NRC: VY didna t follow procedure

While Entergy has made significant repairs to Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant's cooling towers, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission faulted it for not adequately documenting problems found in two fan cells necessary for emergencies.

[mike mulligan]

I went looking for the report on the NRC site. They just have revamped the nudocs site. They have made it highly inefficient and extremely slow to search through large numbers of documents. This has been a typical tactic with the NRC for years with making enormous hurdles on acquiring the limited information that is available.

[mike mulligan]

The problem is the VY plant is of a obsolete and defective design...along with not enough employees and the experience level is dismal. In order to compensate they are increasing the numbers of procedures and massively increasing the complexity of said procedures...they are revising the procedures faster than anyone can comprehend the extent of the changes.

I think with the level of revisions and complexity...these employees live in a environment of permanent procedure disorientation. I think the complexity of these procedures have gone prompt critical...you got a positive reactivity procedure coefficient. In other words, the magnitude of the amount and increasing procedure complexity, the defective design of the facility and the organization dysfunction...the dysfunctions is it itself are causing increased needs of procedure revisions and changes.

I think the prompt procedure complexity criticality is increasingly disconnecting the procedure comprehension from the plant staff.

[mike mulligan]

mike mulligan wrote:

I went looking for the report on the NRC site. They just have revamped the nudocs site. They have made it highly inefficient and extremely slow to search through large numbers of documents. This has been a typical tactic with the NRC for years with making enormous hurdles on acquiring the limited information that is available.

Thanks for fixing it?

[mike mulligan]

The easy and cheap why to bring illusory reforms to a organization is to massively increase complexity through bureaucracies and creating procedures and policies....it just delays the failure. The hard way and it takes a extraordinary amount of thinking...is you smartly reduce the complexity of the organization.

I guess there is a third way, deregulation...you just hack and slash rules and regulations to reduce the complexity of the bureaucracies, then they just walk off the cliff.

[Fran]

I'm tired of hearing about how this problem and that deficiency are of "low safety significance". At a nuke plant there is no such thing as low safety significance. If these things weren't being documented (surprise surprise) then of course we can assume most anything else that might interfere with relicensing isn't being documented either.

If VY were so safe and efficient Entergy would not be desperate to dump it (and all financial responsibility) by "spinning it off". They simply don't want to pay for decommissioning, period. It is no coincidence that they are seeking a 20 year renewal, and originally said that the decommissioning account would reach its optimum level in 20 years.

[Bratty]

More sketchiness from Entergy - what a surprise! What else haven't they documented?

[Tamarac]

Fran wrote:

I'm tired of hearing about how this problem and that deficiency are of "low safety significance". At a nuke plant there is no such thing as low safety significance. If these things weren't being documented (surprise surprise) then of course we can assume most anything else that might interfere with relicensing isn't being documented either.
If VY were so safe and efficient Entergy would not be desperate to dump it (and all financial responsibility) by "spinning it off". They simply don't want to pay for decommissioning, period. It is no coincidence that they are seeking a 20 year renewal, and originally said that the decommissioning account would reach its optimum level in 20 years.

Oh good grief stop being such a dim whit. The Reformer would make it front page news if an employee got a paper cut. P.S. that too would be a "low safety" incident as well.

[Brattleboro]

Fran wrote:

I'm tired of hearing about how this problem and that deficiency are of "low safety significance". At a nuke plant there is no such thing as low safety significance. If these things weren't being documented (surprise surprise) then of course we can assume most anything else that might interfere with relicensing isn't being documented either.
If VY were so safe and efficient Entergy would not be desperate to dump it (and all financial responsibility) by "spinning it off". They simply don't want to pay for decommissioning, period. It is no coincidence that they are seeking a 20 year renewal, and originally said that the decommissioning account would reach its optimum level in 20 years.

Maybe I can help you. There are safety significant issues and nonsafety signficant issues. Let me give two examples using your car.

Say your brakes are fading. This is a safety significant issue and needs immediate attention.

Say your car has a scratch in the clear coat that does not go through the paint. This is a nonsafety significant isue that you need to address in the near future to prevent future rust and to protect the life of the car.

The same is true of any system in a nuclear plant.

[John Ward]

Brattleboro wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe I can help you. There are safety significant issues and nonsafety signficant issues. Let me give two examples using your car.
Say your brakes are fading. This is a safety significant issue and needs immediate attention.
Say your car has a scratch in the clear coat that does not go through the paint. This is a nonsafety significant isue that you need to address in the near future to prevent future rust and to protect the life of the car.
The same is true of any system in a nuclear plant.

This "car" was scratched so long ago that it has major amounts of rust. because it is a unibody the structural integrity is compromised. Is it compromised so much that it will be the cause of a major accident or only compromised to the point that it will not withstand an accident? Do we really want to find out?

[What]

John Ward wrote:

<quoted text>This "car" was scratched so long ago that it has major amounts of rust. because it is a unibody the structural integrity is compromised. Is it compromised so much that it will be the cause of a major accident or only compromised to the point that it will not withstand an accident? Do we really want to find out?

Yep, that is why they inspect the towers so they know if it is a nothing issue or a big deal. If it were a big deal the NRC would have made a big issue of it. Watch the industry, when there is something big the NRC hammers the plant, they do not turn a blind eye. They are there to ensure everyone follows every little rule not just the big ones. The error was very little not big. Stop acting like the sky if falling.

[New Clear Waste]

What wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep, that is why they inspect the towers so they know if it is a nothing issue or a big deal. If it were a big deal the NRC would have made a big issue of it. Watch the industry, when there is something big the NRC hammers the plant, they do not turn a blind eye. They are there to ensure everyone follows every little rule not just the big ones. The error was very little not big. Stop acting like the sky if falling.

Gosh, what a great system! I guess we can rest assured that the NRC is safeguarding our local nuclear plant with its thorough inspections and ensuring that everyone follows every little rule.

Except when a cooling tower crashes to the ground - OOPS! And water leaks, and cracked nozzles, and old ladies breaching security with lawn chairs...

Relicense that thing?! If it were a bridge, it would have been shut down and people would have to take the ferry.

[Tamarac]

Remember John Ward has investments in Solar and must talk down VY. John's technology at this stange in development is nothing more than a rich man's tinker toy. John I think that solar could be a great solution to what ails us as a nation, but you can not come to the table until your product is affordable to the middle class. Take another look at your cost benefit ratio and get back to us. Thanks

[mike mulligan]

What wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep, that is why they inspect the towers so they know if it is a nothing issue or a big deal. If it were a big deal the NRC would have made a big issue of it. Watch the industry, when there is something big the NRC hammers the plant, they do not turn a blind eye. They are there to ensure everyone follows every little rule not just the big ones. The error was very little not big. Stop acting like the sky if falling.

Why they are making a bid deal about the cooling towers...is a Vermont Yankee employee whistleblower sabotage the public relation of Entergy and the NRC but releasing a picture of the towers without permission.
It is not because the NRC was inherently interested with the safety implication of the tower collapse...they were interested in the public response to the pictures.

[John Ward]

Tamarac wrote:

Remember John Ward has investments in Solar and must talk down VY. John's technology at this stange in development is nothing more than a rich man's tinker toy. John I think that solar could be a great solution to what ails us as a nation, but you can not come to the table until your product is affordable to the middle class. Take another look at your cost benefit ratio and get back to us. Thanks

No, my dissatisfaction with VY came first and as I learned more about energy issues in general and nuclear in particular I became more interested efficiency, conservation, solar and wind. That is why I "invested" in conservation, efficiency, and solar at my house. That is why I recently "invested" in a retail solar, efficiency, and conservation business. At least I use my time and energy to further what I feel is right. Can I come sit at the table? because solar is not a rich mans tinker toy and I would not be able to afford it if it were. And speaking of cost, just what are you putting into your cost/benefit analysis if you think nuclear even comes close to being worthwhile?

[Tamarac]

Sure it did John, sure it did. Try being honest in the future, my oh my but you must sure have fun rubbing elbows with real Vermonters wearing your store bought jeans with make pretend holes and $200 work boots. I suppose to folks like you hiding behind a gentleman's farmhouse door.... Well wealth is relative my friend and some of us hang out our clothes to dry because that is what we can afford to do in an effort to save the environment. Rich brothers like you who can afford to save the environment by buying solar panels.....well enough said. P.S. the paint on my jeans got their while actually working for a living.

[Take another pill]

Tamarac wrote:

Sure it did John, sure it did. Try being honest in the future, my oh my but you must sure have fun rubbing elbows with real Vermonters wearing your store bought jeans with make pretend holes and $200 work boots. I suppose to folks like you hiding behind a gentleman's farmhouse door.... Well wealth is relative my friend and some of us hang out our clothes to dry because that is what we can afford to do in an effort to save the environment. Rich brothers like you who can afford to save the environment by buying solar panels.....well enough said. P.S. the paint on my jeans got their while actually working for a living.

What is wrong with $200 work boots? Is that any worse than $1000 business suits or $500 designer hand bags? This is (so far) still America and if I want $200 work boots that complies with OSHA safety regulations for steel toes and shanks, electrically insulated, provide warmth in the winter, waterproof to rain and snow, and have good non-slip sole, then I will buy them and those that think that is terrible can go screw.

[hmmmmm]

I think he was talking about $200 work books not cause u need them but more as a status symbol. I think his point is that Solar is out of reach of the average person who is working hard to make a living.

[John Ward]

hmmmmm wrote:

I think he was talking about $200 work books not cause u need them but more as a status symbol. I think his point is that Solar is out of reach of the average person who is working hard to make a living.

That is exactly his point and he is wrong!

[Tamarac]

John Ward wrote:

<quoted text>That is exactly his point and he is wrong!

How wrong am I John? I looked into the cost of heating water with solar a couple of years back. Not only would I need to take out a loan to instal the system, but it would take aprox 22-24 years to recover the cost the loan, instalation, and purchase. That is just about the life expectancy of the system. My biggest mistake after moving into my home was to tear out my electric heat before replacing it with wood and oil. I should have left the electric in place and added wood.

[John Ward]

Tamarac wrote:

<quoted text>How wrong am I John? I looked into the cost of heating water with solar a couple of years back. Not only would I need to take out a loan to instal the system, but it would take aprox 22-24 years to recover the cost the loan, instalation, and purchase. That is just about the life expectancy of the system. My biggest mistake after moving into my home was to tear out my electric heat before replacing it with wood and oil. I should have left the electric in place and added wood.

I just ran the numbers on SDHW again and it is about 9 yrs. payback which means if the system lasts 22-24 years it will pay for itself 2 1/2 times. The used SDHW panels I installed at my house are from 1980 and still working. I bought a new Stiebel tank that should last a long time. These are the kind of investments to make when you are an average working Joe like me who cannot afford $200 boots unless you REALLY NEED them.