ML20082E507
| ML20082E507 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 11/18/1983 |
| From: | Hirsch D COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP |
| To: | Cormier W CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8311280219 | |
| Download: ML20082E507 (3) | |
Text
'
I COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP 1637 BUTLER AVENUE #203 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90025 (213) 478 0829 00CMETED USNRC November 18, g 8 g g Mr. William Cormier CFF:CE OF SECHtlM~
Office of Administrative 000KEffNG & SERvir BRANCH Vice Chancellor University of California Los Angeles, CA 90024 RE: UCLA Reactor, Docket 50-142
Dear Mr. Cormler:
Please find enclosed full copics of the remaining CBG exhibits.
I apologize for the delay in getting them to you, but we had to re-obtain the originals f rom the UCLA Engineering Library in order to make reproducible copics.
(I note that the documents were already in your possession, as we obtained them f rom your library in the same building in which the reactor is located).
As to the matter of the videotape, my quick review of the transcript, which we have only just finally received f rom the POR, does not contradict my previous recollection, i t is my recollection that the Universi ty, af ter seeing the last portion of the Borax tape, dealing only with the destruct test, asked for a copy of the tape. Thereaf ter you asked for a transcript to be made of the enti re tape. When this was agreed, during an off-record discussion (at TR 2693) regarding Ms. Woodhead's lack of viewing equipment and your preference for a transcript, you indicated that if a transcript were made you wouldn't need a copy of the tape itself. Thereaf ter a transcript was made of the full tape.
Should you be able to further clarify the matter for me, please do so quickly. The tape would have to be sent out for reproduction, which could take a few days, in the meantime, we are willing to make available for your viewing our sole remaining copy.
On a related matter, the Board has asked Applicant to provide detailed drawings and other visual materials about the core arrangement.
The materials supplied to date do not appear to CBG clear or precise enough to be sufficiently useful. We note the existence of far more detailed drawings than those previously provided--in particular, the 89 series of technical d rawi ngs,
in addi tion, at the time you offered certain reactor photographs at the-July' hearings, i t appeared you had others f rom which you were selecting.
8311280219 831118 PDR ADOCK 05000142 G
PDR Od
% CBG therefore wishes, prior to resumption of hearing, to review and if necessary copy, all drawings, photographs, and other visuals not yet provided in response to the Board's request related thereto.
Additionally, CBG, in its Octob:r 25, 1983, letter to the Board, made clear that any calculations upon which Applicant intended to rely in its asserted rebuttal testimony should be included in full in the prefiled ma te ri a l. We find, however, that Mr. Ostrander's discussion of his neutron escape calculations summarizes conclusions but does not actually provide the full calculations and the sources of the input parameters and assumptions.
CBG requests the full calculations be provided now, before the Thanksgiving holiday.
These matters are identified in the attachment.
Sic l coly, f
/ &C Daniel Hi rsch cc w/ attachments: service list Express to Board, Staff hand-deliver (11/18) to Applicant enc losu res-:
CBG Exhibit lll-9 " Observation of Fission Fragment Damage in Thin Films of Metals" by J.J. Kelsch, O. F. Kammerer, A. fl. Goland, and P. A. Buhl, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Journal of Applied Physics, Volume 33, riumber 4, April 1962, p.
14/5-1482 CBG Exhibit 111-10 " flew Technique for Di rect investigation of Fission Events",
J.J. Kelsch, 0.F. Kammerer, P.A. Buhl, of tietallurgy Division,
Brookhaven National Laboratory, in British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. II, December 1960, p. 555 CBG Exhibit 111-11 " Examination of Uranium Fission wi th an Electron M croscope" by N.F. Pravdyuk and V.11. Golyanov, i n P_ropert i es of Reactor Materials and the Effects of Radiation Damage, ed. by D.J. Li t t le r, Butterworths, London, 1962, p.160-175 CBG Exhibit lll-2 " Optimization of Critical Mass in the Uraniurn Water Close-Packed Latticein the Engineering Nuclear Reactor", UCLA Masters Thesis by Joseph A. Vi tti, May, 1961 CBG Exhibit C-8
" Experimental Study of Transient Behavior in a Subcooled, Water-Moderated Reactor" by F. Schroeder, S.G. Forbes, W.E. Nyer, F.L. Bentzen, and G.O. Bright, Nuclear Science and Enqineering, 2,96-115 (1957)
1 Attachment A 1
Detailed technical drawings (particularly those in the "89" series),
photographs of core internals not to date identified as exhibits, and any other drawings or other visual materials that might detail reactor internals and components.
2.
The full calculation summarized in Mr. Ostrander's " Appendix A" to " Calculation of Wigner Energy Release for the UCLA Reactor by D r. H. Pearlman wi th Supporting Calculation by N. Ostrander."
Particularly, a.
" Figure 1" identified at page 13 but not included.
b.
The integral (and source thereof) identified at page 14 but not included which assertedly leads to the representation of fj at midpage
-1 c.
The source and/or computation for the asserted.213 cm cross-section at page 14 d.
The source and/or computation for the asserted 42-58 ratio of collisions in oxygen or aluminum versus collisions in hydrogen e.
The source and/or computation for the assertions about numerical change in energy and mean f ree path at bottom of page 15 and top of page 16, including excape probabili ty assertions.
f.
The computer program, input parameters (and sources),
output sheets, and any other material documenting the computational method, input values and assumptions, and output.
for the "ltonte Carlo" calcu*ation the conclusions of which are summarized at pages 16-18 w