On Memorial Day 2012

At last, NUREG/CR-6980

I've been after this for several years.  Finally, here it is: RBHT Reflood Heat Transfer Experiments Data and Analysis

Document A
http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/search.cfm?q=ML12128A368


The Report, NUREG/CR-6980, covers the period Nov 1997- Feb 2003, but it was not published until April 2012!  It is a somewhat useless report, and I was aware of that likelihood well before the NRC released it.

In the FORWARD to the report, page 7 of 599, we read, "With improved data and code models for an LBLOCA, we can more accurately predict the consequences of LBLOCA accidents and provide better technical bases for regulations associated with such accidents.  As a result, this study will help to achieve the NRC's strategic performance  goals of making the agency's regulations more efficient, effective, and realistic."

It has been no secret that the NRC's Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) at Penn State is essentially useless for modelling an LBLOCA because the test section includes no zirconium alloy structures, especially the fuel rod simulators which have inconel cladding.  The RBHT has been operated with cladding temperatures less than 1800 degrees Fahrenheit, well below the NRC's Appendix K limit of 2200 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Aside from the fundamental defects in the design of the RBHT and the very limited scope of its test program (the low temperatures of the tests and the absence of zirconium alloy structures), the report NUREG/CR-6980 does not include any discussion of the test results.  For example, in one run, there were very large temperature oscillations.  I have sent the following e-mail to the lead investigator at Penn State's Applied Research Laboratory. 

It is unfortunate that the report does not discuss this temperature cycling.  The data is about 10 years old and Professor Hochreiter, the originator of RBHT is no longer available to discuss this.  If NRC had not withheld the data for about 10 years, there would perhaps have been meaningful responses to significant  inquiries.  As matters stand, there is very likely no motivation on the part of the investigators to return to this old data.

There is more to this situation, and I will add to this.  On MAYDAY 2002, I submitted a Petition for Rulemaking to the NRC and on May 8, 2002, it was docketed as PRM-50-76.

Document B

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0222/ML022240009.pdf

Right now I'll jump ahead to the NRC review of my PRM-50-76 because it relates to NUREG/CR-6980.  The document is "TECHNICAL SAFETY ANALYSIS OF PRM-50-76."  It is a rather lengthy document and it castigates PRM-50-76.

Document C 
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0412/ML041210109.pdf

On page 10 of 18 of this so-called technical analysis , it is asserted that the expense of PRM-50-76 would have only "marginal benefit" in comparison with the activities at Pennsylvania State University and elsewhere. "This would be a minimum requirement before considering the expense of high temperature Zircaloy tests, which would have marginal benefit in terms of increased understanding of LBLOCA heat transfer and metal-water reaction kinetics.  Current programs at Pennselvania State University (PSU)and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and elsewhere are far more cost effective."  (Please note that the spelling of Pennsylvania is the NRC's.)

For the moment, let's reflect on the timing of the documents.  PRM 50-76 was docketed on May 8, 2002.  The NRC's Technical Analysis of PRM-50-76 is dated April 29, 2004. Although NUREG/CR-6980 is dated April 2012, it covers the Penn State activities from November 1997 - February 2003.  The point is that the NRC should have been aware that the program at Pennsylvania State University was totally outside of the realm of the Zircaloy bundle tests that are called for in PRM-50-76.

At this point the reader is asked to return to page 10 0f 18  of Document C. (Update later)

And here is a Risch document.

Dopcument D

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ml1206/ml12060A144.pdf

Document E  Leyse e-mail to chairman (PM-50-76)

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1005/ML100500035.pdf

Document F  SECY-05-0113  20 pages

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/cvr/2005/2005-0113vtr.pdf

Document G  SECY-05-0113  32 pages

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0502/ML050250359.pdf

DOE ORNL CASL

Here are the slides

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/nsed/docs/CASL_Overview.pdf

DOE and $125 million Another OBAMA white elephant

Following is copied from a set of
DOE slides; my comments will follow sometime.

https://ric.nrc-gateway.gov/docs/abstracts/kothe-d-hv-th28.pdf

Thermal Hydraulics R&D Plans and Efforts

within CASL: The Consortium for Advanced
Simulation of Light Water Reactors


CASL is a DOE Energy Innovation Hub for
Modeling and Simulation of Nuclear Reactors

CASL Charter



Mission


Provide leading edge modeling and simulation capabilities to improve the
performance of currently operating Light Water Reactors


Vision


Predict, with confidence, the safe, reliable performance of nuclear reactors, through comprehensive, science-based modeling and simulation technology that is deployed and applied broadly within the U.S. nuclear energy industry


Goals


1. Develop and Effectively Apply Modern Virtual Reactor Technology


2. Assure Nuclear Safety and Address Operational and Design Challenges


3. Engage the Nuclear Energy Community Through Modeling and Simulation


4. Deploy New Partnership and Collaboration Paradigms

NRC Safety Research Program and Obama Open Government

Tomorrow I will send the following to Idaho's Senator Risch.

Dear Senator Risch:



Please encourage the NRC to now release SECY-12-0013 to the American Public. Details are below:


NRC recently published the ACRS review of its research program. There are leads to closed material. Here is the identification of the ACRS open report:


REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF THE NRC SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM


NUREG-1635, Vol. 10 APRIL 2012 ML12094A142


And, here is an example of the closed performance of Obama’s "open" government:


From Page 83 0f 84 of ML12094A142 (Page 71 of the report):


Reference 2.


Memorandum to the Commissioners
from R. W. Borchardt, Executive Director for Operations,


Subject: SECY-12-0013,


“Agency Long-Term Research Activities for Fiscal Year 2014,"
(Official Use Only Document - Sensitive Internal Information - Limited to NRC unless the Commission Determines Otherwise)


Very likely, a wide assortment of insiders has access to SECY-12-0013 (including the twenty foreign governments that NRC has enrolled in its Severe Accident Research Program). The American Public should also have access to this. Furthermore, interested Americans should be encouraged to participate in suggesting the scope of the NRC research activities. For example, my PRM-50-76 has been in the hands of NRC since MAYDAY 2002; nevertheless, NRC ignores the dangers to the American Public of zirconium oxidation and hydrogen release during loss-of-coolant accidents.




Robert H. Leyse

2002 docs, Hochreiter, Hache, Myers others

Contents of CD distributed at NSRC 2002.
Accession Number: ML023050480
Date Released: Wednesday, November 6, 2002
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.
ML023050477 - Readme. (1 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040648 - Bessiron Slides - Main Outcomes of the Patricia Program Presented at NSRC in Washington, DC on 10/29/2002. (14 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040652 - Bessiron Summary - Main outcomes from the PATRICIA programon clad to coolant heat transfer during RIAs. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040653 - Hache Slides entitled, "Oxidation of Zr Alloys in High Pressure Steam & Some Results Under Atmospheric Pressure" presented at Nuclear Safety Research Conference 2002 in Washington, DC on October 28-30, 2002. (38 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040656 - Hache Summary - Oxidation of Zirconium Alloys in High Pressure Steam & Some Results Under Atmospheric Pressure. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040657 - Hochreiter Slides - Penn State/US NRC Rod Bundle Test Facility & Reflood Heat Transfer Program (RBHT). (35 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023040658 - Hochreiter Summary - US NRC/PSU Rod Bundle Heat Transfer Program. (3 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050060 - McGrath Slides entitled, "Investigation of the Impact of In-Reactor Short-Term Dry-Out Incidents on Fresh & Pre-Irradiated Fuel Cladding." (26 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050061 - McGrath Summary - Investigation of the Impact of In-Reactor Short-Term Dry-Out Incidents on Fresh & Pre-Irradiated Fuel Cladding. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050065 - Meyer Slides - LOCA Ductility Tests. (14 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050070 - Meyer Summary - LOCA Ductility Tests. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050073 - Nakamura Slides. (22 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050077 - Nakamura Summary. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050083 - Pierron Slides - Influence of Hydride Distribution on Failure of Zircaloy-4 Sheet. (18 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050086 - Pierron Summary - Influence of Hydride Distribution on the Failure of Zircaloy. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050234 - Tsai Slides - Characterization of High-Burnup PWR & BWR Rods. (25 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050236 - Tsai Summary - Characterization of High-Burnup PWR & BWR Rods. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050238 - Yan Slides - LOCA Research Results for High-Burnup BWR Fuel. (39 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050240 - Yan Summary - LOCA Research Results for High-Burnup BWR Fuel. (2 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050244 - Yegorova Slides - Understanding LOCA-Related Ductility in E110 Cladding. (18 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050248 - Yegorova Summary. (3 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050429 - Pierron Slides A - Influence of Hydride Distribution on Failure of Zircaloy-4 Sheet. (18 page(s), 10/29/2002)
ML023050464 - Meyer Slides A - LOCA Ductility Tests. (15 page(s), 10/29/2002)

Baker-Just, ANL-6548, WAPD-104, BMI-1154, Zirconium Fire (Bundles)

The following is from
Zirconium Fire Testing at Sandia
ML11031A000, page 58 of 226

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1103/ML11031A000.pdf
Phase 2 will address radial heating and burn propagation and
will include effects of fuel rod ballooning. Five full-length
assemblies will be constructed in which the center assembly
will be of the same heated design as used in Phase 1. The four
peripheral assemblies will be unheated but highly prototypic,
incorporating prototypic fuel tubes and end plugs. These
boundary conditions experimentally represent a “cold neighbor”
situation, which complements the bounding scenario covered by
Phase 1. The peripheral fuel rods will be filled with high density
MgO ceramic, sized to precisely match the thermal mass of spent
fuel. Studies using this test assembly will conclude with a fire
test in which the center assembly is heated to ignition, which
eventually propagates radially to the peripheral assemblies. All
of the fuel rods in two of the four peripheral assemblies will be
pressurized with helium so that these fuel rods will balloon when
the zirconium-alloy cladding reaches a high enough temperature.
The two peripheral assemblies without pressurized rods will serve
as a control for evaluating the effect of ballooning.

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). The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies 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.

The following cross sections of the zirconium clad heater bundles at Sandia are copied (and enlarged) from ML113140453, page 4 of 23.

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1131/ML113140453.pdf

Analysis Support
As in the previous BWR study, all stages of testing will use
MELCOR modeling results. Pretest MELCOR modeling results
will be used to guide the experimental test assembly design and
instrumentation. MELCOR modeling results will also be used
to choose experimental operating parameters, such as the applied
assembly power. At each step in the testing, improvements
will be made to the MELCOR model to continually increase
confidence in the modeling validity.