Federal regulators say a nuclear reactor design chosen by FPL and another Florida utility has structural flaws that might not stand up to natural disasters such as hurricanes.

BY CURTIS MORGAN
cmorgan@MiamiHerald.com

The nuclear reactor design that Florida Power & Light has chosen for its expansion at Turkey Point has safety flaws, federal regulators said Thursday.

The problem, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is weakness in a structure called the shield building. It is erected around an internal nuclear containment building primarily to protect it from natural disasters such as tornadoes and hurricanes.

In a letter to the Westinghouse Electrical Co., manufacturer of the reactor, the NRC said that part of its AP1000 reactor design did not withstand design loads. The agency said it would require additional analysis, testing and possibly redesign.

FPL is one of several utilities that have chosen the Westinghouse design as part of a resurgent effort to build nuclear plants. Progress Energy, which is planning a nuclear plant in Levy County, is also using the design. Overall, 14 AP1000 units are under review in the country, and Westinghouse is building several overseas, with one in China farthest along.

Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the NRC in Atlanta, said the agency did not yet know whether fixing the flaw would delay permitting or construction of any of the plants. FPL did not return calls and e-mails seeking comment Thursday.

On its website, Westinghouse posted a statement that it had expected the NRC action and is already working to address the issue. The company said it hoped to have the design certified by 2011 and the first reactors online by 2016. ``We have fully committed the resources necessary to both quickly and definitively address the NRC's concerns, and we are confident that we will meet all applicable requirements,'' the statement said.

In a release, Michael Johnson, director of the NRC's office of reactors, said the agency had been discussing the flaws with the company since October 2008.

``This is a situation where fundamental engineering standards will have to be met before we can begin determining whether the shield building meets the agency's requirements,'' he said.

Hannah said one concern was about potential building failure, regarding a large water tank mounted at the top of the structure that contains an estimated six to eight million pounds of water.