-safety standards, procedures, systems, and materials and inform the facility of deficiencies.
4. Advise courses of action and guidelines for nuclear safety to facilities.
5. During investigations, test knowledge of operators of nuclear facilities to ensure they are properly trained.
6. Establish exposure limits for the populace in regards to exposure to nuclear power to ensure they receive less than harmful levels of radiation exposure due to the facilities.

ESTABLISHES the World Nuclear Regulatory Agency with the responsibility and power to:
1. Once every ten years certify individual nation's NSO to verify level of knowledge, attention to detail in inspections, and that the organization is maintaining standards.
2. Mandate and advise the national NSO on how to correct deficiencies in order to maintain the organization operational.
3. Collect information on and advise NSOs on best practices, observed in various nations to all member nations, provided the nation does not deem the information confidential.

REQUIRES reactor plant agencies to abide by advisories and mandates of the NSO.

MANDATES nations to establish procedures and arrangements to maintain safety and update them as deficiencies are discovered.

Have made a few changes for you.

[Pharthan]

OOC: Thank you, Chester.

The Sixth Draft is now available for viewing in the original post. This is likely to be the last draft. I may submit the resolution soon.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: I do apologize for the late replies, Real life eats your time sometimes...

"Ambassador, your sarcasm is quite unbecoming. Instead of offering snarky, snide comments, would you care to enlighten us on exactly how you believe this legislation should read? I ensure you, protecting against a tsunami is by no means impossible. If you feel it is not possible, and if an investigation shows you have any coastal nuclear power plants, I should think the international community should begin to actively and aggressively condemn your nation and force the 'retirement' of your nuclear operators, who, if they believe as you do, should be arrested and jailed for sheer negligence; if they are so ignorant as to the potency of nuclear power, or if you designers are so ignorant as to the concepts of engineering, and you still operate in this manner, the negligence involved on someone's part, within your nation, would be downright criminal."

Clover shook her head "I believe I already stated that I am not a nuclear technician, and also stated that our relevant officials informed we we would be in compliance already!" she said, her voice raised, barely keeping composure. "I am from the coast however, and do know what the power of a tsunami is. As far as the international community responding with aggression, I am not overly concerned. Our position has always been that we will gladly hand over any nuclear material to any nation who attempts to forcefully remove it, however we deliver it warhead end first."

Calming down, she said "I would suggest you have solved my issue by basing these requirements on hard facts instead of whatever the committee guesses. Its a shame we had to come to shouting and threats to do so, however, the issue was ultimately solved to my satisfaction. I have nothing more on this subject"

[Pharthan]

He almost chuckled. "I hardly think that simply living near a coast bestows one with the knowledge of the power of a tsunami. Surely, it makes you more likely to research it, but that one fact alone is entirely unimpressive. The committee does not guess that a nuclear power plant can take the force of such a massive tsunami, the committee knows from both an engineering side and from historical occurrences that a properly constructed nuclear plant can take the force of a tsunami.
"And I did not mean to say the international community would be taking your fissile material. Only your keys to be able to use it. And a key-warhead is far less menacing, don't you think?"

OOC: Like, really, they totally can take the force of a 100ft tsunami, along with a wide variety of other things most building's can't. The walls of a reactor compartment are several feet thick with multiple layers of different materials, designed to take extreme forces; those on the coast are specifically designed to beat tsunamis.

[Separatist Peoples]

Our position has always been that we will gladly hand over any nuclear material to any nation who attempts to forcefully remove it, however we deliver it warhead end first."

"Seems your government lifted that off of a C.D.S.P. "Diplomatic" communique." Bell chuckled.

He almost chuckled. "I hardly think that simply living near a coast bestows one with the knowledge of the power of a tsunami. Surely, it makes you more likely to research it, but that one fact alone is entirely unimpressive. The committee does not guess that a nuclear power plant can take the force of such a massive tsunami, the committee knows from both an engineering side and from historical occurrences that a properly constructed nuclear plant can take the force of a tsunami.
"And I did not mean to say the international community would be taking your fissile material. Only your keys to be able to use it. And a key-warhead is far less menacing, don't you think?"

OOC: Like, really, they totally can take the force of a 100ft tsunami, along with a wide variety of other things most building's can't. The walls of a reactor compartment are several feet thick with multiple layers of different materials, designed to take extreme forces; those on the coast are specifically designed to beat tsunamis.

"It's my opinion, ambassador, that your requirements are sound from an engineering perspective. Not that my opinion counts for much, but you've managed to plug any legislative gaps that set standards would have left with your current wording."

[Railana]

We're inclined to oppose this proposal as written, mainly because it contains a number of inappropriately inflexible requirements. For instance, the resolution requires that nuclear reactors be equipped with "four...methods of decay heat removal". Why four? Given the differing levels of technological development among World Assembly nations, isn't it conceivable that a nation may have developed a method of decay heat removal sufficiently effective such that fewer backup methods are required? Why didn't the resolution simply require that the reactor be equipped with effective methods of decay heat removal, rather than requiring an arbitrary number of such methods?

The proposal also contains a number of typos (e.g. the REQUIRES clause contains an extra "the") and contains some unnecessarily verbose or unclear language (e.g. in clause 6 and clause 2b respectively).

Joseph Fulton
Chief Ambassador, Railanan Mission to the World Assembly

[Normlpeople]

He almost chuckled. "I hardly think that simply living near a coast bestows one with the knowledge of the power of a tsunami. Surely, it makes you more likely to research it, but that one fact alone is entirely unimpressive. The committee does not guess that a nuclear power plant can take the force of such a massive tsunami, the committee knows from both an engineering side and from historical occurrences that a properly constructed nuclear plant can take the force of a tsunami.
"And I did not mean to say the international community would be taking your fissile material. Only your keys to be able to use it. And a key-warhead is far less menacing, don't you think?"

OOC: Like, really, they totally can take the force of a 100ft tsunami, along with a wide variety of other things most building's can't. The walls of a reactor compartment are several feet thick with multiple layers of different materials, designed to take extreme forces; those on the coast are specifically designed to beat tsunamis.

Clover laughed "Not that the international community would have the power or means to do so, all one has to do is leave the assembly to avoid compliance with the laws it sets. Once outside the assembly, you are also free from restictions in warfare which the WA 'international community' would be handcuffed by. Thats a conversation for another time however.

In any case, while you clearly come from a background with experience in the nuclear field. Ambassador Fulton makes a good point. I will leave it to my region to decide should it get to vote."