Welcome back to Stockhouse Member Sign In
Send my password
Become a member today, It's free!
We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Yankee, #Vermont: 1984 loose core shroud bolts, leaked contaminated coolant. Oceanside Approvd by NRC for another 20 years.Peach Bottom, #Pennsylvania: 1985 4 of 48 bolts cracked due to irradiation/intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC).Peach Bottom 3 #PA: Experiencing core flow shortfall as EOV coastdown is begun. Problem is attibuted to jet pump fouling.Grand Gulf, #Mississippi, 1989 Wearing of the bolt splines.I. Hatch 1, #Georgia: Seven core shroud flawed head bolts from the moisture separator were removedHatch 2, #Georgia: Cracks were detected during the inspection of four welds (H3, H4, H2 and H1)Quad Cities 2 #Illinois core shroud repair clamps created interference prevented 2 separators support legs from lowering.Clinton Power Station #Illinois: An ultrasonic indication (crack) in the beam bolt area was identified in one beamBrunswick 1 #NC: Cracks appeared close to the weld between the core shroud and the upper guide support ring.Brunswick 2 #NorthCarolina: 1994 involved the impossibility of fitting a shroud bolt holding pawl in its position.Dresden 2 #Illinois: Loose core shroud bolts, leaked contaminated coolant.Dresden 3 #Illinois: Numerous indications of cracking were detected in the heat-affected zone located below weld H5,Dresden 3 #Illinois: Rupturing of hold down beam, jet pump transition, causing failure of jet pumpSusquehanna 1 #Pennsylvania: some welds inspected in spring 1995 crackingfound, NRC prepared a SER.Limerick 1 #Pennsylvania: a crack discovered in weld joining inlet riser to two jet pumps and the transition pieceMonticello #Minnesota: Large crack detected inside vessel, of holding arm for inlet riser to jet pumps #7 & 8, caused by fatigue#Washington Public Power 2: Discovered that several adjusting screws were not in contact with the jet pump inlet mixer
On August 29, 2002 last year, an announcement was made about the long-termcover-up regarding cracks in the reactor shroud. Over the following year, numerous horrifying facts have been revealed one after another.
The first incident involved hiding cracks in the reactor core shroud. This was followed by the discovery the that Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) had also found cracks in the recirculation piping system, but had failed to report them. Then there was the cover-up of the results of the leak rateinspection test for the containment vessel.
The first official announcement of cracks found in a reactor shroud was made for Fukushima II-3 on July, 2001.
Mr. Kei Sugaoka, a former GE engineer, who disclosed lax management of nuclear inspection by TEPCO and GE, revealed his name and appeared to the public in Fukushima Prefecture for the first time.Mr. Kei Sugaoka is a third generation Japanese-American who had been working as an engineer at GE until 1998 when he was fired without being given sufficient reason. He was involved in the construction of Fukushima I-1 where he witnessed flaws that were kept secret by the company.In replying to the question, why he decided to whistle-blow long concealed secrets in nuclear industry, he explained "it's all about GE's insincere manage-ment attitude."He added, however, that he never expected that his appealing could result in theresignation of the former president of TEPCO as well as the shut down of all the nuclear plants in TEPCO's power supply region.
Reactor Location Size Year operation beganBrowns Ferry 1* Decatur, AL 1065 MW 1974Browns Ferry 2* Decatur, AL 1118 MW 1974Browns Ferry 3* Decatur, AL 1114 MW 1976**Brunswick 1 Southport, NC 938 MW 1976**Brunswick 2 Southport, NC 900 MW 1974Cooper* Nebraska City, NE 760 MW 1974**Dresden 2 Morris, IL 867 MW 1971**Dresden 3 Morris, IL 867 MW 1971Duane Arnold* Cedar Rapids, IA 581 MW 1974**Hatch 1 Baxley, GA 876 MW 1974**Hatch 2 Baxley, GA 883 MW 1978Fermi 2 Monroe, MI 1122 MW 1985Hope Creek** Hancocks Bridge, NJ 1061 MW 1986Fitzpatrick* Oswego, NY 852 MW 1974**Monticello Monticello, MN 572 MW 1971Nine Mile Point 1* Oswego, NY 621 MW 1974Oyster Creek* Toms River, NJ 619 MW 1971**Peach Bottom 2 Lancaster, PA 1112 MW 1973**Peach Bottom 3 Lancaster, PA 1112 MW 1974Pilgrim** Plymouth, MA 685 MW 1972**Quad Cities 1 Moline, IL 867 MW 1972**Quad Cities 2 Moline, IL 867 MW 1972**Vermont Yankee Vernon, VT 620 MW 19731 Star - has received 20-year license extension from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission2 Star - 20-year license renewal extension is under review by Nuclear Regulatory Commission2 Star, left of Facility name/bold print - On the European Problem Event list above.
The country's 104 nuclear reactors produced 799 billion kWh in 2009, over 20% of total electrical output.Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2018, the first of those resulting from 16 licence applications to build 24 new nuclear reactors made since mid-2007.Government policy changes since the late 1990s have helped pave the way for significant growth in nuclear capacity. Government* and industry are working closely on expedited approval for construction and new plant designs.