Unexplained mechanical failures force seventh unplanned shut down in past two years
BY ROGER WITHERSPOON
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
A series of unexplained mechanical failures — including a large hot water leak and the activation of a fire suppression system — triggered an emergency shut down of Indian Point 3 late Thursday night. It is the seventh unplanned shut down between the twin Indian Point reactors in the past two years. The facility is located less than 20 miles from the New Jersey border in New York.
The latest mishap comes just one week after failures in the steam generation system forced the shut down of the companion nuclear reactor at Indian Point 2. That reactor is still off line while engineers at Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owners of the Indian Point site, try to find what caused rising water levels in its massive steam generators, and triggered an automatic shut down.
Last week's event prompted inspectors for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to begin an investigation in the management of the nuclear site's major equipment, since it was the sixth unplanned scram. While the NRC has treated the shut downs, or "reactor trips," as separate incidents, officials now are looking to see if there are common elements in overall management and training leading to the disruptions at the site.
NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said "this trip will affect the Indian Point 3 performance indicator for Unplanned Scrams per 7,000 hours."
Plants having three or more outages within that time frame have their performance ranking downgraded and receive increased numbers and types of inspections from federal regulators.
Related:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission probes Indian Point
Operators at Indian Point 3 shut down the reactor bout 9:30 p.m. Thursday, Sheehan said, when a plant operator "observed water within the main generator exciter housing, a metal enclosure that surrounds the exciter. Steam generated by the reactor is used to turn the turbine, which in turn powers the generator; the generator sends power to a transformer and from there to the switchyard and from there to the grid.
Entergy officials declined to state how much water was leaking into the area, but David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, "It must have been a significant leak. A less severe leak typically allows time for operators to reduce the reactor power level before tripping it. In this case, they had to do it immediately."
Lochbaum spent most of his career in the nuclear engineer as a safety consultant, including a stint working at Indian Point 3, where he was in charge of ensuring their reactor safety systems were updated to meet NRC and license standards. He left the UCS in 2009 to spend a year working for the NRC, updating their operating training manual and teaching reactor safety to agency inspectors.
According to the incident report filed by Entergy, the shutdown of the reactor caused a secondary problem: the transfer of power within the plant from the generator to outside electrical sources did not occur properly and, as a result, one of the four reactor coolant pumps shut off.
Under normal operating conditions, about 10 megawatts of electricity produced by the 1,100-megawatt plant is routed back to Indian Point to maintain its various machines and systems. In the event of a complete power failure, the plant maintains emergency diesel generators so it can always maintain reactor control. It is not known at this point why the transfer to outside power in this case was not seamless.
In addition, instead of cool air circulating within the generator housing, Lochbaum said a feedwater pump serving the main boiler opened, and hot water flowing through that system "flashed to steam. There must have been a lot steam because fire sensors detected the temperature rise and signaled a carbon dioxide release to put out the fire that didn't really exist."
Though the plant's automated fire detection system thought there was a fire and acted, workers on site knew otherwise and, therefore, no human fire units were mobilized to the scene, Sheehan said.
Over the past two years there have been a series of sudden shut downs at Indian Point. The steam generators in Indian Point 2 shut down due to erratic water levels April 21, 2008 and April 3 2009, and September 3, 2010; while Indian Point 3 shut down May 15, 28, and 31, 2009.
Presently, both plants at Indian Point are rated "green," the highest level in the NRC's color coded matrix of plant operator competence. But they face a demotion as a result of the last two reactor shut downs. The NRC ratings descend from green to white, yellow, and then red. According to the NRC, only seven of the nation's 104 operating reactors are at the yellow level, and none are "red" a level where the agency is calling the shots on nearly all vital plant operations and can shut it down at any time.
Indian Point 2 had been on the red list from 2000 to 2003. It went from the worst performing plant in the nation to one of its best after Entergy invested $500 million replacing ageing, defective equipment and completely retraining the staff.
Roger Witherspoon writes Energy Matters at www.RogerWitherspoon.com
Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Besides the obvious safety issues there are ecological violations from the seeping water into the ground. Fish have been affected in the Hudson River by the seepage. It is time to stop this destruction of the wetlands. Please reconsider and close down this plant!
More troubles at Indian Point nuclear power plant
Unexplained mechanical failures force seventh unplanned shut down in past two years BY ROGER WITHERSPOON NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM A series of unexplained mechanical failures — including a large hot water leak and the activation of a fire suppression system — triggered an emergency shut down of Indian Point 3 late Thursday night. It is the seventh unplanned shut down between the twin Indian Point reactors in the past two years. The facility is located less than 20 miles from the New Jersey border in New York. The latest mishap comes just one week after failures in the steam generation system forced the shut down of the companion nuclear reactor at Indian Point 2. That reactor is still off line while engineers at Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owners of the Indian Point site, try to find what caused rising water levels in its massive steam generators, and triggered an automatic shut down. Last week's event prompted inspectors for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to begin an investigation in t...
Indian Point Safety 1 Monday, 13 September 2010 20:46 Mark Fry
I've lived in Tarrytown and Sleepy Hollow, less than twenty miles from Indian Point, for 24 years. I've followed the Indian Point news very closely, and have been appalled to learn of the repeated failures of the plant operators to maintain the plant in a safe operating condition. Seven unplanned emergency shutdowns in three years is unacceptable.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commision defines "Scram" as follows:
"The sudden shutting down of a nuclear reactor, usually by rapid insertion of control rods, either automatically or manually by the reactor operator. Also known as a “reactor trip,” “scram” is actually an acronym for “safety control rod axe man,” the worker assigned to insert the emergency rod on the first reactor (the Chicago Pile) in the United States" [The term was coined by Enrico Fermi]
The procedure, which takes just four seconds, is designed to prevent a catastrophic nuclear meltdown. But almost nothing at Indian Point works as designed, as the recent radioactive water releases to nearby ground water have shown. Entergy's own engineers are scratching their heads each time there is an "unexplained" reactor trip.
Let's all be thankful that we haven't all experienced a Chernobyl first hand, at least not yet.
And let's be sure that we all encourage the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the New York Department of Environmental Protection to step in to enforce the law, permanently shut down the plant, and prevent an unimaginable disaster in an area with 25 million people.
The recent gas line explosion in California, which was caused by a corporate failure to replace leaking 54 year old high pressure natural gas piping is just one more tragic example of what happens when our corporations put profits before safety.
Let's not forget, as we learned in the BP spill, that our regulatory agencies fail to regulate.
How many close calls do we need? Let's shut it down.
"It's somehow unique to nuclear power that, when one refuses to have nuclear power on the industry's terms, one gets chucked into a bin labeled 'anti-nuclear.' ''
The fact that a nuclear plant shuts down automatically -- or manually as in this latest case -- does not negate that fact that something went wrong, requiring the action. Reporting why a plant shut down, instead of mindlessly quoting a press release that there is no danger to the public is the job of a journalist. It is not a pro or con diatribe. It is, simply, what happened.
The notion that there can not be a serious accident affecting the public makes as much sense at the oil industry's long standing assertion that deep water oil spills are impossible. Every plant has a a lengthy SAMA -- Severe Accident Mitigation Assessment -- delineating some of the ways a catastrophic accident can occur and the ramifications to the public. The likelihood of these happening may be slim. But they are not impossible.
The contention that the presence of NRC inspectors means nothing can go wrong is false: if that were the case more than half of the operating reactors would not have spilled millions of gallons of contaminated water into local waterways and watersheds without being detected by the companies or the regulators.
Until 9/11/01, the NRC's analysis of containment buildings stated they were vulnerable to crashes from commercial jets, but the notion of a deliberate crash was too far fetched to be taken seriously or considered.
Commercial nuclear power would be better understood, and not feared if, when something occurs, those in the industry would explain what went wrong, why it went wrong, and how such a mistake may be avoided in the future rather than asserting that mistakes can't happen and attacking those crass enough to point to failures.