[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GAO Opens DB Investigation]
This illustrates my concern that the weakness of regulatory agencies is that the
are reactive, not proactive. Although the leakage while DB was running was
probably within Tech Spec limits, a significant area of the reactor vessel had
been reduced to a thin sheet of metal. If this had failed during reactor
operation, this would likely have been outside the design basis accident. The
reactor vessel is designed to survive a LOCA, but I doubt that the corroded
reactor vessel scenario had been analyzed, although they are probably doing that
now.
That's the real challenge to the industry. It's not good enough to just meet
the regulatory requirements.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Curies forever.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
High Plains Drifter wrote:
> Bill, Matt is right. NRC allows plants to operate with leakage (so long as
> the reactor and effluent safety constraints in the technical specifications
> are not exceeded). It is recognized that base power needs of the region and
> economics play a role in any operational decision, but safety (public and
> worker) is a big factor in the equation. Not knowing all the facts in the
> David Besse case, I can only assume that everything was done iaw the
> technical specifications. However, if the licensee knew more about the
> leakage source and did not disclose it to the regulators, then they are in
> deep kemchee. The operation of a power plant is based on reactor safety and
> a safe amount of worker and public exposure to radioactive materials. If
> the limits were zero exposure then they could not operate. They pretty much
> operate at a level that results in very little additional radiation exposure
> to the public. Effluent releases from a plant have an allowable range, just
> as with the case of worker exposure to airborne radionuclides, and neither
> is zero. David Besse running with leakage came to light due to the
> degradation of the reactor head issue and were probably well within the
> limits for such releases. Many plants operate with known leakage,
> especially PWRs with degraded steam generator tubes. Its economics balanced
> with public safety.
>
> H. Dean Chaney, CHP
> URS Corp. Sacramento, CA
> (916) 679-2086
>
> "In science there is only physics; everything else is stamp collecting."
> --Ernest Rutherford
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William V Lipton" <liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM>
> To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 12:35 PM
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: GAO Opens DB Investigation]
>
> >
> > [I am forwarding this to Radsafe with the permission of the author.
> > Bill Lipton]
> >
> >
> > I don't think they put profit in front of safety. It was a
> > decision
> > made. If there were no regulatory leak rate or ISI timeframes
> > exceeded, then it's no issue.
> >
> > Why should a pwr depressurize the containment and let out all those
> > noble gases? Hold them an extra half-life. They are truely
> > putting
> > profits first in this instance...no? How about short outages?
> > Take
> > your time, dbl PC everyone, NO CONTAMINATION EVENTS. Any decision
> > to
> > reduce PCs or not wear a respirator is purely a sacrifice in
> > safety.
> >
> > Bill, w/o reviewing the pedigree that led to the degredation of the
> > Rx
> > head, these are my thoughts; the plant wasn't self critical enough
> > (it's the ONLY industry that does self assessments) and now they
> > are
> > paying the price.
> >
> > Matt Williamson
> > former (why, because it nukes are OVER regulated) nuke rad
> > engineer...
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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.
> > You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> >
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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.
> You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
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.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/