ML20125B269

Responds to FOIA Request for Records Re Coatings Delamination Problem at Midland.Forwards Apps A,B & C Documents.Documents Also Available in Pdr.Sanitized Version of Document in App C Encl

ML20125B269
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	12/28/1984
From:	Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Butler N SMITH, HAUGHEY, RICE & ROEGGE
Shared Package
ML20125B272	List: IA-84-893, Partially Deleted Ltr Ack Receipt of Concerns Re Const at Site.Concerns Will Be Reviewed During Forthcoming Insps ML20125B269 ML20125B317 ML20125B500 ML20125B519 ML20125B542
References
FOIA-84-893 NUDOCS 8506110364
Download: ML20125B269 (4)

Text

_

g

/ 0%go,, UNITED STATES h0h 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O  : E W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

~s...../

. SEC 9 R iw4 Ms. Nancy L. Butler Smith, Haughey, Rice & Roegge 200 Calder Plaza Building IN RESPONSE REFER Grand Rapids, MI 49503 TO F01A-84-893

Dear Ms. Butler:

This is in response to your letter dated November 28, 1984, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), copies of records regarding the coatings delamination problem at the Midland Nuclear Power Plant. This confirms the information conveyed during the telephone conversation between you and Linda Robinson on December 27, 1984.

The records identified on enclosed Appendices A, B, and C are available for public inspection and copying at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR),

1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555. We have deleted information in the document identified on enclosed Appendix C in order to protect the identity of an individual who provided information in confidence to the NRC, and you agreed to accept the deleted version of the document. We are enclosing a copy of a notice that provides information on charges and procedures for obtaining records from the PDR.

If you have any questions re arding this response to your request, please telephone Linda Robinson at 301) 492-8133.

~

Sincerely, ff

. M. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration

Enclosures:

As stated l

8506110364 841220 <

PDR FOIA l BUTLERB4-093 PDR

I IN 9HE PDR APPENDIX A FnIt 92-P.93

1. }7 !/79 Letter fror Howe to Keppler ?DR 8001300209

2. 2/7/60 Letter fror. Howe to Keppler, FDR 8002120349

3. S/9/80 Letter fron Cook to Keppler, POR 3010200335

4. 10/31/80 Letter frot Cook to Keppler, PDR 8011100620

5. 2/23/81 Letter fror Cook to Keppler - PDD 8103D*9E49 i 6. 5/29/81 Letter fror. Cook to Keppler, PDR R10fS40371

7. 7/31/81 Letter foot Cook to Keppler, PDR 8108110273

8. 10/30/81 Letter fron Cook to Keppler, PDR 8111060619

9. 12/17/82 Letter frcr Cook to Keppler, PDR 8301110220 IN5FECTION REPORTS:

l 10. 05000-329/83-21, PDR 8401190286 l

11. 05000329/82-10, PDR 8206130323 l

[

i i

I

IN PDR FOLDER APPENDIX B FOIA 84 403 F0IA-84-893

1. 3/15/80 Letter to Keppler from Howell on internal structures coatino deficiency (3 paces)

2. 6/11/80 Letter to Keppler from Cook on internal structures coatino deficiency (3 paces)

3. 6/8/82 Menorandum for Clark from Little on protective coatino deficiency (1 pace) i

4. 7/15/82 Memorandum for Clark from Abramson on trip to Hidland (a canes)

5. 7/28/82 Letter to Cook fron Little on safety inspection (7 paces)

6. 12/17/82 Letter to Keppler from Cook on internal structures coatino deficiency (25 paces)

7. 12/7/83 Memorandur for Clark fror Little on orotective coatino de'iciency

(1 page)

8. Undated Handwritten notes on Other Inspection Areas (I nace) i 1

s h

PARTIAL- DISCLOSURE APPENDIX.C FOIA Re-903 IN PDR FOLDER F01A-84-893 i

l 1. 2/13/81 Letter frorn Foster to confidential source. .(1 page) i I

1 t

b 4

l l

4 J

I j

l l

I 1

i f

i l

L

a

- - -/L6UU.t:,

Consumers '

t

) ~

J..

f Power Company l

sie - a.ao-oii Senior Vwe hasLient Genecel DMices: 1945 West Peenett mood Jackson. Michleen 40201

• 15171 784 4453

/

April 15, 1980 Hove-75-80

,h Mr J G Keppler , Regional Director Office of Inspection & Enforce =ent US Nuclear Regulatory Cc==ission Region III .

799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 MIDLAND NUCLEAR FIJJ;T UNIT NO 1, DOCm NO 50-329 UNIT NO 2 DOCEET NO 50-330 CONTAINMENT INTERNAL STRUCTURES COATING DEFICIENCY

References:

S H Eevell letters to J G Keppler; Midland Nuclear Plant; p

Unit No 1, Docket No 50-329; Unit No 2, rocket N o 50-330; Centainment Internal Structures Coating Deficiency;

1) Serial Heve-309-79; dated Dece=ber 13, 1979

2) Serial Hove-26-80; dated February 7, 1980 "

This letter, as were the referenced letters, is an interim 50 55(e) report cri in-containment coatings which have a loss of adhesion between successive layers of the coct.ing ryste . The attach =ent to the letter provides the status of the actions being taken to resolve this condition.

Another report, either interim or final, vill be sent on or before June 16,

~

1980.

y.  %

WRB/1r

Attachment:

MCAR-35 Interim Report #3, "Contairment Internal Structures Coating," dated March 31, 1980 CC: Director of Office of Inspection and Enforce =ent Att Mr Victor Stello, USNBC (15)

Director of Office of Manage =ent Information and Pro 6rs= Centrol, USNRC (1) 9 5N APR 17 eso,

%d g

,s

(

~

Attech rnt to a

~ ' Ecve-75-SO  !

Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation  ;

t i

SUBJECT:

MCAR 35 (issued 11/13/79) (

Containment Internal l

~

Structures Coating .

f INTERIM REPORT 3 i DATE: MARCH 31,,1980 .

j PROJECT: Consumers Power Company  ;

Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 '

Bechtel Job 7220 ,

This report updates project engineering's progress in evaluation and (

action regarding the failure of coatings on concrete, as applied by subcontracto'r J.L. Manta in the containment building, to maintain  !

adhesion between successive layers of the coating system. ..

The corrective actions identified in Interia Reports 1 and'2 are now progressing with a program involving Consumers Power Co=pany, Bechtel, and Manta. A short update of these programs follows. .

1. Quantify Extent of Physical Probles  ;

f The procedure for mapping and adhesion has been approved. I Approximately 90% of the walls in contain=ent Number 2 coated with

System 9 have been tested and the results are being logged *and plotted on wall elevation drawings. The results of this testing are  ;

being used to identify the extent of the coating failute and for correlation with other data (Items 2 and 3) to deteralne root  :

cause . j r

2. Document Review -

• Documents ,are continuing to be reviewed and evaluated. Application records have been reviewed and coating data concerning daily  ;

application, batch numbers, application temperatures, an ! time between costs have been plotted on well elevation drawings. These data are being compared with testing data from Iten 1 and being reviewed against other documents and data as applicable. -

3. Material Analysis Coating materials are continuing to undergo investigation. Re tained i coating batches, analysis of, failed and unfailed coating samples, and coating application tests have been identified for analysis and are in various stages of c,ompletion.

'f i ..

I

Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation HCAR 35 (Interim Report 3)

Page 2

4. Coating Acceptance Procedure A coating acceptance procedure is being developed. However, this will not be finalized until completion of studies to determine the extent and the root cause of the coating failure.

While neither the full extent nor the root cause of the failure have been determined, data are being evaluated continuously in an effort to

/ resolve this concern. Upon completion of all planned investigations, a

/ thorough analysis of the data will proceed to determine both the cause and extent of the subject coating failure prior to the completion of the remaining System 9 coating work.

The next report is scheduled for May 30, 1980, and preliminary investi-gations included in Items 1, 2 and 3 above are expected to be completed at that time'.

Submitted by . e@6N Approvedby:M.N,wAs M L. . H .(o r.rts Concurrence by _ M fr. 4/!M JC/ccb t

p.% e

.a p .

, s p!G8

...'\'- ( (~

1 CollSum8IS

~.t 1 1 -

Company t"7,0'f,. ..su a ,,,,,,,

Q* Power t,eaerst omses: 1945 West Parnell Hood, Jackson, Michigan 49201 .(517)788 0640 June 11, 1980 ih b Mr J G Keppler, Regional Director Office of Inspection & Enforcement US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 MIDLAND PROJECT DOCKET No 50-329, 5 % 330 CONTAINMENT INTERNAL o UCTURES C0ATING DEFICIENCY FILE: 0.h.9 37 UFI: 73*10*01,00210(S) Serial: 9125

References:

S H Howell letters to J G Keppler; Midland Nuc3 ear Plant; Unit No 1 Docket No 50-329; Unit No 2, Docket No 50-330; hh Containment Internal Structures Coating Deficiency;

1) Serial Hove-309-79; dated December 13, 1979

2) Serial Hove-26-80; dated February 7, 1980

3) Serial Hove-75-80; dated April 15, 1980 This letter, as were the referenced letters, is an interim 50 55(e) report on in-containment coatings which have a loss of adhesion between successive layers of the coating system. The attachment to the letter provideo the status of the actions being token to resolve this condition.

Another report, either interim or final, vill be sent on or before September 15, 1980.

B/c1h

Attachment:

MCAR-35, Interim Report #L, " Containment Internal structures y Coating," dated !!ay 30, 1930.

CC.s Director of Office of Inspection and Enforcement Att !!r Victor Stello, USNBC (15)

Director of Office of I'.annee ent MN j $ (Q')Q Information and Program Control, U3!!RC (1)

(tD0 0el % W 0 0 AL Y / $ (tYl0INEE.b 0' ~ W

&)[ Q * (cA;t,[,t ic m.uch. J4 Lclu b GatLMto ne cut!.e,6/.cnlc4IW:q, . . .:

_ . . = - .- . . _ _ . _. . . _ -

.g . S1ric1: 9125

• *:' * * - ( Bechtel Pc(wer Corporation

.' MCAR 35

'-)

I:staria Report 4 May 30, 1980 -

i P:32 2 l

Summary of ktions to Determine Root Cause We believe T2 date, we have nt been able to identify the root cause.

the answer may be found in further efforts to detect and identif y some faro of significant contamination on the failed coating. .

We also believe the lack of adhesion may be the result of multiple f ctors that, when acting together, result in a condition which could We are preparing several coating application test ccuse delanination.

panels under multiple adverse conditions in an effort to demonstrate d: lamination.

The above information vill be useful both in the determination of root scu6e and to place sufficient controls on the application of Coating System 9 to encure an acceptable finished coating system.

gu smary o; Corrective ktion f

( ) We are preparing procedures and testing atthods for remov procedures are to be developed which will utiliac of the coatings.

information gained from the determination of root cause to ensure the  ;

{ acceptable application and to prevent a recurrence of failed coatings *.  !

Fo110wint, reapplication of the coating, adhesion tests will be performed to demonstrate acceptability of the coating system.

Before proceeding with the actual work to repair Coating System 9 in c:ntainment 2, we will submit the final results of our actions to determine t root cauce and our corrective action plans for repair of the deficient 4

coatings for your informatio'n.

ne next report is scheduled for August 30, 1980.

I asc/ w./ceb submitted by f .d eg(

.O).,N,4

[ Approved by: M. 4, r'<R t.. * (u m r i s.

l e

- concurrence by: . /4 T

T #

!Q l

~

. M tt uctUnviat J a-  %

3

( .

(

stristi 9125 Bachtal Powar Corporation I

r'

)

SUBJECT:

MCAR 35 (issued !!/13/79)

Containment Internal Structures Coating INTERIM REPORT 4 CATE: May 30, 1980 PROJECT: Consumers Power Company Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Bechtel Job 7220 1 troduction f

This report updates project engineering's progress in evaluation and l

action regarding the failure of coatings on concrete, as applied by subcontractor J.I. Manta in the containment building, to maintain adhesion l

l between successive layers of the coating system. ,

Update of Actions /Taken to Resolve MCAR 35

1. Quantify Extent of Physical Problem

! (,) Results of adhesion testing indicate' s tandom . failure pattern on valls in containment 2 coated with Coating System 9, with some walls af fected more extensively than others. Approximately 17.7% ,

of the tests demonstrate insuf ficient adhesion.

J Ibcument Review

. 2.

Ap911 cation docteerts have been reviewed and daily data 'has been plotted for coating variables. We have not'been abic to identify any significant correlation betuen the plotted variabl,es and the data from item 1 above,. ,

3. I:sterici /.nalys'is lhterial analysis to date has not yielded any significant data to inJicate the cause of the adhesion fatture. We vill be performing

' additional tests in an ef fort to detect and identify come form of l contaminetton which could affect the coating adhesion.

1

4. Coating Acceptance Procedure The coating acceptance procedure will include the performance of r

I adhaston tests to demonstrate the acceptability of the finished f repaired coating.

I .

\

i l . .

.