ML111530446

From kanterella
Revision as of 14:35, 30 April 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Exhibit 3C in Support of Pilgrim Watch Request for Hearing on a New Contention Re Inadequacy of Environmental Report, Post Fukushima
ML111530446
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 06/01/2011
From:
Pilgrim Watch
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
Shared Package
ML111530440 List:
References
RAS 20407, 50-293-LR, ASLBP 06-848-02-LR
Download: ML111530446 (7)


Text

l:otc to E. P. JMIC Ei'-lL-r GY CO\1M!S: )',1 , ,

17, 1]71 l * * *. r " I / Ple2sc lc't Li2 if yo," concur; if l:ot,

'dill hc!ve to di.scuss it fur::.hc.r and reoch a decision', l' '. , .. l.\ Force Rcvicu ," i ( '-, J .,

) S U1LJ D I SCU S JJ):-!

..

.. -


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

--.-1.

Bypass n rath without passinG th::ough the ,:2ter of the suppression pool and therefore without condensing .*.. 2. Consen\lC'nces

--_.'-----

a)

LOCh -no problem. b) Small LOCA -slow pressure buildup in dryoell, bypass lets wetwcll pressure follow without steam. This trouble cases on slowly, but if the prim3ry leak widens and the LOCA severity in-creases (the advertised course of for a big leak starts 5m311) then the

.. /. -b10,:doh'n p,-essure vill build on the pressure built up sJ.O'.;l::.')

and the con-taiument would That could the torus water source, hence ECeS, as well as leak out fission products.

3. Prob2bility a) Small lLak rather probable -alreauy hnd one S10'.7 blowdown (Dresden 2). Another (Honticello) b1m'ldmm occurred through the byp:,ss valve, then through a safety valve. A large leak improbable, but is supposed to be a small one first. b) GE two passive failures b) The GE position that this "" are required for trouble, but is too improbable to any malfunction of 12 vacuum worry about is rejected.

in the locus, over will set up half th8 accident,

{or if a. s leak occurs. c) 0;11)" a limited of c) Further study is required sizes gets into trouble. for this and other configura-Large L!aks clc;lr the VC.l1ts tions, including sensitivity and assumption postulated bypass. Very snaIl leaks are condensed on the dry>*,cll

,,70.11. Thc GE cu;::ve subrailted foc

? has not been very much by REG) shQ";.Js SOt:le 0.05 -0.5 ft.2 Other GS containments 0= over/ under with vents, or other parameters have problems not yet calcu-and, in some cases, worse than Ho.tch.

'V "eli -.DECFIO::S

'r--


--/ a) Containment spray (particularly torus air s pac e spr<lY) lcl We cnnnot expect an operator 0 condense t 1t c. s t CeliU and L! e -;,:c G.S C. the r,ravcyarc!

shift to sort ou the pressure, but at enormous the pros and of turning cost (ruin equipment in dry-oti the

sprny, maybe hnve to retire thus ruining his reactor) to reactor).

In present designs, cope \*11 lh a trarsicnt he -only spray water is dimly undcrstan2s.

diverted fro:;\ the LPCIS, thus from Eces. b) Inservice inspection of poten-b) Check the! valve

[f tial bypass leakage: corrosion, fully to make sure it cracks in vent pipes, nalfunc-doesn't (too tioning valves. The Ha:ch the probability of f<1i1u:::e..

applicant offcrs an elaborate Push for adequate inspection I scheme to the' positions of valves and pipes. of the: valves using rec1u:1cL:mt devices) and to rC;010te testing of the valves, but nothing in the H.JY of inspection.

DEcr ication --<..A.-______ ._ \ past and CE to stu2y fix the in whatever 40 such already way is F6r back-Hatch-2 C? is next ACRS fitting. wait until fixQ5 revie\.].

are studied and problem is scope:d. b) CE wants us and ACRS not to mention the publicI;.

from nml on for plants They are afraid of delaying affected will have to 'fcss up. Hearings for CP be satisfied

,;Hh a s<.:itab 1 commitment; if they're not. maybe that's a suitable spu-::-to CE-to resolve the problel:l.

In any event-, th is probably trouble for Vermont Yankee and hearings; it will have to

) DECISTO::S faced a real found. All GE prc3sure stippression cases in hearinG ,*lill soon have to Get letters REG problen; better that they hear from us than from ACRS letter on. another caSe. 2 CP ACRS letter docs nat mention the problem, thus giving us a li:t c more time. The subject is dis-in the ?ublicly aV0.ilaolc Hatch-2 docket as an ::mSiJer to a DRL question.