ShareThis Page
Nation

Ex-nuke worker gets probation for hiding damage

| Friday, May 2, 2008

TOLEDO, Ohio -- A judge sentenced a former nuclear plant worker on Thursday to three years' probation for concealing from the government the worst corrosion ever found at a U.S. reactor.

David Geisen, the Davis-Besse plant's former engineering design manager, had faced five years in prison after being convicted of misleading regulators into believing the plant along Lake Erie was safe.

U.S. District Judge David Katz opted for probation and a $7,500 fine. The judge noted that Geisen already had been stripped of his license to work in the nuclear industry.

"It is both an economic and a career blow," Katz said.

Prosecutors said Geisen and two other workers lied in the fall of 2001 so the plant could delay a shutdown for a safety inspection. Months later, inspectors found an acid leak that nearly ate through the reactor's 6-inch-thick steel cap. It's not clear how close the plant was to an accident.

Federal prosecutors said Geisen told regulators that an area of the plant the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission was concerned about had been inspected and that there was no reason to worry. But the inspections weren't fully completed, and Geisen knew it, prosecutors said.

Following the discovery of the leak, the NRC beefed up inspections and training and began requiring detailed records of its discussions with plant operators.

Geisen never was in a position to know how bad the leak had become at the plant, said his attorney, Richard Hibey. Geisen also had nothing to gain by delaying a shutdown, Hibey said.

Hibey asked for a sentence of probation, saying his client already has suffered a great financial loss and is struggling to start a new business and provide for his family.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me