ML14072A080
| ML14072A080 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 02/24/2014 |
| From: | Leavitt J South Texas |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14072A075 | List: |
| References | |
| NOC-AE-14003075 CHLE-006, Rev 2 | |
| Download: ML14072A080 (15) | |
Text
NOC-AE-1 4003075Attachment 2CHLE-006:
STP Material Calculations, Revision 2
PROJECT DOCUMENTATION COVER PAGEDocument No: CHLE-006 Revision:
2 Page 1 of 14Title: STP Material Calculations Project:
Corrosion/Head Loss Experiment (CHLE) Program Date: 2/22/2014 Client: South Texas Project Nuclear Operating CompanySummary/Purpose of Analysis or Calculation:
A survey of materials within containment at South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STP) wasperformed to identify material that may leach corrosion or dissolution constituents into the pool solution asa result of a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA). This survey was performed to identify materials to includein the Chemical Head loss Experiment (CHLE) analyses and to determine the ratio of material surfacearea to solution volume [1] for testing purposes.
This preliminary analysis of STP containment materials in this document is based on information that wasavailable at the time this document was prepared.
Where final information was not available, values formaterial quantities used in CHLE tests will be identified in the individual test plan documents.
Role: Name: Signature:
Date:Prepared:
Janet Leavitt/Kyle Hammond < signed electronically
> 3/12/2012 Reviewed:
Kerry Howe < signed electronically
> 8/15/2012 Oversight:
Zahra Mohaghegh
< signed electronically
> 2/11/2013 Approved:
Ernie Kee < signed electronically
> 2/22/2014 Revision Date Description 0 3/12/2012 Original document1 8/14/2012 Revised to resolve internal comments2 2/22/2014 Reviewed for NRC submittal
___ ___ I _________________
Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Pagel1 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations Table of ContentsList o f Fig u re s .....................................................................................................................................
3List o f T a b le s ......................................................................................................................................
3Definitions and Acronyms
...................................................................................................................
41 P u rp o se .........................................................................................................................................
52 M e th o d o lo gy .................................................................................................................................
53 Design Input and Analyses
..................................................................................................
53 .1 A lum in u m .......................................................
......................................................................
63 .1 .1 ST P S u rve y ....................................................................................................................
63.1.2 CHLETest Parameter
................................................................................................
73.2 Fiberglass insulation
.......................................................................................................
73 .2 .1 ST P S u rvey ....................................................................................................................
73.2.2 CHLE Test Parameter
................................................................................................
73 .3 C o n cre te .................................................................................................................................
83.3.1 ST P S u rvey .........
..........................................................................................................
83.3.2 CHLE Test Parameter
................................................................................................
83 .4 Late n t d e b ris ..........................................................................................................................
83 .4 .1 ST P S u rvey ...................................................................................................................
83.4.2 CHLE Test Parameter
................................................................................................
93.5 Zinc (Galvanized Steel and Coating)
.....................................................................................
93 .5 .1 ST P S u rvey ...................................................................................................................
93.5.2 CHLE Test Parameter
................................................................................................
93 .6 C o p p e r ...................................................................................................................................
93 .6 .1 ST P S u rvey ...................................................................................................................
93.6.2 CHLE Test Parameter
................................................................................................
93 .7 Le a d .....................................................................................................................................
103.7.1 ST P S u rvey .................................................................................................................
1 03.7.2 CHLE Test Parameter
.............................................................................................
123.8 Uncoated Carbon Steel .........................................................................................................
123.8.1 ST P S u rve y ..................................................................................................................
123.8.2 CHLE Test Parameter
.............................................................................................
124 S u m m a ry .....................................................................................................................................
135 R e fe re n ce s ..................................................................................................................................
14Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2 Page2 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations List of FiguresFigure 1: Simplified CAD image showing locations of lead insulated pipes are indicated in yellow ..........
10List of TablesTable 1: Volume of materials in STP as a function of break type ........................................................
7Table 2: Ratio of fiberglass material volume to pool volume to be used in the CHLE analyses
.............
7Table 3: Caldum concentration required to form precipitation
........................................................
8Table 4: Volume and mass of lead insulation within STP containment
..............................................
11Table 5: Lead precipitate and associated thermodynamic data associated with solubility
.................
11Table 6: Lead concentration to form lead phosphate precipitate using STP representative chemistry
.... 12Table 7: Surface area of materials in the CHLE analyses
.................................................................
13Table 8: Volume of materials in STP containment for breaks of various sizes ...................................
13Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 3 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations Definitions and AcronymsRCB Reactor Containment BuildingRCS Reactant CoolingSystem RWST Refueling Water Storage TankSI Safety Injection ECCS Emergency Core Cooling SystemLOCA Loss of Coolant AccidentSTP South Texas ProjectCHLE Chemical Head Loss Experiments ICE Integrated Chemical EffectsDocument No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 4 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 1 PurposeA survey of materials within containment at South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STP) wasperformed to identify materials that may leach corrosion or dissolution constituents into thecontainment pool solution as a result of a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA). This surveywas performed to identify mate rials to include in the Chemical Head loss Experiment (CHLE) analyses and to determine the ratio of material surface area to solution volume [1] fortesting purposes.
These values areimportant in conducting a risk informed approach in evaluation of potential safety issues aftera LOCA.The initial pool chemistry and the corrosion ordissolution constituents within the pool solution mayreact to form chemical precipitates that may negatively impact head loss across the sump strainer, resulting in failure of the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS). An accurate assessment of materials that will leach corrosion ordissolution constituents intothe pool solution and the ratio of materialsurface area to volume within containment will allowthe CHLE analysesto investigatethe mostprobable pool chemistry of a LOCA; thus determining the most realistic consequence of chemicalreactions on head loss across the sump straineras a result of LOCA conditions.
This preliminary analysisof STP containment materials in this document is based on information that was available atthe timethis document was prepared.
Where final information was not available, valuesfor material quantities used in CHLE tests will be identified in the individualtest plan documents.
2 Methodology A survey of materials in containment was conducted atSTP. Surface areas or volumes of materials within containment were determined and reviewed for possible exposure tothe containment poolsolution.
Materials with very low surface area or probability of exposure to the pool solution wereeliminated from the list of materials to be included inthe CHLE analyses.
For materialsto be included inthe CHLE analyses, ratio of surface areas or volumes of materialstothe pool volume [1] weredetermined using the following equation.
VchleMchle '- Vstp MstpWhere Mche is the material surface area or volume to be included inthe CHLE analyses, Vchleisthe volume of the solution in the tankforthe CHLE analyses, V,tp isthe steady-state volumeof the poolwithin the STP containment, and Mtp isthe material surface area or volume in containment.
3 Design Input and AnalysesThe following data was obtained from a survey of material identified to be present in containment atSTP. Materials within containment that can leach metals into the containment pool are dividedbetween non-submerged and submerged surfaces.
Non-submerged material surfaces are thoseexposed tothe containment spray during a LOCA. Although some condensation may remain onequipment and material abovethe containment flood level, the amount of corrosion productscontributed from this material is relatively small compared tothe corrosion product generated byDocument No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 5 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations submerged materials.
With the exception of fiberglass insulation, the division of submerged and non-submerged materials is not affected by break type. Materials found to exist within containment at STPare as listed below:* Aluminum
-from valve actuator components and scaffolding
- Fiberglass (Nukon and Microtherm)
-used as insulation on pipes" Concrete
-represented exposed concrete surfaces* Zinc -in galvanized steel and in zinc-based protective coatings* Lead -permanent lead shielding blankets* Copper- wiring, cables, and tubes ofthe fan coolers* Latent debris- dirt and lintfor air flowing into containment vents* Carbon steel -component of structural steel, steam generators, piping, etc.Aluminum and zinc, primarily in the form of galvanized steel or non-top coated inorganic zinc basedprimer, have been identified as the materials most susceptibleto corrosion following a LOCA [2-4]. Lead[5] and carbon steel [4] may also corrode within the expected pH range of about 4.5 -7.5 [6] following aLOCA, releasing metal ions intothe pool solution.
Fiberglass and concrete can leach constituents suchas calcium and silicon into solution
[4], which may produce chemical precipitates in the tri-sodium phosphate (TSP) buffered pool solution.
Copperand iron (from steel) are relevant because they mayaffect the corrosion rates of other materials, such as aluminum
[7]. Since all the above materials existwithin STP containment and are expected to be present within the pool chemistry if exposed tothe poolsolution, all were evaluated to determine available surface area and probable exposure tothe poolsolution.
The pool volume at STP varies depending on the volume of waterin the reactor cooling system (RCS),refueling water storage tanks (RWST), and safety injection accumulators.
The RCS and RWST contribute to the pool volume in all LOCAs. The accumulators do not discharge in small break LOCAs (SBLOCAs),
and therefore SBLOCAs technically.have a smaller pool volume and therefore larger ratio of material topool volume than othersizes of LOCAs. However, the accumulators only contribute about 4 percent ofthe pool volume sothe effect is relatively minor. The pool volume for LBLOCA and MBLOCA werecalculated to be 71,778 ft' at 21 °C [1]. The pool volume fora SBLOCA was calculated to be 61,949 ft3at 21 0C I'].3.1 Aluminum3.1.1 STP SurveySources of aluminum in containment include structures such as scaffolding and small components suchas valves and aluminum coatings.
Most of these materials are above the containment pool elevation, but may be exposed to containment sprays. Both integrated and separate effects tests have shown thatthe corrosion of aluminum can be significant and may cause precipitates
[4, 8, 9]. There are 5,567 ft2Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 6 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations (10% submerged and 90% non-submerged) of aluminum in containment at STP[10].
This corresponds toa ratio of aluminum surface area to pool volume of 0.078 ft2/ft3.3.1.2 CHLE Test Parameter Based on the information obtained from the STP survey for aluminum, the surface area of aluminum inthe CHLE tests will be 2.64 ft2 in the vapor space (unsubmerged, subjected to sprays) and 0.47 ft2submerged in the pool solution.
3.2 Fiberglass insulation 3.2.1 STP SurveyTwo types of fiberglass insulation can be present in containment:
(1) Nukon and (2) Microtherm.
Nukoninsulation is classified as E-glass which is an amorphous material containing silicon dioxide, calciumoxide, aluminum oxide and boric oxide [4]. Microtherm insulation is classified as amorphous silicamaterial which contains materials made up of predominately amorphous silica with a small percentage of E-glass [4]. The amount of fiberglass insulation is determined by breaktype and is listed in Table landthe ratio of material volume to solution volume is listed in Table 2.Table 1: Volume of materials in STP as a function of breaktype FiberglassType SBLOCA (ft') MBLOCA (ft') LBLOCA (ft')Nukon N/A1 60 N/AMicrotherm N/A 0 N/A1. N/A: Not available at the time of completion of this report. Values will be determined before conducting SBLOCAand LBLOCAtests.
Table 2: Ratio of fiberglass material volume to pool volume to be used in the CHLE analysesBreaktype Nukon Ratio (ft'/ft')
Microtherm Ratio (ft'/ft')
SBLOCA N/A' N/AMBLOCA 8.36E-04 0LBLOCA N/A N/A1. N/A: Not available at the time of completion of this report Values will be determined before conducting SBLOCA and LBLOCAtests.
3.2.2 CHLE Test Parameter The amount of insulation is a function of breaktype which results in a range of material volumes.
Thisrange is dictated bythe break sizes that fall within the category of LOCA scenarios.
The amount ofinsulation material to be used in each of the 30 Day tank test is determined by debris generation calculations by the CASA Grande program and is shown in Tables land 2.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 7 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 3.3 Concrete3.3.1 STP SurveyMost concrete surfaces in within containment are coated [11]. However, some uncoated surfaces couldbe exposed to the pool or spray water by direct jet impingement within the zone of influence (ZOI). Also,there are some concrete surfaces with unqualified ordegraded qualified coatings which mayfail.
Thequantity of exposed concrete in STP containment that needsto be addressed in the CHLE tests iscurrently being determined.
Also, bench tests may be considered to characterize metals leaching from concrete.
As shown bytheevaluation of Table 3very little calcium (<0.5mg/L) in solution theoretically may be required toform acalcium phosphate precipitate in a TSP buffered system, but depends on temperature and pH.Therefore evaluation of leaching rates of metals, specifically
- calcium, from the concrete is necessary.
Table 3: Calcium concentration required toform precipitation.
TSP Boron CalciumTest Concentration Concentration Concentration Case (mg/L) (mg/L) pH A (mg/L) B1 4032 2486 7.33 0.362 4032 2659 7.26 0.413 4032 2897 7.18 0.484 4435 2486 7.36 0.31A Value reference to 21 °C., value determined using STP operating median boron concentration and STP representativeTSP concentration B 8ased on the solubility of [-Ca(PO4)2with solubilityconstant Log K = -28.92 [12], ignoring activity coefficients 3.3.2 CHLE Test Parameter The concrete used for the CHLE tests will be made atthe University of New Mexico (UNM) followingthe procedure provided by Westinghouse and used forthe ICET tests [13].3.4 Latent debris3.4.1 STP SurveyThis material type accountsfor dust and fibersthat exist in containment as a result of environmental conditions.
The maximum valueof latentcdebris in STP containment has been determined to be 170 lb.dirt/dustand 30 lb. fiber[14].
This correspondstoa mass to volume ratio of 0.002 lb/ft3 fordirt/dust and 0.0004 lb/ft3 forfiber in containment.
While it is known thatthe TSP buffered system may besensitivetothe addition of metals to solution, it is unknown if the soil leaches any attributable concentration of metals. Therefore, bench tests may be considered to evaluate metal leaching from theSTP soil.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 8 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 3.4.2 CHLE Test Parameter Latent debris is defined as fiberand dust. The fiber used for Latent debris is Nukon insulation and will betaken into account within the total fiberglass added totests.
The dust used in the CHLE analyses is soilobtained from the STP site usingthe standard environmental sampling procedure
[15]. The use of thematerial in the 30 Day CHLE test will be evaluated by bench tests that investigate metal leaching.
Anydetectable metal leaching will be incorporated as a salt in the CHLE tank test.3.5 Zinc (Galvanized Steel and Coating)3.5.1 STP SurveyGalvanized steel and zinc based paints orcoatings are sources of zinc within containment.
There are273,749 ft2 (10% submerged and 90% non-submerged) of galvanized steel in STP containment
[10]. Thisquantity corresponds to a surface area to volume ratio 3.81 ft2/ft3.There are 417,839 ft2 (10%submerged and 90% non-submerged) of inorganiccoated zincsteel within containment atSTP [16]. Thisquantity corresponds to a surface area to volume ratio of 5.82 ft2/ft3.These numbers are theconservative quantities.
They are currently under review by the team to determine nominal quantities.
These values will be revised beforetests are conducted.
3.5.2 CHLE Test Parameter The inclusion of galvanized steel and zinc coated material in the LBLOCA 30-day test is currently underreview bythe project team. if they are included, the surface area of galvanized steel in the CHLE testswill be divided between the vaporspace (unsubmerged, subjected to sprays) and submerged in the poolsolution.
The surface area of zinc coated material in the CHLE tests will be also be divided between thevapor space (unsubmerged, subjected to sprays) and submerged in the pool solution.
The quantities willbe determined priorto conductingthe CHLEtests.
3.6 Copper3.6.1 STP SurveyVarious source of copperare found in containment at STP. These sources include wiring, cables, andtubes of the fan coolers [17].3.6.2 CHLE Test Parameter While copper is present in STP containment, none of itwill be submerged during a LOCA. In addition, significant quantities of the unsubmerged copperwill be protected from spray impingement.
Coppercable and wiring will not be subjected to spray as long as some insulation is in place.As a result of all these factors, copper is excluded from the long-term CHLEtests.
Howeversince it isknown that copper may accelerate aluminum corrosion
[7], the effects of copperon aluminum corrosion underSTP conditions will be investigated in short-term bench-scale corrosion tests.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 9 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 3.7 Lead3.7.1 STP SurveyLead exists in STP containment in two forms: (1) lead blankets and (2) lead pipe insulation.
There areapproximately 500 lead blankets (ift x 3 ft) in containment (45% are submerged and 55% notsubmerged)
[18]. The equivalentthickness fora lead sheet in the blanket is 3/16 [19]. These leadblankets are stored in drums with holes to prevent them from floating away if containmentfloods, butthe sources of lead are sealed within vinyl-laminated nylon covers which provide a protection barrierbetween the materialand pool solution.
The lead pipe insulation is sparsely present in containment as illustrated by Figure 1. The volume/mass values associated with the locations as listed in Figure 1 are listed in Table 4. Given that onlythree locations within containment have lead pipe insulation, the probability thatthey will be in the zone ofinfluence is relatively low [20]. Since the contribution of lead from the pipe insulation is not a likelyoccurrence in a LOCA, the probable contribution from this material tothe pool solution is neglected.
t-igure 1: Eimpilflea LAU image snowing iocations or leaa insuiatea pipes are inaicatea in yellow.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 10 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations Table 4: Volume and mass of lead insulation within STP containment Number Official Name Mass (Ibm) Volume (ft')1 4CV-10010-BB1 930.7771 14.909622 4RC-1123-BB1 1437.241 23.022393 4RC-1422-BB1 1399.997 22.42536Total Lead Blanket Insulation 3768.015 60.35737A literature search for lead precipitates, using ions known to exist in solution as a guide (regardless ofconcentration),
was done to identify possible precipitates and gatherthermodynamic information associated with the solubility limits, Table 5. Since lead can form a variety of precipitate products in thepool, some which theoretically require very little soluble lead (lead phosphates and lead chlorides) insolution (Table 6), bench tests may be considered to characterize lead corrosion in the CHLE poolchemistry and the formation of precipitates.
It should also be noted, however, that phosphate iscommonly used as a corrosion inhibitor for lead.Table 5: Lead precipitate and associated thermodynamicdata associated with solubility Solids Log K SourcesPb(B02)2(s) 6.5192 NIST[12]Pb(OH)2(s) 8.15 MTQ3.11[21]
Pb20(OH)2(s) 26.19 NIST[12]Pb3(PO4)2(s) -43.53 NIST[12]PbHPO4(s) -23.805 NIST[12]PbO:0.3H20(s) 12.98 MTQ3.11[21]
PbCI2 -4.78 NIST[12]PbSO4 -7.79 NIST[12]Solubility A Solubility 2BSolid (mg/L) (mg/L)Pb(C2H302)[22] 551,006 2,185,084 Pb(N03)2 [23] 565,000 1,270,000 A Solubiliy i 1for lead acetateis at 25C and for Lead Nitrate itis at 20 CB Solubility 2 for lead acetate is at 50C and for Lead Nitrate is at 100 CDocument No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 11 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations Table 6: Lead concentration to form lead phosphate precipitate using STP representative chemistry TSP Boron leadConcentration Concentration Concentration Test Case (mg/L) (mg/L) pH (mg/L)1 4032 2486 7.33 2.50E-052 4032 2659 7.26 2.87E-053 4032 2897 7.18 3.38E-054 4435 2486 7.36 2.14E-053.7.2 CHLE Test Parameter While there is a significant surface area of lead and copperavailable in containment, lead will beexcluded from the CHLE analyses since it is not directly exposed to spray or pool solution and theprobability of material exposure due to destruction of protective outer layers is very low.3.8 Uncoated Carbon Steel3.8.1 STP SurveyUncoated carbon steel is generally present in containment as structural supports.
168,836 ft2 (10%submerged and 90% non-submerged) is present in STP containment
[16]. This quantity correspondsto asurface area to volume ratio of 2.35 ft2/ft3.3.8.2 CHLE Test Parameter While there is a significant amount of carbon steel in containment, previous research found that carbonssteel corrosion occurred in insignificant amounts [9]. The ICET tests contained 0.15 ft2/ft3 of carbon steel,with 34 percent of the material submerged and 66 percent in the vapor space. The unsubmerged uncoated steel coupons had very little change in weight, with changes rangingfrom
+1.3to -0.4 g,compared to a mean pre-test weight of 1025 g. The submerged uncoated steel coupons in Test #1 (highpH) had a weight change of -23.3 g, but had very little weight change in the remainderof the tests(ranging from +1.4 to -1.1 g). In ICETTest
- 2, which corresponded most closelytothe STP conditions, the unsubmerged coupons gained 1.3g and the submerged couponsgained 1.4g of weight. Ironconcentrations remained nearly undetectablethroughout the full duration of all the ICETtests.
Thehighest concentrations of iron were less than 0.1 mg/L, duringthe first few days of ICET Test #3. Ironwas undetectable duringthe entire ICETTest#2.
Based on the previously mentioned
- results, uncoated carbon steel will not be included in the CHLEtanktests.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2Page 12 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 4 SummaryA survey of material in containment at STP was performed.
For materialsthat are expected tocontribute to the containment pool chemistry, a ratio of surface area or volume of material tothevolume of solution in containment at STP was determined.
These ratios were used to determine thequantity of materials to include in the 30 Day CHLE tank test, Tables 7 and 8. This approach providesaccurate materials and quantities to include in the integrated test as compared to previous evaluations.
This approach allows forfocus on materials of concern and probable chemical reactions associated withthose materials.
This preliminary analysis of STP containment materials in this document is based oninformation that was available atthe time this document was prepared.
Where final information wasnot available,values for materialquantities used in CHLEtests will be identified in the individual testplan documents.
Table 7: Surface area of materials in the CHLE analysesMaterial Surface area(ft2)Submerged Non-submerged Aluminum 0.47 ft2 2.64 ft2Galvanized Steel N/A N/A'Zinccoating N/A N/AConcrete N/A N/A'Latent debris N/A N/A1. N/A: Not available at the time of completion of this report. Values will be determined before conducting SBLOCA and LBLOCAtests.
Table 8: Volume of materials in STP containment for breaks of various sizesFiberglass Type SBLOCA (ft') MBLOCA (ft3) LBLOCA (ft3)Nukon N/A' 60 N/A'Microtherm N/A 0 N/A -1. N/A: Not available at the time of completion of this report Values will be determined before conducting SBLOCA and LBLOCAtests.
DocumentNo:
CHLE-006,Rev2 Page 13 of 14 Title: STP Material Calculations 5 References
- 1. Alion, STPPost-LOCA Water VolumeAnalysis, 2012, Alion Science and Technology:
Albuquerque, NM.2. Burche II, R.C. and W.D. D., Corrosion Study for Determining Hydrogen Generationfrom Aluminum andZinc During PostAccident Conditions, 1976: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
- 3. Griess, J.C. and B.A. L., Design Considerations ofReactorContainmentSpraySystems-PartIII.
The Corrosion of Materials in SpraySolutions, 1969: Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
- 4. Lane, A. E., et al., Evaluation of Post-Accident Chemical Effects in Containment Sump Fluids toSupport GSI-191, 2006, Westinghouse Electric Company:
Pittsburge, PA.5. Revie, R. and W. C., Corrosion and Corrosion Control:An Introduction to Corrosion Science andEngineering.
2008, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.6. STP, TGX -RequiredMassof TSPforLOCA Sump Solution pH Adjustment, 2001, South TexasProject Nuclear Operating Company.7. Davis, J.R., ed. Corrosion of Aluminum andAluminumAlloys.
1999, ASM International.
- 8. Reid, R.D., K.R. Crytzer, and A.E. Lane, Evaluations ofAdditionallnputs to the WCAP-16530-NP Chemical Model, 2007, Westinghouse Electric Company Pitssburge, PA.9. DalI man, J., et al., Integrated Chemical Effects Test Project:
Consolidated Data Report, 2006, LosAlamos National Laboratory:
NM.10. STP, Added Commodities Inside The RCB, 2003, South Texas Project.11. Sande, T., K. H. Howe, and J.J. Leavitt, Expected Impactof ChemicalEEffects on GSI-191 Risk-Informed Evaluation forSouth Texas Project, 2011, Alion Science and Technology:
Al buqueruqe, NM.12. N IST, NISTCritically Selected Stability Constants of Metal Complexes:
Version 8.0, 2008, NationalInstitute of Standards and Technology:
Gaithersburg, MD.13. LAN L, NUREG/CR-6914, VoL 1, Integrated Chemical Effects Test Project:
Consolidated DataReport (Appendix B), 2006, Los Alamos National Laboratory:
Los Alamos, N M.14. Al ion, GS1 191 ContainmentSump Evaluation:
Debris Generation, 2008.15. STP, REMP Sample Collection, in Soil Surface Sample2009.
- p. 26.16. Schulz, W., Zinc and Galvanized Steel inside containment, J. Leavitt, Editor 2012, G- Mail.17. STP, RCB HVACHeat Sink Area Estimate, South Texas Project.18. Schulz, W., Lead inside containment, J. Leavitt, Editor 2012, G- Mail.19. Industries, L. Lead Blankets.
2012; Product specifications].
Available from:http://www.lancsindustries.com/lead-wool-blankets/.
- 20. Merte ns, A., CAD Model Summary:
Sourth Texas ReactorBuilding CAD Modelfor Use in GSI-191Analyses, 2011, Alion Science and Technology:
Albuquerque, NM.21. Allison, J.D., D.S. Brown, and K.J. Novo-Gradac, MINTEQA2/PRODEFA2, A Geochemical Assessment Modelfor EnvironmentalSystems:
Version 3.0 User's Manual, 1991, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development:
Washington, DC.22. Dundon, M. L. and W. E. Henderson, Measurement of Solubility byfloating Equilibrium.
Thesolubility of Lead Acetate.
Journal of the American Chemical
- Society, 1922. 44(6): p. 1196-1203.
- 23. Lide, D.R., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 80th Edition.
1999.Document No: CHLE-006, Rev2 Page 14 of 14DocumentNo:
CHLE-006,Rev2 Page 14 of 14