Comanche Peak Reactor (Texas) goes offline for "unplanned maintenance"...why the secrecy?

energyandenvironmentblog.dallasnews.com...
July14, 2011

Allan Koenig, a spokesman for Energy Future Holdings, which owns the plant near Glen Rose, confirmed that the plant is down, but declined to give further details about the outage.

News media sent out notices asking the public to conserve energy between 3 and 7 pm due to strains on the electrical grids here, and cited Comanche Peak reactor as adding to the problem because it had to shut down a reactor due to "unplanned maintenance".

Why the secrecy? I can't find info anywhere as to what is going on with the reactor, what the problem is. A spokesman for the owner of the plant refuses to give details.

If it is deemed "unplanned maintenance", isn't that an "unusual event" by definition? Yet I can't seem to find that listed anywhere.

Is there any site that has to list details why a reactor is taken offline, no matter what?

link to site: www.nucpros.com...

This happened back on May 19, 2011. Could be related to the need for maintenance.

reply to post by RoyalBlue


I'm quite sure there are plenty of unplanned maintenance issues with major machines that would cause some stir if people were aware...bottom line is machines breakdown and it would be silly to think that nuclear reactors are exempt...they are damned if they say what's wrong and damned for not saying anything..

Sometimes "unplanned maintenance" might just be exactly what it sounds like, unplanned maintenance. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Link to site: www.nrc.gov...

this site shows all the reported events. i read through a few of them ( 6 for July 15th alone!!!) stopped after a few of them. I decided that i wanted to be able to get to sleep tonight.

To my mind, "unplanned maintenance" means that something broke unexpectedly.

The question is what broke and why.

What I think is that the weeks of unending excessive heat overstrained components that need to cool off periodically to maintain functions.

I expect more things to begin breaking due to heat stress, and I further expect that replacement parts will become harder and harder to come by, due to supply chain interruptions due to limited productin capacity in Japan for a variety of reasons: earthquakes, tsunami, Fukushima, low energy supplies, etc.

Posting a Reuters article not visible on the public website, here's the article from database Factiva, fully attributed.

UPDATE 1-Luminant Texas Comanche Peak 1 reactor shut
200 words
12 July 2011
07:40
Reuters News
LBA
English
(c) 2011 Reuters Limited

(Updates with company comment)

July 12 (Reuters) - Luminant's 1,150-megawatt Unit 1 at the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant in Texas was shut on Monday to address a maintenance issue, a company spokeswoman said on Tuesday.

"Our team acted decisively in assessing the issue and making the decision to take the unit offline to ensure the continued safety of plant employees and plant reliability," spokeswoman Laura Starnes said in an mail to Reuters.

The unit shut from 60 percent power earlier Monday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report.

The adjacent 1,150-MW Unit 2 continued to run at full power, the NRC said. ---------------------------------------------------------------

PLANT BACKGROUND/TIMELINE
STATE: Texas
COUNTY: Somervell
CITY: Glen Rose in Somervell County about 50 miles
(80 km) southwest of Fort Worth
OPERATOR: Luminant
OWNER : Energy Future Holdings
CAPACITY: 2,367 MW
UNIT : 1 - 1,209 MW
2 - 1,158 MW
FUEL: Nuclear
DISPATCH: Baseload

TIMELINE:
1990- Unit 1 enters service
1993- Unit 2 enters service
2030- Unit 1 license expires
2033- Unit 2 license expires

(Reporting by Naveed Anjum in Bangalore)

UTILITIES-OPERATIONS/LUMINANT-COMANCHE (UPDATE 1)

Reuters Limited

Document LBA0000020110712e77c000jv

I believe this plant has a public lake, somerville lake, "attached". Used to swim in it as a kiddo, this being a weekend, if they closef the lake to the public, then I would worry. (creepy stories of the lake built over a graveyard, probably just told to me for laughs)

I used to swim in lake bryan also, which is close and also has a reactor. We used to take the boat directly behind the plant to the "warm water"... Boy oh boy, if I knew then what I know now!

Maybe they know something is going to happen
and starting to shut down the nuke plants to prevent
another fukushima disaster.

An unplanned maintenance shut down means the haven't done any maintenance and something broke.
At least that is what my company does.

What's with all these threads about nuclear outages, unusual events and so forth. A lot go OMG, we're all going to die or the sky is falling.

Equipment breaks down and you have to do maintenance. If involves the primary or secondary loops you usually can't while the reactor is critical and you are generating power. Secondary pumps are used, leaks continue, etc until plant capacity can be removed from grid and a controlled cooldown can be initiated. Only if damage to critical equipment is imminent will you or safety systems SCRAM the reactor.

At shift change if something on check list doesn't work right you may have to report it to the NRC. Just about everything in the protected area that happens has to be reported particularly security, safety, fire protection and most anything involving the .primary or secondary loops and related equipment.

Nuclear power is basically safe clean economical power for now and the foreseeable future that is the most regulated and misunderstood business in the US.

reply to post by Bramble Iceshimmer

Wow, really? Wish I could believe that one, it's more likely I'll find a pot of gold at the end of the next rainbow.
All the reactors running right now are pushing way past their intended service life. The officials are looking the other way while licenses are being extended by rubber-stamping them. The whole industry is so wrought with corruption, lies, and cover-ups since the beginning. Just do a little research on how many "accidents" and "incidents" each reactor has had since it's beginning, how many whistleblower intimidations and threats, charges and violations, so on and so on.
And how can you call it a clean, safe energy, when multiple reactors are constantly leaking radioactive contamination into our environment, in one way or another?

Anyway, I know problems have to be reported to the NRC (kind of like the wolf in charge of guarding the hen house, but that's for a different debate), but why aren't the details of the problem with this reactor on any official reporting like the other reactor problems have been reported? If it needs maintenance, great! Then say "it needs maintenance...NOT it was shut down due to UNPLANNED maintenance AND refuse outright to give details. Other reactors are reporting details when they are having problems. I'm sorry, but an UNPLANNED shutdown of a reactor IS a big deal, something that is not taken lightly.

And thanks JJJTIR, good find!

"Our team acted decisively in assessing the issue and making the decision to take the unit offline to ensure the continued safety of plant employees and plant reliability," spokeswoman Laura Starnes said in an mail to Reuters.

Sounds a little more to it than a "minor maintenance adjustment". And not to mention this plant is already mired in lots of controversy, just from the reports I've found on it (it's history) online.

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer

What's with all these threads about nuclear outages, unusual events and so forth. A lot go OMG, we're all going to die or the sky is falling.

Equipment breaks down and you have to do maintenance. If involves the primary or secondary loops you usually can't while the reactor is critical and you are generating power. Secondary pumps are used, leaks continue, etc until plant capacity can be removed from grid and a controlled cooldown can be initiated. Only if damage to critical equipment is imminent will you or safety systems SCRAM the reactor.

At shift change if something on check list doesn't work right you may have to report it to the NRC. Just about everything in the protected area that happens has to be reported particularly security, safety, fire protection and most anything involving the .primary or secondary loops and related equipment.

Nuclear power is basically safe clean economical power for now and the foreseeable future that is the most regulated and misunderstood business in the US.

OMG,yes the sky is falling,
one mistake can turn into a disaster.
You seem to take it so lightly.

‎"There is no amount of radiation so small that has no ill effects... Perhaps we are talking only a very small number of individual tragedies... Perhaps they are too small for statistics... But they nevertheless loom very large indeed in human and moral terms."

reply to post by kdog1982

Yeah, I live just outside the 1st evacuation zone of two units. The final construction permits are supposedly in progress for two more units. Another two units are planed about 70 miles away. There will be lots of jobs within the region. They are trying to get a coal plant also but they are having permit problems. We have several chemical plants that have ups and downs in jobs and products. We have pretty good rail and water ways and are near the Intercostal Canal.

I was here during construction of the first two units and have neighbors that work at plant. When I was part of county EMS we had lots of presentations and training by plant health physics and security. We had drills with their medical squads that in an emergency would bring any injured employees out of the protected area to us after initial decontamination so security didn't have to search us or our equipment. In an emergency even though we had training to use the extra equipment, a health physics employee would ride with us to document everything, check our dosimeters and clear us and our equipment to return to service.

Just before fuel loading and start up they had tours of the finished plant and you pretty much got to see everything.

I would have to say I respect nuclear energy but I look at it as just another industrial plant in our area. I suppose I would initially do what I would do with any chemical or nuclear emergency, tape doors, windows and turn off AC then check my evacuation kit. Listen to the radio and scanner. I have oxygen cylinders and accessories available if necessary, Since we live in hurricane country we already keep vehicle topped and cash, food, water, candles, matches, batteries and camp stove fuel on hand.

reply to post by RoyalBlue


Commanche peak is 20 years old and the average reactor in the world is about 30 years old, while some of the older reactors are approaching 40 years. They were apparently designed for 40 years of service. The concerns are with extending the life past 40 years to 60 years. So no, very few if any reactors are pushing past there original expected service life.

As far as this accident goes, it could be anything. Safety related or not.

reply to post by RoyalBlue


OP lost all credibility on this subject in these threads,

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not much more to say.

Originally posted by Nosred
reply to post by RoyalBlue

 

OP lost all credibility on this subject in these threads,

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not much more to say.

edit on 23-7-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)

Hmmm, which OP, I wonder are you referring?