Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Junk Dead-Ender Plant Fitzpatrick: The NRC Cover-up and Unethical Employees In The Public Affairs office.

Update 6/30
Michael Mulligan <> Dear Sir, I had a problem yesterday with a NRC employee yesterday. I called and made a complaint to the Region I Administrator’s office. Mr Dorman was out of the office. I made the complaint to the office secretary. She said a employee would further talk to me about these events. “There is no radioactivity in turbine lube oil on the roof. It is a closed system” Here is my version of these events and a analysis of why this occurred. It is my blog. It will be my talking points to the investigator. Could

The region I(all regions)NRC public affairs officials have become effectively nuclear industry open door mat concierges. They have turned into corporate public relations specialist befitting the nuclear industry. Everything NRC public affairs specialist has turned into the typical corporate model public relations specialist who will automatically sell their souls for a few pennies to the highest bidder. 

You get the word """Public""" in Public Affairs specialist. You are not named nuclear industry Corporate Affairs specialist.

These guys don’t serve our common interest and greater national purpose. They are wholly serving the nuclear industry. The whole ends of this appalling corruption is to continue to make the nuclear industry collectively more fragile. You think you are trying to help-protect your weak buddy-brothers, but you are making them weaker by allowing to "not follow the accepted codes, rules and our common ethics.  

Basically the whole NRC’s public affairs department is not effectively manage towards the greater ends of our country by the EDO and commissioners. I doubt they are really are public servants and they don't serve our collective commons ends and purpose.  

And if the agency’s senior management were smart...the whole exchange by me concerning Fitzpatrick beginning with the trip last Friday has been a plan by me to preserve the NRC’s public credibly.

Ultimately, the NRC has a choice: is the NRC going to consume the NRC’s perilous public credibility on the dead-ender plants or will the agency conserve their precious public credibility to save the plants who might continue to operate for 10, 20 or 30 years and upcoming new plants. All plants and nuclear corporations aren’t the same national worth.

***NRC Complaint talking points...this will be my description of the events in my complaint to the NRC! I'd be glad to talk about this to any news media. 1-603-336-8320 Remember, everything is always recorded when talking on a NRC telephone call. I highly approve of this policy.

Think if the news industry first impression was Entergy declared they released radioactive turbine oil to Lake Ontario last Friday. Would their response and the magnitude of the interest be the same? This is what's the concern to the NRC.

Junk Plant Fitzpatrick: Cover-up of Radioactive Leak

(June 27) “By the talk of the NRC spokesmen, the inspectors are too busy monitoring the outcome of the immediate plant trip. They don't have time to take a deep dive into the lube oil radiation contamination documentation. Imagine the fallout if the inspectors go deep into the documentation and discovered the releases was radioactive. I am not saying this level of radiation would harm anyone. I just want to see the facts. I want to make sure everyone is following the establish rules and regulations.”

Region 1 Public Affairs Staff
Senior Public Affairs Officer: Diane Screnci
Field Public Affairs Officer: Neil Sheehan
Implements NRC policies and programs for Public Affairs in the Region.   

6/27/2016@ 4:18pm
Hypothetical conversation between Fitz's senior VP and his slave underlings surrounding the turbine lube oil leak.
“This is Entergy's first declaration there is no radiation in the oil (above normal background). I suspect it went down like this.”

“The VP asked his underlings "is there any radiation contamination in the lube oil". They came back off the cuff, I am certain there is no radiation in the oil. But nobody ever collected a sampled for radiation detection yesterday or never referenced the documented history of radiation sampling in the lube oil.”
I called the NRC's Allegation department early yesterday (6/28 to get my complaint down on the NRC’s paperwork, that the Fitzpatrick leaking turbine lube oil was radioactive. I don’t trust verbal communications with the NRC officials. I highly favor written commutations for this reason and it is publically available. I know the Allegations department would accept my complaint and reply in writing. They declined to accept my allegation. The Allegations person said instead of an official allegation complaint, she would get an expert NRC person to have a talking with me. I found that perfectly acceptable. I was surprised the Allegation department didn’t automatically accept my complaint. I have a lot of experience good and bad with the NRC’s allegation department. I was basing my allegation on my experience and some documents and pictures I had obtained.

Surprisingly I got a quick call back from I think was Senior Public Affairs Officer Diane Screnci later on in the afternoon of June 28. I laid out my rationale why I think it was an uncontrolled radioactive discharge. I think we had about a 20-minute pleasant conversation. I specifically stated many times I need a current sample result on radiation contamination levels in the turbine lube oil to be happy. She told me she would get the information from the Fitz staff. She stated, the Fitz’s staff is extremely busy…don’t think you will get a quick answer back. Mrs. Screnci responses seems very reasonable and I was impressed with the NRC response even though I wasn’t allowed to document my concerns

This afternoon on June 29, I see on my tv screen I getting a region 1 call. I suspect it is about Fitz. It is Mrs. Screnci. She has a very pleasant voice on the phone. She confidently and curtly declares,
“I got this from the Fitz'd staff, there is no radioactivity in Fitz’s turbine lube oil spill.  It is a closed system. The turbine lube oil is completely isolated from the radioactivity”.
Yesterday I thought Entergy was covering-up their illegal discharge of radioactivity into Lake Ontario. Today I think it’s a conspiratorial cover-up by Entergy and NRC, that Fitz’s illegally discharged radioactivity to Lake Ontario contrary to regulations.

When I hear Mrs. Screnci response “it’s a close system” I immediately think I can’t be hearing such nonsense from a seasoned highly trained PA officer and much more educational and experienced NRC staff at a Nuclear power plant. The plant’s NRC staff is highly professional nuclear people and it's in the highly sensitive nature of the business…these guys would never put the agency’s and individual reputation on the line with such nonsense.  

I immediately told her the staff doesn’t know how the turbine lube oil and sealing steam works at Fitze talking like this. I begin thinking she must think I am a typical anti-nuclear dummy. Then it comes to me, she trying to derail my concern and information, she thinks I am a anti nuke dummy by throwing disruptive communication bs at me. How widespread is this in the PA office. But I think, I am absolutely sure she knows who I am. Then it came, she playing the role of a information disruptor, not a federal regulator who supposed to eb a provider of accurate and reliable information to all stakeholders. Her role is supposed to a provided of accurate information to the outsiders, not a disruptor of bad information leaving the plant.

I ask her, “can I show you something”. I am two steps ahead of her, I got my ducks in row. I get this light grunt from her on the phone, a slight delay, then begrudging prolonged OK. She was beginning to unethically dump me from the phone, but thought about who I was and held her tongue. I think she hates me. 

Vermont Yankee has the same turbine lube oil and vapor extractor as Fitz. The radioactivity in the turbine lube oil is a well warn path for me at VY. I show her a picture of the identical VY vapor extractor pipe vent on top the turbine build as Fitz…it’s got a large reactor main steam and vapor plume coming out of the vent line. It is the same line…vent pipe…that turbine lube oil that leaked oil out at Fitz vent line. I showed her the memo I got Vermont's state nuclear engineer Uldis Vanag in Oct 2011. He thinks there is at least tritium getting discharge from the lube oil system and probrably other radionuclides. Basically VY never knew radiation was in the plume…I forced VY to hire Areva to do an independent investigation on radiation in the turbine lube oil. The implication is the yearly environmental radiation discharge report was incomplete. I thoroughly explained the meaning of the VY’s lube oil plume picture and the state’s official memo to me.

Then I get a sheepish Mike from Mrs. Screnci, "I know what happened". I misconstrued your question yesterday(a lie). I thought you were just asking about the lube oil on the roof. This absolutely makes no engineering or system/component sense. It is complete gibberish. I will ask the proper question now to the staff.
Mrs Screnci declaration of no radioactive turbine oil on turbine roof to me (6/29) 
“I got this from the NRC's Fitzpatrick staff; there is no radioactivity in Fitz’s turbine lube oil spill on the roof.  It is a closed system. The turbine lube oil is completely isolated from the radioactivity”.
You notice how closely this tracts with my hypothetical question the Fitz’s VP posed to his staff on June 27. The NRC is doing the same thing with Mrs. Screnci to me. She is intentionally stiff arming me off my investigation of these events. Didn't I do a great job predicting this kind of response:
My hypothetical conversation(6/27)between Fitz's site VP to is underling slaves:  
“The VP asked his underlings "is there any radiation contamination in the lube oil". They come back off the cuff, I am certain there is no radiation in the oil. (But nobody ever collected a sampled for radiation detection yesterday or never referenced the documented history of radiation sampling in the lube oil.)”  
I thought about what occurred here for a few minutes…then made a call to the region I administrator to file a complaint. He was out of the office for a few days…I suspect a vacation. Basically we are now checking to see if the regional administrator is also participating in unethical behavior and a cover-up. The regional administrator (senior official in region I) is a Mr. Dorman. I had to describe my concern to Mr Dorman Office secretary. She told me a NRC employee will call you to make the official complaint. My aim is to get these concern in the NRC documents. This article is my talking points to that person.
Mrs Screnci is the senior office in the region I public affair office. So who could you trust to make this complaint in that office. I wanted to make this complaint to her office. Basically this is corruption in the highest order…a US regulator’s public affairs senior officer is carrying the water of Entergy and the nuclear industry. She participated in an illegal cover-up. She is not a US governmental regulator’s public affairs officer…see is a anti US public Affairs officer. Her action withholds information the public has a right to know and protects bad actor nuclear plant operators.

Can’t you see Mrs. Screnci and NRC’s response, Mike, we were trying to protect a secret NRC investigation…that’s is why we deceived you.    

Junk Dead Ender Fitzpatrick: Expansion of Investigation BY New York

Just saying, how competent is the NY DEC or PSC? The NY political system is riddled with corruption and insiders deals...worst in the nation with state legislators serving sentences in jail.  Bet you the state is concerned with throwing off beach business with declaring radioactive oil in Lake Ontario. I can't find the state press release anywhere on the their site.
Ok, so it looks like the PSC and DEC agree with Entergy the lube oil is non radioactive. I just want to know what documents and information they are keying on to make this assertion.

Who tested the oil for radioactivity?

State investigating shut down, oil spill at FitzPatrick nuclear power plant in Scriba
by Eric Reinhardt
Date: 6/28/2016 at 16:37:10

SCRIBA, N.Y. — New York officials are investigating the shutdown and subsequent oil leak into Lake Ontario at the James A. FitzPatrick nuclear power plant in Scriba, near Oswego.
The New York State Departments of Public Service (DPS) and Environmental Conservation (DEC) are probing the matter, DPS said in a news release issued Monday night.
The departments describe the plant shutdown as “unexpected.” They’re also pointing to a stuck valve, which they contend led to a leak of non-radiological oil into Lake Ontario.
The two agencies are conducting this joint investigation to understand the precautionary measures the plant operator took and what impact the leak had on water quality.
Investigators have stopped the source of the leak. The incident didn’t release any radioactivity into the environment, the departments say.
New Orleans, Louisiana–based Entergy (NYSE: ETR), which operates the Fitzpatrick plant, is currently remediating the spill under DEC and the U.S. Coast Guard oversight, according to the release.
The plant produces more than 800 megawatts of electric power, representing about 4 percent of the total energy demand in New York, according to the Entergy website.

Contact Reinhardt at

Junk Entergy Senior Nuke Executive Realignment: Moving Deckchairs on the Titanic

Some come from notorious plants?
 Entergy Nuclear names new leaders for strategic site and fleet support and oversight
Wednesday, Jun 29, 2016
Entergy Chief Nuclear Officer Chris Bakken has announced that Larry Coyle, Indian Point Energy Center site vice president, has been named chief operating officer to work alongside COOs Donna Jacobs and John Ventosa. These leaders are responsible for the strategic direction, support and oversight of the company's national fleet of 11 reactors in nine locations.

In other facility moves, Tony Vitale, currently site vice president for Palisades Power Plant in Michigan, was named site vice president for Indian Point Energy Center in New York, and Charlie Arnone, interim vice president of operations support, was named site vice president for Palisades. Coyle, Vitale and Arnone begin their new roles in August.

"We recognize that we face significant challenges at our sites, across the fleet and industry," Bakken said. "These organizational changes are a part of our nuclear sustainability plan aimed at improving fleet performance."

Coyle joined Entergy in 2011 as general manager of plant operations at Indian Point. In 2013, he was named site vice president at FitzPatrick, and has led the team at Indian Point for the last 18 months. He has more than 33 years of commercial nuclear power experience.

He began his nuclear career with Exelon at Dresden Nuclear Power Station and held various positions increasing in responsibility including main control room supervisor, shift manager, mechanical maintenance manager and work management director. During his tenure at Dresden, he served as an operations peer evaluator for the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations.

Following his work at Dresden, Coyle served as operations director at LaSalle Nuclear Power Station. He then accepted the maintenance director position for Braidwood Nuclear Power Station, and was subsequently promoted to plant manager.

Vitale began his career as maintenance engineer at Indian Point. Throughout his 33 year nuclear career, Vitale has held a number of positions with increasing responsibility, including various maintenance, engineering and operations supervisory and management roles before becoming general manager plant operations in 2007. In 2011, he accepted the leadership role at Palisades.

Arnone began his nuclear career 31 years ago after eight years in the U.S. Navy Nuclear Power program. He has extensive operations experience as a licensed reactor operator and senior reactor operator.

"I am pleased that Larry, Tony and Charlie have agreed to step into these key fleet and site assignments," Bakken said. "They will have the responsibility for the safe, secure and reliable operations of their respective facilities and will be involved with local communities, take an active role in the industry and partner with our employees as we strive to be one of the best nuclear operators in the world."

Entergy Corporation (NYSE:  ETR) is an integrated energy company engaged primarily in electric power production and retail distribution operations. Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 30,000 megawatts of electric generating capacity, including nearly 10,000 megawatts of nuclear power. Entergy delivers electricity to 2.8 million utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Entergy has annual revenues of approximately $11.5 billion and more than 13,000 employees.

Junk Plant Salem/Hope: Another Mysterious Plant Trip

This is the second largest nuclear facility in the USA. It is a three unit site with two Salem Units and then Hope Creek. 66% of their units are down mostly over a poor maintenance philosophy. Their philosophy is symbolized by Salem's troubles with bolting issues surrounding the reactor cooling pumps loose bolts in the coolant and their baffling core bolting issues. Maybe they need to extend their outages a week or so to do deeper preventative maintenance. It would be cheaper than a this.

So 66% of this site's plants were dead in this perilous summer period. Its got to jack the grid's prices to the hapless ratepayers.

Facility: SALEM
Region: 1 State: NJ
Unit: [ ] [2] [ ]
RX Type: [1] W-4-LP,[2] W-4-LP
Notification Date: 06/28/2016
Notification Time: 06:58 [ET]
Event Date: 06/28/2016
Event Time: 04:23 [EDT]
Last Update Date: 06/28/2016
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B) - RPS ACTUATION - CRITICAL
Person (Organization):

UnitSCRAM CodeRX CRITInitial PWRInitial RX ModeCurrent PWRCurrent RX Mode
2A/RY100Power Operation0Hot Standby
Event Text

"This 4 and 8 hour notification is being made to report that Salem Unit 2 suffered an unplanned automatic reactor trip and subsequent automatic auxiliary feedwater system actuation. The trip was initiated due to a Main Turbine Trip above P-9 (49% power). The Main Turbine trip was caused by a Main Generator Protection signal.

"Salem unit 2 is currently stable in Mode 3. Reactor coolant system pressure is 2235 psig and Reactor Coolant System temperature is 547 F with decay heat removal via the main steam dump and auxiliary feedwater systems. Unit 2 has no active shutdown tech spec action statements in effect. All control rods [fully] inserted on the reactor trip. All ECCS [Emergency Core Cooling System] and ESF [Emergency Safety Features] systems functioned as expected.

"No safety related equipment or major secondary equipment was tagged for maintenance prior to this event. No personnel were injured during this event."

The main generator protection signal was either a ground fault or a differential current trip. The plant is in its normal shutdown electrical lineup. No safeties or relief valves lifted during this event.

Unit 1 is defueled and was not affected by this event.

The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector and will notify the Lower Alloways Creek Township.

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Junk plant Watts Bar: Massive NRC Approval of Tech Spec and Rules Violations

Is the CDRM threated vent plug a NRC defined pressure boundary. It is questionable. This guy is a PWR. They operate at much higher pressures than a BWR. This guy’s leak must have boron deposit near the plug. This is not a water leak…it’s a high pressure 2000 psi steam leak. The vapor probably gets deposited in the containment coolers…then drain to the sump. We got the big time steam cutting probabilities surrounding this guy. If that plug popped out what would it do to the CRDM. You notice the quick worthless show trail corrective action…they only weld sealed this plug. Why didn’t they seal weld all the plugs. What would the increased flow of coolant water thought the CDRM and then out the crack do to the CRDM? Could it damage the CRDM? 

I am interested in why a LER wasn't written up for the plug leak. When did Watts Bar first discover the leaking indications? They measure airborn radiation as a sensitive indicator of a pressure barrier leak. How did the end up ignoring this symptom?     

Reg guild 1.45
RCPB leakage is leakage from a nonisolable fault in the material of an RCS component, pipe wall
(including welds), or vessel wall. Leakage from seals, gaskets, and mechanical connections (e.g., bolts, valve seals) is not considered RCPB leakage although these components are part of the RCPB, as defined in 10 CFR 50.2, “Definitions” (Ref. 2). Thus, RCPB leakage is indicative of degradation of pressure retaining components that could ultimately result in a loss of component structural integrity.

***See, these guys spend all their intelligence on illegally getting around the rules instead using their god given intelligence of blindly following the rules.

I just don't think the NRC educated enough on the specific plant technical specification and how to use power to make these guys follow the rules. So why didn't the NRC order them to shutdown over the out of position rod? Are they getting complacent with leaks and out of position rods?

They had a reactor coolant leak over a control rod drive mechanism drain plug and they didn't know it. I bet they knew it was a leak, but didn't emediately know it was a pressure boundary illegal water leak. They had a reactor pressure barrier leak...they are required to emediately shutdown to repair it.

Basically they had a unaddressed dreaded pressure barrier leak (Davis Bessee)that shorted out the rod position indication.

They violated two tech specs shutdown requirements over this to protect profits and capacity factor.

1) They intentionally overrode the Tech Spec requirements over a inop rod position indication system and the NRC did not intervene.

2) They had a dangerous and illegal reactor pressure boundary leakage. 

They got probably 6 inches of concrete around the reactor and the containment is poorly instrumented containment. They are half blinded on their best days and they know it. It is not like they got a god's eye view of every possible leak. Of course these guys defense with this is, we couldn't discriminate between pressure boundary leak and insignificant leak.  But believe me, they always agonized over how blinded they are with things happening behind the six inches of concrete.       

What did I say about the money grubbing NRC, plant engineers and management always screwing the licensed operators. The control room guys are just powerless to maintain professional nuclear standards. Aren't these the guys where the NRC charged TVA with systemic safety intimidation of the employees. How can you not come to the conclusion that the NRC facilitated this broad intimidation of employees and poor safety culture, if the agency is not enforcing their regulations over and over again. They are letting TVA run around with uncontestable power never contemplated by congress and the peoples who voted for them.      

There are tons of electrical equipment and electrical instrumentation in containment. There are strict QA requirements, but not enforced, to make all this equipment water and moisture proof and temperature resistance. In the big bad meltdown accident LOCA, the environment is upward to 600 degrees. with long term steam, moisture and water saturated conditions. How the hell are we getting electrical shorts in the extraordinary safety related rod position indication system in these benign normal operation conditions in 2015? This was a warning to everyone that is ignored.

My considered accidents:

1) A quick puff of steam filling the area around the CDRM positon indication area but not big enough to create a scram. It shorts out numerous rod position indications leading to numerous rod drop accidents... The control room operators aren't quick enough to scram the reactor and control the core rod density. The core partially melts down leading to the greatest nuclear scandal the US ever seen. The plants are destroyed including the untouched new nuclear plant, but little release of radioactivity. You just cratored the nuclear industry and it will have grave consequences to our nation way beyond the nuclear industry.

2) You come to a mid size or largest design LOCA...but on the big picture is easily controllable. The plant might be easily repairable after it. They allowed again illegal pressure boundary leakage (wink, wink)...the piping tiny crack mysteriously blew open months after knowing about the illegal tiny leak. But all is safe, we are designed and trained for this. But a host of equipment and instrumentation electrical shorts in containment begin to show up. The crew gets terribly confused, become effectively blinded by the magnitude if shorting equipment in containment. A easily controllable events turns into a partial meltdown or a full blown meltdown.

The real risk of the big one is a lost of integrity with the NRC and TVA...everyone is spinning engineering analysis for self interest in a secrecy driven system. Everyone is allowed to have their own special secrets and outsiders can't protect themselves. They have to create a widespread severe employee intimidation system to accomplish this engineering paper whipping spinning.

Nobody knows what the true conditions of the plant is and everyone is lying through their teeth to keep their jobs. This is when you have mind boggling stupid plant accidents that any idiot should have prevented. This happens more than you think. These kinds of new events in a much smaller event are emerging more and more at these plants because of the financial pressures.   

On April 21,2016, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN) Unit 1 concluded that a condition prohibited by Technical Specification (TS) Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.8, Rod Position lndication, had occurred during the dropped rod event on November 05, 2015. The Surveillance Requirement for TS 3.1.8 states that each Analog Rod Position lndication, (ARPI), agrees within 12 steps of the group demand position for the full indicated range of rod travel. Since the ARPI was indicating correctly for the dropped rod and was verified by diverse indications, it was considered operable. However, the Bases for TS 3.1.8 states that for the position indication to be operable, the Rod Position lndication System indicates within 12 steps of the step counter demand position as required by TS 3.1.5, Rod Group Alignment Limits. ln the case of a dropped control rod, the Rod Position for the affected rod would not be within 12 steps of the demand counter. Since WBN Unit 1 at the time of the dropped rod was in a mode of applicability, the above conditions would have been met warranting entry into TS 3.1.8 Condition A. Because the actions of TS 3.1.8 were not taken within the required times, WBN Unit 1 was in a condition prohibited by TS.

On November 05, 2015, WBN Unit had a dropped rod event and entered Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.5, Rod Group Alignment Limits - Condition B, and TS 3.2.4, Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio (OPTR) - Condition A. The control room staff took the actions according to TS and reduced power to less than 75%. However, upon review after the event, it was determined that TS 3.1.8, Rod Position indication for the Control Rod Drive System [El|S:AA], should also have been entered. The Surveillance Requirement (SR) for TS 3.1.8 states that each Analog Rod Position indication (ARPI) agrees within 12

steps of the group demand position for the full indicated range of rod travel. Since the ARPI was indicating correctly for the dropped rod and was verified by diverse indications, it was considered operable. However, the Bases for TS 3.1.8 states that for the position indication to be operable, the Rod Position indication System indicates within 12 steps of the step counter demand position as required by TS 3.1.5. ln the case of a dropped control rod, the Rod Position for the affected rod would not be within

12 steps of the demand counter. Since WBN Unit 1 at the time of the dropped rod was in a mode of applicability, the above conditions would have been met warranting entry into TS 3.1.8 Condition A.


A. The cause of each component or system failure or personnel error, if known.

The dropped rod occurred as a result of an electrical ground caused by moisture intrusion from a reactor coolant system leak. The leak was found during a subsequent maintenance outage on a Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) threaded vent plug which had decreased torque. A sealwelded vent plug was installed to prevent further leakage.

Intention falsification of federal documents...or a falsification of licensee documents that impairs the oversight of the NRC. Why didn't the NRC have the expertise to catch it?  

While there was a dropped rod event, this issue was the result of an incorrect licensing position (CR 979285) addressing how to comply with TS 3.1 .8, specifically, whether TS LCO 3.1.8 for Rod Position indication (RPl) should be entered after a dropped rod as a result of not being able to successfully perform the associated 18-month TS SR

B. The cause(s) and circumstances for each human performance related root cause.

The cause of this event was an incorrect licensing position of how to comply with TS 3.1.
Wink, wink, wink:  another intentional misinterpretation of tech specs in a operational bind uncontested by the NRC. I am sure the NRC rules allow this. These guys spend tremendous amounts of time studying and training on teck specs. These guys brag they are highly detailed oriented. That is what they get promoted for. Believe me, they knew what they should have done, and they expected the agency's pitiful response.   
Previous similar events at the same plant

LER 2016-002, Technical Specification Action Not Met for lnoperable Containment lsolation Valve, describes a similar event of personnel failing to comply with the requirements of Technical Specifications. ln this LER, WBN Unit 1 entered TS 3.6.3, Containment lsolation Valves, for a containment isolation valve being inoperable. The requirement to isolate the penetration associated with this containment isolation valve was not completed within TS time requirements. The cause of this event was operations staff misunderstanding the applicability of the Note associated with TS 3.6.3, which allows administrative controls under certain conditions. ln response to this event, a shift order defining the correct response when entering TS 3.6.3 Condition A was provided to the operating staff, and is to be a topic of future operations training. The response to this issue was specific to TS 3.6.3 and would not have prevented this event.

Monday, June 27, 2016

Junk Region IV: New Administator

Oh, I didn't miss this.
NRC Names Kriss Kennedy as Region IV Administrator

Kriss Kennedy, a 28-year veteran of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has been named the new Administrator of the NRC’s Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. He succeeds Marc Dapas, who has been named Director of the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards in Rockville, Md.
“Over the course of his career, Kriss Kennedy has repeatedly demonstrated an exemplary commitment to technical and managerial excellence,” said Victor McCree, the NRC’s Executive Director for Operations. “The experience he has gained in a wide variety of NRC assignments will serve the agency well.”
Kennedy was assigned as the Deputy Regional Administrator in Region IV in June 2014.

Junk Plant Fitzpatrick: Grossly Delayed Reporting on Oil Spill

I doubt they had a way to know how much tube lube oil was missing from the plant. I bet you the spill was much large than admitted.  

***These guys are so incompetent: why did the coast guard have to inform Fitz they had a large oil leak discharging from site and why did it take so long for them to discover where the leak came from and then report to the NRC?

1) Event occurred on Friday June 24 at  12:15pm.

2) They reported it to the NRC 4 hours later at 4:06. They are required to report it within 15 minutes. This is a serous violation of NRC regulations. When a event occurs at a plant, the agency wants an immediate report so the agency has time to spin up the agency if it is a bad accident. This is a clear indication that the on shift licensed operators were discombobulated for at least the first few hours of the accident. This whole  thing with the delayed reporting of the scram, the coast guard reporting the spill to the agency and it took days for them to discover where the leak occurred and then make a NRC speaks to massive control room and executive organizational discombobulation for hours and days at a time.

3) Something big is wrong Entergy and NRC: the plant tripped on Friday and the first reporting of it occurred on Monday two days later. This indicates the NRC and Entergy doesn't care or are indifferent about protecting their reputation. The outsiders aren't people, they are just mushrooms.

4) On Sunday June 26 @ 11pm Entergy reports to the NRC the Coast Guard discover a oil plume emanating from the site. Seemingly Entergy reports they were made aware of the offsite plume by the Coast Guard on Sunday at 9:15pm and then reported it to the NRC at 11:08 pm. It is a much shorter delay in reporting from when it was made known to reported to the NRC, than the scam...but I am certain this is contrary to important regulations and acting ethical.

5) Then on Monday June 27 at 2:52 am,  Entergy sheepishly reports to the NRC they discovered the source of oil leak? It takes them almost three days to discover where the oil came from. Really, should they even be running this plant in than condition.

The times and days are all in the reports below.
Power ReactorEvent Number: 52042
Region: 1 State: NY
Unit: [1] [ ] [ ]
RX Type: [1] GE-4
Notification Date: 06/24/2016
Notification Time: 16:06
Event Date: 06/24/2016
Event Time: 12:15 [EDT]
Last Update Date: 06/24/2016
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B) - RPS ACTUATION - CRITICAL
Person (Organization):

UnitSCRAM CodeRX CRITInitial PWRInitial RX ModeCurrent PWRCurrent RX Mode
1M/RY100Power Operation0Hot Shutdown
Event Text

"At 1215 [EDT] on 6/24/2016, James A. FitzPatrick (JAF) was at 100% power when Breaker 710340 tripped and power was lost to L-gears L13, L23, L33, and L43. These provide non-vital power to Reactor Building Ventilation (RBV), portions of Reactor Building Closed Loop Cooling (RBCLC), and 'A' Recirculation pump lube oil systems. Off-site AC power remains available to vital systems and Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG) are available.

"Due to the loss of RBV, Secondary Containment differential pressure increased. At 1215 [EDT], Secondary Containment differential pressure exceeded the Technical Specifications (TS) Surveillance Requirement SR- of greater than or equal to 0.25 inches of vacuum water gauge. The Standby Gas Treatment (SBGT) system was manually initiated and Secondary Containment differential pressure was restored by 1219 [EDT].

"The 'A' Recirculation pump tripped at 1215 [EDT] and reactor power decreased to approximately 50%. 'B' Recirculation pump temperature began to rise due to the degraded RBCLC system. At 1236 [EDT], a manual scram was initiated. Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) water level shrink during the scram resulted in a successful Group 2 isolation. All control rods have been inserted. The RPV water level is being maintained with the Feedwater System and pressure is being maintained by main steam line bypass valves. A cooldown is in progress and JAF will proceed to cold shutdown (Mode 4). Due to complete loss of RBCLC system, the Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) cooling capability is degraded but the Decay Heat Removal system remains available. SFP temperature is slowly rising and it is being monitored. The time [duration] to 200 degrees is approximately 117 hours.

"The initiation of reactor protection systems (RPS) due to the manual scram at critical power is reportable per 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B) and 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(iv)(A). The general containment Group 2 isolations are reportable per 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(iv)(A). In addition, the temporary differential pressure change in Secondary Containment is reportable per 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(v)(C), as an event that could have prevented fulfillment of a safety function."

The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector and the State of New York.

Power ReactorEvent Number: 52045
Region: 1 State: NY
Unit: [1] [ ] [ ]
RX Type: [1] GE-4
Notification Date: 06/26/2016
Notification Time: 23:08 [ET]
Event Date: 06/26/2016
Event Time: 21:15 [EDT]
Last Update Date: 06/27/2016
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
50.72(b)(2)(xi) - OFFSITE NOTIFICATION
Person (Organization):

UnitSCRAM CodeRX CRITInitial PWRInitial RX ModeCurrent PWRCurrent RX Mode
1NN0Cold Shutdown0Cold Shutdown
Event Text

"The United States Coast Guard reported an oil sheen in the vicinity of the station's circulating water system effluent. Investigation by station personnel has not determined the source. The circulating water pumps were secured to mitigate the potential source. The United States Coast Guard response Center, and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation have been notified."

The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.



"The source of the oil sheen has been identified. The source, main turbine lubricating oil, has been stopped and cleanup efforts are underway."

Notified DOE, EPA, USDA, HHS, and FEMA.

Junk Plant Dresden's fire

Updated 2/28

Imagine having a event where 95% of the safety systems have been striped away from you? The whole nation is watching the event. You are controlling water level on HPCI. RCIC is dead. You are in a emergency manner repairing the plant so it can be safely cooled down. Then the HPCI lube oil motor catches fire. By itself its a minor event. But on the edge of a meltdown, it is a tremendously restful event.

Hope they have a motor on site. Bet you they are scrambling around begging other utilities to give them a motor. Certainly this motor is no long manufactured. Will they have to reverse engineer it from a two bit contractor?   
Power ReactorEvent Number: 52046
Facility: DRESDEN
Region: 3 State: IL
Unit: [ ] [ ] [3]
RX Type: [1] GE-1,[2] GE-3,[3] GE-3
Notification Date: 06/27/2016
Notification Time: 12:21 [ET]
Event Date: 06/27/2016
Event Time: 10:50 [CDT]
Last Update Date: 06/27/2016
Emergency Class: ALERT
10 CFR Section:
50.72(a) (1) (i) - EMERGENCY DECLARED
50.72(b)(3)(v)(D) - ACCIDENT MITIGATION
Person (Organization):

UnitSCRAM CodeRX CRITInitial PWRInitial RX ModeCurrent PWRCurrent RX Mode
3NY100Power Operation100Power Operation
Event Text

"At 1050 CDT, [on 6/27/16], an Alert was declared at Dresden Unit 3. The Alert is due to Unit 3 experiencing a fire in the HPCI (High Pressure Coolant Injection) system, auxiliary oil pump motor. The fire is out.

"This notification is being made per 10 CFR 50.72(a)(1)(i)."

Dresden Unit 3 is stable and continues to operate at 100% power and HPCI has been declared inoperable. There is no impact on Dresden Unit 2.

The licensee has notified the NRC Resident Inspector

Notified DHS SWO, FEMA, USDA, HHS, DOE, DHS NICC, EPA, and FEMA National Watch Center, FDA EOC, NuclearSSA via email only.


"Termination of MA-5 [Alert]. Fire in HPCI room verified extinguished. HPCI system is inoperable. [Technical Specification] TS 3.5.1 condition G in effect, per 10 CFR 50.72(c)(i) - notification of termination of Alert."

Dresden Unit 3 terminated the Alert at 1319 CDT, on 6/27/16. Dresden Unit 3 continues to operate at 100% power.

The licensee will notify the NRC Resident Inspector.

Notified R3DO (Kunowski), NRR (Miller), IRD (Grant), DHS SWO, FEMA, USDA, HHS, DOE, DHS NICC, EPA, and FEMA National Watch Center, FDA EOC, NuclearSSA via email only.


"At 1042 [CDT] on 6/27/16, the U3 High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) system was declared inoperable after the Auxiliary Oil Pump failed.

"This event is reportable per 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(v)(D); any event or condition that at the time of discovery could have prevented fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems that are needed to mitigate the consequences of an accident. This is an eight hour reporting requirement.

"The Dresden NRC Resident [Inspector] has been notified."

Notified R3DO (Kunowski).

***This plant was built in the Middle Ages:

Dresden operators extinguish small fire on pump

Station declares, then terminates ‘Alert’ classification

Published: Monday, June 27, 2016 4:09 p.m. CDT                             

MORRIS — Dresden Generation Station operators extinguished a small fire on a pump Monday morning.

The fire lasted three minutes, was contained to the pump and did not affect the safe operation of the plant, according to a news release from the station. Both reactors remain at full power.
Operators promptly identified and extinguished the fire and no off-site assistance was necessary.
An “Alert” was declared and later terminated, as required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. An Alert is the second lowest of four emergency classifications established by the NRC. It was declared at 10:50 a.m. and terminated at 1:19 p.m., according to the news release.

Junk Plant FitzPatrick: Cover-up of Radiactive Leak

Update 6/28
Based on the tube oil coming into direct contact with reactor steam (short radioactive decay), the procedures should dictate the lube oil be treated as radiative in the spill emergency procedures.
Can you just imagine the oil pooling on the roof and the roof caves in?

What would this look like if it was raining cats and dogs out? Winter in heavy snow covering?

This is what I mean by the engineers and plant management always screwing the control room employees by setting them up with degrading equipment. But at least its a job.
Update 3:30 pm
So a NRC official called me back on this. It was a very timely response. I called the allegation department, they wouldn't throw this into a allegation because they think I picked up this up from the media. My expertise about these components bares no weight. The spokesperson said, she thinks the system and lube is clean without any radiation. I told her I am a guy of facts, thinking its clean is not the facts. Bottom line, she is going to ask the NRC residents to get the information. I want the date and last testing sample of lube oil radiation. They just might never have tested this system for radiation. Basically I am asking her, has there been any increase of radiation levels since before the lube oil was placed in the plant? This lube oil has come in direct contact reactor steam and it has to contain radioactivity. I suspect they will find small levels of radiation in the oil, but there is small chance we might get a surprised it was a reportable level. 
It is really important they immediately declared they had a uncontrollable release radiation into the lake. It would be a completely different news story if Fitz first declared this was a radioactive lube oil leak no matter how minute it was. 
By the talk of the NRC spokesmen, the inspectors are too busy monitoring the outcome of the immediate plant trip. They don't have time to take a deep dive into the lube oil radiation contamination documentation. Imagine the fallout if the inspectors go deep into the documentation and discovered the releases was radiative. I am not saying this level of radiation would harm anyone. I just want to see the facts. I want to make sure everyone is following the establish rules and regulations.

This is Entergy's first declaration there is no radiation in the oil (above normal background). I suspect it went down like this. The VP asked his underlings "is there any radiation contamination in the lube oil". They came back off the cuff, I am certain there is no radiation in the oil. But nobody ever collected a sampled for radiation detection yesterday or never referenced the documented history of radiation sampling in the lube oil.     
While this oil contains no PCBs, is non-radioactive, non-hazardous and has low potential health effects, any unintended release to Lake Ontario is not in accordance with Entergy’s standards. 
“We are taking appropriate e actions to mitigate the environmental consequence from this event and working closely with appropriate local, state and federal agencies,” said Brian Sullivan, FitzPatrick’s site vice president and Entergy’s top official at the site. “We have identified the source of the oil, stopped the leak and put protective absorbent material and barriers in place to help mitigate additional oil from reaching the lake. Environmental protection is a hallmark of our operations, and we are taking all appropriate actions.”
***So I have made a complaint to the NRC and NY environmental agency. Notified the media. The NRC promised to get back to me with one of their experts.  

I know the reactor steam comes in direct contact with the lube oil. Most insiders consider the turbine lube oil as non radiative. They are complacent with radioactivity in the lube oil.

*Another good question, do they consider used turbine lube oil as radioactive? What do they do with the used lube oil. Some burn the oil in a burner.... 

With the difficult plant trip and this complacency...I don't think a thought was made about what are the real radioactive levels are in the oil. Does the radioactivity concentrate as the oil ages? Maybe the employees think if they admit the radioactive discharge, they would stop a "Hail Mary" pass at saving the plant.  

*A good question to ask, was their any radioactive tape barriers placed around the spill area on the roof? *Will they treat the oil on the roof or any clean-up materials as radioactivity?

This is one of those deals where this might have gone past everyone on site!!!