|
---|
Category:General FR Notice Comment Letter
MONTHYEARML20161A0122020-06-0808 June 2020 Comment (48) of Martin Kral on Holtec International HI-STORE Consolidated Interim Storage Facility Project ML20115E5482020-04-24024 April 2020 Comment (23) of Pam and Greg Nelson on Holtec International HI-STORE Consolidated Interim Storage Facility Project ML18155A3262018-06-0404 June 2018 Comment (49) of Eva M. O'Keefe on Very Low-Level Radioactive Waste Scoping Study ML18158A1872018-06-0101 June 2018 Comment (51) of Gayle Smith Concerning Nuclear Waste in San Onofre Research and Action Is Needed to Protect the Public ML18158A1862018-05-29029 May 2018 Comment (50) of Joanna Mathews Concerning San Onofre Nuclear Station to Find a Permanent Solution for the Nuclear Waste ML18155A3252018-05-29029 May 2018 Comment (48) of Quentin De Bruyn Opposing to San Onofre Waste Situation ML18066A5612018-03-0707 March 2018 Comment (161) of Matt Collins Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5552018-03-0707 March 2018 Comment (157) of Kathleen Morris Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5582018-03-0707 March 2018 Comment (159) of Anonymous on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5292018-01-22022 January 2018 Comment (140) of Patricia Martz Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5262018-01-22022 January 2018 Comment (139) of Abell Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5252018-01-22022 January 2018 Comment (138) of Michelle Schumacher Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5532018-01-22022 January 2018 Comment (155) of Jan Boudart on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5302018-01-16016 January 2018 Comment (141) of Erin Koch on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5322018-01-10010 January 2018 Comment 142 of Dave Rice on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5372018-01-0808 January 2018 Comment (146) of Carey Strombotne on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5392018-01-0404 January 2018 Comment 147 of Phoebe Sorgen on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5512018-01-0303 January 2018 Comment (153) of Alexander Bay Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5562018-01-0303 January 2018 Comment (158) of Lee Mclendon Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5492018-01-0303 January 2018 Comment (152) of Shari Horne Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18066A5242018-01-0303 January 2018 Comment (137) of Joseph Gildner Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5962018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (60) of Matthew Stein Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A1932018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (44) of Mha Atma S. Khalsa Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5952018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (59) of Chelsea Anonymous Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A1952018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (45) of T. Strohmeier on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5932018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (57) of Patrick Bosold Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5702018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (56) of Katya Gaynor on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5692018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (55) of Robert Hensley on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5672018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (54) of Angela Sarich Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A1972018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (46) of Cheryl Harding Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5632018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (52) of Viraja Prema on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A5622018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (51) of Larisa Stow-Norman Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A4982018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (66) of Nancy Alexander Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18033A4962018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (65) of Lorna Farnun Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A2002018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (49) of Starr Cornwall Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A1992018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (48) of Daryl Gale on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6822018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (94) of Jennifer Quest on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18032A1922018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (43) of Frances Howard Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6992018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (108) from Anonymous Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities; Request for Comment on Draft NUREG ML18037A6972018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (107) of Diana Dehm on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6922018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (104) of Ari Marsh on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6912018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (103) Christina Koppisch Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities; Request for Comment on Draft NUREG ML18037A6902018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (102) of Helen Hanna on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6892018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (100) of Cindy Koch Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6882018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (101) Angela Ravenwood Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities; Request for Comment on Draft NUREG ML18037A6872018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (99) of Melissa Brizzie Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18036A1912018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (72) of J. C. Chernicky Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6812018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (93) of Ricardo Toro Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18037A6802018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (92) of Stan Weber Regarding Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities ML18036A2082018-01-0202 January 2018 Comment (89) of B. Grace on Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems and Facilities 2020-06-08
[Table view] |
Text
Page 1 of 1 RULES AND DIRECTIVE, S BRANCH U'Nr.C As of: May 17, 2013 Received: May 16, 2013 Status: PendingPost PUBLIC SUBMISSION 21t3 MAY 17 AM 10* Iracking No. ljx-85d2-fqvc Comments Due: May 16, 2013 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-201 3-0070 P CFIV f Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Pnvolvng Prop se o Significant Hazards Consideration Determination Comment On: NRC-2013-0070-0001 Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Document: NRC-2013-0070-DRAFT-0200 Comment on FR Doc # 2013-08888 4ý ISLU,3 Submitter Information Organization: DAB Safety Team General Comment Charts: San Onofre Unit 2 Modes Of Operation and what that means if a MSLB with Multiple 8 Ruptures occur
@600 gpm to U2 RSGs @0% Power - Radiation will exceed SCE FSAR limits. Offsite releases probability due to multiple tube ruptures will exceed assumed Core Damage Probability (CDP) and Large Early Release Probability (LERP) of 2X 10-7 stated In SCE Enclosure 2, page 20.
Attachments Charts of Unit 2 Submitted SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM - 013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 Add=. B. Benney (bjb) https ://www.fdms.gov/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?obj ectld=09000064812e7a65&for... 05/17/2013
The DAB Safety Team: February 27, 2013 Media
Contact:
Don Leichtling (619) 296-9928 or Ace Hoffman (760) 720-7261 Charts: San Onofre Unit 2 Modes Of Operation Table 1 - San Onofre RSGS Design and Operational Data MSLBwith Multiple 8 Design and Operational Ruptures @600 gpm Parameters which caused FEI, U2 RSGs U2 RSGs U2 RSGs FIRVand MFE @100% Power @70% Power @0% Power (1) Reactor Thermal Power, M\ 1729 1215 0 (Reactor Trip)
(1A) Unit Electrical Generation, 1183 N/A (2) Number ofTubes 9727 9727 12,580 (3) Average Length of Heated 729.56 729.56 729.56 Tubes, inches m (4) Heat Transfer Area, ft2 116,100 116,100 116,100 (5)Tube Wall Thickness, 0.043 0.043 0.043 inches (5A)Tube Diameter, inches 0.75 0.75 0.75 (5B)Tube Pitch, inches 1.0 1.0 0.87 (5C) Tube Array Triangular Triangular Triangular/Square (5D)TubeIndex 1.33-1.43 1.33-1.43 1.52-1.67 (5 E) Tube to tube clearance, 0.25 0.25 ?
inches (5F) Nominal Gap between 0.002 0.002 0.003 tubeand AVB", cold, inches (SG) Nominal Gap between 0 0 0 tube and AVB", Hot, inches (5H) Nominal Gap, N/A N/A N/A Manufacturing Dispersion, inches (51)Tube Wall Thickness/Tube 0.057 0.057 0.057 Diameter Ratio 1
(5J) Average Heated Tube 973 973 973 Length/'Tube Diameter Ratio (6) Reactor Coolant Flow (at 79.8 78.2 0 (RCS Pump Trip) cold leg temperature),,
Million lbs./hour (6A) Reactor Coolant 598 591 591 Operating Temperature (Thot), OF (6B) Reactor Coolant 541 551 551 Operating Temperature (Tcold), OF (7) RSG Operating Pressure 892 946 ATM
(@100% power), psia (8) Steam Operating 531 538 212 Temperature (@ 0% power),
OF (8A) Steam Flow, Million 7.6 5.1 Feedwater Inventoryto lbs./hour Environment in 5 -15*
Minutes-SG Empty (8B) Feed-water Inlet 442 407 N/A Temperature, OF (9) Feedwater Flow, Million 7.6 5.1 0 (Feedwater PumpsTrip) lbs./hour (10) Steam Quality, % 90% 36% >90%
(11) Void Fraction, % 98.5% 92.6% 100%
(11A) Maximum Gap Fluid 25.1 12.6 >50 Velocity, feet/second (11B)Secondaryfluid 7 12 <7 density, Ibm/cubic feet (12) Reactor Coolant 2003 2003 15,000 gallons RCS Tube Volume, fl3 Inventory contained in tubes escapes to the Environment in 5 -15* Minutes (13) Circulation Ratio 3.3 4.9 0 (13A) Down-comer 24.8 24.8 0 Feed-water Flow, Mlbs./hour (14) Delta Te = (TS, 6A)-(TSAT, 67 53 ~400 7A),OF Fluid Elastic Instability NO NO YES (Film Boiling) 2
Significant Radiation**
Flow-induced Random YES YES YES Vibration Mitsubishi Flowering Effect YES NO YES Flashing FeedwaterJet N/A N/A YES Impingement Forces on Tubes Compilation of data based on Publicly Available Documents (e.g., Westinghouse Operational Assessment, SCE Unit 3 Root cause Evaluation, http://wwv.efunda.com/materials/water/steamtablc sat.cti, etc.)
- No Operator Action assumed in 15 minutes
- Radiation will exceed SCE FSAR limits. Offsite releases probability due to multiple tube ruptures will exceed assumed Core Damage Probability (CDP) and Large Early Release Probability (LERP) of2X 10-7 stated In SCE , page 20.
3
Boiling Regimes Free Convection Nucleate Transition Film
.. ... _ _ _ _ _ 4-- *W-Radiation effects significant- 4 Isolated st'able Jets and F.llm Bubbles Columns so )lllng 104
- 101, 5 10 30 120 1000 ATe = Ts- Ta (oC)
Boiling Curve for water at I atm.
Surface heat flux q" as a function of excess temperature ATe= Ts-T littp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film boiling 4
1.5 1.0 -
0.5 01 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 PITCH FLOW VELOCITY lm/sl Figure 1 - Vibrations amplitude as a function of flow pitch velocity for a flexible cylinder In a rigid cluster (taken from Pettigrew et al. 1991). The cylinder Is free to vibration in the cross-flow direction.
Reference:
YJqkC. R., Pettigrew, M.I., NtVXS N.W. (2006). fl1q4jl4l Instability of an Array of Tubes Preferentially Flexible in the Flow Direction Subjected to Two-Phase Cross Flow._Zmnmds.k.
efL4(ASF, Journalof Pressure Vessel Technology, 128(1), p. 148-159.
These charts will be posted on the web at this link: DAB Safety Team Documents.
The DAB Safety Team: Don, Ace and a BATTERY of safety-conscious San Onofre insiders plus industry experts from around the world who wish to remain anonymous. These volunteers assist the DAB Safety Team by sharing knowledge, opinions and insight but are not responsible for the contents of the DAB Safety Team's reports. We continue to work together as a Safety Team to prepare additional: DAB Safety Team Documents, which explain in detail why a SONGS restart is unsafe at any power level without a Full/Thorough/Transparent NRC 50.90 License Amendment and Evidentiary Public Hearings. For more information from The DAB Safety Team, please visit the link above.
Our Mission: To prevent a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima, from happening in the USA.
Copyright February 27, 2013 by The DAB Safety Team. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast or redistributed without crediting the DAB Safety Team. The contents cannot be altered without the Written Permission of the DAB Safety Team Leader and/or the DAB Safety Team's Attorney.
5