[dino_bobba_renno]

"What, they wanted her to "lead" by allowing the AECL to continue to operate the reactor without the required backups?"



Ok, I'm kind of getting played out with all of the "ITS GONNA BLOW!!" rhetoric. I'm not saying that you're say this exactly but most of the arguments I've heard about this all seem to imply that the safety deficiencies were some sort of imminent danger. The fact is that these back up pump were in case of an extremely rare seismic event. Now lets take a look at this, on one hand you have the possibility of a melt down if just by some by almost imposable fluke of nature the area gets hit with a major earth quake and on the other hand you have, ... well say.. a world heath crisis that might happen.. or no wait .. will definitely happen if you shut the plant down. Hmmph, *scratchs his head* . Tough choice. A person with enough leadership skills in this situation should have been able to find a solution to this problem without having to shut down the plant. You can blame the lack of leadership on either Keen or Lunn or both for that matter. Heads should roll for the simple fact that the plant shut down in the first place. What did Keen expect? To stay on as president after a major screw up like this? Give me a break, she should have stepped down long before she was ever fired to save herself the embarrassment.

[hurley_108]

dino_bobba_renno wrote:

"What, they wanted her to "lead" by allowing the AECL to continue to operate the reactor without the required backups?"



Ok, I'm kind of getting played out with all of the "ITS GONNA BLOW!!" rhetoric. I'm not saying that you're say this exactly but most of the arguments I've heard about this all seem to imply that the safety deficiencies were some sort of imminent danger. The fact is that these back up pump were in case of an extremely rare seismic event. Now lets take a look at this, on one hand you have the possibility of a melt down if just by some by almost imposable fluke of nature the area gets hit with a major earth quake and on the other hand you have, ... well say.. a world heath crisis that might happen.. or no wait .. will definitely happen if you shut the plant down. Hmmph, *scratchs his head* . Tough choice. A person with enough leadership skills in this situation should have been able to find a solution to this problem without having to shut down the plant. You can blame the lack of leadership on either Keen or Lunn or both for that matter. Heads should roll for the simple fact that the plant shut down in the first place. What did Keen expect? To stay on as president after a major screw up like this? Give me a break, she should have stepped down long before she was ever fired to save herself the embarrassment.

Then why build the equipment into the reactor at all? Why build in equipment that will likely never be needed or used?

If it's important enough to require and design and build, then it's important enough to shut the plant down over if it's not functional.

[Wally_Sconce]

why is it a meltdown, if the sci-fi movies always show a nuclear winter.

[Zipperfish]

dino_bobba_renno wrote:

"What, they wanted her to "lead" by allowing the AECL to continue to operate the reactor without the required backups?"



Ok, I'm kind of getting played out with all of the "ITS GONNA BLOW!!" rhetoric. I'm not saying that you're say this exactly but most of the arguments I've heard about this all seem to imply that the safety deficiencies were some sort of imminent danger. The fact is that these back up pump were in case of an extremely rare seismic event. Now lets take a look at this, on one hand you have the possibility of a melt down if just by some by almost imposable fluke of nature the area gets hit with a major earth quake and on the other hand you have, ... well say.. a world heath crisis that might happen.. or no wait .. will definitely happen if you shut the plant down. Hmmph, *scratchs his head* . Tough choice. A person with enough leadership skills in this situation should have been able to find a solution to this problem without having to shut down the plant. You can blame the lack of leadership on either Keen or Lunn or both for that matter. Heads should roll for the simple fact that the plant shut down in the first place. What did Keen expect? To stay on as president after a major screw up like this? Give me a break, she should have stepped down long before she was ever fired to save herself the embarrassment.

It wouldn't blow. A nuclear meltdown at this kind of reactor would not result in a nuclear explosion. A steam explosion maybe. It results in potentially highly radioactive matieral being emitted to the atmosphere. I'm in the emergency response business. If I had a dime for every emgerency I've been to where the emergency back-ups were off-line because operators figured that an emergency is, as you say, " an extremely rare event," I'd be a rich man.

Emergency systems are designed to work for that one-in-a-thousand chance that something goes wrong. To view them as unnecessary because an emergency is unlikely is the kind of thinking that leads to catastrophes.

[Scape]

The NSC granted a new license to the AECL on the condition that AECL would complete seven upgrades. They didn't. On Nov 19 they discovered that the connection of two cooling pumps to a backup supply had not been installed as ordered. Now I grant the chance of a 6.1 quake is remote but that's not the point, they didn't do it. So what teeth does the NSC have if their conditions can be ignored? Now the NSC is not without fault here as they did not inform Health Canada that a shut down was in the works the moment that this was discovered and they should have aborted the shutdown and worked with AECL to avert a crisis and did the paperwork in follow up. That being said, and the government ordering a restart is the correct action here, the authority of the NSC is compromised with every other nuclear facility in Canada. They have been publicly neutered and if you don't think major footdragging will be the result of this from every major nuclear operator in Canada you're dreaming in technocolour. In that regard the safety of the community of Canada at large is at stake.

Quote:

NRU first went critical on November 3, 1957. Under AECL's previous operating licence, the reactor was scheduled to be shut down at the end of 2005.

But the company applied for permission to keep the reactor operating to the year 2011 "and beyond" while discussions continue with the federal government about a possible eventual replacement.

In its application for the extra time, AECL said it has spent more than $30 million over the past 15 years upgrading the reactor's safety systems and bringing it up to current standards.

Combined with a "systematic and wide-ranging review" of the reactor, AECL said NRU can keep running "with a very high degree of assurance of safety and reliability."

"The material condition of NRU and its critical structures, systems and components will support continued safe and reliable operation, with a good prognosis for the next 10 years."

During hearings on the new Chalk River site licence, which includes NRU, CNSC members said they were generally pleased with the progress AECL has made.

But that didn't stop commission members from asking some pointed questions.

Commission members noted that CNSC staff have found a number of "deficiencies" in an audit of two safety upgrades AECL has completed on NRU.

Those deficiencies included problems with welders' qualifications, work proceeding beyond a mandatory inspection hold-point, and concrete work that was not controlled in a way to ensure that the results met the required specifications.

link