Below is my recent letter to Senator Risch. It turns out that SANDIA, under contract from NRC, is conducting large scale corrosion tests of zircaloy bundles in air only. These are called fire tests.
Robert H. Leyse
P. O. Box 2850
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
January 19, 2012
The Honorable James E. Risch
United States Senator
1411 Falls Avenue E Suite 2
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Dear Senator Risch:
Nutshell: Why is NRC reluctant to perform the testing in water-steam per PRM-50-76?
The main appeal of my PRM-50-76, ML022240009, Docketed May 8, 2002, is that further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam are necessary. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories, see ML041210109, April 24, 2004. NRC now says that none of these Canadian tests are applicable and I believe you have already asked NRC for the details of their analysis that I requested in my letter of December 19, 2011.
On December 19, 2011, I wrote you, “I must keep this inquiry brief; hence I am deferring other concerns until very early in 2012,” It turns out that on December 23, 2011, I inadvertently found out that NRC has a huge program that involves corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies, see ML11031A000, page 58 of 226, I have asked NRC about this and they have told me nothing. Then, on January 5, 2011, I accidently ran across an NRC disclosure of a closed meeting that was held on September 30, 2011, that included EPRI and DOE and that included discussions of the corrosion testing of the full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. Here is one reference that was released on January 3, 2012: ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011, (23 page(s), 12/22/2011).
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
Robert H. Leyse
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Viewing content in the browser is not configured for this document. Content downloading will start shortly.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
CLOSED MEETING: EPRI, NRC, DOE September 30, 2011
On January 3, 2012, the NRC released the following restricted amount of contents of the closed meeting. You may view the any of the four documents at NRC's ADAMS.
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Following is the two page memo of the closed meetiong that is dated 12/22/2011. Note that on page 2 we are told: "In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public."
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Following is the two page memo of the closed meetiong that is dated 12/22/2011. Note that on page 2 we are told: "In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public."
December 22, 2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Director
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
FROM: Brett A. Rini, Technical Assistant /RA/ B. Holian for B. Rini
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
SUBJECT: CLOSED MEETING BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH;
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; AND THE ELECTRIC POWER
RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC.
On September 30, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) staff met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) and Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (EPRI) to:
(1) Discuss ongoing and future research including potential projects as a result of the
Fukushima-Daiichi accident.
(2) Exchange current research and development (R&D) activities and plans of interest to all parties to identify potential opportunities for collaborative research projects.
(3) Identify progress made and any obstacles to making progress in tasks identified in the addenda to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NRC and EPRI on Cooperative Nuclear Safety Research (ADAMS Accession No. ML092290122).
Enclosure 1 of this meeting summary provides a list of the meeting participants.
A closed meeting notice was issued to the meeting participants on September 21, 2011
(ADAMS Accession No. ML112640017). A high-level draft agenda was included as an
attachment to the meeting notice.
The meeting consisted of several presentations by RES staff and representatives of DOE and EPRI. These presentations were organized by topic areas of interest that had been coordinated among the meeting participants in advance.
Enclosure 2 provides the final meeting agenda that identifies these topic areas and includes a detailed schedule for the meeting.
Enclosure 3 provides handout materials that RES staff used for their presentations. Following staff review of the RES handouts used during the meeting, staff determined that the handouts could be released to the public.
CONTACT: Brett Rini, RES
301-251-7615
Brett.Rini@nrc.gov
-2-
The meeting objectives were accomplished through discussions that accompanied and followed presentations throughout the day. In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public.
Enclosures:
1. List of Meeting Participants
2. Final Meeting Agenda
3. RES Staff Presentation Handout Materials
DISTRIBUTION
Jennifer Uhle
Brian Holian
Michael Case
Richard Correia
Kathy Halvey Gibson
Richard Rivera-Lugo
Jeanne Dion
Vered Shaffer
Thomas Nicholson
Ghani Zigh
Marty Stutzke
Steven Schaffer
Richard Lee
Rosemary Hogan
Aladar Csontos
Mirela Gavrilas
Annie Kammerer
Kevin Coyne
Patricia Santiago
David Stroup
Russell Sydnor
Sean Peters
David Skeen
Friday, January 27, 2012
The Obama Growth Gap
The following is copied from the Wall Street Journal, January 25, 2012, page A17.
Ronald Reagan: He and advisers such as George Schultz shunned the idea of stimulus and agreed on "the need for a long term point of view."
Ronald Reagan: He and advisers such as George Schultz shunned the idea of stimulus and agreed on "the need for a long term point of view."
Friday, January 13, 2012
Closed meeting at NRC Sept.30, 2011
From: Bobleyse@aol.com
To: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, chairman@nrc.gov
Sent: 12/2/2011 11:31:03 A.M. Mountain Standard Time
Subj: Meltdown in Japan
Meltdown in Japan
The reactor core meltdown in Japan, WORLD NEWS, WSJ, December 1, is covered very well. However, the U. S. Nuclear Reactor Commission (NRC) gets into the act with its deceptive remarks. NRC is quoted, “This was not all unexpected. It really does nothing to change our assumptions – because we based our decisions on very pessimistic scenarios.” The NRC does not license our nuclear power plants on the basis of very pessimistic scenarios. The NRC believes that hydrogen production begins when reactor core temperatures exceed 2200 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, hydrogen production begins well below 2200, and the rate of hydrogen production speeds up rapidly as the core temperatures soar to meltdown.
Maybe the NRC could open up and tell us what they have really produced prior to the WSJ disclosures. Tell us Mr. Chairman of the NRC, at what temperature of the Fukushima reactor core did hydrogen production begin? And how fast was hydrogen produced? And what was the time-pressure history in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel? And what was the pressure in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel when the pressure vessel was breached? And when the molten reactor core breached the reactor pressure vessel, how fast was the molten core squirted out?
Robert H. Leyse
Sun Valley, Idaho
Subject:
RE: Your e-mail of Dec. 3
Date:
1/9/2012 8:40:09 A.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
OPA.Resource@nrc.gov
Subject:
RE: Your e-mail of Dec. 3
Mr. Leyse;
Thank you for your e-mail to Chairman Jaczko. The Japanese government is currently conducting research that directly relates to your questions regarding accident conditions at Fukushima Dai-ichi. As the Japanese government releases information from that research, the NRC will incorporate the findings into its Japan Near-Term Task Force lessons-learned effort. The NRC will also use information from Japan in similar regulatory activities, such as the recent petition for rulemaking on hydrogen generation that you are already familiar with. Thank you.
Office of Public Affairs
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
However:
I have found out that NRC has held closed meetings that likely included discussions of the matters that I addressed in my December 3, 2011, e-mail to the Chairman.
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Certainly, the progression of the meltdown at Fukushima must have been discussed in this closed meeting that included DOE and EPRI, but excluded UCS, NRDC and others. But more universally, I want to know what NRC is doing to pursue answers to the questions that I have posed. NRC must have something going on to address these questions. At what temperature in the core would hydrogen production begin in the case of a tough wreck at a USA nuclear power plant?
To: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, chairman@nrc.gov
Sent: 12/2/2011 11:31:03 A.M. Mountain Standard Time
Subj: Meltdown in Japan
Meltdown in Japan
The reactor core meltdown in Japan, WORLD NEWS, WSJ, December 1, is covered very well. However, the U. S. Nuclear Reactor Commission (NRC) gets into the act with its deceptive remarks. NRC is quoted, “This was not all unexpected. It really does nothing to change our assumptions – because we based our decisions on very pessimistic scenarios.” The NRC does not license our nuclear power plants on the basis of very pessimistic scenarios. The NRC believes that hydrogen production begins when reactor core temperatures exceed 2200 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, hydrogen production begins well below 2200, and the rate of hydrogen production speeds up rapidly as the core temperatures soar to meltdown.
Maybe the NRC could open up and tell us what they have really produced prior to the WSJ disclosures. Tell us Mr. Chairman of the NRC, at what temperature of the Fukushima reactor core did hydrogen production begin? And how fast was hydrogen produced? And what was the time-pressure history in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel? And what was the pressure in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel when the pressure vessel was breached? And when the molten reactor core breached the reactor pressure vessel, how fast was the molten core squirted out?
Robert H. Leyse
Sun Valley, Idaho
Subject:
RE: Your e-mail of Dec. 3
Date:
1/9/2012 8:40:09 A.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
OPA.Resource@nrc.gov
Subject:
RE: Your e-mail of Dec. 3
Mr. Leyse;
Thank you for your e-mail to Chairman Jaczko. The Japanese government is currently conducting research that directly relates to your questions regarding accident conditions at Fukushima Dai-ichi. As the Japanese government releases information from that research, the NRC will incorporate the findings into its Japan Near-Term Task Force lessons-learned effort. The NRC will also use information from Japan in similar regulatory activities, such as the recent petition for rulemaking on hydrogen generation that you are already familiar with. Thank you.
Office of Public Affairs
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
However:
I have found out that NRC has held closed meetings that likely included discussions of the matters that I addressed in my December 3, 2011, e-mail to the Chairman.
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Certainly, the progression of the meltdown at Fukushima must have been discussed in this closed meeting that included DOE and EPRI, but excluded UCS, NRDC and others. But more universally, I want to know what NRC is doing to pursue answers to the questions that I have posed. NRC must have something going on to address these questions. At what temperature in the core would hydrogen production begin in the case of a tough wreck at a USA nuclear power plant?
Simulators as Cover-Ups
And, the EDF simulators likely have hydrogen produced well above 1200 Centigrade, if they produce any at all.
More on Air France 447 from Dick Rutan.
From Dick Rutan:
Every "actual" pilot should read this.
Two things:
1. The Airbus cmptr system algorithm is designed by a bunch cmptrnerds who have no understanding of aviation. (that comment is kind)
2. The copilots are not even actual pilots but from the same world as cmptr nerds that designed the system. I'll call them "cmptr nerdpilots" who should not be allowed to operate a wheelbarrow.
This is worse than I thought....the pitot tube ice over was just temporary and most of the time all indications were normal. What drooling idiot would design a plane where the right seat had no indication of what the left seat was doing with the stick. OH yes the nerds at Airbus.
To say that this was "Pilot Error" ...... lacks understanding of the ramifications of this gargantuan screw up starting with nerds that designed this travesty and the "aircrews that operate it. (AIRBUS)And to think someone has allowed them (AIRBUS) to put into operation a plane that can carry 400 naive souls. OMG for the sake of aviation in this century why has no one put a stop to this insanity?
dick rutan an actual pilot
More on Air France 447 from Dick Rutan.
From Dick Rutan:
Every "actual" pilot should read this.
Two things:
1. The Airbus cmptr system algorithm is designed by a bunch cmptrnerds who have no understanding of aviation. (that comment is kind)
2. The copilots are not even actual pilots but from the same world as cmptr nerds that designed the system. I'll call them "cmptr nerdpilots" who should not be allowed to operate a wheelbarrow.
This is worse than I thought....the pitot tube ice over was just temporary and most of the time all indications were normal. What drooling idiot would design a plane where the right seat had no indication of what the left seat was doing with the stick. OH yes the nerds at Airbus.
To say that this was "Pilot Error" ...... lacks understanding of the ramifications of this gargantuan screw up starting with nerds that designed this travesty and the "aircrews that operate it. (AIRBUS)And to think someone has allowed them (AIRBUS) to put into operation a plane that can carry 400 naive souls. OMG for the sake of aviation in this century why has no one put a stop to this insanity?
dick rutan an actual pilot
Monday, January 9, 2012
Meltdown in Japan, WSJ, December 1, 2011
The meltdown in Japan was covered reasonably well in the Wall Street Jouarnal on December 1, 2011. Our NRC was also cited, so on December 3, 2011, I sent the following e-mail to Chairman NRC
Meltdown in Japan
The reactor core meltdown in Japan, WORLD NEWS, WSJ, December 1, is covered very well. However, the U. S. Nuclear Reactor Commission (NRC) gets into the act with its deceptive remarks. NRC is quoted, “This was not all unexpected. It really does nothing to change our assumptions – because we based our decisions on very pessimistic scenarios.” The NRC does not license our nuclear power plants on the basis of very pessimistic scenarios. The NRC believes that hydrogen production begins when reactor core temperatures exceed 2200 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, hydrogen production begins well below 2200, and the rate of hydrogen production speeds up rapidly as the core temperatures soar to meltdown.
Maybe the NRC could open up and tell us what they have really produced prior to the WSJ disclosures. Tell us Mr. Chairman of the NRC, at what temperature of the Fukushima reactor core did hydrogen production begin? And how fast was hydrogen produced? And what was the time-pressure history in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel? And what was the pressure in the Fukushima reactor pressure vessel when the pressure vessel was breached? And when the molten reactor core breached the reactor pressure vessel, how fast was the molten core squirted out?
Today I receved the following response fron the NRC.
RE: Your e-mail of Dec. 3
Date: 1/9/2012 8:40:09 A.M. Mountain Standard Time
From: OPA.Resource@nrc.gov
To: bobleyse@aol.com
Mr. Leyse;
Thank you for your e-mail to Chairman Jaczko. The Japanese government is currently conducting research that directly relates to your questions regarding accident conditions at Fukushima Dai-ichi. As the Japanese government releases information from that research, the NRC will incorporate the findings into its Japan Near-Term Task Force lessons-learned effort. The NRC will also use information from Japan in similar regulatory activities, such as the recent petition for rulemaking on hydrogen generation that you are already familiar with. Thank you.
Office of Public Affairs
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
