accidents or incidents regarding nuclear powered naval vessels 2

[WillE]

given that a large part of the U.S. Navy is driven by nuclear "propulsion" and so little has been made through the years of any accidents or incidents concerning the heat source of this system of propulsion I am curious:
1> are any incidents or accidents regarding the heat source so classified as to never get to the news media or are they that safe.
2> are the incidents or accidents regarding the heat source so infrequent and so minor as to never deserve any scrutiny by the news media.
3> are the operators of this equipment so skilled and diligent that no incidents or accidents of any reporting magnigude ever reported.
4> is the equipment so skillfully engineered and constructed as to never have had an incident or accident requiring any scrutiny by the news media.

i am very interested and concerned about this information for some research I am conducting for myself. I have no nuclear training or substantive knowledge what ever and therefore am starting at square one in this project and need any assistance in regards to the first 4 questions that i can get.

 

[oldnuke]

POWER LEVEL is the main difference between a Navy reactor and a commercial sized reactor. The largest Navy reactor is smaller than 600 Mwt. The smallest commercial reactor is about 1800 Mwt.

Typical average operating power level for a Navy reactor is about 30%. (Yea, I know they do calorimetric runs and cat ops on carriers, but basically they cruise at low power.)

Typical average operating power level for a commercial reactor is in excess of 90%. Most run 100%, but a few have done thermal power uprates which their electrical plant can't support.

What this all means is - there is a HUGE difference in decay heat and radiological inventory between commercial and Navy reactors. A multitude of containment isolation, cooling, and emergency core cooling equipment is required for the commercial plants which are not required for Navy plants. The consequences of a leak or accident at a commercial plant is far more severe.

The Navy also has the luxury of being part of our US defense structure, which does not lend itself to public scrutiny or regulatory influence.

After 25 years in the industry - the comparison is that a Navy reactor is a race car, a commercial reactor is a tractor trailer. Capacities and performance levels compare on that scale. Big plants haul the freight cheaper and farther, Navy plants have better 0-100 times and are built to far more exotic standards.