Re: Testing Radiological Filters

["Bruce R Heida" <BHEIDA@WPSR.COM> (by way of Bruce Heida <bheida@itol.com>)]

snip>From: Norman Cohen <ncohen12@HOME.COM>

>> by Lochbaum:
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Aging Nuclear Plants and License Renewal - Updated 09/13/2001
The NRC allows nuclear plant owners to cut back on the number of safety tests
>> and inspections. The NRC justifies this safety rollback on the notion that
>> experience demonstrates improved equipment reliability. But the fact remains
>> that nuclear plant equipment-just like virtually all living and inanimate
>> objects-follows what is called the "bathtub" curve. Region A, or the break-in
>> phase, and Region C, the wear-out phase, have high failure rates while Region
>> B reflects peak reliability during middle life. The NRC uses the lower
>> failure rate for equipment in Region B to relax testing intervals from once
>> per quarter to once per year. Mathematical magic then falsely "proves" safety
>> gains. For example, consider a component that fails every time it is tested.
>> Going from quarterly to annual tests reduces the number of failures per year
>> from four to one. On paper, safety is greatly improved. But in the plant,
>> safety is unchanged. Every nuclear plant in the United States is in Region B!
>> heading towards Region C, if it is not already into the wear-out phase.
>> Cutting back on safety checks saves plant owners money, but it may someday
>> cost lives.
>>
The NRC originally licensed nuclear plants for 40 years. Plant owners have
>> the option of seeking a 20-year extension. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
>> (NRC) renews licenses after determining plant owners have aging management
>> programs to monitor the condition of important equipment and structures so
>> that repairs and/or replacements will take place to prevent failures. But
>> failures are simply not being prevented because many nuclear plants have been
>> forced to shut down since January 1, 2000, after aging equipment broke:
14. August 14, 2001: The owner reported that the Kewaunee nuclear plant in
>> Wisconsin had automatically shut down due to insufficient instrument air
>> supply to the regulating valve for feedwater flow to the steam generator. The
>> regulating valve closed when the instrument air pressure dropped. The owner
>> attributed the air pressure loss to a tear in a neoprene diaphragm that had
>> not been detected due to a "running to failure" maintenance schedule. In
>> other words, the part wore out and broke.
>> 
I cannot find where the management Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant has a stated policy of "running to failure". Mr. Lochbaum makes it appear that Kewaunee deliberately runs equipment important to safety to failure. As a "Nuclear Engineer" Mr. Lockbaum knows or should know that in a PWR the main feedwater regulating valve is on the secondary side of the plant. Its safety function is to close to limit the inventory of water in containment in an accident. (Its economic function is to be open). The pneumatic relay that failed is on the air supply to the actuator. It does not have a safety function to maintain the feedwater reg. valve open. Its function is economic.  The feedwater regulating valve did perform its safety function and closed on a loss of air.  This safety function is tested routinely.  It is tested to assure it closes within a time limit as determined by safety analysis with additional margins added  (close in 5-10 seconds instead of 30 seconds).  Contrary to Mr. Lochbaum's implication that equipment important to safety is "run to failure" the internals of the main feedwater regulating valve have been upgraded along with a new actuator and positioner.  Mr. Lochbaum may be confusing equipment important to safety with equipment important to ecomonics.

Norm, is this lack of concern for accuracy from an "expert" due to a lack of understanding of nuclear power plants or a deliberate attempt to use half-truth to misinform?  Either way it does little to help your credibility.
  
As far as those who are frustrated with NORM, remember, he has all but admitted his livelyhood depends on maintaining a Luddite point of view.  If he starts to admit nuclear power isn't really that bad his sponser (wife) may dump him.  He has stated he is more interested in politics than science.  My opinion of politicians is they are reluctant to let the truth stand in the way of their arguments. 
  
Usual statements of disclaimer that these are my points of view and not necessarly those of my employer.




Wishing everyone much happiness for the holidays and best wishes for the new year.
Shalom, 
     


Bruce R. Heida, PE (WI)
Nuclear Management Company
Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant
920 388-8701
<mailto:bheida@wpsr.com>bheida@wpsr.com
 ************************************************************************ You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.