ML20134E385

Expresses Concern Re Cracks in Plant Secondary Containment Walls

ML20134E385
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	06/23/1996
From:	Blanch P AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Zwolinski J NRC
Shared Package
ML20134D719	List: ML20134D716 ML20134D731 ML20134D744 ML20134D763 ML20134D921 ML20134D931 ML20134D943 ML20134D947 ML20134D970 ML20134D988 ML20134E029 ML20134E053 ML20134E069 ML20134E075 ML20134E152 ML20134E155 ML20134E157 ML20134E165 ML20134E171 ML20134E179 ML20134E182 ML20134E202 ML20134E221 ML20134E230 ML20134E234 ML20134E241 ML20134E249 ML20134E266 ML20134E271 ML20134E295 ML20134E308 ML20134E323 ML20134E348 ML20134E371 ML20134E377 ML20134E381 ML20134E385 ML20134E415 ML20134E449 ML20134E452 ML20134E463 ML20134E469 ML20134E488 ML20134E496 ML20134E504
References
NUDOCS 9611010148
Download: ML20134E385 (1)

Text

- - . . .. - - . . - -

l From: <VMBLANCH9aol.com>

To: WN02.WNP3(jaz),udl.internet3("JAZWOL9aol.com")

Date: 6/23/96 10:22pm

Subject:

Vermont Yankee John:

Do you have an answer to this concern?

Paul l

Vermont yankee secondary containment walls have big and many cracks throughtout. It's the Reactor building outer shell. Engineering wise, I dont know if it's load bearing or if it make's the structure weaker. I know they have injected glue into the cracks prior to 1980. I know that when it rains water leaks through the cracks. I would like to see the engineering analysis which allowed them to glue it up-it should be funny. Is the glue just as strong as an uncracked wall? IF water leaks in, air can like out during an accident. I know they test sec. containment by taking a suctions on the building by standby gas treatment system, then measuring the flow rate.

During an accident this system should be running to maintain an vacuum on the building. Should we have an upgraded system because of cracks? What caused the cracks, overload or what? Do they monitor the cracks for size or length-yearly. Did it happen during contruction-why was it accepted. Is there an accident that can make the cracks bigger or an offsite release worst that what was planned for. Is the cracks normal-do other plants have cracks.

Cement walls can be built I know without cracks- the cracks are caused by shortcuts.

) CC: WND2.WNP3(jnh),TWD1.TWP4(wjs,1jn1),WND1.WNP2(dcd),...

9611010148 961024 PDR ORG NRRA l PDR

From: <VMBLANCH0aol.com> 4 To: WND2.WNP3(jnh,jaz),TWDI.TWP4(wjs,1jnl),WNDI.WNP2(d...

Date: 6/25/96 8:22am

Subject:

MILLSTONE By Leslie Gevirtz BOSTON, June 24 (Reuter) - Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors, in a violations report on Northeast Utilities' <NU.N>

Millstone, Conn., power plants, found the service water and emergency service water systems in Millstone 1 "may have been inoperable since the initial plant operation."

The June 6 report, excerpts of which were obtained by Reuters, said that at the 660 megawatt Millstone 1, first commercially licensed in 1971, NRC inspectors " concluded the SW (service water) and ESW (emergency service water) systems may have been inoperable since initial plant operation."

Northeast Utilities spokesman Anthony Castagno said in a telephone interview that the problem with the water systems was that "they didn't meet the seismic qualifications and we weren't upgrading them as quickly as we should have."

He said the service water system draws water from Long Island Sound, pumps it through heat exchangers, and returns it to the sound without it ever coming in contact with radioactive materials.

About the emergency service water system, Castagno said, "The issue here is the seismic qualifications of those. And, we weren't upgrading them as quickly as we should have."

The NRC report also mentions that the concrete foundation supporting Millstone 3 is dissolving.

Studies concluded a chemical reaction between two kinds of concrete in the foundation, now 40 feet below the surface, was causing a nine-inch-thick layer of concrete to dissolve.

Northeast Utilities estimated that it removed about 100 pounds of the liquefied concrete each year from the drains.

! "It's eroding at such a small rate," said Castagno. "That concrete is a hugh slab that weighs 670,000 pounds. And we've gotten about 1,000 pounds out of that in 25 years."

The foundation he said later was poured in 1975.

NU said in a statement released on Friday that the utility " discovered this erosion nearly 10 years ago, and has been working with the NRC in a series of analyses and interactions...These analyses all confirmed that the containmnent structure meets its design requirements."

The NRC inspectors said in their report "we are concerned regarding the long-term safety implications of this concrete condition" and gave the utility

, 45 days to come up with an interim report.

NU said it plans to respond to the NRC request for an updated analysis in July.

The three Millstone plants are off-line and are going through intensive k v] i W55 Q y -

i inspections.

"We're finding a fair number of times, first of all, we're finding documentation that wasn't properly kept up...We haven't found any that are directly significant or extremely significant to safety, but all these things, even though they are tertiary systems, are important to keep up,"

Castagno said.

Millstone 3 will be the first nuclear plant back on-line Castagno said, but there is no specific restart date, "although in some of our financial filings we've projected the worst-case scenario of a restart date at the end of the year."

l i

l I

i  ;