June 26:
According the NRC tonight Entergy replaced the C PCP pump with a new one this outage and a malfunctioning PCP seal on the new C pump caused the most recent shutdown.
It was a new seal!!June 22:
See bottom update...Hmm, the Cooper plant secretly just came down for a recirc pump seal job a week or so ago. Had to pry it out of them. One is PWR and the other is a BWR. It is suspicious though as hell…are they related?Is there some deep management philosophy thing going on...like just let it run till it fails. Did they take a shutdown with anomalies readings on the seal…just start up without replacing the seal because they didn’t have enough time?
+++The Below is the first entry setting this up and then Reposted from 6/20...everything else was added after one day later.
Junk and obsolete "primary coolant pumps" and Entergy has a habit of intentionally running safety equipment until failure. We have no idea if the proper maintenance was taken on these seals...
Maybe they will break another impeller blade on the way down and up...they will be running these pumps outside their design margins during the shutdown and start-up. Everyone cross their fingers!
June 26: The severely out of balanced impeller since 2011 damaged the C pump...this cause them to replace the whole unit this spring. The brand new pump and its brand new seals failed upon start-up...this is what caused their new shutdown.
"2014: The licensee removed the impeller from PCP-C and replaced it with a newly manufactured impeller. The removed impeller had missing portions in two impeller vanes."
Now when did they come out of their recent outage...March 16.Obviously the massive vibrations with the severely out of balance impeller shortened the life of the seals? You think Entergy would be smart enough to replace the seals at the same time...I doubt it.
Congratulation Entergy on that record run of 97 days!
(June 22: Pretty cool ha, sending signals...)COVERT TOWNSHIP, MI – Palisades Nuclear Power Plant was removed from service at 11:30 p.m. Friday, (June 20).You catch that...I put this up on the internet at 4 pm yesterday:)
That is being done to conduct a "planned maintenance outage" to replace a primary coolant pump seal, says Lindsay Rose, spokeswoman for Entergy Corp., which owns Palisades.These reports are so selective and incomplete…no mention in the 2012 inspection report and I believe the newest IR don't mention "out of licensing" issue began in 2002. I don’t trust these guys to give us the unvarnished truth on these events.
She said the outage will be brief but she would not provide an estimate of how long, saying that is not information the company makes available to the public.
"This is not an emergency situation at all," Rose said. "We are just shutting down to replace this now so we can have more reliable operations in July and August, through the summer, when energy demand is higher."
She said the seal helps maintain pressure inside one of four primary coolant pumps at the plant.
"There are primary pumps that push water from steam generators to our reactor vessel," Rose said. "We have four of them. We are replacing the seal in one of the pumps."
She said the seal is being replaced "because we've been monitoring the seals and we noticed one of the seal's layers – each has four layers – and we've noticed one of the layers of the one seal wasn't performing the way it should."
The pumps work together to circulate water and keep the vessel cool.
Early this month, Allison M. Macfarlane, chairwoman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and U.S. Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph, toured the plant to see safety upgrades. They said the plant was safe but Macfarlane acknowledged that there were concerns about a "chilled work environment" in Palisades' security department.
In a poll, workers said they believed they could not raise safety issues without facing retaliation.
Macfarlane said there was no final word on what the NRC would do to address those concerns, "but it's something we look at very seriously."
I can’t find the non sighted violation so far...
In further consultation with industry specialists over the next several months, the licensee reviewed previous site and industry operating experience regarding PCP impeller issues and assessed the manner in which the Palisades pumps were operated. The research concluded that the cause of the failures is fatigue-related effects from the operation of the pumps in conditions beyond the maximum flow rates and below the minimum net positive suction head recommendations as described in the UFSAR and other design documentation.In response to the October 2011 event and subsequent research conducted to better understand the phenomena affecting the PCPs, the licensee has instituted a monitoring plan, changed the preferred sequence for starting/stopping PCPs during startups and shutdowns, and has corrective actions to explore further procedure changes regarding operation of the PCPs and the resultant impact on other aspects of plant operation.
I just can't understand this, yet this continuation of allowing the operating the PCP outside the design operating critera in 2002 lead to the distruction of many PCP impellers.
I can't find any non sited violation of the PCP pumps in 2002...somebody is smoking dope in the NRC. The idiot must be must be talking about 2012.
For example, the licensee received a non-cited violation in 2002 for the failure to operate the primary coolant pumps in accordance with their design operating criteria. The inspectors verified that the licensee’s evaluations for the issue were comprehensive and the corrective actions completed and planned were appropriate and timely, commensurate with their safety significance.
This is the first time I’d
seen this…
Was this in the recent
inspection (foreign material) about this?
June 21@ 6:30pm
>>>>Can you even imagine how many well educated NRC officials looked over IR 2014007 for errors? So I looked in the back section of the "listed of documents" they inspected. They had no 2002 documents listed in this inspection report. This below is what they looked at.
We are lucky these guys aren't reactor operators.The NRC looked over IR 2012003 and recertified there was no any operational safety issues with repeatedly spewing RCP impeller blades all in the coolant over the decades. But we could never see the secret internal document...how do we know the operational determination was thorough?<<<<
We are lucky these guys aren't reactor operators.The NRC looked over IR 2012003 and recertified there was no any operational safety issues with repeatedly spewing RCP impeller blades all in the coolant over the decades. But we could never see the secret internal document...how do we know the operational determination was thorough?<<<<
CR-PLP-2012-02044 Operation of Primary Coolant Pumps with Inadequate Net Positive Suction Head April 2, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment