• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register

Yo ho ho and a Cask of leaking fuel
February 21, 2018

[ large primary doc Kr-85 releases detected at Milestone, Calvert Cliffs, Arkansas. Some snips ]

Millstone Power Station, Unit 2
On May 12, 2015, [...] dry shielded canister (DSC) being loaded with Unit 2 spent fuel.  
During the blowdown evolution, the licensee received local radiation alarms
and observed a spike in activity with the spent fuel pool (SFP) ventilation radiation monitor.   

[...] detectable krypton (Kr)-85 results from a sample taken directly from the DSC [...]

[...] 15 of the loaded assemblies originated from cycles that experienced grid-to-rod fretting (GTRF).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1
On September 17, 2015 and October 8, 2015, the Unit 1 wide range noble fission gas monitor detected Kr-85 releases.
The investigation concluded the probable cause to be latent near-through-wall failure sites which fully opened when subjected to the vacuum environment.  

Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2
September 2014
On September 12, 2014, the control room emergency ventilation system at Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO) was unexpectedly triggered, placing both Unit 1 and 2 control rooms on emergency recirculation because of increased radiation levels.
[ https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-colle...ml#en50454 ]
The licensee cited both the prevalence of GTRF in the operating cycles of the subject assemblies, which may produce breaches larger than a pinhole, and the limitations of ultrasonic testing in accurately identifying leaking fuel.

As a corrective action, the licensee elected to conservatively reclassify the fuel loaded into the
MPC as damaged and submitted an exemption request from the requirements in
IN 2018-01 Page 4 of 9 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2) and 10 CFR 72.212(b)(11), as the loaded MPC had not been approved for
damaged fuel.

August 2015
On August 21, 2015, the licensee’s process radiation monitor for Unit 2 spent fuel area alarm was activated, which tripped the exhaust system. [ Unclear if 'tripped' means the exhaust system was activated or deactivated. ]

The licensee characterized the sample and identified fission product gas Kr-85

Reactor Operating Records

Licensees may assess whether any missing records from early reactor operation, such as those
lost because of changes in plant ownership, may impact conclusions made about fuel discharged from a given cycle.

[ This statement illustrates how non chalant they are in record keeping, convieniently able to claim lost records, everyone shrugs, nice plausible deniability in case a fuel bundle casked causes a prblem in the future. ]

Visual Inspection

NUREG-1536, Revision 1, states that a visual examination of a breached rod can be used to determine if a breach is gross (i.e., cladding breaches greater than 1 mm).


[ From the Reactor Status data ]


[ I thought there was another unit that had leaking fuel problems (Columbia?) but haven't been able to verify yet. ]
[ I think that the three bundles meet the definition of the gross damage. ]  
[ So we know that at least RiverBend has breached (leaking) fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool. ]


A new method to predict Grid-To-Rod Fretting in a PWR fuel assembly inlet region | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...9311005024
Nuclear Engineering and Design | Volume 241, Issue 8, August 2011, Pages 2974-2982

[ from the abstact ]
Grid-To-Rod Fretting (GTRF) is one of the main causes of leaking fuel in a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR). GTRF is caused by grid-to-rod gap, secondary flow, and axial/lateral turbulence caused pressure fluctuations within the fuel assembly, which produces rod vibration and wear.


[ Dry casks are air cooled, meaning they have vents in them for air flow, the vents have to be free of blockage. ]

[ This EN involves WI_Zion - snow blocked vents in casked fuel ]



March 1, 2018
NRC - NRC Begins Technical Review of Holtec Application for New Mexico Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Facility

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has formally docketed an application by Holtec Inc. to
construct and operate a consolidated interim storage facility for spent fuel from commercial nuclear
power reactors in Lea County, New Mexico.
In docketing the application, the NRC has determined the application is sufficiently complete
for the staff to begin its detailed safety, security and environmental reviews.

Docketing does not indicate approval of the application.Holtec submitted its application on March 30, 2017,
and supplemented it in October and December in response to NRC staff questions.
Holtec seeks to store up to 8,680 metric tons of uranium in commercial spent fuel
in the Holtec International Storage Module Underground “MAXimum Capacity (HI-STORM UMAX) Storage System
for a 40-year license term. [ What do you think international means? ]

The NRC staff informed Holtec of its docketing determination in a letter dated Feb. 28, 2018.
The NRC will publish a notice of docketing in the Federal Register in coming days.

The application and other documents related to the NRC’s review are available on the NRC website.
[ There's a picture showing what they mean by undergrund storage. ]
[ it's a giant cncrete pad with the canisters sunkintothe ground and only the top showing. ]
[ Bet that will absorb some heat. ]

[ If they were smart they would shade the pad with solar panels. ]

[ So possible leaking fuel, stored in air cooled casks in the desert. What could go wrong? ]


[ Here's a couple vids showing what happens to spent fuel. ]

3 mins | Spent fuel composition by Ace Hoffman (based on Sorensen) | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m2sr78g9uI

45 mins | Is Nuclear Waste Really Waste? | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv-mFSoZOkE

Thanks for providing these reports.

It is very interesting that snow can block the cooling vents in casked fuel, and the safety equipment was disabled due to snow.
CafeRadLab  Free Guides and Resources For Everyone Here!

Get Prepared For Earth Changes!

The purpose of life is to learn to express your personal energy Creatively and Lovingly!

Regulators File Complaint Against Maker Of Nuclear Fuel Cask


NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan tells the Brattleboro Reformer that Holtec International adopted a new design for its steel and concrete casks without a written evaluation, violating federal safety regulations. Officials say the company made changes after it discovered a loose bolt at San Onofre nuclear power plant in California.
List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International HI-STORM 100 Multipurpose Canister Cask System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1014, Amendment Nos. 11 and 12

A Proposed Rule by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on 12/12/2018

This document has a comment period that ends in 11 days. (01/11/2019)

We always ask what have we done because we don't know what we are doing.

Good catch, Jebus!


"NRC has determined that this direct final rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The NRC has made a finding of no significant impact on the basis of this environmental assessment."

Holtec International submitted a request to the NRC to amend Certificate of Compliance No. 1014 in a letter dated January 29, 2016, and supplemented its request on February 16, 2016; June 6, 2016; December 22, 2016; April 22, 2016; September 8, 2017; November 10, 2017; and December 21, 2017. This revised Certificate of Compliance was denoted as Amendment No. 11 to Certificate of Compliance No. 1014. The revisions to Amendment No. 11 involve the following changes to the authorized contents:

1. Increase the per-storage location weight limit for cells authorized for damaged fuel containers in multipurpose canisters (MPCs) MPC-68, MPC-68FF, and MPC-68M in the HI-STORM 100 storage system.

2. Change surveillance requirements for casks with certain heat loads as specified in the Technical Specifications.

3. Allow the storage of higher average initial enrichment weight percent uranium (U)-235 fuel with low enriched Chalk River unidentified deposits-induced localized corrosion fuel.

4. Increase the enrichment limit for 10x10G boiling water reactor fuel assemblies from 4.6 weight percent U-235 to 4.75 weight percent U-235.

5. Change the minimum soluble boron concentration limits for the 17x17A pressurized water reactor fuel assemblies in MPC-32.

6. Increase the burnup limit to accommodate non-fuel hardware consisting of neutron source assemblies in combination with other control components.

7. Add thoria rods/canister as contents for the MPC-68M.

8. Add a second permissible composition for thoria rods for all MPC-68 models. The new thoria rod composition is made of 98.5 weight percent thorium dioxide and 1.5 weight percent uranium oxide. The maximum enrichment of U-235 in uranium oxide is 93.5 weight percent.

Amendment No. 11 also makes the following editorial changes:

1. Clarify heat load limits and drying methods in Appendix A, Table 3-1.

2. Include NUREG-0612, “Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants: Resolution of Generic Technical Activity A-36.” as a basis for stress limits.

3. Remove manufacturer's tolerance in Appendix B, Tables 2.1-2 and 2.1-3.

4. Clarify dose evaluation for stainless steel replacement and dummy rods in Appendix B, Tables 2.1-2 and 2.1-3.
This direct final rule is effective February 25, 2019, unless significant adverse comments are received by January 11, 2019


https://sanonofresafety.org/2018/11/29/1...l-damaged/ (NRC admits San Onofre Holtec Nuclear Waste Canisters Are All Damaged)!

Placed elsewhere at the lab today:

Attorney seeks federal criminal investigation into Edison's handling of nuclear waste at San Onofre


In a letter to the FBI San Diego field office supervisor, Aguirre said the findings and violations issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission late last month could be considered criminal under federal law.

"There are compelling public interests that require an FBI investigation into whether the violations were willful,” Aguirre wrote to Special Agent in Charge John Brown. “The violations were frequent during the period January 2018 to August 2018. Indeed, Southern California Edison is a repeat offender.”


The utility, which co-owns the plant with minority partner San Diego Gas & Electric, said it prefers the case remain with federal regulators rather than criminal investigators. Crews are moving nuclear waste from above-ground storage to casks buried on the shore north of Oceanside, since the power plant failed in January 2012 and ceased operations.

NRC investigators were examining a near-miss accident from early August, when a 50-ton canister containing spent nuclear-fuel assemblies became lodged inside a storage cavity about 20 feet above where it was supposed to be placed.

“Southern California Edison believes the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the proper authority to oversee and determine matters relating to the Aug. 3 spent nuclear fuel canister-loading incident at San Onofre nuclear plant,” the company said in a statement.

The unsolicited request from Aguirre for a criminal investigation by the FBI comes in response to a formal notice of violation issued to Edison by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission late last month. The agency said it is “concerned about apparent weaknesses in management oversight.”


Of course they want to be investigated by....themselves. (NRC)
The solution to the krypton leakage, loose bolts, teetering casks, defective fuel, unstudied/unknown consequences and sketchy ownership: Switch owners, mock an investigation, change regulations and deny, deny, deny.

D. Alternative to the Action

The alternative to this action is to deny approval of Amendment Nos. 11 and 12 and end the direct final rule. Consequently, any 10 CFR part 72 general licensee that seeks to load spent nuclear fuel into a Holtec International HI-STORM 100 System cask in accordance with the changes described in Amendment Nos. 11 and 12 would have to request an exemption from the requirements of §§ 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative, interested licensees would have to prepare, and the NRC would have to review, a separate exemption request, thereby increasing the administrative burden upon the NRC and the costs to each licensee. Therefore, the environmental impacts would be the same or less than the proposed action.

HHD: Makes sense.


F. Agencies and Persons Contacted

No agencies or persons outside the NRC were contacted in connection with the preparation of this environmental assessment.

HHD: Inside Job.
NRC and SCE certainly ARE making a mockery of an investigation. Dancing around the minutae regarding the one grossly mishandled  cask, carefully avoiding discussion about the fact that ALL the installed casks are damaged. They're  only 5/8" thick, difficult to precisely use that glorified forklift to position the casks; bumping & scratching the casks on the poorly designed spacers. Once a scratch is started, in a corrosive marine environment, leads to a leaking crack pretty quick. How long? Within a decade?
  What we are witnessing  is a conspiracy to commit monetarily  driven mass murder. Should just one cask go critical, there is no way to get close enough to do any effective  remediation. So, they all light up. There goes North America...
don't stir up the hot particles
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing Revision 2 to Regulatory Guide (RG) 3.54, “Spent Fuel Heat Generation in an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation.” Revision 2 provides methods acceptable to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff for calculating spent nuclear fuel heat generation rates for use for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). The revision presents an up-to-date methodology for determining heat generation rates and provides greater flexibility (less restrictions). It also allows loading of higher burnup fuel by using more accurate methods for decay heat calculations.

We always ask what have we done because we don't know what we are doing.


Forum Jump:

Browsing: 1 Guest(s)