This is an NRC Headquarters report from Aug. 22, 1999, about a reactor scram at a Commonwealth Edison plant. I did not post it initially because there was no direct link to Y2K, but it has stayed in the back of my mind. I believe it does relate peripherally to the Year 2000 issue, in that the two causes for the scram are "inadequate testing and tuning" (at that power level) and the operator not performing "the expected procedural actions" in response to the event.

The good news is that the automatic reactor scram went off without a hitch (unlike the recent Indian Point scram). The bad news is that the problem was caused by inadequate actions on two different levels -- exactly the type of thing which might engender Year 2000 difficulties, too.

Commonwealth Edison Co. MR Number: 3-99-0075 La Salle 2

Date: 08/22/99 Marseilles,Illinois Licensee report, 8/23/99

Subject: Automatic Shutdown on Low Reactor Water Level Reportable Event Number: 36056

Discussion:

At 22:00 on 8/21/99 Unit 2 operators commenced a load drop to repair a degraded condition on the main generator phase A potential transformer. At 22:55 with the reactor at 78 percent power, the reactor scrammed automatically due to low reactor level induced by a feedwater level transient. All control rods fully inserted. Reactor level and pressure followed expected trends. All systems responded as expected. Subsequent to the scram, minor problems were encountered putting the main turbine and the "A" turbine driven feed pump on their respective turning gear. The licensee's preliminary investigation of the event has determined two causes for the scram. First, was inadequate testing and tuning of the feedwater control system at this power level. The licensee plans to conduct further feedwater system testing and tuning during the return to full power. Second, the operator did not perform the expected procedural actions in response to the event. The licensee is continuing to determine the potential extent of condition and corrective actions.

Regional Action:

The senior resident inspector responded to the site and is monitoring the licensee's post scram investigation and corrective actions.

-- Anonymous, September 04, 1999

Answers

The licensee'spreliminary investigation of the event has determined two causes for the scram. First, was inadequate testing and tuning of the feedwater control system at this power level. The licensee plans to conduct further feedwater system testing and tuning during the return to full power.

Second, the operator did not perform the expected procedural actions in response to the event.

ah yes... inadequate testing and tuning, inadequate testing and tuning, inadequate testing and tuning -- get used to the sound folks this will be a mantra of despair when tshtf...

but, not to be outdone by that oft phophesized disasterous event, that is being brought to a town near you by way of the infamous operator errroooorrrrrrrr.

now, fancy that this is happening in the best of times... so what do we think will happen to the nukes when all hell breaks loose? is it going to get better under all that pressure? does it comfort you that we can 'ring up' the nrc to ride in like superman and save what is left of the day?

whenever i bring this up someone suggests moving to a 'safer'locale... how the hell do 20 million people pick up and move to a safer locale?

or is it only i who should relocate since i am so 'concerned' about the safety, or lack thereof, of the nuclear facilities?

-- Anonymous, September 04, 1999

Marianne,

You bring out a good point regarding operator error. And I'm not jumping on these operators, since I know all about pilot error charges that are routinely advanced after some mishap. Sometimes these charges are justified, sometimes not. But, one thing I do know, when you are very tired out from long hours of duty time and add an undercurrent of continuous stress to the mix, human errors are guaranteed. I think that is a formula we can count on next January. And that is precisely the time that the automatic controls need to work flawlessly.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 1999

Marianne,

I currently live on the Texas gulf coast and for many years lived in Florida. We have something called 'hurricanes'. Back in the 50's and 60's many people died when they didn't evacuate out of dangerous from the path's of hurricanes. I went with a friend to see how his beach house did after hurricane Frederic in 1979. He evacuated. We could not even find where his house had been. The house was gone, the road was gone, all that was there was sand. I also remember seeing the water marks on the Air Force barracks at Keesler AFB in Biloxi, Missippi, 2 1/2 stories up, 1/2 mile from the gulf in the 60's. I viewed the debris of Andrew, which I had prepared my own home for. Back in the early part of the century over 6,000 died in Galveston. As a result, the people who didn't die increased the height of Galveston Island, by 17 feet on average. If you go to Galveston Island today you can see just the tips of the 12 foot tall fences sticking above the ground around some of the old mansions.

Today, as a result of these deaths, evacuations are often now enforced and 10's and hundreds of thousands are now evacuated, routinely. If nothing happens, they come back to their homes and continue with life as usual. If something does happen, they thank their lucky stars that they did leave, and they go back and try to pick up the pieces.

Today we have no 'evacuation' plan for y2k problems. It is like the old days of the hurricanes. There is one difference though, this time the NRC and many others are saying 'there is no hurricane' coming, it is a fig newton of our imaginations.

They have answered your question 'how the hell do 20 million people pick up and move to a safer locale?' with 'you don't'. While they have provisioned their bunkers well beneath the White House and beneath Camp David.

Just remember, the same people who brought you ' I didn't .... that woman', 'no incidiary devices at Waco', no Delta Forces at Waco, 'What FBI files?' and the Chinese are our friends and buddies and wouldn't spy on us, are the same ones bringing you 'don't worry, be happy'.

What do you think? Is there a 'hurricane' coming or not? Are you in the 'flood plain' or not? On this one, you get to make your own decision for yourself. Take advantage of the opportunity. You are not bound by the decisions of 20 million others, only by yourself.

xBob

-- Anonymous, September 05, 1999

Additional Note for Marianne:

Here in Texas we have "Remember the Alamo!". Perhaps for y2k we should have "Remember Noah!"

xBob

-- Anonymous, September 05, 1999

I went with the Indian Point post since it involves the ability of the plant to be safely shutdown on a loss of power. But Bonnie, you've made quite a stretch there, I don't think this event is y2k related at all. Lasalle had a reactor trip on 9/2....shall we include it next? WACO is a popular topic these days on TB2000...is this forum going to devolve as well? Regards,

-- Anonymous, September 05, 1999

yes ff, bonnie did make quite a stretch thinking 'outside' of the box as it were... you ought to try it sometime. it is quite easy and based on a logical extrapolation of data into a possible scenario.

maybe i can give you a simplistic example of how this works...

this is not a scary thing and is accomplished by the common man every day of the week. it kinda works like this... you are driving down a street, you see three kids on bicycles cross the road in front of you, they are one in front of the other, you are almost at the intersection and quickly slow down, not sure, but assuming another one or two might be following behind... and thank god you slowed down, because there are two more directly in your path. see how this works? you took a piece of information, analyzed it, and deduced a probable outcome.

it should not be difficult for one with minimum creative abilities to to draw the parallels between existent problems at a nuclear facility manifesting into large problems at the rollover when the heat is on and all the rules of the game are new and different.

sometimes, just sometimes, with sufficient data, a tad of extrapolation is necessary in order to arrive at a probable conclusion. ... you are up to your old tricks again.

-- Anonymous, September 06, 1999

Hey Factfinder

How gracious of you to allow the posting of the Indian Point emergency.

Now perhaps you can explain how the redundant safety systems failed? That Augmented Investigation Team desperately needs your expertise.

There's a nice little hotel on the main street in Peekskill. You really should think about spending your new years there. They may need you. Until then, I hear the Pope is not feeling well and God was wondering if you could fill in for him for a while.

-- Anonymous, September 06, 1999

FactFinder,

It appears that we can't keep our EDG's (emergency diesel generators) running, with or without y2k. And without EDG's and/or external power our nuc's melt down. Is this correct?

Quoting from the Indian Point scram post:

"Following the trip, 480 VAC bus 6A received an undervoltage trip signal, causing buses 2A, 3A, 5A, and 6A to transfer to their associated emergency diesel generators (EDGs) (22, 21, and 23, respectively). Buses 2A, 3A, and 5A are currently being supplied by the EDGs; however, the output breaker for EDG 23 tripped upon loading to bus 6A, which remains deenergized. Operators manually started the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump due to the loss of control power to one of the motor driven AFW pumps caused by the loss of bus 6A. "

xBob

-- Anonymous, September 06, 1999

xBob,

Yeh, but don't you see, they were able to "work-around it" and by taking personal charge they kept the system going. So, it didn't matter that the emergency systems didn't function correctly. In fact it doesn't matter that any emergency systems function correctly as long as there are folks there, who know what they're doing, and can quickly jump start something or other to keep it from going critical. Now, don't you feel a whole lot better? :-(

-- Anonymous, September 06, 1999

Thanks Gordon,

I agree, we have a lot of talented people who can 'jump start' and work around the problems, for a while and hold it all together. How long can they stay awake?

I return back to the Ohio plant, hit by the tornado, which lost all commercial power last year, who had numbers of hero's hold it together for 41 hours.

But they finally ran out of spit, glue, duct tape and bailing wire, and were about to lose it all, when a few minutes another set of hero's finally got the commercial power working again.

41 hours without external power and they lost it.

Doesn't sound to me like the odds favor keeping up the EDG's for a week or a month or what ever, if necessary.

xBob

-- Anonymous, September 06, 1999

xBob,

You're right about people just plain running out of steam after too many hours without proper R&R. And from what I gather so far, they have no idea if the EDGs will actually run for even a week, because they haven't been tested to that extreme yet. We know that diesel locomotives (locomotive sized generators, as Cory says) will run for days/weeks without fail, because we see them doing exacly that kind of work routinely. So, what's wrong with these EDGs that they are not at least that reliable?

-- Anonymous, September 07, 1999