NRC says 11 nuclear plants need to provide information on effects of irradiation on nuclear fuel

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has requested information from 11 nuclear power plants, mainly concerning analyses of the effects of irradiation on nuclear fuel’s physical properties under certain postulated accident conditions.

The agency is requesting the licensees evaluate a phenomenon known as “thermal conductivity degradation” – the fact that older fuel has a reduced capacity to transfer heat, potentially changing its performance during various accident scenarios, including loss-of-coolant accidents. The NRC is concerned that this phenomenon may not have been accounted for in realistic performance models for nuclear fuel developed by Westinghouse Electric Co.

“The NRC alerted the industry to this problem in 2009, and Westinghouse needs to do more to account for thermal conductivity degradation in its fuel performance codes,” said Eric Leeds, director of the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “We need information from a few nuclear power plant licensees to maintain assurance that they can continue to operate safely with sufficient margin.”

In December, Westinghouse notified the NRC that an analysis it had conducted for a power plant indicated that thermal conductivity degradation could cause peak cladding
temperature to increase by more than 100 degrees F during a worst-case loss-of-coolant accident at a Westinghouse pressurized water reactor.

The 11 plants named in the RFI are those Westinghouse clients with currently reported peak cladding temperatures above 2,000 degrees F. Accounting for thermal conductivity degradation in their analyses could result in peak temperatures approaching or exceeding the 2,200 degree limit. These plants are Beaver Valley 1 and 2, Braidwood 2, Byron 2, Catawba 1 and 2, Donald C. Cook 1 and 2, Kewaunee, and McGuire 1 and 2. An additional 23 plants that use the Westinghouse performance models also received informational copies of the RFI, to ensure that they are aware of their obligations to address this error.

The plants have until March 19thto provide the requested information to the NRC staff. If the information received does not demonstrate that NRC regulations are met, the staff will recommend imposing restrictions on reactor operating limits until acceptable action has been taken.

Source: NRC

 

 

About author
A frequently published author at Enformable, Chris Harris is a former licensed Operator and Nuclear Engineer in the United States.
Read More About , , , , ,
1 comment on this postSubmit yours
  1. captddd@gmail.com'

    Reactors a very complicated and have a huge number of things that must all work perfectly if the reactor is to be operated safely…

    Normal wear and tear are not acceptable because of the radiation RISK…

    Unlike anything else, all these reactors can create a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster because Nature can destroy any land based nuclear reactor, any place anytime 24/7/365, just like it did in Fukushima!

Submit your comment

Please enter your name

Your name is required

Please enter a valid email address

An email address is required

Please enter your message

*

Enformable © 2014 All Rights Reserved

More in Editorials, Events
Inside the reactor a fuel bundle glows with a vibrant blue light known as Cerenkov radiation, produced as escaping neutrons are slowed by water.
San Onofre Reactor 2 operated for several months with degraded nuclear fuel cladding

Three weeks after shutting down, problems continue to surface at San Onofre Unit 2.  Scott Burnell, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Washington, said the root cause of the faster-than-expected wear...

Close