(Ed has a series of NRC/VT Yankee-meeting live blogged comments on the user diaries sidebar. Kudos for that, and very interesting stuff. I encourage folks to check them out. – promoted by odum)

It’s remarkable that Entergy’s attitude to the NRC is so similar to their stance with Windham Regional Commission: use old or generic data and not-quite applicable methods, promise more info at a later date, and keep going as if you’ve explained everything, but never give the info requested.

Today, the NRC staff seemed very skeptical about ENVY’s process. It remains to be seen if this will be the first time the NRC stands up to a reactor operator requesting a another 20 year operating.

It is clear the NRC is not yet satisfied with what ENVY has presented as their analysis.  

questions from the public

public questions

Dave Lochbaum, UCS re: water chemistry-

were changes monitored over the operating time and incorporated into predictions?

Entergy- we don’t have to answer you.

Ray Shadis, NEC: will the underlying methods and calculations be available for review and evaluation?

NRC- we use very experienced people here, so we don’t need anyone outside the NRC to verify the data and process. We spent two days at VY reviewing their data and hope you can tell from our questions that we’re trustworthy.

Shadis- considering the Office of Inspector General report (that NRC staff cut and pasted operator/licensee data and arguments directly into their review documents), more public scrutiny is warranted.

NRC-Trust us. If ENVY doesn’t provide us with the information, we will not approve the relicense.

Audette and Smallheer, Reformer and Herald. Please tell us succinctly what happened today, and what are next steps.

NRC- we’ll get back to you on that.

NRC- We’re expecting more info from ENVY before Feb 7 Advisory Committee on Rractor Safety meeting.

Entergy- we’ll get back to you on that

Entergy- there is some significant evaluation work going on so we can show you this is accurate, but we haven’t done the work yet.

NRC-when? Can you give us a date?

Entergy- we’ll get back to you. We’ll let you know when we’re done.

Entergy summary:

The methods we’ve used have been used traditionally.  We’re building in conservatisms to allow for error and variation.

We’re very comfortable with the way we’re doing this.  

more skepticism from the NRC

——

Entergy- Everything that’s here, there’s nothing new.

NRC: Shear stress could be as much as 41%.

Entergy- the process can be approved subject to site specific review. The methodology can be generic.

NRC- it depends on the experience of the analyst. There’s not enough qualified people in the county to travel around to do that. That’s why people want a clear process.

Entergy- we can do the review in house or with a sub-contractor.

NRC- You wanted to ignore the shear stress until we asked you about it.

NRC- We don’t know how to trust your methodology at all. You’re not going to tell us what kind of shear stress will generate this. My problem is your methodology. You may have used this for the last 20 years. You need to demonstrate it to us.

nozzle stresses

NRC: you put yourself in such a bind.

NRC: is there any new data here?

Entergy- for these nozzles, there is no new data.

Entergy- there’s a couple things we did based on our experience. Ran a different analysis on this nozzle. This is not a right angle nozzle, it has an extra bend.

Shear stresses are significant. Worked backwards to show our other calculations have a similar result, and are therefore accurate.

NRC: how many nozzles have this geometry at VY?

Entergy- this is the only one.

NRC- You cannot even show me the magnitude of the shear stress.

5 MINUTE BREAK  

Long theoretical discussion, then another example of being out-of-date

Entergy: most vendors use component stresses.

NRC: Just because most vendors use it, doesn’t mean it’s correct. 25 years ago, if you told me to use that, I would. Today, I would refuse.

Nozzle calculations

Entergy: This is not VY, we’re showing you, this is a generic picture, not specific to ENVY.

Entergy:

We used a method that was commonly used 25 years ago.

Simplistically, if I model a sphere and want to model a cylinder, I could increase the diameter in the calculation because the cylinder has twice the hoop stress of the shere. This bounds the difference between the sphere and the cylinder.

“I think the non-linear aspect of it is very small.”

The nozzles introduce a discontinuity

NRC: the geometric discontinuity is in your model. You have to demonstrate to me the shear stress and nominal stress are very close.

ENVY: the nozzles we examined were not from VY.

Normal hoop stress should be 2.65. This would not cover the nozzle corner.

Entergy- we’re getting off on a tangent. We’re trying to explain what we did.

Livish blogging on AGING MANNAGEMENT

Projection uses present water chemistry. Doesn’t account for varying levels of noble metals, etc.

Used different analysis for different nozzles.

NRC: model you used for analysis was standard in the past, but is not necessarily the model to be used in the future. We wanted nozzle corner location addressed. You did not address this. What you used is based on 1970’s when computer time was so expensive.

Entergy: We will address that.

NRC: It’s even more confusing to me after I’ve reviewed your submission. I want specific numbers.

slow typing, live blogging

Entergy and NRC

AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

ENVY’s AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM for Relicensing

I’m following a conference call at NRC HQ in MD.

13 parties in conf @ sign on

ENVY c.10 people

NRC Headquarters c. 10 people

No one from NRC Region 1! They’re supposed to be supervising everday operations.

Southern Co

Dept Envir Cons

Public may comment at end.

No transcription.

Entergy’s Jay Thayer, ex ENVY chief, introduces presenters

Entergy: “Haven’t properly communicated methodology.”

“no new information, just repackaged.”

Entergy first tries to explain what they think the NRC was asking explanations for.

Description of stress model ENVY used to calculate stress response for nozzle due to mechanical loading and thermal stress. IE, predicting failure and system breach.

“a sphere has a hoop stress half the rate of a cylinder.” ENVY took a cross section of the reactor vessel as the basis for its calculations, although the vessel is not a sphere.

Attached piping stresses: assume directionality.

Used +20% uprate for 60 year life of reactor. Is this conservative, or merely easier?

# transient cycles: 100 startups in 30 years. Used 300 in 60 years projection. Used Design basis transients.

How often will you update your projections? Right now, every cycle, 18 months. Re-forecast and re-project every month? Is there a formal process, a person whose job it is to do the reprojection every year?

Yes, someone who’s in the room. But ENVY thinks it assumptions are so conservative, it will never have to recalculate.

NRC: what will be the basis for us to evaluate your programs if you do not provide us with sufficient detail? We need to see that before we can evalute it.

ENVY: We’ll show you as we go along. You just approve the general process, we’ll let you know how it goes. We can’t get into the detail at this meeting.

Thanks, Peter.

BILL TITLE: Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.

                    Yeas Nays PRES NV

Democratic 195 9 9 19

Republican 177 1 21

Independent

TOTALS 372 9 10 40

—- ANSWERED “PRESENT”    10 —

Conyers

Frank (MA)

Holt

Payne

Pence

Schakowsky

Schwartz

Wasserman Schultz

Welch (VT)

Yarmuth