Fitch: US Nuclear Power growth Prospects uncertain

Was modular construction and overhauling new plant licensing just a nuclear industry con job. I think the extreme nuclear and electric industry mentality...the extreme anti governmentalism and market ideology of selfishness is behind this. Us corporate titans are gods and we answer to nothing but our small tribe's interest.
 
This isn't a technical failure, but a extreme conservative political, organization or so called market failure. It is the crazy idea that the free markets are the gods of our times. We are incompetent at managing organizations...the faux ethereal free markets are the best ultimate managers of our bureaucracies and organizations.

Basically we don't trust our politicians and corporate leaders...the safest solution is to dilute power to the lot of them all. We don't trust people who hold power over all of us, to act in our interest...so give as little power to the lot of them. 
 
As with our failures of new construction during the 1970s and 1980s, and the startling new construction failures today, its our poor control over our electric utilities. We don't think big enough...

A huge symptom of this today is the average age of the nuclear fleet. It is burgeoning dependence an reverse engineering, as original manufactures or vendors supporting the nuclear industry have long gone out business. We once had huge American businesses with a horde engineers and extensive testing...now we got little mom and pop vendors doing reverse engineering manufacturing obsolete components.

The nuclear industry looks like today, how we are eking out survival after the apocalypse. It speaks about our capability to be organize as a nation...  

Fitch: US Nuclear Power growth Prospects uncertain

India Infoline News Service | Mumbai | August 21, 2015 07:19 IST  

However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, along with the rise in federally funded nuclear power research, could yield growth factors longer term.

The recent failure of modular construction to deliver lower prices and shorter timelines will likely keep a cap on U.S. nuclear development into the mid term, Fitch Ratings says. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, along with the rise in federally funded nuclear power research, could yield growth factors longer term. 

The total cost to complete the Vogtle nuclear power plant expansion has risen to approximately $17 billion. Similarly, construction costs for the new units at the V.C. Summer plant have risen to approximately $12.4 billion. Both projects are approximately three years behind schedule. They are using a modular construction technique and technology developed by Westinghouse, the AP1000 PWR, which was designed to be less costly and faster. Four AP 1,000 reactors under construction in China have also experienced cost overruns and delays. In our view, the change in expectations about this technique could join other forces in keeping expansion down. 

Last year, the U.S. Energy Information Administration forecast that nuclear generation will drop by approximately 10,800 MWe by 2020 on the low cost of natural gas and an expected lack of growth in electricity demand. In our view this number could grow if more plant operators find upgrades and local political pressure too costly to continue operations. 

These pressures shut Dominion Resources' Kewaunee plant, Duke Energy Corp.'s Crystal River plant, Edison International's San Onofre plant, and Entergy's Vermont Yankee plant. Exelon's Oyster Creek is scheduled for retirement in 2019. Approximately eight additional merchant units, with an aggregate capacity of 6,334 MW, are also at risk of early retirement.  

By comparison only five new units are currently under construction and a license has been issued for one other, according to a report published last month by the Nuclear Energy Institute. Although a further 10 units are under active Nuclear Regulatory Commission review, their status remains uncertain. Plant age could also play a role in preserving current generation. Of the 99 nuclear units in operation, 73 have received 20-year license extensions beyond their original 40-year operating licenses. An additional 19 applications for license extension are pending and the remaining units are likely to be filed over the next several years.  

However, several federal government initiatives could reverse these pressures. One was issued this month. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan credits new nuclear power plants and upgrades to existing ones towards compliance. Various Department of Energy loan programs also provide inexpensive funding and liquidity. U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that energy subsidies and research support have been in the billions, annually. In our view, these measures could slow the decline in nuclear power generation if they are continued for the long run. 

The Exelon and Quad Cities Cronicles.

Exelon says revamped PJM auction won't spare Quad Cities plant

Jeffrey Tomich, E&E reporter
EnergyWire: Thursday, August 20, 2015 

PJM Interconnection LLC's annual capacity auction will almost certainly mean more revenue for some power plant owners. It will also probably spark renewed outcry from critics who fought new capacity performance standards -- rules aimed at avoiding a repeat of near system collapse related to the 2014 polar vortex. 

But the auction, results of which will be released tomorrow afternoon, will not provide a lifeline for Exelon Corp.'s money-losing Quad Cities nuclear plant, the Chicago-based company said. 

Just about admitted they are running these plants with inadequate funding. They are going use this added funding to plow it all right back into the plants. Sounds like this inadequate funding is going to menace the community for a longer period of time? At some point, the NRC is going to have to step in to make a example; we can't allow you maga powerful utilities in crisis to operate nuclear plant like rag dolls. 

The problem with all these nuclear utilities is we have to take them for their word...they won't show us the books.

Contrary to suggestions by some, any additional revenue from the auction and its new rules will have little if any effect on the prognosis for the 1,1819-megawatt dual-reactor plant in western Illinois. And what additional revenues it does bring in will be invested back into units to enhance reliability or used to offset a decline in energy prices. 

Should any nuclear unit ever be "severely challenged"?

We have severely challenged units. We expect those challenges will persist even after the auction," said Joe Dominguez, Exelon's executive vice president of governmental and regulatory affairs and public policy.
Also increasingly clear, the timeline for the company to make a decision whether to shutter the plant isn't as imminent as had been suggested. While the company could announce the plant's retirement in September, there remains time for lawmakers to enact the proposed low-carbon portfolio standard during a fall veto session and perhaps even into early 2016. 

"There is no magical drop-dead date," Dominguez said yesterday morning during a conference call with reporters. 

 

It's expected that Exelon Corp.'s 1,814-megawatt Quad Cities nuclear plant in western Illinois didn't clear last week's PJM capacity auction for 2018-19, increasing odds the company will announce the plant's closure later this year. Photo courtesy of Exelon. 

Illinois, home to 11 Exelon nuclear reactors at six plant sites, is at the forefront of the policy debate about keeping the nation's fleet of aging nuclear reactors running while combating climate change (EnergyWire, Aug. 4). In fact, the company said it will be twice as difficult for Illinois to meet its carbon dioxide emissions reduction target under U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan if two of the three troubled nuclear plants in Illinois were to shut down. 

And the Quad Cities plant, which employs 800 people and pumps millions of dollars of tax revenue into local government, is in the most immediate need of help to keep running. 

While the carbon rule should indirectly benefit existing nuclear plants, the help won't be immediate. Exelon says some of its plants -- Quad Cities, Clinton and Byron -- continue to bleed red ink. 

The company's Clinton station, a 1,065-MW single-unit plant an hour northeast of Springfield, Ill., faces the greatest financial challenges, Dominguez said. Exelon has said the plant lost more than $100 million last year. 

But the timeline for making a decision about retirement is further off because it is part of the Midcontinent Independent System Operator Inc.'s grid. And the next cutoff for notifying MISO about participation in its next capacity auction isn't until next spring. 

The threat to the Quad Cities plant is more immediate. It has lost $350 million over the last five years, Dominguez said. And analysts have projected losses in excess of $100 million for Quad Cities and Clinton this year.

How about operating the system holistically. Some years the nukes will be more profitable and other years the fossil plants will be more profitable...the stronger energy sources then temporally carry the weaker sources. What about the golden years of nukes, say 2000 to 2010 when they carried the whole utility with their profits. Is that ever accounted for. If Exelon would have massively plow back nuclear plant profits in the golden years to the plants themselves, certainly they would have been more economically now. I think they massively waste money on the excessive bureaucracy instead of building up their infrastructure.        

While Exelon and its merchant nuclear fleet as a whole are profitable, the company has made clear that each generating asset must stand on its own, the same way McDonald's or Starbucks won't let unprofitable stores remain open even though the chain is doing well. 

Exelon's plants have two revenue streams -- income for energy they generate and payments for capacity standing ready to run whenever they're needed. 

Under PJM's rules, those capacity payments are determined through an annual auction conducted three years ahead. The auction results to be announced tomorrow cover the 12 months beginning June 1, 2018. 

Two of Exelon's nuclear plants in PJM -- Quad Cities and Byron -- failed to clear last year's auction at a price of $120 per megawatts-day. The company said before this year's auction, conducted electronically last week, that the plants are a "long shot" to clear for 2018-19, even with new capacity performance standards in place, according to CEO Chris Crane. 

The capacity performance standards, approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, significantly raise penalties for generators that fail to perform during emergencies like the polar vortex and increase payments for those overperforming. 

Dominguez, however, said the new PJM standards, while they could produce incremental revenue for plants that clear, are offset by other factors. First, the company expects to invest $350 million to $450 million in its fossil fleet in PJM to meet the new rules. 

Perhaps more importantly, the decline in forward power prices over the past year offsets even a $75 per MW-day increase in capacity prices for 2018-19, putting the company in the same spot it was in from a total revenue standpoint, he said.

Exelon continues push for new energy policies

Exelon maintains that the only real solution to the financial challenges faced by its three Illinois nuclear plants is a state policy that rewards its nuclear fleet in the same fashion as wind, solar and other zero-carbon energy sources. 

The company's low-carbon standard proposal is one of three major energy bills filed this spring, none of which passed. Legislators have expressed a desire to look at energy policy on a comprehensive basis, something that could even happen during a fall veto session (EnergyWire, June 2).
Critics and supporters of competing legislation question the need for the legislation proposed by Exelon, and said the PJM 2018-19 auction and 2016-17 transitional auction held this month could bring the company hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue beginning next year. 

Dave Lundy, a spokesman for the BEST Coalition, a business group that opposes the Exelon bill, expects the company to announce the closure of Quad Cities as it seeks to bolster its case with legislators. 

"I think you need to take a holistic look at this, from the credibility of the threat and what happens if there's a closure," Lundy said. 

Wall Street analysts, too, expect a Quad Cities announcement if, as expected, the plant doesn't clear the 2018-19 auction. 

"We expect firm plant closure commitments to ratchet up pressure in the state this fall," UBS research analysts said in an Aug. 10 note to investors.

Critical decisions ahead for Quad Cities

Dominguez said Exelon faces several key decision points in the coming months with respect to Quad Cities. And while there's no firm cutoff date for getting legislative help, the longer it takes will make keeping the plant in business more difficult and expensive. 

First, the company must notify PJM 18 months in advance whether its plants will be available for the annual capacity auction. That means by September for Quad Cities to participate in the spring 2017 auction (for 2020-21). 

It's possible Exelon could announce a Quad Cities closure in September and still have time to reverse the decision if the Legislature acts on the low-carbon standard proposal by the end of the year or even early 2016. 

Exelon also faces operational decisions at Quad Cities. One unit at the plant requires refueling in March, and the company hasn't yet decided if it will order a fuel core assembly that enables the reactor to operate for two years, as usual, or if it will order a single year's worth of fuel. At the Clinton plant, Exelon has moved to annual refueling outages, which, while less efficient and more costly, enable the company to operate the plant from year to year. 

The company must notify Westinghouse of its decision whether to fuel one of the reactors for one or two years by the end of September. But even that could be changed if the Legislature acts. 

"Action by the end of the year would likely put us in a posture where we could reverse that decision," Dominguez said. 

Exelon's Quad Cities Shutdown Moving Line In the Sand.

The new monies shouldn't go to CEO bonuses or to artificially boost the price of their faltering stock price. You should sign a contract with them with new grid monies, forcing them to "make new" the Quad Cities two plant facility. Completely overhaul the facility! And I am telling you, it is going to be costly...

This has the ability to collapse the safety culture of a plant, the good and highly experienced guys heading for the doors. These guys have been putting off doing the bigger maintenance jobs, they will never catch up with these poorly cared for obsolesced plants.

These creaky "junk plants" can make a lot of money for Exelon if they aren't forced to bring these plants up to current standards.

I still say Exelon is blackmailing Illinois with these junk plants. We will hollow out many thousand of state jobs if you don't come up with a new grid formula. I would never trust the word of a blackmailer.

Quad Cities Generating Station

 

Exelon warns Cordova nuclear power plant could close in 2017

Posted: Monday, August 17, 2015 5:38 pm | Updated: 5:38 pm, Mon Aug 17, 2015.

qconli

MOLINE -- Exelon could close its Quad Cities Generating Station near Cordova in 2017 if Illinois lawmakers do not approve a new energy bill this fall, according to William Stoermer of the company.

Mr. Stoermer also said Exelon must be able to successfully sell its power at upcoming energy auctions, the first scheduled for Friday.

The auctions hosted by PJM -- the Northern Illinois Regional Transmission Operator that supplies power to parts of 13 states -- are designed to ensure enough energy is available to meet customer demand, Mr. Stoermer said. PJM is planning three auctions within four weeks of each other.

Mr. Stoermer said Friday's auction is for power distribution in 2018-2019.

"While we certainly anticipate we would clear that auction, there is a possibility that we will not," Mr. Stoermer said. "If we do not clear that auction, that means our power can't be sold into PJM during that time frame.

"So it's essential that we clear the auction," he said. "If we don't clear any of those auctions, then the legislation in Springfield becomes even more important to us."…

Wolf Creek: Is This What Got Both NRC Inspectors Booted Off The Property?

Update Aug 26

Now the NRC pops out saying they could not substantiate intimidation. It seems like the intimidating chilling atmosphere come from a Quality Assurance "non employee" and this OI guy comes as a Quality Assurance "employee"?    

August 21 , 2015

Adam C. Heflin, President and

Chief Executive Officer

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation

P.O. Box 411

Burlington, KS 66839

SUBJECT: CLOSURE OF INVESTIGATION (01 4-2014-019)

Dear Mr. Heflin:

This refers to an investigation conducted by the NRC's Office of Investigations regarding activities at Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The Office of Investigations initiated the investigation to determine whether a quality assurance specialist at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Burlington, Kansas, was the subject of discrimination for raising safety concerns regarding a design change modification package. 

Based on the evidence developed during the investigation, the allegation that a quality assurance specialist employed by the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station was the subject of discrimination for raising safety concerns regarding a design change modification package was not substantiated. The NRC plans no further action related to the discrimination aspect of this allegation and considers this investigation closed.

You should note that final NRC documents may be made available to the public under the Freedom of Information Act subject to redaction of information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. Requests under the Freedom of Information Act should be made in accordance with 10 CFR 9.23, Requests for Records. Information is accessible from the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/foia-request.html#how.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice,'' a copy of this letter will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Docket: 50-482

License: NPF-42

Sincerely,

7Jt<L ( (_ l4y

Michael C. Hay, Team Leader

Allegations Coordination and Enforcement

Both coming from new reactors? They seem light? What do you see?

My bad, the resident has no history of new reactors?  

Resident,

Thomas joined the NRC’s Region IV office in Arlington, Texas, in 2013 as a project engineer in the Resident Inspector Development Program. Previously he worked for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration overseeing facility and infrastructure upgrade projects. Thomas holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Southern University at Baton Rouge and a master’s degree in business administration from Our Lady of the Lake University in San Antonio. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Texas.

The senior resident,

Dodson joined the NRC in 2007 as an engineer in the Office of New Reactors in Rockville, Md., as part of the Nuclear Safety Professional Development Program. Most recently he was a Resident Inspector at the Ginna nuclear power plant outside Rochester, N.Y. Prior to that, he was the temporary Resident and Senior Resident Inspector at Fitzpatrick and Hope Creek stations. He holds a bachelor’s of science degree in mechanical and aerospace engineering and a bachelor’s degree in religious studies from the University of Missouri.

More likely both NRC inspector got fired from Wolf Creek because they ignored the concerns of the discriminated employee?   

Maybe both NRC inspectors resigned from Wolf Creek over NRC upper management not backing the on-scene inspectors. They asked for a immediate reassignment on protest...

What does this mean...what does it buy them this is so important? 

"gain margin for the Mitigating Systems Performance Index (MSPI)" 

Have the inspectors been nit-picking the plant?

See how pathetically weak the NRC. It took a complaint by a contractor to OSHA to get the NRC off their ass over intimidation issues with the extremely important Quality Assurance Group?  

ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LETTER FORWOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION (REPORT 0500482/2014001)

The NRC also issued a Chilling Effect Letter (CEL) (ML13233A208) to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation on August 19, 2013. The CEL was issued because the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had issued a finding of discrimination for raising safety concerns against a former employee of an engineering contractor employed by Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, and due to the NRC identifying that a chilled work environment existed within your facility’s Quality Assurance Group.

The idea the agency can't immediately eradicate a sense of intimidation within a week of discovery again shows how pathetically weak the agency. This has been going on since Aug 2013 and they have made such pathetic progress.

The forces the "be" has turned the agency into a cheap absolution process.     

April 7, 2015 

SUBJECT: WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION – NRC CHILLING EFFECT LETTER FOLLOW-UP INSPECTION REPORT 05000482/2015008

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to identification and resolution of problems, safety and compliance with the Commission’s rules and regulations and with the conditions of your operating license. The inspection focused on the station’s progress in addressing safety culture issues related to the NRC Chilling Effect Letter dated August 19, 2013, (ML13233A208). The team reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.

*However, the team identified that some general work environment issues associated with supervisory styles and trust in management remain within the QA, Security and HP departments.

*Although the focus group interviews indicated that some QA personnel stated that they were not sure if they were ready to fully trust licensee management, the licensee has made reasonable progress in addressing the SCWE in the QA department.

*However, prior to receiving the CEL, the QA organization had had an internal policy that QA personnel could only initiate CRs following approval by their supervisor or manager. 

Between problems in Pilgrim's LOOP last year with their Diesel Generator FLEX-SBO air compressor and this...I think all FLEX systems are junk. The NRC is just not enforcing good standards with the flex gear. It is for show systems...

The SBO and Flex crap...

August 6, 2015

SUBJECT: WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION – NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000482/2015002

Description. In mid-2012, the licensee decided to add station blackout (SBO) diesel generators in order to gain margin for the Mitigating Systems Performance Index (MSPI). The SBO diesel generators were originally expected to be completed during the spring 2013 Refueling Outage, however construction fell behind schedule. In April 2013, the licensee opted to finish the SBO diesel generator installation online. The licensee acknowledged that it could not energize a safety related bus from the SBO diesel generators at power without rendering the bus inoperable, and that testing to fully demonstrate capability could not be performed until the spring 2014 mid-cycle outage. In August 2013, the licensee announced their plans to revise the station Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) and, by extension, the MSPI to include credit for the SBO diesel generator system effective October 1, 2013. The inspectors expressed concerns that it was not appropriate to take the credit for the equipment without performing all testing necessary to verify the equipment’s capability to perform its required function. The licensee documented the testing of each of the components under Work Order 12- 354257-205. The disposition credited the load bank testing of the engines, the successful racking of the breakers, and the continuity checks of the associated cables as sufficient to have high confidence that the equipment would perform its required function. The licensee declared the system operational on September 26, 2013 and the revised MSPI PRA inputs were submitted to the NRC to be effective for the 4th quarter performance indicator data.

On April 25, 2014, the licensee attempted testing on the NB01 train A Class 1E 4kV bus to show the safety related bus could be powered by the SBO diesel generators. While attempting to load the bus from the SBO diesel generators, feeder breaker PB0508 opened unexpectedly, which de-energized NB01. Troubleshooting identified the cause of PB0508 opening was due to incorrect wiring of a current transformer inside the NB0114 breaker cubicle. An extent of condition also identified the same wiring performed incorrectly inside NB0214 breaker cubicle on the NB02 train B Class 1E 4kV bus. Neither safety related 4kV bus could have been powered from the SBO diesel generators for the time the system was credited as being functional, from September 26, 2013, to April 25, 2014. The wiring was corrected and the test was performed satisfactorily prior to restarting the reactor.

The licensee wrote Condition Report 83370 and performed an apparent cause evaluation. The licensee found that Design Change Package 14117 removed the existing current transformers (CT) and wiring in the NB0114 and NB0214 cabinets, because the existing CTs did not have the correct turns ratio required by the new design. When installing new CTs, the licensee found that they would not fit as designed. The licensee stopped work on the new CT installation but continued work on the wiring installation. The licensee decided to re-orient the CTs so that they would fit into the NB0114 and NB0214 cabinets. Wiring drawing WIP E-009-00132-W08-A-1 was revised, but the terminations that were already completed on terminal block “N” inside the cabinet were not changed to match the drawing.

When the modification completed the current transformers were installed per revision 2

of the drawing, and the wiring was installed per revision 1. This went unnoticed because the work was performed under separate sub-work orders. After the work was completed, the instrument meter relay team tested the cabling from terminal block N to the SBO diesel generators, but they did not test the cabling from terminal block N to the current transformers because it was not specified in the work order. If it had been, this wiring error could have been detected even without a full functional system test.

Wolf Creek: NRC Cleaning House?

You don't see this very often with getting both a new senior resident inspector and a new resident inspector at the same. What is going on at Wolf Creek?  Usually they alternate replacing the residents. I don't think it is safe, both these guys being replaced at the same time. 

Aug 17, 2015

NRC Names New Resident Inspector at Wolf Creek Nuclear Power Plant 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has selected Fabian Thomas as the new Resident Inspector at Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station located in Burlington, Kan.

“Fabian Thomas’ experience, training, and commitment to safety will help the NRC in its mission to protect people and the environment by ensuring the safe operation of Wolf Creek,” said NRC Region IV Administrator Marc Dapas. 

Thomas joined the NRC’s Region IV office in Arlington, Texas, in 2013 as a project engineer in the Resident Inspector Development Program. Previously he worked for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration overseeing facility and infrastructure upgrade projects. Thomas holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Southern University at Baton Rouge and a master’s degree in business administration from Our Lady of the Lake University in San Antonio. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Texas. 

Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two Resident Inspectors. Thomas joins Senior Resident Inspector Doug Dodson at the site. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring significant work projects, and interacting with plant workers and the public.


The Wlf Creek Resident Inspectors can be reached at 620-364-8653.


Aug 17, 2015

NRC Names New Senior Resident Inspector at Wolf Creek Nuclear Power Plant

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has selected Douglas Dodson as the new Senior Resident Inspector at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station located in Burlington, Kan.

“Douglas Dodson's technical experience and regulatory perspective will assist the NRC in carrying out its mission of protecting people and the environment and ensuring the safe operation of Wolf Creek,” said NRC Region IV Administrator Marc Dapas. 

Dodson joined the NRC in 2007 as an engineer in the Office of New Reactors in Rockville, Md., as part of the Nuclear Safety Professional Development Program. Most recently he was a Resident Inspector at the Ginna nuclear power plant outside Rochester, N.Y. Prior to that, he was the temporary Resident and Senior Resident Inspector at Fitzpatrick and Hope Creek stations. He holds a bachelor’s of science degree in mechanical and aerospace engineering and a bachelor’s degree in religious studies from the University of Missouri. 

Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two Resident Inspectors. Dodson joins Resident Inspector Fabian Thomas at the site. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring significant work projects, and interacting with plant workers and the public. 

The Wolf Creek resident inspectors can be reached at 620-364-8653.

 

Grand Gulf Got Reactor Vessel Control Problem also

Kind of sneaky way they did this...

 

GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION –NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000416/2015002

b. Findings

Introduction. The inspectors identified a Severity Level IV, non-cited violation with three examples for the licensee’s failure to update the UFSAR in accordance with 10 CFR

50.71(e). Specifically, the licensee failed to update the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station UFSAR, Section 15.2.2.2.2.1, “Generator Load Rejection with Bypass,” to appropriately reflect the anticipated plant response to a full load reject after the completion of the extended power uprate (EPU). Additionally, the inspectors determined that the licensee did not adequately describe the EPU changes in the UFSAR Chapters 11 (Radioactive Waste Management) and 12 (Radiation Protection) and submit an update to the NRC.

Description. Entergy Procedure EN-LI-113-01, “Updated Final Safety Analysis Change Process,” Revision 1, describes that the Entergy fleet process for maintaining the UFSAR is consistent with NEI 98-03, “Guidelines for Updating Final Safety Analysis Reports.” Paragraph 5.3.1 [2] of EN-LI-113-01 requires that “the UFSAR shall be updated to include all Safety Analyses and evaluations performed by or on behalf of Entergy to support approved license amendments, or to support conclusions that changes did not require a license amendment per 10 CFR 50.59…” This expectation is consistent with NEI 98-03 Revision 1, which was endorsed by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.181, “Content of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report in Accordance with Title 10 CFR 50.71(e).” Additionally, NEI 98-03 requires that the UFSAR be updated annually or within six months after each refueling outage, which was not completed in the three examples described above.

 

 

 

 

 

Tip: Might Be Implicated in River Bends Breaker Problems?



                                UNITED STATES
                        NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                    OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
                          WASHINGTON, D.C.  20555

                              December 15, 1989


Information Notice No. 89-45, SUPPLEMENT 2:  METALCLAD, LOW-VOLTAGE
                                                POWER CIRCUIT BREAKERS
                                                REFURBISHED WITH
                                                SUBSTANDARD PARTS

Addressees:

All holders of operating licenses or construction permits for nuclear power
reactors.

Purpose:

This information notice supplement is being provided to alert addressees to
the problem of potentially defective General Electric (GE) and Westinghouse
(W) metalclad, low-voltage power circuit breakers and associated equipment
supplied to nuclear power plants by the Satin American Corporation (SA) and
its affiliate, Circuit Breaker Systems, Incorporated, both of Shelton,
Connecticut, or by any of SA's representatives.  Of particular concern are
GE EC-type, electromechanical, overcurrent trip devices, in safety-related
applications, or available for use in such applications, supplied by these
organizations.

It is expected that recipients will review this information for
applicability to their facilities and consider actions, if appropriate, to
avoid similar problems.  However, suggestions contained in this notice do
not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written
response is required.

Description of Circumstances:

NRC Information Notice (IN) No. 89-45 discussed a General Electric (GE) type
AKF-2-25 metalclad, low-voltage power circuit breaker (field discharge
configuration) supplied to the Quad Cities nuclear power plant by SA that
was found to have been built or refurbished with nonstandard and substandard
parts.

Supplement 1 to IN 89-45 discussed the NRC's findings on GE EC-type trip
devices from follow-up inspections at utilities that had procured circuit
breakers and related electrical equipment such as trip devices from SA.  As
discussed in detail in the supplement, the NRC found EC-type trip devices
supplied by SA that were refurbished with nonstandard and possibly
substandard parts, or old, used parts, in nonstandard combinations using
questionable fabrication methods.  Some of these devices had failed in
service or testing. 

Additional tests were conducted by utility personnel and were observed by
representatives of the original manufacturer and the NRC.  In these tests,
the devices

8912110177
.
                                                    IN 89-45, Supplement 2
                                                    December 15, 1989
                                                    Page 2 of 3


exhibited inconsistent performance including some test failures. 
Subsequently, the NRC obtained more of these SA-supplied trip units and had
them tested and examined at the GE Apparatus Service Facility in Atlanta,
Georgia.  This facility is currently the sole original equipment
manufacturer of EC-type trip devices.  The results of this testing were also
unsatisfactory, with virtually all the devices tested exhibiting
out-of-specification operation of one or more of their functions in some
portion of their design operating ranges.  The devices were not adjustable
such that they would operate within tolerance at all points within their
nameplate-identified characteristic curves, and some of them failed to
perform one or more of their trip functions entirely.  Post-testing
examination of these devices confirmed that they were rebuilt with used
parts, in incorrect combinations.  Some of the parts were so degraded with
age that they were no longer suitable for use, and some of the
unsatisfactory test results were directly attributable to the discrepancies
in the conditions found.  Some of the fabrication methods used could
contribute to erratic operation and failure.  Such latent defects would not
be readily detectable during routine inspection and testing and could render
the affected circuit breakers unreliable during normal operation due to
spurious tripping and lack of overcurrent protection.

The SA facility in Shelton, Connecticut, suffered major damage in a fire in
July 1989.  The resultant destruction of records may make it difficult or
impossible for SA's customers to audit the company and obtain the
information necessary to assure that previously purchased equipment was in
full compliance with the applicable specifications and purchase order
requirements.

In order to assess the scope of the problem with regard to GE EC-type trip
devices, all nuclear utilities were contacted by the Nuclear Management and
Resources Council (NUMARC) at the request of the NRC to determine which
utilities had purchased low-voltage electrical switchgear or related
equipment from SA that was used or available for use in safety-related
applications.  Information thus obtained indicated that about 40 utilities
had purchased equipment of the types in question in the last 5 or 6 years,
much of which was purchased as commercial grade equipment and was used in or
available for use in nonsafety-related applications only.  Of the NUMARC
respondents, several utilities initially reported that they had GE AK-type
circuit breakers containing EC-type over-current trip devices supplied by SA
which were possibly used in safety-related applications.  These utilities
subsequently contacted the NRC. 

All licensees thus far identified that have GE EC-type trip devices
installed in safety-related circuit breakers have committed to acceptable
courses of action to replace the suspect trip devices or to consult with GE
in reviewing and determining the suitability of the trip devices for
continued use.

As a result of the NRC's continuing inspections of the types of equipment in
question at licensed facilities, the NRC has identified additional
SA-supplied equipment that may be defective.  NRC inspections of SA-supplied
Westinghouse low-voltage switchgear at several plants, including type DB-25
and DS-416 circuit breakers at the Cooper Nuclear Station and the Zion
Nuclear Power Station respectively, have identified apparent irregularities
when compared to the original equipment.  Specifically, apparent differences
in pole shaft and spring-pin configuration, wiring type, frame finish, and
nameplates were observed..

                                                    IN 89-45, Supplement 2
                                                    December 15, 1989
                                                    Page 3 of 3


It is possible, therefore, that this and other equipment supplied by SA may
not be suitable for service without additional operability reviews in
consultation with the original equipment manufacturer.

The NRC is interested in obtaining information on circuit breakers and
related pieces of equipment that have been found with deficiencies such as
those described in IN 89-45, Supplement 1 thereto, and this supplement. 
Documentation, in as much detail as practicable, of any such deficiencies
noted, especially in recent procurements and in cases of possible improper
servicing or refurbishment, is important.  Licensees may communicate
information of this type by telephone to the technical contacts listed
belw.

This information notice requires no specific action or written response.  If
you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact
one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate NRR project
manager.




                              Charles E. Rossi, Director
                              Division of Operational Events Assessment
                              Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation


Technical Contacts:  S. D. Alexander, NRR
                    (301) 492-0995

                    U. Potapovs, NRR
                    (301) 492-0984

Salem Nuke Plant Is Heading For A Big Event Because Of Maintenance Budget Cutbacks?

Updated Aug 8:

LOWER ALLOWAYS CREEK TWP. — The Salem 2 nuclear reactor has returned to service after a brief shutdown, a company official said. 

According to Joe Delmar, spokesman for the plant's operator, PSEG Nuclear, the unit began sending electricity back out over the regional power grid at 7:39 a.m. Sunday.
Salem 2 automatically shut down at 3:39 p.m. Wednesday because of an electrical circuit failure on one of the four reactor coolant pumps. 

When any of those four pumps — which circulate cooling water around the reactor vessel — fails, it automatically causes the reactor to trip off-line. 

Workers traced that pump circuit failure to an electrical issue with a drain pump which removes condensed water off of the turbine on the non-nuclear side of the plant.
The drain pump tripped and a relay switch did not function properly causing the electrical circuit failure on the one reactor coolant pump...

Updated on Aug 6:

Is it a electrical problem, detector or a frozen reactor coolant pump or motor? 

***Salem reactor shut down by electrical problem

Jeff Montgomery, The News Journal 8:26 a.m. EDT August 6, 2015 

An unexplained circuit breaker closing triggered an automatic shutdown of the Salem Unit 2 reactor (left dome-shaped structure of two at right) Wednesday afternoon. The incident is under investigation, with not restart time reported The plant was reported as holding in a temperature and pressure mode below “critical” nuclear reaction operations. 

An electrical malfunction triggered an automatic shutdown of the Salem Unit 2 reactor Wednesday afternoon, with the cause still under investigation. 

PSEG Nuclear spokesman Joe Delmar said the system had been online for 387 consecutive days before the shutdown at 3:39 p.m. Wednesday. 

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission report said a circuit breaker on a part of the system that supplies one of the reactor’s coolant pumps shut off after a surge indication. All safety systems operated as expected, with Salem’s reactor remaining in a stable mode.

 *** NRC daily report: AUTOMATIC REACTOR TRIP ON LOW REACTOR COOLANT FLOW 

"This 4-hour and 8-hour notification is being made to report that Salem Unit 2 had an unplanned automatic reactor trip. The trip occurred because the 2H 4kV infeed breaker tripped on over current protection which deenergized the 2H 4kV group bus resulting in a reactor trip on reactor coolant flow due to the loss of the 21 reactor coolant pump [RCP]. The 21 RCP remains unavailable. The cause of the over current protection trip on the 2H 4kV infeed breaker is unknown at this time.

Posted originally on 7/31/2015

How come the NRC never discloses why the licencees reduced the maintenance?

This facility has two plants three plants(Hope Creek and 2 Salem plants)...these guys could have upwards of 10 30 million components and parts. A small change in maintenance philosophy can and does lead to a runaway component breakdown uncontrollable by the licencees. It demoralizes the staff.

Why didn't the NRC pickup this change in maintenance frequency and write up a NRC report on it before the breaker failure? Why isn't the NRC anticipatory instead of reactionary?

Just saying, on my River Bend special inspection, there has been a widespread breakdown in GE Magne-Blast breaker reliability over maintenance issues. I am sure is is not limited to breaker (Salem), but a global maintenance financial issue across the whole plant and across whole fleets of plants.

Just as the NRC expressed it in the finding concerning broad "Equipment Reliability" and entry into LCOs...an increasing trend in equipment failures outside the breaker failure. How bad is this going to get?

Broken bolts found in all of PSEG Nuclear's Salem 2 reactor cooling pumps LOWER ALLOWAYS CREEK TWP.  

PSEG Nuclear has now found broken-off bolt pieces inside all four of the huge pumps which help cool the nuclear reactor at its Salem 2 plant, officials said.

Errant bolt heads have been found in the bottom of the reactor coolant pumps and even at the bottom of the reactor core itself, settled under the nuclear fuel rods.

And some of the bolt heads that have broken off have not yet been accounted for, federal regulators confirmed Tuesday.

The bolts secure parts known as turning vanes on the inside of the pump. The vanes direct water out of the pump into the reactor where it circulates to cool the core.

We seen this a last year with their poor maintenance on the Reactor coolant pumps with nut/bolts breaking off and entering the coolant. It cost them a tremendous amount of money with the plant staying off the line. I am just saying with penny pinching, it takes a delay time for the equipment failure to show up. Then when the plant is reflooded with monies for the proper maintenance, it takes a long time to fix the degraded parts and do all the proper maintenance with equipment failures still occurring. 

This kind of licencee behavior puts the community at risk...

July 28, 2015

SUBJECT: SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 –INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000272/2015002 AND 05000311/2015002

*Equipment Reliability

The inspectors identified that an increasing trend of equipment failures was having an apparent impact on the ability of PSEG to meet station CAP goals. Specifically, the inspectors noted that there has been a steady increase in the number of unplanned LCOs (that exceeded station goals) and CAP evaluation products, as well as CAP evaluation products and actions that fell below station goals for quality and timeliness.

PSEG has identified an adverse trend in equipment deficiencies, as evident by the following notifications captured in CAP, dating back to September of 2014.

*Annual Sample: 12 Safety Injection Pump Breaker Failure to Close

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors performed an in-depth review of PSEG’s evaluations and corrective actions associated with notification 20660365 and ACE 70168725 for an August 27, 2014 failure of the 12 SI pump breaker to close on demand while attempting to refill the 14 SI accumulator. The limiting conditions for operations could not be met as provided in the associated action requirements, because the system had no operable SI pumps available due to the 11 SI pump being out of service for routine maintenance. PSEG realigned, tested, and returned the 11 SI pump into service, then transitioned into TS

LCO 3.5.2.b for meeting the action statement of having one SI pump available. PSEG performed an ACE and determined the most probable cause of the failure was due to the lack of lubrication inside the breaker close latch roller. The apparent cause was determined to be not proactively addressing timely overhauls of the breakers.

The inspectors assessed PSEG’s problem identification threshold, problem analysis, extent of condition reviews, compensatory actions, and the prioritization and timeliness of PSEG's corrective actions to determine whether PSEG was appropriately identifying,

characterizing, and correcting problems associated with this issue and whether the planned or completed corrective actions were appropriate. The inspectors compared the actions taken to the requirements of PSEG's corrective action program and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, “Corrective Action” and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, “Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings.”

Findings and Observations

The inspectors concluded that PSEG took appropriate actions to identify the cause of the August 27, 2014, 12 SI pump breaker failure. The inspectors determined that the breaker failure was due to inadequate overhaul intervals of the 4kV breakers.

During review of the 12 SI pump breaker trip event, the inspectors noted that the breaker’s recent operating history had, in effect, changed its classification under PSEG’s ER-AA-1001, “Component Classification,” Revision 2. Specifically, the breaker had originally been classified as a critical, low duty cycle, mild environment component. However, inspectors noted that a high duty cycle was defined, in part, as one where the component is cycled frequently (i.e. greater than two times per week). From late 2014, the 14 accumulator had been experiencing leakage. From that time through the first half of 2015, the frequency at which the 12 SI pump was started to refill the accumulator steadily rose. In the few months leading up the failure, the number of accumulator fills with the 12 SI pump increased until its usage was three times a week for the two weeks prior to the failure. Essentially, PSEG had changed the breaker’s classification by changing its operational frequency to compensate for accumulator leakage. A review

of PSEG’s maintenance template for the same breaker as a high duty cycle component was the same as that for a low cycle breaker. Therefore, the inspectors concluded that this issue was minor. However, they also concluded that PSEG missed this as an opportunity to identify a change in the circumstances surrounding the breaker’s operation. PSEG captured this in their CAP as notification 20664925.

Introduction. A self-revealing Green NCV of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, “Instruction, Procedures, and Drawings,” was identified because PSEG did not establish an appropriate interval to overhaul 4kV GE Magne-Blast breakers. As a result, the safety-related breakers for the 12 safety injection pump and 11 CCW pump were operated beyond the industry recommended overhaul interval and subsequently failed.

Analysis. The performance deficiency associated with this finding was that PSEG did not establish an appropriate interval to overhaul the 4kV GE Magne-Blast breakers. This finding is more than minor because it is associated with the equipment performance attribute of the Mitigating Systems cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Specifically, PSEG did not consider industry recommendations nor develop a basis when establishing 4kV GE Magne-Blast breaker overhaul intervals, which resulted in failure of the 12 SI pump and 11 CCW pump breakers. In accordance with IMC 0609.04, “Initial Characterization of Findings,” and Exhibit 2 of IMC 0609, Appendix A,

Entergy Missed Earnings Estimates By A Wide Margin ( down 4%)

Entergy's CEO: 

"...Average Northeast power prices for the second quarter were more than 40% below last year’s levels. Moreover, forward power prices continue their decline following an average of more than 6% for our plants in the Northeast since the end of March this year. These low prices are coupled with the market structure that does not reflect the value of nuclear power. Congress continues to indicate its concern about the specific market structure challenges. On July 8, the Chairs of the Senate and House committees and subcommittees responsible for energy and power Senator Murkowski and congressmen Upton and Whitefield communicated this concern in a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman, Norman Bay. In the letter, the committee chairs raised concerns about organized wholesale electricity markets, including the impacts certain market rules were having on reliable base load plants, including nuclear plants and ultimately on consumers. Entergy shares these concerns and we are encouraged by FERC’s willingness to consider these issues. We are also hopeful that FERC will take subsequent action as soon as it can..."

So not having Vermont Yankee running has cost Entergy a lot of money this quarter? 

"The decline was due to lower wholesale power prices and less of nuclear generation. Closure of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station last year also played a role in pulling down this segment’s results."

Stock price down by over 4% at 2:30 pm today? 

Entergy Q2 Earnings & Revenues Miss Estimates, Down Y/Y- Analyst Blog 

By Zacks Equity Research 2 hours ago 

Entergy Corporation ETR reported second-quarter 2015 operational earnings of 83 cents per share, widely missing the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.13 by 26.5%.

The reported number also declined 25.2% from $1.11 per share in the year-ago period. The downside was due to bleak performance at all its three segments. 

Revenues

Entergy’s second-quarter operating revenues of $2,713.2 million also fell short of the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 7.9%. Revenues declined 9.5% from $2,996.7 million in the prior year.

Operational Results

Entergy’s total operating expenses declined 8.1% year over year to $2,335.8 million primarily due to lower input costs.

Operating income for the second quarter also dropped nearly 17% to $377.4 million.

Entergy recorded $159.8 million of interest expenses in the quarter compared with $155.8 million incurred last year.

Segment Results

Utility: The segment’s quarterly operating revenues were $2,273.9 million compared with $2,409.4 million in second-quarter 2014. The downside was due to a 0.2% and 1.5% respective decline in commercial and industrial sales.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities (EWC): Entergy Wholesale Commodities' operating revenues were $439.3 million for the second quarter. In the corresponding quarter last year, revenues were $587.3 million. The decline was due to lower wholesale power prices and less of nuclear generation. Closure of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station last year also played a role in pulling down this segment’s results.

Financial Condition

As of Jun 30, 2015, cash and cash equivalents were $910.4 million compared with $1,422 million as of Dec 31, 2014.

Long-term debt as of Jun 30, 2015 was $12.1 billion compared with $12.5 billion as of Dec 31, 2014.

In the second quarter of 2015, cash from operating activates was $727.4 million, down from $761.4 million in the year-ago quarter.

Guidance

Entergy affirmed its 2015 earnings guidance in the range of $5.10–$5.90 per share on an operational basis.

Kind Of Boring Nuclear Industry 2015 Summer So Far?

What the hell?

Judiciary Panel Indicts Former Tepco Executives

Judiciary panel indicts former Tepco executives Kana Inagaki in Tokyo

©AP

A Japanese civilian judiciary panel has forced prosecutors to indict three former executives of Tokyo Electric Power, in what would be the first criminal charges brought against officials in relation to the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

In a statement, an independent review panel of 11 lay people accused the former Tepco officials for failing to take any “effective measures” and “turning a blind eye” to the possibility of an earthquake triggering a serious nuclear accident.

Citizens’ groups welcomed the decision after prosecutors twice decided not to indict the three former Tepco officials. The review panel overruled the prosecutor’s decision on Friday.

“We feel like we’ve finally gotten this far,” said Ruiko Muto, an anti-nuclear activist who represents a group of about 15,000 residents and citizens who had filed criminal complaints with prosecutors against senior Tepco officials.

“We hope that the criminal trial will uncover the truth behind the accident and that justice will be delivered,” Ms Muto said.

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in northeastern Japan suffered a number of explosions and partial meltdown following an earthquake and tsunami hit the country in March 2011. It was the worst nuclear incident since Chernobyl in 1986. Tens of thousands of people have yet to be allowed home.

The three senior managers who will stand trial are former chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, 75, and former executives Sakae Muto, 65, and Ichiro Takekuro, 69.

In the statement, the panel accused the officials of prioritising on economic arguments over safety, saying they “had a responsibility to prepare for the remote possibility of an accident occurring from a tsunami.”

“If proper action had been taken, it would have been sufficiently possible to prevent this critical and brutal accident from occurring,” it concluded.

Tepco declined to comment on the judiciary panel’s decision. But the utility said it would continue to make efforts to strengthen the safety of its nuclear plants.

While it is rare for a civilian judiciary panel to overrule decisions made by prosecutors, legal experts say it is unlikely a trial would lead to a guilty verdict.

In 2010, a review panel of 11 lay people selected by lottery similarly overruled the prosecutor’s decision not to indict Japanese politician Ichiro Ozawa in a political funding scandal. But two year later, a Tokyo court found Mr Ozawa not guilty, clearing him of charges due to lack of sufficient evidence.