Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Anti comments posted to NRC Blog


Anti comments posted to NRC Blog


FUD commentary by the anti-faction on the NRC Blog about used fuel management. We joined in on this post today to balance their statements about materials and technology.

" Donna Gilmore October 20, 2015 at 3:18 pm
The NRC may not dictate what materials are used, but they can set the minimum standards for storage, transportation and aging management. Currently, the NRC standards are so low they approve 20-year licenses to store thin 1/2″ to 5/8″ stainless steel canisters that are subject to stress corrosion cracks, cannot be inspected for cracks or depth of cracks, cannot be repaired, cannot be transported if they develop any cracks, have no early warning system prior to radiation leaks and no plan in place plan to deal with leaking canisters. In addition, NUREG-1927 (Rev. 1) Aging Management proposes to allow up to 75% cracks in these canisters even though they know canisters cannot be transported with cracks. And there is no seismic rating for cracking canisters. Promises of future solutions are just vaporware — needed capabilities that don’t exist and may never exist. If NRC required products met these needed requirements now, utilities would be forced to choose thick cask technology (9″ to 20″ thick) used in most of the rest of the world. It’s time for the NRC to increase their standards before it’s too late and we have radiation releases all over the country. Each canister contains more radiation (Cesium-137) than released from Chernobyl.
The Holtec HI-STORM UMAX system is even worse. It’s an unproven underground system that does not allow for adequate inspection of the below ground concrete portion of the system and will be subject to moisture and chemical degradation from the ground.
It’s time for the NRC to take responsibility for setting higher minimum standards that vendors must meet. Approving dry storage systems that cannot adequately be maintained or monitored and accepting vendor promises of future solutions puts us all at risk for both short-term (up to 60 years after reactor lifespan) and long-term. Decommissioning funds are limited. Southern California Edison plans to spend about $1.3 billion (yes, billion) for Aging Management at San Onofre. Once that money is gone, there is no other billion available. The $1.3 billion assumes nothing will go wrong with this inferior technology. Thin canisters have been loading since 2003 at San Onofre. The NRC materials engineers know that these canisters are particularly susceptible to chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking from the marine environment. The NRC engineers say similar components, such as the tank at Koeberg nuclear plan leaked from cracks in 17 years. The largest crack was 0.61″ deep. Most canisters are 0.50″ thick. San Onofre’s are 0.625″ thick. A Diablo Canyon two-year old canister has all the conditions for stress corrosion cracking — low enough temperature for the magnesium chloride salts found to dissolve on the canister, which can initiate stress corrosion cracking. The NRC states once cracks initiate, they can go through the wall of the canister in 16 years. Learn more at SanOnofreSafety.org." http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/2015/10/20/dry-cask-101-storage-and-transport-the-right-materials-for-the-job/


No comments:

Post a Comment