Share the Cost of Bridge Work Equally

Sentinel Editorial

Share the cost of bridge work equally

Posted: Friday, January 17, 2014 12:00 pm

Share the cost of bridge work equally

Let’s make a deal.

The Vermont Agency of Transportation recently made the N.H. Department of Transportation an offer. Vermont’s agency would pay the entire cost of rehabilitating the Vilas Bridge, which connects Route 12 in Walpole to downtown Bellows Falls. But then, New Hampshire would pay Vermont’s portion of all future repairs to bridges spanning the Connecticut River until the $4-6 million is repaid.

The motivation for the offer isn’t hard to discern. Since the bridge was closed by the N.H. DOT in 2009, merchants in Bellows Falls have complained their business is off by about 30 percent. That certainly provides some incentive on the river’s west bank to reopen the 84-year-old bridge.

But there are a lot of bridges – and other projects – on New Hampshire’s transportation to-do list, and there has apparently been little furor about lost revenue in Walpole. New Hampshire’s explanation for pushing off work to reopen the Vilas Bridge has centered around the fact that there are two other bridges spanning the river nearby, including the New Arch Bridge, which also leads into Bellows Falls.

At first blush, Vermont’s offer seems like a windfall. The bridge work gets done sooner. New Hampshire doesn’t have to pay immediately. Everyone is happy. However, a spokesman says the N.H. DOT is unlikely to accept, and the reasoning is sound. If the only goal is to reopen this particular bridge, the deal is good.

But that’s not the financial reality. There are 30 bridges spanning the Connecticut River, and New Hampshire is on the hook for nearly all the cost of maintaining or replacing each of them. In the case of the Vilas Bridge, for example, the Granite State is responsible for 93 percent of the cost of any work, while Vermont must pay for 7 percent.

That’s because way back in 1764 King George II of England set the boundary between the states ((SINCE THEY WERE COLONIES THEN, SUGGEST REPLACING "THE STATES" EITHER WITH "NEW HAMPSHIRE AND VERMONT" OR "THE TWO-THEN COLONIES")) as the western shore of the river. Now, George was a lame-duck monarch at that point as far as the American colonies went, but still, the U.S. Supreme Court re-affirmed this boundary in 1934.

Somehow, along the way, this fact led to New Hampshire being stuck with almost the entire tab for any bridge work, even though, as far as we know, none of the 30 Connecticut River Bridges is one-way. No, each of them carries cars both from the Granite State to Vermont, and from the Green Mountain State to New Hampshire. Thus, the benefits of the bridges would appear to be equal for each state.

There may be some instances where a town or city on one side has clearly benefitted from the existence of a particular bridge. In the case of Vilas, that community would appear to be Bellows Falls.

Thus, we find ourselves more intrigued by another deal, this one proposed from this side of the river. Five Cheshire County lawmakers have put forth a bill this session calling((??)) limiting the amount New Hampshire would pay for the overhaul of the bridge to 50 percent, assuming someone else would pay the remaining 50 percent.

Of course, the N.H. Legislature can’t force Vermont to pay more for a bridge repair than it would normally under the two states’ existing agreement. But it would seem in the case of a bridge New Hampshire considers a low priority and Vermont is clearly more eager to see reopened, there might just be some incentive there. In fact, we think the two states should revisit the idea of who’s responsible ((. . . SHOULD REVISIT THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY)) for all bridge work along the border ((TO BETTER REFLECT THE MUTUAL BENEFIT THEY ENJOY)).

The history of the Vilas Bridge is an interesting one. Where it now spans, the very first bridge across the river went up in 1785. And in 1930, when the current bridge was opened, it was dedicated as a “Symbol of Friendship” between New Hampshire and Vermont.

Friends don’t let friends pay 93 percent.

Vermont makes New Hampshire offer for bridge repair

Vermont makes New Hampshire offer for bridgerepair

By Meghan Foley Sentinel Staff
SentinelSource.c

WALPOLE — New Hampshire isn’t the only state frustrated by the lack of funding available to repair its roads and bridges.

The Vermont Agency of Transportation, after waiting nearly five years for the N.H. Department of Transportation to act, has made an offer to the New Hampshire agency to pay for the entire rehabilitation — and subsequently the reopening, of the Vilas Bridge.

The double arch, reinforced concrete bridge, which was built in 1930, crosses the Connecticut River to connect Walpole to Bellows Falls. It has been closed since March 2009 when New Hampshire officials order it shut down to pedestrians and vehicles after it failed a safety inspection.

New Hampshire owns 93 percent of the bridge, while Vermont owns the remaining 7 percent.

Sue Minter, deputy secretary for the Vermont Agency of Transportation, said Thursday the offer was made as part of a recent informal conversation between Vermont’s secretary of transportation, Brian Searles, and Christopher Clement, commissioner for the N.H. Department of Transportation.

“We’re trying to solve a mutual problem, which is the bridge,” she said. “This is a concept we felt could be a win-win for both states.”

Since the Vilas Bridge closed, Bellows Falls’ businesses have reported a roughly 30 percent drop in commerce. Vehicles crossing the bridge from Route 12 in Walpole were dropped right into the heart of downtown Bellows Falls.

(Can you really trust them with the 30% and was the decline caused by the relative economic decline)

As part of the Vermont’s offer, New Hampshire must agree to cover Vermont’s portion of the bill on any future projects to repair or replace bridges connecting the two states. Once those payments equal the cost of rehabilitating the Vilas Bridge, New Hampshire will no longer be on the hook, Minter said.

“We’re not talking about changing the ultimate responsibility of each state as legally defined by the property boundary, but about essentially putting out a loan that would be paid back over time through the rehabilitation of other bridges,” she said.

New Hampshire and Vermont share responsibility for 30 bridges up and down the Connecticut River, she said.

The well-being of the Vilas Bridge is of particular interested to Vermont officials because the state has a strong policy of supporting downtowns and trying to restore historic bridges, she said.

(So why don't they support Brattleboro)

Vermont officials have yet to hear directly from their New Hampshire counterparts as to whether that state will accept the offer. But it’s likely the Granite State will decline, according to William H. Boynton, spokesman for the N.H. Department of Transportation.

“Simply getting the funding fronted for the rehabilitation does not work for us,” Boynton said Friday. “New Hampshire’s position is that we have too many unmet transportation needs and do not currently have the funds to address the Vilas Bridge.”

Of the two states, New Hampshire has the greater portion of the costs associated with any bridge project over the Connecticut River because the bulk of the river is in the Granite State.

N.H. Department of Transportation officials estimate the cost of rehabilitating the Vilas Bridge to range from $4.5-$6 million, Boynton said.

The project isn’t included in the draft of the N.H. Department of Transportation’s 10-Year Transportation Improvement Plan for 2015-24 because of “severe funding constraints,” he said.

Those funding constraints have resulted in nearly 39 percent of the roads maintained by the state being in poor condition, and 145 bridges being red-listed.

State officials define red-list bridges as having known deficiencies, requiring weight limit postings or being in poor condition.

The Vilas Bridge was on that list for about two decades before state officials closed it.

The 2013-22 transportation improvement plan includes $60,000 for a preliminary engineering study of the bridge to be done in 2013.

“That has not happened yet due to staff limitation,” Boynton said.

Another factor that has made rehabilitating Vilas Bridge a low priority is that there is another bridge close by that crosses the Connecticut River, state officials have said.

“It difficult from our perspective to actively pursue this project when other communities with deficient bridges do not have the option,” Boynton said.

(Hinsdale, Brattleboro)

Francis “Dutch” Walsh, development director for the town of Rockingham, Vt., which includes the village of Bellows Falls, said having another bridge up the road doesn’t solve the challenge emergency responders face in getting from Walpole to Bellows Falls or vice versa to provide mutual aid.

The other bridge, while newer than Vilas, crosses and active railroad line. When freight trains use the crossing, it can delay the response of emergency vehicles between the communities, he said. Vilas didn’t have that problem, he said.

While he understands New Hampshire’s funding situation, it’s frustrating that the Vilas Bridge continues to remain closed and deteriorating, he said.

“I’m very disappointed.”

Energy: In New England, we pay 40% above U.S. average

It is the world we create when self interest and secret free market force dominate over our collective interest…

And you bet, our NH roads and energy infrastructure problems emerge from the same  current dominate politics, ideology philosophy…

It is the Mexican standoff all across our political system for societal needs. We don’t trust the moral use of power in order to shape our society for the good of us all…we only believe in the use of power when it is secretly used to drive self interest…political, business and corporate interest that dehumanize us all. 

It is not so much the CEOs and Executives that I am irked and disappointing with…it is the vast army of the rank and file employees who let them get away with shaping our world like this. It is the rank and file employees who only gain a very limited freedom though the pennies that get thrown at them…that gives the soulless executives’ the power they hold over the good people of our nation. We give them the power to attach the balls and chains to our lives…to all of us…that hobbles all of our lives so dearly…our kids and grandchildren are going to hate their lives over our indifference just for a few mere pennies.
\
And the rich CEOs and Executives are chained to useless lives more than anyone else!

I am convinced if Moses walked on our planet today carrying a message from god concerning all our current the plagues to the Pharaoh…Mosses and Aaron would be saying right now at this very moment, “let my politicians, regulators, business owners, CEOs and executives go“...   

January 07. 2014 10:03PM

Energy: In New England, we pay 40% above U.S. average

By DAVE SOLOMON
New Hampshire Union Leader
GOFFSTOWN — Economic growth in New England will be constrained by the lack of natural gas pipelines in the region for at least another two years, and perhaps longer, according to a group of energy experts speaking at St. Anselm College on Monday.

"Growth in jobs and income will lag the national average despite many other advantages we do have in the region," said Lisa Shapiro, chief economist at the law firm of Gallagher, Callahan and Gartrell in Concord.
Shapiro was one of several speakers at the workshop "New England's Energy Future and its Effect on the Regional Economy," which was hosted by the New Hampshire Institute for Politics.Natural gas delivered to New England can at times cost seven to 10 times higher than the national average on the continental U.S., she said, given the high demand for transmission and the lack of space on pipelines, particularly in the coldest months.

"We really are at such a comparative disadvantage compared to the rest of the country," she said, when businesses size up the cost of energy in planning an expansion or relocation.

From 2010 to 2012, energy prices in New England declined 6 percent, she said, but the region remains the highest-priced market for energy in the U.S.

"We are now only 40 percent above the national average, but we had been at 50 percent," she said.

In addition to discouraging business expansion or relocation to the region, high energy prices sap resources for consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of the economy, she said.
New Hampshire consumers have already seen increases in electricity costs for 2013 versus 2012, with no relief in sight.

When energy spending goes up, that's less money for everything else, she said, especially with incomes stagnating as they have since 2008. The cost of electricity has been declining across the country as shale gas from Pennsylvania and Ohio flows into the vast transmission network that bypasses New England, with only five pipelines into the region.

"We need more pipeline capacity," said Dan Ford, an investment analyst for Barclas Capital who specializes in energy stocks. "The question is, who is going to pay for it?"

More than 50 percent of the power plants that provide energy in New England are now fueled by natural gas, but the owners of those power plants do not want to commit to long-term contracts for the purchase of natural gas.

Pipeline builders won't build without those contracts, and there's no indication that the stand-off will break anytime soon.

Anne George, vice president for external affairs at the independent system operator, ISO-New England, described steps the ISO is taking to encourage long-term contracts.

Ford said the costs of building new pipeline into New England may need to be "socialized" over the entire energy system.

The six New England governors acknowledged as much on Dec. 6, when they signed the New England Governors Commitment to Regional Cooperation on Energy Infrastructure Issues.

The pact commits policymakers in the six states to pursue solutions to the pipeline problem that could include a massive investment by New England ratepayers in pipeline construction through their electricity bills.
"States are interested in making ISO a collection agent to fund pipeline construction," George said.

Even if the governors are able to reach an agreement on "socializing" the costs of new pipeline, as Ford said, any new pipe in the ground is years away.
A Jan. 3 report in Environment and Energy Publishing summed up the challenge succinctly.

"The plan unveiled in early December commits the governors' combined political will to the task," wrote reporter Rod Kuckro, "but it remains to be seen whether the best of intentions can overcome market barriers, inadequate incentives and old-fashioned not-in-my-backyard sentiments that have bedeviled past efforts to build energy infrastructure in the six-state region."

(Concord Monitor) NH DOT Chief: We Need Help

And I am locally the bad guy trying to bring attention to the dilapidated 1921 Charles Dana and Anna Hunt Marsh bridges....10,000 cars per days...warning everyone about the consequences when they shut down this bridge.

One thing I am certain with is our roads, bridges and highways…it looks likes the politicians are trying to save you money with this strategy. If you elect me I am going to save you a few pennies off your taxes. But they are recklessly doing the exact opposite. Or elect me if you hate government. Neglecting our highway system only means you are damaging it…it is going to be a much more expensive fix in the end. Further, it is a generational cost shifting…our children and grand children are going to pay for our reckless penny pinching.

You get to see the nasty politics in this. The NHDOT commission isn’t a independent operator just telling us what is collectively in our best interest. He is captured by the insecure and nasty local and Concord politics. The governor and the fearful legislators always controls the mouth of the NHDOT commissioner, if he wants a job. He can’t go to the cities and towns of NH trumpeting the damagers we face with under funding our transportation system…notifying the citizens of their needs. Right, NH politics is truly a soviet style gulag where head rolls if you tell the people the truth! NH politics is always about playing the concord insider game, and most of it is done in secret.

 

At the bottom of all this is in all the citizens of NH...the overall insecurity theology or philosophy that has been educated in all of us. Is I always automatically do what I think is in my own self interest. That is how they control us..they give us no choice!

Largely a resourced and politically dysfunctional organization...everyone knows I picked up the magnitude of NHDOT downsizing during my interviews with DOT officials...

∎ Since 1991, the DOT has reduced staff by 22 percent, or 430 positions. In that time, the amount of traffic on the roads has increased 30 percent.

Front page Concord Monitor DOT Chief: We Need Help

DOT commissioner: We need more resources

4268 miles of roads

ANNMARIE TIMMINS

Monitor staff

Tuesday, January 7, 2014
(Published in print: Wednesday, January 8, 2014)

Chris Clement, the commissioner of the state Department of Transportation, is a man who likes numbers. Just not his numbers.

He’s paving 200 fewer miles of roads a year than he’d like to. The number of “red-listed” state bridges is 145 and climbing. He’ll begin 2016 with a $48 million deficit in the highway fund. Thirty-seven percent of the state’s roads are in poor condition.

And while plenty of lawmakers say they want to finish improvements to Interstate 93, they’ve put $0 toward the $250 million bill.

Lawmakers reconvene today and will consider a few bills this session that would send more money Clement’s way, either from casino proceeds or a bump in the gas tax. The same lawmakers vetoed both ideas last year.

Since then, Clement has taken his case to the public, talking with locals in small meetings across the state and handing out 5,000 copies of his PowerPoint presentation along the way.

“I’m revenue agnostic,” Clement said in an interview with Monitor editors yesterday. “I’m not going to say (I want a) gas tax or casino. We are just presenting the needs. We are saying we have the need here and wherever the funding comes from . . . is just fine with us.”

In his Monitor interview yesterday, Clement went through his 53-page presentation, counting the ways he believes the state’s roads and bridges are dangerously deteriorating.

Clement discussed the promise he saw in last year’s gas tax bill from Rep. David Campbell, which would have increased the gas tax by 12 cents over three years, giving the DOT an additional $93 million a year – enough, Clement said, to cover the department’s immediate needs and work on I-93.

This year’s gas tax bill from Sen. Jim Rausch, a Derry Republican, would add 4 or 5 cents to the gas tax, generating $28 million a year for the DOT. If the bill passes, it would be the first increase in the gas tax – and thereby the state’s highway budget – since 1992.

But it would still fall short of what Clement argues his department needs.

“If the Legislature lets me use those funds, do I use all those funds and plug the operational hole in DOT and not fix roads and bridges and not continue (improvements on) I-93? Or do you use it toward I-93?”

Here’s what Clement wants lawmakers and the public to know about the upkeep – or lack thereof – of roads and bridges they use daily:

∎ Since 1991, the DOT has reduced staff by 22 percent, or 430 positions. In that time, the amount of traffic on the roads has increased 30 percent.

∎ The number of miles plowed in an average snowstorm would equal nine trips to Alaska and back.

∎ If the Legislature does not increase the DOT’s budget and Clement is left with a $48 million deficit, he will have to eliminate up to 700 positions or a combination of positions and programs.

∎ The number of “structurally deficient” state bridges will reach 175 by 2016. Clement said he doesn’t have the money to repair bridges and reduce that number.

∎ There is $500 million worth of turnpike projects that won’t be completed without more money. That includes a $195 million plan to widen I-93 in Bow and Concord.

∎ Thirty-seven percent of the state’s roads considered to be in “poor”condition equal the number of miles between Concord and Fargo, N.D. And the DOT is investing its limited dollars in the state’s other roads instead because it costs $50,000 a year to improve a mile of a “good” or “fair” road and $1.1 million a mile to do the same for a poor road.

∎ A federal program that brings the state $140 million to $150 million for road work expires in September. “If Congress doesn’t come together with another . . . program, that’s going to cause us problems,” Clement said.

∎ The $30 surcharge on car registrations the 2010 Legislature repealed raised $45 million for the DOT in one year.

Clement came to the DOT in 2008, initially as deputy commissioner, from private business. In his former life, numbers like these drove budget decisions. The transition to a government job has been a difficult one.

“I come into state government and I’m trying to sell the need for investment, and that’s how I look at all of this stuff, is investment . . . and it’s much more difficult because of politics. And because of the need to educate both the public, the businesses and the policymakers.”

Clement’s persistence in making his case has put him at odds with some lawmakers. That’s a risk he feels he needs to take.

“I’m not going to give up,” he said. “I’m going to keep communicating the need. I’m going to keep going out there and presenting just the facts.”

(Annmarie Timmins can be reached at 369-3323 or atimmins@cmonitor.com or on Twitter @annmarietimmins.)

Editorial: A 21st-Century Way To Pay For Roads

Editorial: A 21st-century way to pay for roads

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

New Hampshire’s highway trust fund is going broke. So are the highway funds of most states, as well as the federal Highway Trust Fund, which pays for about half the road and bridge work done in the United States. The common denominator is the historic, but failing, reliance on gasoline taxes to maintain the nation’s transportation infrastructure.

The gas tax, as we’ve argued often in the past, should be increased, if only to reflect the vastly improved vehicle fuel efficiency. But it’s time to recognize another reality. More vehicles are powered by means other than gasoline: natural gas, electricity, biofuels and the latest entry in the vehicle fuel mix, hydrogen. Fuel efficiency will continue to increase. So will the shortfall between what a fuel tax can raise and the revenue needed to maintain, let alone improve, the roads and bridges used by all.

New Hampshire raised its gasoline tax to 18 cents per gallon in 1991 and hasn’t touched it since. The federal gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon hasn’t been increased since 1993. Every effort to do so succumbs to a massive lobbying effort by those who benefit from keeping the tax low and the mindless anti-tax mentality that’s infected politics. As a consequence, a national infrastructure that was once the envy of the world is crumbling.

New Hampshire has 145 red-listed state bridges and an additional 353 local bridges that are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. The Department of Transportation, which has shed hundreds of employees in recent years, faces a $48 million deficit in fiscal year 2016 and a $105 million deficit the following year. The roads are getting worse, and the damage toll to humans, roads, vehicles and the state economy is mounting.

Several states, most notably Oregon, are experimenting with a different way to pay for roads: a user tax based on the number of miles driven. In its pilot program, one that continues in modest form, vehicle owners pay 1.5 cents per mile driven on that state’s roads. No fuel escapes taxation. Everyone in the program pays to maintain the transportation infrastructure.

A switch to such a system would have to be phased in, but it’s eminently doable. The simplest, though not the fairest system, would be based on the difference in mileage recorded when a vehicle is inspected or registered. Since the tax would be small, say $150 or $200 per year for most drivers, it generally wouldn’t exceed what the owner would have paid with a per-gallon gasoline tax. Since heavy trucks cause far more road wear than passenger vehicles, the tax could be adjusted to account for vehicle weight.

The technology exists, say using a GPS device, to ensure that the mileage tax is levied for the driving done within a given state. As in the Oregon experiment, drivers could pay the mileage tax in a variety of ways, with a surcharge at the pump, or, using a version of E-ZPass transponders, periodically via credit card. To protect privacy, the mileage information collected would not be preserved.

Congress is expected to take up two bills to address the Highway Trust Fund shortfall: one to raise the federal gas tax by 15 cents over the next three years to pay for catchup maintenance and another that would create a federal pilot program to tax motorists based on the number of miles they drive. Given the woeful state of Congress, it’s difficult to imagine that much progress will be made. But that shouldn’t stop New Hampshire from moving ahead with a plan to rebuild its infrastructure while transitioning to a funding mechanism that taxes all road users equitably.

Seabrook Nuclear Station's "Crap" Service Water Piping System

Jan 7, 2013 10:02 am

Sarah, 

Any news about my Seabrook Nuclear Plant's "crap" carbon steel service water piping letter? It is going on all over the place...one plant (Salem) has over 200 Walmart temporary rubber patch jobs in the vital nuclear plant cooling water piping systems contrary to ASME codes. 

Of course, what worries me most is the local NRC inspectors don't feel their Washington NRC management fully supports them. Or at least that is a perception these guys expressed to me. 

Thanks,

Mike Mulligan

Hinsdale, NH

16033368320

 Jan 7, 2013 10:10 am

Mike – we had some downtime during the holiday so your inquiry just went into NRC. I will let you know as soon as we’ve received a reply.

Kind Regards,

Sarah

First Published on 12/18/13

The problem is national in scope...cheap cooling water carbon steel pipes at old obsolete nuclear power plants. Calvert Cliffs got a leak in a service water piping and they are asking the NRC for special permission to put a patch over it for two years.

Obscene falsification with Calvert Cliffs documents...crap service water system!   

Excepts and links from the NRC web site.

Pressure building. Why did the NRC act now? Did they get this letter?

December 20, 2013

NRC: No relicense until ASR addressed

BY ANGELJEAN CHIARAMIDASTAFF WRITERThe Daily News of NewburyportFri Dec 20, 2013, 03:00 AM EST

SEABROOK — Political pressure to close Seabrook’s nuclear power plant continues to mount, but the Nuclear Regulatory Commission says it will not make a decision until issues with degrading concrete are fully understood

Dear Senator Shaheen,

These comments below are from the NH Union Leader newspaper by Seabrook Station’s Local 555 Union President Ted Janis on Nov 26, 2013. They were negotiating a union contract.

“Their battle cry is ‘natural gas’ is killing us. We are not making the money we were making five years ago,’ ” said Jenis. “But it’s hard for us to sit here and see these raises go out to management.”

"This is a workplace that has been beaten down over the last few years," he said.

“There seems to be a total attitude change toward the workers from the corporate level.”

Seabrook nuclear plant was brought on line in 1990 with cheap and non-corrosion resistant carbon steel service water piping. Within two years, piping integrity problems began showing up with pitting and local corrosion. And this problem has only gotten worst and it’s running out of control as I write. It is corrupting the staff of this organizations.

 

In 2011 they replaced a 30 year old 8 foot section of 24 inch (huge) width pipe on the service water strainer by pass line. I think because of corrosion issues. It seemingly had a secret failure of some sort in 2011, as the NRC didn't disclose it in their most recent inspection report (2013001). They replaced it with new carbon steel piping that was lined with so called super epoxy material Belzona. It failed within three years during August of this year. This is called progress. How do we know if the Belzona isn't’ going to clog again the emergency diesel generator cooling water orifices?
 

As it stands right now, the pipe only has a Band-Aid over the wound till the next outage (late spring 2014). Seabrook and the NRC will tell you they ultrasonically tested the hell out of this section of pipe once they detected it leaking. This device shows you the thickness of the metal piping. This is a nuclear plant and a crucial nuclear safety component...one which just failed mysteriously after 2 years...why weren't they UTing the hell out the pipe before it leaked, as they knew the carbon steel service water piping was seriously corrosion prone? Why wasn't there an intense program to uncover any corrosion throughout the system and especially on the strainer bypass line that already failed? Why didn't they catch the defect before it first leaked...then catch it before the tinfoil thickness of pipe wall burst and the leak got even bigger threatening the design of the plant? This is a matter of trusting them and their integrity. This is a matter of the NRC prodding them over and over again about following their procedures and using conservative engineering ethics.

 

Seabrook through August this year didn't want to shut down over a pipe leak fearing a summer grid emergency with limited electricity and in a heat wave with expensive replacement electricity. Was this all about money and very little about public safety?
 

Next Era obtained regulatory good will and forbearance to not shutdown to fix this dangerous leak even after botching the UT reading. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers sets the engineering standards that the NRC requires Seabrook to abide by. The ASME nuclear piping codes requires Seabrook to repair the pipe...not a temporary repair like the NRC gave them permission to do. I bet you they want Seabrook to actually see the damage inside by eye to make certain they know what is going on...not guessing. They could have kept this plant up at power if they first designed this plant prior to construction with sufficient extra service water capacity and flexibility in this area.

• "ASME Standards used in over 100 countries 
• ASME members provide engineering and technical expertise to policy makers in Congress, the White House Office of Science and Technology policy, and key federal agencies"

You get it, the poor initial plant design of the service water system sets Seabrook up to cry like a baby to the NRC with the burdens of code and agency compliance. Your brother Pilgrim (Entergy) plant up north and the NRC doesn’t have a care in the world with any "shutting the plant down in mid-cycle creates undue and unnecessary stress on plant systems, structures, and components” during the last year with all the multitudes of shutdowns and scrams Entergy had caused by their poor plant upkeep and maintenance. These are nothing but excuses of convenience, and it boarders on another falsification in federal documents.   
 

"6. Burden Caused by Compliance

It is impractical to complete a Code-acceptable repair to the identified SW leak at Seabrook Station without shutting the plant down. Shutting the plant down in mid-cycle creates undue and unnecessary stress on plant systems, structures, and components." (Sept 4, 2013)
 

I don’t think these guys deserved any regulatory forbearance. They should have prepared their service water system years before for the rigors of summertime operations. This is how you protect the consumers from the potential of electricity shortages and maintain nuclear safety. Nuclear safety never comes from undeserving regulatory good will. Honestly, they need to spend big bucks to fix their service water. Course, the grid might be more vulnerable in winter time operations and with our limited natural gas piping capacity. They should have spent our good money towards the aims of making this plant reliable without regulatory nuclear safety forbearance during these critical summer months. Do you think the NRC's regulatory good will and forbearance will get us a reliable service water system for the rest of the life of this plant?   
 

The service water cooling system supports all the reactor core cooling and the emergency diesel generator. This is certainly their Fukushima nuclear safety system. I spent considerable time talking to the NRC senior resident inspector and his boss the branch chief. The senior NRC resident frames the quality of the carbon steel service water piping system as “crap”. Every professional in the field knows this is grossly inappropriate material for a salt water system.
 

Because of the poor quality of the carbon steel and its reckless susceptibility to early failure and all sorts of corrosions, they have lined (inside) portions of the piping with concrete, plastisol and Belzona. Seabrook began using plastisol in 1992 two years after first operation of the plant.

The station was oblivious to the fact that the plastisol only has a service life of fifteen years. The NRC had to remind them of this. The brittle and pitted plastisol then sheeted off the piping and clogged a cooling orifice into a Fukushima emergency diesel generator. The machine didn’t have enough cooling water and the station botched the "operability determination" over this twice. The big event you should be worrying about is any of the cement, plastisol or Belzona detaching from the inside of the piping and clogging up the water flow or damaging any of the valves.
 

I believe Seabrook knowingly falsified internal paperwork (prompt operability determination (POD)) the NRC depends on to make a regulatory judgment. Is it safe to stay up at power or should they shut down? Seabrook has made a string of bad "operability determinations" over the recent years and nothing the NRC does seem to turn these guys around into making accurate operability determinations. Seabrook had a leak in their service water system and they used a ultrasonic detector to measure the nature of hole in the pipe. They had information the hole was a very dangerous type which could leak big amounts of water...but they put on the POD document it was a safe and stable hole. Within weeks the hole widened and leaked significant amount of water inside the plant threatening other safety equipment.
 

Then I questioned the Branch Chief and senior NRC inspector. They tell me Seabrook didn’t adequately support their prompt operability determination (POD). This is a basic operation’s safety function at a nuclear plant and they are all trained much on it. What are they even up at power for if they can’t perform this simple determination? These guys are all extremely educated and there are many employees with advanced engineering degrees who ultimately make these determinations. It doesn’t wash with these really smart and educated people making these kinds of simple mistakes. What they are really good at is covert-ups and playing stupid. Like I said, this plant has had lots of bum service water safety operability determinations lately...why isn’t the punishment cumulative? They had at least two stupid and inaccurate operability determinations with erratic cooling water flow indication to an emergency diesel generator. The dangerous brittle and over aged so called protective plastisol that sheeted off the sw pipes. What does it take to turn their hearts? What does it take to make accurate and safe operability determination? How will this faux stupidity end? This revolved around an accurate UT scan of the pipe hole on day one and the staff blowing it with getting the information into the “Prompted Operability Determination”. (wink wink)

 

I questioned the NRC inspector Mr. Cataldo about if it was a falsification of documents or if the NRC interpretation was Seabrook didn’t adequately support the POD. How could these really smart and highly trained employees ever make that kind of simple mistake? He said, "Mike, it was just gross staff incompetence" surrounding the reading of the UT and getting the correct information into the POD.” I still believe it was an intentional willfull falsification of documentation and the NRC is sweet talking this event into a poor support of the POD. But the great problem now is; why didn’t the NRC accurately characterize this event as “gross Seabrook staff incompetence” surrounding the UT and the characterization of the hole in the NRC’s inspection report? Does the NRC have two tiers of reporting, the prettified talk in the inspection reports for the community and the actual events at the plant?

 

I have real issues with the early failure of the new carbon steel piping and its super epoxy material Belzona. The nuclear industry is riddled with issues of improper heat treatment of metals and using the wrong type of metal. Remember, the old section of pipe failed mysteriously after 30 years. The new section of pipe failed failed within three years and the inside of the pipe was covered with the supper epoxy Belzona.  You get it, they never depressurized this section of piping. They never eyeballed the flaw inside the pipe and taken samples for sophisticated metallurgical analysis at an approved engineering laboratory. And these guys are terrible at guesswork. It could be related to microbial corrosion, electrochemical reactions with dissimilar metals and cement is a great worry.

"As previously stated in Section 7.2, the cause of the degradation is from localized corrosion. The typical corrosion rate used in Seabrook Station Service Water piping evaluations is 30 mils per year (mpy). However, the current identified wall defect resides in piping which was recently replaced during Refueling Outage 14 during April 2011, concluding that an accelerated (presently unknown) mechanism exists within the bounding area." (Sept 4, 2013)

The new carbon steel and the super coating failed after two years. The NRC’s branch chief says the seawater in the bypass line is stagnant, but is open at the downstream connection. Nowhere in their documentation does it explain why the new section of piping failed so quickly other than to imply it is the same corrosion mechanism that destroyed the 30 year old first pipe. I think it is a new failure mechanism and other areas of the pipe could also fail quickly.
 

And believe me, there is no way to get an objective and independent interpretation of what went on here. The NRC and Seabrook have a dog in this race with protecting their credibility...you would need a recording (voice, visual) of the initial control room discussion about this hole with the NRC and then a recording of any subsequent discussion on this. Can you even imagine in a nuclear plant’s safety cooling water piping, the NRC would allow the metal destruction mechanism to remain unknown?

 

Senior inspector Paul Cataldo told me he fought like hell with his bosses trying to get a bigger violation over this. He talked to me about the burdens the agency who only gives him with a very limited weekly or monthly time budget with events at the plant. He put in a lot of time with this non violation. No overtime and certainly no paid overtime. I got the impression he thinks his bosses don’t fully support him as they should and he is worried Seabrook’s management doesn't respect him for his federal oversight role at the plant.

 

I have called Seabrook’s security gate and left a message asking to speak to an engineer about the sw strainer piping leaks. Better, somebody in the know within the operations department. I am still waiting for that call back?

Sincerely,

Mike Mulligan

Hinsdale, NH

(Cell)16032094206

‘The Popperville Town Hall’
 

http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/

Blizzard Hercules catastrophe at Pilgrim Nuclear Plant tonight?

Jan 3: Holy crap, they survived the night. Now I am boring with nothing to write about!

Oh, yes...with the NE ISO market prices now around $200, they can smell how vulnerable we are! 12:45pm

I give them a 30% chance of staying up at power tonight...when we most need them. Almost a certainty they will lose all off site power to the facility again. There is no way they got the problems fixed about the high voltage transmission system and with icing up and causing shorts on their own transformers and switchyard! Pilgrim has a long history with not tolerating blazzards well!  

It is extremely dangerous and rickless operating the Pilgrim nuclear plant in NE Nor'easters.

Remember blizzard Nemo On February 8, 2013 that tripped off Pilgrim, whose switchyard isn’t designed for the harsh winter climate....who scared the pants off us with regional electricity shortages last Blizzard Nemo.

What is the chance of another secret met tower failure like Nemo?  

The National Weather Service just gave a blizzard warning around the Pilgrim....

It will go much like this:

Notification Date: 02/08/2013
Notification Time: 22:50 [ET]
Event Date: 02/08/2013
Event Time: 22:00 [EST]
Last Update Date: 02/10/2013

UNUSUAL EVENT DECLARED DUE TO LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER

"Pilgrim Station scrammed on a loss of offsite power. All systems performed as designed. Groups I, II, VI went to completion. Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) is injecting to the vessel controlling level. High Pressure Coolant Injection is in pressure control and slowly cooling down. Offsite power was lost multiple times. The Startup Transformer has been declared inoperable. The Unusual Event was declared under EAL SU 1.1 based on loss of offsite power greater than 15 minutes [at 2200 EST]."

The licensee originally experienced an automatic reactor scram at 2117 EST due to a load reject with a turbine trip/reactor scram due to loss of power. Offsite power availability has been fluctuating in and out to the site. The licensee states that all systems are functioning as required. All rods fully inserted and the reactor is stable in Mode 3. Both Emergency Diesel Generators are providing power to the safety related buses. The loss of offsite power is believed to be weather related.

The licensee has notified the State and local authorities and the NRC Resident Inspector.

Notified DHS SWO, FEMA, USDA, HHS, DOE, DHS NICC, EPA, and NuclearSSA via email.

* * * UPDATE FROM PAUL GALLANT TO VINCE KLCO AT 2/10/13 AT 1108 EST* * *

Pilgrim terminated the Unusual Event and has transitioned to recovery effective at 10:55 AM on 02/10/2013. Offsite power has been restored to safety-related and non-safety-related electrical buses through the station Startup Transformer via a single 345 KV line. The other two offsite power sources remain out of service. The emergency diesel generators have been secured and are in standby. Residual heat removal is in shutdown cooling mode maintaining the reactor in cold shutdown. Fuel Pool Cooling is in service with fuel pool coolant temperatures trending down.

 A late Thusday night blizzard like last year?

 ...LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER AND SUBSEQUENT PRESS RELEASE

"On Sunday, February 10, 2013 at 1405 [EST], with the reactor at 0% core thermal power, all control rods fully inserted, and in cold shutdown conditions, the plant experienced a loss of off-site power. With Pilgrim Station aligned to off-site power via the start-up transformer (SUT), a fault on the 'B' phase of the SUT was experienced due to suspected falling ice striking the phase's insulator. This resulted in the tripping of the feeder breaker, ACB-102, and the loss of power to 4160 KV buses A1 through A4. Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs) 'A' and 'B' auto-started as designed and are powering emergency buses.

"The loss of off-site power resulted in de-energization of both Reactor Protection System (RPS) channels resulting in a reactor scram signal and isolation of shutdown cooling. At 1418, shutdown cooling was returned to service. All other plant systems responded as designed. Station personnel are in the process of establishing back-up power in accordance with plant procedures.

"The following press release was made at 1715 hours: 'Offsite power to Pilgrim station was interrupted this afternoon. The plant is in a cold shutdown condition and Pilgrim's diesel generators are providing power to the site. There is no worker or public safety concern. Plant personnel are troubleshooting the cause of the interruption.'

"This event had no impact on the health and/or safety of the public.

"The NRC Senior Resident Inspector has been notified."

 

US power firms slam ISO NewEngland over market ‘flaws’

So a pack of power firms are circle the defenceless public doe.

US power firms slam ISO NewEngland over market ‘flaws’

Author: Alexander Osipovich

Source: Energy Risk| 18 Dec 2013

Market woes may threaten winter reliability, firms argue

Winter reliability at risk due to problems with real-time pricing, market participants warn

As the northeast US prepares for winter, electricity firms are warning that flaws in the design of the New England power market will threaten the reliability of the region’s power supply in the event of an extended cold snap.