PETER RICKARDS

PROTECTING IDAHO FAMILIES since 1988

U S CONGRESS

Butch's Fake Nuclear Cheerleaders, The LINE Commission COSTS YOU money & they LIE. 

   Here are some of my ignored documents on containment flaws that remain unstudied. According to the DOE they could lead to "CATASTROPHIC FAILURE"!!!

HMM... That doesn't sound "safe" at ALL.

 Did they forget to mention these problems on your high schoolers tour of "safe" INL? 

   Why does Idaho DEQ INL Oversite website NOT mention these threats? Money talks, and buys silence!

From: Peter Rickards 
Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Subject: LINE public comment - NRC/DOE paper on containment flaws that can lead to "catastrophic failure"...
Dear LINE members,

While I see no response from LINE to my documentation and request to correct the Governors' claims we won the "all means all" lawsuit. No mention of plutonium nanoclusters dangers from moving with water. No response on the CERCLA plan that admits it expect cap failure and water is expected to flood the plutonium. That's the acres of billions of loose scattered plutonium particles that will remain 90% buried, while we open new plutonium dumps onsite like ICDF. No report on meltdowns from cyber-terrorism.
So here is another subject to ignore while you volunteer Idaho families for more front line nuclear duty. Please let me know if you don't understand technical terms, like "catastrophic failure.", and I will be happy to explain what Governor Otter and the INL Sate Oversite team prefers you never hear...Peter Dr. Peter Rickards DPM Spokesman for Idaho Families For The Safest Energy

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0624/ML062440075.pdf

P 167-9/212 on web on real page 141- 3


4.7 Issues for Future Consideration
4.7.1 Leakage
A great deal has been learned about containment behavior and containment analysis methods in
the last two decades of containment research, but questions still remain. One of the most
important behavior questions is that it is not known with certainty whether a leakage failure will reach an equilibrium state or if it will lead to a catastrophic failure. The arguments for each follow below. SNIPPED FOR SPACE!!!4.7.2 Other Considerations Many aspects of containment integrity have still not been addressed in the various containment integrity research programs. Some of these topics are listed below:• The behavior of the containment under elevated temperature and pressure loads has not been thoroughly investigated. Most of the containment tests have ignored the effects of temperature on the material properties and thermal induced stresses associated with elevated temperatures.• The effect of aerosols within the containment atmosphere during an accident has not been investigated. Aerosols may plug holes in the containment that may lead to a higher pressure capability, but have the potential to change the mode of failure from a possible benign mode to a burst mode. This applies to unlined concrete containments and lined containments when the liner has failed.• Seismic loadings coupled with severe accident loads have not been investigated in any detail.• Liner-anchorage-concrete interaction is significant in determining how liners tear in concrete containments. These phenomena are still not fully understood. SNIPPED!!!

"SAFE" MEANS:

4.7 Issues for Future Consideration
4.7.1 Leakage
A great deal has been learned about containment behavior and containment analysis methods in
the last two decades of containment research, but questions still remain. One of the most
important behavior questions is that it is not known with certainty whether a leakage failure will
reach an equilibrium state or if it will lead to a catastrophic failure. The arguments for each follow below. -

 

Seismic loadings coupled with severe accident loads have not been investigated in any detail.• Liner anchorage-concrete interaction is significant in determining how liners tear inconcrete containments. These phenomena are still not fully understood.

       Is that what

           "SAFE"

          means?