TVA, Brown's Ferry Reactor Scram

Unit 2 Reactor Scrams, safety equipment offline, coolant water level drops 50 inches before recovering. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2009/09/browns_ferry_nuclear_plant_shu.html
Official Report from NRC http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/2009/20090930en.html Event 45391 This event occurred last night.

What would have happened if the cooling water had dropped a few more inches, hear about 3 Mile Island, how about Chernobyl? Nuclear Power is all so safe huh? How long did it take for the cooling water to return to the "safe level?"

Do you feel safe when the TVA and TVA's contractors punish their employees for reporting safety problems? http://www.timesdaily.com/article/20090928/NEWS/909289992/1011/NEWS?Title=Tuscumbia-whistle-blower-wins-case-against-Browns-Ferry Unfortunately there is a history of punishing those who report nuclear safety violations within the TVA.

Nuclear power is not safe, it is not clean (Just ask the 160,000 nuclear workers who have filed claims and the 40,000 whose claims have been approved and the 1200 whose claims were never paid due to their deaths.)and it is sure is not cheap. One plant's cost, 8-9 billion dollars and rising.

>>>

Update: The Browns Ferry Unit 2 Nuclear Reactor Scrammed due to equipment failure at 11:23 PM on the 29th of Sept. 2009. The TVA reported, "HPCI and RCIC actuated as expected to restore reactor water level. Reactor pressure control was maintained on the turbine bypass valves, and no Main Steam Relief Valves (MSRVs) were opened as a result of the transient."

>

"At this time the unit is stable in mode 3. Reactor water level is being controlled using one Reactor Feedwater pump. HPCI and RCIC have been returned to standby readiness. Reactor pressure is being automatically maintained by the main turbine bypass valves." So they stated, but was this a true statement? Did the RCIC actually return to standby readiness?

>

The subsequent event report, after review of the event data reads, " "The initial notification made at 0409 hours ET on September 30, 2009, reported that the RCIC system actuated as expected in conjunction with the HPCI to restore Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) water level. However, during a review of plant data, BFN [Browns Ferry Nuclear] determined that after receiving a valid actuation signal, RCIC failed to inject to the RPV. The cause of the failure is under investigation. " The RCIC is the reactor core isolation cooling system, a very important safety asset failed. This is what caused the reactor water level to drop 50 inches but was not reported in the initial report.

>

The initial report mentioned above was in error and false. A violation of Atomic Safety Protocol even though it has been corrected in the subsequent report. Inaccurate reporting reflects a failure in the attention to detail, a personal reliability issue. A lack of attention to detail is not a desirable trait for the management of a nuclear power plant.

>>

Update: The NRC Event report was updated the next day to reflect an accurate report after a review of event data. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/2009/20091001en.html The updated report reads, " * * * UPDATE FROM MIKE HUNTER TO JOE O'HARA AT 1508 ON 9/30/09 * * * "The initial notification made at 0409 hours ET on September 30, 2009, reported that the RCIC system actuated as expected in conjunction with the HPCI to restore Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) water level. However, during a review of plant data, BFN [Browns Ferry Nuclear] determined that after receiving a valid actuation signal, RCIC failed to inject to the RPV. The cause of the failure is under investigation. "The licensee informed the NRC Resident Inspector of the update and does not plan a press release." Notified R2DO(Ernstes)."