[ RadSafe ] Risk Communication

Sat May 11 03:08:03 CDT 2013

Hi Jaro - Well, I see that USNRC's draft "Director's Decision", issued last month, denies the NRDC petition, but not because NRC disagrees that the PARS at Indian Point-2 (with its two installed PARS units) would be an ignition hazard in some severe accidents. NRC staff has concluded that the benefits of PARS in coping with design basis accidents -- station blackout in particular -- outweighs the risks added in the case of beyond design basis accidents, because severe accidents are so unlikely.

Your message seemed to point to beyond design basis accident at Fukushima as rationale for PARS. I appreciate your comments and your knowledge of how Chalk River analyzed PARS. Was it the isotope production reactor there that you were working on? If you didn't have to install thirty-to-sixty IP-2 sized PARS units (each one is capable of handling several grams of hydrogen per second), then you were dealing with less maximum hydrogen than the big US LWRs. NRDC says the two PARS units at IP-2 are sufficient for design-basis accidents. And NRC does not contest that they would be overwhelmed in more severe accidents, in which hydrogen production is projected to be as much as 10 kilograms/sec.

The draft DD is available via NRC's ADAMS document ACN ML130501596
http://www.nuclear.com/archive/2013/04/02/ML130501596.pdf

Very truly yours,

NUCLEAR.COM

Steve Schulin, Founding Editor
http://www.nuclear.com
info at nuclear.com
301-433-4211

http://www.linkedin.com/in/nuclearcom
http://twitter.com/nuclearcom
http://facebook.com/nuclearcom

On May 10, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Jaro Franta wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> You don't seriously believe *any* of the BS spread by the Natural Resources
> Defense Council ?
> 
> Having been involved in preparing licensing-related documentation for PARs
> installation in Canada, I would like to share some basic information that I
> reviewed & used in my documents, referenced from numerous development & test
> reports written by the folks who developed the Canadian version of PARs, in
> Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories.
> 
> First of all, PARs can NOT increase the likelihood of a hydrogen explosion
> in a beyond design basis accident, because they self-start at a hydrogen
> concentration that is well below that required for an explosion.
> Once PARs self-start, they have a high capacity for hydrogen recombination,
> which heats them up to roughly the same temperature as a barbecue.
> 
> A plant-specific analysis is prepared by the licensee for the regulator, to
> indicate how many PARs need to be installed, and in which specific
> locations, to ensure that adequate recombination capacity is available under
> all circumstances.
> 
> Secondly, US NPPs already have electric-powered hydrogen "igniters".
> The problem with those is not that they will blow up the pant, but that they
> don't work in a total station blackout situation, like Fukushima.
> 
> Regarding the issue of containment vent filter clogging, sure, a poorly
> designed filter can clog.
> A similar issue arose in past years regarding containment cooling water
> recirculation: New pump intake filters had to be designed, built and
> installed at nuclear plants, to ensure that even under the worst conceivable
> circumstances adequate water could be circulated from the containment sump,
> to maintain cooling.
> 
> Ignoring appropriate solutions is simply another way of saying dragging your
> feet.....
> 
> Jaro
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Schulin
> Sent: May-10-13 6:43 PM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Risk Communication
> 
> Hi Jaro, and all. One reason I don't support use of PARS is because such
> devices can actually increase the likelihood of a hydrogen explosion in a
> beyond design basis accident. See "passive autocatalytic recombiners could
> act as hydrogen igniters in beyond design basis accident" at
> http://news.nuclear.com/blog7.php/indian-point-2-passive-autocatalytic
> 
> I'm also not so keen to put filters on the hardened vents. The safety
> function of the vents is so important that it seems unwise to risk clogging
> up the vent path. I'm no engineer, but as a radiation protection technician,
> and as a homeowner, it it has been my experience that filters clog.This
> concern about filter-clogging was raised in at least one of the
> post-Fukushima ACRS meetings (NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor
> Safeguards) where the filtered vent issue was discussed, but I haven't
> noticed any studies or reports on the subject.
> 
> As to contributors to public outrage, I'd rank several items as of much
> greater significance than the explosions. The admission by TEPCO that they
> purposefully did not improve tsunami protection to guard against increased
> max credible tsunami height is one example. That the reasoning included not
> wanting to alarm the public was an especially egregious aspect of this, and
> I see this raised in many more recent newspaper pieces than the explosions.
> 
> Very truly yours,
> 
> NUCLEAR.COM
> 
> Steve Schulin, Founding Editor
> http://www.nuclear.com
> info at nuclear.com
> 301-433-4211
> 
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/nuclearcom
> http://twitter.com/nuclearcom
> http://facebook.com/nuclearcom
> 
> 
> On May 10, 2013, at 5:36 PM, Jaro Franta wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for the link.
>> 
>> It seems to me that a very big part of the "Outrage" following 
>> Fukushima came from the public seeing images of one reactor after another
> blowing up.
>> 
>> Does anyone dispute that assertion ?
>> 
>> Anyway, a fairly easy and relatively inexpensive way to combat that 
>> specific outrage is to make sure that NPPs subject to total station 
>> blackout do not blow up, because of hydrogen accumulation.
>> Now why on earth is the US nuclear industry dragging its feet on 
>> installation of Passive Autocatalytic hydrogen Recombiners (PARs), 
>> while everyone else around the world is installing them, is totally beyond
> me.
>> 
>> Similarly for containment venting filters.
>> 
>> How about some leadership for a change ?
>> 
>> 
>> Jaro Franta
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Miller, Mark 
>> L
>> Sent: May-10-13 12:59 PM
>> To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu; Adams, Steven; Anastas, George; 
>> Armstrong, Dennis R; Baker Ken; Baltz, David ; Barcal, Karen Kay; 
>> Barclay, Hazel Thorniley; Bates, Bob B. Jr. (LANL); Bayless, Mark A. 
>> (LANL); Beall, Patrick; Becker, Ralph ; Beekman, Marsha ; Bertelli, 
>> Luiz (LANL); Bianconi, Charles J. (LANL); Bland, James R. (LANL); 
>> Bliss, John L. (LANL); Boecker, Bruce; Borders, REX @ DOE; Bramlitt, 
>> Edward T; Brennan, Martin Jr; Buchan, Andrew ; Buhl, Thomas E; 
>> Bullock, Christine A. (LANL); Burkhart, Robert; Cheng, Yung-Sung (External
> Contacts); Chilton, Milton W; Colby, Brian P.
>> (LANL); Costigan, Stephen A. (LANL); Cox, Morgan; Crawford, Arthur 
>> (LANL); Culp, Todd A; Farrar, David Ryan; dhanna at bladewerx.com; Dierks,
> Deann D.
>> (LANL); Duran, Michael A. (LANL); Durrer, Russell E. (LANL); Eisele, 
>> Shawna L. (LANL); Eisele, William F. Jr. (LANL); Elkin, Bradley S; 
>> Enghauser, Michael William; Ennis, Malcolm E. (LANL); Fanning, Michael 
>> (LANL); Farmer, Steven; Farr, Chuck; Feldman, Alexander (LANL); 
>> Fingerlos, James P; Fitch, Stanley; Fleischacker, Randy ; Flor, 
>> William J. (LANL); Forbes, Betsy; Fuehne, David P. (LANL); Gadd, Milan 
>> S. (LANL); Garcia, Benito J. (LANL); Garcia, Mark ; George, Gerald L. 
>> (LANL); Ghanbari, Faraj; Giblin, John ; Gomez, Leo S PH.D.; Griffin, 
>> Justin M. (LANL); Groves, K.L. Ken; Guilmette, Ray; Guilmette, Todd; 
>> Guinn, Charles D; Haaker, Richard Frank; Hallman, Anne K. (LANL); 
>> Hanson, Christina B; Hayes, Sarah (LANL); Heintz, Philip H ; Hoffman, 
>> Jeffrey M; Hoover, Paul S. (LANL); Hoover, Sarah C. (LANL); Horvath, 
>> Alex; Howe, Michael L. (LANL); Hrabosky, Stefan; Hung-Cheng Chiou; 
>> Hunt, Brian; jkraus at wcstexas.com; johnmc at unm.edu; Johnson, Ed; Johnson,
> Nels; Justus, Alan L. (LANL); kbporch928 at sprintmail.com; Koster, James E.
>> (LANL); Kraus, Terrence D; Laiche, Thomas P; Lee, Michelle B. (LANL); 
>> Longley, John Marion; macadoofox at aol.com; Madonia, Mike; Manzanares, 
>> Leonard F. (LANL); Marshall, Elaine; Martin, Deborah; Matthew Alden 
>> Griffin (Griffin at AnythingNuclear.com); McLean, Thomas D. (LANL); 
>> McNaughton, Michael (LANL); Metcalf, Robert A ; 
>> michael.ortiz1 at state.nm.us; Mickey, Walen; Miller, Mark L; 
>> Miltenberger, Robert P; Mohagheghi, Amir H; Monsalve-Jones, R. A. 
>> (LANL); Moore, Terence M; Morales Bert; Morgan, Ronald G. (LANL); Neill.
> Robert H; Oldewage, Hans D; paulward.pw at gmail.com; Peifer, Martin J.
>> (LANL); Potter, Gus; Rasmussen, Richard (LANL); Rees, Brian G. (LANL); 
>> Rhodes, William G; Roach, William.; Robert Cornish; Romero, Leonard L.
>> (LANL); Rowley, Mark; Savignac, Noel ; Schierman, Michael ; 
>> Schoendaller, Karen; Schoenfelder, Robert P; Schoep, David ; Schramm, 
>> Garry R. (LANL); Scott, Bobby; Seidel, David J. (LANL); Seiler, Fritz 
>> ; Shanks, Arthur; Shanks, Sonoya T; Simmons, Theodore; Smeltz, John; 
>> Spoerner, Michael T; St Ledger, John W. (LANL); Steiner, Virginia M; 
>> Treadaway, Walter A. (LANL); Vergamini, Terrance M. (LANL); Vosburg, 
>> Susan; Voss, James T. (LANL); Wald, Theodore L; Waligora, Stanley Jm); 
>> Wannigman, David L. (LANL); Ward, Dann C; Wasiolek, Maryla; Waters, Tom L.
> (LANL); Weiner, Ruth; Whicker, Jeffrey J.
>> (LANL); White, Robin S
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Risk Communication
>> 
>> 
>> http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2013/05/07/outrage-management-calming-people
>> -conce
>> rned-about-low-risks/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>> 
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>> 
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>> 
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>> 
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu