ML20087M982

Response to B Stamiris 840304 New Contention Re Transamerica Delaval,Inc Diesel Generators.Bases in Support of Contention Clarified.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20087M982
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	03/30/1984
From:	Gilomen B CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
OL, OM, NUDOCS 8404020254
Download: ML20087M982 (9)

Text

.-. - - _

-(e tl March 30, 1984 1 l

t e l 00LXETED i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USMC

, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'84 ffR -2 A11 :11 l BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD l r - ;. g : p > 1 CO. i;U : !. L *'

In the Matter of: ) Docket Nos. 50-329 OM an4Eln

' ) 50-330 OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) docket Nos. 50-329 OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2 ) 50-330 OL APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENOR BARBARA STAMIRIS' NEW CONTENTION REGARDING TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC. DIESEL GENERATORS On March 4, 1984, Intervenor Barbara Stamiris submitted a new contention regarding the Transamerica ,

Delaval, Inc. ("TDI") emergency diesel generators ("EDG's")

installed at the Midland plant. On March 15, Ms. Stamiris submitted an addendum to the contention addressing the requirements of 10 C.F.R. 2.714 with respect to late-filed contentions. Thereafter, in its Order (Time for Responses to Ms. Stamiris' Motion for New Contention re: TDI Diesel Generators) dated March 21, 1984, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board permitted parties to respond to Ms. Stamiris' proposed contention as if the original filing date by mail had been March 15.

Applicant does not oppose the proffered contention.

Applicant does, however, offer several clarifications to the bases provided by Ms..Stamiris in support of the contention.

'First, at page 3.of her motion dated Marchf4, 1984, .

Ms. Stamiris refers to "the soil related structural and dif-~ -

ferential settlement problems of the OM proceeding" and the

. O]

8404020254 840330 PDR ADOCK 05000329 k

- /

9 PDR _

- . . . _ ~ , . . _ . - . - - - - _ -. . . - _ . __

l-I i

t recent interim 10 C.F.R. 50.55(e) reports regarding differ-ential settlement between the DGB structure and diesel generator pedestals (referring to J. W. Cook letters to J. G.

l l Keppler dated January 13 and January 30, 1984, serial 26664 and 28000, respectively). As this basis acknowledges, settle-ment of the DGB has been litigated in the OM proceeding; there is no need to separately litigate it with respect to the new contention. Thus, this basis should be limited to the issue of whether the mechanical connections to the TDI EDG's are adequate to withstand pcstulated differential

settlement between the DGB structure and diesel generator i pedestals.

l Second, Ms. Stamiris makes reference to the tran-script of a January 26, 1984 meeting between the NRC Staff i

and the TDI EDG Owners Group attached to Board Notification

.84-020 (Docket Nos. 50-416 and 50-312). See Stamiris motion, 1

p. 2. This reference mischaracterizes statements made during the meeting. For example, Mr. Denton's statement at page 46 of the transcript does not indicate NRC dissatisfaction with the-approach chosen by the Owners Group. Rather, it evidences a non-judgmental Staff inquiry into the scope of the Owners Group's proposal. The complete exchange is reproduced below:

I MR. DENTON: What's your confidence in the ultinate success?- It's a very impressivo .

group you've put together here.

Do you have a group on just replacing the engine with one of the different design? Why didn't you go that route versus this route?

r

1 i.

MR. SEAMAN: We don't have a group to consider replacement of design.

l ATTENDEE: Replacement of engine is a l very long term project. This is something we can do over a period of months as opposed to period of years. We are -- we feel con-fident that this program will be successful, and we will not know until we get further j into it.

Board Notification 84-020, Docket Nos. 50-416 and 50-312, Enclosure 4, pp. 46-47 (February 13, 1984).

While Ms. Stamiris is correct to the extent she concludes that the NRC Staff is concerned about the reliabili-1/

ty of.TDI EDG's,'~ she has incorrectly assumed that replacement t

of the EDG's is the only option. Neither Applicant nor the -

Board Notifications prcvided to date reach this conclusion.

Finally, Applicant notes that the matters raised in the new Stamiris contention overlap those raised in Sinclair Operating License Contention 11, as adopted by this Board on December 30, 1982. See Memorandum and Order (Rewritten Con-tentions of M. Sinclair), LBP-82-ll8, 16 NRC 2034 (December 30, 1982). To avoid redundancy, Applicant suggests that the new Stamiris contention be incorporated in the Sinclair contention.

Applicant includes herewith as Attachment 1 a proposed rewrite of the new Stamiris contention, formatted as Basis 5 of Sinclair

-1/ Ms. Stamiris is, however, incorrect in her literal l conclusion regarding "the NRC's lack of' confidence in the TDI' generators." The cited references are to statements made by the NRC Staff,Jnot the Com-mission.

, , . , - ,- y .e, -- - a -n v-

Contention 11. Attachment 1 has been drafted so as to in-corporate Applicant's clarifications.

Respectively submitted, y , ll>w Brian R. Gilomen An Attorney for Consumers Power Company Isham, Lincoln & Beale Three First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60602 (312) 558-7500

~

?

l

l ATTACHMENT 1 Sinclair Contention 11 (as amended by the addition of new Stamiris contention) i.

There is no basis for a finding of reasonable assurance that the Midland facility can be operated safely

during a loss of all AC power and resulting station blackout, for the following reasons

i

5. In Board Notification 84-020,84-021 and 84-024, 4

the NRC Staff has compiled findings and rendered 4

conclusions regarding Transamerica Delaval, Inc.

( TDI " ) diesel generators supplied to nuclear plants. Based on the problems identified in I

these Board Notifications, the TDI Model DSRV 12-4 emergency diesel generators installed at the Midland plant can not be relied upon to per-form their requisite safety function.

J Board Notification 84-024 includes Policy Issue SECY-84-34, dated January 25, 1984. This Policy i Issue states at page 1 that "[d]uring'the course of the evaluation of the failure and the repairs i

of the Shoreham EDG's,'information related to the operating history of TDI engines and the QA program of the manufacturer has been identified which calls into question the-reliability of all I TDI diesels." 'The Policy Issue concludes at n , - n -.. , - - -,. .-- .v-. -w n - - ,, -- , -

m,4 . , + -p e

4 l

1 ,

page 3 that "[t]he staff believes that before l

additional licensing action is taken to authorize the operation of a nuclear power plant with TDI

engines, these issues, relating to quality as-i surance, operating experience, and the ability of the machines to reliably perform their intended ,

1 function, must be addressed."

i Board Notification 84-021 includes NRC Staff j inspection reports from March, 1979 through ,

July, 1983, relating to the TDI facility in Oakland, California. These reports detail f i

Notices of Deviations, nonconformances and i

j violations of NRC regulations on the part of  !

! TDI, and indicate a failure of TDI to properly I implement its QA program or to properly inform the Commission under 10 C.F.R. Part 21 of-certain failures and defects.

Board Notification 84-020 includes as Enclosure

! 3 a document entitled "U.S. Nuclear Experience

^

with'TDI' Diesel Generators -- San Onofre 1, l Grand Gulf-[an'd] Shorchcam [ sic] . " Th'is enclosure lists problems to date atithe referenced generat-ing' stations, and indicates the inability of TDI generatorsLto perform. reliably and safely.-

l i

i

[' . , _ . . ._ , . . _ .-.

1 In letters dated January 13 and January 30, 1984 (Serial 26664 and 28000, respectively), Consumers Power Company submitted interim 10 C.F.R. 50. 55 (e) reports to the NRC Staff. These reports indicate that requirements for differential settlement between the DGB structure and diesel generator pedestals were not accounted for in the design of the piping, equipment, conduits and pipe supports.

Since all these adverse conditions that can affect the performance of the DGB and the redundant emergency power systems which must operate to prevent station blackout are present at Midland, the findings required by 10 C.F.R. SS 50.

57 (a) (3) (i) and 10 C.F.R. SS 50.57 (a) (6) cannot be made on the basis of this information.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330-OM

) 50-329-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 ) 50-330-OL and 2) )

PROOF OF SERVICE Rose E. Garcia, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she served copies of the attached Applicant's Response to Intervenor Barbara Stamiris' New Contention Regarding Transamerica Delaval, Inc. Diesel l

Generators upon all persons shown on the attached service 1

I list by deposit in the United States mail, first class, this 30th day of March, 1984.

]

I O -

e l a u w. -

wx, .. w

! SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this 30th day of March, 1984.

- h, . sf'(

)%- ,./

i sg Otiotary'Publ-ic My Commission Expires January 19, 1985 4

I

I Frank J. Kelley, Esq. Mr. Scott W. Stucky

. Attorney General of the Chief, Docketing & Services

! State of Michigan U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Carole Steinberg, Esq. Office of the Secretary Assistant Attorney General Washington, D.C. 20555 Environmental Protection Div.

720 Law Building Ms. Mary Sinclair Lansing, Michigan 48913 5711 Summerset Street Midland, Michigan 48640 Myron M. Cherry, Esq.

. Cherry & Flynn William D. Paton, Esq.

Suite 3700 Counsel for the NRC Staff i Three First National Plaza U.S. Nuclear Regulatory j

Chicago, Illinois 60602 Commission washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Wendell H. Marshall l 4625 S. Saginaw Rd. Atomic Safety & Licensing r

Midland, Michigan 48640 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Charles Bechhoefer, Esq. Comraission Atomic Safety & Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555  ;

i Board Panel i j U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Barbara Stamiris

} Washington, D.C. 20555 5795 North River Road Route 3

Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Freeland, Michigan 48623 6152 N. Verde Trail l Apt. B-125 Dr. Jerry Harbour Boca Raton, Florida 33433 Atomic Safety & Licensing I Board Panel l Mr. D. F. Judd U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Babcock & Wilcox washington, D.C. 20555 P.O. Box 1260 Lynchburg, Virginia 24505 Lynne Bernabei 4

Thomas Devine James E. Brunner, Esq. Louis Clark i e Consumers Power Company Government Accountability Project i 212 West Michigan Avenue of The Institute For j Jackson, Michigan 49201 Policy Studies

' 1901 Q Street N.W.

Steve Gadler Washington, D.C.

20009 2120 Carter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Samuel A. Haubold, Esq.

Kirkland & Ellis Atomic Safety & Licensing .200 East Randolph Drive Appeal Panel Chicago, Illinois 60601 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20555 P. Robert Brown, Jr., Esq.

, Clark, Klein & Beaumont .

1600 First Federal Bldg.

1001 Woodward Avenue 4

Detroit, Michigan 48226

< w -