Subject:
The Zion D&D Game
Date:
2/12/2012 12:34:03 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
Bobleyse@aol.com
Reply To:
To:
btompkins@ans.org
Hello:
The Zion D&D is a continuing game that very likely has armed guards in place 24/7. Maybe Nuclear News could report where that payroll comes from. When ISFSI and its security monitoring building are returned to Exelon it is likely that the requirement for having armed guards in place 24/7 will continue. Who will pay for that? Nuclear News says that remaining trust funds will be returned to the ratepayers after ZionSolutions finishes the D&D. So, Nuclear News, please tell us more about the money games that will be played for a long time to come.
Robert H. Leyse
222 Elkhorn Road
P. O. Box 2850
Sun Valley, ID 83353
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
NRC ECCS Zircaloy Bundle at Sandia - ACRS & EPRI
I addressed the full ACRS on Thursday, February 9, 2012, as follows:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I’ll use 2 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. I wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive corrosion tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
The NRC-EPRI closed meeting discloses 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.
ACRS need not spend much time on this item in its review of the NRC Safety Research Program. There is enough disclosure in the closed meeting, reference ML113140453, pages 3, 4 and 5, so that ACRS may recommend termination of the work.
You may click on the link ML113140453, below, to view the slides on pages 3, 4, and 5, to view the featherbedding at SANDIA:
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
I also considered the following brief, but longer presentation that has more facts:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I have 5 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. So, I’m encouraging ACRS to inform the public and Congress about this research.
I first wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
On October 18, 2010, I told the Thermal Hydraulics Subcommittee, “It is not sound science to combine the testing of single short rods of zirconium alloy with the testing of multi-rod stainless or Inconel assemblies in order to ascertain the performance of ECCS having thousands of zirconium alloy full-length rods.”
On Mayday, 2002, I sent NRC my PRM-50-76, calling for further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories. On January 25, 2012, NRC reported that these Canadian tests were not well suited for reflood assessment of TRACE. NRC now applies more recent tests from the Pennsylvania State University Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) facility, with modern grid spacers and more measurements.
However, since it has no zircaloy, RBHT is sterile and unresponsive.
Return to the slides.
On January 19, 2012, I wrote to Idaho Senator James E. Risch:
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?
ACRS should tell NRC to stop the work at SANDIA and to redirect the work.
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I’ll use 2 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. I wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive corrosion tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
The NRC-EPRI closed meeting discloses 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.
ACRS need not spend much time on this item in its review of the NRC Safety Research Program. There is enough disclosure in the closed meeting, reference ML113140453, pages 3, 4 and 5, so that ACRS may recommend termination of the work.
You may click on the link ML113140453, below, to view the slides on pages 3, 4, and 5, to view the featherbedding at SANDIA:
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
I also considered the following brief, but longer presentation that has more facts:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I have 5 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. So, I’m encouraging ACRS to inform the public and Congress about this research.
I first wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
On October 18, 2010, I told the Thermal Hydraulics Subcommittee, “It is not sound science to combine the testing of single short rods of zirconium alloy with the testing of multi-rod stainless or Inconel assemblies in order to ascertain the performance of ECCS having thousands of zirconium alloy full-length rods.”
On Mayday, 2002, I sent NRC my PRM-50-76, calling for further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories. On January 25, 2012, NRC reported that these Canadian tests were not well suited for reflood assessment of TRACE. NRC now applies more recent tests from the Pennsylvania State University Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) facility, with modern grid spacers and more measurements.
However, since it has no zircaloy, RBHT is sterile and unresponsive.
Return to the slides.
On January 19, 2012, I wrote to Idaho Senator James E. Risch:
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?
ACRS should tell NRC to stop the work at SANDIA and to redirect the work.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Again NRC Evades PRM-50-76
I've been after NRC to tell me about several matters regarding the denial of PRM-50-76. In their denial NRC referred to more than 50 tests at NRU, Canada that were managed by Pacific Northwest Laboratories (PNL). Then they narrowed the reference to two tests. More recently the NRC said those two tests were also unacceptable. So , I asked Senator Risch to find out which tests were found to be acceptable and the reasons for rejecting that data.
NRC responded that NRU tests PTH-110 and MT-3 were originally "... proposed as part of our initial assessment matrix for TRACE." NRC adds that RBHT at Penn State was used.
Well, I'll send another request via Senator Risch. I'll ask why the NRU data was rejected. I'll point out that the Penn State tests did not include the vital aspect of a zircaloy clad bundle.
The NRC's reply to Senator Risch is copied below.
NRC responded that NRU tests PTH-110 and MT-3 were originally "... proposed as part of our initial assessment matrix for TRACE." NRC adds that RBHT at Penn State was used.
Well, I'll send another request via Senator Risch. I'll ask why the NRU data was rejected. I'll point out that the Penn State tests did not include the vital aspect of a zircaloy clad bundle.
The NRC's reply to Senator Risch is copied below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
