More

Browns Ferry, Alabama Nuclear Plant Cited For Safety

Alabama Nuclear

By RAY HENRY   05/10/11 11:20 AM ET   AP

ATLANTA -- Federal regulators ordered in-depth inspections Tuesday at a nuclear power plant run by the Tennessee Valley Authority in northern Alabama after deciding the failure of an emergency cooling system there could have been a serious safety problem.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a rare red finding against the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant near Athens, Ala., after it investigated how a valve on a residual heat removal system became stuck shut. Safety regulators said only five red findings – the most severe ranking the agency gives to problems uncovered in its inspections – have been issued nationwide in the past decade.

In an emergency, the failure of the valve could have meant that one of the plant's emergency cooling systems would not have worked as designed. The problem, which was identified as the plant was being refueled in October 2010, was fixed before the reactor was returned to service.

"The valve was repaired prior to returning the unit to service and Browns Ferry continued to operate safely," said Victor McCree, the NRC's Region II administrator. "However, significant problems involving key safety systems warrant more extensive NRC inspection and oversight."

It was not immediately clear whether TVA officials would appeal the finding from federal regulators. Officials at the TVA had attributed the valve to a manufacturer's defect and said it inspected all similar valves in the facility to catch any problems.

NRC officials were critical of the utility for not identifying the problem sooner through routine inspections and testing. The valve failed sometime after March 2009 but wasn't discovered until more than a year later.

As part of the upcoming inspections, the NRC said it will review the plant's performance, its safety culture and its organization.

"The results of this inspection will aid the NRC in deciding whether additional regulatory actions are necessary to assure public health and safety," McCree said in a letter to TVA officials.

Past problems at the plant have led to increased scrutiny. The Browns Ferry Plant is known in the industry as the site where a worker using a candle to check for air leaks in 1974 started a fire that disabled safety systems. It is similar in design to the reactors that malfunctioned at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant in Japan after a massive earthquake and tsunami earlier this year.

TVA, the county's largest public utility, supplies power to about 9 million people in Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

ATLANTA -- Federal regulators ordered in-depth inspections Tuesday at a nuclear power plant run by the Tennessee Valley Authority in northern Alabama after deciding the failure of an emergency cooling...
ATLANTA -- Federal regulators ordered in-depth inspections Tuesday at a nuclear power plant run by the Tennessee Valley Authority in northern Alabama after deciding the failure of an emergency cooling...
Filed by Benjamin Hart  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 398
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
HLL 02:16 PM on 05/10/2011
NO NUKES! ☮

"The US remains the largest producer of commercial nuclear power in the world. The 104 licensed commercial nuclear plants are old, close to the end of their originally projected life spans. Plant owners are petitioning the federal government to extend their operating licences.

These licences are controlled by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). On 10 March, the NRC issued a  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RRK70
10:16 PM on 05/11/2011
Nuclear power is safe in the US?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_accidents_by_country#United_States
07:10 PM on 05/11/2011
Brown's Ferry worked perfectly as designed when the tornadoes took down all of the towers which carried away the energy produced by the reactors. This would have been a disaster if the plant had not went into an automatic shutdown mode as planned for in this type of emergency. Thank the lord the workers stayed and made sure the shut downs went just as planned unlike in Japan. However they did not get hit with a Tsunami either but 3 or 4 tornadoes is pretty darn serious. In my opinion they may have had one bad mark and deserved it, but the way the plant functioned during the worst outbreak of tornadoes to ever hit one area gives them one well earned good mark back in return.
LawrenceL
"The dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on."
12:20 PM on 05/11/2011
"The Browns Ferry Plant is known in the industry as the site where a worker using a candle to check for air leaks in 1974 started a fire that disabled safety systems."

What can you say about a facility so poorly designed that, even though its safety systems are completely vital to the operation of the plant, they can be knocked-out by a minor fire (a candle flame) so casually and accidently started?

I might expect this degree of flammability with a dry Christmas tree, but not the safety systems of a nuclear reactor.

This facility should never have been licensed in the first place.
02:29 PM on 05/11/2011
This is in response to your reply to my post below. The original Mach 1 reactors had a number of design flaws to a point that 3 of the original GE engineers resigned and went public with their concerns. Unfortunately, in the early 70's, the slogan "What's good for GM is good for America." was being applied to all big industry and GE got an initial pass, in large part because the regulators had little expertise in evaluating nuclear reactors. Subsequently, the engineers' complaints were recognized and fixes were put in place. However, some believe that the fixes to the core of the Mach 1 reactors do not provide the same level of safety as the subsequent GE reactor models.

The French run a model program and have never come close to a disaster while generating about 80% of their nation's power and only importing oil for transportation purchases. They are also not at the mercy of the Russians for natural gas.
LawrenceL
"The dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on."
05:27 PM on 05/11/2011
This is a good response, generally.

I "only" quibble with your closing paragraph, because 1) it implies that the French are "really" "at the mercy" of the Russians, b/c it's not really a matter of national security anymore (no one thinks the Russians are going to invade Western Europe), and 2) it implies that the US is/would be at the "mercy" of the Russians. I think we have adequate amounts of natural gas; it is oil that is a problem.
02:30 PM on 05/11/2011
continued..
For one thing, the French recycle spent fuel rods, even though it adds to the cost of the power production. No one in the US does that because it would hurt the bottom line. Meanwhile, waste piles up while Yucca Mountain is debated and litigated. The French government strictly enforces safe operating regulations and has a very hands on approach. Not so in the US. Like it or not, unless we want to burn a lot of coal and/or burn a lot of natural gas obtained by fracking slate with caustic chemicals that may well find their way into our fresh water aquifers, nuclear power must be an option, but only if the US adopts the policies and the procedures employed by the French.
LawrenceL
"The dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on."
05:35 PM on 05/11/2011
These facts/issues open an entire new can of worms.

1. "the French recycle spent fuel rods, even though it adds to the cost of the power production­. No one in the US does that because it would hurt the bottom line." And we're talking about an industry which couldn't receive insurance from an insurer, and had to be exempted from claims, which is a deal maker/breaker. In other words, it is *already* unprofitable and subsidized by the public.
2. Yucca Mountain is debated b/c of the nearby earthquake faults which were discovered after it was already built. It is not clear if a compromised repository is better than the current kludges/ad hoc approach. And some Nevadans feel like the state has already had enough nuclear material blasted into it; hard to disagree with that.
3. Are the French regulations uniform from plant to plant, or do they differ considerly, as is the case here?
4. At least one French reprocessing plant is emitting an excessive amount of radiation.
photo
baxtron
tek phlarpt
12:00 PM on 05/11/2011
If Obama would let us build more power plants, this never would have happened. fliggle blouuurghahh!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
08:45 AM on 05/11/2011
Radiation levels outside Fukushima exclusion zone are above levels at Chernobyl that necessitated evacuation.

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2011/5/10/usjapan-release-radiological-readings-around-fukushima-hot-z.html
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
08:43 AM on 05/11/2011
This is an incredible video of the structural damage to the Fukushima Unit # 4 reactor building - which contains the largest spent fuel pool. Workers entered Unit # 1 this week for the first time since the earthquake. There were plans to start replacing the cooling system, but it was determined that 10 minutes inside unit 1 would expose workers to a lifetime dose of radiation. This is a must watch video.

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2011/5/10/is-fukushima-unit-4-about-to-collapse.html
LawrenceL
"The dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on."
12:34 PM on 05/11/2011
The "scary" thing to me is the visible sagging of the reactor building.

The idea of placing the spent fuel on a high floor, where the building would require tremendous reinforcement, was a very bad design decision, because if the support was compromised, it might be inevitable that the cooling pools would collapse and the fuel would be scattered on the ground.

Trying to reinforce a damaged building in a radioactive "hot" zone: I'm glad *I* don't have to do it.

Thanks for the video, which seems pretty matter-of-fact.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
08:33 AM on 05/11/2011
Video of destroyed Fukushima Unit # 3 spent fuel pool that contains Plutonium based MOX fuel rods.

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2011/5/10/is-fukushima-unit-3-spent-fuel-pool-gone-some-experts-think.html
06:25 AM on 05/11/2011
Apologies for being slightly off topic, but Reactor #4 at Fukushima is leaning and could collapse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxbm7iJTT8U&feature=player_embedded
06:58 AM on 05/11/2011
I was hesitant to post this link because it is an interview conducted by a very controversial figure. However, over the years his views on nuclear power have not wavered, plus the person he is interviewing appears to have extraordinary access to events surrounding Fukushima. If what he says is true then it's getting real weird in Japan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3lSLpSHBuY
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
08:49 AM on 05/11/2011
You are not off topic. Browns Ferry is of the same design as the Fukushima GE Mark 1 reactors. Everything is relevant in this debate. See my video above of the destroyed Unit 3 spent fuel pool.
05:48 AM on 05/11/2011
Are they Union workers there?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SoquiliAsgaya
07:50 AM on 05/11/2011
YES, WHY YOU ASK?
08:04 AM on 05/11/2011
That would explain why they were asleep on the job.
04:57 AM on 05/11/2011
The author of the article would do well to research the history of the Browns Ferry plant. On 3/25/75, a fire was started by a worker using a LIGHTED CANDLE to inspect a repair in some cables. A fire was started that not only wiped out the primary control cables, but also the secondary backup cables that were running near by (an absolutely stupid design flaw). The controllers lost all control of the reactor and it was headed for a melt down into the Tennessee River which drains into the Cumberland which drains into the Ohio which drains into the Mississippi and on into the Gulf of Mexico. Luckily, before things got critical, the Alabama National Guard arrived with portable generators that were able to restore power to the pumps. This was 4 years before 3 Mile Island and is to this day one of the biggest near misses we've had in the US. Had it gone critical, a humongous amount of fresh water east of the Mississippi River would have been contaminated for centuries.
I'm a big proponent of nuclear power, only if we institute the regulation and control that the French do. To do otherwise is to invite a horible disaster as we've seen in Japan and Chernobyl.
LawrenceL
"The dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on."
12:43 PM on 05/11/2011
"'but also the secondary backup cables that were running near by (an absolutely stupid design flaw). The controller­s lost all control of the reactor and it was headed for a melt down into the Tennessee River which drains into the Cumberland which drains into the Ohio which drains into the Mississipp­i and on into the Gulf of Mexico."

I'm glad you realize how bad the design was, and how serious the situation could have been. Maybe that will temper your enthusiasm for technologies which can get dangerously out of control, even when one thinks proper attention would have been paid to basic issues like resiliency of the control systems.
03:48 AM on 05/11/2011
joper201- it would be great if obama let it all go and it blows up, then who will u blame
finallylegal
why,oh why, didn't I take the blue pill
05:22 AM on 05/11/2011
yeah, that would be great. what's wrong with you?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joper201
Lifes tough, it's tougher when you're stupid. JW
01:59 AM on 05/11/2011
It stuck, they found and replaced it while the plant was down.

This is just more obama environmental political BS.
photo
blackwind
Relax, nothing is under control
02:57 AM on 05/11/2011
What does Obama have to do with it?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SoapboxKing
10:58 AM on 05/11/2011
everything that is wrong with the country is because of Obama, and everything that is right with the country is because of the actions of the GOP. geez, everyone knows that.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joper201
Lifes tough, it's tougher when you're stupid. JW
04:09 PM on 05/11/2011
Obvama is in his perpetual campaign mode. This is OBAMA's Regulatory Agency. This is a sop the the Greenies that support him.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
petaiel
12:30 AM on 05/11/2011
I seriously doubt there is anyone smart enough in Alabama to run a nuke plant safely !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
allmywickedsins
05:28 AM on 05/11/2011
As someone that currently lives in Alabama, and has lived all over this country, I'd have to disagree with that statement. There are plenty of plants down here that Alabamians run just fine.
photo
straightuptalker
What ever happened to common sense?
06:33 AM on 05/11/2011
I don't get you people that continue to malign our Southern States with crass comments about how stupid they are...what's up with that? Still drawing that line in the sand? Americans against Americans...still?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ryan Tippens
republican.
06:49 AM on 05/11/2011
Yeah.....NASA is in Huntsville Alabama...guess nobody very smart works at NASA...WOW and you've only got 2 fans,wonder why?
07:33 AM on 05/11/2011
Alabama home to, George Wallace, slavery, racism and the kkk.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
petaiel
11:48 PM on 05/12/2011
Ryan Tippins: Nasa, ANOTHER failure. Soon to be de-funded.
photo
skyeagle
R.I.N.O.
12:04 AM on 05/11/2011
What do we do with the spent nuclear fueld rods? We have about 71,000 metirc tons of them cooling in water pools waiting for a good home.
11:55 PM on 05/10/2011
The pro radiation crowd using crumbling plants to justify new ones is an interesting tactic.
Admit the problems and just happen to have multibillion taxpayer dollar plans to fix the problems.

I also like the supposed factual approach using science that ignores facts.
Sweeping half of the history under the carpet as if the hundreds of thousands of health claims filed by industry workers never happened, as if nuclear accidents are healthy too, as if millions spent lobbying and funding campaigns leads to good policy, as if a safe and profitable industry needs taxpayer dollars and taxpayers on the hook for accidents too.

No. I think it is time to put nuclear on the shelf with powdered wigs and other outdated concepts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NWBrunette
Blessed Girl
02:02 AM on 05/11/2011
Exactly. F&F.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
09:59 AM on 05/11/2011
You forgot to call it what it really is - double dipping on the ratepayer and taxpayer. End investor owned utilities now. Make utilities compete by forming regional Independent Service Operators who by electricity from all producers, including residential and business producers of clean energy, at retail rates. You will see nuclear power disappear because it cannot operate outside of the investor owned utility model because it cannot compete.