ML20093C472
| ML20093C472 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1983 |
| From: | SEAWORTHY ENGINE SYSTEMS, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20093C471 | List: |
| References | |
| 123-01-C, 123-1-C, NUDOCS 8401260417 | |
| Download: ML20093C472 (110) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:M/V COLUMBIA SHAFT HORSEPOWER MEASUREMENT SEA _ TRIAL 24/25 MARCH 1983 REPORT NO. 123-01-C Prepared for: Alaska Marine Highway System Department of Transportation Juneau, Alaska Prepared by: SEAWORTHY ENGINE SYSTEMS, INC. 36 Main Street Essex, Connecticut 06426 April 23, 1983 g40l2&O'lI?*/
I f TABLE OF CONTENTS
)
1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Method of Measurement 1 2.1 Speed Measurement 3 2.2 Torque Measurement 2.3 Data Processing System l 3.0 Calibration 4.0 Measurement Results 5.0 Instrumentation 6.0 Horsepower Derivation f
'l l
l I L.0 Introduction
'The starboard shaft power output was computed measuring the parameters of - speed and torque during two (2) days of sea trials-conducted from the Port of Seattle.
The object was to measure the engine power output . af ter . the installation of two (2) DeLaval C-17 turbochargers. A full range of power points were run. 2.0 Measurement Method The shaft speed is measured independently of shaft torque by the use of a separate encoded electronic tape which completely encircles the shaft. Torque measurements are derived from the signals which are encoded on two (2) magnetic tapes which are located along the length of the shaft. Speed and torque coded signals are sensed via a magnetic proximity pick up and transmitted to the processing and readout equipment. 2.l Speed Measurement . The shaft speed was measured on the shaft at the same location that the torque measuring tapes weru 'ocated. A speed signal was electronically encoded on the sha:t to give 4.44 counts /rev. This sensor also provides shaft diretion and shaft vibration location to the processing equipment. 2.2 Torcue Measurement The shaft torque was measured after the first line shaft bearing along a uniform length of shaft. The torque measuring tapes were placed forty-eight (48) inches apart and electronically e - . , __
encodcd ~after installation. The tapes form a continuous loop around the -shaft to provide a continuous and instantaneous output of torque. The electronically encoded tapes are then used to indicate the angular twist of the shaft which is sensed by the proximity pick ups and sent to the processing equipment for interpretation and display. 2.3 Data Processing System Figure 1 illustrates the horsepower measuring system which was installed for the test. The basic flow of information as it is received from the shaft is signal amplification and condi-tioning via the DER 100. High level quality signals are then available for input to the CPU and/or the dual channel recorder which' is used to record the entire test period for later playback and detailed analyzation. The signal output from the amplifier / signal conditioner may also be monitored for signal quality by a dual trace oscilloscope. The output froIn the CPU is displayed on a CRT where instantaneous torque and horsepower values are presented. Processed signal data may also be input to an x-y recorder for typical torque /HP traces, or input to a data logger for an averaged torque /HP. 3.0 Calibration Calibration of the shaft is accomplished by rotating the l l
Figuro 1 Horsepower Measuring Equipment MAGNEi!C ENC 00E0 TAPE % ,, ', , C00C PHASOR 9 g - SHAFT O!RECTION 1 ,
, p VIBRAi!ON INPUT 2
1 9 1 TOROUE ANPLIFIER C SIGNAL INPUT CON 0!!!0NER DUAL
- DER 100 CHANNEL MAGNETIC -. RECORDER l
PICK.UPS Q OUAL TRACE SCOPE CPU DER 1000 KEYBOARD , r , CRT y O!$ PLAY UNIT t > x K-Y RECORDER gg TOROUE/HP TRACE 3r HP 70358 OATA LOGGER AVERAGEO 10 ROUE /HP 4 DER 200
-shsft in . both directions with the sh$ft jacking gear to relieve t.s the residual torque in~ the shaft. Colnciding with the shaft rotation, the microcomputer analyzes the encoded tape and stores and enters the relaxed torque shaft position in the computer program as an electronically produced null point for the averaged relaxed torque-as detected 'a both directions of rotation.
4.0 Measurement Results 'M Vessel: M/V COLUMBIA Date: e 3-25-83 ' Shaft: S'bd t Aft 1st Line Shaft Bearing ENGINE RPM SHAFT RPM . HORSEPOWSR 363 202 3570 385 215 4590
. 403 224 5815 5.0 Instrumentation i
.The instrumentation used on sea trials is illustrated
)
l in Figure 1. 6.0 Horsepower Derivation
\
Given:
~
\ Shear Modules 12.0 x 10 6 Shaft Outside Diameter 13.00 inches Shaft Inside Diameter 5.9055 inches
?,
Shaft L$ngthMeasured 48 inches 6.1 Torque Measurement Hooke's Law states that a shaft will twist through an
;. /
angle (4-) over a unit length which is proportional to the applied torque (T). This is described ~in the following formula:
/ .
t
0 o T(h2)(1)(k) u D g where: 4 = Angle of twist in radians T = Torque in ft-lb
'U =
Elastic modulus in lbs/in 2 D = Shaft diameter in inches L = Distance along shaft between encoders in inches However, the angle of twist 4L is not directly measured. Rather, the phase shift between the zero crossing point of the encoded signals is measured. This phase shift may be given by a time difference by the following expressions: t = 4/w OR -4 = tw where: t = time in microseconds w = rotational speed of shaft The speed of the shaft (s) may be expressed: 3 , 60 W 2 n-where: , S = Shaft speed in RPM Therefore: Substituting in Hooke's Law and utilizing the horsepower equation of: TS HP = 5252 i 1 An expression for the time difference measured by the microcomputer 1 is given in the formula t(microseconds) = (6.131 x 1012)L(HP) (D OI )S U which equates to the hors.epower formula: 2 HP , t(D0 -D7 4)S U
-LL (6.131 x 10 )L
,[
4 APPENDIX D BMEP FORMULAE AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS l l l I
(229)(BHP)
- 1. BMEP =. 3, any 4-cycle' 2 engine (n74)(BORE )(STROKE-)(ERPM/2)(# CYLS)/1728 IN For the DMRV-16-4 BMEP is:
(229)(BHP) { (76,266/1728)(.5)(ERPM) i
* (229)(BHP) 1 (22.068)(ERPM) ,
I
=
(10.377)(BHP /ERPM) For shaft horsepower conversion, assuming a 98% gearing and shafting mechanical efficiency in COLUMBIA, BMEP is
=
(10.377)(Sh()(ERPM) (10.589)(SHP/ERPM)
- 2. BMEPs for measured trial SHPs and ERPMe are calculated as follows.
@ 363 ERPM:
BMEP = (10.589)(3570/363) = 104.1 PSI .
@ 385 ERPM:
BMEP = (10.589)(4590/385) = 126.2 PSI
@ 403 ERPM:
, BMEP = (10.589)(5815/403) = 152.8 PSI l l l l
4
~
1 l APPENDIX E FUEL RATE CALCULATIONS AND FUEL ANALYSIS REPORT
SAMPLE BREAK SPECIFIC FUEL RATE CALCULATIONS . Fuel-Oil: AIP/Sp.Gr.@ 60 F=33.8/.856,@ 90 F=.845 LHV=18,354 BTU /LB 1. (GALS 3 - GALSR)(SP.Gr.)(8.33 #/ GAL) 60 MIN /HR = #/HR RT MINS
- 2. BHPAVE = SHP AVE / .98, where .98 = NGear & Shaft
- 3. F F
= LHV /
A e 1.009, LHVD* ' LHV D BTU /LB LHV^ = LHV of fuel as fired, 18354 BTU /LB
- 4. Brake Specific Fuel Rate:
BSFC = LBS/HR 0bserved BHP
= LBS/ BHP-HR AVE BSFC Corrected = (BSFC0bserved)(FF' ENGINE SHAFT RUNNING GALS. F.O. GALS. F.O. LBS. F.O. SHP, BHP. BSFC BSFC RPM RPM IIME SUPPLY RETURN / HR. AVE. AVE. OBSERVED CORRECTED 363 202 60 min 352 100 1773.8 3370 3640 487 491 385 215 25 min 167 44 2078 4590 4680 .448 447 404 225 100 min 731 169 2373.5 5815 5930 .400 404
l y 2.-m.o., L W. <SMB,N
...<o......o..
= =, . . w . ., c .
.= n .
o..a.=,v.. eu .. 1<s. c AvcaTe.. - OA,.e
. T ..3.. .. .. .. mm.
..... . sc.
. sa.ee -o m e s .= o. oot
=
& CD., INC.
- u ' ' c*^
,. O . , ,, . 5.'.
" ' ' ** a ' e " ,
I
?."~.'.c~,, :::i .c";,'.'* *- **' , asset a. traas 77s02 e rank cawacon unrine attsurvevon ,,,,, ,,,.,,,,
.= e .s c ,,o = evse c..o o t s.
.o= ro o * = c e s.o w.o s. APPROVED CAUGERS SY U.S. CUSTOMS
.c o so6t w. west COAST ME AOOu AmTEns GENERAL HEADQUARTERS r O ees s ne6
..c
.sess .s os cecoce o . e es .o.wc a s = o.s st .-=.
c o.6s. s 400 SWENSON ORIVE L*"*"C'- " K ENIL WOR TH, N.J: 07033 '3' " **3'8 s et t s.6.s t t.=a C . k.e * * *.= G
=ca s .4 o.s3.=t' 3 EAST COAST ME AOCU ARTERS 400 setas0= 0*s C singtecares. m. 4. 07033 j
(2010 245 3100 ' st eveno To.c *ETaosgu.a enousTay rom owt a v. vsAas l on = ~o..tc .=sncT oa ss aw.a AT .66 onTs o= T c A rt. .c. cv6, .~o ..c ,.c co sTs LABOR ATORY ANALYSIS REPORT SAMPLE DESIGNATED BY CUENT AS #6 Fuel Oil March 30, 1983 Lab. No. 30304
,,0,, M/V Colitmbia P.O. #Pl-23-01-01 on 3-29-83.
rom Seaworthy Engine Systems 36 Main Street Essex, Ct. 06426 Invoice No. EV-2049 1 FMIS LAeon ATOR 40VERTISING OF YAN R,EPOR T MAY NOT et PuaLisMED on USED E XCEPT IN FULL.$ MALL NOT SE U$ED FOR ADVE A TISINC On IN CONNECT SON we T M _ MINO UNLE$$ PERMi$$f 0N FOR TNE pugLg5MINC OR ADVE RTI58NG 04 AN AP9AOVEO ASST R ACT MAS BEEN CST A.NEO. .N w AITINC FaOM E.w. SAv801.7 4. CO INC. RESULT 5 ARE SASED ON ANALYS35 MADE AT TNE TeME SAMPLES ARE RECElvEO AT LA80m ATOev. TESTS RESULTS Gravity, API @ 60'F 33.8* Spec. Gravity .8560 l BTU Per Pound 19644 BTU Per Gallon 140022 Sulfur, ASTM 0.27% E. W. SAYBOLT & CO., INC. 2f- -
,,,,,,,,,, . - A. .. .. - s. A. a.
, = < c a s or A. s. T.
dg1 (203) 934-8391 i
Ger.vi tie s , Densitiss, and Hacts of Combustion of Fuel Oils i V ALUES TOR 10 TO d OEG API, INCLU5tVC. R EPRINTI:D TROu QUR E AU OF ST ANDAROS ul5CE LL AN EOUS **UBLIC A TION NO. 97. " THERM AL PROr'CR TIE S OF P E TROL EUM PRODUCT 5." CRAVITY AT DEN 11TY TOTAL NEAT OF C048USTION 40/60 F AT 40 F ( At Cesse ie Vol.,= NET HEAT OF CC>d8U$ TION
) ( As Ce s, e Pe.. ..,,.)
oCC SPEctrec L6 PER STU atu PER 87u rE9 A PI GR avl TY CAL G CAL PER C PERT.5 g Ofu PER L8 C t. C A t. P E R C 5 1.0366 8.643 18,250 157,700 10,140 17,290 149,400 9,610 6 1.0291 8.580 18,330 157,300 10,100 17.340 148,800 9,650 7 1.0217 8.518 18,390 156,600 10,210 17,390 148,100 9,670 8 1.0143 8.457 18,440 155,900 10,240 17,440 147,500 18,490 9,700 9 1.007 1 8.397 155,300 10,270 17,490 146,900 9,720 10 1.0000 8.337 18,540 154,600 10,300 17,540 146,200 9,740 11 0.9930 8.279 10,590 153,900 10,330 17,580 145,600 9,770 12 0.'1861 8.221 18,640 153,300 10,300 17,620 144,900 9,790 13 0.W 92 C.164 18,690 152,600 10,390 17,670 144,200 18,740 9,810 14 0.9725 0.108 152,000 10,410 17,710 143,600 9,840 15 0.9659 8.053 10,790 151,300 10,440 17 ,750 142,900 9,860 i 16 0.9593 7.998 18,840 150,700 10,470 17,790 142,300 9,880 17 0.9529 7.944 18,890 150,000 10,490 17,820 141,600 9,900 18 0.9465 7.891 18.930 149,400 10,520 17,860 140,900 9,920 19 0.9402 7.839 18.980 140,800 10.540 17,900 140,300 9,940 20 0.9340 7.787 19,020 148,100 10,570 17,930 139,600 9,00u 21 0.9279 7.736 19,060 147,500 10,590 19,110 17 ,960 139.000 9,900 22 0.9218 7.686 146,800 10,620 18,000 138,300 10,000 i 23 0.9159 7.636 19.150 , 146,200 10,640 18,030 137,700 24 0.9100 19,190 145,600 10.020 l 7.587 10,660 18,070 137,100 10,040 25 0.9042 7.538 19,230 145,000 10,680 18,100 136,400 10,050 20 0.8984 7.490 19,270 144,300 10,710 18,130 - 135,800 10,070 27 0.89"7 7.443 19,310 143,700 10,730 135,200 20 0.8371 7. 3% 19,350 143,100 18 18,160 10 090 l 10,750 ,190 134,600 ;0,,110 j 29 0.8816' 7.350 19,380 142,500 10,770 18,220 133.900 10,120 30 0.8762 7.305 19,42 0 141,800 10,790 18,250 133.300 10.140 31 0.8708 7.260 19.450 141,200 10,810 '18,280 132,700 10,150 i 32 0.8654 7.215 19.490 140.600 10,830 18,310 132,100 10,170 3J 0.8602 7.171 19.520 140,000 '10,850 18,330 131.500 10.180 34 0.855C 7.128 IV.bou 1.W,4vu 10,860 Lu,360 130,900 10,200 i 35 0.8498 7.085 19,590 138,800 10,880 18,390 13U,300 10,210
.% 0.8448 7. 0 43 19,620 138,200 10,900 10,410 129,700 19,650 10.230 37 0.8398 7.001 137,600 10,920 18,430 129,100 10,240 38 0.8343 6.060 19,680 137,000 10 940 18,460 128,500 10,260 39 0.8299 6.920 19.720 136,400 10,,950 10.400 127,900 10,270 40 0.8251 6.879 19,750 135,800 10,970 18,510 300 10 41 D.8203 6.039 19.780 135,200 10,990 10,530 127,700 126, 10,280
,300 42 0.8155 6.799 19,010 134,700 11,000 1:1, 56 0 126,200 10.310 43 0.8109 6.760 19.830 134,100 11,020 10,500 125,600 10,320 44 0.8063 6.722 19.860 133,500 11.030 18,000 125,000 10,330 45 0.8017 6.684 19.890 132,000 11,050 18,620 124,500 10,340 46 0. 7 W 2 6.646 19.020 132,400 11,070 18,640 123.900 10,300 47 0.7927 6.609 19,940 131,900 11,000 10,o60 123,300 10,370 48 0.7603 6.57 2 19,970 13i.200 100 10,680 000 10,380 49 0.7839 6.536 20,000 130,700 11,110 11, 10.700 122,200 122, 10,390
l l APPENDIX F TURBO AND ENGINE AIR EXCHANGE DATA AND SAMPLS CALCULATIONS i l l
~ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ _ . .
l COMPRESSOR AND ENGINE AIR EXCIIANGE DATA, FORMULAE AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS I COMPRESSOR DATA 3/25/83 RPM T T P yg P P T gg T P E MANL MAMR OL ML 0/I'g g OL P IR P OR P MR 0/P IR T IR T OR F F "ll 20G "H8G "HgG F F "H20G "HgG "HgG F F 363 117 150 -1. 7. 21.3 21.4 1.72 90.3 210.6 -1.7 21.6 21.5 1.73 93 214.4 385 117 150 -2.4 30.5 30.6 2.03 95.8 254.1 -2.4 30.4 30.7 2.03 99.1 258.2 403 118 158.5 -2.6 36.9 37.3 2.25 95.9 280.9 -2.6 36.7 37.3 2.24 97.1 283 TURBO DATA 3/25/83 RPM P P T yg T P P T T E ig OL OL IR OR IR OR Pg /. 0 g 1
/POR "IlgG "H 20G F F , "HgG " 11 0 F F 2 ,
363 16.6 -0.1 771.3 631.8 17.6 2.6 810.2 675.5 1.56 1.58 385 23.75 0.5 796.3 620.9 24.6 4.3 820.3 657.2 1.79 1.80
! 403 28.8 0.85 790.35 602.9 30.15 4.8 818.9 630.9 1.97 1.99 4
O
v. Atmospheric pressure, 3/25/83 = 29.86" HgA (29.86 + PO) " HgA fB p0/P 1 blower blower pres u (29.86 + (Py)(.074)]"HgA , k p jp , (29.86 + Pt ) " HgA (29.86 + (P ) .074) FH', * "P O rt 2 Swept Volume: [ Tr/4'B x5/1728. RPM /2*#CYL] = FT / min !
= (22.068)(RPM), FT 3/ min Engine Trapped Air: (22.068)(RPM)hB #
IB 1+1/e.) = FT/ min b V where: y =
.85, volumetric efficiency of engine Tg = Temp. air manifold, F -
I = Volumetric compression ratio = 12.5 SPECIFIC VOLUME at compressor inlet Y1 = RT 1 3
= FT 7 LB R = Gas constant air, 53.3 P
AT.144 PAT = Atm spheric Pressure in psia EXCESS AIR RATIO, h
\ (9 trapped)(60)
/\ = = LBS. AIR /LBS. FUEL (BHP)(BSFC) ( T1 )(14.7) 14.7 = Stoichiometric air / fuel ratio for diesel on MDO:
12.07.H, 87.75 C SCAVENGING FACTOR h SC = 0.3 per.TDI e
- TOTAL AIR DELIVERED ,
9 total
- OB V Ty M ,
[t ySC} = FT / min g i 4 OR 9 total " 9 trapped (1 +' A SC' (1 + 1/2 ) FOR 363 RPM: 9 trapped " O' B BT .} (t tfj ) (22.068)(363)(1.72)(55 Z 3)(.85)(1+1/12.5) Per Turbo or Cylinder Bank
= 6031.63 FT / min Q trapped = (7353.81)(T ) (p )
(7353.81) (h) (1.73)
=
5766.65 FT / min EXCESS AIR RATIO: ' 9 trapped) 60 m g x r x A/F
'l '
'G
=
T' P To = 13.89 FT /LB atmos *100 = (.0252482) b
= 13.96 R h= I9 trapped)(.004602b) = 2.00 g , Diesel A'=
{
= 1.90 2 to 4 R
TOTAL' AIR FLOW: L.B. QTL (1 + A se) 6031.63(1.3) 7260.3 ACFM
=
(t t fg ) = (L.08)= R.B. s,c1 QTR (1 +
- 5766.68(1.3) 6941.4 ACFM
' l + 1/() (1.08)"
Base' on computed values of above, a theoretical stoichiometric A/F ratio of 14.7 and an observed hourly fuel flow of 1773.8#/hr. at 363 ERPM, ~ the air flo;; calculations for the compressor can be compared to the theoretical air flow required. Qtrapped
- I AVE)( A/FS )(Mg)( V AVE) (#/HR)(FT /#.1 60 (MIN /HR)
(1.90 + 2.00)(14.7)(1773.8)(13.89 + 13.96) 2 2 60 11800.5 FT3 / MIN Required vs. Total Trapped Air through the compressor (6031.63 + 5766.65)
= 11798.28 FT / MIN Actual average of operating A/F ratio at 363 RPM (A)
(A/F3 ) = (1.95)(14.7) = 28.665 #-Air /# Fuel by indirect measurement of 0; in exhaust gas assuming air , content by volume 79% N2, 21%02 nd 0% C0 in exhaust gas: X, Amount of Air Blown N
, 2 Stoichiometric. Air Required N C 79 I
n
- 21 2T)(0 2 .5'CO);
= 79 -
where 0 measured was'll.5% 2 79-[(79/21)(11.5)}
= 2.2 both banks; which should include scavenging air in addition to engine trapped ~ air or total air delivered by the compressor Correction of ACFM to SCFM:
( ACFM)- (Y!Y'D O L.B. (7260.3)(13.303/13.89) = 6953.9 SCFM AVE = 6771.7 SCFM 6914.4 (13.303/13.96) R.B. -
= 6589.4 SCFM Observed Turbo RPM Correction:
(RPMO) ( / D20/IO ) = Equivalent RPM L. B. : (12208)( v 320/330.3 ) = 11958.1 RPM .) R. B. : (12272)( '328/353 ) = 11991.4 RPM k e l l
F APPENDIX G TURBOCHARGER COMBINED EFFICIENCY FORMULAE AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS 9 { l f l
COMBINED TURBO CHARGER EFFICIENCY, TC TC "a A
! A
~ ~
A IB l B A-l/K A - 1) .- (100) ,,
= '.
M g Kg /Kg R g. T IT (1-P T 8! 8' t where t
~
"A Weight rate of air flow through compressor, 1.0, for computation on per pound basis Kg =
Air adiabatic exponent, 1.4 R = Gas constant for air, 53.3 A Ft-Lb g Lbm 'R T = Compressor inlet air tempe ature, IB R P B
= Compressor pressure ratio OB/P tg Absolute M
8
=
Weight rate of exhaust gas flow through turbo taken as 1.03 including added weight of fuel burned per pound of air blown for computation on a per pound basis. K = 8 Exhaust for dieselgas oil adiabatic operation: exponent given as the following K = 1.42 - g (.0000305)(TIT + TOT I TIT = Turbine inlet temperature, R TCT = Turbine exhaust temperature, R R g
=
Gas constant for exhaust gas, 53.06 FT-LB g LBm - R P Turbine expansion ratio, IT/p P = T , absolute TC @ 363 ERPM: L.B. (1.0) TC = _l*0/.4* 53.3 '550.3 * (172 Il*0-1)_(100) = 60.87"/. (l.03)b3'9/.349
- 53.06
- 1231.3 -
(1-1.56.349/1.349[3
D e APPENDIX H M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINE CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE TABLES IN CHRONOLOGICAL' SEQUENCE O i r . .. _2m__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .
TABLE H-1 1 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE l Period Ooerational 74 Engine Hours: Port Sebd
. ..n e, . r oc c .,, ... . . t ., s. .: ., ...,.,e ...,.
c.cresti.e a.iacea aee ses.ee. ocs.ce ace me..eti Cyl. Heads ~ Total Removed i Cracked-Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable Piston Total Removed Maintenance / Modifications To ~ Crown / Skirt j Ring Replacement (Sets) Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed Articulated Bearing / Pin Fastener Mechanism , Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cam Shafe
- Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls Head, Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger Total Removed 1 2.000 Overhauled 1 ? 000 Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) I 2.000 Seal Failure ,
l
,-,_,e . - - - - . - - , , _. __ _. ,, ,y_, ,__,._m_,, _ . , . _, _ _ _ . , . .
TABLE H-2 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhaul 74/75 d Engine Hours: Port 3.021 Stbd ?.955 i s...., er oce.,,..... t. i.i.: ., a.. .,. ...,. s.t.... occ.,,e.ce a...,=. c.,,,cti..a.i.ne.se/ Cyt. Heads Total Removed 32 3.000 Cracked 14 3.000 Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures 32 3.000 Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed 1 3.000 Scrapped / Unusable l } Piston f Total Removed 3 3.000 j Maintenance / Modifications To ; Crown /Skire 1 3.000 Undersized Crown - Ring Replacement (Sets) 1 3.000 f Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed 3 3.000 Articulated Bearing / Pin j Fastener Mechanism ' i Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cim' Shaft ' l Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block ' , Scrapped / Unusable M9 Jar Overhauls Haad, Piston, Liner . Saaring, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger Total Removed 4 3.000 Overhauled & i nnn Scrapped / Unusable Parts
-(set or casings) ' 3.000 Seals / Bearings i
l
TABLE H-3 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE' MAINTENANCE l \
'erLod Operational 75 Engine Hours: '
Port l Stbd j s...., f oce.,,.. .. t., i.e.: ., a..,.,. ... . c.ecenti.e nei.ie. <e sei.... oca.,,..c. e...,.. f- Cyl. Heads l Total Removed 6 2.000 ! Cracked 1 7 non Manufacturing Defects Warp Head /FLre Ring Failures 2 3.500 Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable . Piston Total Removed 1 2.500 Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) *
. Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed 1 2,,500 Articulated Bearing / Pin Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable J
Crm Shaft *
, Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls i
Head, Piston, Liner
, Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger Total Removed 3 500 Seal Leak Overhauled 3 7 non r c .,1 i . - r. 'm ,13 Scrapped / Unusable Parts .
(set or casings) 2 500 Rotor C Bearing i 1 i 9
,- - , , , , , - , - ,e -e -w - , . . , . - , ,n , .- ,, -. ,,mN -e -
TABLE H-4 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhau! 75/76 Engine Hours: Port 7.988 , Sebd 7,759 I a...., .r occ.,,..... r., i.e. ., a..,.,. ...,. c.,,.c t i.. a iat e .ac e s.t.... act.,, ace a...,n. Cyl. Heads Total Removed 34 4,000 Cracked 11 7_R00 Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring failures 16 4.000 10 Warped Scrapped / Unusable 3 7.800 Cyl. Liners Total Removed 32 7.800 Reolace Seal Rinos Scrapped / Unusable 1- 7.800 Piston Total Removed 32 7.800 i Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt 20 7.800 Ring Replacement (Sets) 32 7.800 Master & Link Connecting Rod i i Total Removed 32 7.800 t Articulated Bearing / Pin 1 7.800 ! Fastener Mechanism 16 7 nno Red can ser.ws . Master Rod Bearing Replacement j Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable 1 7,800 5.M.E. ab Crackea l Cam Shaft
- I Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable
. Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls Head, Piston, Liner Saaring, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair 1 7.800 Turbocharger. l Total Removed 4 2.000 I Overhauled ' e 2.000 Scrapped /Unusabt.e Parts (set or casings) 1 2,000 New Turbo P.M.E. l i t . _ . . . _ _ _ , . . - . _
t TABLE H-5 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period n,,,o ;aa =1 76 Engine Hours: i P:rt S :. bd
....., .r ou .,, .... r., i. .: , ..,,,,, ...,.
c.,,ect s. nas tea a<= s.t.... ces.,,..ce e...re. Cyl. Heads Total Removed 6 1,000 Cracked i 1.000 Manufacturing Defects. Warp Head / Flee Ring Failures l Scrapped / Unusable 1 8.200 S.M.E. #4 - Cyl. 1.iners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable i Piston Total Removed 1 1,500 Exh.Vlv. Stuck Open Maintenance /ModificacLons To ' Crown / Skirt 2 1.500- S.M.E. All Ring Replacement (Sets) 4 Master & Link Connecting Rod
]
Total Removed I I,500 ' Articulated Bearing / Pin ~ ~ Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cam Shaft ' Scrapped / Unusable Main Searings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyt. Bleek Scrapped / Unusable Mnjor Overhauls Head Piston, Liner , Bearing Simu taneous 2 Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger I Total Removed 2 1.000 Overhauled ? t.000 Scrapped / Unusable Parts , (set or casings) 1.000 Rotor Begs, Seals
-, , - - - - . - - ,.-e., .-,v- e, - - - , , , .. , , ,- . , - . . - , - + --w,.-
TABLE H-6 M/V COLUMBIA' MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE 5 Period Overhaul 76/77 Engine Hours: Port 9,982 Stbd 9.493
....ec .t o n .,,.. . r., s. .: .,i.e,.,e ..,.
c.crec t i.e a siat e..as e ses.ee. occureense e...,6 Cyl. Heads Total Removed 35 1,700 Vlv. Guide MOD Cracked Manufacturing Defects Warp Head /FLre Ring Fallures Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Rewved Scrapped / Unusable Piston . Total Removed 3 1.700 Maintenance /ModLfications To Crown /Sklet 2 1,700 S.M.E.#11 Piston Replaced Ring Replacement (Sets) 3 1.700 j Master & Link Connecting Rod i Total Removed 1 1.JR l Articulated Bearing / Pin 1 1.700 Fastener Mechanism ! I_700 Master Rod Bearing Replacement J Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cem Shaft ' Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings # Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable M4jor Overhauls Head, Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger ! Total Removed 4 1,900 , Overhauled 4 !_enn i Scrapped / Unusable Parts j tset or casings) 4 1,900 F00 Seals NOTE: More work done, but not recorded. I
TABLE H-7 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE ~ Period Ocecational 77 Engine Hours: Port Scbd e...., et occ.,,....$ r., i.e. .,a..,.,. m..,. c.,,,cti,e n.i.ie. se sei.... oce.,,.. e a...,.. Cyl. Heads Total Removed 20 750 Cracked a 1.snn viv. Arian, Manufacturing Defects R 1 snn Warp Head /FLre Ring Failures is 7so 3_q nietney Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. 1.Lners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable Piston Total Removed Maintenance / Modifications To i Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) M2 ster & Link Connecting Rod ' ToeaL Removed Articulated Bearing / Pin Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable C*m Shaft ~ Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Sc rapped /Unusa ble Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls Head, PLston, Liner Bearing, SLmuttaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger Total Removed 2 1,500 Overhauled 2 1.500 Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) I 1.500 F00
TABLE H-8 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhaul 77/78 Engine Hours: Port 14,080 Stbd it g77 m...., .r oc a.,, ac e s ,r., i.e.: ., a....,. a..,s c.ececti.e a.latea. ace set..e= Sec.e,.ac. n...,6 Cyl. Heads Total Removed 4 3.000 Crtcked 1 i nnn Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed 3 6.100 Scrapped / Unusable Piston Total Removed ) 6,100 Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt 3 6,100 Ring Replacement (Sets) 3 6.100 -- Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed _ 3 6,Jjl[1 Articulated Bearing / Pin _ Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement 1 13.677 Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cam Shaft Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls Head. Piston. Liner Bearing. Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild. Repair Turbocharger Total Removed - 4 3.600 - Overhauled t. 1 ano Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) 1 3,600 Cracked Casing NOTE: New Exhaust Manifolds - Mod III
TABLE H-9 I
'M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Operational 78 t
Engine Hours: i Port l Scbd s...., er occ.,,.. .s f., i.e.: .,a..,.,. ...,s c., recti.e meinte...c. sei.... oce.,,..<e n...,si Cyt. Heads Total Removed 9 1,500 Cracked Manufacturing Defects 2 1.500 Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures i Scrapped / Unusable 9 1.500 4 Cyl. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable Piston Total Rewved ! Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) Master & Link Connecting Rod i Total Removed
- l. Articulated Bearing / Pin , _ _ l Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement
- Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable i
C4m Shaft ! Scrapped / Unusable i Main Bearings Replaced i Scrapped / Unusable Cvt. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauts Head, Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebutid, Repair i Turbocharger Total Removed Overhauled i 2 Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) e _ - _ _ - _ _ -.- _ ~ - . . .. -y c- - _ ,_ - - . _ _ . , _
TABLE H-10 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhaul 78/79 Engine Hours: Port 17.090 Scbd u 7st, e...., .r oce.,,.ac. i., i.e.: ., a..,,, ...,. c.,,.cti.. neiaiea ase s.t.... oss.,,. ace n .. .,n s 1 CyL. Heads ) Total Removed 32 7.000 Cracked 7 7. con Manufacturing Defects 4 7.000 Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures Scrapped / Unusable 1 Cyt. Liners Total Removed 32 7,000 Scrapped / Unusable 2 16,500 Piston Total Removed 17 o nnn Maintenance / Modifications To Crown /Skire 32 9.000 Ring Replacement (Sets) 32 ' 9.000 Master & Link Connecting Rod l Total Removed 16 9,qqq ._ l Articulated Bearing / Pin 6 16.500 i < Fastener Mechanism 9 Master Rod Bearing Replacement ,g i, enn --~ 1 Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cam Shaft
- Scrapped / Unusable tia in Bearings Top / Bottom Bearing Replaced All 16.500 Roll-Over Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls Head. Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair 1 9.000 Turbocharger Total Removed 4 2,600 Overhauled 4 ?_sco Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings)
TABLE H-ll M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Deerational 79 Engine Hours: ^; Port Stbd n.... .r oce.,,..ces t., s.t.: .,4..,.,e n..c. -/ c.,,ec t i .e maisi.. < e sei.... ccc.,,eace me..,is Cyl. Heads Total Removed 5 2.000 Cracked ! 7_onn j Manufacturing Defects 1 7 nnn Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures y ;_ono Scrapped / Unusable CyL. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable l Piston Total Removed 1 1 7nn p wr s7 Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) Master & Link Connecting Rod f Total Removed 1
?,200. = our n, Articulated Bearing / Pin Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement 1 2.700 Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable 1 19.790 link Red Cemeked Cam Shaft .
Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced , Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Msjor Overhauls Head, Piston, Liner - Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair [ Turbocharger i Total Removed Overhauled Scrapped / Unusable Parts 4 (set or casings) 4 -
, - .w- -_ , -:..~-,,y , ', - - - - - . _ .-r , , , , , . _. _ y
. TABLE H-12 t
M/V' COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVEaMAINTEN-ANCE l5 , Period Overhau! 79/80 (ij N y .V Engine Hours: y S Port 21,916 c- Stbd ?!.74g
....., or oca.,,.... t., s.t.: .,a.. .,. w..,.
y-p f c.,,.c)..a.6ie...<e s.t.... occ.,,. ace s...,..
.,9 !
CyL. Heads > Total Removed 19 < nnn
- Cracked to 5.~000 Manufacturing Defects Warp Head /FLre Ring Failures
' Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed 32 5.000 Scrapped / Unusable ,
Piston Total Removed 32 5.000 Maintenance /ModifLeations To Crown / Skirt 1 32 5.000 Ring Replacement (Sets) 32 5,000 Lth compression ring damage Master & Link' Connecting Rod Total Remove"d 16 5.000 Articulated Bearing / Pit 16 21,900 Fastener Mechanism 16 13.900 Master Rod Bearing Replacement 16 4,800 Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable - 5 21,500 Cam Shaft .
' Scrapped / Unusable M'ain Bearings' Replaced "
Scrapped / Unusable g Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Ovechauls Head, Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair 1 4.800 Turbocharger Total Removed 4 5,000 Overhauled 4 ' 5.000 Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) 1
'~
TABLE H-13 l M/V. COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE l
' Period 0perational 80 Engine Hours:
Port Stbd 1
....., et ou ., ....s f., r. .: ., a..,.,. .,.
+ c.,,, cts., a s iai ...c. s e t.... oc e.,,..s e a...,n. Cyl. Heads Total Removed 1 2,000 Cracked Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures r Scrapped / Unusable 4 Cyl. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable ~ Piston Total Removed Maintenance / Modifications To Crown /SL',et Ring Replacement (Sets) ~ Master & Link Connecting Rod 4 Total Removed ,. j Articulated Bearing / Pin _ Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement j Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable 1 _ 4 Cam Shaft Scrapped / Unusable 1 l Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable
- Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls i' Head, Piston, Liner i Bearing,' Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger 4 Total Removed Overhauled _
Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) t t
.,,.--,---a , , , , , , . - -- N - , ,, wo-, ,- --w .- e,r,- . - , ,
1-TABLE H-14 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE i
. Period Overhaul 80/61 Engine Hours:
Port 24.278 Stbd 23.513
....., .t ces.cce.<,i t., s.t.: ., a. e.g. n..es c.,,,c t i .. a s i ai e..ac e set... occerceace e...,6 CyL. Heads Total Removed 32 2.500
. Cracked Manufacturing Defacts 0 n. [
Warp Head /Ftre Ring Fallures Scrapped / Unusable 16 24.000 Cy1. Liners Total Removed 32 7.500 Scrapped / Unusable 16 24.000 . PLscon Total Removed 14 7 mnn Maintenance / Modifications To l Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) 32 2.500 Master & Link Connecting-Rod Total Removed 16 2.500 Articulated Bearing /PLn 16 7.500 Fastener Mechanism 16 f 500 ,_ Master Rod Bearing Replacement 16 7 900 Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable ~ Cam Shaft - I Scrapped / Unusable 4 2t. 000 2 each engine Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cy1. Block Scrapped / Unusable 4 2t. 000 2 each engine Major Overhauls Head, PLston, LLner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebulld, Repair 2.500 1 ( Turbocharger j Total Removed , 4 7 *no , Overhauled 6 2.500 Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) l _a _
l - i t- 'I1 TABLE H-15 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE ~ MAINTENANCE Period Operational 81 Engine Hours: Port Scbd / s..ner t oss., ..c s f.c l
- r. .: ., ..,.,. ..,s c.crec ti e nei te...<e e. .... oct.cre ce a...co.
Cyl. Heads Total Removed 3 1.500 Cracked 2 1.500 Manufacturing Defects t i snn Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures 1 1 son 1_ o n i .1,, r t, Scrapped / Unusable Cyt. Liners Total Removed Scrapped / Unusable Piston Total Removed Maintenance / Modifications To Crown / Skirt Ring Replacement (Sets) Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed Articulated Bearing / Pin ' 1 Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable -- Cam Shaft
- Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyt. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls
. Head, Piston, Liner Bea ring, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair
~
l 1 Turbocharger Total Removed ~ Overhauled Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings ) l l
TABLE H-16 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN CNGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhau! 91/82 Engine Hours: Port 26.544 Stbdyg / }
/...s.e et os<.re..<es t., ses s er n..<.,. ...es c.,, .c i i .. a . . . i .. ... . e.i.... oce. ... . s...,=.
l Cyl. Heads Total Removed 1 2,000 Cracked Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire RLng Failures Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. L.Lners Total Removed n Scrapped / Unusable Piston
. Total Removed .
Maintenance / Modifications To { Crown / Skirt l Ring Replacement (Sets) i Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed ,_, Articulated Bearing /PLn i Fastener Mechanism ! Master Rod Bearing Replacement : Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable j Cam Shaft . Scrapped / Unusable MALn Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Block Sc r a pped / Unu's a ble Mnfor Overhauls Head. PLston, Liner Ecartng, Simultaneous Removal, Rebutid. Repair Turbocharger Total Removed _. 4 2.500 Overhauled 4 ? con Scrapped / Unusable Parts (set or casings) 10,000 j 1 Cracked Casing P.M.E.
TABLE H- H M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Ooerational 82 Engine Hours: Port Scbd
....., et on .,,..ces t., t.i.: ., a....,. n..es c.,,.c 6.. n e iat ea.as e sei.... oce.,,..c. a..., .
CyL. Heads Total Removed 3 4.000 Cracked Manufacturing Defects t nnn Warp Head / Fire Ring Failures Scrapped / Unusable Cyl. Liners Total Removed Scrapped /Unus.ible Piston Total Removed Maintenance /ModifLeations To _j Crown / Skirt _I Ring Replacement (Sets) 1 Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed Articulated Bearing / Pin ' ~ ~ 'j Fastener Mechanism Master Rod Bearing Replacement Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable Cam Shaft ' Scrapped / Unusable Main Bearings Replaced Scrapped / Unusable Cvl. Block Sc rapped / Unusable Mnjor Overhauls Head, Piston, Liner Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebuild, Repair Turbocharger Total Removed Overhauled ' Scrapped / Unusable Parts Iset or casings)
TABLE H-18 M/V COLUMBIA MAIN ENGINES CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE Period Overhaul 82/83. Engine Hours: Port 30. 752 Stbd 30. ! ! 7- ....., .r occ.,,.. . t., v.i.: ., a..,.,. n..,.
- c. ..c t i .. a.i at ...ac e s.t.... occ.,,.. . a...,.
Cyt. Heads-Total Removed 32 6,500 frabon Sys Mod Cracked- r. 6.500 Manufacturing Defects Warp Head / Fire Ring FaLLures , Scrapped / Unusable 20,000 5 Estiaated Averaoe 1 Cyl. LLners 4 Total Removed 6 6.500 Scrapped / Unusable 1 30.000 Piston Total Removed 7 6.500 Maintenance / Modifications To "1 Crown / Skirt ! Ring Replacement (Sets) 7 6.500 i Master & Link Connecting Rod Total Removed 7 5,ts, 1 Articulated Bearing / Pin 'l Fastener Mechanism j Master Rod Bearing Replacement i Con Rod Scrapped / Unusable j Cem Shaft '
- Scrapped / Unusable M.ain Bearings Replaced Scrapped /Unusa ble
! Cyl. Block Scrapped / Unusable Major Overhauls l Head, PLston, LLner , Bearing, Simultaneous Removal, Rebutid, Repair l l Turbocharger !' Total Removed NE d C-17 TURBOS ( Overhauled
- t. Scrapped / Unusable Parts j (set or casings) l I
-. ._.1_.. , -- _ _ _ . , , _ . . - . . _ _ . . _ - - - - -
O e APPENDIX I ECONOMIC ANALYSIS COMPUTATIONS
=
-J _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
CALCULATION OF ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS The fuel, lubricating oil and maintenance costs used in the analysis were calculated using rates quoted by the engine builder correc ted for the heating value of the proposed fuels. These numbers were then adjusted using historical data provided by the State of Alaska for operating parameters and The International Marine Fuel Contract Price List to produce a ' projected life cycle cost for each proposal. l Example: Enterprise Fuel Rate = .34 Lb/ BHP-br X 1.1 factor (includes 3% guarantee margin + 7% per engine deteriora-tion) Alternate Fuel Rate = 147g/ BHP-br X 1.05 factor (includes 5% guarantee margin) Heating Value Correction = Gas oil /MDO = 8190 = 1.01 17968 Average Engine Load = 5250 BHP . Average Operating Hours Per Year = 5400 hrs Cost per Metric Ton Fuel = $276/m.t.
.374 lb/BHPhr x 101 x 5250 BHP x 5400 hrs X $276.00/m.t.
2205 lb/ metric ton
= $1,333,222.46 x 2 engines.
Cost of Fuel = $2,666,440 The lubricating oil costs were calculated similarly: Example: 1.lternate Engine L.O. Rate = .00335 lb/hp-br Average HP = 5250 Average Hr. = 5400 Cost per gallon L.O. =
$4.26 TBN 30-40
.00335 x 5250 x 5400 X 4.26 1 6.66 lb/ gal
= 61,300 x 2 engines 4
Cost of L.O. = $122,600 e.
Tha Maintenance and Repair costs were estimated using data contained in Figure 5.1 and adjusted with the use of historical data supplied by the State of Alaska. Example: 5250 BHP 1500 SRI Fuel 5400 hr/yr = 1 operating year Yields 20.8 dollars /hp/yr (Fig. 5.1) 5250 BHP x 1 operating year x 20.8 = 109,200 190,200 x 2 engines = $218,400 M&R Costs = $218,400 e i 1 6 I l h
~, , . - - , - - , - - . - - -. ,, ..,n... -, , , - , - , , - , .- - "W W ,
^
ALASKA STATE FERRY: M/V COLUMBIA DATE: 4/22/83 ITEMS: EXISTING NEW ENGINES ENGINES ACQUISITION 855000 6000000 ANNUAL OPERATING COST: FUEL OIL MDO 2666440 2416080 HFO 1655970 LUBE OIL MDO 60630 100090 HFO 122600 M&R MDO 301310 120750 HFO 218400 INFLATION RATES: GENERAL ECON %/YR: 6 FUEL OIL RATE %/YR: 8 ABOVE OPERATING COST ARE FOR APRIL 1983 AMOUNT ESCALATED TO TO MAY 31,1984 DOLLARS. ACQUISITION COST WERE ASSUMED TO BE PAID MAY 01, 1984 TOTAL CO! FUEL & EXISTING YEARS LUBE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 855000 8550s 1985 3180854 372260 355T1 1986 3405323 394596 . 38299 1987 3710149 418271 41284 1988 4006961 443368 44500 1989 4327517 469970 47974 1990 4673719 498168 51718 1991 5047616 528058 55756 1992 5451426 559741 60111 1993 5887540 593026 64808 1994 6358540 628925 69874 1995 6867226 666661 75008 1996 7416604 706660- 81202 1997 8009903 749060 87589 1998 8650707 794004 94447 1999 9342785 841644 101844 2000 10090208 892143 109820 ) 2001 10897425 945671 118400 2002 11769219 1002411 127716 2003 12710756- 1062556 '137703 2004 13727617 1126309 148509
i ! NEW ENGINES ON MDO TOTAL COS FUEL & NEW YEARS LUBE DIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES ! 1984 6000000 600000 . 1985 2935211 135675 307088 1986 _ 3170027 143815 331384 j 1987 3423630 152444 357607 l 1988 3697500 16150 385911- j 1989 3993322 171286 416460 ' 1990 4312787 181563 ' 449435 1991 4657810 192457 485026 1992 5030435 204005 523444 ; 1993 5432870 216245 564911 1994 5867500 209220 ' 609671 1995 6336900 242973 657987 1996 6843852 257551 710140 1997 7391360 273004 '766406 1998 7982668 289084 827005 1999 8621282 306747 892802 2000 .9310984 325152 963613 2001 10055863 344661 1040050 2002 10860332 365341 1122567 2003 11729159 387262 1211642 2004 12667492 410497 1307798 NEW ENGINES l!:1 Hi 0 TOTAL COS FUEL & NEW
. YEARS LUBE DIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINEE 1984 6000000 60000C 1985 2074524 245394 231991 1986 2240486 260118 25006C 1987 2419725 275725 269545 1988 2613303 292268 290557 A989 2822367 309805 . 313217 1990 3048156, 328393 337654 1991 3292009 348096 36401C 1992 3555370 368982 392435 1993 3839799 391121 42309:
1994 4146983 414588 456157 1995 4478742 439464 49182( 1996 4837041 465832 53028; 1997 5224004 493781 57177E 1998 5641925 523408 61653; 1999 6093279 554813 664808
'2000 6580741 588100 71688<
2001 7107200 620088 77005E 2002 7675776 660791 83365e 2003 8289839 700408 89902*. 2004 8953026 742465 96954'
~ - - -.
23
ALASKA STATE FERRYB,M/V COLUMBIA
~DATE: 4/22/83
' ITEMS:- EXISTING ' NEW ENGINES- ENGINES ACQUISITION 855000 6000000
~
' ANNUAL OPERATING
-COST:
- FUEL OIL MDO '2666440 2416380 HFO 1655970 LUBE OIL MDO 60630 100090 HFO 122600 M&R MDO 331310 120750 HFO 218400 INFLATION RATES:
GENERAL ECON %/YR: 6 FUEL OIL RATE %/YR: 8 ABOVE OPERATING COST ARE FOR APRIL 1983, AMOUNT- ESCALATED TO TO MAY 31,1984 DOLLARS. ACQUISITION COST WERE~ ASSUMED TO DE PAID MAY 31, 1984 FUEL & TOTAL CO! J EXISTING. 1 YEARS LUBE DIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 855000 1985 3180854 8550s - i 372260 35551 l 1986 3435323 394596 . 38299 1987 3710149 418271 41284' 1988 4006961 443368 44503 1989 4327517 469970 47974 1990 4673719 498168 51718 1991 5047616 528058 55756 1992 5451426 559741 60111 1993 5887540 593326 '64808 1994 6359543 628925 69874 1995 6867226 666661 75338 1996 7416604 706660- 81232 l 1997 8009933 749060 87589 1998 8650727 794004 ' 94447 1999 9342785 841644 101844 2000 10090208 892143 109823 2001 10897425 945671 118430 2002 11769219 1002411 127716 2003 12710756 1062556 137733 2004 13727617 1126309 148539
,. ,. , e
~ NEW ENGINES ON MDO TOTAL COS FUEL & NEW YEARS LUBE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 6000000 600000 1985 2935211 135675 307088 1986 3170027 143815 001084 1987 0420630 152444 057607 1988 3697500 161591 385911 1989 3993322 171286 416460 1990 4312787 181563 449435 1991 4657810 192457 485026 1992 5030435 204005 523444 1993 5432870 216245 564911 1994 5867500 229220 609671 1995 6336900 242973 657987 1996 6843852 257551 710140 1997 7391360 273004 766406 1998 7982668 289384 827205 1999 8621282 306747 892802 2000 9310984 325152 960613 2001 10055863 344661 1040052 2002 10860332 365341 1122567 2003 11729159 387262 1211642 2004 12667492 410497 1307798 NEW ENGINES ON HFO TOTAL COE FUEL & NEW YEARS LUBE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINEE 4 1984 6000000 60000C 1985 2074524 245094 201991 1986 2240486 260118 25006C . 1987 2419725 275725 269545 1988 2613303 292268 290557 1989 2822367 309805 , 313217 L 1990 3048156. 328093 007654 1991 0292009 348096 36401C 1992 3555370 068982 39240* 1993 3839799 391121 42309: 1994 4146980 414588 456157 1995 4473742 439464 49182( 1996 4837041 465832 530287 1997 5:24004 493781 57177E 1998 5641925 523408 61650; i 1999 6093279 554813 664908 2000 6580741 588102 71688' 2001 7107200 620088 77005! 2002 7t75776 660791 83365e 2003 8289839 700438 89902~. 2004 8950006 742465 96954' t
NETrCASH FLOW (LOSS) FROM OPERATfNG NEW ENGINES OVER EXISTING ENGINES
,NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH ON MDO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DIFF VEAR TOTAL s TOTAL s $
1984 6000000 855000 -51450C
- 1985 0070885 0553114 4822
1986 0310843 3829918 51607 1987 3576074 4128420 .55254 1988 0859111 4450328 59121 1989 4164608 4797487 63287 1990 -4494051 5171886 6775: 1991 4050268- 5575674 7254C
, 1992 5234440 6011167 7767:
1993 5649115 6480865 83171 1994 6096719 6987468 89074 1995 6579872 7533887 9540: 1996 7101403 8123265 102184 1997 7664364 8758993 10946: 1998 8272053 9444731 11726: 1999 8928029 10184429 125644
, 2000 9636137 10982351 13462.
2001 10400525 11843096 14425' 2002 11225673 12771630' 15*59! 2003 12116420 13773312 16568' 2004 13077989 14853926 17759: NEW ENGINES ON HFO NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH
, ON HFO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DI YEARS TOTAL s TOTAL 5 1984 6000000 855000 -51450 1985 2319918 3553114 12331 1986 2500604 3829918 13293 1987 2695450 4128420, 14329 1988 2905571 4450328 15447 1989 3132172 4797487 16653 1990 3376549 5171886 17950 1991 3640105 5575674 19055 1992 3924352 6011167 20868 1993 4230920 6480865 22499 1994 4561572 6987468 24258 1995 4918206 7533887 26156 1996 5302873 8123265 28200 1997 5717786 8758993 30412 1998 6165303 9444731 0279;
'1999 6648092 10184429 35360 2000 7168840 10982351 38175 2001 7700588 11840096 41125 2002 8306567 12771600 4435C 2003 8990277 13773312 478;(
2004 9695490 14853926 51584 1
DISCOUNT RATE 10% 0 MDO HFO NET PRESENT VALUE FOR 10- YRS: -1255124. 5110098 15 YRS: 331499.08 9516611 20 YRS: 1722831 13506697 INTERNAL' RATE 06 RETURN FOR 10 YRS: .04533733 .27182447 15 YRS: .10929462 .30391482 20 YRS: .13546313 .31311172 -LIFE CYCLE CCST FOR EXISTING ENGINE: 10 YRS 51841328 15 YRS 95886633 20 YRS 160110949 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES MDO: 10 YRS: 50309412 15 YRS: 88855133 20 YRS: 145311877 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES HFO:- 10 YRS: 39287213 15 YRS: 68039502 20 YRS: 109961268 l l
ALASKA STATE FERRY M/V COLUMBIA DATE:4/22/C3 ITEMS: EXISTING NEW - ENGINES ENGINES ! ACQUISITION 855000 '7000000 l ANNUAL OPERATING COST: . { FUEL OIL MDO 266644O 2416080 HFO 1655970 LUBE OIL MDO 60630 100090 HFO .122600 M&R MDO 001310 120750 HFO 218400 INFLATION RATES:. GENERAL ECON X/YR: 6 FUEL OIL RATE %/YR: 8 ABOVE OPERATING COST ARE FOR APRIL 1983, AMOUNT ESCALATED TO TO MAY 01,1984 DOLLARS. ACQUISITION COST WERE ASSUMED TO DE PAID MAY 31, 1984 FUEL & TOTAL cot YEARS LUBE EXISTING OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 855000 8550C 1985 3180854 372260 355013 1986 3435323 394596 082991' 1987 3710149 418271 4128* 1988 4006961 443368 44503; 1989 4327517 469970 1990 4673719 479745 498168 51718E 1991 5047616 528058 1992 5451426 557567 559741 601116 1993 5887540 593026 1994 6358543 648084 628925 699746 1995 6867226 666661 75038E 1996 7416604 706660 1997 8009933 812726 749060 875899 1998 8650727 794004 944470 1999 9342785 841644 101544I 2000 10090208 892143 2001 10897425 109820" 945671 1184309 2002 11769219 1002411 127716; 2003 12710756 I 1062556 1377301 2004 10727617 1126309 14G539: F
,,ni
NEW ENGINES ON MDO TOTAL COS FUEL & NEW YEARS LUDE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 7000000 700000 1985 293'211 5 105675 007088 1986 0170027 143815 001084 1987 3423600 152444 057607 l88 3697520 161591 085911 1 '+ 8 9 3993322 171285 416460 1'<90 4012787 181563 449405 1*91 4657910 19:457 485026 1992 5000405 204005 523444 1993 5432870 216245 564911 1994 5867500 2C?220 609671 1995 6336900 242973 657987 1996 6843852 257551 71014C 1997 7391060 273004 766406 1998 7982668 289384 82720" 1999 8621282 006747 892802 2000 9310984 325152 96061; 2001 10055863 344661 104005: 2002 10860332 365341 112256* 2003 11729159 387262 121164; 2004 12667492 410497 130779E NEW ENGINES ON HFO TOTAL COE FUEL & , NEW YEARS LUBE OIL M%R ACCUISITION ENGINEE 1984 7000000 70000s 1985 2074524 245394 231992 1986 2240486 260110 250064 1987 2419725 275725 20954: 1988 2613303 292268 29055. 1989 2822067 309805 - 31321. 1990 3048156 328393 03765 1991 3292009 348096 36401: 1992 0555070 368982 09243: 1993 3809799 391121 42009: 1994 4146983 414588 45615: 1995 4478742 439464 4.918D 1996 4837041 465832 53028" 1997 5224004 493781 57177t 1998 5641925 523408 6,1650: 1999 6093279 554813 66480' 2000 6580741 588102 71688-2001 7107200 623088 77305: 2002 7675776 660791 80065 2000 8289809 700408 89900 2004 8950006 742465 96954 4
r .
. NET. CASH FLOW (LOSS) FROM OPERATYNG NEW ENGINES OVER EXIST 2NG ENGINES I ' NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH h
ON MDO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DIFF YEAR TOTAL s TOTAL S S 1994 7000000 855000 -614500 1985 3070885 ;553114 48020' 1986 3313843 3829918- 51607 1987 3576074 4128420 55204 1988 ' 3859111 4450328 59121 1989 4164608 4797487 60287 1990 4494051 5171886 67750 1991 4850268 5575674 72540 1992 5234440 6011167 77672 1993 5649115 6480865 83175 1994 6096719 6987468 89074 1995 6579872 7503887 95401 1996 7101403 8123265 102186 1997 7664064 8758993 109462 1998 8272053 9444731 117267 1999 8928029 10184429 12564C 2000 9636137 10982351 134621 2001 10400525 11843096 144257 2002 11225670 12771630 15459" 2003 12116420 10770312 165689 2004 13077989 14850926 17759: NEW ENGINES ON HFO NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH ON HFO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DIF YEARS TOTAL 5 TOTAL 5 1984 7000000 855000 -61450C 1985 2319918 3553114. 120:35 1986 2500604 3829918 102933 1987 2695450 4128420, 1432?~ 1988 2905571 4450328 15447: 1989 3132172 4797487 166531 1990 3076549 5171886 17953 1991 3640105 5575674 19:554 i 1992 3924352 6011167 20868: 1993 4230920 6480865 2:4994 1994 4561572 6987468 242588 1995 4918206 7533887 261562 1996 5302873 8123265 282005 1997 5717786 8758093 30412( 1998 6165330 9444731 02790: 1999 6648092 10184409 05062.: 2000 7168843 10982051 08105i 2001 7700588 11840096 41125( 2002 8306567 12771630 44350e 2000 8990277 13773012 4787.0: 2004 9695490 14853926 51584~
DISCOUNT RATE 10% 0 MDO HFO NET PRESENT VALUE FOR 10 YRS: -2255124. 4110098 15 YRS: -668500.6 8516611 20 YRS: 722831 12506697 INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN FOR 10 YRS: .01392683 . 22089354 15 YRS: .08353923 . 25920790 20 YRS: .11305927 . 27134039 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR EXISTING ENGINE: 10 YRS 51841328 15 YRS 95886633 20 YRS 160110949 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES MDO: 10 YRS: 51309412 15 YRS: 89855133 20 YRS: 146311877 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES HFO: i 10 YRS: 40287213 15 YRS: 69039502 20 YRS: 110961268 I i e _ , _ , _ _ . _. _ _ . . - . . . - , . . -- _ - . _ _ . - . . - --,r
. , ~ ,.
- l l
. ALASKA STATE FERRY: M/V COLUMBIA : -DATE 4/22/83 ITEMS: EXISTING NEW ENGINES ENGINES ' ACQUISITION- 855000 8000000 ANNUAL OPERATING COST: FUEL OIL MDO 2666440 2416380 HFO 1655970 LUBE OIL MDO 60630 100090 HFO 122600 M&R MDO 331310 120750 HFO 218400 INFLATION RATES: GENERAL ECON %/YR: 6
- FUEL OIL RATE %/YR: 8 ABOVE OPERATING COST ARE FOR APRIL 1983, AMOUNT ESCALATED TO TO MAY 31.1984 DOLLARS.
ACQUISITION COST WERE ASSUMED TO BE PAID MAY 31, 1984 TOTAL CDs FUEL & EXISTING YEARS LUBE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 855000 0550C 1985 3180854 372260 35531; 1986 3435323 394596 , 3829vs 1987 3710149 418271 41284; 1988 4006961 443368 44503~. 1989 4327517 469970 47974E 1990 4673719 498168 51718E 1991 5047616 528058 55756* 1992 5451426 559741 601114 1993 5887540 593326 648084 1994 6338543 628925 69874c 1995 6867226 666661 75338t 1996 7416604 706660 81202c 1997 8009933 749060 875898 1998 8650727 794004 944477 1999 9342785 841644 101844: 2000 10090208 892143 109823: 2001 10897425 945671 118430' 2002 11769019 1002411 127716: 2003 12710756 1062556 137700 2004 13727617 1126309 148539
- - - , - +w- - -
.e= u-
t1EW ENGINES ON MDO TOTAL COE FUEL & NEW YEARS . LUBE. OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINES _1984 , . 8000000 80000C 1985 2935211 135675 30708E 1986 0170027 143815 301084-1987 3420630 152444 057607 1989 0697520 161591 385911 1989 0993322 171286 41646C 1990 4312787 181563 449405 1991 4657810 192457 485024 1992 5030435 204005 523444 1993 5432870 216245 564911 1994 5867500 229220 609671 1995 63069v0 242970 657987 1996 6843852 257551 71014C 1997 7391360 273004 766404 1998 7982668 289084 82720" 1999 8621282 306747 89280 2000 9310984 025152 96361: 2001 10055863 344661 104005: 2002 10860332 365041 1122567 2000 11729159 087262 121164 2004 12667492 410497 130779E NEW ENGINES ON HFO TOTAL COE FUEL & NEW YEARS LUBE OIL M&R ACQUISITION ENGINE 5 1984 8000000 80000G 1985 2074524 245394 231991 1986 2240486 260118 25006C 1987 2419725 275725 269545 1988 2613003 292268 290557 1989 2822067 309805 - 310217 1990 3048156 328393 007654 1991 0292009 348096 36401C 1992~ 0555370 068982 39240* 1993 0809799 391121 42009: 1994 4146983 414588 456157 1995 4478742 439464 49182C 1996 4807041 465002 500297 1997 5224004 493781 57177E 1998 5641925 523408 616500 1999 6093279 554813 '664809 2000 6500741 588102 716884 2001 7107200 623088 770055 2002 7675776 660791 800656 2003 8289839 700438 89902'/ 2004 8950026 742465 96954c P ll
. NET CASH FLOW' LOSS) FROM OFERATING NEW ENGINES OVER EX8 STING ENG8NES NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CA H ON MDO ENGINES ON -MDO FLOW DIFF YEAR TOTAL 5 TOTAL $ 5 1984 8000000 855000 -714500 1985 0070385 3553114 48222
.1986 0313843 0829918 51eO7 1987 0576074 4128420 55204 1988 3859111 4450328 59121 1989 4164608 4797487 63287 1990 4494 51 5171886 6775 1991 4850268 5575674 72540 1992 5234440 6011167 77672 1993 5649115 6480865 83175=
1994 6096719 '6987468 89074 1995 6579872- 7533887 95401 ! 1996 7101403 8123265 102186 1997 7664364 8758993 10G462 1998 8272053 9444731 117267 1999 8928029 10184429 125640 2000 9636137 10982051 134A21 2001 10400525 11843096 144257 2002 11225673 12771600 154595 2003 12116420 13773312 165609 2004 10077989 14850926 177592 NEW ENGINES ON HFO NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CAE ON HFO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW U LF YEARS TOTAL s TOTAL 5 1984 8000000 855000 -71450c 1985 2319918 3553114 12;;1c 1986 2500604 3829918 12003 1987 2695450 4128440 14 r "6 1989 2905571 4450328 15cef: 1989 0132172 4797487 16653: 1990 0376549 5171886 17o50: 1991 3640105 5575674 197554 1992 0924352 6011167 20868: 1993 4200920 6480865 2:499 1994 4561572 6987468 24258c 1995 4918206 7533887 26156g 1996 5302873 8123265 2820;< 1997 5717786 875899; 00412e 1998 6165300 9444731 3279;c 1999 6648092 10184409 05060: 2000 7168843 10982351 081 5i 2001 7700588 11840096 41125 2002 8306567 12771600 44050. l 2003 8990277 13773312 478 0- i 2004 9695490 14G53926 51534' l l O
DISCOUNT RATE 10% 0 MDO HFO NET PRESENT VALUE.FOR 10 YRS: -3255124, 3110098 15 YRS: -1668501. 7516611
, 20 YRS: *
-277169 11506697 INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN FOR 10 YRS: .0110409 .18173831 15 YRS: .06319838 .22538622 20 YRS: .09551446 .24020318 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR EXISTING ENGINE:
10 YRS 51841328 15 YRS 95886633 20 YRS 160110949 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES MDO: 10 YRS: 52309412 15 YRS: 90855133 20 YRS: 147311877 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES HFO: 10 YRS: 41287213 15 YRS: 70039502 20 YRS: 111961268 l. i > 1
, ALASKA STATE FERRY 8 M/V COLUMBIA .DATE: 4/OO/83 ITEMS: EXI' STING NEW ENGINES ENGINES ACQUISITION 855000 9000000 ANNUAL OPERATING COST:
FUEL OIL NDO 2666440 2416380 HFO 1655970 LUBE OIL MDO 60630 100090 HFO 122600 M&R MDO 331010 120750 HFO 218400 2NFLATION RATES: GENERAL ECON %/YR: 6 FUEL OIL RATE %/YR: 8 ABOVE OPERATING COST ARE FOR APRIL 1983, AMOUNT ESCALATED TO TO MAY 01,1984 DOLLARS. ACQUISITION COST WERE ASSUMED TO BE PAID MAY 31, 1984 TOTAL-COS FUEL & EXISTING YEARS 1.UDE OIL M&R ACQUISITION 1984 ENGINES 855000 8550C 1985 31E0854 372260 1986 3435323 355011 094596 - 08099) 1987 3710149 418271 41284 1988 4006961 440068 44500 1989 4327517 469970 1990 47974E 4o73719 498168 1991 51718E 5047616 528058 55756; 1992 5451426 559741 1990 60111d 5887540 590026 1994 603854; 648084 628925 69874t 1995 6867226 666661 1996 75008! 7416604 706660 1997 8009903 8120t# 749060 875898 199G 8650727 794004 1999-94447' 9340785 841644 101844' 2000 10090208 892140 109820: 2001 10897425 945o71 118400' 2002 11769219 100411 127716' 2003 12710756 106:556 10773; 2004 10727617 1126009 14850c'
.cm- n - e + - - -- ~ w y 7
- NET CASH FLOW (LOSS) FROM OPERATING NEW ENG3NES OVER EXESTING ENG8NES
-NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH ON MDO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DIFF VEAP
- TOTAL s TOTAL 5 . S 1984 9000000 855000 -814500-1985 0070885 0550114 46222 1996 0010840 0829918 51607 1987 0576074 4128420 55004 1988 3859111 4450028 59121 1989 4164608 4797487 60287 1990 4494051 5171886 67750 1991 4850268 5575674 72540 1992 5204440 6011167 77672 1993 5649115 6480865 83175 1994 6096719 6987468 89074 199F, 6579872 7500887 95401 199. 7101400 8120265 102186 1997 7664064 8758990 109462 1C98 8272050 9444701 117267 1999 8928029 10184429 125640 2000 9606107 10982051 104621 2001 10400525 11840096 144257 2002 11225670 12771600 15459" 2003 12116420 10770012 165689 2004 10077989 14850926 17759:
NEW ENGINES ON HFO NEW ENGINES EXISTING NET CASH ON HFO ENGINES ON MDO FLOW DIF YEARS TOTAL 5 TOTAL 5 1984 9000000 855000 -81450C 1985 2019918 3550114 120015 1986 2500604 3829918 102901 1987 2695450 4128420 . 14029; 1988 2905571 4450028 154471 1989 010:172 4797487 16650: 1990 0076549 5171886 17950; 1991 0640105 5575674 190554 1992 0924052 6011167 20068: 1990 4200920 6480865 24994 1994 4561572 6987468 24258' 1995 4918206 7530887 26156f 1996 5002870 8120065 23200' 1997 5717786 8750990 00412< 1998 6165000 9444701 027c0' 1099 6648092 10184429 05060: 2000 7168840 109G2351 08105 2001 7700588 11840096 411 ~:5 2002 8006567 12771630 44050, 2000 e990277 13770012 47800' 2004 9695490 14050926 51584' l
* +
l i l 1 l
NEW ENG2NES ON MDO TOTAL COS* FUEL te' NEW
-VEARS LUBE OIL M !< R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1984 9000000 900000 1985 2905211 105675 007089!
1986 0170007 140815 001084'
, .1987 0420600 152444 057607-1988 0697500 161591 085911 1989 3990022 171286 416460:
1990 4012787 181563 449405 1991 4657910' 192457 485026 1992 5000405 204005 520444 1990 5402870 216245 564911 1994 5867500 229220 609671 1995 6006900 242973 657987 1996- 6840852 257551 710140 1997 7091060 273004 766406 1998 7982668 289004- 927205 1999 8621282 006747 892802 l 2000- 9010984 025152 960610 2001 10055863 044661 1040052 2002 10860002 065041 11:2567 2005 11729159 087262 121164;' 2004 12667492 410497 1007798 NEW ENGINES ON HFO TOTAL COS FUEL 8< NEW i YEARS LUBE OIL M t< R ACQUISITION ENGINES 1994 9000000 90000C 1985 2074524 245094 201991 1986 2240486 260118 25006C 1987 2419725 275725 269545 1988 2610000 292263 29055; 1989 2822 67 009805 , 310217 1990 0048156 028090 007654 1991 3090309 048096 06401< 1992 0555370 068982 To2405 1CC3 0809799 091121 42009: 1994 4146983 414588 456157
- 1995 4478742 409464 4o182(
I 1996 4807041 465802 500257 ' 1997 5:24004 493781 5717?e 1998 5641925 523408 61650: 1999 6090279 554810 66480' 2000 6580741 588100 71o8G< 2001 7107:00 600088 777)SE 2002 7675776 660791 80065d 2000 8089809 700408 84402; 2004 0950026 742465 C645M 1 L k (
~
r DISCOUNT RATE 10% O MDO HFO NET.PRESENT.VALUE FOR 10 YRS: -4255124.- 2110098
. 15 YRS: -2668501. 6316611
.20 YRS: -1277169 10506697 INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN'FOR 10 YRS: .0316:142 .15031525 15 YRS: .04651146 .19857976 20 YRS: .08121113 .21582506 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR EXISTING ENGINE:
10 YRS 51841328 15 YRS 95886633
- 20. YRS 160110949
- LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES MDO:
10 YRS: 53309412 15 YRS: 91855133 20 YRS: 148311877 LIFE CYCLE COST FOR NEW ENGINES HFO: 10 YRS: 42287213 15 YRS: 71039502 20 YRS: 112961268 i e t i J f ' i i
?
I f i e I
. _ _ ._ -._ - . _ -- .. . _i
( a I
,I I
M/ V. ' 00s i s u t)/ // ' Onte brsois_ T. 983
' Time l(.,hC)
(pleP&s g . . . . I Port ., RPM N4 JW Temn. Out /d.~7
' Ma irt Fuel Rack '. t*- Manifold Press.1 #* '
Fani~ fold T~.n l
~
Engine Propeller Pitch !., , r Booster " EMa: o. Servo Lubo Oil' no. Port F.xtlaust
.in Eng. Temo. Firi.1q Pressure . Remarks, Color of Exhaust, Smoke,et:
CyT. #1 ; b46 900 C( Zo R
#2 "4-y o/, o o 900 C(S a P ]
'- ' '/T ~ Aoo C t.e a R
'~T4----' 5 / .7 sM)R Lt nr^ t n
#5 e ~n n /., G- -
C1 SJ4R
~~'
**~~IG~ < ':. - a, ;' n C L1;-R
" ~~5T*~ c:. :. >
.% o t= Lp._ts e t.
~
#8 Kn HnO :^ t t%?
i9 4
.,.,e A'SO PLNeG e
#10 vto B70 C L E n-R
~~
L
.". #11 4 ' . o. o Cgn C Lt ;=, rr
#12 ', 6sO
-~
.s 3 CR.Aw- n;
#13 w' ~1 r> 795 C.LF_ M2
~
#14 ,
', '; J - ,
81o Q a~i c_ o
/ _<- (. 0 0 R7o QEg_
/4 GO 8 Y0 A Ft e 4. t STBD.
Main RPM Fuel Rack D U bhu U" JW Temp. Out
' Manifold Press.
/hb IM.; 5 Manifold Temo. /
Engine Propeller Pitch LJ M Booster " i
~
Fuel Temn.
~~
' Servo ", 1lo Lube Oil Temo.
STBD. Exhaust Main Enge. Temo. Firing Pressure Remarks. Color of Exhaust, Smoke , e-Cyl #1 (., & 0 V CO . ~ Lu.e
#2 6 ao Y. '4S cts.c ra ,
#3 !. LU 9'50 -
r t c .~ n 94 , 'O ']
, suo c' ( c v ."
\
l 45 4 '< O v u ~) C s c :. t
#6 mw a '. c C.t 9 .a.
w1 a 4 'u 9 ulC r ' ) ~ -
#8 n 'a 3 6 9. , s I p 19
#9 -; , a q ?.a r LL:.c
#10 / :. o oIo C Lt_ c s.
~
~
all ' r, a . 6 /, o ( LEast
#12 r.,L' O .
6SO C leo R. ~~
#13 03-r3 880 C (Sarz -
#14 ' u -- AtO C LEA R I
/ T~~ S o' 870
\ l C.LL AR Evb ~Gewtaamineds Ptfrt , Starboard !
/g. ) 630 l ?MO CLEAR _.
Remarks: (s.f-\ .
. y Dr-By Engine
BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOM bEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES AGAINTENANCEANDOTRATIORG OfVISIONOFA44RINEHIGHHnYSYSTEA6 PHONE: 206) 623-6850 l September 12, 1983 f To whom it may concern: M/V COLUMBIA is a passenger vehicle Ferry Vessel owned and operated by the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation, Division of Marine Highway System. Vessel entered service in June 1974 It is propelled by two each model DMRV-16-4 Delaval Main Engines rated at 9200 HP each at 450 engine RPM's. These are 16 cylinder Vee configuration engines, otherwise identical to the R46 and R48 engines which are 6 and 8 cylinder inline versions. Vessel to that has been operating on #2 Diesel Fuel since approximately 1976. 1.rior time, it used PS-300 fuel oil for steaming and shif ted to #2 Diesel fuel for manuvering. PS-300 (Pacific Specification) is equal to ASTM No. 5 fuel oil, Commercial Standard C2 12-48 Designation Grade No. 5. The engines were operated at approximately 6000-7000 HP each until 1983 at which time the engines were derated from 9200 HP to approx. 6100 HP. Vessel is currently operating using approximately 4300-5000 HP from each engine. The derating dropped the BMEP from 213 to 158 ps1. Prior to the derating, and while burning #2 Diesel Fuel, average firing pressures of 9000 F. were approximately 1100 psi with average cylinder exhaust ' temperatures This was associated with the engines operating at 398-400 RPM, maximum fuel rack of 30MM and approximately 12.5 psi of Manifold pressure. Af ter derating and resumption of service early 1983, average firing pressures were approximately 880 psi with average cylinder exhaust temperatures of 650 0F. This was associated with the engines operatinig at 385 RPM, maximum fuel rack of 23191 and approximately 13 psi of Manifold pressure. j The vessel has had poor experience relative to the cylinder heads. The major problems concern warpage and. cracking. For a number of reasons, no proper i ( accounting In 1981, 16 of cylinder heads by serial numbers, was maintained until recently. built cylindernew cylinder heads were procured and installed along with 16 re-heads. I 4=T128.H
Scp tembcr 12, 1983 Page II During the following two operating seasons, less than 5000 hours, had been acc ummula ted . During the 1982-1983 engine repair period, all 32 cylinder heads were shipped to TDI's repair facility in Oakland for rework. Of this group, 4 were reported as cracked, or did crack during repair procedures, and were scrapped. A fif th head was scrapped because of a thin fire deck. During this repair period, the cylinder heads were all stress relieved and are so marked by an "SR". Ey the end of this 1983 season we expect to have ac-cumulated approximately 2500 hours on these reconditioned cylinder heads. The heads will be pulled for inspection during the forthcoming repair period. S inc erely, s' ! , W c. x1 bb en Assis tan ort Engineer Divisio of Marine Highway System Department of Transportation MEZ:cip w
? . a p c- 2 7 p 1
l k Bill SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR I
.] am%% a REPL Y TO:
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ###"'""' D rU#/TE '0O ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99501 OFFICE OF THE A TTORNEY GENERA L PHONE: 1907) 276-3550 0 ist NATIONAL CENT ER 100 Cl5HMAN ST. SUITE 400 September 15, 1983 FAIRBANKS. ALASKA 99701
? HONE: 1907) 4521568 bPoUCH K STATE CAPITOL
.tvNEAU. ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (907) 466-3600 465-3603 Michael S. Miller Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Christohper & Phillips 1900 M Street N.W., 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 Re: The matter of Long Island Lighting Company The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Docket No. 50-322 0.L.
Production of Documents
Dear Mr. Miller:
to the The documents enclosed are transmitted to you pursuant subpeona duces tecum issued by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board September 1, 1983. on August 24, 1983 and served on the state on The documents were copied from the state's files located concurrence. in Seattle, Washington by state employees with your If you have any questions, to contact me. I will then endeavor the procura. please feel free or the clarification expla-nation that you need. Please be advised I will be on vacation from September 19 through September 24. Sincerely, NORMAN C. GORSUCH ATTORNEY GE2?ERAL By: // William F. Cummings Assistant Attorney General WFC:ebe Enclosure
LAW oFTICED CorERT J. BLACEWEZ.I. JORN A. DOUOLAS BOGLE & Gxrzs .- 0,,1CE A PARTNEBSAIP DECLUDINO PROFEsttONAL CORPOEaff0NS TEX BAME OF CALIFORNIA CENTER ANN"J E. MICKEY SUTTE 900
- MEY B. MSI CABLE **BOOLE SEATTLE ONE THOMAS CIRCLE. N. w. faOen eaa. stet htEx: ca.gOs7 COcwent WASHINGTON D. C. 20005 g
TERRY L. LEITZELL (303)393 3600 TELEX: 89'T410 g g ,g, DCNALD J. BRUNNER 900 ' TEST FIFTE AVENL*E PLEASE REFLY TO w& SED,OTON.D. C. OFFICE ANCEORAGE. ALASEA 99601 (907) a76*4667 S.X12X: 04 de-eeS FILE NO October 14, 1983 . Michael S. Miller, Esq. Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, 12111, Christopher & Phillips 1900 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036
Dear Mike:
Enclosed are copies of documents which you examined at the offices of Titan Navigation, Inc. last Friday, October 7, 1983, pursuant to the subpoena addressed to Titan. Questions about the enclosed documents may be directed to me at the above address or telephone number. Very truly yours, BOGLE & GATES N
- Linda L. Martin Enclosures i
9 I i
l l 1 G II S E n1 0 l'i G a "'"'~"*7!,"m*;%73l,6i,i,io, n n an gygl 550 85th Avenue P.O. Box 2161 WW Oakland, California 94621 (415) 577 7400 I September 30, 1983 ' , Titan Navigation l 1000 louisiana l Suite 2900 Houston, Texas 77002 Attention: Mr. J. Molina k Subj ect: DMRV-12-4 Cylinder Heads
Dear Joe:
( It is my understanding that Titan Navigation is in receipt of a subpoena for certain records having to do with the operation of cylinder heads aboard the Texas Class vessels. Transamerica Delaval has been compelled to inform counsel for LILCO, who then pass the information on te the attornies for Shoreham County, of specific information on several cylinder head leaks we believe have been experienced with cylinder heads cast af ter mid 1978. One of the cylinder heads has been identified as coming fr'om your operation. l Our records show the Star of Texas returned a cy1Linder head to our i factory, identified with Serial No. K71 and Heat No. 542D, which was found to have a small leak near the intake port. Transamerica Delaval has given counsel for LILCO a complete list of all cylinder head castings manufactured since 1978, however with the exception of heads that have failed in a manner to permit water to leak into the combustion chamber, the identity of the cylinder head owners has not been given. Attactad 19 a list of cylinder head castings manuf actured since mid 1978 and which we believe are in the possession of the Texas Class ships, either as operating cylinder heads or as spares. l l We believe the subpoena for records asks specifically for information concerning the head leaks which could result in cooling water entering l ' the combustion chamber and nothing more. It is regrettable that the l burden of supplying the information mur ' fall on our good customers, however it is prcper that we mutually supply information supporting the facts. (continued) l L - . -
transamerica Delaval Es - Titan Navigation - Joe Molina September 30, 1983 Page Two We trust the attachments will be of interest to you and assist you in deciding what records you have in your posession are germain to the subpoena. Thank you for your help in this matter.
- Regards,
~
b G.E. Trussell Manager, Engineering & Customer Service GET/wam Attachments e O
043. 624E 12/17/79 EV8N3570N M8 968D 7/5/79 LEVINGS70N - 7ut38 054 649E 12/21/79 POT 083 724E 1/16/80 POT H44 878W 10/24/78 POT - 78034 H46 878W 10/24/78 POT - 78034 H52 899W 10/30/78 POT - 78034 H56 910W 11/1/78 POT - 78034 J9 137D 12/28/78 POT - 78034 J87 317D 2/6/79 POT - 78034 K52 463D 3/9/79 POT - 78034 K69 592D 4/6/79 POT - 78034 l K79 626D 4/13/79 POT - 78034 l M82 647D 4/19/79 POT - 78034 K83 667D 4/24/79 POT - 78034 K96 690D 4/30/79 POT - 78034 J36 1/12/79 POT - 78035 , J67 273D 1/29/79 POT - 78035 ! K64 557D 3/29/79 POT - 78035 f K65 581D 4/4/79 POT - 78035 K74 613D 4/11/79 POT - 78035 K76 6260 4/13/79 POT - 78035 K84 671D 4/25/75 :07 - 78035 K93 656D 4/27/79 POT - 78c35 K97 690D 4/30/79 007 - 78035 L2 695D 5/1/79 POT - 78035 L10 710D 5/3/79 POT - 78025 N23 307E 10/*/79 POT - SPARE . N67 425E 10/31/79 POT - SPARE 088 731E 1/17/80 SOT P5 759E 1/24/80 SOT P10 774E 1/28/80 507 P27 813E 2/5/80 SOT P45 850E 2/13/80 SOT P59 878E 2/20/80 SOT K78 626D 4/13/79 SOT - 78035 J34 1/12/79 SOT - 78036 K32 421D 2/28/79 SOT - 78036 K48 454D ; 3/7/79 SOT - 78036 ' K71 592D 4/6/79 SOT - 78036 L24 749D 5/14/79 SOT - 78036 L34 777D 5/18/79 SOT - 78036 L36 782D S/21/79 SOT - 78036 i L45 801D 5/24/79 SOT - 78036 l L55 814D 5/30/79 SOT - 78036 l J80 295D- 2/1/79 SOT - 78037 ' K21 3900 2/22/79 SOT - 78037 K22 4000 2/23/79 SOT - 78037 K53 463D 3/9/79 SOT - 78037 K73 613D 4/11/79 SOT - 78037 L3 703D 5/2/79 SOT - 78037 L14 722D 5/7/79 SOT - 78037 L44 801D 5/24/79 SOT - 78037 L62 830D 6/4/79 SOT - 78037 L69 848D 6/7/79 SOT - 78037 L71 854D 6/8/79 SOT - 78037
L87 900D 6/19/79 SGT - 78037 L64 830D 6/4/79 . 507 - 76038 K39 4400 3/5/79 SPOT - 78029 K36 434D 3/2/79 SPOT - 78035 L41 7930 5/23/79 SPOT - 76036 L75 860D 6/11/79 SPOT - 76036 L82 890D 6/15/79 SEr$T - 78038 L88 9000 6/19/79 SPOT - 76038 L97 931D 6/26/79 SPOT - 76038 M5 976D 7/6/79 SPOT - 78038 M7 968D 7/5/79 SPOT - 78038 M25 20E 7/17/79 SPOT - 7803tt M54 72E 7/30/79 SPOT - 78038 l K89 667D 4/24/79 S907 - 78039 L48 804D 5/25/79 SPOT - 78039 L84 890D 6/15/79 SPOT - 72039 M9 981D 7/9/79 SPOT - 76033 M10 981D 7/9/79 SPOT - 76039 M11 981D 7/9/79 SPOT - 78039 M19 991D 7/11/79 SPOT - 78C39 M23 13E 7/16/79 SPOT - 78039 9 e
dadua/ada,TM V$,~a dJHfdt&
- ",":".::::" L % . X % ooos .::::::::.::. ,::..
4,88)483 930. (,0 58 e 5 5. 5 00
,,,, ,,,_,,,, ...;5 .. 5......
CAs k. AO...S S* LAs.LLues
,.L.-......,......
l 1^ April 25, 1983 Joseph Molina, Esq. Falcon Carriers, Inc. Suite 3300 Two Allen Center Houston, Texas 77002 Re: PRIDE OF TEXAS - Haif a Engine Casualty Intercooler failure - December 6, 1981
Dear Mr. Molina:
We enclose a copy of the complaint recently filed in the United States District Court in Houston in the above matter together with a letter from local counsel. I We will keep you advised of any and all developments. Very truly yours,
/
.6 .
WSB:jm encls. cc:H.R. Wasson H.L. Meyerson
.l'.o 5 N "e'm 2.so~.s. ROYSTON, RAYZOR, VICKERY 8e WILLIAM 3 7
- c2oS Ig 'd N d N ATTORNCVS AT LAW I Cnem ots O.acN*stOT
~
atoo Tcxas Comucacc Towcm " **S' " *"'C E ~o "Oa'r'u5 I "UCoZ "
**#.*.,,3 .o 6..cc HOUSTON. TzxAs noon ros corto= cac=aacc e6:c.
ca6vesto=. tcaas mso s = **ca coce 7'8 783-'s,3
,,i .umao.... .s.eass=
.C c AacA Coot n2 22.-aseo sa.eis pare *Ca Coomtv ca.6cc . .ovsto.e-enaI6gy a sac a tose CA86co mans "Mov pomT fgLgx ,eo. 76s-se9 g., a, t r,:,c,,
,c6c,,eo.,......
fcLcCop'em wo. 713 763-3853 sg== ,, ,a;,-=, Tcteco sc= ~o. m us.. .
. ,,,,c , "'M".t."."..s.
u> c 'cc oao 5vc a L",' ","G"t*J *," "" . , s.e-.ePfr!='s* reno a -~ 6c? April 21, 1983 a~u coce w m-37' C-a... .c.6 . m. s .. mo co. ,-- gy,2,-1, sg.~.,gau3 mcco-c. o. m ww3,o suu.m a. .aou.eano Tog a.fa.on s#sese a suthswa8e. M steese F u se G E R LawitseCC G moSEN?seak mestC MCLL C. Cwancy
- w. ge acromo oeskk. sa.
William Busch, Esq. Cadwalder, Wickersham & Taft One Wall Street New York, New York 10005 PRIDE OF TEXAS - Haifa Engine Casualty - Intercooler failure -
. December 6, 1981 -
Our File: 32,603
Dear Bill:
Pursuant to your request, enclosed please find a copy of the Complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, against Ashland Oil Inc., Levingston Ship Building Company and Transamerica Delaval, Inc. - For your information, the case has been assigned to Judge Gabrielle Mcdonald who has a reputation as being somewhat slow in moving her docket. We have also taken the appropriate steps to serve the defendants through C.T. Corporation System in Houston and Dallas, which is listed by the Texas Secretary of Stateas registered agent for service of process for each of the three companies. Yours truly, Ja G. Blain JGB':rk
*W/ Enclosure I
'o *.O *f".'
ows a semesw se c.so, s . ROYSTON. RAYZOR, VICKERY 8e WILLIAMC .DE=' C a emow= etw s *t'hosos ATToRNcYs AT LAW C=**sts D at%= COT
'o'cU,'w'~ s o,'c" '"
2200 Tcxas Cowwcacc Towcm " ^ ' ' ' ' ' " "**
'* acs corvo= c=ca**ct eL;c
.c e "Es3'c o HOUSTON TuxAS 77002 c =. Gatvtstoa.TEMS 77550
.66.a.
,a=c s oe.~ ..s e.c=sc, c ec e e e.c a coo =cv AacA Cocc n3 aze-esso anc4 coot 7t3 re3-e23 castgenase novste -
= =.o.c. a ,aCaso= vtoca =o. 7es-.ae castcca*** *ow* cat
- retsco,.cn =o. 7 3 re3 3es3
* *, ",",",l, 'g "[,',c ,,
, ec6cm mo. 7ea-e4e sa=rs
= c64 ,=. wat=.=s, oures trLacopics wo. 7 3 22s-ee+s o ,mg o,,,cc ma6 . a =cvc=
.c.,-c....s.. , s. cc mono . svert a 6.-c-o :
,,o.,,, ,,3,o7 , ,,,,o
% '.* *'c'A*J.~. ?pril 21, 19P3 a-ce coot $2 =
C o*a sk C s E. N E t hkCT. J 4 TELEX No 704M eo eCav J. PeLTEaw Dawe O 4. Waka t e YELECop'Em sec. 3 2 Seg437o sukea e. S noweemmO Tome a. vanom sug6ewese, m c e= M e wNoCR LawmCNCE o. mostNTmak C sosome a e*
- T C = C 6 6 C. C m a m C T
- e ma OF o40 ***bh. s m 1illiam Bucch, Esq.
Caducider, Wickcrsham & Taft One Ucli Street New York, New York 10005 PP.IDE OF TEXAS - Haif Engine O Casualty - Intercooler failure - Dectmbcr 6, 19C1 - Cur File: 32,603 _
Dear Bill:
Pursuant te your request, enclosed please find a copy of the Complaint filed in the United States District Ccurt for the Southern District of To::as, Houeton Division, against Ashland Oil D rne., tcvingsten ship suilding Cempany and Transamerica Delaval, ' 4 inC. For '/ cur information, the case has been assigned to Judge Cabrielle t'cDonald who has a reputation as being somewhct slow in moving her decket. We have also taken the appropriate steps to serve the defendants through C.T. Corpcration System in Houston and Dallas, Y which is listed by the Texas Secretary of Stateas registered agent for service of process for occh of the three ccmpanies.- Yours truly, l I Jcmcr G. Blair ' JGB:rk
*W/ Enclosure l
l r- +
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERU DISTRICT OF TEXAS i HOUSTOtt DIVISION EQUITY CAnRIERS, I, INC., S Plaintiff S S VS. 5 C. A. NO. H-83-Elf'1h S ASULAt1D OIL, INC., LEVINGSTON 5 SHIPBUILDING COMPANY, and S TRAt1SAMERICA DELAVAL, INC., S Defendants S COMPLAINT TO THE HONORADLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Plaintiff, by its attorneys, for its complaint alleges against defendants, upon information and belief as follows: Jurisdiction And Parties
- 1. The jurisdiction of this Court is founded upon (a) the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. S 1333, as hereinafter more fully appears, and within the meaning of Rule 9 (h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and (b) pendent
, jurisdiction.
- 2. Plaintiff Equity Carriers I, Inc. (" Equity Carriers")
is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with offices and a principal place of business in Houston, Texas, and was at all times perti-4 nent hereto, the bareboat charterer of the vessel PRIDE OF TEXAS (the " Vessel"). Pursuant to an assignment between plaintif f and 1 rn .. - - w - . - - -
Hull 751-IPSC Partnership (" Hull 751"), the owner of the Vossel, plaintiff acquired the right to any and all claims with respect to the Vessel.
- 3. Defendant Levingston Shipbuilding Company ("Levingston")
is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with offices and a principal place of business in Orange, Texas, and is subject to the juris-diction of this Court. Levingston was at all times hereinafter mentioned the principal contractor and builder of the vessel pursuant to a certain construction contract entered into between Levingston and Levingston Falcon I Shipping Company (" Falcon") on October 3, 1978 (the " Construction Contract"). Pursuant to an assignment and novation, each dated May 22, 1981, between ASCO-Falcon I Shipping Company (formerly Falcon) and Hull 751, ASCO-Falcon I Shipping Company assigned to Hull 751 its rights under various agreements, including the Construction Contract.
- 4. Defendant Ashland Oil, Inc. ("Ashland") is a corpora-tion organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Kentucky, with offices and a principal place of business in Ashland, Kentucky, and is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. Pursuant to its guarantee dated October 1, 1978 (the "Ashland Guarantee"), Ashland is the guarantor of the obligations of Levingston under the Construction Contract.
i t -
- 5. Dafondant Transamsrica DeLaval Inc. ("DeLaval") is a corporation organized and existtng under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with offices and a principal place of business in Oakland, California, and is subject to the juris-l diction of this Court. DeLaval was the manufacturer and supplier of the main propulsion s2 stem of the vessel pursuant to a certain agreement between Levingston and DeLaval dated October 3, 1978 (the " Engine Agreement"). The Engine Agreement, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit A, is incorporated herein with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
- 6. On or about October 3, 1978, Levingston entered into the Construction Contract with Falcon for the construction of the vessel. The Construction Contract, a copy of which is annexed l hereto as Exhibit D, and plans and specifications referred to therein (the " Vessel, Plans and Specifications") , together with any addenda, additions or corrections, copies of which are in the
! possession of plaintiff and defendants, are incorporated herein with the same force and effect as though fuIly set forth herein.
- 7. Pursuant to the Engine Agreement between Levingston and DeLaval, DeLaval agreed to manufucture and supply the main propulsion system of the vessel, including the installation and incorporation of the intercoolers. Pursuant to the Construction Contract, Levingston assigned its rights under the Engine Agreement to Hull 751.
l l 1
- 1
- _ _ _ _ _ . - , . _ _ . . , _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ - _ . - - -1
f f
- 8. The Vessol is a United States Flag 36,000 DWT Dry Bulk Carrier built by Levingston at -its shipyard in Orange, Texas.
The Vossel was delivered on or about May 22, 1981 and payment was made to Levingston in accordance with the Construction Contract.
- 9. On or about December 6, 1981, while at anchorage in a laden condition at the Port of Haifa, Israel, during a start up of the engines, the forward outboard cylinder block of the starboard main engine of the vessel cracked.
- 10. Due to the aforementioned crack in the forward outboard cylinder block of the starboard main engine, there was extensive damage to the cylinder block, liner, piston and related machinery.
- 11. The forward outboard cylinder block of the starboard 3
main engine of the Vessel cracked due to the entry of water from the cooling system into the air intake system of the engine, permitt,ing the entry of water into a cylinder during the
; compression cycle.
- 12. The source of the coolant water was leakage from the jacket uater cooling system into the combustion air intake system as a result of leaking tubes in the starboard outbank intercooler.
- 13. Between December 9, 1981 and December 15, 1981, it was ascertained in Haifa that the starboard main engine block would have to be replaced and that the Vessel would be required to return to the United States on one engine so that permanent repairs could be effected.
l
-4_
l l l
I
- 14. The Vessel departed Haifa on Dsctmbar 16, 1981 and proceeded, at greatly reduced speed and by a longer but safer route in view of the vessel's loss of an engine, to Norfolk, Virginia for permanent repair.
- 15. The Vessel arrived in Norfolk, Virginia on or about January 18, 1982 and remained there, at the Norfolk Shipbuilding
& Dry Dock Corporation, until on or about February 1, 1982, for replacement of the starboard main engine block and for other repairs necessitated by the crack in the forward outboard cylinder block of the starboard main engine.
- 16. On or about February 1, 1982, the vessel departed the Norfolk Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Corporation in Norfolk, Virginia, and docked a'c a grain elevator in Norfolk, Virginia to load soy beans for a trip to Haifa, Israel. .
- 17. On.or about February 4, 1982, the vessel underwent a final inspection prior to departure for Haifa, Israel. The final inspection revealed that the starboard main engine inboard intercooler and the intercoolers on the po'tr main engine were eroded, thinned and needed to be replaced.
- 18. A representative of DeLaval recommended thit g the vessel not leave the Port of Norfolk due to the conditidn .of the intercoolers.
- 19. Accordingly, the Vessel remained in Norfolk, Virginia from on or about February 4, 1982 through February 8, 1982 for replacement of the aforesaid intercoolers.
j l l l First Claim for Relief
- 20. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 19 with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
- 21. Pursuant to the Construction contract, Levingston expressly warranted, among other things, that (i) it would design and construct a complete and seaworthy ship in accordance with good shipbuilding practice; (ii) it would construct, launch, outfit, test and deliver the vessel in strict compliacce with the vessel Plans and Specifications; (iii) the vessel would be ready for its intended service; (iv) the materials for the Vessel would be of commercial marine quality and suitable for the marine service intended; and (v) the vessel would be free from deficiencies, failures, breakdowns or deterioration in installation, workmanship, material or design,
- 22. Pursuant to the Engine Agreement, DeLaval expressly warranted, among other things, that the main propulsion system supplied for the vessel would meet the requirements of the purchase specifications annexed thereto, would be free of defects of material, workmanship or design, and that materials for the main propulsion system would be of commercial quality and suitable for marine service.
- 23. Plaintiff is the direct and intended third party beneficiary of the terms of the Engine Agreement and the Ashland Guarantee.
- 24. The vessel was purchased in relianco on said warranties and the design and construction expertise of defendants.
- 25. Defendants breached their express warranties to plaintiff in that (i) the vessel was not constructed, launched, outfitted, tested and delivered in strict compliance with the vessel Plans and Specifications; (ii) the Vessel is not a complete and seaworthy ship designed and constructed in accordance with good shipbuilding practice; (iii) the Vessel was not ready for its intended service; (iv) the materials for the vessel were not of commercial marine quality and suitable for the marine service intended; (v) the vessel was not free from deliciencies, failures, breakdowns or deteriorations in installation, workmanship, material or design; (vi) the main propulsion system of the vessel did not meet the requirements of the , purchase specifications annexed to the Engine Agreement; (vii) the main propulsion system of the vessel was not free from defects of material, workmanship or design; (viii) the materials 4
for the main propulsion system of the vessel were not of commercial quality or suitable for marine service; and (ix) defendants failed to correct or repair such defects, failures, deficiencies, breakdowns and/or deteriorations.
- 26. Plaintiff had no knowledge of the breach of said warranties at the time of acceptance of the Vessel.
- 27. Plaintiff gave timely notice to defendants of the breach of said warranties.
- 28. As a consequence of the broach of said warranties, plaintiff has sustained monetary damages, economic losses and expenses, including costs of berthing, repairs and additional expenses associated therewith, additional crew expenses, tug expenses, loss of profits, fuel costs, and additional personnel and travel expenses, in an amount to be proved at trial, but in excess of the sun of $1,690,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.
Second Claim for Reliaf
- 29. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 28 with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
- 30. At all relevant times herein, defendants Levingston and DeLaval were merchants engaged in the manufacture, design, assembly or distribution of vessels or component parts thereof.
- 31. Defendants impliedly warranted to plaintiff that the vessel and/or component parts thereof were of a quality which would at least pass without objection in the trade, were at least fit for the ordinary purposes for which such vessels and component parts are used, and were in all respects of mercha'ntable quality.
- 32. Defendants knew that the purpose for which the vessel uas intended was the transport of dry bulk products in world-wide trade, and plaintiff relied upon defendants' skill, knowledge, expertise, and judgment to design, manufacture, fabricate, assemble, test, and deliver a vessel suitable for such purpose.
i i
- 33. Dafendants brecched their implied warranties of l
merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose owed to plaintiff in that the Vessel and component parts thereof were 1 defectively designed, manufactured, fabricated, assembled , tested, and delivered, were not of a quality which would pass without objection in the trade, were not fit for the ordinary purposes for which such a vessel and its component parts are used, were not of merchantable quality and were not fit for the - purpose intended.
- 34. By reason of the breach of said implied warranties, plaintiff has sustained damages as previously described in an amount to be determined at trial, but in excess of the sum of S1,600,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs.
Third Claim of Relief
- 35. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 34 with the same force and effect as if fully. set forth herein.
- 36. At all relevant times, defendants Levingston and DeLaval held themselves out as having knowledge, skill and expertise in the manufacture, design, assembly, fabrication or testing of vessels or component parts thereof.
- 37. Defendants impliedly warranted to plaintiff the work-manlike, careful and skillful performance of their obligations in respect of manufacture, design, arsembly, fabrication or testing of the vessel and/ r component parts thereof.
- 38. Defendants breached their implied warranties of workmanlike performance owed to plaintiff in that the vessel and cob.ponentpartsthereofweredefectivelydesigned, manufactured, fabricated, assembled.. fabricated and tested as a result of the failure of the defendants to perform their obligations in a workmanlike, careful and skillful manner.
- 39. By reason of the breach of said implied warranties, plaintiff has sustained damages as previously described in an amount to be determined at trial, but in excess of the sum of
$1,600,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.
Fourth Claim of Relief
- 40. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 39 with the same force and effect as if fully sat forth herein.
- 41. Defendants had a duty to plaintiff to design, manufacture, construct, assemble, test and deliver a vessel and/or component parts thereof, which would be seaworthy, suitable for the intended service, and free of defects.
- 42. Defendants were negligent and careless in manufacturing, designing, constructing, assembling, testing and delivering the vessel or component parts thereof.
i 43. By reason of the negligence of defendants, the Vessel and component parts thereof were manufactured, designed, con-structed, assembled, tested and del.i stered in a defective and deficient manner, l l l t
- 44. Tho defectivo mnnufactura, design, construction, assembly, testing and delivery of the Vessel and component parts thereof were the sole, proximate and producing cause of the damages to plaintiff.
- 45. As a consequence of the negligencs of the defendants, plaintiff has sustained damages previously' described in an amount to be determined at trial, but in excess of the sum of
$1,600,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.
Fifth Claim for Relief
- 46. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 45, with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
- 47. Defendants designed, manufactured, assembled, tested and delivered the Vessel knowing that the vessel would be utilized for the transport of dry b ulk products in world-wide trade.
- 48. Defendants delivered the Vessel and/or component parts thereof in a defective, unreasonably dangerous, and unsafe condition.
- 49. Despite the fact that plaintiff at all times used the vessel for the intended purpose of transporting dry bulk products in world-wide trade, the defective design, manufacture, assembly and testing of the vessel and component parts thereof resulted in the disabling of the Vessel and other damages set forth herein.
- 50. As a result, defendants are strictly liable in tort to plaintiff for damages previously described in an amount to be j
determined at trial, but in excess of the sum of S1,600,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs. UHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment against. defendants for damages in an amount to be proved at trial, but in excess of the sum of $1,600,000.00, together with reasonable attorneys' fees, interest and the costs and dicbursements of this action, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this day of April, 1983. t Respectfully submitted, Ben L. Reynolds Attorney in Charge 2200 Texas Commerce Tower Houston, Texas 77002 713/224-8380 Attorneys for Plaintiff OF COUNSEL: ROYSTON, RAYZOR, VICKERY & WILLIAMS OF COUNSEL: CADUALADER, WICKERSHAM & TAFT 9 ( M i< . 0/zqy2c;Oce > M
. jim 2:-
M/V Star of Texas ~bMR 1 April 1983 gig '-- TO: J.L. McClashan, Marine Supt. FM: R. Jaegersen, Chief Engineer
Subject:
Main Engine Maintenance We are at this tice getting ready to change 7 (seven) cylinder heads. 5 (five) SME and 2 (two) en PME. We are awaiting final word on shift to dock and when. This is always a problem here. 4 (four) of the above cylinder heads have leaking exhaust valves. (2400 hec.) 2 (two) are past due (2400), and 1 (one) have giving problems with sticking exhaust valves. I hope to be able to save themlve seats on all heads but possibly one. In reality we are behind on changing out heads. As you know, anywhere from 1,800 to I 5 2,00,0 hours is about all we can safely expect an exhaust valve to last. Anytime after that one can expect to pull heads at sea, weather and traffic permitting. Due to the fast turn arourd and USCG Inspection in Philadelphia last trip, we were able to pull only one head, which has burned valves and unfortunately cracked seats. This head had only 1642 hrs. a bit early but near the ball park. We do have 5 (five) hea ds ready to go, but due to a bent shaft on the Thc=pson valve grinder & the bad condition of the seats on the remaining 3 spare heads, I don't know if. we will have time to pull anymore. Except to be able to relap at least 2 (two) of the heads we are now replacing - I may be a little too optimistic, them go andbut loseeven if we do not get the seats perfect, it is better then letting the seats. I am trying to have a new shaft spindle for the Thompson fabricated here. If that works out we will be ok. We have found it impossible to do any valve grinding at sea, due to vibration. It may work if we slow coun,this we tuve not tried but expect it would work. -ith the vessel ioaced and can: weather it mighy.
.11 of which is a tall order in the North Atlantic in the winter.
If there are any prospects of another fast turn around returning to the U.S. this time, I think we better consider getting a repair gang and work around the clock. As you know I will be getting off and so will the 2nd Asst. all CMED8s
but one will probably be getting off. 1 expect 4 (four) to 5 (five) heads or hNmoremustbereplaced. I will keep to pull more here, it depends on how youlong informed as per telex. We may be able we stay.
.)
Too be honest with you John, this situation with the exhaust valves are begin-pil' ning to wear on all or us. The work it self is no problem as long a s we nave g. j time and not have to work i2 (twelve / to 16 (sixteen) hours every single day in t port. But what is going to happen when other maintenance items become due? Pull-7it ing pistons, liners, exhaust manifold problems, turbochargers, gear and cam inspec-I tions. kibort besides the main engines.After Looking all, there downare the also road,other machinery knowing that needs what we have done & attention while in
,T
- what we do face eith these engines. 1 am' afraid i don't see a very pleasant fu-t ure.
\L b R.cilA.N
M/V Star of Texas 31 March 1983 J. L. McGlashan, Marine Supt. Returning to the U. S. it is imperative that the turbo charger on LB PYS be replaced. In order to maintain RPM, scav. Air Press, and exhaust temp's, I have a very small RPM range to play with, 80 to 82 ILCM's, weather and sea cond. \ pannitting. I have also been forced to transfer some load to the SME (see last firing sure. pressure chart) in order to keep up the RPM and relative scav. air pres- p ; Right Bank Turbocharger on SME is beginning to show sign of not supplying i the amount of air needed. So, you better figure on replacement of a turbo each '" time the vessel returns to the U. S. until all 4 (four) are replaced. It is as you know very important that we maintain an RPM near 82 or higher if possible. This is because turbochargers don 8 t really begin supplying much air until the engine reaches that speed. I have received a memo dated Feb. 3, 1983, amendment to USCG Automated Test Procedure, signed copy of receipt enclosed. Expect to be seeing you upon our return to the U.S. Where we can h e our usual debriefing / briefing / work planning session. , l Yours truly, ,
#f#
opld Uaegersen blef Engineer Enc. - 1
- f I
00 Mb $ l9 8 & M. r-9 _ l M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" DAMAGES TO PORT MAIN ENGINE MALTA, JUNE 1982 f PERMANENT REPAIRS l 5 l s
?
10822 Sogeleet Lane e' Houston, Texas 17089 e Phone 113/4811890
4 M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" INDEX Section Description A Trip Report
'B Photographic Essay C Report for Underwriters D Further Observations E Copies of'Telexe-F Log Extract G Yard Invoice (Copy)
- /
m s
'L h
1 E(. _. _- _________________2_________... = _ _
I l SECTION A TRIP REPORT . l 1 I l J 5
i l- M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" l A. TRIP REPORT This is to certify that the undersigned of Nautilus Surveys, Inc. did attend the vessel M.V; " PRIDE OF TEXAS" of Wilmington, Delaware, while the vessel lay afloat starboard side to at Malta Dry Docks, The Docks, Malta, on June 28, 1982 and subsequent dates, for the purpose of carrying out repairs to No. I left bank Port Engine Cylinder Assembly, i i The author was appointed Owner's Representative on June 25, 1982 and attended Titan Navigation's offices at Suite 950, One Allen Center, Houston, Texas, on June 25, 1982. It was learned at this time that a casualty had occurred to No. I left cylinder bank of the port engine on the above mentioned vessel. Preparations were made to procure replacement components, and to bring the vessel alongside at the closest port without causing severe diversion. Inquiries were made of Malta Dry Docks, Maltg and it was found that a berth was available. On June 26, 1982, the author proceeded to Malta from Houston and arrived in Malta late on June 26. June 27 was spent recuperating from the long flight and discussing entrance of the vessel with Agents' Representatives (Agents Cassar and Cooper, Malta). At approximately 0330 hours June 28, 1982, the; vessel was off the pilot station ready to come alongside. At approximately 1200 hours June 28 the vessel was alongside and the following personnel boarded: D. F. Brown (Owner's Representative) M. Hartwig (DeLaval) P. Cross (DeLaval) Visual inspection was carried out of the broken components'which had previously been removed by crew personnel (see photographic essay), together with the crankcase in the area of the No. I cylinder and timing gears. Shore labor was brought in to clean out the crankcase and lube oil sump and also to stone up the timing gears. Close inspection of the lower "O" ring seal surface in the engine block revealed a gouge that was probably caused during the removal of the liner after it had broken. This gouge was repaired using Belzona j Molecular and a new liner from vessel's spares installed to No. 1 I left bank cylinder assembly. I
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" 'A. TRIP REPORT (continued) One June 29, 1982, both A.B.S. and The Salvage Association were in attendance to view the casualty. By late evening the No. I left bank piston had been installed. Note: Components used from vessel spares and the engine sump had been superficially cleaned. On June 30, 1982, U. S. Salvage was in attendance and was shown various and sundry debris from the casualty. At this time much trouble was experienced with the build up of the link rod for No. I right bank. A special fixture was fabricated so that the speci-fied torque of 1050 pounds feet could be-applied to the bottom end pin bolts. It was determined that the only 1-3/4 inch socket on board which would fit these bolts broke at approximately 800 pounds feet of torque. A new socket was purchased and specified torque applied. On building up the rod assembly to the piston, it was found that the chrome plating on the piston pin was flaking off in an area approximately 4 inches from the pin end. Since no new pins were on board, it was decided to use the one previously removed from the damaged No. I left bank assembly. It was also determined that the piston pin bores of the piston were slightly out due to a possible eachining error in that the piston pin would enter the piston from cne end, but not the other. > Spare parts previously ordered on June 25 were found to be in London Airport, with no hope of reaching the vessel before sailing time. It was hoped at this instant that bolts for rocker arm pins would reach the vessel as these were the only components which could not
, be located in spare parts.
On July 1, 1982, the four (4). holts for the rocker' gear arrived on board and were immediately utilized in the build up of No. I left rocker box assembly. At approximately 1630 hours engine build was complete and engine started at 1700 hours. Vessel departed Malta at approxicately 1900 hours, July 1, 1982. On July 2, 1982, discussion with Malta Dry Dock Co. revealed that
. invoices for services rendered would not be available for perusal by Salvage Association, U. S. Salvage, or Owner's Representative until 0900 hours July 5, 1982.
I 1
. M.V. "PRIDS OF TEXAS" A. TRIP REPORT (continued)
An inspecticn of the vacuators previously removed from the M.V. , " STAR OF TEXAS" and now stored at Mid Sea Ship Repair Facilities, Marsa, Malta during the latter half of July 2, was carried out. It was found that as previously determined that one (1) bank of No. 4 unit had no compression and that all alternators for the units required cleaning, together with respective ammeters. It was also found that the compressor driving sprocket for No. 2 < unit had completely worn out. Instructions were given to rectify the above situations and then to run the units on load; ie, against the compressors for one (1) hour at least once every two (2) weeks. On July 5 the invoice for services rendered by the yard was nego-tiated with the shipyard, U.S. and Salvage Associations in attendance. Final billing was in the amount of 3915 Maltese Pounds. At an exchange rate of $2.4025 to the Maltese Pound, this sum equates to $9,405.78. I On July 6, 1982, the undersigned departed the island of Malta. It should be noted that one day after the vessel left Malta; i.e. July 2, the DeLaval spare parts arrived and were placed in a bonded 1 warehouse for pick up at a later date. D. F. Brown Nautilus Surveys, Inc. i
. er e r,.. , -
,n... , ,.
SECTION B PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY
'. h -
,1
~
V l f e .
- f' ' ', ,*
M,
=*_-.%~==
'# -QQ.' '
h) ."~h ' '
,A. f a . Ti i ,
- . . M%gs '
, e
-- '* y k. ; .; k n j. .
.. s if l' ~ .-,*.a
'fh .~r: * **, y :
'y
'.* . ./
ra g j p&) f )," '3. ,h;y y
, s, '
p -
,o nenF '
] e.? ,.
,\
- e*s
. Y.,H e .
. * / py "G'3h rea- .
, tr .
f:'. ,
,r , ,
, /* . ~= *;,
Sy g , [ .gfa ;. . a, 4 , f k Tj 1
.?F '
L *D.
-* %; + p f$- .1
?
h
*\,lg .1' f,,4 .. .
,& t
~~
8 , 'g 7. -[p r. wMi, -%,W. , =.';- c.- - - ,
-9 .- .; . - ~ j
-)
s - < rr - %.s
- y%.- V -..
'. v. _.,..n..-'.~ -
1 .s
,,-p
.a _ yes R au ': '_Q 7 , ;. _ 4 - . -
._i; J'y .A ^
$w;. s4 ' ' ,'- - .
- 1. ' )-~
- 1. Remains of No. 1 piston crown and skirt. Note Bellville washers lower left and top right. Also note locking strap
.,_ too right.
M y L
~
y ,- l
;__p,,,3,.gg s. - &,
f
, .- i... . , . _ ., - ...
a.
//j - . c s, 3
w f .#tg - en } ,M'n N ik,
-u~
- ,~* ..'
- g h 3 2 t * .
l%., .: '
..~..
K,+, .'Q.ast.. t.g, * %g . pp-
- W - i. :_ ;
3y'm~ L ;f 4 ,
- -J .M *
- er-' -
D
~
,*w ,
(
-..; j F _
_ , y - : ' ;,_,,,._, T. . Gre '$
.'n% .
- f. '-h' '
-??' ' a if <-g s
s L
~2
]! l e
,.9/
. lose up or a)ove. ote tvoicM ,, cup and saucer
- tensile break.
l l
M,.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" B. P110TOCRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) a g n:-l,? . .. .e u
- fm :% O. *!
.c Y. * *P '
I - .,p.
- 4% 'M . , , . f. _d.
* . .e .-
* *l x.
. g. J . * ,, ,
-? ,
i ?- .
~
.w "
V,(
.y h[ t.
b[ t
+
-' ' N 5
, h 3
; ;- f ' ,. y_- ) ,
~
& 2 - N.
,' s fi..#g* w ". .. ./ g,, . S ,
E ~
. f- 9
,%,i
'y;;;., g.*
.z.f,,.s g % gu
...r.. -a - 4 ,
l y::. g - h e, ' R ctf..a
. -+h ' w'
. - Yp . -
Vj r p .;_ 9 _ .
.s s y 2
$* , _ ~a -
.r
.ne
. ~. _. ,
- 4. .-
,g .
.9 *g g* '
% lR%g* %75R._
.~"l Aw b 5 A
- 3. General debris removed from No. I left bank port engine. Note sepearation of piston pin bosses.
% 'Q.4
~ ~
-~+~1;m -
44 ~
>p. .
-h
- s hw. 3
- d;
;* g- , 'o y .e.- +. 'd- . ..
- - .g A, -
+
[. ; #" y . '8
? ' [h 15 a
g ' 'i.. f+ ',7 N ~' g'. ? . f- &
- g.
B.% q, '.g ; 3 . .g s~ \ .k . Y.'
- b.' t- 'tm 4
. . [ ?k ,,.,
g* _ 7; j.% ' ~ 9.7
. f f .'.'.',~ [ a93W.p.C$,1l@y@k 2 Y<'
'M -
^
$.Yb %. ~r- . . .h'h hY,
. . :.-v - Q. : ~:. . , ...- >..: . ..s. Jr,.O ..* , xc . . . ; .
. p~r. '4 '.
,_ % N-,.. -
\ - - . -; s %- ' ' .,I' . , ,* *
'7 ) .
l E.$i - - " .,y ~- . . . . . G % % ?'--
.: s . f-T
~
". 'NR*-i. 7 .. 3 '
& !*1....sisM Pt Y! & L //
c1.. t....- . ... .: s.... e ..
- s as .. . .
--,w--w.v. ,- - ,. . < - - . ,.,3 - - - - - - . - . - -
l t i M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" d. PHOTOCRAPHIC ESSAY (continued)
- 5. Broken liner from No. I left bank port engine.
\ --*-#f,.
fc[* 23; f -9 - t :-
"* "t Note large piece -
,e ; w' g-
..- q ' '? '~-?
resting on top of i' h,,i '
' :- l Irner.
)
-. . , -. .;-s,;; g .; ~5f ;
. 9 :-.;
.s N.qi,.. -. -<
- s
.a
. .. ...s ..
.A *. -
~
.. , ..= '
. - w r.v ._ 3 .c_ . . >
I' * - I-
~,.
's e,e j y .R.s- * **; s t 4 J k "' $ .e. . .
E (;,E@?,!.h$, Q nu w K2
? ~' w a'
_. 3,
~
y
$.k.
F.:};
.. N
..)m w-f sW ..;e f - 's
^
& J ..
- ,g., -
.p ,
if - ;:p 5
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" B. PHOTOCRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) D&5 an
,. . ? '
{5f! . i {,
?<
yl
~'
~
~
f
.k,.Rr% '64 % f.. ~J'
# v -r q. *p
- f N_.
,f',h F Q z *1 n$2h'.)
.n,w}I
[ h(!, k. Ih,, . 2de, e ri
%e ~d. -
r q-e: -
.m 5@M a.<
gw J
' #~
2
- ~
E$$.g 2
- $. .Y: l.
- .,u .
n ,..n
.,;c .
- .e t
a-- f-t* -
. .;-h - ~
m.=S' ,
$& 0.m S .&
~
.f:&} . T:$.$ *.l.$* '1?.,,~ % y d a: .
yg, <.c
~ ' - '
4 % e e -u% h7Ny.) 7. **q=' 1t -..- }.> - :' g f .k.b Up
~
. %};fg, ~JC -
[&m*ff[hy;L,,;gi w b : Q,,y ....** "'" W 1e .> ?. :;. ..[:.' m,
.. -?i:*
r . .. s .
. . ,- 4 :- .n h
t a g,,! _r 469 w p, mpt . {,y,3 Q. ....
^
- %* :W7 * * . ' " .:7 7..i:
s. n
. m.% ,ym %
'{.'..'.p* N QA ._
3 a
,, f. j ..
fn h f ,. L. ' "
,T )'j.-
'*~
.. $ng$ h Q h 1
'.1 I ,.: ~y;. ^ e. .?iEdQphhI N
..- h .7.fg$0i.b$$
y $.'.D% J+A - :gg-j . E-5
.% dD.;;t-Qlidw J
$ 5 ~
r..- sr&pvwym ss.g.,M i.W: M S??X$
$ $ 55 55.k-
-~ .stq. ,
%55% W$
5S$
- 6. Close up of upper end of liner showing fractured peice still in place.
c
s 'E
- M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" '
B. PHOTOCRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) w ., >' ' + - < . .
. , yg/
7 c
..,,y.-*
, *','- Ty ,y'
/
. . . , , -g, - >
$ .-=-
, . .. f- .
3 1 g. W- - d >y _n 5 g .- .,yn
- p i
,7 u
.r. .
._r i
M u, W+ + _ yb 1s &cvmwe G.- A sO '
~ -
4.g.af . , .,, k' . w .
,,a,
.:t .s .
.h Tr I-- DJ' N*WA,._"'- g, hk k . e, lN.. . .. s h..k o
.h". , ..A.....
- 7. As per photo No. 5 showing both forward and aft breakages.
g'- ' F 43 ner. y m, p;e. ~ c - . - u"N"._
; ~s.
'V.'
4 .,. s Q, *V~ g
. . . .- Q'* ~q *. ' {s N m.
+ h~;,m?,w. c w. zw 3g
- we.~..,.
- n. g=.. m-cv.:
- m.,.-=en-rmw .
, . m ."y.,
y
,W:.&. W . m., a...., %.. .Js ~ y d,- t *etwsm, M, t.:\ h-
[ tw . .+cq;.k.':29asge:ge;we%
.m
. . w. g.. ...
t %. - Mvcs c w. #:.%. ts -- Oe gid g e'~g.
--w fjh, g.i .[ f ,~ ..x... igJE # 3.. h
*~ . *.
2^ mgR.iW nRg rst ..~ m. 4 15 gig i -L u:.De.c,s.,b5 t-
? Fw *f. %. s.?..t .> .pv=':. ,- , 2.~2mic
. ~ .g .@.v,J_ive.
u- f
.~
M:.:. w e.s .: m:: m snm.g . m..w t 4-.~ . w ..e;; p m 2 pa . --. , w, yf w..:.
- s. .. . .+.w ~aw=. .n.n.1g. .- , y,..ar
' E'.
=-
. i
# . ( c
a .
..u g
73 %,;,,'. j
>A
~~ ~ ' - ,
~ ,
%'n~,E_ l ..f'.'. , ~, ~?..<,.nh I
b x-j i ? ..l T 5.-),.7f . h,a., $w& h{
? , . .
Q_ _. W&kkR..A
. . . n.
d
M.V. " PRIDE OF TF.XAS"* - 6-B. PHOTOCRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) l i I I I I l m ;q: _ . - c _
- 9. Bottom end or "
crank shaft . F S beating. . #4 ~ % Note p fair to good -
*' 3 -
M"M'"
~
wear pattern ani N -
,,, ~ 4 .. i c' )
Y E F-
~
no damage. '" l 5 -
., . , .-. . R _
.$i r, .
y1
.w C __
W
&$i'&fh
- ~-. ~_ _
i
]Nhh .'f.$ i'5<*': ' . _ ~?? y
% w M
-4 - ,
,a d'-
,6,.s o w w ,: m . m m m'?hh-
=
4 '
?
u o .- m d, u, ,s wn u
,aw s t gg y.: c - '
-m. p. . . >
. , .-[y,.j,, - - - IS$Ti }'p2g
. ~ %. *
, pp s % , .o ; 'b g y- , .~ -
.- s.
r ' w] , _,g.g. 4 s .
'f a -~
ness nesw s l 1 - - ---
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" -7_ B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) hn - - p.
, -(
' zy .'my . f -
y *
"h" ~' > -, f/ , ' . - p p. _ . ,
- 10. Underside of * 'E "~ /'
[T cylinder head. .
/ . . . --
>a 1 1.-
Rust cotored area ' around periphery
.5.
(' ' [j E - -
' s p['.$~j)'
' J'd -\
is where piston ,
,f,/" .hg,g'.., .-. , ,,.:-
S '- y,g 'I crown impinged ,. f w' . 3
,y... :
gg
- upon head and r: + : .i;.k]l '
m _fp *~ ,, x, g pi / ,./..&q*g;.. .'
. /f' . .
p vatves. noe. -
- S . . 25g; .. +.c displacement af // f .f , ,.e.2% . jpj;.f.dPr ,j;f' #
valves. -
"G7 ,, c ;;
{; fym.;- .y[j,..q~
. . .. e;4 ~ .. -
. . >n. ,,
-h.,
,-{$. rY., Tw".2 .:p
_.,_ " ~. .- ' *, -
- f. .-h
- $.D , ,
N,f*l - t
-4
-]
f[i[ .3
~ _.6 _
u W R.- J +8 N. &m p- .. .
~
<?
7 g', ,- s,
- 7. - 4 [r ? . s.
-j ..- df.- ~y
- - 4 jff? $'f.M,3
(,_ ~~ ;', & ' W '
. f 3
w- .2
%g ?l%' 79 Q .e-
. a-Vy ./,-s-n
;, f s # ;-.
.% - i.p....r . .~i
~-
. ;. p -n; M* ,- '
s, ~~ - . . ._ _1 1
I M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" ,
- 3. ? HOT 0 GRAPHIC ESSAY (continued)
- . j *
;/j
" ' e p xZs w LM jE d e
. -12Q-h.
- 11. Bent valve re-moved from head jhgh Dgub '
-7y' ,, gyhg . !"y1 -- ,- - .,
5 i,; shown in photo Q ._ ,- ; , .' .?- g JWA 543.4 [g?g, )74 a M @F "o- 10- - - - -
.. ...: . .. .;,.R i. -+ % W ,
b c",'\ ' ' . N 5jM I lC.fl.'7.0,cp~,i .: - -'l
.m .
N-
. ..~ s.
- d. ':: ,h t E;, A :
- 1. r, l ,. , s. , t. .
' . ~.;_
\, .. &%%
4-- .
- ,I v
. .l.
' ^
],1 .
.s }g' y,l ns .t
~
l
. w]; .'
y, 1 t . 4a g t ,- c 1 ,> ; 6.e ,.
.A'. l1fI -
- c. .s '.,9~ . h - -
q,
.- rsr GN )C
- i r .
') *%
,3 ,', {
l ', . u ~,*1
, ", .%, .., . -r ;;f *' .; . ; ,;,,
,g._ . I s -
3-y;a f,p.e . 4 {g a wJ kMY i- ' w,.- ' m:.e. r.x5 F* r m,\ u.
%]>a
-W> MM.X. '",WM.4 __%
3--SGM'y;d h- j ._. B. - i -- . i** v.+ 4;- g;;? 4 -g,3si.s'i F. .
- 74~' ....-- ,. $A,i ..
Aca g-,a... - g .
~
< %e E.- e y3 - W -
S 9.5J E=h_z -
- r,.Y w %." . -
'N sv'. {;
,(a.g.
f: f.",, r% .i . R g,
;,% g* Vjg.D hr~
-= '
h b Y'R'% ;& ; .[ , '
^
l *? AMMhhni^6s l
. 1 I
M.U. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) U .%f55:(l,-l'f5br*
~
fbt{$)
;. ?
y .
, * ,, / . . .. .. - t.
x -g* _ ~~- .-
.n c
..- .@m
...'. 2. '.'f..
f- , w r~:.p::
.3 ,Q'n* ..
7
.'Q*.h ..L .&...-i.-,_.~.,d
- y,P f __ .
C:. . ' ,* Y * <*PQ, . . I. ,
.j
. fy Ar p ' 4 -* , .'*.i.*;
- e. . ,s.
.-M -
. W 7L,
.e
, --fg*. -
M
.- re ...
41 p.* '. a: ...
~ %: . .. ,
,]
m . ' . ' '. . .: -] 2' _ ,,.?=. ? _
, ., . :.:. -: y . ; . . u .is. ,~ -n ~ .;y;-
. . ~ , / . o'., .. ,. ?
'tQ:ll".f,. .,- . *** ~~n_,>. '.= -.m; n. -3.g. : .,. ...y",4 -*$*.'.p.*** *ah@uir,Q>4&
g*me ,
- f. .
c: 2 2._.s W;;s;,._j
- 12. Typical nicks in rod caused by f?ying debris.
-Y N??NC m. MPI&Qffz*"AWg -
,%j- ..
mu-r _. ( _
+ ~ A'K,
.e
( ,
.8) g n
' Q k. W .r.
, .n
@Te* ' -
w.- p? - 4 . c- . W .
'r,- ,
.t .. e l f . . J '.
, g st. .. w:.y*n W.4N-ke,j'.y.
k 4
~
.y w: ,;;d
'....C~?k*y,yh,W$9$.,$
n-;.~-44m!M a i. N;t. Gifg Y th$
.. ,. .:. n ' ,.,2.
. '. f
,m z. *--
.a a4,'t...
g
. .. . ; w@
A c Y. .a: '.. -
, .fn ': k'hid
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" . B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) l I l {, - . . _ ., ,
} .
. - : ; ,; b g 1
;- ,K j
- "..;;g;
. . . . : , .. .t 3
l
- 14. Bent bolt and 7-NC ., .hbMM collapsed ferrule i from rocker box. (gh f' T-.
[.*g - n-
, g'.;
s- 4g
- 4
( ' i
,a tW)As. ;
i t ' 5
; t-l 7 - -
.W 2
-f h
9 sk, b(..'\
., ~?'
' ... , s - r-
~
- r. .
y-
, .f *,
.I ,?..
s.,Q. . y ~L..-. = u
.s.
.z., -
;'. . .g i ;
- q' , . r :
j f g..
. .g.: . .
, * ' ,( ' 'xka E
( , t - it G{G4 . . .
'. !A :
__k. -!. w~ g' " n$.q pj ~-t' . , n ' N
.. '.g~ , j gon ,s t + : l; ,
~-5~-
g- .
+ .
p $ k i b ,d ' ,Q. .. = f, ..
., _ a r, n .
. tit'a[
, y e
s
"- .4
't g l ...
W l.-
#~ ' !c h= $.1 d'.W. ? :' e w.:'
j .,. . c-r. J ( ( ;-
'w ,2[
MS
'1 -'-
h W2 n > = 4u - iM _ .i 2-;1:2
" 7.&
l l M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (continued)
~
i l l
)
i ft ._ p.+ l -%
,;. y L> ., $ ;~ .r
}
f g
-svf:,,,?;:
~
. l N!t $ rY,,,* . $)h ,
4 4y~?[.. ..';
.., *4 **1:.'y ' > % y r 1
* =+' 3 , _ '%
e r_ $. l
. x. n er wn.w
. .. , .Yc' .
c.
- s m- _- Vr ~gj p ar - ', g'y - ' f '. ,
h' . v ' L, Y,sw2$-
*
- fl
- p, #M l v . c. .s fa
. s. w. *
,, .. ~.. .f 3 1 -
p
+g , .f . , ;;-
~ a. - , ,]',
,ag.* ;,,
. - 1 : s= : ., .a
- 15. Broken out piece from rocker box. Note this is where bolt shown in photo No.14 fits.
I _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ . ~ . _ __ __ _. _ _. _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" - 12 - B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (' continued) l
~
h ~ QI. .- i
* { -Q f *y. %-c;&%E.;&. Cih' h-e-WW
~4 ;
; *&l%Ygih'*.Y :5$$?; $Ph?
R??W.S.i? *b$15fk,iSS$b=MW5 m. y ., . -
.W d sf?dA.s.-;R o
. p- .-,
e ,.
~ ~
w c-_m _ m, m Jife t ) M.N.ereur * - = L 4 ' m y
'& I g\ hhw.w. ;p wa l A X;%k2 ! Iv -
Nh+- ~.$,.
": ' 5$.v$
[ =;*+1?D'*
" W 5- '
; [ -in ^:~ 4g m e .
) g
, - ., .j ,
.. p;
= i_ --~ .
=M _ _ _ _ * . __ ' ELwt s m-e w s w _ _
i
- 16. View of " top end" pin removed from No. 1 right bank port engine.
(= _
~ . - * -
__ s:M : ' & t
.m . --
m . n ,. g W 12$h, _. _, r_ QL 1 @@,. Wh. ei. -r%: .y <R-T .$, Qn g-e.-~:.#
. IE{,d!.'.r_,.gv.
s .-%r* .- M [ k s2
.m.-..s..
- t6@ @$ .iy
~. ._
e - % 3.w- ? z_y..- 9 gy ,,
}~ .
t'
----x
' -~
. it g . -m .
e,q f r .n.-Et E 'iv-Yg% ~ , *t.t. .
\ ..
~
~f ,
i
/
~# .
re - I -- 7 '
- t hp*eq ;,.1,QY
.,3 y .~.5 6.N.s Y
dpj$6, [s.. I
- 3. . . . w .=~.a. c. 5 m? 9-b M U b k. I k.
- b' [' _ ' d l
- 17. As above. Note flaking of ch. rome plated surface.
2 - M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" . B. PHOTOGRAPHIC ESSAY (continued) 0 '
* +-
. .? v 7 f w.
IM.p.euwerar.eshMl
-Nh; ,b'.
f aggg;.g
~
.q gt I
=-
N A I Nd-o m W-W]l:M1 4- . __
^' @M'
. , ;, .g r1 @- -i '
_.mg.,d'-) i
'..t l
v.' r~
- r. j ha! n ;
i ;;,' ' d-] ~~ S
- _ ~ b 71,
~' M '.' ,,. m _ . ._ W -
- 18. liicks and gouges on No. I crankshaft .. trow.
=~-
G+ ggyFgp {.es.J . .
-, 4. ;
~
n.
\ .N -- ,
, a , 1
.,.e-2 , 4 ,. . ;q
# .s sc, A- v
.. . ~7 Q& .A.h
.. s., g .
A '* 7o p4 8.h
%. s
?^ % C .;r . . 4
- y. . T.x" .
w.nx . &..$b$.1 w ... .
.< g.
h; 3 _ 5 N .,. .,
. C h / -'
- 19. Multilated oil feed pipe to main bearing.
Although damaged was reused since no spares available.
9 SECTICN C REPORT FOR UNDERWRITERS l l 1 i l t
. Fin i FIELD SURVEY REPORT VE35E' "** = n' 'm e" DATE 7" a= 7' '*
GROSS TONS 24 N " 0FFICIAL NO 634621 PORT OF REGISTRY. Wilminaton. Celaware OWNER
- OPERATOFs Titan Navitation, Inc. Houston, Texas We, the undersigned have this date held survey on the " PRIDE OF TTYle '
June 29. 1982 and subseouen~c dates while lying afloat aMalta Drvdocks. The Docks. Malta in order to ascertain and agree upon, or as noted otherwise, the cause. the nature and extent and the recommended repair of darnage alleged to have been sustained. FOUND RECOMMENDED
- 1. Port main enaine DeLaval Model R.V.12.
(Piston / cylinders nussbered from . forward end rimht and left bank; i.e.. 1R 1L 2R 2L 31 3 L). .
- 2. Severe damage to No. 1 L cylinder unir, comprising the following: .
a) Piston skirt broken away from . Renew in entirety. crown. . hi ?*n., trate.n (haled) in eine . Renew..
.....-1 .... ueu enua ,na are .
c) Con red slightly scarred by . Renew. fivina debris. . d) Crank webs and counter weight Dress uo as necessary. scarred by flying debris. . el No. I right bank liner bottos . Dress up as necessary. end slightly scarred by flying . debris, f) No. 1 L bank cylinder head . Renew in entirety. damaged in way of valves. . g) No. 1 L bank inlet and exhaust . Renew in entirety. valves impounded into head. . h) No. 1 L ba t rocker gear holding . Renew in entirety. bolts distorted and bent. .
Pag 2 2 l FOUND RECO3151 ENDED
- 1) No. I 1, bank rocker housine , Renew.
broken in vav of hold down . . studs. :
- 1) No. I L bank tappee pada .
Dress un as necessary. scarred / burred on edges. k) L. O. sumo tank contaminated . L. O. sumo to be cleaned. engine with debris and water. . flushed and charmed with new oil.
. No. 1 R bank oiston assembly to be re-
. newed. Remo ted piston assembly to be
. diesenembled and dve eheck ineneceed
. and 84ndinee made known_
All other niston assemblies es he vieumlly
. ersmined as far as armetiemble viehnue
. removal frem eart srime mover. Finc(#Jgs
. to be 5ade known.
. I.$ PO$# 4 n M _1 f* {@ De 09 9 99NO Som41Sb1g
. chemuehnee Ai,ese4mn mF ..nmie. he ..mry
; etige *m he meav4ded_
=
e
?
u f _4.. , . . _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ -
- Fag. 3
- CNElt.tL NOTES j
( ) Vessel to be drydocked fur examination and in arder to effect repairs. (One (1) haul and lay days.) ( ) Necessary line and gangway services to be supplied. ( ) The follo.ving drydock services to be furnished.
- 1. Connection, supply and disconnection of steam.
- 2. Connection, supply and disconnection of electricity.
- 3. Connection and disconnection of fire main.
- 4. Conn'ection. supply and disconnection for reefer, cooling. etc.
- 5. Removal and disposal of foreign garbage.
( ) Tow boats to be furnished to move vessel on and off drydock. ( ) Chemist Caa Free Certificate to be furnished prior to commencement of repairs. ( ) AH removals necessary to effect repairs to be replaced in good order. ( ) AH new and disturbed work to be tested and proven satisfactory. ( ) All new and disturbed work to be recoated. ( ) Necessary stasing to be erected and afterwards removed. ( ) Keel Blocks in way of repairs to be removed and afterwards replaced. ( ) Necessary shoring to be installed in way of repairs and subsequently removed. ( ) The vessel was steam cleaned and gas freed by the Owners for which they wd! render a separate account. ()
'grees to effect the foregoing repairs for the su.n of 3 e.sduding and induding a scrap credit of 3 This price is considered fair and reasonable.
Survey made without prejudice. ATTENDING: Slaned by (D. F. Brewn) _ Representing 0wners U.S.S.A., INC. SAL
;- ' S; ' '- 9 : y 5 : x) *?.L C!assification U.S.C.G.
I Contractor
Pas = A e Arrival of Vesnel at Repair Area 1200 Maurs fune 28. 1982 Commencement of damage repairs 1400 Mours June 29. 1982 Completion of damage repsirs On Dry Dwk MA-
. Off Dry Dock N.A-
- Departure of Vessel from Repair Area Last Drydocking Tailshaft weardown, present Tailshaft wennlown, previou=
Owner's work consisted of i 1
. Time for Owner's work i.
i I 9===== ALLEGATION: 2nd raa=4v= ca aare *=4a scenuision Set m l tv 12 Stessi Ensina. Falturne/bemahdaua scenered due to imenne defect in Skire eastine whilse
.....t . , . ,...... f- b11... ,. a- A t e 4 a. r,- it....a 4. en ,,nt..a gr.c.. rair ,,,,,_
rif iur. er- w- a 01?n %ur. mn. M 19s t 4 ? l \ l i i 1 l l P i l
,. , - . , , - , , , --..-_-,-,.-~.--e ., , - - - , , . -- , , - , . , - - . - , - - . - . - , - . , s--,_ ----v- .* , . - - -.--
SECTION D TURTHER OBSERVATIONS O L
M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" D. FURTHER OBSERVATIONS
- 1. -The No. 2 fuel cas on the starboard engine inboard bank was closely inspected for wear since it had been reported that damage had occurred to the surface. The results of the in-spection confirmed that wear was present and that the surface had been dressed up by the crew.
It was the opini*on of DeLaval and of the writer that there was a 70-30 chance of the cam lasting until the first U.S. Culf Port, and since there were no fuel cams on board, the vessel had no alternative but to sail with the cas in a diste-issed condition. It would appear that since thia is the second can failure on this pair of engines, that all fuel cams are suspect and will possibly have to be changed out.
- 2. Exhaust velves and cylinder heads are still a problem os these engines. Maxiasm exhaust valve life appears to be in the region of 2500-3000 hours which is totally unsatisfactory.
Several hypothesis have been presented which would indicate the following:
- 1) Spring tension is insufficient since valves appear to have a light carbon build up on their face.
- 2) The rotators do not turn fast enough.
- 3) The rotators appear to tualfunction at approximately 2500-3000 hours.
- 4) There is no interference angle between the valve and seat when valves are installed to the head. This latter condition gives rise to the situation wheraby a knife edge seating effect occurs when the engine becomes hot, consequently any products of combustion remaining on the seat tend to keep the talve open with consequential guttering of the valve and cracking of the cylinder head.
f t SECTION E COPIES OF TELEZES l i . e e
O
#+9 4 IMAGE EVALUATION '8'# ,
[,,j// 4 4)8#@9 g res1 m eer <m1-s> 7
+ <.
l.0 lf M M y ll NE i,i [ EM _ II.8 l l.25 1.4 t6 4 150mm > 4 - 6" >
*r 4%
+%$il 5,,,,,,,, -
~
/+4
+Q[4%
4,,,,, g
. .23l-
.Y
.{$ 15LLv -o V' /Vt5LASWAd. 5 7 N / b h fic,M ric E
M . Y(o 'L e c T. F?acr Zw.erss a es esseury ro d i'
?.di= 7 '%s< Po a r /Ed cid e.
- l. lime,q tSA oicfd 007 io4Ando A/;7 ~
Ess-H Aet:4S roA ikla Sc7rcdf ErrLL
/MTA C C SK9 b'c t G s!.?AcUAES. M*M o r
/'2 st /44 , A i.;i~ J-lo c.G MGASGAGs A-EARo 3 f ' >< u. [
C TgtA 7
'2. a rs7on Cct1?rc7cc/ b/.cidTref. '
Pts re J Ciqcca v srifa ,alqcr 10irw Cc&sP. Rt.ws fa e s. Otc 4de,'s cenaesa 4<aAv' va ,W sniar hsw Ra invs 1906
/d 6ces CcNa rded G rrH Ex CCP7704 CA~ N/ND A bidd;2
.c. cvusota neA<a x.1c ' mucs esgr 20r sesnem e<< cri 's,e ,Jr.cc.
d, /H;rsc7c.q ves x .s c<<r ek. s' 6u).:: .-7ppsi>e rc 25 id piecc , ado d 'O r IIlove6 (o . 2cciv:A Ecx 2pcicit in uw ei= ucco Deal Groo 19 re R'ceirca naki fetciwu 2cctada Ai9h l s ~7k!GN / SE Lvt G &Pst~na CK,
.PAcc c'rs -J- 8E :S <vc<J'es oc Sparrera a
"A Pe.s / ,eoaa Lcen ro etC OK.
l j-2, / T* A PA?M c r.-In r pisrvd Sss,eni+.-cc. i{o &~4torncs o.= C'it xca7.: is 4?pnwdiT 9 \lts.ssi 19Anivec 'N W=a u A-r MPaar i2oo Has, U2ws C' ? "- 10 CoM PcHEnts r cRG o4 P2c.42a 7o Rat Anes c~c mat.FTE CVLiMacA A'CS. id 175/ Sk CEs YrOd 0/= f'JL C Allki M Nl S DLI~2
// t/c rdPP N-2. W CAMArvE To 7 iMk6
&GMes /E u;~~ & &t /NSM c 7'o4 PfiH'd C%aico c.: r t '2. C 4 awx S un;=~ && Gor: c M dub Ck. itIraca omA3 cd ccon r X "Je
's .
.:.t.o c A tri iG.cF.:.:cn r .CHA,os v)17?-/
AlbsoAl. .s;'c.o a t e.> H' Gc7rvx/ b'&n 3c,4r Ong a. 'SC kod,a Ilotc6J4.M t V
/-?/Dcan<~'~D 7"o SLL C/%//c ,
/t !, Wo DEdpti 7;V4c5/G/;./ f>WRosr-
/VY+Dro aa
/5~ 0PPiA B Ccdi o 19G c c.1 ? h & M *4 Of JUL ~/ / T
/(o . Par <ts/c Q~ca. i. Scica citcsel Dsf TOP Exa Pirv' t ' .C rNC l
fc/Mo od ScAeo, l O2h i t,t rG in/.* M #'] /Mdat'a 6 f-yGg
$*/ CAfn7 tJ[ / (YM ; W ILL l t VG
UW7/L E, t/L F A-QCA AHb A A Q A A & L~/ S c8 6KR, Sur we WEU uM reaWG.
/ 2. A//KC WA A rnJe g f-N'O NAr'~ CRoCS Cd (ScAAo AGoa4 Oft r%* e . $x./Arst:
RS. Toc ConrAc rso S/ wis x me AdHEy' PdapcMs kksaeos Ded Sporad i I I L~
i Titan Navigation, Inc. er July 22, 1982 To: All Concerned
Subject:
M/V " Pride of Texas" There is attached a report on the many failures which have occurred on the Delaval main engines of the M/V " Pride of Texas". Included in the report are recommendations as to mod-ifications required to lessen or eliminate failures in the future. I1 0. Q Harrison R. Glennon Jr. Attachment A l CABLE: TITANAV HOUSTON 950 oNE ALLEN CENTER 500 OALLAS STREET HOUSTON, TEX AS 77002 1137757 1467 O
, . _ - . , , - - .m , c . . -.- . , - . , . , .,,-9 + ,- . - - ,
The following items have all given considerable trouble during the short duration of operation of the main engines on the M/V ' Pride of Texas'. Cylinder Heads ....................... X Exhaust Valves & Rotators ............ X Camshafts. ........................... ,2-Cam Rollcrs .......................... Y Pistons ............................'.. # Wrist Pins........................... Y' InterCoolers ......................... J# s Air Start Valves..................... 9 Couplings and Clutches............... 10 Crsnkshaft Plugs..................... 11 Cylinder Liners ..................... 12 Fuel Lines........................... 13 Controls ............................. 14 l l i 9 l
CYLINDER HEAD EXHAUST VALVE SEATS AND EXHAUST VALVES The Pride of Texas began having exhaust valve failures on arrival Haifa Isreal with approximately 3000 hours service. Since that time the vessel has experienced a total of 23 incidents of I cracked stellite seats in the cylinder heads. These failures are believed to be directly related to the .inumerable exhaust valve failures the vessel has sustained and is still sustaining. ! It is believed that these failures are the result of improper design of the cylinder head for the intended use with heavy fuel. Recent investigation has disclosed that the valves are being plated with a carbonaceous deposit preventing them from properly seating, subsequently creating a condition where blowby then errodes the valve head and the elevated temperatures during combustion i caused cracking of the stellite seat in the head. It is believed a more appropriate design would entail caged exhaust valves to enable change out with out dismantling the entire head. Additional improvements would be to employ rotators more suited for the intended use to aid in cleaning the seats and to e better distribute heat around the so called seating faces. The ) installation of interference angles in the valve face to seat interface would also be of value to aid in compensating for thermal changes in the valve geometry and increasing spring tension on the exhaust valves would be of benefit also. Finally, the appli-cation of higher grade material in the valves th5mselves should be i g Y cons.tdered. ) t, - P 1 plg, gs'}lp/f. t DyM
@9 ,
l
. _ ._- . . - - . - - . _ - . , - . - _ - - - , _ - . , _ . . , _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ , _ ~ - , . . _ - _ - - - -
l CAMSHAFT PLACEMENT / LOBE DESIGN Examination of the new camshaft installed in New Orleans indicated there exists some positional difficulty with either the camshaft shif ting mechanism or the design of the fuel cam lobe. In either the ahead or astern mode the fuel cam roller rides either at or over the edge of the cam, greatly stressing both the lobe and the roller. It is interesting to note that there was no evidence of this condition on the inlet or exhaust cams which seems to indicate
- a design error in the fuel cam.
f 9 y/ ($+, '*v i ce V V ? s'/ J V 5& 9 e
/
} Yb
,l4 G Y. .
v j l I 2-
, - - - - - - , ---n n-.e ,, - . , . - . - , -- , s- - -, ,
CAMSHAFT ROLLER FAILURES During the course of the block repair in Norfolk, it was discovered that the tappet assembly rollers were severely galled on the starboard main engine requiring replacement of all. At the present time these same units are showing distress again and will require replacement within the near future. The cause of this is believed to be~ a combination of camshaft and lobe placement'and inadequate heat treatment. ,g, h
, Yg/' y '"y a
d e vW sP p '< e $ F gf 4 /d p)(# 1 9
FUEL CAM LOBE FAILURES
- l The vessel has sustained two instances of fuel cam failures to date requiring in one case the renewal of the faulty lobe and in the second case the renewal of the starboard engine left bank camshaft in its entirety. The failures of the cams-is reported to be improper heat treatment of the lobes and the condition is reported to exist on all three of the vessels under consideration, 4jfr)<ys
\O P J O~
\f
#1 /l Y
,f D q/r f
pr f ri
.1
-4_
PISTONS During the rebuild of the starboard engine after the casualty in Haifa, during the month of February 1982, all : pistons for this engine were disassembled and a stress riser taken out of tdue skirt in way of the bellville washer fastening. device. No. 6 cylinder of the inboard bank of the Port engine was similarly treated, since this piston and liner assembly showed severe signs of distress and was changed out. On June 25, 1982 at approx. 0320 hrs. No. 1 left bank port engine piston skirt disintegrated. Examination of the broken pieces would suggest that the breakage was caused by a stress riser in the identical area previously taken out of 4 the stbd engine pistons. Numbers 1 right and left pistons were built up utilizing pistons which had been stress relieved. This now leaves a total of NINE pistons in the port engine which are suspect. Inspection of the underside of the piston crown from the con rod side is extremely difficult and the re-suits of this type of inspection can be considered inconclusive. It is therefore imperative that the remaining nine piston i assemblies be extracted from the engine, disassembled, and exam-ination made of the suspect. area at the top end of the piston i skirt. . L
Another probicm which existe io in the finished diamsters of the piston pin bores, which in many instances have been noted to be different;ie the piston pin will enter from one end, but will not enter from the other. ik
#f- .-
,;)* e / gs6 , # -
b.P '
,*Y . oi e, e
' ?"
3 - D
?y
- c. o p,
f0 I j -g-l ! l
PISTON OR WRIST PINS n' fring the course of repairs to No. 1 bank port engine, it was noticed that the pin removed from No'. 1 right bank had lost a patch of chrome plating from the periphery of the pin in an area approx. 4 inches from its end. The question automatically, arises how many more are in the process of failure. - The instruction manual page 5-41 implies that piston pins should be inspected at 24,000 operating hour intervals. The very act of chrome plating a pin of.this size naturally puts a stress into the surface of the pin, which can be detrimental to correct operation. 0
/
hY'
\
t )- (v0 .
/'jd;~
- 9
INTERCOOLERS l l All four intercoolers have failed during the course of operation. The cause of failure has been determined as erosion of the tubes due to fluid velocity which has been partially attributed to construction debris in the fresh water system which partially blocked off the intercooler tubes. This partial blockage caused excess velocity of the water with consequential erosion of the tube material. y4' a Y atp J Uf l
/
1 l
AIR START VALVES ~ I l Several Air Start Valves have ceased to function in that they i have suddenly, for no apparent reason and after considerable hours of operation, malfunctioned,neccessitating removal from the engine, and renewal of air start pipes. It is hoped that
< with the increased torque values published by Delaval that this situation will cease.
\t/ .-
9 e- 1 9 YY q$ - J t -)
-9 d
- - - , - , , , , . . , , + , . . , , . . , , , . , . , , , , , , . . - - , , , . , - . . _ , - - . _ _ . . . . , . . . , , _ , . , . . , . _ . _ . , . .
COUPLINGS AND CLUTCHES The third order vibration from the engine has transmitted through the Holsett couplings to the clutch assemblies and two failures have occured. One in the Panama Canal and the second in the Mediteranean on passage to Alexandria. The transmittal of the third order vibration has made slow speed maneuvering non exsistant with a minimum speed of some 40 shaft RPM, which is not conduciv e to good operation in a vessel of this size. Single engine operation nas been basically non exsistant since reccmendations from engine manufacturers warned against this situation. In actual fact, to enable the vessel to take the trip from Haifa to the U.S.A., the pinion from the damaged engine had to be removed, so that single engine mode could be accomp-lished. Even with the stbd engine pinion removed the Holsett coupling inserts on the port engine ' melted' and had to be replaced. It is understood that Geislinger couplings are to be installed to both engines in the near future, but once again considerable down time will be encountered. i It must, however, be understood that even if Geislinger couplings are fitted, then excessive wear will be encountered to the spring packs of the Geislinger couplings. l
- m. . .-. - - -- -.-, - - . - --
CRANKSHAFT PLUGS It was brought to the attention of the operators, during the Pride of Texas stay in New Orleans (July 82) that the plugs in the crankshaft oil ways could be cracking due to the use of improper gauge of material used for the plugs. Delaval has inspected the starboard engine crankshaft, the results of the inspection are not as yet known. The port engine crankshaft has not as yet been inspected. If the plugs are found to be of incorrect gauge, then these should be replaced by the correct components. q.0<. o% Y . J l an, . , , . ---4n----- e n - -- -n , ,-. n----e, , ,. r- . - . - - , , - - , . - - - . .y-.--, .-.
T - CYLINDER LINERS During repairs carried out in Norfolk during the month of February, 1982 all the stbd engine cylinder liners were honed out and pistons fitted with new rings. Since the engine only had some 3000 running hours the operators question the reasoning behind the engine manufacturers logic in this situ-ation. During the same time period, the No. 6 right bank port engine cylinder liner was found to be scuffed and was conse-quently changed out. The reason why this particular liner, and.no others in the engine, scuffed, remains a mystery. An explanation from the manufacturers would be greatly appreciated. P,L j)68 so l l __ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ . .__ _ . _E__ _ , _ _ _____ __ _, . _
FUEL OIL RETURN. LINES These items have been a continuing source o'f problem aboard the' vessel. The failures constitute not only a maintenance problem but a fire hazard as well. Recommendations would be to replace all with Delaval's new design with heavier wall tubing employed. This. recommendation to be carried out at no cost to owner or operator, f fd' e*"
/ p1p ff' e Y
N
+')l 1
CONTROL SYSTEM RELIABILITY The operators have experienced on numerous occasions repeated incidents of control f ailure where by the engines will not reverse or only one reverses and on occasion either main engine will randomly refuse to start. Additionally maneuvering time has been a constant source of irritation to both the crew and pilots in that the time to reverse is excessive taking up to 55 seconds. It should be noted that speed increase signals are not immediately identified by the control system circiutry, conse-quently severly detrimental time lapses have been encountered, which have further personified the problem of so called unsea-worthiness of the vessels in question. 9 s I
Page 1 FIELD SURVEY REPORT VESSE8 "N n' **" DATE kna 29- 1982 GROSS TONG 24. 3 8t. t. . T . OFFICIAL NO 634621 PORT OF RECISTRY. Wilminaton. Delaware OWNERM OPERATOpq Titan Navigation, Inc. Houston, Texas We, the undersigned have this date held survey on the " PRIDE OF TEXAS *' June 29. 1982 and subsequent dates while lying afloat aMalta Drydocks. The Docks. Malta In order to ascertain and agree upos. or as noted otherwise. the cause. the nature and extent and the recommended repair of damage alleged to have been sustained. FOUND RECOMMENDED
- 1. Port main entine DeLaval Model R.V.12.
(Piston / cylinders numbered from . forward end risht and lef t bank; i.e. . Ih 1L 2R 2L 3R 3 L). .
- 2. Severe damage to No. 1 L cylinder unit.
comprising the following: ; a) Piston skirt broken away fro" : Renew In entirety. crown. . hi finne henken '(hnled) in rine . Renew.
. . . . . . , . . . . un s e - na .ma .re .
c) Con rod s11thcly scarred by . Renew. flyina debris. . d) Crank webs and counter weight Dress up as necessary. scarred by flying debris. ; e) No. I right bank liner botton , Dress up as necessary. end slightly scarred by flying . debris. . f) No.1 L bank cylinder head . Renew in entirety. Jamaged in way of valves. . i g) No. 1 L bank inlet and exhaust g Renew in entirety. i valves impounded into head. , h) No.1 L bank rocker gear holding , Renew In entirety. bolts distorted and bent. , l
FOUND RECO3131 ENDED i) No. I L bank rocker housins : Renew. broken in wat, of hold down : studs. . i) No. 1 L bank tappet pads : Dress un as necessarv. scarred / burred on edges. : k) L. O. sump tank contaminated . L. O. sumo to be cleaned. entine with debris and water. . flushed and charged with new oil.
. No. I R bank piston assembly to be re-newed. Removed piston assembly to be
- dfmammembled and dve chec1r inaneceed
- and Hndines made knavn.
- All other niston assemblies to be visually examined as far as oractiemble without.
- removal from nort erime mover. Findings to be nade known.
- M.vehtng Fmettfet,. en h. mad. numit hte
- eh entighnn e Anemefnn af rammire Weseeary eng. en he nenvfdad
-~ -.. - -
Pega 3 GENEH.tt, NOTES ( ) Vessel to be drydocked for examination and in order to effect repairs. (One (1) haul and sy days.) ( ) Necessary line and gangway services to be supplied. ( ) The following drydock services to be furnished.
- 1. Connection, supply anr! disconnection of steam. ,
- 2. Connection, supply and disconnection of electricity. *
- 3. Connection and disconnection of fire main.
- 4. Connection. supply and disconnection for reefer, cooling. etc.
- 5. Removal and disposal of foreign garbage.
( ) Tow boats to be furnished to move vessel on and off drydock. ( ) Chemist Cas Free Certificate to be furnished prior to commencement of repairs. ( ) All removals necessary to effect repairs to be replaced in good order. ( ) All new and disturbed work to be tested and proven satisfactory. ( ) All new and disturbed work to be recoated. ( ) Necessary staging to be erected and afterwards removed. ( ) Keel Blocks in way of repairs to be removed and afterwards replaced, i ( ) Necessary shoring to be installed in way of repairs and subsequently removed. ( ) The vessel was steam cleaned and gas freed by the Owners for which they will render a separate account. () screes to effect the foregoing repairs for the sum of 3 excludlng and including a scrap credit of 3 This price is considered fair and reasonable. Survey made without prejudice. ATTENDING:
$laned by (D. F. Brown)
._ Representing Owners U.S.S.A., INC.
S.A.L M;-M by ' *-9 :ny S: *.:: )
- S.S. .
Classification U.S.C.C. Contractor
Pagr A Arrival of Venei at Repair Area 1200 Hours June 28. 1982 Commencement of damage repairs 1400 Hours June 29, 1982 Completion of damage repairs On Dry Dock NA. Off Dry Dock N.A. Departure of Vessel from Repair Area Last Drydocking Tailshaft weardown present Tailshaft weardown, previou= Owner's work consisted of i f Time for Owner's work i i i f ALLEGATION: Da-are and re, airs to nort main eronuiston DeLaval RV 12 Diesel Eneine. Failures / breakdown occurred due to latent defect in skirt casting whilst A1,vonart, en tinie,a seme . cult pnre . m.1 nn ., .. 3, in h ite.e rnnateinn ren I Failure occurred 0170 knure _Tn n , 18i. 1082. i l l l t l
y - . _ - - k a ? SECTION D 1 s FURTHER OBSERVATIONS i } l i ) I s .. _
i l M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" I 1 D. FURTHER OBSERVATIONS
- 1. The No. 2 fuel cam on the starboard engine inboard bank was closely inspected for wear since it had been reported that damage h.d occurred to the surface. The results of the in-spection confirmed that wear was present and that the surface had been dressed up by the crew.
It was the opinio~n of DeLaval and of the writer that there was a 70-30 chance of the cam lasting until the first U.S. Culf Port, and since there were no fuel cams on boar 4 the vessel had no alternative but to sail with the cam in a distressed condition. . It would appear that since this is the second cam failure on this pair of engines, that 'all fuel cams are suspect and will possibly have to be changed out.
- 2. Exhaust valves and cylinder heads are still a problem on these engines. Maximum exhaust valve life appears to be in the regica of 2500-3000 hours which is totally unsatisfactory.
Several hypothesis have been presented which would indicate the following:
- 1) Spring tension is insufficient since valves appear to have a light carbon build up on, their face.
- 2) The rotators do not turn fast enough.
- 3) The rotators appear to malfuncticn at approximately 2500-3000 hours.
- 4) There is no interference angle between the valve and seat when valves are installed to the head. This latter condition gives rise to the situation whereby a knife edge seating effect occurs when the engine becomes hot, consequently any products of combustion remaining on the seat tend to keep the valve open with consequential guttering of the valve and cracking of the cylinder head.
P e
SECTION E
.> COPIES OF TELEXES )
e m a I I 4 I e l l l I I l l [ _
2 %l
+ .b . .
N4.Lv ~7 o f /lY W C'YA d. 574/ WANif,AricA M E. Wo i s o T, l Fiesr IMAREssa cs C'Aurk.ry ro N'*/' hisFr _ s< Pbar ifdtide. l
- l. l.iMcat iG A o nt d 007 tro4 A AHb /Mr.
Socr+L 14424S -)~0$ Arlo Se77c4 C7/Lt.
/MTAcC S a b H C L G nIG d eUA-[ %. h* tao e
/Q "t' iM ", A/:r h'ot.6 M/EAdd4G$ i4t*p40 t f ' < u. f ,
l
'2 Pisron .s*xia r cosisLx:7t c/ biziarra,te
[ S 57 eel fi9ceJ*V $ 7/44. r AITf,
- C7~ h)174' CcMP.
A/MC.S SM 6. Ott. 'Q,/HU C/laarTd 14tdA'/ ' W ,74/ Ne/47, 8 57bev A N nuo Ac4
/d foss CcHe17?cN' O 17H~ ExCCp7704 C/*M/HoA bidt" 2,
[ t, C~/'i/dord HsArJ Milc Mevcs esgr . 2dr s+A Ama s Cic 07H/a di C. L!, H.ffc 70 sq. 7Caita c<tr &k, f 61stM r7ApetM 70 dG /// -PtSc6 Ado N'o 7 Wl0v't 4 (o . Roenta Ecx Esce,v in saw of ucco den Gro.o sta ,9ceista MM /~aundM Rcca oca ,4,%/s ~ike,v/sn1,vi::c & P p ri14 C /c. R'io S d'rfrJo 86 ffsvcn/4s cA? dPetttra (, 1 M Pd.s4 Reas t. c e n To & OK, I l
. ,. ,e w,u.n c , .- o,s,u ss-a.,o. A(0 KviO/nce o.= Gr : tida /s Appnw JT" D. fC2.Sdt. AADtVCd /N Y40 A-7~ A PA40 't.
/200 HAS, %Etv5 t 29
/0 (Q 60 t%H4tif$ rQAd O U 20t4 A0 70
$4to A tat. C~C &lAl. fig Ctf't.i/VOCA N S.
Cd ITN Gk CG Af Od t of fdt CW) M4 /Sa'.7~$,
// /Yo rM?r'+W.91- C&avM r,,2 7c v !/n6 7~ia hGMR 45 C. </ 7" k4L o'NStk"fI'Od &stV6 G.snAico c.: r l '$, C A t h V M 2 M t1 5 o*** 4.; d 00T'70 #1 &O CK, a sli/VoA Cmp;2 OW cow,rm Oct E. 5.L o t* A /N d ~.s C' f 4 <* N 1~~ Cr/i9Ad y) i??-/
W/tNoa. .cconc e.> N' GerrowI 'D ' A%e 3rAc. Al?r,s 41. SCt.~ ZONA /Wot.cc/Jer4A
/-34(wd<~ro 'Fo 4 t.t. CA/c , /t J, /Yo DEdA/E TWAc06/t' /.?~WAtisf*
7
/Vlrirl/ro t.b i'd* 0 pat 4 & CctJLO 19C C'C.1//hd~7!~~4 Of JVt. ~/ /'C /6 Pirnsic conce s. Rycis ci ccx C// Toro Exd Airl t's rN/.*.
AtMo O H' S c:< H o ,
!7 a red iru:mt No2 incon a Get 6tw?, RCMi+r /* tic t- c.'t1 N? , & itt. Li tt
UW7ff.- c$- t/4/ A-REA A&O /OROGd&L~/ dC N 6l~R, 0x// ~ K) tL L. WEEA tr/A Tct //dC.
/P. 8//KC /,fA A rr.), $; AMD PA-T~ CR c SS Cd ScnAo Aaca.,1 Oft Ng e . fadArsti 0S2O C con 7A c 7-Er.) 0/ 7FL/1 x &&
ft/ME/ IS/APCCEE
/O. //= foci WnsE Any' G30Gspons IQ R SECRAo2 Dad Hectad'
;'./;0'11.15 5.~. 1? e-
" Tc:>f 2 '.7 =^ .c.u. T . ". ". . ".'. .'
e... n. . *C r,."II'r a **c- . ..n f . S ^c
;m. , e- v.-y .. . c.- - n' - " . CP 0..u' o." " ". . " f.'. P i..: C.* .C. C .4." /.".
.. " C r o."T.".
o f.
. ". A'a 7 r.". *. 4 . -I '.'. . .r o.
. . C". ". / * . ."..' a. ~u L -
T 3v 1T S FEIDE CT TIXAS
----------------------- y "EF CU2 TCLT.CCI: .T!!IS I !ST/.!!T '-?C CO'? FIR" THAT A SU2VEY IS FECUIEED Ol' TME AFCVL VESSEL E;;TERII*G !:ALTA Ht.EECUn 1222 L." . LTCP
' ' . " . . . -' E. 0".. I'.
. ( *. *_ *. n".I I'A\r. .n.en
. .. }. .p*'.
. E e F.'.'*.
. .T Y A*.- I .A L*. /. C'."O."
r- e
.um c n. , . .eI v. ....
. Y 6 ..Em. .en n. .
= n- ec.[ n.C S .
..-#T C*"L f -
a rn e..n es n.mo
-s.-.4 u---~ ~ 1.,, ,. ..... C
* . ... v.
272 SEISU2 ::'. . . . . . . .
- . ef "2
l l l
\
, .,.y_, . _ . . . . , . .
.g.. .. ,....
c3-.-. *; . . . ; . t ..47 762008. TN HOU T *,r . .s. Y - 752003.TM
-. ., HOU .
a Te- ._
' t; 1 : ' *3
_3'..* -. . ql n
- .g___- .
.x ,
. e: : .c_
k
.g '"? * *
. . . ". ?. "* . 1.2 t d .ty t* T. .? a d [..4 .a4h.
- s.' .T .:. A ~I t ... I "...
- .".2,.
.:7. l 3.! 7 7.'i .* :.1 .
A> 2.r_.... :. r e. e . . s. . e r.ic ;.i e. pj u =
. _ e-:. s..m o. .-- e ,..c. c. ,.e eo::: = 4 .: r. e. s _ u.z.r e :. _7 .y.3 ,
- c. r ... .
.f .a.iqLi.cnta hjac a
_ ..J '. 0. 0 .. 7 ..t : es.t.t r.) - u s 4e.u --) .e. n - -, Tee 27.a rs-.i.q vSeL A s.? . sn- .o.c a -.rc. o.c ) _ 2. 0 '. T :. A : : ".
. . . . .r, er..'
- s. o v A o.D A T 1 ~. '. 6 .'-i'O.c. .' u' " Y '. C
- A 'F.' A "n .=_ 7 ". T A. '_--' # D
.~c > : . . : n. _ .:,. :.e .:.:_ y =.1 <.2~-H T m= ~'
.~ _.
c _ 'e ' . . , P. c_ 'w , ,' o' =_ -'~=_ r.> ~ , .
. .'_~~
= c ts T .>* rv'*T v .- -
..,.n-:
e%.
.n ..
u J :.-
. ., t L .:
_,' c..s0 ,.1. ,' c ., ,'Vil. i. s .
- r. ., ) ,,.y__ . _ . . _ .
... .: . :. . ma a f=_ 3 ..; .,.: 00 ...
n c. S e.L,.Y. i_ 1 n..Lt vn., s
,. .n O._ . L _o. t i:_ . .J o-
.s..r.2 :..- e , 1 ..,
.. = ..s. .=
L'E53EL i.CULD BE AWAY AT1700 HRE JULY 157 eec.s, I r....,.E .::
- in .Y a w f.,
.t) .._.:.
. . :. . .. _. . L ;_ ,.-,..it , _ .i . .4, L ., c .f_.:_ 3.:. c . ., o u . .,. . . ...v l., .e.
- _ : 2 ,--.- . n.
-4 .r _e.:.w., i. .uq c,, _:
r- 4 _ u_ . . . .: c i. i ..,. w ,.. .,....
. .' n s'> _ .n _ c _ E_it .,t.,e . J ,.,. i .,
a u .. -._._:n; ._ .
.: A n:: _. . ci . ,- - _eo c, iJ 5_
F...,_.. ue t... t. i.
. c.a
., '_ i : n v . ,. -::- . . . - ...
l 1 ( 760006 TN n O *.! l Ti- . _-
- .u. _ .>
e.4. . , ; . . ,....... l Ou.:4 w
-'w- ~s
.:/.~ .... '762uct "" s:e 70 SP!St's Mr4 -
Q, 60i_3 - T" HOl! i 2"79 S!'ISU7 :".' % (; GD POR'?IU" ?"D JULY 1932 TO8 J. "COLASFA?! TITA" FAVIGATION, HOUSTON TEX, USA AA) PDIEE OF TEX / S DEP'ARTED !!ALTA /PPP.OX 19QQ HRS JULY 1 ST 198 2. PE) SECC?'D S*!ITME"T SPA 9"S ARRIVED f*AL'TA JULY 2ND Q900 HRS. ,
'70:!DE?FUL.
. SUC?EST T'!AT COSNIO""ENT EHICH CC!!SISTS OF LINERS, OOCKE70, PUS!! RCDS ETC. DE LEFT IN PCNDED UI'AREHOUCE FCR PICE UP SY EI*ilER PRIDE OP-STAR ON PETURN VOYAGE. CCSTS FO.7 STCEAGC APPFOX 1000 US PCR MONTH.
CC) STILL HAVE I!O? RECEIVEDTELEX 'dITH REGARDS TO CCSTS AS PER ITCM (AA) CF JULY 1 TELEX. DD) SUCOEST T!!A* LINER, PISTON, t'RIST PIl!. ROCKEP 20X, ROCKER AR"S, PUSP 20DS AND ASSCCIATEC HARD"AFC EE PROCURRED AIID PUT CN PRIEE Of! ES2 APP.IVAL U.S.As IE) AGE'!CY '.*ILL PEQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF WHICH VCSSEL IS TO PICK UP SPA 7! 0 LCFT IN EONE. FF) ARRA!!OEME! TS IAADE TO !!EGOTIATC EILL' VITII YARD, U. S. SALVAGE AND SALVACE ASE. '"Ot' DAY Q990 HRS. GG) S!!OULD DCPA?T f"ALTA AT 18Q0 IIPS MONDAY AND APRIVE MA!!CHESTER SA!!E DAY. '?ILL STAY IN MAi!CHESTER -TWO' OR THEEE DAYS A!!DTHEN DEPART FOP FOUSTO!!. YOU HAVE THE PHONE NUMBER ON THE BACK OF Ti>E FO' DDR FOR Tf*E GOLDEN. REGARDS C ON L'."O'.'i .
?
762LJ3 T!: HOU 27Q S"TSUP '" h 6
=
i
i CC ' GA23762008+.
- 8l9 i 05/07 11.12 I 762008 TN HOU 1 4 ,
, Q >,
853 SHISUR MW j GOOD MORNING 5Tij JULY 1982 ah ATTN: J. .MCG(A', SHAH. J (AA) , VACUVATORS INSPEC.TED.AND AUTH'ORIZAT. ION ~FOR.THE FOLLOWING WORK ':T.0 ,BE CARRIED .0UT GI.VEN.; (1)) ENGINE REPA' IRS TO NO'4 UNIT,
- (2) RENEWAL OF DRNING SPROCKET 'NO 2 UNIT.
j (3; CLEAN UP OF' ALTERNATORS".AyL. UNITS'. 4
.(4) ~ CLEAN UP 0F.-ANN.ET58S.Al,L Uh1 m,';.
, (BB) YARD BILL <NEGOTIATnD)TO.NGb'IPAl2ENT'OF.;940'5,78 US
~
BOTH US AND SALVAGE'-ASS.0C AGREE":0N. PRI,CE. , STILL NEED-SPARE. PARTS PRICES:t hSERVICEMEN'. COSTS AND. LOR'AN COSTS SUGGEST .THESE .. NUMBERS. BE :TRA.NEMITTED. T.0 CASSAR AND '. COOPER FOR.'.PA55.~ 0 -T0lSAhV, AGE. REGARDS
. DON BROWN 4
762008 TN HOU
+0853 SHISUR MW' 0025 l .
I I f
1 i I I
- .e i ,
O '7t s C1
- 4 a. % . .'. TwC f *'.i .. 999 1...- a a. r.,. %m e
... . a. p .wc 6
,- . , , . e
. .. l
.. . :. , . a
- t. .
r
. n. .m is J a. . f f, -**. e
,6.* c m r.. ,..p p - - ., k. . . - .
. . . . . ... w t* . 4 ,. . . . . . . . . *._ %
..T*.--
t.r.
.o a, - . y c ,
..w . .
I 6at."*? .a*=
. . , . . . . 7 7* T .u" *f.* '.*.T. - -*
"'.'.*~'..'.O .
* ~ ~ ~ ~ *
'.*..~*ac4A.~.~.."..' s
."'% T' "-
" 7 ~ T.e "a .
- S. s' a'. i l
. . w .. J. e s . m *.
* * *= ~ ' ~ * * * *
*Cn**' *~~'*
. . .l. . . . . a ....a 1.*'3 *T*
. *P & J b *bt.:.m A . .'A '*. C w R ha- . *. . ' .L. ." - - .'s L..-.s*
1
** e.a-I~.rT . *s ' "; * . .~*."* . 3 6. . ..? ?.. .* vwc'.'
- n a --
m**+- ** r' *6 ge .- r= a ge a
. .s. . .1 e.) ***v. */ a #.1 s.. . . . .u; '* e,:
s.+ .. . t -/k ."i .o s' e :n :,; -t.*,.
*3*C 1.**. . .. . .(m. e t ,..I..-
. . . - . ."J... p 1 *,
eo e W. '1 e AS T* -. "C'
- p ". "1. =7 T. ^* ?. ." i. .. i w . . T. *J . . s ' '" 9 t.* T m. <' .. ..- w.- c %. mus'a.: : '. .* '_ " ? ".s . r w"". e
.s_4 .
.f,5.. *g. . var 4
= s-
. ?.*f14 s
e p-.-,,-m.,.
. -s..
.*sL C .*., m . .y
. f.,. ..4 p ,. L r..S.e .,s .s. n,,.-..., e
'.1.7.' C. * .. -*C p
> ***'.'..v..n...'*
~..
a.C ~a
**.C R> ^d'.*7i 9 g x w.tT O t. . et*'43 wb . et. +.eeeee e..m. ., ,,
s*es-.....- .. .
- en t
6 i I 1 l l l
,w, -
,,- ,,. m , - - ,,e- -- - e,-
m- - - --
4 SECTION F LOG EXTRACT l l l A g
Oae ..Ol.or ~ Z 5~ K2~ vo, no. 'Y~ _ . . TITAN NAVIGATIONs INC. "oa'- NE/3NDC4 ENGINEERS NOON LOG Ta ustr -._
. _ sino ' Pon L rinsa . REMARKS
^
'_' _ =< _
ay1LoI o-un- pue -r:,.. hA he,. due- r - M 2,(or S(th_.
l a L e a.d..Jrl%d IeaL.
i v.nJ t +S.1o .
) xxx _- IZ:Pm- 73,O w-: _p c.
io
} u J- ._
t s=, o pr - aoo 9 u . c 2 < w s. s o 3. o _ l t9 Eso. z 5 '-t 1 o ,
,.g 2en s 8.8
~
\
G ' two% si s'n T~ eC D 120 0 C- ZS69f '4 RO
. . a.@.f , Mded du yd LO. T3 *3 4yJ M V- H?fp_
..e i.1
* '] . _
R.Ptn~ 49,0 1mo C- Z 'i7eR 5'Ro
.;. _~~' , d. ;!. __ .T
_ _ _ . . RGv. 1174o r.
; e r, RN- 4 'B.9 ly ". i. -- - pp.o.; I4STG o C IA G e. o o i_'. ra t.,
e 2 G 72e oso m3 ____
. t.a AT c ie . o.x. ".P s v. ti es: 7c i ~~ 9'e W . % t . c.
'u.,.... ; ., . _. a;-
- I i
axx i -- --,l / . .. .
.- .x: x_., e. < ... m 4 d . .L
; i?'.;
$ .... a <e fo ~u-./t.:.c -. d' .. t .e - a.b_G-
?
I ' 5 (' ll
'".3..
i y.' ' ] [ww .s /u <. 4-l 1.....: -- / y ,n//aa-f' >. 2 L. /m J4 J
! a..&A -r a- A /~ .9. e c.,k-
' ? -+) ---' s< xL .# /. . . . e + ga. .e .
'... [
- 5% . $
.,.M ,,.srM
. a .* < 4 s '. 4- d. * -
Md M ., d- - - - - I~;?',M. . .i
/%
.e . . *39 & C d a[/// / er) /
__q i__ AAA o. FWE. STeY 2 f '/h DEPT L,
,!. Tinie
_. .. I -- H { %: IIX (L Counter _
....n. '. . . ug
. _<;; .-.; o o.e.e ed sLe ter. - w
. . . _ ..'. g a. .. .. .
g l Fues Od g -ME. L.O. 4
- XXX Water s.$ AJ.gf
* ., ... -- _. .m-
_. :: la Ois . Consunted _ $ Hour PYetaf l i_ M g" l~ yuel Sibd Masa Eng. h"I 'f L T Y *)1
- .__ ._ g a o O.
l
; C_e. g port ua.n Eng.
w z *1 Olesef Gen.
... 1.$. $ __ , Oess Produced j #7 oie es Gen. 311g
___' y _. a _E..o. o eso. iG 2y so w
.._..A....____ <
; . . _ . s e.=oor .,
o I
.... . _ _ _._ d t. A .4 t-, a 41 cenoun e a ..--, w On Mead
,,, ,f o.r e. Od set u au..
, . r e
. - _1. MM * - -
grues Od sol j counior
. - - . -. E M E. L.O. Gas #70. 2- g Total Move
-.l N 'd G. L.O. ' . Gai 2."JU O @ Snart RPM
,..,.J. g GenJ.0,,,((qr,e/ Gas 4/. 4l,Z. M 87J[' E
, She % (.)
l . - --{ - -l q . P=.=e_w.=_. _ Y. . 22.5 . . a. moe j._ l> k > oishu waser Ton _ g One Sosed 6 ar b . 1 I
*-.m.
{j y, sm : nam.F r .smina. ~
-l secu,.ey cn.ca: iroo " nos esoo
-l .2s L4/ e Y/,, SIL..
l SECTION G YARD INVOICE (COPY) i l l l l l 1 l
. ..:::::::.'... .. . ... fl.ALTA DRYDOCKS n nic-a511
. -. 'IE*::::::
..'...'.'.....'...... Ti.e oocK$ M AL T A PPJDG OF TEXAS . 2 TO C Al>T.tlN. O tN Elts AND ALL CONCEllNE. IN:- -
I DAMtGE ACCOUlff REPAIRM AT }','stTA - JUNE / JULY 19S2 500 Assistance rendered bythreo yard engine fitters to engine cakers service engineers, carrying repairs, renevnis onport r.aincngina No.1 inboard a nd outboard units. 1200 , l 501 Maineugina port, erankease and lub cil sucp tm k vcre thoroughly cleanedend , wiped dry. ! 645 1 I i EM 1845 re
- m ,-
r f I t I
' Seen and noted, subject to co !
entaiced j ' No.8A[mmentspk'. { 3igned........:'.4.'. M ?....... ' (R. SPITElt!) ,;
, \
Date ......J... I.. I ! I. . . n : l il '
,i !
.il !
,'l eI i i 4
f i s'!' i n l l i , i ,, b
1 l l h M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS ADDENDUM TO MALTA CASUALTY REPORT In the opinion of the writer the reason for the catastrophic failure which occurred to No. 1 outboard bank of the port engine was caused by tensile forces acting upon a stress riser in the upper part of the skirt attachment to the crown. It must be understood that severe problems existed with the piston skirt to crown attachment mechanism in_the engines, which were fore-runners of the engines supplied for the three (3) Lone Star class vessels, and that this problem was alleviated by the use of Bellville washers as opposed to a solid type configuration. During the interim process of redesign of the fastening method, the manufacturer became aware of a possible stress riser in the spot faced area of the underside of the top of the piston skirt. Unfortu-nacely quite a number of pistons, which had not been stress relieved, were placed in the engines which subsequently went into either marine or stationary operation. , It is apparent that the engines on the " PRIDE OF TEXAS" suffer from i this malady, 1 The consequence of this malady is piston crown and skirt separation, which, it should be noted, can occur after either very few or exten-sive operating hours. C.- .- ( , }.y%:* ' '/ - vx= , D. F. Brown Nautilus Surveys, Inc. i 4
.e' Prido of Texac [ -
Main T.naine Intnrcooler Tallif0_f3 ^ l'
. Clalal fy H - PTJgo ;y qjqjp l
t ( l f
..... -.... \
UNITED STATES SALVAGE ASSOCIATION,INC. j
"~ '
14 WALL STREET NEW YOR K. N. Y., 100]5 c m po. 52-15573 tbrfolk. Virginia i Machinery Damage July 1, 1982 ; December 6, 1981 (Supplementar; to
- Case No. 74-12240)
M. V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" coNDf71CNS u 2:l. t"r.C?t,^.:::*r.""a'd .",".;:PO,".":::t t "t !" '".a"rf?Jt, .:':c.".:'."::i"t" :;i". :'." ":"4"
. :' '" 'd'-"' -
- . L"13.d::"l."'".!::::i"?::::T,".L*".". .Pr!".::.ct:::";':;.',";.'.::.s"!.t.'It" .2:=". J' : : r:::.= ::::/::
- .-t;': ,,:: .a. =."!_::'".". tr,.-.,er.:.r.t.".:" .":Y.".A:.'".'! ::::::.;..!:::::l:=.".'"'.:n'.d.::tcct ,":'J",3
.~ . . ..
.'.".J -i:': ,:" : :."2.n".*.":.:t",".::' 22?.":r::";
..g,i 2 re."u.
*9.:...*.":s";;;t:stda
. ::: t".;:.. r*..rt..
. a...
;"t::,"./
I:',"":f,""frett.'
.:.:,l',7 ;t:m" .".t:".t:::,"t.:7."t."" :,::T".r: y::'2:".;;;',::,,t".rf. 7. :"s t:
. .. . .w . , - . .a 6, . .
:':"2.
. 2:.i_*l.d::.".* '*.':$ "'!.'!,
- t,"",.'*.!","ll.'.'.";.'!.it:".C"".'~.',":*:.
. ",'" ":r.:". ".l*4.'".':1;;". ".
. ..h .*:Or,*",2".1
. " ".i* .". I".' *f:'J:.:;;':;' T:: :" ':'#.*. :'"" "'" '"""*'**"'** '" "*' "' '"'" *""""'"' " '"' "*
Report of first supplementary survey made by the undersigned sur-veyor of the United States Salvage Association, Inc., on January 19 22 and 25, 1982 and conference held on February 4 and 5, 1982, at the request of Johnson & Higgins, Inc., on the M. V." PRIDE OF TEXAS". 24,774 gross tons, 634621 official number, Asco Falcon I Shipping Company, owners, Titan Navigation, Inc., operators, while lying afloat at Norfolk Shipbuilding and Drydock Corporation, Norfolk. Virginia, in order to further ascertain and agree upon, or as noted otherwise, the cause, the nature and extent, and the recommended repair, of machinery damage alleged to have been sustained in consequence of a failure in the starboard main engine outboard intercooler, allowing water to leak into the air manifold of the starboard main engine resulting in damage to the starboard main engine when the engine was started, while lying a-ficat in the port of Haifa, Israel at approximately 1330 hours on December 6, 1981; with subsequent damage to the port main engine occurr-ing between the period of December 16, 1981 to January 18, 1982, while on a passage from Haifa, Israel to Norfolk, Virginia, for repairs. DESCRIPTION: The M. V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS" is an all welded steel constructed bulk carrier with machinery aft. The vessel is powered by two (2) 12 cyl-inder Delaval diesel engines developing a combined 15.600 horsepower and was built ar Levingston Shipbuilding Company, Orange, Texas during 1981. DIMENSIONS: _, Length between perpendiculars ------ 590.3' Breadth (molded) ------------------- 93.2' Depth (molded) --------------------- 50.4' ATTENDING: Mr. D. Brown, representing Asco Falcon I Shipping Company Mr. W. Tye, representing The Salvage Association Mr. T. Oulie, representing O. Thomas Oulie, Inc. behalf ; Loss of Hire Underwriters Mr. G. Doerfler, Jr., representing Norfolk Shipbuilding and Drydock Corporac2en
, - , 7
Croe No. 52-15571
.ForCase survey, further particulars, please refer to the report of original No. 74-12240, 26, 1982. issued at London, England, dated January STATEMENT OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE:
5 Februaqr 1982 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: On December 6, 1981 the s'tarboard main engine outboard intercooler leaked because of erosion to the inlet end tubes. Erosion to the tubes throughis the believed tubes.~to have occurred because of excess fluid velocity through the air manifoldBecause of the leakage, water entered .the engine causing severe damage to engine cylinder block, necessitating comp,lete renewal of the block. While under way from Haifa to Norfolk the port engine was utilized in a single engine ~ mode and is believed to have suffered casualty to exhaust valves, cylinder heads and cylinder liners which re-quired repair at Norfolk in conjunction with repairs carried out to starboard engine. Port engine was operated in accordance with advices from engine manufacturer's representatives who were aboard the vessel during the entire voyage. 8 i (signed) D. F. Brown ' i The foregoing is a true copy of the owner's representatives statement as furnished the undersigned. STATEMENT OF THE SECOND OFFICER: , TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I served as second officer of the Motor Vessel PRIDE OF TEXAS ouring Voyage #4, and in particular during the course of her passage from Haifa, Israel to Norfolk, Virginia after the casualty to the starboard engine. I have been asked to describe the various reasons why that casualty re-sulted in a substantially longer passage time. Single engine operation resulted in a substantially lower maximum service speed. In ballast this ship has easily sustained speeds well in excess of 16 knots under favorable conditions, and even exceeded 16 knots while wards Haifa. loaded on several separate day's runs during the passage to-Normal propeller revolutions at sea speed is 80, but with one. engine out of service, we could not exceed 55 RPM, and were frequent-ly obliged to run more slowly due to sea conditions aud engine temperatures ! Over the entire pase ge from Haifa to Norfolk our speed never exceeded - i 12 knots, and exceeded 11 knots under only the most favorable conditions Dring th? passage the plant was considerably more sentitive to wea-ther than under normal conditions. As weather conditions deteriorated, we were oblgged to reduce speed to prevent engine temperatures from ex-ceeding 300 F as the sec and wind added load to the engine. On at least three occasions we were able to make good only 3 to 5 knots under force 6-8 conditions, through which the ship under full power could have made, in my estimation, 12 to 13 knots. On December 24th in bad weather we were obliged to recuer- speed progressively until a destructive vibration arose in the coun117. borwoon the port engine ,
3 Cas e No . 15573 STATEMENT OF ' DIE SECOND OFFICER: (Continued) and the reduction gear. Unable to increase speed because of exhaust temperatures and unable to maintain or decrease speed because of the damage occurring to the coupling, we were obliged to stop the ship and lay to in the seas. See attached Abstract of Deck Log and Deck Log entries. (All entries on the Abstract pertain to noon on the date noted and to the run since noon on the previous day) . On three other occasions (December 26-7, January 6-7, and 1 January p) we were obliged to stop for repairs to the port engine or 4 to the port engine coupling. It was also necessary to stop and maneu-ver off Cagliari, Sardinia to disembark Delaval technicians. The total of these stoppages amounted to 39 hours, 33 minutes. Due to the greater vulnerability of the ship to the weather, a weather routing service was engaged for the Atlantic crossing. On ' ti"8 **rvic* *ft*r l**ri"8 Gibr*lt*r themade we recommendation our way south to of 29 the r3" North Latitude and made the bulk of our westing on that parallel. d$e dxtra miles involved in this route, plus those added by the necejstty of touching at Sardinia, resulted in a total distance run of 6,155 miles from Haifa to Cape Henry. The most direct route between tihese points involves a distance of 5,344 miles. t .' The total elapsed tL2:e on this passage was 33 days, 12 hours, 30 minutes. Assuming an average sustainable speed of 14.5 knots on two engines, the passage would have taken 15 days. 8 hours, 33 minutes. The excess elapsed tLme is thus 18 days. 3 hours, 57 minutes. (signe d) Mich..1 J. kauworth, 2nd Off. Norfolk, Virginia 3rd Fobruary 1982 The foregoing is a true copy of the second of ficer's statement as furnished the undersigned. When the undersigned attended the vessel at 'the time and place stat-ed above, the extent of damage and temporar described in the report of original survey,y repairs with additional were essentially asas damage, all described below. FOUND FECOMMENDED STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE Make: Enterprise /Delaval ! Type: DMRV-12-4 Racing: 7,800 HP at 450 RPM Serial No. - 2985 - 78034 Starboard Cylinder Block Cast Iron , (common for all 6 starboard cylin-der units): la. Cylinder block broken and -
- 1. Provide labor, material cracked at various locations in -
and equipment necessary to cut way of cylinder No. IR (starboard - an access hole between #6 cargo d forward unit) . hold and the engine room. Sta-
. tion a portable crane in 46 car-
- Inboard top part of cylin- : go hold to facilitate engine -
der block broken over full room removals and replacemants, length of No. 1R cylinder : Upon completion of repairs, close unit, down for up to 100mm : up access opening using good ma-below cylinder cover s tud : rine practice. pockets (capped holes in cy- - linder block). . r n -- ,.,,,-e. . ,, .--.9-.---n-
,,- ..m - - , , - ,
_4 Case No. 52-15573 FOUND RECOMMENDED la. (Continued) : 1. (Continued)
- Cracks in way and through : Wire brush, prime and top all 3 inboard and forward : coat all disturbed coatings.
outboard (4 out of 8) cy- : linder cover stud pockets. : Necessary removals and re-
- placements to starboard main en-No. IR (Starboard forward) : gine to be made including the Cylinder Head - (cast steel): : following:
Ib. Cylinder side (pressu're side) : Break loose and remove exhaust face slightly corroded (also af- : manifold and water jacket, fecting valves), covered with brown: Break loose and remove starboard reddish powdery layer of corrosion : cylinder block. products. : Install new owner furnished cy-
- linder block and harden down Lower studs to No. 1R inlet : to factory representative's manifold branch deformed. : specifications.
- Open and inspect all main bear-No. IR cylinder cover suspect- : ings.
ed cracked. Inlet and exhaust : Renew forward main bearing with valves apparently intact. : factory spare.
- Install liners in new starboard No. IR (starboard forward) . cylinder block.
Cylinder Liner: . Renew one (1) liner in port cy-
. linder block.
Ic. Cylinder liner cracked axially :' Remove and clean all con rods and over 1/3 length. : p4.stons
- Pis con No. 1R to be renewed. Two Part of cylinder liner.u .
(2) pistons distorted in way flanged landing broken off. pper : of gudgeon pin bosses to be
- replaced with owner furnished Bore bearing axial seizure : parts. The tw'o (2) distorted scores. .
pistons to be transported no
- manufacturer in'0akland, No. IR (Starboard forward) .
California, for reconditioning, Piston: . if possible. Credit for dam-
. aged pistons to be allowed.
Id. Pis ton cracked axially over : Ins tall new rings on twelve (12) approximately 1/5 length at skirt , pistons. parts : Assemble rods, rod links and pis-
- cons.
Piston bearing axial seizure , Install twelve (12) piston as-scores. : semblies port and starboard
- banks of starboard main engine.
Piston rings free. : Ins tall new con rod bearings and
- torque to factory represen-No. IR and IL Pair of Connecting . cative's specifications.
Ro ds : Reinstall exhaust manifold and j (articulated, precision matched . water jacket. ! steel forgings) : . Reinstall heads and torque to , factory specifications. l le. Connecting rods suspected af- . Reinstall rocker bodies and pus'.. l facted by overload. : rods.
- Reconnect miscellaneous fuel oi' _
Articulated rod bottom end and lube oil lines, pin slightly scored. [ Reinstall blow down valves and various air linea. Bottom End Bearing of No. 1 : Reinstall governor linkage, and Cylinder Units (shellt:) : -~
. fuel rack for starboard side
. of starboard main engine.
If. Bearing of No. I cylinder ; Reinstall turbo charger on star-units suspected overloaded. : hoa*d cnpine.
- - - - - _ - - - .m.
Case No. 52-15573 FGUND RECOMMENDED Main Bearings In Way Of No. 1 1. (Contidued) 1 Cylinder Units (shells): ) Ig. Main bearings No. 1 and 2 : Assist factory representative suspected overloaded. . in crating used parts that
- are to be shipped to factory.
Scavenge Branch to Cylinder Unit - Reinstall starboard main engine IR (starboard forward): : coupling using new ship fur-
- nished drive balls.
Ih. Cast. flange at cylinder head : Renew various nuts, bolts and end bottom part broken in way of : washers that are missing, bro-attachment studs. : ken and deteriorated.
- Renew all disturbed baskets.
- 11. Six (6) piston gudgeon pins :
on starboard bank distorted. : Starboard Main Engine Sump: lj. TWo (2) pistons distorted in way of : Provide labor, material and gudgeon pin bosses, one (1) in : equipment necessary to open the way of No. 3 unit. : starboard main engine sumps af-
- ter the crew has pumped the oil
- out. Clean the sump to the sat-
- isfaction of the Port Engineer.
- Install Devcon and pipe clamp
- on heating coil in area of bel-
- mouth. Gas free prepare and weld
- sleeve at deck penetration for vent line (approximate 4" line).
- Upon completion of repairs, re-i move debris to the satisfaction of port engineer.
- Main Engine Cylinder Head:
i
- Provide labor, material and
- equipment necessary to rig the
- starboarB main engine lef t bank
- #1 cylinder head ashore, steam clean, magnaflux, make ready for i
inspection and pressure test, Pressure test is to be witnessed by interested parties. As requested by manufacturer, cylinder head to be transported to Oakland, California for fur-
- ther examination and testing.
Cylinder head to be replaced with owner furnished part. Ap-propriate credit to be allowed. Main Eneine Boles: provide magnetic particle inspection services for starboard main engine bolts as per Delaval's requirements. Head bolts 42
. Rod bolts 1 ft. 20
- Rod bolts 2 ft. 10 Total bolts inspected 7I
l I l 1 l Case No. 52-15573 l FOUND RECOMMENDED
- 1. (Continued)
- Starboard Pinion:
. Provide labor, material
- and equipment necessary to rig
- the starboard pinion from en-
- gine room storage into the cas-
- ing and close up in good order.
- Lift main reduction gear
- casing and cle'an all flanges.
- Renew aft starboard pinion bear-
- ing with ship's spare. Install
- starboard pinion lower casing
- and harden.down. Clean and in-
- stall jacking gear. Remove and
- replace various oil lines and
- thermometers as required to
- open and close reduction gear
- bearings and casing.
STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE OUTBOnRD : INTERCOOLER : , Make: Young Radiator Company : l Part No.: NS-007-00 ,(YRC 288955) : Serial No. YM-ll847 ,, 2a. Scavenge manifold, reportedly, .: 2a. Starboard main engine out-flooded with engine cooling water : board intercooler to be discon-in Haifa. : nected and transported to shop. Scarboard main engine out- : The necessary header plate covers board intercooler suspected of : to be fabricated and intercooler leaking. : to be tes ted from the air side
- to water' side. Maximum pressure
- of 25 pounds per square inch.
- All interested parties to be
- notified when test is to be car-l t
- ried out.
- 2b. Four (4) tubes of intercooler
- 2b. A new owner furnished re ,
l leaking in way of tube sheet, as - placement cooler to be provided, revealed by test. : rigged on board a:~ installed in
- good order.
l :
- Furnich labor, material and
- equipment to crate a section of damaged tube nests from star-
- board outboard intercooler and
. transport to New York for metallurgical examination, as di-rec ted by owner's reoresentative.
. Furnish labor, material and equipment to crate remainder
, of starboard outboard intercool-er to engine manufacturer's fa-
- cility in Oakland. California, as directed by owner's repre-sentative.
l r
- Ca se No . 52-15573 t
! FOUND RECOMMENDED p PORT MAIN ENGINE L 3. Engine coupling rubber in- : 3. End plate on coupling to be ternala, reportedly, overheat- : removed , rubber internals to be l ed and destroyed. : removed, area in way to be
- cleaned and new owner furnished
- internals to be installed, and
- end plate resecured.
- 4. Exhaust valves in eight (8) : 4. Affected cylinder heads cylinder heads, total of sixteen : to be removed. Eight (8) heads (16) valves, reportedly, over- : removed by crew from starboard heated and burnt on voyage : main engine and installed in from Haifa to Norfolk. : port engine. The eight (8) dam-
- aged- heads to be removed from i
- vessel at Norfolk and transport-
- ed to manufacturer in Oakland,
- California for reconditioning,
- if possible.
- Credit for damaged heads
- to be allowed. The sixteen
- (16) exhaust valves to be ship-
- ped separately to manufacturer
- for evaluation.
- Eight (8) owner furnished
- cylinder heads to be provided
- and installed in good order.
- 5. No. 6 cylinder liner in the 5. Liner to be removed and ves-right bank, reportedly, developed : sel's spare installed by ves-hard spots. : sel's crew, renewing two (2)
! : 0-rings , ,four (4) compression ring:
- and two (2) oil scraper rings, us-
- ing ship's spares. All necessary
- removals to be replaced, as orig-
- inal.
l'
- 6. Forward and af ter bearing for 6. Shipyard to furnish labor i
pinion shaf t suspected. : to assis t Delaval representative
- in inspecting bearings. Nec-
- essary removals to be replaced.
- 7. Sheet metal ducting in way of : 7 One (1) 64 1/2" long sec-port side air filter house dis- : tion of 30" x 30", 16 gallon torted by turbocharger surge. : galvanized ducting to - be remov-
- ed and renewed.
NOTES: A. Foregoing repairs do not require drydocking. B. Necessary(Separate cili ty . invoice). tugboats to assist vessel to and from the renair fa- , C. Necessary riggers to Isandle lines and gangwav to be provided, f i _ , - - , __ _ ,. - - . , . - ,- - . , . ...A'
r:n n e llo . 5'/-1557l j NOTES: (Continued) D. Necessary cleaning and gas freeing of vessel by vessel's crew prior to entering the repair facility. (Separate invoice). E. Necessary cleaning and gas freeing of engine room bilges and slop. tank prior to commencement of repairs. F. Necessary gas free certificate to be provided. G. Necessary removals to be replaced upon the completion of repairs. H. Necessary disconnection and re-hook-up of vessel's carbon dioxide fixed fire fighting system, as required by repair facility under-writers. I. The following services to be provided, while the vessel. lay afloat at the repair facility; including the hook-up and disconnection, as applicable. Fire line Fresh water Garbage removal 4 Telephone ' J. Necessary services of a manufacturer's representative to be pro-vided. (Separate invoice) K. Necessary replacement parts to be furnished by owners. (Separate invoice) . L. All new and disturbed work to be tested and proven satisfactory. M. All new and disturbed work to be coated, as prior to the casualty. N. Value of scrap material to be credited. O Due credit to be allowed for engine parts returned to engine manu-facturer for evaluation. Norfolk Shipbuilding and Drydock Corporation, Norfolk, Virginia, submitted a price in the amount of $177,500.00 to effect the fore-going repairs, inclusive of Notes "C", "F", "H" and "I", but exclusive of Notes "B", "D", "J", "K" and "O" and premium overtime in the amount of $19,800.00 and reflecting a scrap credit allowance in the amount of
$440.00. This price is considered fair and reasonable.
.The foregoing services as enumerated in Notes "B", "D", " J " ., "K" and '"0" were furnished by Titan Navigation, Inc., et al, on a " time and material" basis. The costs expended in furnishing these services are to be submitted to the undersigned for review.
It was agreed that, if carried out alone, the foregoing repairs , would require: ru Tugboats - Note "B" ------------------------------ Separate invoice Lin e han dle rs - No t e "C" - -- ---- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- S 1,800.00 Gas free certificate - Note "F" ------------------ S 800.00 Carbon dioxide system - Note "H" ----------------- S 550,00
)
.. .-. . . - ~ . _ - - - -. . . - ._ __ _.-.
. 9 Case No. 52-155/3 c Services - Note '.'I" Fire line - Hook up and disconnection --------- $ 300.00 Fresh water - Hook up and disconnection ------- S 300.00 Supply - 200 tons at $3.00/ con ------------ - $ 600.00 L Garbage removal - 15 days at $50,00/ day ------- S 750.00 Telephone - Hook up and disconnection --------- $ 200.00 Long distance. service ----------------------- S 230.00 5,530.00 1
Premium. overtime in the amount of $19,800.00, not included in the above agreed price, was authorized by owners to expedite the foregoing repai,rs and saved four (4) days delay to the vessel. SURVEYOR'S NOTES: l ' It is the opinion of the undersigned surveyor that the damage' as tenumerated in the foregoing under Item No. 2 would not reasonabl attributable to an accidental or fortuitous cause and the owner'ys be re- [!- presentative was so informed. 1 It is the further opinion of the undersigned surveyor that the dam-age as enumerated in the foregoing under Item Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, would not reasonably be attributable to a single incident and the own- , er's representative was so informed. 4 The owners are requested to furnish any further particulars which' may be available pertaining to tho alleged ca.suni rw for review by the undersigned. The foregoing repairs were t .u ried out 6,.ncurrently with owner's
- work and repairs of one (1) other damage as iless:ribed in the follow-
! ing survey report:
Case No. 52-15580 - Generator Damage - November 1, 1981 Also attended at this time was one (1) other survey, as described i in the following survey report: 4 Case No. 52-15589 - Port Main Engine Clutch Damage - June 3, 1981. 7 Owner's work consisted of maintenance repairs to an overhead en-gine room crane, overhauling of life raf ts, overhauling of existing
; radar wave guide, minor refrigeration repairs and. change of port of
- registry, all of which, if done alone, would have required two (2)
, lays afloat.
Arrival of vessel at repair facility ----- 1030 hours, January 18, 1982 i Commencement o f repairs - ------------------ 103 0 hours . Janusry 18, 1982 4 Completion of repairs -------------------- 1500 hours. Februarv 1. 1982 Departure of vessel from repair facility - 1500 ho'urs, February 1 1982 1 Survey made without prejudice and subj ect to adjus tment + Q.U cY l:%t.W-David A. bartc. Resident Serveycr DAB /bcm
- ' + - -b=- -v n----**v+W+ -me- igr MM -r -tv-go.>-4
g - - - , - - - - - t o 2 N I' Oe A N
~
V N < Q N, NI D > ! bA ge
,a u 4
2 b fv N M l 4 l__ l i
l 1 American Bureau of S 7 ipping ! l 65 BRO ADWAY. NEW YORK. NY 10006 Haifa, Israel Report No. HAI-82-2600 _19 August 2.1.982__ _ m.v. STAR 0F TEXAS" THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT the undersigned Non-Exclusive Surveyors to this Bureau did, at the request of vessel's Master, attend the single screw, steel, motor bulk carrier "S T A R 0F T E X A S" of Wilmington, De., (U.S.A.), Official Number 6h293h, Call Letters KNDM, 24,384 gross tons, Record Identity Number 8200628, on the 12, 13, lh, 15, 16, 18 and 19 August, 1982, while the vessel was lying afloat in Haifa Port, Israel, in order to: a) Examine and report upon examination of all main engines pistons skirts - b) Examine and report upon'an item relative to the Continuous Survey Cycle of Machinery. For further particulars, see vessel's Log Books and report as follows: a) DAMAGE TO MAIN ENGINES PISTONS SKIRTS MAIN ENGINES: Make: ENTERPRISE / DE-LAVAL Model Designation: DMRV-12 h , Rating: 7800HP at h50RFM port unit: No. 78036-2937 tested 9/31/79 Stbd. unit: No. 78036-2988 tasted 10/10/79 Reported accumulated total verking hours of main engines: 3,300 hours. NOTE: - Piston skirts marked only with batch numbers with no serial numbers, dates or inspection approval marks.
- Cylinder units counted from forward. ;
- 1. All piston skirts were dismantled, cleaned, crack detected in suspect area in way of coupling studs to piston crown. l Piston skirts that were found free of cracks or other apparent defects
. vere manually ground in way of piston skirt coupling studs nuts i landings to obtain a fillet radius of at least 8=m to casting l
./.
th s . t e. e.,C es Co.p..-e .. h o, e o, . e . ihe ..,e s. ou. .s. non...ds o, o.,,e, C,,,e. .o e, ..e., Con . eou o, sh.op.a. and la assued solely toe the use of the Bureau, les Comme ttees, als clieats or olner owinorated enhhes. Th.s R epor t is o eept sentofson only that the dofo reporied hef eln was COtoened by proCeddes in oCCordOnCe with one or more of the Ggeles, g.ades, i stondoeds er othef Critereo of Ae e* econ Bureau of Sh pping, the vosidity, oppleConsisty ond inie,pretot.on of this Report is governed by
...a.. . . . . . . . . . .......a .....m.....
R; port No. HAI-82-2600 c.v. " STAR OF TEXAS" .- Haifa, Israel - 19 August,1982 Page 2 protrusions in way (Belleville washer landing area). Out of a total' of 2h piston skirts,18 piston skirts were modified in this way, crack detected upon completion of repairs, and proven crack free. The portside main engine was outfitted with pistons assembled with piston skirts removed from port and starboard main engines and modified at this time. The remaining 6 piston skirts modified at this time were retained on board as spares. The starboard main engine was outfitted at this time with 12 new piston skirts as follows: 2 skirts from vessel's stock, which were modified at this time as described above for skirts removed from the engines.10 skirts supplied by the Owners, already modified by the Manufacturer as required. Both main engines were assembled with new gaskets and seals, piston skirts as described above, and new piston rings. All 24 cylinder liners were honed at this time (no weardown measur=ents taken). Upon ecmpletion of repairs, both main engines were satisfactorily tested in operation.
- 2. Damaged Piston Skirts:
A total of 6 piston skirts, out of the original 24 working piston skirts in port and starboard main engines were found, upon examination and crack detection, cracked. Port main engine: No. h left unit and No. 4 right unit. Starboard main engine: No.1, 5 and 6 left units and No. 6 right unit. Cracks appear to have all originated at the sharp notch created at the termination of the fillet radius machined in way of piston skirts studs nuts landings. , Cracks extended to various degrees, from short cracks approximately 1" long, visible from piston skirt cavity only, to large crack, extending right access piston skirt top flat, from top oil scraper ring groove at portside to top piston groove at starboardside, clearly visible from top and bottom sides. The da= aged piston skirts were retained on board. Sectioning for proper metallurgical examination was not carried out at this time. 1 j .........=.
Esport No. HAI-82-2600 m.v. " STAR OF 7EXAS" - Haifa, Israel - 19 August,1982 Page 3 b) CONTINUCUS SURVEY OF MACHINERY The following item was opened up as considered necessary, cleaned, examined and found or brought in satisfactory condition as follows: 3 AUXILIARY GENERATORS MAIN SEA WATER COOLING PUMP (located at lover engine room platform forward, starboard, off center-line, described on braker as " SEA WATER SERVICE PUMP"): NOTE: - Ball bearings renewed.
- Wear rings renewed.
Mechanical seals renewed. It is recomended that the foregoing item No. 3 be credited towards the current Continuous Survey Cycle of Machinery. The undersigned reco=end that this vessel be retained as Classed with this Bureau. AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING j
/ /
Michael Kirstein Surveyor Mrw ~ - Simcha Shraiber Appointed Surveyor Hairs., Israel 19 August, 1982 S
- - - . - , , b
4 .
'd '
Z M
% l b '
l N v3 th CW
'm
., p & %
t-8 i goW
! d .*3
) i"O E5 s O,,
b 2 1 l
" \
I l l l l
l Anterican iBureau of $ 7 ipping G5 BRO ADWAY. NEW YORK. NY 10006
, Haifa. Israel Fercrt No. EAI-81-2539 .- 14 Oec e:b.er.. _1901.
=.v._"P R I D E OF T E X A S" TEIS IS TO CIRTITY THAT the undersigned Surveyors to this Bureau did, at the request of the vessel's !! aster, attend the single screw, steel, motor bulk carrier "P R I D E OF T E X A S" of Houston, Texas (U.S.A.) Official Nu=ber 63h621, 25,77h gross tons, P.ecord Identity Hunber 3123953, on the 7 and 11 Dece=ber, 1901. vhile the vessel was lying afloat at Unifa (Israel) outer anchorace, on the 15 December,1951, while the vessel was lying afloat in Haifa Port and on the 16 Oece=ber,1931. durinC sea triala at Haifa Bay, in order to examine and report upon dacace to starboard l'cin Engine outboard cylinder block (co= mon fer all 6 outboard cylinder units) reportedly discovered on the 6 Dece=ber, 1901, during starticg engine while vessel at anchor at Enifa (Israel) Roads.
For further particulars, see vessel's Log liochs and report as follows: UPO3 E7A'fITATION TOU';D: RECO?"GDID_: e STARBOARD PAIN E5GINE l l'.che : E:m 3 PRISE /Dr~LAVAL . Typer D?'RY-12 h Pating: 7800 HP at h50 EPlt j Cerial No.: 2005 - 7803h
- 1. Starboard Cylinder Block - 1. Starbosrd cylinder block (C.I. coc=on for all 6 to be renewed.
starboard cylinder units): Cylinder block broken and ersched at various locations in way of cylinder No. IR l (starboard forvard unit). Prohen part: Inboard top part, over full lenr.th of No. 15 cylinder unit, down for up to 100.m below cylinder cover studs rochets (tapped holes in cylinder block). f r a ro ...c.ac e. co o .cac. ..m a. - . .s m. sos... o .... isaaa.. . . . a., crie.... . 4.... .,so.... s n.oi..a. and is 'ttu.d 8 6.ly 1., lh. wl. of th. SW, .ou. Oft Commell. 9, 1f8 t il.nts ., othe, . ? Yes.d ental..t B.9 0,9 14 o Ih. S
. .. .. e., me . oo.o ....,.. h ..a ... ... by ... 2,.. o.......m.,.in.....,,.... ... .. .. , ,.....o l Ame,,C.,e $w .ou .i $h ppseg. The woHdaly opplet.DWly and mf e p..tof..n .4 mis 8 0.,t is g.ve,ned by !
fieport :to. EAT-91-2539 n.v. 'P R I D E OP 7 C I A G" - Pai fe, Iersel - 16 recc=ber,1931 i e Pe.=e 2
- Cracks in vty u=d throush all 3 inh = w d tud forward outboard (k out cf 8) cylimler cover studs pockets.
- 2. No. 12 (Starboard forward) 2. Eo, 15 cylinier cover to Cylinder Head -
be re- exa=ined, effectively (ennt steel)r pressure tested and crach detecter med dealt with to the satisfc.etto Cylinder side (pressure side) of the attending AM Surveyor at face = lightly corroded (also tice of repnirs. affecting valves), covered with brown reJdish powdery layer of corrosion products. Icver studs to No.1R inlet canifold branch deformed. l "o. 1R eylinder cover suspected crecked. Inlet and exhaust valves ep;arently intact.
- 3. No. 13 (starboard forward) 3. ITo.1H cylinder 11ser to Cy11cier Lineer he renewed.
Cylinder liner cracked axially over 1/3 ler.gth. Part of cylinder liner i ucper flanced landing broken off. Iors tearing axial siezure scores.
%. Eo.'1R (starboard forward) h. iio. lft piston to be rencved.
i Piston: l l Piston cracked axis,lly over app zi=stely 1/SL at skirt part. Piston %earin:: aziel sie:ure acores. Piston rings free.
./.
FePert Fe. FAI-01-2539 =.v. "P R I D r oT T I I A C' Eaifa. Israel - 16 Dece=ber 1931 o l Pace 3
.To. la and IL Pair of 1
- 5. S. No. In and it pair of I Conse: tins Fods connecting rc3s to be re-eza (articulated,preelsion calibrated and dealt vitL tc '
matched steel for;-ices): satisfaction of the atte:Jit ; A33 Scrveyor at time of repe Connectinc rods suspected affected by overload. Markings of connecting r Articulated red botten - Articulated: rROPP Er end pin sli.-htly scored. 60520 F.C. 167 PLIA 6283 and 528k3 PC.9 ?> 65 0 7 10179 A ; f
- Easter r.tcPP ET 5295C PO.271 ht.1A 6569
- 6. Ectten 2nd Bearing of
- 6. Botta= end bearings of f Ko. 1 Cylinder Units and Eo. IL connecting rods t (shells): receved.
Bearing of No. I cylinder i units suspected everloaded.
- 7. Main Bearings In Vay Of T. l'ain tearings No.1 and 20 1 Cylinder Units. to' be re=eved.
i (shells): s Ifain bearings No. I and 2 suspected overloaded. O. Ctarboard seave=ce air Cooler - S. Starboard air cooler to l re-exaufned. pressure tested dealt with to the satisfacti, Make: TOUIC E CIA'*0R CO. the attendine AE3 Surveyor a-Part No.: 32-007-00 (TRC 293955) *D' '# # P*I _Gerial So.: TM-118h7 , .
. Air cooler suspected Icating.
9 Ctarboard .9eavence !*nnifold: 9. Drain fittinFs of. etarbc Scavers:e canifold partially inlet rscifold to be freed. ficoded with engine cooling vater. Drain fittincs on air eacifold i clogged.
./.
Report No. HAI-01-E537 n.v. "P R I D E OF T E I A 8' - l l l Esifa, Israel _16 Dece=ber,1931 ! I l Page h
- 10. Scavenge Branch to 10. Ccavence bracch to cylinfer Cylinder Unit IR unit Ho.1R to be receved.
(sterboard forward): Cast flance at cylinder head end bottom part broken in var of attachment stuas. I
- 11. Upcm completion of repcirs L starboard cais enEine to te ru:-
In, adjusted and tested to the satisfaction of the attending AES Curveyor at time of repairs.
\ The above reco=mendations for repairs were not carried out at this time on account of lack of pri=eipal repc1 cement parts.
l TEM *ORAET BEPA TM The starboard main engine was effectively isolated from the a: sin i reduction Bears (DELAYAL 15600 MP,1:k.90 serial $54377) by dissantling of the flexible coupling joining the e=gine flywheel with its output pinion. The starbcard main reduction gear pinion with attached air clutch vere rc=oved, at desig=er's instructioca, and all redundcut lutricating oil and control air inlets were blocket with blind fla=ges. Ctarboard pinica shaft penetrations through main reduction gear escing vere blinded and sealed. j Hecoved parts were leshed at af t rsrt cf lover riatfcr= in a sceneclike manner. having rested the- starboard pinien and elutch asce bly o= vooden I cradles.
, Disturbed protection railings were substituted with rope guards.
l i l The pcrt side =ain engine.vas tenerally exaciced, c:intersece repairs 7 cffected thereto based on service reccrds ced vortice hours of vearing elements. l l __ _ _ _ _ J
Uaport .*fo. EAI-CI-0530 m.v. "P P. I D E OF. T E T A 5"
! alfa, Israel - 16 December, 1931 Pane __ 5, , l Ge portside r.ain engine was tested in operation and considered sctisfactcry, includinE operation and set points of safety devises.
1 Ghort ses trials effected, der.custra, tics satisfactory operation c { portside main engine and active part of tranauission. l At Master's request, a Certifiesta of "Titcess to Proceed.' in bal condition (fror. Unifa, Israel, to a U.c. Cult port) was issued (Certificate Eo. HAI-81-2530-I). It is reec=nended that repairs to starboard main engine be effect upon crrival U.S. Gulf port, where. Test.el is heading to in ballast ecadition. It is recon-ended that prior to completion of repairs to starbcar main engine, essin shaft output be limited to operating conditicos of portside nmin engine uc exceeding Manufecturer's reectz: ended exhaust Ls temperature and output torque. It is reecreended that prior to co=?letion cf repairs to starton main eccine, tug assistance be made available, Faster's diseression, when entering or learicc D e undersi,gned reconcend that this vessel be retained es Clarsed with this Bureau. AM%EICAR EUSIA" 0F CEIPPI.':0 2*'5 ~%_ <y.m- / .
/
Cinchs Shreiter Michae'l i~1rstein Appointed Gurveyor Surveyor l Ecita, Israel l l 16 Decesber, 1991 l t ! 1 1
V. PRIDE OF TEXAS & OWNERS Aniarican Bureau of Suipping
- o Falcon I Shipping Co l Titan Navigation Inc. ,
2 Allen Center - Suite 3330A l 1200 Smith Street Houston, Tx. 77002 CUSTOME A INVO4CE NO. DATE BRANO4 V ESSE L 4.0. NVM t!E H 595457 293249 5 Feb 82 415 PRIDE OF TEEAS 8123953 BLANKET P.O. NO. PURCH. ORDER NO. REQUISITION NO. SERVICES AT: Haifa, Israel MFG. NO.: ENCLOSED REPORT / CERTIFICATE: HAI-81-2539, IIAI-81-2539-X ON ACCOUNT OF: STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE DAMAGE Including time outside of (CODE) normal working hours . . . . . . ( 5) FEE $1,965.00 ( 5) EXPENSE 84.00 1 cpy etf./
- 1 cpy rpt attached TOTAL $2,049.00 ac NOTE . ALL SERVICES RENDERED AND CERTIFICATES ISSUED IN CONNECTION WITH THIS INVOICE ARE GOVERNED BY THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF.
PLEASE REMIT TO 65 BROADWA Y, NEW YORK, N.Y.10006 AND A TTACH GREEN COPY FOR PROPER CREDIT. I A3.AC 16SL (REV. SiSI) i l w_-______
l O
~1 i
t I;/l . W le _ l O i E l o l , eup l l l 1 l
*'7ELEPMZME' CAWLE AconE23
,AJREA [;O0', 713 "FALCCN TANM" 75 <.C2'i2 TELEX FALCON CARRIERS, I NC. 7' 25 '
susTt 3330 Two ALLEN CENTER 1200 SMITN STatr7 Houston. texas 77o02 atr. No. July 23, 1982 Levingston' Shipbuilding Company P. O. Box 968 Orange, Texas 77630 Attn: Mr. Joe Barrios, President Transamerica Delaval Inc. P. O. Box 2161 Oakland, California 94621 Attn: Mr. Clint Matthews, General Manager Re: PRIDE OF TEXAS Engine Problems Gentlemen: . I In this letter I wish to express my extreme concern regarding the numerous and serious engine failures suffered by the PRIDE OF TEXAS. The current status of these failures'is summarized in the letter from our operator, Titan Navigation, Inc., Attachment A hereto. 4 The magnitude of these failures goes far beyond the ' type of minor " growing pains" normally experienced on a new vessel, and raise serious questions as.to the basic ' ability of the vessel.to perform its intended function for any extended period. Indeed, our insurance under-writers have become so concerned with the losses i _resulting from these failures that they have requested immediate assurance regarding proposed corrections as a precondition to continuing our insurance coverage (Attachment B hereto) . Needless to say, loss of insurance i
- coverage on the vessel would preclude further operatipns, which would force us to revoke acceptance of the vessel and_ precipitate an economic disaster for all concerned.
i i l
Mr. Jon Barrios Mr. Clint Matthews July 23, 1982 Page Two A I Inasmuch as all of these failures involve matters covered under the applicable warranties for which Levingston and/or Delaval are responsible, we hereby request that Levingston and Delaval provido us with written assurances (1) confirming that the engine in its present condition is safe and seaworthy to continue in operation, (2) confirming your undertaking to correct the engine deficiencies, and (3) summarizing the proposed procedures for making such corrections and preventing future failures, so that we can provide these assurances to our underwriters. In addition, we wish to discuss with you in detail the implementation of these proposed procedures. We sincerely appreciate the manner in which Delaval has in most cases acknowledged its responsibility to correct the failures and cooperated in rushing personnel and parts to the scene of engine. breakdowns to minimize the impact of these breakdowns on our operations. However, it is most distressing that.even with the continued efforts of Delaval and Titan engineers, the engine' failures on the PRIDE have to date resulted in more than 45 days downtime (see Attachment C) , at a cost of more than $1,500,000 in a lost voyage profits alone, without regard to repair and - replacement costs. We cannot continue to sustain losses . of this magnitude without severe adverse financial conse-quences, and it is absolutely critical'that you find and implement permanent solutions for these engine problems in the very near future. i Sincerely, , w.f, /.// n ~sn
# ~
' C . t . Wei President 9
Attachs. c: Mr. Carl Giessel HFC Leasing, Inc. f Mr. James Vandervalk Ingersoll-Rand Financial Corporation Mr. Mitchell Lax Maritime Administration
L Mr. Jon Barrios Mr. Clint.Matthews July 23, 1982 Page Three
-c: Mr. Harrison R. Glennon, Jr.
Titan Navigation, Inc. Theodore Ulrich, Esq. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft b
h 9 1 1
.-. .( .
h g*m g I s I i
..\
U@ b4 X 3W e-I Ed 4A NO GG G 'O *
-vi r4 s CD be '
C On DJ - I, . e'
=
I 1
,...,e,
THE SALVAGE ASSOCIATION
,a accaerea s e .one on censweeave er SUITE 7251. FIVE WoRLD TRADE CENTER E'a!E[aEmon'E's"sUrY=Ev'eq a NEW YORK. N.Y.10048 YN!ENe'eEIsaIME Cable Address " WRECKAGE ** NEW Yo l
.d' a",'E ,"g,'*,,'dE.'E"a'di",jo'$ NoRPoLX OFFICE
" j I's"ob'aYeNeN"riEIc" s cec't vNor.'" . SUITE 1504, UNITED VIRGINIA SANK BUILDING 1
5 MAIN PLAZA, NORFOLK, VA. 23510 SURVEY REPORT HO. CH0830 April 1, 1982 ; ADVANCE ADVtCE NO. 1 Glyis is ta Gertify ; (kal(ke cutdexelncdfetyt:eyex ad(kisltcredclic$al(ke pcegete$lof Johnson S Higgins, 95 Wall Street, New York, New York 10005 and on behalf of the Underwriters concerned, survey the
" PRIDE OF TEXAS" 24,774 REGISTERED GROSS TONS OF HOUSTON OWNERS: ASCO TALCON SHIPPING COMPANY for the purpose of ascertaining the cause, nature and extent of damage alleged to have been sustained on December 6th 1981 to the starboard main engine outboard cylinder block during starting the engine, whilst the vessel lay at anchor in Haifa Roads, Israel. Examination revealed the forward outboard cylinder fractured and part broken and on disassembly of the cylinder it was found that the air intake hanifold was full of water. Further examination revealed the source of water ingress to the air manifold was from the outboard air intercooler due to leaking tubes.
The starboard engine was disconnected and the vessel proceeded on the port engine to Norfolk, Virginia for permanent repairs to the starboard engine. The casualty was surveyed on behalf of Underwriters in Haifa by The Salvage Association, Piraeus Office. l Whilst on passage from Haifa to Norfolk, Virginia whilst the engine was operating in a single engine mode, the port engine exhaust valves over-h.eated and severe vibration was apparent in way of the engine coupling. The casualty is attributed to the railure of the starboard side main en-gine outboard intercooler due to erosion of the inlet tubes.
R: port No. CH0830 "Prida of.Tcxco" Pags . For further. particulars, please refer to the ves' sol's log books and/or statements, the foregoing being verbal information made to the Under-signed Surveyor by the Owner's representative and to the previous report t'
- of the Salvage Association, issued from the Piraeus Office.
I On January 19th 1982 and' subsequently, the Undersigned Surveyor proceeded to Norshipco r Berkley Plant, Norfolk, Virginia where the subject vessel
' lay afloat and upon examination found and. recommended as follows:
1 FOUND RECOMMENDED i PART A STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE ACCESS HOLE: Make: Enterprise /Delaval Provide labor, material and equipment i Type: DMRV-12-4 necessary to cut an access hole be-i Rating: .7800 HP at 450 RPM tween #6 cargo hold and the engine i ' room. Station a portable crane in Serial No.: 2985 - 78034 #6 cargo hold to facilitate engine i room removals and replacements. Starboard Cylinder Block Cast Upon completion of repairs, close Iron (common for all 6 star- access using good marine practice. board cylinder units): ! Wire brush, prime and top coat all Cylinder block broken and disturbed coatings. cracked at various locations . in way of cylinder No. 1R Assist manufacturer's representative 1 (starboard forward unit). in rebuilding entire starboard main l engine. l Broken part: Inboard top }' part, over full length of Details No. 1R cylinder unit, down . I ' for up to 100mm below cylinder Break loose and remove exhaust mani-cover studs pockets (tapped fold and water jacket. holes in cylinder block). Break loose and remove starboard Cracks in way and through all cylinder block. 3 inboard and forward out-board (4 out of 8) cylinder Reinstall new cylinder block and cover studs pockets. harden down - to factory rep. spec. No.1R (Starboard forward) Open and inspect all main bearings. Cylinder Head - (cast steel) Renew forward main bearing with Cylinder side (pressure side) factory spare. face slightly corroded (also affecting valves), covered with Install liners in new starboard i brown r.eddish powdery layer of cylinder block. l corrosion products. l Renew 1 liner in port cylinder block. Lower studs to No. 1R inlet manifold branch deformed. Clean all con rods and pistons.
, . - e .,- - ,, . , - ,
~--,,,,,.,,..,ym.-- ,e , , , - , - - . , , , , - . . , , , , ,
,,a. _+>nnm.,
R; port No. CH0830 " Prida of T4xE0" Pago - FOUND RECOMMENDED Cont. Cont. Install new rings on 12 pistons. ) Assemble rods, rod links and pistons. Install 12. piston assemblies P/S of starboard main engine. Install new con rod bearings and i torque to factory reps. spec.- Reinstall exhaust manifold and water jacket. No. IR cylinder cover suspected Reinstall heads and torque to factory cracked. Inlet and exhaust spec. valves apparently intact. Reinstall rocker bodies and push rods. i No. 1R (starboard forward) Cylinder Liner: Reconnect misc. fuel oil and lubri-cating oil lines. Cylindgr liner cracked axially over 1/3 length. Reinstall blow down valves and var-ious air lines. Part of cylinder liner upper flanged landing broken off. Reinstall governor linkage, and fuel
- rack for starboard side of starboard 1
Bore .aaring axial siezure main engine. scores. Reinstall turbo charger on starboard No. 1R (starboard forward) engine. Piston: I Assist factory rep. in crating used Piston cracked axially over parts that are to be shipped to ! approximately 1/SL at skirt factory. 2 part. Reinstall starboard main engine coup- , Piston bearing axial siezure ling using new ship furnished drive scores. balls. Piston rings free. Renew various nuts, bolts and washers that are missing, broken or deter-No. IR and IL Pair of Connect- iorated. ing Rods (articulated, pre-
- cision matched steel forgings)
- Renew all disturbed gaskets.
Connecting rods suspected STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE SUMP: affected by overload. Provide labor, material and equipment Articulated rod bottom end pin necessary to'open the starboard main slightly scored. engine sumps after the crew had pumped the oil out. Clean the sump Bottom End Bearing of No. 1 to the satisfaction of the Port Cylinder Units (shells): Engineer.
- Bearing of No. 1 cylinder units Install Devcon and pipe clamp on suspected overloaded. heating coil in area of belmouth.
, Gas free prepare and weld sleeve at i deck penetration for vent line j (approximate 4" line). Upon-complet-lon of repairs, remove debris to the satisfaction of port engineer. t 3 -v- - g y v= -,----,-s--i--t,e,v- --c,--~~ -gr-v--,. -e,,-- - , . - - , - , - = ~ ww --3v--r--- .--e-,--+v, - ,-,---- , =-
R; port No. CH0830 "Prida cf Tcxma" "Pago .i I FOUND RECOMMENDED Cont. cont. Main Bearings In Way of No. 1 MAIN ENGINE CYLINDER HEAD: Cylinder Units (shells): Main bearings No. 1 and 2 sus-Provide labor, material and equipment necessary to rig the starboard main i pected overloaded. engine left bank #1 cylinder head ashore, steam clean, magnaflux, make' Scavenge Branch to Cylinder Unit ready for inspection and pressure IR (starboard forward): test. Pressure test is to be wit-nessed by interested parties. Cast flange at cylinder head end bottom part broken in'way of MAIN ENGINE BOLTS: attachment studs. Provide magnetic particle inspection Six (6) piston gudgeon pins on services for starboard main engine starboard bank distorted. bolts as per Delaval's requirements. No. 3 unit piston distorted in Head bolts 42
; way of gudgeon pin bosses. Rod bolts 1 ft. 20 Rod bolts 2 ft. 10 l .
Total bolts inspected 72 STARBOARD PINION: i Provide labor, material and equipment necessary to rig the starboard pinion from engine room storage into the l casing and close up in good order. Lift main reduction gear casing and clean all flanges. Renew aft star-board pinion bearing with ship's
! spare. Install starboard pinion lower casing and harden down. Clean and in-
) ' stall jacking gear. Remove and re-place various oil lines and thermom- , eters as required to open and close l reduction gear bearings and casing. i STARBOARD MAIN ENGINE OUTBOARD INTERCOOLER Make: Young Radiator Company
- Part No.
- NB-007-00 (YRC 288955)
Serial No. : YM-11847 i Scavenge manifold reportedly Starboard main engine outboard inter-j flooded with engine cooling cooler to be disconnected and trans-water in Haifa. ported to shop. The necessary header plate cosers to be fabricated and Starboard main engine outboard intercooler to be tested f rom the air j intercooler suspected of leaking. side to water side. Maximum pressure ( of 25 pounds per square inch. All interested parties to be notified when test is to be carried out. l Tour (4) tubes of intercooler A new replacement cooler to be pro-l leaking in way of tube sheet, vided, rigged on board and installed as revealed by test. In good order. Replacement cooler furnished by Owners, for which a separate invoice is to be submitted.
Rnport No. CH0830 "Prida of Taxen" Psg2 FOUND RECOMMENDED Cont. Cont.- Purnish labor, material and equipment to crate a section of damaged tube nests from starboard outboard inter-cooler and transport to New York for metallurgical examination, as di-rected by Owner's representative. Furnish labor, material and equipment to crate remainder of starboard out-board intercooler to engine manu-facturer's facility in Oakland, California, as directed by Owner's representative. PART B PORT MAIN ENGINE Engine coupling rubber internals End plate on coupling to be removed, ! reportedly overheated and rubber internals to be removed, area destroyed. in way cleaned and new internals, furnished by Owners, to be installed, and end plate resecured. Exhaust valves in eight (8) Affected cylinder heads to be removed. cylinder heads, total of sixteen Eight (8) heads removed by crew from (16) valves reportedly overheated starboard main engine and installed and burnt on voyage from Haifa to in port engine. The eight (8) dam-Norfolk. aged heads to be removed from vessel at Norfolk and transported to manu-facturer in Oakland, California for reconditioning if possible. Replacement heads furnished by Owners, for which separate invoice will be submitted. Credit for damaged heads to be allowed. The sixteen (16) ex-haust valves to be shipped separately to manufacturer for evaluation. No. 6 cylinder liner in the right Liner to be removed and vessel's spare bank reportedly developed hard installed by vessel's crew, renewing spots. two (2) 0-rings , four (4) compression rings and two (2 ) oil scraper rings , using ship's spares. All necessary removals to be replaced as original. Torward and after bearing for Shipyard to furnish labor to assist pinion shaft suspected affected. Delaval representative in inspecting bearings. Necessary removals to be replaced. Sheet metal ducting in way of port 641" long section of 30" x 30", side air filter house damaged by 16 ga. galvanized ducting to be turbocharger surge. renewed. l l l
R; port No. CH0830 "Prida cf Tcxto" Paga GENERAL NOTES i A. Tugboats - Necessary services of towboats to assist the vessel to and from the repair facility to be provided. (Separate Bill) B. Line Handling and Gangways Services of the necessary trades together with equipment and material to make fast and release the vessel's lines and place ar.d remove access gangways to be provided. C. Chemist Necessary services of a chemist to certify the vessel clean and gas free - safe for personnel and fire to be provided, such to include necessary subsequent visits. D. Cleaning and Gas Freeing Engine Room and Slop Tanks Services of the necessary labor, material and equipment to clean and gas free the vessel to be provided, such to include any compartment inertion that may be implemented. E. Services Services of the necessary trades, together with material and equipment to connect, disconnect and/or supply the following services to be provided:
- 1. Fire lines
- 2. Tresh water
- 3. Garbage removal
- 4. Telephones F. Removals and Replacements 3
Services of the necessary trades together with ' material and equipment to remove and subsequently replace all obstructions in way of the subject repairs to be provided. G. Testing Services of the necessary trades together with material and equipment to test and prove the foregoing repairs in accordance with the Rules of the Classification and Government bodies to be provided. i H. Coating l Services of the necessary trades together with material and equipment to recoat all new and disturbed material to be provided. l I. Necessary cleaning of engine room bilges by vessel's crew prior to entry of repair facility. (Separate Bill) 7: 2 J. Vessel's CO System to disconnect and reconnect. K. Value of scrap material credited against cost of repairs. 0
- - - . , , - , . - -_--m _,--, ,,, - - - ,- _ . . . - , - - -
Rcport N;. CH0830 "Prido of Tcxto" P go GENERAL NOTES, cont. L. Due credit to be allowed for piston assembly of No.1 unit which was returned to engine builder. M. Necessary maker's representative to attend during repairs. (Separate Bill) N. Necessary replacement parts to be furnished by Owners. (Separate Bill) The foregoing repairs were carried out by Norshipco, Berkley Plant, l Norfolk, Virginia for an agreed price of ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY DOLLARS ($171,970.00) exclusive of the services described by General Notes A, B, C, E, I, J, L, M, N and premium overtime which is considered by us to be fair and reasonable and reflects a scrap credit allowance of FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY DOLLARS ($440.00). r OVERTIME The cost of overtime which is not included in the above agreed price is in the sum o'f NINETEEN THOUSAND, EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($19,800.00) and is considered to have resulted in a saving of four (4) days. ' SEPARATE ALLEGED AVERAGE REPAIRS Concurrently with the repairs necessary in respect of the subject alleged casualty, Owners elected to effect repairs made necessary in respect of one (1) further alleged casualty having the following principle details. Alleged Casualty November 1st 1981. No. 1 Auxiliary Generator Damage. OWNERS REPAIRS Concurrently with the above described two (2) Average repairs, Owners olected to car: y out repairs to their own account consisting of overhaul-ing liferaf ts, the overhauling of the existing radar antenna wave guide, miscellaneous refrigeration repairs and the changing of the port of reg-istry. _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ __ _ - . . . _ - , . - - - . . _,_.m.. - , . - _ _.
Rcport No. CH0830 "Prida of Tcxca" Paga l COMMON SERVICES The concurrency of Owners and two (2) alleged Average repairs gives rise, in the opinion'of the Undersigned, to certain services and their respect-ive cost expenditures that may reasonably be considered necessary for the psrformance of all categories of repair as follows. Tugboats (General Note A) To and from repair facility Separate Invoice Line Handlers & Gangways (General Note B) $ 1,800.00 Chemist (General Note C) $ 800.00 Fire Line (General Note E-1) $ 300.00 Fresh Water (General Note E-2 ) Connect / Disconnect $ 300.00 Supply $ 600.00
$ 900.00 $ 900.00 Garbage Removal (General Note E-3) $ 750.00 ,Talephone (General Note E-4) '
Conn.tct/ Disconnect $ 200.00 Si.pply Service $ 230.00
$ 430.00 $ 430.00 2
CO System Connect / Disconnect (General Note J) $ 550.00 Total Available Cost of Common Services $ 5,530.00 Excluding the cost of tugboats to assist the vessel to and from the re-pair facility, the foregoing services were provided by Norshipco, Berkley Plant, Norfolk, Virginia for an agreed cost of FIVE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED AND THIRTY DOLLARS ($5,530.00) which is considered by us to be fair and reasonable and is not included in the cost of $171,970.00. Owners are to'present a separate invoice for tugboat services. I I i i_
R3 port No. CH0830 "Prido of TaxEa" Pago 9 - INDIVIDUAL REPAIR PERIOD:4 Regarding the periods of time that Owners and each alleged Average repair would have required had they been effected alone, it was agreed as follow:. Main Engine Repairs. qlleged Casualty December 6th 1981. Drydocking not required. Fifteen (15) days afloat. No. 1 Auxiliary Generator Repairs. Alleged Casualty November 1st 1981. Drydocking not required. Tour (4) days afloat. OWNERS REPAIRS Drydocking not required. Two (2) days afloat. 4 RECAPITULATION l Repairs ! Norshipco Berkley Plant Repairs required to restore vessel to original condition $171,970.00 4
- common Services Norshipco C 5,530.00 Overtime ,
j Norshipco $ 19,800.00 Owners 4 Tugboats to and from repair facility Separate Invoice I Cleaning of engine room bilges Separate Invoice ] Maker's Representative Separate Invoice Replacement parts Separate Invoice J SURVEYOR'S NOTES The Owners have alleged that the cause of damage to the starboard main engine was due to water entering the cylinder firing space from the air manifold and that the source of water ingress from the outboard inter-coolers due to erosion of the cooler tubes. n -- , , - + , , --,--,,y.,- ,n - r-- - ,,- - - - - - - - - ,,-+- ----w----,--4 ,y, , , <-me-
. m ,-
R3 port Na CH0830 "Prido of Taxma" Pags During the course of our survey, it was recommended that the cooler be
- removed and tested. The test revealed that several tubes had developed leaks. The Owners decided to submit portions of the defective' cooler to Lucius Pitkin, Inc. for metallurgical examination.
A report was subsequently issued by the metallurgist, indicating the-cause of the tube failure to be inlet end erosion. A copy of the metallurgical report has been sighted by us and is in ver-batum as follows: After performing the visual examination, a portion of the ir.tde-cooler was removed and forwarded to the LPI Laboratorics for detailed examination. Based upon this examination, it was con-cluded that the cause of tube failures was inlet end erosion of the inner diameter surface of the tubes. No evidence of corrosion wastage or fatigue cracking was observed. Inlet end erosion is a result of turbulent fluid flow in the be-ginning length of heat exchanger tubes. This turbulence usually is a result of a too high fluid velocity and sharp changes in flow direction. Recommendations would be as follows:
- 1. All the remaining intercooler units should be visually exam-
, ined for the presence of erosion by qualififed personnel and any deterioration should be documented.
- 2. The fluid velocity in the tubes should be changed so as not to create turbulence.
i
- 3. If fluid velocity cannot be changed, different tube material t
may be required.
- 4. Plastic inserts (tube savers) could be placed in the inlet ends of the tubes for eliminating the erosion but this can create other possible problems.
- 5. The flow pattern and design of the tube inlet ends might be changed to fair out the flow and minimize turbulence.
Respectfully Submitted i Lucius Pitkin Inc. A. M. Gull Metallurgist i
Report No. CH0830 " Pride of Texas" Page In view of the report issued by the Metallurgist, the damage to the star-board main engine, as detailed in Part "A" of this report, may reasonably be attributed to the cause as alleged by the Owners. In respect of the alleged damage to the port engine, which forms the sub-ject of Part "B" of this' report, no allegation of cause has been presented at this time. The alleged damage was sustained during the voyage from Haifa to Norfolk, when the port engine was used in a single engine con-dition. The coct of repairs to the port engine are in the sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($15,965.00), which is included in the agreed price of $171,970.00. It was stated by the Owner's representative that following the damage to the starboard main engine, the engine was isolated and th'e vessel pro-ceeded on the port engine from Haifa to Norfolk for repairs and that the port engine was operated in accordance with the engine manufacturer's recommendations. - Vessel Arrived Norshipco, Berkley Plant : January 18th 1982 Repairs Commenced : January 18th 1982 Repairs Completed : February 1st 1982 Vessel Departed Norshipco, Berkley Plant : February 1st 1982 e _ i.-- . tr,mo Attending Surveyor: David Ashton W. R. Tye THE SALVAGE ASSOCIATION I l
R2f. 3995 l Memorandum Tc: Mr. Jo'hn McGlashan From: H. M. Hu
Subject:
M/V Pride of Texas Main Engine Intercooler Failure Date: April 27, 1982 The enclosed letter from Johnson & Higgins is sent to you for your record and information. Your attention is directed to paragraph.2 of the letter. The pertinent question raised is whether or not there is a connec-tion between the intercooler and the main engine damage on December 6, 1981. Your clarification will be very helpful to the adjusters in dealing with this case. Kindly drop me a line on this subject at your earliest donvenience. 9 i i e 9 y . -, - , - - . , - . . . - . - , - .- - _ .
, . _ - _ , , - --,,--,mgn, . .
Raf. 4014
<arPrarPnn nrPm
- MAY 121982
,,,_uawau ...._.. ---- u a6 Memorandum To:- Mr. John McGlashan From: Mr. H. M. Hu
Subject:
Pride of Texas Star-Board Main Engine Damage Date: May 11, 1982 The enclosed SAL Survey Report is sent to you to complete your records. Your attention is directed to Page 11 of the Report on which damage to the port engine has not been clearly alleged; therefore, the cause of damage is subject to speculation. I would suggest that you discuss with Mr. Don Brown to establish our allegation thereby removing any impediment to our applica-tion to the Underwriters for payment on account. 1 If you should have a moment to spare, I would like to discuss the matter with you over the telephone. i D
,,_m _ _ - . , . . ., _ .- - - . - - -
------------,.,--g -, --
9 l 1 f 3 ag . D
.D. a
~ Om b f L
- t. q wss ty %. 3 -
eE.t ., ova.
.S. 5-,s \
U ' O M $ e i p .I W M ; W I Q i.:..) L1 I 1 I l 1 1 t l l
American Bureau of Slupping l 65 11 ROADWAY, NEW YORK, N.Y.10006 l l MT 693 1 July 1982 M.V. ' PRIDE OF TEXAS
- THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the undersigned Survey r to this Bureau did, at the request of the Owner's Representative, attend the single screw motor vessel
' PRIDE OF TEXAS' of Houston TX, U.S. A. , ID. NO. 8123953, Gross Tons 243845, whilst afloat at L'alta Drydocks, The Occks, Malta, on the 29th day of June 1982 and subsequent date, in crder to examine damage and repairs to Port Main Propulsion DELAVAL RV 12 Diesel Engine, failures alleged to have occured due to latent defect in skirt casting, whilst vessel was on passage in ballast condition, from Alexandz-ia, Egypt, to United States Gulf Ports, on 25th June 1922 at 03.20 hours and report as follows:- -
UPON EXAMINATION FOUND RECCNT.iENDED REPAIRS Pcrt '.'ain Engine DELAVAL Model RV 12 Port Main Engine DELAVAL Model RV 12 (Piston / (Piston / Cylinders numbered from Forward Cylinders numbered from Forward End Right and End Right and Left Bank 1.e. 1R 1L Lef t Bank 1.e. 1R il 2R 3.). 2R 3R 3L).
- 1. Sesere damage to No.1L cylinder 1. Severe damage to No.1L cylinder unit, to unit, comprising the following: be repaired as follows:
- a. Piston skirt broken away from a. Piston skirt to be renewed in entirety.
crown.
- b. Liner broken (holed) in ring travel b. Liner to be renewed, area, both Forward and Art.
- c. Conrad slightly scarred by flying c. Conrod to be renewed, debris.
- d. Crank webs and counter weights, d. Crank webs and counter weights to ce scarred by flying debris. dressed up as necessary.
- e. No.1 right bank liner bottom end, e. No. 1 right bank liner bottom end, to tc slightly grooved, dressed up as necessary.
- f. No.1L bank cylinder head, damaged f. No.1L bank cylinder head to be renewed in way of valves. in entirety.
- g. No.1L bank inlet and exhaust valves, g. No. 1L bank inlet and exhaut.t valves, :::
impounded into head. be renewed in entirety. con t' d/. . . . . . . 2
"*"' M':.".'.'t.'.7l.".<"t,'i.L*:. : ll'*.:l .'.'?o:.*14*"::*.?::.s:'.~.9*.? .;':.:::..*'..**'.'. ',; ':l.2'..:.C':. *a.;'.*: %.??l.:"'*:'
\ C'?. :::". ;.*:. '::: ::', ::."L 'l.;C.'1,L':"l.i'..*CC t .'. :N::' ;". .?;:*.7.,7. ' o * ':.:7.: I:::*.nd'; '.**,'t.';'.?i':. *;;"i::'.l.;; 1
- ;;;'...o
. ':l,. :::.'::;
.. . ?l ll.: .': ' .:: ?:'.:.::.'.'
.........u....... . . . ..' ...':*..*.'.,':.'.a...*,*.
l:'.'.C'.:'.t*:.;.:. ll.;;,r.' l? ;;;/:.' ?.:'.*:"a.'.,.t.'a::.."::::::
.........,a.
1 1 e
Amencan B.ureau of Shippug ! spoes MT 693 ones 1 July 1980 M.V. ' PRIDE OF TEXAS 8
- h. No.1L bank rocker gear holding bolts, h.
- No.1L bank rocker gear holding bolts, to distorted and bent. be renewed in entirety.
- 1. No.1L bank rocker housing, broken in 1. No.1L bank rocker housing to be renewed.
j way of hold down studs.
- j. No.1L bank tappet pads scarred / burred j. No.1L bank tappet pads, to be dressed up as on edges, necessary.
- k. L.O. Surrp Tank, contaminated with debris k. L.O. Sum Tank to be cleaned, engine flushec' and water. and charged with new oil.
a
- 1. ..................................... .
- 1. No.1R bank piston assembly, to be renewed.
Removed piston assembly to be dissassemblec and dye check inspected. '; m. ..................................... m. All other piston assemblies, "to be visually e.xamined as far as practicable, without removal from part prime mover.
- n. ..................................... n. Berthing facilities to be made available throughout duration of repairs. Necessary tugs to be provided.
1 De above reccmmended repairs were satisfactorily carried out at this tiene. The tendersigned recommends that this vessel be retained as classed with this Bureau. i r L kn o - A. OEF.tlELI - SURVEYG I. d
,,,. . e seis s.. im l
t
American Bureau of Slupping 65 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, N.Y.10006 1 MT S3 i July 1982 M.V. ' PRIDE OF TEXAS' THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the undersigned Surveyor to this Bureau did, at the request of the Owner's Representative, attend the single screw motor vessel
' PRIDE OF TEXAS 8 of Hcuston TX, U.S.A. , ID. NO. 8123953, Gross Tons 243845, whilst afloat at Malta Drydocks, lho Docks, Malta, on the 29th day of June 1982 and subsequent date, in c-der to examine dsmage and repairs to Port Main Propulsion DELAVAL RV 12 Diesel Enging, failures alleged to have occured due to latent defect in skirt casting, whilst vessel was on passage in ballast condition, froen Alexandeia, Egypt, to United States Gulf Ports, on 25th June 1982 at 03.20 hours and report as follower-LPON EXAMINATICN FOUPO ,R,gqQe@ QED REPAIRS Port Main Engine DELAVM. Model RV 12 Port Main Engine DELAVAL Model RV 12 (Piston /
(Piston / Cylinders numbered frorn Forward Cylinders numbered from Forward End Right and End Right and Lef t Bank i.e.1R 1L Lef t Bank 1.e. 1R 1L 2R 3.). 2R 31 3.).
- 1. Severe damage to No.1L cylinder 1. Severe damsge to No.1L cylinver unit, to unit, comprising the followings be repaired as follows:
- a. Piston skirt broken away from a. Piston skirt to be renewed in entirety.
crown.
- b. Liner broken'(holed) in ring travel b. Liner to be renewed.
ares, both Forward and Art.
- c. Conrad slightly scarred by flying c. Conrod to be renewed.
debris.
- d. Crank webs and counter weights, d. Crank webs and counter weights to be scarred by flying debris. dressed up as necessary.
- e. No.1 right bank liner bottom and, e. No.1 right bank liner bottom end, to be slightly grooved. dressed up as necessary.
- r. No. tL bank cylinder head, damaged f. No. iL bank cylinder head to be renewe:!
in way of valves. in entirety.
- g. No.1L bank inlet and exhaust valves, g. No.1L bank in!.et and exhaust valves, ::
impounded into head. be renewed in entirety. car. 4* 1/ . . . . . . . 3
~
"' h' :':/r.*.:7.".!'t!.'t r.".J :.":".'!! '.tJ,",;; '."J.':*.t" .=ft.;;.7.:* :: ".Trt..t '2*.'t.". . .::.".tc.tr r r:".ra
=:r:: r:..r':.'::::.:::::;;
. J.mf ~r":.' ." t :". *:1.'.":7 rn. :::irr.:*..v.l77 '".t":'::='..:::
' ...r::::: ". .. ... ....a..?:**.~!
. . .. . . . . . . '?.*:.
. ..r!.',:::'.='
. ..,. ?. '::.r..:.:..h.
~ ... . .
'.::?.?.=:/, '.?: 7.r. :.'L1' :::
- a. mg
2-Amencan Bureau of Shipping i apon
- MT 693 oats 1 July 1982 W.V. ' PRIDE OF TEXAS'
, h. No.1L bank rocker gear holding bolts, h. No.1L bank rocker gear holding bolts, to , distorted and bent. be renewed in entirety.
- 1. No.1L bank rocker houeing, broken in i. No.1L bank rocker housing to be renewed.
. way of hold down studs.
l
- j. No.1L bank tappet pads scarred / burred J. No.1L bank tappet pads, to be dressed un as on edges. necessary.
- k. L.O. Sump Tank, contaminated witti debris k. L.O. Sump Tank to be cleaned, engine flushcJ and water. and charged with new oil.
- 1. ..................................... 1. No.1R bank piston assembly, to be renews.d.
Removed piston assembly to be dissassembled and dye check inspected.
- m. ..................................... m. All other piston assemblies, to be visually examined as far as practicable, without I
removal from part prime mover.
- n. ..................................... n. Berthing facilities to be made available throughout duration of repairs. Necessary L tugs to be provided.
i The above recomrrended repairs were satisfactorily carried oJt at this time.
! The undersigned recommends ttis t this vessel be retained as P.lassed with this Bureau.
l 4 i. 1 i
?
l . OL,.. ' A. CEMIT .I - SURVEYW > 1
, i
.s ..:e. unr-i l l
l l
O. F. GOLLCHER & SONS LTD. cont. ch0ct no.6. M A f. Y A REPAIR TIMES. The damage repairs required four days to be completed, afloat. No Owners' repairs were carried out at this time. The vessel arrived at the repair yard on: 28th June, 1982. Repairs completed and . vessel sailed on: 1s: July, 1982. 9 3 8 4.il,,t, i R.SPITERI.. //33 i SURVEYOR. i 1 1
....-_--___--____--__.__.________-._-_--__--_.-__.---__-__.-_-__--____-.__---____---..--_.---.______-___------------a
l s - r
-e-
. IL .* <
s
- )
A!J3LEITE 9 l l THE SALVAGE ASSOCI ATION CERTIFICATE OF APPOINTMENT OF SURVEYOR A requese for the , appointment of a Surveyor having been received by The Salvage As sociation on . . . 2.0.d'.8.2. . . . . . . . . to survey
.P. R. I. .D.E. .O. F. . .T.E.X. A. S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a t . . M. .a.l.t. a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
we Th e S a lva ge As s o ci a t i on h ave ap p o in te db .1.U.5d .' .s, ,A,ge n,t,s, ),1,a l a , , , to effect the aforesaid survey. The attached Report, nun:b are d . . . N[."P 7.0,8. . . . . . . . . b y L.10Y.d,8 s, ,/;ge,n,ts , y,a,lta. . . . . . . . . has been examined by the unde rsigned Principal Surveyor of The Salvage Association . . . . .Q .yA. . . . . . office who believes confidence may be placed in the can' tents thereof and has stan: ped the 'teport accordingly. All future correspondence relating to this report should be re fe rred dire ct to The Salvage Association issuing office with a copy to The' Salvage Association Head Office, London, re fe rence GD.,
,1,ee
, L'sl Date J p th, Ju,17, J p$ ,2, , , , , ,
s .- Cert..AS 1.6.81 l
)
m . O. F. GOU.CHER c SONS LTD. niunoms. . rwa..mn.mus emn
.. m . . , uuse*=. -conc =. nuinamana-tritz. matta mw22naw2es . cotene
~
s mnt AND CAeCO suavtToss 19 ZACHARY STREET. YALLETTA. MALTA. PRIDE OF TEXAS. D*'es MALTA-Sth July,19 82. INSTR: 28.6.82. RS/mp.708. SURVEY REPORT. THIS IS TO CERTIFY, that at the request of Messrs. O.F. Gollcher & Sons Ltd., Lloyd's Agents at Valletta, Malta, through the General Manager of The Salvage Association, London and on behalf of Underwriters concerned, survey was held on the steel, single screw, bulk carrier,
' PRIDE OF TEXAS' of the port of Wilmington, Delaware, 24.394 Gross tons register, whilst lying afloat at Malta Drydocks, The Docks, Malta, for the purpose of ascertaining the cause, nature and extent of damage alleged to have been sustained under the following circumstances:
- 1. APRIL, 1982, LORAN DAMAGE ANTENNAE, BOOSTER & LORAN SET SHORT CIRCUITED BY LIGHTNING.
Whilst on passage during voyage six, in April, 1982 (destination not submitted to us) it was reported that the Loran antennae was struck by lightning causing damage to antennae, booster, wiring and Loran set. n, l l l
.../2...
t
O. F. GOLLCHER & SONS LTD. cont eneet no.2. MALTA
- 2. 2STH JUNE, 1982, PORT MAIN ENGINE NO.1 LEFT BANK UNIT DAMAGE.
Whilst on a ballast passage between Alexandria and~ Gulf Ports, U.S.A., the port main engine broke down. The engine was stopped and upon investigation found that the No.1 left bank unit, desintegrated. For further particulars please refer to the log books which have been examined. The vessel is a bulk carrier with six holds all forward of the accomodation, and machinery space, and propulsion is given by two De La Val Enterprise diesel engines. 28TH JUNE, 1982. Proceeded on board on this date and subsequently and in company with the Owners' Representative found as follows:
- 1. April, 1982 - Loran Damage.
Loran set Morrow Electronics, Inc. Serial No. 33238.
- Internally short circuited and unoperational.
- Antennae deformed and burned.
- Booster burned.
- Wiring internally burned.
It is recommended that the Loran set and system is to be renewed.
.../3...
O, F. GOLLCHER &: SONS LTD.
-cent. theet no.3'.
MALTA Renewal of the set, antennae and booster and permanent repairs to the system's wiring were deferred at this time, until a new set can be purchased from the U.S. A. No temporary repairs were carried out or considered necessary.
- 2. 25th June, 1982, Port Main Engine Damage.
Main engine details:- units numbered from forward. De La Val Enterprise RV12. Built: May, 1981 - U.S.A. Total running hours: 5791 hours. l Date unit was last surveyed': May, 1981 when l engine was new. B.H.P: 7800 at 450 revs / min. According to the Owners' Representative the vessel sailed from Alexandria on the 24th of June, 1982, and at 0320 hours on the 25th of June, 1982, the port main engine broke down. Upon investigation it was fount that extensive damage was caused inside the No.1 left bank unit due to desintegration of the piston skirt, and it was decided to divert the vessel to Malta for repairs where it arrived at 0354 hours on June 28th, 1982. l l The port engine was taken out at commission and the vessel arrived at Malta by using the starboard engine only. I I
.../4...
l 6 l t
O. F. GOLLCHER & SONS LTD. cont. eheet.no.4. MAb7A Upon our examination the No.1 left bank unit components were found as follows:
- Cylinder cover suspected cracked. !
1
- Piston skirt desintegrated.
- Piston crown scored.
- Cylinder liner fractured.
- Cylinder head valvos and rocker assemblies bent.
- Crankshaft web in way of No.1 unit scored by debris.
- Connecting rod scored by debris.
- Lub oil sump tank contaminated by water and debris.
No loss of lubricating oil, loss of cooling water, or seizure of the piston were found. Permanent repairs were effected at this time. I ___ ___ ___ The Owners' Representative alleged that this damage was sustained due to initial cracking at the sharp corner inside the piston skirt in way of the securing hole structure. It was, stated that eventually the crack got longer and deeper and the piston skirt disintegrated causing damage to the other parts as mentioned above. It was stated by the Owners' Representative, that the skirts having this sharp corner inside the casting around the four securing bolt holes is of an old design and are not supplied anymore. It was stated that this sharp corner has now been modified to give a shallow curve to eliminate this stress area. Hence, the Owners' Representative stated that the prime cause of damage was ' Latent Defect' during manufacture. In our opinion the damage found could reasonably be
. attributed to a casualty of the nature of that put forward.
.../5...
O. F GOt.LCHER A SONS LTD. _ cant. cheet no.5. MALTA PERMANENT REPAIRS RECOMMENDED & CARRIED OUT. All damage parts were renewed by spares taken from the vessel's own stock. For full particulars of the permanent repairs carried out, examination of the ship repair
~
account attached to this report is invited. Drydocking was not necessary to carry out the permanent repairs. The seaworthiness of the vessel was affected. ACCOUNTS. The Owners placed the permanent repairs in hand l with Messrs. Malta Drydocks, The Docks, Malta. Owners work was not carried out concurrently with the damage repairs. The costs of the permanent repairs have, we l understand, been agreed by the Owners and they { are approved by us as indicated below, being" considered fair and reasonable for the work h carried out.
- MALTA DRYDOCKS Invoice No.4512. Dated 5th July,1982.
j General expenses account. Amount Invoiced: EM2070.
- MALTA DRYDOCKS Invoice No.4512. Dated 5th July,1982.
Damage Account. Amount Invoiced: EM1845. l i The spare parts invoices and the lub oil renewal invoices will be submitted at a later date by the Owners' Representative.
.../6...
ozeem u se av nova 6 c .a n a iner
.... To the General Manager Tr:gr tas
. x s A Lv A av- A ssocr ATION Bookside House GENOA OFFICE 107 112 Leadenhe'l Street London EC3A 4AP
...NFS/R1F.
LPS/AP. (R. 221/8 2) Geaoa, .16..th .J.uly 19.8.2 ... Na 221/82 PRIDE OF TEXAS
'(Instruction 'd' ate' 2'8--6-.8'2 )
We refe r to the captioned vessel and to Lloyd1s Agents r'e po rt N' RS/mp.708 dated Malta, 5th July 198 2 and in particular to page 4 o t' that report where the prime cause of damage of the N' 2 casualty (port main engine) is des cribed. Whe re the surveyor uses the te rm " latent de fe ct'5 it is cle a r that what he in fact refe rring to is a Design Fault and that this is in fact the pri .te cause alleged by the Owners
- Representative with which the surveyor agrees.
/ '
JU
- c. c. Lloydf s Agents Malta ! SIGNED) L. P. SMITH p.p. C. N. LA M B Principal Surveyor
I l \ ! l l ' rl 4-.
=g 3 n fi f k .'
g bo a . T-2. 8 l g,3 , x [Q a & w.gg , c t .-
!. $. +k 2 .o u l
l Amencan Bureau of Shipping 65 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, N.Y.10006
)
ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES SALVAGE ASSOCIATION INC. ! OF NEW YORK, N.Y. M-8129 Ealboa , Panama Reoort BL 8696 10 June 1981 M.V. " PRIDE OF TEXAS " REPORT OF SURVEY made by the undersigned surveyor to this Bureau as the representative of the United States Salvage A=seciation, Inc., on the 5th, 6th, 9th and 10th days of June 1981 under authorization of the Association's Executive Office at New York at the request of Johnson and Higgins on the steel single screw motorship" PRIDE OF TEXAS" 23,500 gross cons, of Houston, Texas whilst the vessel lay afloat at the anchorage, Balboa, Panama in order to ascertain the nature and excent of machinery damage (verbally) alleged sustained as a consequence of recorded but non-corrected excessive vibration experienced initially during builders trials and subcequently during operation whilst on a passage from Mobile, Alabama to mainland China via the Panama Canal laden with a cargo of grain. (1) ATTENDING: Mr. John McG1ashan......................... Owner's Representative Captain S .S . Grif fin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ves s el's Mas ter Mr. D.M. 0ver ton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ves s el's Chie f Engineer Mr. M. Hardwick. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dei aval Rep t. Mr. John 01sen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entercris e Rep t. (2) DOCUId.NT,S,L (a) As no formal allegation as t.o cause of the subject c.ascalty has been presented it vae recommended that partinent data be provided ec, substantiate that damage was fortuitously caused whereupon Owners Representative stated same would be subtaitted at a later time and place. (b) The following are attached for reference /reptvduction/ distribution purpenes as may be required.
- - Chief engineer's statement dated 3 June 1981 at Balboa, Panama.
- - Copy of engine log dated 4 June 1981.
"AIRFLEX" clutch drawing (2 sheets).
Thss Certificate is granted subject to the condd on that it is understood and agreed that nenher the Bureau nor any nor any of its Offeers. Surveyors. Agents or Empeyees e under any circumstances whatever to ber held respons.o in any report or certf.cate .ssued Dy this Bureau or ns Surveyors or in any entry .n Aecord or oiner puchcanon'or ine Bureau or fo any of as or ineir errors of judgroene defaust or neghgence. Form A 8.141 Aev (12/78) l
l American Bureau of Shipping econ, EL 8696 e v.
, fee.
e 10 Jime 1om (3) DESCRIPTION: Vessel is a 584' x 93'2 x $0'2 conventional bulk carrie r with machinery and acconanodations af t built 5-1981 as hull 751 by the Livingston Shipbuilding Company of Orange, Texas on its maiden voyagee Propu' ion machinery consists of two diesel engines driving a single screw through appropriate clutches and gearing. Engines furnished by Transamerica-DeLaeral " Enterprise" RV-12 models e ch rated at 7,800 BH1'e Clutches are supplied by the Eaton Corporation "AIRELEX" divi;ione Model 38VC 1200e FOUND: RECOMMENDED: (4) Port main engine clutch reported (4) Disassemble clutch and remove to have failed on 4 June 1981 components to shop for inspection during transit of the Panama Canal renewals / repairs as required, e was examined with findings as atatic and dynamic balancing follows; and tests all under the supervision
- - 20 fasteners connecting adapter of maker's service engineere plate to friction shoe retainer Re-install aboard the vessel and element four:d battered and/or subject assembly to installation and sheared and/or missing. operational trialso
- 24 friction shoes heavily burnt /worne '
end anti-friction bearing failuree
- drum / shaft surfaces stored. -
(5) Reported e:ccessive vibration (5) Provide expertise and instrumentation not investigated at this timee to measure and identify vibration with a view to issuance of recoc=enda-tions leading to satisfactory levelse (6) Transient malfunction of port (6) None. engine control mechanism was reported corrected by maker's representative aboard the vessel. 1 COURSE OF ACTION: l (7) The aforementioned recormendations were not carried out a e this time Sutvtfot The Cere. fame se yeased meteers se the saadas sa shee se e waneeneoad and myeed thee a..ehee the swee rio, eny of .se Com eeeee ,uw , es ese ote m S tweyers, Apnee er (medeyees es wader arew eartweaseenwee udtsesver es be head toggoneseWe fee may enere. eery on aa, espore se eget f. care M ey shee E., eau er we $ cwevere se sa eay sesey ea steemre er geher paesessenen of the ev eme e se fee say of are or them enesas ed sese,/neae, r.efmede er negp.gerua Fe,en A 8.1135 81es if71
American Bureau of Shipping i 1 epoer w BL 8696 sum w ein 10 June 1981 as vessel elected to divert to Long Beach, California for further survey l and permanent repairs. I j Accordingly the following were carried out as a temporary ' expedient in order to enable the vessel to proceed on both engines.
- - scorea sections of inner drum /shaf ting hand filed to a satisfactory surface.
- - entire friction shoe element including 24 friction shoes cud inflatable feature renewed. '
- - end bearing renewed.
- - 20 threaded fasteners renewed.
- - satisfactory operational trial.
Survey =ade without prejudice and subject to adjustment. UNITED STATES SALVAGE ASSOCIATION INC.
~
Oliver Paul Cote Representative suivaros
- n. c .e .e ei= e i. in. . w. a in.i .. am,.io.e -w e m. ~.en- in. s- , a., .e ... c . .e one s , a . s , .v - e.,n.,=. -a c. - e. i n e a..tw. e., -., ,-, - = . . ., c,...eo. ., .
s ~ ., as s ,-, . .a -, .auw .a a -m = .*- - w a .e va. e- , ., i., - , .e .= ., m.. . .,, .e w , . e . - --e ,-.= s f or.se A 5.1135 a.w. II71
Titan Navigation, Inc. l June 17, 1981 l l Levingston Shipbuilding Company Post Office -Box 968 Orange, Texas 77630 Attention: Mr. J. Barrios, President
Subject:
Failure of Main Propulsion Engine - June 3, 1981 Gentlemen:
.In accord with Article 19 of the contract for the construction of five 36,000 DWT dry bulk vessels MA Design CS-M-129, written notice is given on behalf of the owner and charterer of the PR1DE OF TEXAS of the failure of the main propulsion system which resulted in the vessel becoming completely disabled cnd being towed to a safe anchorage in Balboa, Panama for repair. The failure occurred on June 3, 1981 while vesse3 was transi-ting the Panama Canal enroute to China with a full cargo cf grain.
Whereas the exact cause of the fai. lure has not yet been determined the sequence of events leading up to the failure is described below. At approximately 1615 on June 3, 1981, a control fault in the port engine control loop prevented normal start and assumption of ahead speed by the propeller in response to an order from the bridge control station. The port engine was disconnected and. transit of the canal resumed on the starboard engin'e. Within one half hour, during which excessive vibration occurred, fire was extinguished and operation resumed on the starboard engine. However, at approximately 1830 the vibration increased noticeably and inspection of the port clutch revealed that the outer clutch was completely adrift and all the fasteners were missing from the forward i I support flange of the clutch assembly. Operation of the train propulsion system was terminated at 1835 and the vessel was towed to a safe anchorage. l l l
====* ==*a e e e ese ecktTCO . unt 14 TON. TEXAS 77002 7131757-1467
6/17/81 l Page 2 Telephone advice was given me by Iir. John McGlashan, Superintendent Engineer of Titan, who was on board the vessel at the time of the failure. Telephone advice was also given to Delaval principals by Mr. M. Hartwig, Delaval engineer, who was also on board. Shortly after receivinrj notice from Mr. McGlashan, I telephone Mr. Terry Rahar of Levingston, informed him of the failure and the fact that repairs would have to .be made in Panama and requested thst he remove clutch parts from the engines for Hull 753, which we would pick up and forward to Panama. During the next several days I had conversations with Mr. Garry Mower of Delaval, primarily in the '. interest of expediting the repair. Repairs were made to the clutch by Servicios Tecnicos Industriales S.A. in Balboa, using parts removed from the engine of Hull 753 and the vessel was issued a seaworthy by the American Bureau of Shipping and sailed at 0730 on June 10, 1981. Vibration similar to that which caused failure of the clutch and disabled the vessel was first noted during the dock trial and has been in evidence during the subsequent , sea trial and during the first voyage of the vessel. With both engines in operation, the vibration disappears at speed above 36 R.P.M., however, with one engine in operation the vessel can only operate in an emergency mode over the entire range of R,P.M. The operator is unable to state the primary source of the vibration but can state that either a design, manufacturing, or installation deficiency of major import-ance does exist and hence, looks to the prime contractor, Levingston Shipbuilding Company, for correction of this guarantee deficiency and the expenses which arose during the. emergency repair of the vessel as she lay at anchor in Balboa, Panama. Very truly yours ia. n . p. H. R. Glennon, Jr.
- President
! 9 c: Mr. Carl Giessel (Hull 751 - IRFCI Partnership) i Mr. C. C. Wei Mr. H. Reed Wasson ! Mr. K. L. Dow ! Mr. T. M. Dyer
linikd uss M5 l Steel l LAW DEPAATMENT NOATHERN AREA OFFICE ((M b SCO MISSA8E SUILDING DJLUTH. MINNESOTA 55802 September 23, 1983 Michael S. Miller, Esquire Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Christopher and Phillips 1900 M Street, NW - 8th f1r Washington, D. C. 22036 Re: Long Island Lighting Company
Dear Mr. Miller:
As agreed I enclose Ralph H. Bertz's explanation of subpoened documents and the documents themselves. I understand that you accept this as complying with the subpoena and do not require Mr. Bertz to appear to explain the documents at this time. Yours truly, f n ,3 c M M C. L. Stevens, Jr. General At'torney CLS/ law Enc. cc: R. H. Bertz l l 1
Septsmber 23, 1983 Explanation of '.nformation assembled by USS Great Lakes Fleet Services, Inc. in response to subpoena in the matter of Long Island Lighting Company - Docket No. 50-122 0.L. l This information was prepared by and under t' a supervision of Ralph H. Bertz, Director, Engineering. An explanation of the information furnished follows: Item Caption on Item Explanation
- 1. Request 3 sn= mary memo prepared Sept. 1983 by Ralph H. Bertz to satisfy subpoena
- 2. Fuel Oil (same)
Specifications A. Items 3-9 pertain to failure of cylinder head 518E. 4
- 3. Mechanical Report prepared by Chief Engineer L. H. Pierson 80-96 7-18-80 on board E. H. Gott upon installation of head 518E; acknowledgement of receipt in office on 7-22-80 by E. R. Merry
- 4. Mechanical prepared by Chief Engineer L. H. Pierson Report 80-176 on board E. H. Gott while Gott was still operating on 11-13-80; explains reason for replacement; U. S. Steel blanked out head that replaced 518E; acknowledgement of rece.ipt in office on 11-18-80 by E. E. Liberty
- 5. Minutes -
- 6. Failurc No. exce rpt from summary sheet kept by U. S. Steel and Transamerica Delaval
- 7. Telex 335304 from U. S. Steel's Bruce Liberty to Bert Durie and Steven Schumacher of Transamerica DeLaval
- 8. Telex Enterprise Oak reply from Transamerica Delaval rMww*o
- 9. Engine Room Log shows engine %eem data on trips 32-36; and Abstract prepared on board Gott -n de wim J_-
- pc :: c. 1 Gil Acac ope m ius ~u d i. .~
DJoeLo a.rw Of $.a L eJ M G s* Wa O f* M eJ
? ,
7 pz14 a a 1% p., Y m.?c . <W Y' y a e <. ~ u s ... w. m Aw l l l l l
= - _ _ _ .. .-. - .
B. Items 10-17 pertain to failure of cylinder head J65273D.
- 10. Mechanical Report . prepared by Chief Engineer W. E. Shuga on ,
WC&E 3121 board E. H. Gott 11-1-79 upon installation of head J65-273 D
- 11. Failure No. (same as item 6)
- 12. Transamerica Delaval arises from inspection aboard Gott by Memo 1-9-81 Transamerica Delaval's S. G. Schumacher 12-30-80 to 1-2-81. Page 2 shows that
, among the heads located was J65273D. This inspection does not itself deal with the failure of the head. Irrelevant matters blanked out.
- 13. Transamerica arises from inspection aboard Gott by i Delaval Memo 1-23-81 Transamerica Delaval's S.G, Schumacher 1-3-81 to 1-11-81. Page two states that head J65273D was cracked.
- 14. Telex 335304 from Transamerica Delaval to USS Great Lakes Fleet
- 15. Minutes of meeting irrelevant matters blanked out 1-30-81
> 16. Transamerica Delaval internal Transamerica Delaval memo of which . Memo 2-17-81 a copy was sent to U. S. Steel *
- 17. Engine Room Log (same as item 9) and Abstract C. Items 18-24 pertain to failure of cylinder head 144E SR.
- 18. Mechanical Report 80-41 prepared on board Gott by Chief Engineer K. Kitinoja 6-1-80 upon installation of head 344E SR; acknowledged in office on 6-12-80 by B. E. Liberty
- 19. Transamerica Delaval (basically same as item 12)
Memo 1-9-81
- 20. Transameriha De'laval of the four failed heads referred to in the Memo 2-27-81 memo, the SR head which failed was 344E SR.
- 21. Failure No. (same as item 6)
- 22. Telex 335304 to USS Great Lakes Fleet from Transamerica Delaval
- 23. Minutes of meeting --
1-30-81 i I
9
- 24. Engina Roca (same ca iten 9)
Log and Abstract D. Items 25-30 pertain to failure of cylinder head P68891E.
- 25. Tradamerica Delaval (basically same as item 13)
Memo 1-23-81
- 26. Mechanical Report 81-232 prepared by Chief Engineer R. M'. Hutton on board Gott on removal of head P68891E
- 27. Failure No. (same as item 6)
- 28. Shipping instructions from U. S. Steel's B. E. Liberty to Transamerica Delaval
- 29. 0 148781345 Telex to U. S. Steel from Transamerica Delaval
- 30. Engine Room covers trips 27-32 Log and Abstract
, 31. USS Great Lakes Fleet Se rvices , Inc. Column one lists heat number (which is t stamped on each head) of each head and date of manufacture or date of heat insofar as USS Great Lakes Fleet Services, Inc. has or has been given this infor ation by
- i Transamerica Delaval. Note chht head WT-K43-447-D, involving a cracked head, was repaired by Derrington, not Transamerica Delaval. Hours prior to repair not ;
available as to this one head. Item 31 was prepared by R. H. Bertz in September, ' 1983 in response to subpcena. O i 2
- e. _.
,-.---1., ,,.,,.,a - - . - - - ,m. .- --,. ., , , - - -
I Ftqu:st 3 - United Statsa Stesl Corporation 1 1 I. Fuel Specification - The M/V EDWIN H.,GOTT used fuels as per these specifications as noted since the vessel was placed in service April 1979. II. History of the following heads manufactured since 1978 and failed in service: WT N93 518E WT J65 273D l-29-79 SRSR WT N30 344E 10-12-79 SRP WT P68 891E 2-22-80 The history displays documents showing:
- 1. Installation information
- 2. Failure information
- 3. Recording on a failed head summary sheet
- 4. Correspondence and memo $with TDI
- 5. " Engine Room Log & Abstract" recording operating parametersfor the voyages immediately prior to failure III. A compiled listing of heads' currently in service on TDI engines
! S.N. 75039/40 displaying heat number, date installed and hours of service as of 7/27/83. Heads shown are tnose manufactured
. 1978 or later only.
s ( i f i
FUEL OIL SPECIFICATIONS GREAT LAKES VESSELS SPECIFICATION DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATION VALUE NO. 2 CIESEL FUEL 011. 1. API Gravity Minimum 30.0
- 2. Cetane Number ' Minimum 40
- 3. Flash Point Minimum 140 F This fuel used by 4. Vater & Sediment Maximum percentage .05 M/V GOTT for start-up, 5. Ash (percentage by weightl Maximum .01 ehut down and engine
- 6. Distillation Temperature Minimum 540 -
in degrees F, 90% point. break-in after repair Maximum 640 only. ASTM Distii1ation
# 7. Kinematic Viscosity (in Minimum 2.0 -
Centistokesl Maximum 4.3 R. H. Bertz
- 8. Sulfur Percentage 0.50 Maximum 9/1/83 9. Carbon Residue on 10% 0 35 Maximum bottoms Specifications same as
- in 1978.
l INTERMED! ATE FUEL BLEND 1. API Gravity <
- 2. Flash Point Min!mem140 Minimum 12 6 F
- 3. Water & Sediment Maximum Percentage 75
- 4. Ash (percentage by weight). 0.10 This fuel used at all 5. Kinematic Viscos i ty other times including 320 Maximum maneuv i Centistokes @ So C (122 F).
- 6. Sulfur Percentage 2.0 Maximum
- 7. Pour Point, degrees F + 60 Maximum R. H. Bertz 8. Vanadium ppm 100 Maximum 9/1/83 9 Sodium ppm 20 Maximum 10.. Conradson Carbon Percentage 12 Maximum Specifications revised 11. BTU's/ Gallon 150,000 Minimum since 1978 to include 12. Calcium 20 ppm items 10, 12 and 13. 13. AL + S1 20 ppm USS* Great Lakes fleet Se rv i.ces , Inc.
1/11/83 RHB;ms
UNITED STATES STEEL CORP. - GREAT LAKE 5 FLEET ECHANICAL REPORT (5UMMER & LAY.UN WC&EM / CODEl l I i l I I I I I I I I STEAMER /M.V. REPORT NO. b- 9 d ITEM: NAME PLATE DATA & SERIAL NO. [1/ >~ erf I8 I >>g *: # DATE OPENED 7-/I Id _DATE OPENED PREVIOUS , A. ROUTINE INSPECTION [ - REPORTER TROUBLE g .- , .
* = l s .o i
- 8. CONDITION FOUND: , _
- I j .,
C N --- 7 PERMANENT y TEMPORARY O "^'"5 "^ ' '"'5 "' 1 r #^"'- ' " #' '-
- I '
N v - _ _
=
D. PART5 '.*5ED, l~ 0,U ^ b bs* 03 Yd0-83~Of i- c eU 1, f 24 n -nu - E. RECOMMENDED REPAIRS FOR FUTURE. IF ANY: O CHIEF ENGINEER fA F. (IF ATTENDED) NAME OF A.B.S. SURVEYOR FOR CLASS CREDIT NAME OF U.S.C.G. INSPECTOR FOR INSP. REOS. NAME OF USS REPRESENTATJVE NAME OF MANUFACTURSP.'s EEPRESENTATIVE I I MAIL CAR 3CN COPY TO FLEET ENGINEER'S OFFICE SAME TRIP A5 EACH JOB IS COMPLETED. NO. MEN M HRS. [
- s. o. , -7: n L ... i n A , /o a 1
UNITE 3 STATES STEEL CORP. GREAT LAKES FLEET
]j ?f MECHANICAL REPORT ISUMMER & LAY.UPI
\
CODEI l l l l l l ll l l l l STEAMER /M.Y- "'" [# REPORT NO. '/ 7 I ITEM: NAME PLATE DATA & SERIAL NO. Cvk>,bs $,,) $$' '
/
% 1B fft/ E. DATe OPENEo //. /f-F0 DATE OPENED eREviouS 9-/f- ro filt Al 97.-SITE r2 P J/-23-tr
~
A. ROUTINE INSPECTION Q REPORTER TROUBLE g /, , j j . gk{,{ B. CONDITION FOUND: lr5 e t.- N 2r hs *, ws of s l- AA!h he w > s n '. edAn u<b /4/,/ < ra v Tl:' t C. PERMANENT TEMPORARY g p REPAIRS MADE THIS TIME: ,,,, ,
/
D. PARTS USED- /~ I/ E A #w S. / , 8. Y ' 8 d 8 -= 88- O _ l l' $ 3% / ha' yf lb l $_. $ ~3 d ll , E. RECOMMENDED REPAlRS FOR FUTURE, IF ANY: M ! ~ CHIEF ENGINEER , F. (IF ATTENDED) NAME OF A.B.S. SURVEYOR _, [ FOR CLASS CREDIT 6 NAME OF U.S.C.G. INSPECTOR
/////// __ , FOR INSP. REGS.
NAME OF USS REPRESENTATIVE NAME OF MANUFACTURER'S RIPRESENTATIVE MAIL CARBON COPY TO FIEET ENOINEER'S O ICE SAME TRIP AS EACH JOB 15 COMPLETED. NO. MEN H RS. _
O W" 64M}ybJrL , 9 &i~ f rJ M The following are minutes of a meeting held with Transamerica DeLaval on ge,.p ee November 20,1980 at the Lake Shipping Office - Duluth,, Minnesota 75, 27f t,p 4 In Attendance: Mr. G. Trussell Transamerica DeLaval A~%:9 Mr. R. Erickson Transamerica DeLaval Mr. G. King Transamerica DeLaval Mr. S. Schumacher Transamerica DeLaval Mr. D. Wyncott Nalco Chemical Company
}k. S. Lamp Nalco Chemical Company Mr. R. McCartney USS Research Laboratory Mr. R. Bertz USS Lake Shipping Mr. B. Liberty USS Lake Shipping Mr. E. Merry USS Lake Shipping The purpose of the meeting was to discuss and resolve certain outstanding problems relative to the operation and maintenance of the DeLaval DMRV angines, Serial #75039-40, installed on the M/V EDWIN H. GOTT.
l., Head Problems
- a. Review of 1980 Experience - Since fit-out 1980, five. heads have failed. Four of these heads were on the cearboard engine and one on the, port.
- b. nr. ni..a so.- . ....-- -. ....... . 464 ueLaval's research into
! the head failure problem. He concluded that (1) locked up casting stresses in the heads precipitated cracking failure and (2) a severe aeration problem in the starboard engine contributed to hot spots which in turn caused head failures. The Water Treatment Program supervised by Nalco Chemical Company aid not contribute to i the failures.
- c. At this point, Mr. Bertz stated that he would meet separately with -
Mr. King and' Mr. Erickson to discuss any contributing financial responsibility on the part of U. S. Steel concerning the head failures. This meeting was held at the conclusion of the group meeting. Mr. Bertz again stated that U. S. Steel did not have any contributing responsibility for the head cracks and we would stand ; on the answer to the problem given in Mr. Bertz' letter to Mr. Durie
! dated June 13, 1980. Transamerica DeLaval indicated that the stand- i pipe causing the aeration was designed by the shipyard naval archi-l tect, R. A.' Stearn, and therefore, was considered owner-furnished.
i Mr. Bertz pointed out that the standpipe was constructed in accor- ' i dance with informatiot, received from DeLaval and neither the ship-yard nor U. S. Steel was in possession of the Transamerica DeLaval drawing #00-700-01-DM showing a detail design of the standpipe for jacket water even though the drawing was dated in October 1973.
! Mr. King . acknowledged that this design information was not submitted to the owner prior to placing the engines in operction and this was regre ftable. - Mr. Bertz again pointed out that there was certainly j
i no jusMfication for U. S. Steel to share in the cost of the warranted head failures. Mr. King stated that he personally ac- ' i cepted this explanation. If his superiors did not care t o appeal it, j the matter would be considered closed. 1
'alluro llcad Location llcat Noo. .Ed. Hra. Eng. Hro. DHH llo. Dinpooltion llo , Commenta i
No. 1 RB V't. J65 273 ' fj/pp Port 1.-29-79 SRSR dj M3 Ho.3 RB Vt. N30 3%B g2D3 /0 AA 0 Sthi. 10-12279 SRP a
/s.JssbrMt THEsRP ,g, a3 n7g g ,,m wn-eb a oma,,a i
#/VN w t
- l JJ13: 3 8434137
=/=/ l 404 OU.UTH. .t !!2ld E!Q TA II/te/g3 Ts.X 33530A p' Ltechte.ory 0:pt. g g' Eari.nant sE oA;t (B.E. Ub-tyMEb A TT :: .3 3. 3 Ext auR E O E.R Merry 0 J.P. Soutin
.1 R . s7Eira s:::U.:AC;;:a O R.X. Johnson O Chief En;ineer O Vessel, File suw ECTs .1/V EDvsn H. 0077 O Lubs Oil File a H20 Analysis Fife s/n 75339-40 .* O Service File r) '.cr f#9 d Y '
R Es $1R REQUESTS .
-fd~/7f I T C1 A - 0:3 II/13/SO CYa.1 JDZ,3 HEAD #5 L3 CF STARSOARD ENG11tE "AS CHAP)GE3 OUT aliOAUSE OT CRACX IN VAY 07 3 RIDGE SET *JEEN EXRAUST VA1.VE CAVITIE$s DATA = UT-:2-93 588 T. SRP 41-2u=79 2372 EOUn3 - SCR*11CZ J
=
i-B RUCE E. 1.13EMTY E;J G l.4 EER t;J3 ,LI? A RT.t DAT L AM E ShP3. t 430 .11 $$49E 3 LOG. O tLUTH, .! ! .J:J ES O TA 55E32 O UR T*l.1 910 SSI 0050
? GTL/.STuT DUL fit.chln::y Ocpt. // N V U ItJFO.1 ASTER 1 - 0 :.0 38StJ32 3 11/ I 6/60 [d.E. Uberty [M O E.R. f. terry TLX EtJTh.RPRISE oak O J.P. Boutim O R.K. Johnson
!!SG NO. 01 OAl(LAtJD, CAL 17. 1I/18/80 a Chief Engineer 0 Vessel File O Lubs Oil File TUX 910SS10050 GTLXSFu7 DUL 0 H2O Analysis RIs O Servica File er #####
ATTN: SRUCE LISERTY [_8 " UN - U. S. STEEL DULUTH ATTN: DRUCE LISERTY S UBJ ECT: ii/V GOTT S/ti 75039/40 RE: YOUR TEL~.X c OF 11-18-80 ITEst - A) PLS USE RiiR 5814-7d FOR RETURN OF liEAD TAILED 11-13-760 MARXED N93 SISE. S.G. SOH3:ACHER CORRECTION: LINE 1 SHOULD . READ 11-13-80. CORRECTION: LINE I SHOULD READ RrlR 5814-76. h 2006 EST GTLMSTLT DUL , I
.{r
.r. .I l
is<s. c I
- .i i i * ! : , j i ,' :-.,=. ,
p}
, I l I
i i i-'=f J .i 4 j i a s a j A i - .I-l ,i s. :, a . . I-l 1
.a sj i4
-=g: 6 . .
p , a ,
.J' y. .
.e . - ! I e. 1 e w .
~ , ,
4 Q ,g;
.e.
li*l$lau,17344i'1
- ) .62: g :, .,: .,a -> f .+
is * ,,' r. j' ,
,4 l32 . -
- 2. a
, t
-_.2 a q, o sl"l .s -' :1 5 - J d i i ! 7 ; ! , J .
l J s . ci
".M :
~ ; -- 1 y i-'er . . e :f i. e .: -a~ #. p 4. ; i 4. ., N
= a z; '< . 4 ,,.a~
y -t
.s. .i J =, s. 3
- 3 N Q,
~
.?
'"c*'
-Eh?: : 3l? s l.....taa: c- 9 . ;. 3
'4_.i.
p<-w
'~^
i j O O .. ..W's t .l. . l. f . l.
. . l. .! . s ;
I I d,,. l p t l l l44 ! ,+. -.;i . ; .t J t- ; ,3.v,,.t -
.i,- j i 1 ! i hJ s. d ;: '1 I i is ,g -
, r!
- I i ' - il ' * - l !dJ
.J 13 S i.i t h ?.' ' 9 i M j :.N 4 +
l; dtiy _
, O 1N IIl9I .*.II-*
f'.'f.'f.d- 6 -2 f
$ .I .
d
&5
- . .;4...... ,,
- ; i 2 5.:E r g .. t ,L t
.-- 2 'l 0om
> , ss.
=1 ..... ,
-j i4 '*
~! 4 4: R- et i ! 4 0 l
==
v 'l f l . *. . ..- ' 1 5
- i '- t ni 4 E
< ;i s ,'ii s s' E * * =
? E 1
= ; i 1 w
.g s 9,li . :: .
,.- - I
= 1 Elf 4 .it 7 El ': .i :. sI i E d'
,, ,i e s. , -. - ; i. .
.i *.4 _ - i ?- -
r o hgit's- A ;: m I 4 % i 't d-0 1 I!:t1) *
- ; 5 2 -
- s
, , _. ., .. .~. ~
g .e . . , , ,.s, ..i..,t., o , !)3 3 r i , y._._._._. O i, l j.. ;. j..,y, 8>=3,,,,,.,,,rw,,.,~.. r . g ,- _ ,, af g .
. . , .a,,
wi g a *]r s . t ' ... = E+ *I m - - . .O ye % ..i '* @~f - I
-:- i 4
. tit: I- l2 - 5 4i
.3 .': - ? -
i
.c. . [ .
e
<l- .. . tc, , 9 :- t. t :3 e -
t O i l 'i l - t r :1 M a.1 : f' ": t i '>I: j'g% s
$,,E l ih, ; /. 4 . , m ,r u f4
.n, W q . w I I . . .,a
.' ! i. s-
. , ,- ; v- :. . . -.
i . .
. * , i i <; ,
4 ';~ . -- ~ i 1 0 ~.::
,1
* -J 3,
1 :8 - - -
. e, %:
! ~. u
,'d E ; 7' "., [ 0 t , -* i
~.4 -,.,'yggl s!
- -N ~ -
t gisi ,"l- 21 '. T! : 2: i s s' R e s
;I r...i >: y ; e v. -; r i ; C 1w
# .z.
.i . i .
l . .o31
,a,, :;;l e ;4 s. ,. i e m
~,
i e +t.. I' ..o} ',;.<tur ?m2. J t J .:n l 0 w ii3 !. i i i i l . l.j g1 h ivl 4; M r. : T l ?, ': 1 t C .3 y !i[,tli 4! L 2 16 i si i 2 '*
' I E i f*!si ;l FI ** ! ;i 3 .i l ; 2:
la '
! i
- al i . l. i e i, '
8 ~ l
- i 2 l a~ :, # ' :. .:: .,c :,::
. . .,i
,a.
mcra l I ,,::,: '. r.r Cl-Ini?'l.$5?f? EMF]kD i IT'TE
']t.iej: -' .g .,. ,t,; . .; a- >> ~r . . I, a
I (?~~ ? ?
+
E ' a i a l ,M Al 5:32-754 al s s! h 'I JIE'4 l
, l m l d .'t, .U - ~U~2.,, ? .':4.Q " a* ~* 'l .i ' l..f a .~~r et 4*
!" ! l Al. ';, 0 . -
0, C ':' 4 d E .y ,J' ~:,;
,4 e4 . ! ,
! c : ::. ,'c ci >
- . . . ,~
i ,
! = ' : l t . . c c e ,c ~; d c.
y,
. c .4 y :1
~
Ik. . cr- , i a 1::-.;. 9e ~.s ..a 3 W F -- .,. . , I . .. , .,
- rt i
...gse . .eu a - . rN . a w.. .. .e , - as . . . s . . .e-1 a
. . . . . . . . . , . _ . ._ p, r, y .
... i .M !. e w :1 M : ,?.i . a II i ;:
. . . . . . . . * !. ;6 e 4 ,. q ,... ',4i -~ e r)
....sei e ! e . .n - .
m
- i mai
UNITED STATES STEEL CORP. GREAT LAKES FLEET wCaE S/2/ MECHANICAL REPORT ISUMMER & LAY-UP) CODEI I I ll IIl l l l l I STEAMER /M.V. d/ ffEM: NAME PLATE DATA & SERIAL NO.
. fr/b}t. P,b,i, Ar T 02-?lo-03-of
_ DATE OPENED //'d/-79 DATE OPENED PREVICUL
-?T/f?BSL.ki,1Enain ; . .
2s' W Hes o w n oae-A. ROUTINE INSPECTION REPORTER TROUBLE g i
- 8. CONDITION FOUND: ,, -
/ d C. PERMANENT g TEMPORARY O "^ '" 5 "^ ' '"' S "" !" # 'A' " C "> ^ -
D. PARTS USED. !- v!/M dM d4
/
oe Mo . O E E d o - o 7- o 8 l-San ke r/ft T Pw Fflo. /A-/s ~44(/ E. RECOMMENDED REPAIRS FOR FUTURE, IF ANY: W941 En91av 4 a ee CHIEF ENCINEER - M F. (IF ATTENDED) NAME OF A.B.S. SURVEYOR FOR CLASS CREDIT NAME OF U.S.C.C. INSPECTCR FCR INSP. #EGS. NAME OF USS REPRESENTATIVE NAME OF MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE MAIL CARBON COPY TO FLEET ENCINEER'S OFFICE SAME TRIP AS EACH JOB 15 COMPLETED.
e - ,,
)
U 5
- e W
a c kNk$.e
- u e =
h. E c: }% C s a e o T K d e
= I i
ma, i A N m % a !,
= '
$5M h'
5
$o .O o
R e 2 u ' 8 - -
- o a 3 %
- Sh n.
b g %-
= = im w
~
A - es , o~ l t
Transamenca 23 Delaval MEED #P Transamerica Delaval Inc. g m_ Engine and Compressor Division l 1 INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: File, S/N 75039/40 Date: January 9, 1981 From: S. G. Schumacher
Subject:
U. S. STEEL CORPORATION On Board M/V Gott December 30, 1980 - January 2, 1981
\
j l l l
\
']r n Lo i
l File,;S/N' 75039/40 "*## '* [j.: n. n
- 30
t Log port head locations as follows*:
R.s. i I i
*rort engine operated 5,250 hours during 1980 season.
i I e i . 1 January 1, 1981 Log starboard head locations as follows:* L.B. Head Nours R.B. Head Mours N30 3t.4E 10-12-79 SR 4.203 /. s i-l l
- starboard engine operated 3.2ba nours curing .1veu season.
I
~
,aansamerica
[lelaval MEMO 8, !' Transamerica Delavat Inc. CC sem = Engine and Compressor Division INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: File, S/N 75039/40 I January 23, 1981 Frcm: S. G. Schumacher Subiset: U. S. STEEL CORPORATION On Board M/V Cott January 3, 1981 - January 11, 1981 e 1 l l i I
/L File, S/N 75039/40 January 23, 1981 t
i No. 3 R.B. starboard N30 344E 10-12-79 SR- 4203 Hd Hrs 10,215 Eng. Hrs. RMR 5814-78 cracked at Exh. bridge Replaced wf.th P68 891E 2-22-80 SRP i i f 1
,w , -vv- y ._y , . - -.- ----. --- . - - - - - _ - , -
e.- -. , - . # + - -,
JJ70J01007'!J3 TEST G TLg syL7 Out - 409 Di> LUTH ;.'INNESOTA J ANUARY 27. 1981 TLX 335304 ENTERPRISE OAd A TT ENTION : LINDA BLOCX - P, ARTS DEPT.
^
S UBJ ECT: REPAIR OF ii/V GOTT CYLINDER HEADS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR TVX OF 1/21/SI, P.O. NO. 630- Al 125-59 HAS BEEN VRITTEN TO COVER REPAIR OF SU5 JECT CYLINDER HEADS PER SIM 249
,R EV 2, FOR AGREED PRICE OF P ER HEAD. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT RECONDITIONED HEADS WILL BE ABS INSPECTED AND TOR ANY HEADS FOUND TO BE UNREPAIRABLE, THERE VILL BE NO CHARGE TO U. S. STEEL.
H EA DS INVOLVED IN THIS REPAIR ARE: M"' # #N ### N 30 344 E RAR 5814-78 4
#sw D < Ca,1 ric W.r 7
"/Wfd~ d 4 W Machinery Dept l ~ 'II erry 8 J OHN B0UNTIN . 01P. Bout!n M A CHINERY D EP T . O RX.Jchnson O Chlef Engineer L AME SHIPPING O Lubo Gil FI!q 0UR TVX 910 561 0050 0 M20 Analy:in F5e G TLXSFLT DUL O Service File OWS 00ther A CCEPTED 00409 4 -P O.
^
l MUTp ' 0F 'EEDQ UNITED STAIES STEEL, LAKE SHIPPING - TRANSAMF.n:CA DeLAVAL , fEus r5(3[03'!19]U,in_MilwauYeD_ __ w - Is e o a s i,
~. ,-
- . g =. - . -
Subjecc: E{nii MN..dadi*ni'i$dd'hMy;imis.H 1 h,7 Machinery Ocpt. 4d s i
IV Cylinder Heads s B. Two (2) stress relieved heads. Transamerica DeLaval may want to keep one (1) to cut up for examination and vill replace with new one. I l 1
- - l
,ansamerm+ MEMO Delaval
*, ,g Transarnerica Delaval Inc.
, Engine and Comoressor Division INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: C. S. Mathews Date: February 17, 1981 From: G. E. Trussell
Subject:
U.S. Steel
- 4. U.S. Steel has cut a purchas'e order for TDI to repair rive cyiiiiuc.
heads returned for leak inspection. Two of the heads are stress relieved pickled heads exhibiting vertical cracks in the back wall of the exhaust port. I advised TDI may want to cut one of these heads up for the Foundry to assess the reason for these first-ever cracks. I will advise later. Geoff asked U.S. Steel if there was any interest in a sprayed-on ceramic coating applied to the fire deck and the exhaust port surfaces. Bertz and Liberty were interested and Geoff will follow up on this possibility.
l l l l S..i 4 i b5. 1 g.iii. i ii lii i i i l i i 1. t I *5Hd I- 34$- yk$ III N7' if . l -f *f b '$i $$4- $t h4 Il5 $ b ** ' l' i '3 y I{*!si 7 j j i-{i d}} I I -i 1Y** [ ! at :1 i y ' - Idj *1I- ' l $id 7g 16-.=is.:, i i -i 7 : !i . i -"e
" ' l -i si 1 -j ti : }!idfy}j!'I id 1-
]
.e i -i =:
. - =!
4i4a i
- ;Jdi!ii!E1 j4je?;J
!i 2 11 !
- 4 ! ! i l._.-
..j
, i . . . . . j '= * ' i - *
- 1 "l *
- i l * , 'l O._
> r = h.....f , ! ,{, l . ( , ! , l , I , l ,li . .
s
' , ' . o,,
y a Ii
. ,;,.' ;I I i 4 :il i i l liI i i I I ! {_.._.
i !., - i! .1 < i e i tird f L [ 1 = ' t .'! .! ! l 3 ,. ! J, 1 I i fi d ;E :._ !- 33 =h j...- . . . . . ,l . .j i a s, r _tJ,' ! i,14 9 'j ste r. . .. _ , .a 6 , t ,.. . ' -'!,
'l 1' giq . - ,- --
z- - 9 C l C ! e ! 1 O O (11..---l
.. ! .. i a d i 2 l- !
3 a,,s, 'g!....: I I I i ; i . I :: ,4 4". e 01 4 1 d C
==
v i. 5
'ji ,fr !lil J-isa_. . .. ,. a .: r ..,! .G::. :.1 U .i d .._ . _ .:'i . . .:
nd4:r:1 ' l .~ lJ .l . '5$[
,l "l li.l.l 9 ,i d 4. q J 1 'l. ..! .3 5 ,
, , il l jll .
t l l111 -! :2 :' d! N 4 4 5Wt ! I I J il '; y* si i . 9,1 ;. Q A 3;C i " d!l l 1 =1i #. 6 ;ie i . . Y.I,a Pt . si ~ ei E
~ =>8
~
t 9 t,,
]
Ir 3 r,il
.., 6_a:
t L ?{iiEl I W -'
- a. e .. .
y :p!L:ri.i i = . i <
! u .
- O et : 1 i e i 'J 1 ;,;...! ,, 3 :i ., e , ; i u _
= :T, r i ai e aE Ei t i r
}'i****l 2 I2 433 U ** A l %.A e
o i !P JI _
. i i n l . 4 % El 4 2l
- I C 4 .
i
. i e 4 ;i t 1i !i i G %.
8
= 0; r gi ! A i s i. i :: ;
.i .
-l= l ifIlill lli 1
..,4 1 1! .
-la 2. :< .,q :. .:: a a s .,a:, a 14 I,l :s J 1, -. .
. s.
- . -l= e. 4,u .:i a. _s m 3 a.a = gJ i, m-1 .n jIi y .i ,j ... .
l - i n';] J A 3 33i8 0 s! li ll I 221.: g -l= .a .,J n .- n. :., ~t a....u. n , .s:
.a .-
IiI L3 1. l = i ;:; u .:: 3 .1.:. 2, n , ,.h , iII $ b, , ' l . l = 2 ii S I 35d5 A 2 'J ' Ii 111
-i= 3.'! s 3 5sGE S O :n !I sl :l J -
-!= Zi.[3:10i121:Jil3 .~i.;l l I i I! W :!
..,....m...........;....._,... .-
.- ; .e . ,
- a
.. ~v
-=-a a o. .-a, io, n ,, ,,
g4
.see - sa.. aa e.ew e -n-
UNITED STATES STEEL CORP. GREAT LAKES FLEET wCiE3 /_1/ MAN REPORT WMR & W-M CODEI I l !l l l l l l l l } STEAMER /M.V. _O [ REPORT NO. ITEM: NAME PLATE DATA & SERIAL NO. N UO512 ^ $EAD kb [L8 6A/Shf>A~ DATE OPENEDbA168CDATE OPENED PREVIOUS A. ROUTINE INSPECTION
]
REPORTER TROUBLE g
- 8. CONDITION FOUND:_ , , , , , , . . .
C. PERMANENT TEMPORARY UEW 63/>AsodAt h'c.9 4 O REPAIRS MADE THIS TIME: /US74/.l rb 76SF 90 22 9.14 RB AI3.
// FEA 5'o 6 7P957 M D. PARTS USED ! / 6+0 MAI o 3-36=0 ~d"A-d 8 SASMe1~ Xt7* .:st' /A-436V '
E. RECOMMENDED REPAIRS FOR FUTURE, IF ANY: dYd 25_ o A/ d~A>6 M d~ I f CHIEF ENGINEER [ ' F. (IF ATTENDED l NAME OF A.B.S. SURVEYOR / g FOR CLAS$ CREDIT NAME OF U.S.C.O. INSPECTCR h:R INSP. iiEGS. NAME OF USS' Al!PRESENTATIVE NAME OF MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE ' wt CARr>CN COPY TO FLEET ENOINEER'S OFFICE SAME TRIP AS EACH ' JOB 15 COMPLETED. NO. MEN HRS. _ o ., r.w s~ '
~
Transamerica 23 Delaval [ - fGO
# f' Trgnsamerica 0etaval lnc.
g q Engine and Compressor Division INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: File, S/N 75039/40 Date: January 9, 1981 From: S. G. Schumacher
Subject:
U. S. STEEL CORPORATION On Board M/V Gott December 30, 1980 - January 2, 1981 e
- - - . , - , , - - . - - . - ~ . - - - , , ,
. ~ .. . .. .. -. - . . . . .. . - . ..
J' 1 File, Sn; ;303)j40 January 9,-1981 _3 j' Los port head locations as follows*: R . B ._ Head Houre i j i
=rort engine operated 5 250 hours during 1980 season.
i 1 't i is i' 1 i i 2 January 1, 1981 Log starboard head locations as follows:* i L.B. Head Hours R.B. Head Hours i t I a l *5tarboard ene,ine operated 3,2bs nours curing Aveu season. , g , . , , , ,-,r.--... , . . . - , , v..n.: , .-n ,,.--e. -..e... .e,w.e,,. ,--r.. rn--,a -. ,n, ,,,n,,q.m.~ , , , , . - +en,,.
w p. m /1 Transamerica M i @~ . Deiaval "/
- Transamerica DelavalInc.
Engins and Compressor Division
@mM j
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE L WGAWo4C Of*Hd To: Ceoff King / r '/ ~d o g / Q F Date: February 27, 1981 hl 4%//&#W$ g SNfSN / YHdb Y Machiney Dept. W ' 8' Frorn: {.r u. schu:::acher,
< -:- ._p.n g
Subject:
M/V Gott Trip Report, S/N 75039/40, December 29, 1980 ta a E.R. M6try February 8,1981 O J.P. Boutin a RX Johnsor O Chief Engineer Vo1ective:gTo asinist thy ~o'GridrN1IIIdiYdsYeEii1EIy ' R e GMO01 la goi:Gr entiti%y$Mg(a dfeEE$/l.EGhTEIt' i 'tiNigidhE-k[a niift $54c4 Analysis File
-du @ . ;t" Service File M O t.etter File Personnel 'Conta et ed: O Other .
Ralph Bertz, Superintendent, U. S. Steel Bruce E. Liberty, Senior Mechanical Engineer U. S. Steel Laverne Pierson, Chief Engineer, U. S. Steel Bill Shuga, First Assistant Engineer, U. S. Steel
- 2) Four quantity heads failed water test. One' quantity.vas an SR head. Expect three more heads have failed, but passed the water test.
Foem c.10661 (New) agg _r._ _ . . -
allura ficad locatien lleat Nos. . lli . lira . Eng. Hrs. DMR lis. Dinponition Commenta 11 3 . Ilo. 6LB S tb 'D WT N93 518E 2J72 9354 lio. 1 RB Vt. J65 27y Port 1-29-79 SRS.9 SJ
/d/? P yo.ps brnr nine a,ua wr sm ,ns- -
2.u-8b a canand
/2/9)(P/
J J 7 J J 010 0 7 823 TEST G TLg 37L7 put 409 DUwUTM M INNESOTA J ANUARY 2't. 1981 TLX 335304 ENTERPRISE OAd A TT F.JJT I ON : LINDA BLOCX - PARTS DEPT. S U5J ECT: REPAIR OF li/V GOTT CYLINDER HEADS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR TVX OF 1/21/S1, P.O. NO. 630-41125-59 HAS BEEN WRITTEN TO COVER REPAIR OF SU$dECT CYLINDER HEADS PER SIM 249
,R E7 2, FOR AGREED PRICE OF P ER HEA D. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT RECONDITIONED HEADS VILI.. BE nBS INSPECTED AND FOR ANY HEADS FOUND TO BE UMREPAIRABLE, THERE VILL DE NO CHARGE TO U.S. STEEL.
H EA DS INVOLVED IN THIS REPAIR ARE: J 55273D RMR 5514-6'l - .M 3 . u,c33 , 3 3 1-7_'-t I erry J OHN BOUNTIN O W. M n O R.X. Jchtt:ce-MACHINERY D EP T . OChief Engineer L AKE SHIPPING OVenal file O bb O'm 0UR TVX 910 :26 1 0050 0 H2O Analy:fs se t G TLJSTLT DUL OServics File 0b6 00ther A CC EP TED 0 0 t:3 9 l 4-PO. ff.AJJL FT2 Til AAOCH13f.in SSRVICE
l
$ kUTES OF_.!.!51h.3 A I
\
m ( ,o UNITED STAIES STEEL, LAKE S!!ITPING - TRANSA.'1ER CA DeLAVAL fidu a rE[3[01.19] f ~.in__Milwa ukee G ifi s c o n s !) 1 Subjecc: EgMeidbNiSE4$$d'$M/UNYIN :H1 - GOTT3 , Machinery Ocpt. I 6 i
-,. - - - ....--- _ , , . - - - , n. - - . , ,
~f0l IV Cylinder !! cads B. Two (2) stress relieved heads. Transamerica De!sval may want to keep one (1) to cut up for examination and will replace with new one.
4
ip v.I ji-at
' , .i e i j j iii iI I i i i * !
! .. n} -i j}- ! .I j j54 i *! 'l j
l.i'l a i d ; 4it ii2 ' ' 2 E!$- j .i ni r jj i i ifi} ' 4 14 g vi ! .{ zi ,4- '
, J1 diI 4id '
Q *b]' l .l el "l . 1Id ' i ' 4iN~ O f%.
~ *.
i * ! I<n = ; e, .-s A 1 s 7 4 e4 e A- 1I
#4 .. l _ .i sj { .! ( i *ii i 4i I l . s! .; .* i ; i193I35 E!I l f- ,,i....'.Ia p a s . - i s . 3 .., . ; - f; * -
.g O.
w 8: h a.. ..i . !. . l.l.I- -
?
- .'I -
~
. , ! , ii ia. i ! :t il i i .i i i it if! A f
*1.
li . l :l j i!j? i i : i e i i II%d 1 li . ! iie. iit '
- a. iii 4 E44
- h. t . .. _ a ir.m i.twa,t13,:
Iii! .f.- , I . ! ,! c .; ! ,' 4 .I i .i s a a L r-LIMh E i . 2i f g'8 . , . . - T l C Z. g t;i .... ; i I , O* o g 4 - l 2 l l l ? l
> ' ' l l . . . . )i
! i l l 1 i -
.l 4 i ;S .d d CI QI '
M 0 ' p... , 16 i @l d t! E ' d !I .
$ ir Igg
. 3i g .g l ( 4i( l Ed ? ~
! ! ll : I 'Ei . 'I d O 4
~
s i 'ip i si ; ri e :i: i a2 - w l,If18i r Illii ir- ::- il 5 7' : 1 T J ~ - g l 3 .M .1 '4 t .'. J- 1! l 9 4-
.~_
o, '!ir ini D ? . : is J':i I y f I'l'~ ; AI d U A 8 ^il "l3 %
~
- E o i U" ' l 1 I ! ,a 3 ,. : 4 3 .9 ti , _ ..J.:'._'.
O 'l, [ r. .4 f ;t i n...
}j , ,,
)wh 33- .. .
5 !! 3 e". h S $ I NM h h - 3df ) $ Nhf. i I f Idl!l d E ,;. I lyllll i tt l:' L3 2 2 : T :!'"i : I l N '; i ' gg l 31 I e ! m i 1. Z J :; i .' ! i l ii ?!
- 1. I!! l I wia e6 ;e : ! i
. ly I eiyig f.' .!
M .: 7 . - i i '; ::
- p. 3 < . I! Si e ;i s t 5 4I
- 17. !! _ , . .
i - *: e
.,' II; ! - el .l w
s
' % 'essi ? : at t ;, ;I < u A 3 -l 6..
I wi 3 . 4 14 il f 1.1 -e
.Y ' ' g. r i ",1 '2 :5 E (' t: ! M :1 _
g ! '....i>i2 w: J 2 vi iJ ;I is i 1 ; i n fl Mi N *l
.T 3i $ i l' *,
l,Ie li 41 4 di ! 5 ! G '. - I i: ? 4 i ae i i l 11 ?! l.lel i i l It !I I i
!I f l li )
*ia 2 $29 33d 423$% i8 i Id .l N P !
! -!= J 'J .t ii.3 '1411 E E h !! ! I i 15 h r,i .
I als 2055 .$ 2 9 8 5 :15 i i i 2 0 ." : I
,a..,. ,. e. .: 4. .n,:
) ai:
x; u .i i .
- J!.
2 .1, .J. n2 .* , 1.}s ala ;ld.9Q2il
. , ,4 a" a" .a, .' i 1 i 2 ?j f) i
.si s4 a~ .-
0 i i i l ; 2 il I - i s .' :15 '4 3 G:1 E (10 .'i S i! , , i: J --- J-ie Ji!;a :l9 J '1:iti: - :.'..i i icy 1
..,...,...m.........-, .......; .
- t . . . . , . ,
.... ...) ' . 3. .i
. ...<,,, .. .., . . . q j.u,, , }
e e - a a a> e -e e.s % , , , , , ,,,,, g -Q
i aansamenca MEMO , Delaval !
, Transamerica DelavalInc. !
= g Engine and Compressor Division INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: File, S/N 75039/40 Date:
January 23, 1981 From: S. G. Schumacher Subiset: U. S. STEEL CORPORATION On Board M/V Gott January 3,1981 - January 11, 1981 l l 1
1 } f 1 0 t l . File, S/N 75039/40 Janua ry 23, 1981. 4 ( i 1 4 l No. 3 R.B. starboard N30 344E 10-12-79 SR, 4203 Hd Hrs 10,215 Eng. Hrs. 2 i. 4 1 t i r s 1- -)
+
I No. 1 R.B. oort J65 273D 6,723 Hd Hrs 10,163 Eng Mrs
! RMR $814-81 Replaced with 84/ 43 7WCrackedthroughintakesea[tNob l( 7 3 OO x
4 1 1 l i / ' 2 i
. , - - - - . , . , - . , - . . - - . - - . .,,.--,-.,---.r., - , . . - , - - - _ - - - -- ., ,,..,,,,,~.._ ,.. ,-., _ ,_n - _-~-_n.e--
UNITED STATES STEEL CORP. GREAT LAKE 5 FLEET WC&E 3121 MECHANICAL REPORT ISUMMER & LAY-UPI CCDEl l Il l l ll l l l l I STEAMER /M.V. Di!IN H. COIT REPCRT NO. 01 ~ 232 ITEM: NAME PLATE DATA & SEtiAL NO. STED l'AE! Dir*INE Dl'RV 16-4 CiOE?E HOURS 13,683
#3 Ric.ht Bank head DATE CPENED 10/8/81 DATE OPENED PREVIOU$
A. ROUTINE INSPECTION
]
REPORTER TROUBLE
- g. #3 R. Bank Head Leaking Jacket water into Exhaust chamber.
- 8. CONDITICN FOUNO: Head cracked or hole in it.
C. PERMANENT [ TEMPORARY O "^ ' " 5 "^ ' 7"' 5 "" Ch*""** # R i'ht 3'"* "'*d ""4 * ' "25k' t$ - w -n,o,n J (D,m, .y k,,2 7B,y n,/,e,/p> r s..- - - - - .- , - Cr1ck4 nenA No. **T n F58 2-22 80 2012 spp 75 )#m oy , /dkA j D. PARTS USED. 1 Cylinder head P/N 1A-64h7-ABS 1 Casket Kit P/h 1A-6")64 , E. RECCMMENDED REPAIR $ FCR FUTURE, IF ANY: 34/2 - G 70 3 6- 69-/dz W6c e346
,2 2 1,
CHIEF ENCINEER R.M. Mutton F. IlF ATTENDEDI NAME OF A.S.S. SURVEYOR FOR CLASS CREDif NAME CF U.S.C.G. INSPECTCR FCR INSP. RECS. NAME OF US$ REPRESENTATIVE i NAME OF MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE Mall CAR 8CN COPY TO FLEET ENGINEER'S CfFICE $AME TRIP AS EACH 108 l$ COMPLETED. NO. MEN HRS.
- allure ifcad location Heat Nos. .Hd. Hro. Eng. Mrs. RHR Ho. Dispooltion Commento No . .
l 6LB S th'D WT M93 518E # I 72 9354 No.1 RB Vt..J65 273 : -
,/4/2 0 Port 1-29-79 SRSR "$s N .
No.3 RB Wt. N30 344E ff. bili [MAAB # Stbd 10-12-79 SRP
S UBJ ECT : SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS
; P LEASE '5 HIP, Td TOLI 0VING, ADDRESS (1) BOX OTT A/V GOTT 'CR#00744 10/13/81l CONTAI NISCt CRACKED C M WOE" yEAD TROM 'ST.ARBOARD ENGINE a.3 RIG $T BANX'HIAD SERIAL sWT-P6S-2 80 S91 E ,SRP 4
SHIP TO: Tit >4NSAM ER I CA DELAVA INC.
- 5 5 0 , '- 8STH AVENUE P . C ., B OX 216,1-CAXLAND,,CA ,
94521-TAG VITH DE.L,AVIL, R.t R #9.278
,TA6 VITH USS . , REPAIR 5fk,D k,,'#5422670 3 5'-5 9- 102 - (REL . ,2 36 6 . ' D . 'E . LIBERTI' u n m m. & f -
Q ER. % i S R . , d ECH . ENGR 4 0JA Soutin E N'D ., S TKP O R.K. Johnson O Chlef En:rneer
.. . . O Vessel Fife G TLKSTLT. SUSM C Lube 011 FJa
.' O H2O Analysis Flte
~ D I D. OU G,iT ,,'M'ES S,AG E7 O Service File
{$'Nn"ll-f*wx Fi ;y G.TLdSTwT, DU4 ,
~
YE5 THANKS I l l
.Y U IiJTQ.1 ASTER G T* XSTLT DUL 1
0 l'4878I34) .17 30 EST
' A' 09 DIEb7M'111N9ESOTA.'
D EC. EdBER. 9s 1981* T LX' .3 35304 'ENTERP RI SE . 6AX'
'A Ti. ENT. I dN ". . .N R.* . CH. AR1' E.5i. 'JH I T$ . .
.O..,.....
. R Es.{<?;.TVX. i12/O S*/81/ . CYL . . . ,"Ri.R..f9278
. . .I .N DER.' li.E.AD 4 -
I
- 2
., , .0 :PG 8'-I.22 5%6.{. . , S'f1'.I
,ra $* ~S..RP.;-[, .
. _s . . . . ,, . , , . . *
! # 3 R .,E . . S Tisa r v.u..m.t ' . '.-.
.iG Y. ,L IND.ER'.. IIEA D . 70 2.BE , S. CRAP.P ED'.' d.N '. S. .I T. E. . ND' N. E*.f.
H.. EA D 7U.R.N I S.H ED. V
. T RA30W, . ,.L U SA AT I O N . .* . CHANGE ORDER .
NO.l. . . i S S.U ED. T.O...R. EL.. . 2 3 6 5 TO . '-
'C OVEN NLDiTIbNkd'd0$T' 0F.' Ns7 MEAD.
- i 1
i T
, , , . - . - , - . - , , . . - , - - . ,e. . ,-
9.c ir
.[$ pfd /3, ! ! [ .s !
q." l{! d1:; * { l :$!{ izi i u :n at t;: : V Y: bi0 '3q' % IM- !!, ' " fe. ! k: 4 a'A ?!
'Q >i '
! .. . ei i ie i ie i,>1 , i 1 i- i!@ 3 ! W i! R iisi H I141 # F # H. y ? F V i
~ H'!!44! t 5 ! pfiNi n f f i e & f i!W i Vih d li * ? # 2! 4 6 4 .M ililil# f r $ #sFNf m
.a l i-4! ? 19 3 4 8 4 a f:4i!'!id F u df f HMs 7 L l ai 4 3
- 4 81 S ili!2!1ll! 3 f f L s $ ! =t i-M B
- 41 3 ? ? 2 6!!98'Jift!.l N !8??ff! M PP
). -414 ? g i ! t s t! M f H s i 4 64 y ? f d!i v H
%1 n e: nt3h4L8! fity*?4 Eigt t95 c h s? I *"* 'l l l l l l l ,'
S ' I .' ~ ~ i . . L . ... A. j. 1. ~. fe. ,l . _ s J .! ! . !
, R I II (M i f' I Sl 1 Il dl ' $3i i :4 3 l l fl'@f d -
I?J W !4 iallf$ Mii d.l f i i t ! MhT,' kNqj) f ** .l ai ilt +' j#1 {l i
! d fl di d I e i! # ! . ' ! ' " -T t i t yi'$Il _III[
s Tl 'l 94 Ok [:)rL '*:**! ""ai 1 . . ' vi :S s ~n ! 4 bi - c's iiO:F
~~~ ~~ -
i t!i i Om z - ,3, - r-* ~ ^ - " ,= , s,. is I s <
- 4. e jo h':...a i a i tt i J l 'd ie .2 ! #!
>= .i i i i ' >
.; -
- i <' X i '** * '2 i I I T U 7 l l8 ?i i.! ' 7. '
y ,
-d ? ?!?'I fit 3 %: a t! u;'
< Ii gles i ? t 7. ; ei ; dir ira:
rjj,II'!I tit E ! 'c ?! a i s ! ;' - 1 ci : i 8,1 8 ris - si r aim
) l pill 4 i r 4li 3!i 3'St Ei r! E! 3 o i 3siem o . ;im aei 4 e i .t :: :, n :
.o. , !!'r sist mi.in'em aimi,719 u a e se n w.a z l ,/ e 4iliTm:$:!:1sidiiW i 5 Els si ?! e *.i '
o ol e if H M M ej! M W ? ?in it % R o a i
,I,,i l
l!.[ll'c' h"'" e7 ,ir A. .d.f .g W ~4 M2 m i . ., . y 7, a*' d=h, -w l.e.f.,t..$,. E p *. ; l o .. . I' d! i) :4 j~r 2 d h3'f[{,jeihb'*laj,i8:
+,d,whll 9MF1r, gd8' [io.f,r aac eL z
=
I l!!F!t: m; ::W M;ml".:3;;:t u : s!W' '4 g f.
- I! '
- i O ' 4 b, %i ta 't f 4 CiPt 2'lI Lbi f 3 ft 1i;>e 7
;iF + ! F e ! s,l e siydi, i 9! 9 ? Am '?! rid !i3.?i - 8!
4 h*:] lt!b'8 4im< t Ti511 sif.T* & li e'et : ie i .- r a e :- t; i.ei yT. R. E a'g:'**!% ?l7: 3l 3+3'3 2! C4 -42 ?I rr isisis,ttwi3 4 yi i ti e.. g = - *
- i _.d 44 i A a La J it. J . .- i u - . ,8 A . 01
' ,- ,1:! :.?
leiwr iis i : . ~ : .i.,,imti I ;t . s i - .t i c, : a 1=!e a l 1j , 1 -!? si E 4! 9 :: a iL6 % Si
.i. e Eet 4's ei s s !issii3 mi l f lai lllltil ill'!'lli l lit il j ! iampaMc esN !! H ri a s wd?. M l - l a i= MIS * ~.* Il t ? R i M IaE537iiff.' F9 L
' l ais!M1 ru.15 d 2 3! 5 2 F I D R E E @ M VJ d -i s lE!!T3 $11EF9FFR if E FI s.a'33] M t!E ll l a Elt:Mi E :: A B M A; Enit 3 5 CJH W
-la llth fiM E 9 5 '!El f $ s E's 23s5HfGE
-!= Iis5!B E93f El 5' 4 Bliliik! B B 'l! ,1! /liJ $ ilhJ
-}e d:t@ S S id 5lO 4215 Jiflf d' .i 2 !$83 flii
...., . . n.. ..;....,., . . . , . . . . . . . , . . , ;.
........--m ..,3... ...w.. . . .w . . . . .w . . .
_,..o7
... , ,o , .-. .. . . . .
......m, ~ . , , ,. , ,.
i
USS CREAT LAKES FLEET SERVICES, INC. Subj ect: M/V EDWIN H. GOTT TDI Encarprise Diesel Engines S/N 75039/40 Cylinder Heads in Service on Septe:nber 1,1983 and Manufactured by TDI since 1978. Engine Hours as of 7/27/83: Port 18,829 hours Stbd. 19,271 hours APPROXIMATE DATE HOURS SERVICE CN REAT NUMBER INSTALLED HEAD TO 7/17/83 WT-L89-900D 6-19-79 SR 12/79 14,546 WT-J78-295D 2-1-79 N/A 17,344
%7-K60-543D 3-27-79 9/79 16,233 WT-R91-409E 6-25-80 SRP 5/81 8,341 WT-589E 12-7-79 SR 12/80 8,666 b
WT-G77-598W 3-2-78 5/79 16,434 WT-K77-626D 10/79 15,229
%7-H61-937W 11-7-78 12/80 8,666 WT-J16-156D l-3-79 SRP 8/79 16,434 %7-K20-390D 2-22-79 6/79 17,239 WT-L19-745D 5-11-79 SR 4/80 13,563 WT-J93-328D 2-8-79 SR 1/80 13,875 %T-K55-475D 3-6-79 SR 12/79 , 14,356 %7-K9-370D 2-16-79 6/79 17,313 WT-H43-878W 10-24-78 12/79 14,109 WT-L68-848D 6-7-79 11/80 7,999 47-N62-423E 10-31-79 N/A N/A WT-02-531E 11-26-79 N/A N/A WT-H78-975W 11-13-78 SR 10/79 15,576 *k7-K43-447D 3<-6-79 SR 6/81 5,588
- Repaired' by Derrington - Rours prior to repair not available WT-04-976E 3-10-80 SRP N/A N/A N/A - Not Available RHB:ss 9/7/83
e w.e . .
,/ % UNITED STATES e* * 'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{.
) wasmNGTON. D. C. 20665 '
5
%.....'/ February 13, 1984 Docket Nos: 50-416 f
50-312 MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Palladino Commissioner Gilinsky t Comissioner Roberts I Commissioner Asselstine Commissioner Bernthal FROM: Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (
SUBJECT:
REPORT OF MEETING 0F REPRESENTATIVES OF THE TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC. (TDI) EMERGENCY hh k kh fY h 0$ h - 20) In accordance with procedures for Board Notifications, the following information is being provided directly to the Commission. The appropriate boards and parties are being informed by a copy of this memorandum. This information is relevant to all facilities that have diesel generators manufactured by TDI (see Enclosure 1), including Rancho Seco, which is before the Comission, and Grand Gulf (an uncontested case), which is scheduled to come before the Commission for full power authorization in the near future. , On January 26, 1984, members of the NRC staff met with representatives of the TDI Owners' Group to discuss problems related to emergency diesel generators manufactured by TDI. A list of attendees is included in Enclosure 2. The staff provided a brief summary of TDI operating experience for both nuclear and non-nuclear applications. For the remainder of the meeting, the TDI Owners' Group described details -of their Program Plan, the purpose of which is to provide reasonable assurance that TDI diesels will I perform their intended function. Enclosure 3 contains the meeting handouts and slides. The transcript of the meeting is included as Enclosure 4. N DarrellG.E6s'enhut,
'W lth ector Division of ticensing Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
em As stated . __h_
o e Encitsure 1 TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC. EMERGENCY DIESEL GE'NERATOR DISTRIBUTION Plant Docket Utility Shoreham 50-322 Long Island Lighting Grand Gulf 1, 2 50-416, 417 Middle South Energy San Onofre 1 50-206 Southern California Edit: . Rancho Seco 50-312 SMUD I i River Bend 50-458, 459 Gulf States Utilities Shearon harris 1, 2 50-400, 401 Carolina Power and Light Catawba 1, 2 50-413, 414 Duke Power Perry 1, 2 50-440, 441 Cleveland Electric 111ur . Sir
- Bellefonte 1, 2 50-438, 439 TVA Comanche Peak 1, 2 50-445, 446 Texas Utilities Services Vogtle 1, 2 50-424, 425 Georgia Power Midland 1, 2 50-329, 330 '
Consumers Power i WNP-1 50-460 Washington Public Power I a k
F Q O Enclosure 2 ATTENDANCE LIST 1/26/84 TDI EDG MEETING. i NAME ORGANIZATION RT~Caruso NRC/DL J. Collins NRC/RA/R-IV i D. Eisenhut NRC/DL { F. Miraglia- NRC/DL C. Be, linger NRC/DSI 1 H. Denton NRC/NRR D. Garner NRC/0CM S. Brooks NIRS/ Palmetto Alliance J. Kammeyer SWEC/Shoreham J. Deddens GSU ' J. Price GSU I J. Hamilton - GSU T. Ippolito NRC/AE00 J. Olshinski NRC/R-II B. Angle MP&L , F C. Duvall Operations Analysis Corp. A. Dynner Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Christopher & Phillips N. Bell CFSP R. Condello NUTECH Engineers D. Scheidt Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Christopher & Phillips P. Eselgroth NRC/R-I J. Schroeder TOI C. Brinkman Combustion Engineering R. Huston Engineering Planning & Mgmt. J. Taylor NRC/IE R. DeYoung NRC/IE J. George Texas Utilities R. Sharpe Duke Power H. Tucker Duke Power W. Owen Duke Power - E. Hall BECHTEL l T. Houghton KMC H. Schmidt Texas Utilities D. Wa'de Texas Utilities J. Austin NRC/0CM L. Mills TVA D. Wilson TVA A. Thadani NRC/DL i B. Barnes EG&G Idahn R. Burg BECHTEL i M. Capicchioni Consumers Power L. Connor The NRC Calendar i H. Cheatheam Texas litilities l J. Knight NRC/DE G. Gisonda > LILCo M. Williams NRC/DL '
. - - . ../
O O 1 NANE ORGANIZATION D ovak NRC/DL V. Noonan NRC/DE S. Israel NRC/ DST B. D. Liaw NRC/DE R. Wright NRC/DE B. Saffell, Jr. Battelle Columbus Lab. e G. Zech NRC/IE R. Bosnak NRC/DE ! J. Taylor B&W M. Srinivasan NRC/DSI A. Ungaro NRC/DSI R. Rodrique: SMUD J. Bobbitt SMUD ( C. Woodhead NRC/0 ELD R. Goddard NRC/0 ELD E. Jordan NRC/IE J. Graham GA Technologies, Inc. L. Rubenstein NRC/DSI W. Museler LILCo C. Seaman LILCo J. Richard MP&L J. McGaughy, Jr. MP&L B. Herrick Franklin Research Ctr. C. Wells Failure Analysis Assoc. M. Milligan LILCo A. Earley Hunton & Williams D. Foster Georgia Power G. Bockhold, Jr. Georgia Power M. Miller NRC/DI. W. Ramsey Southern Co. Services, Inc. C. Wylie Duke Power D. Owen Duke Power , R. Muschick Duke Power M. Pollock LILCo W. Uhl LILCo- ;~ G. Leidich Cleveland Electric L. Beck Cleveland Electric M. Lyster Cleveland Electric D. Bauser Shaw, Pittman, Potts & . Trowbridge K. Basklim Southern California Edison R. Phelps Southern California Edison J. Mangum Southern California Edison C. Matthews TDI D. Bixby TDI M. Towrey TDI C. Kano Teledyne Engineering M. McDuffie Carolina P&L A. Cutter Carolina P&L C. Hinnant Carolina P&L , P. Skinner NRC/R-II l l
o a 3-NAME ORGANIZATION U alker NRC/R-III W. Shenton Carolina P&L B. Harshe Consumers Power J. Grinaldi Braun & Co*
. McClure TDI J. Pinto Mpat R. Jackson BECHTEL F. Schroeder NRC/ DST J. Lieberman NRC/0 ELD l C. Sellers NRC/MTEB R. Kiessel NRC/EGCB G. Klinglen NRC/IE E. Gilbert NRC/01 E. Reis NRC/0 ELD J. Jankovich NRC/DHFS W. Keller NUTECH Engineers
. Wheeler NRC/DL
. Vollmer NRC/DE E. Case NRC/NRR
]
*,-m,- , ,' w
O O Enclosure 3 TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL HAS SUPPLIED THE DSR AND DSRV ENGINES TO THE FOLLOWING SITES: UTILITY SITE SERIAL N0, MODEL LONG ISLAND LIGHTING SHOREHAM 74010/12 DSR 48 MIDDLE SOUTH ENERGY GRAND GULF 74033/36 DSRV 16 GULF STATES UTILITIES RIVER BEND 74039/40 DSR 48 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT SHEARON HARRIS 74046/49 DSRV 16 DUK$ POWER COMPANY CATAWBA . 75017/20 DSRV 16 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SAN ONOFRE 75041/42 DSRV 20 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUM. PERRY 75051/54 DSRV 16 TVA BELLEFONTE 75080/83 DSRV 16 WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER WPPSS 1 75084/85 DSRV 16 WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER
- WPPSS 4 76031/32 DSRV 16 TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES COMANCHE PEAK' 76001/04 DSRV 16 GEORGIA POWER V0GTLE 76021/24 DSRV 16 CONSUMERS POWER MIDLAND 77001/04 DSRV 12 TVA* HARTSVILLE/ 77024/35 DSRV 16
- PHIPPS BEND SMUD RANCHO SEC0 81015/16 DSR 48
- PROJECT DELAYED OR CANCELLED I
I
O O l l I I i t i l l U. S NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE WITH TDI DIESEL GENERATORS I . . SAff DN0FRE 1 GRAND GULF i SHOREHEAM i. J
.--....e, .,- ... ,. , ---,--w.-..-.+,.-.-e.. ,.,,,,,,..r -,, . - . - - , .. , , ..nm--,.,.,.,,-..,-,.an v.~. . .g-_. , - - -, -
o o i SAN ONOFRE 1 TWO TDI DIESEL ENGINES INSTALLED IN 1976 - MODEL DSRV-20
' DECLARED OPERATIONAL IN APRIL 1977 ENGINE OPERATING TIME TO DATE - 450 HOURS / ENGINE SERIAL NO. 75041/42, RATED AT 6000 KW (NOMINAL) 8800 KW (PEAK)
~
FIRST TDI ENGINES TO ACTUALLY ENTER NUCLEAR SERVICE ONLY V-20 IN NUCLEAR SERVICE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS TO DATE EXCESSIVE TURB0 CHARGER THRUST BEARING WEAR LUBE OIL LEAK AND FIRE PISTON MODIFICATION TO PREVENT CROWN SEP,ARATION UNQUALIFIED INSTRUMENT CABLE POTENTIALLY DEFECTIVE GOVERN 0R COUPLING MATERIAL l I {
O O l I l GRAND GULF TWO TDI ENGINES INSTALLED - MODEL DSRV-16 SERIAL NO. 74033/34, RATED AT-7000 KW OPERATING HOURS TO DATE - DIVISION I = 1100 HOURS; DIVISION II = 700 HOURS FIRST V-16 UNITS IN NUCLEAR SERVICE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS TO DATE PISTON CROWN SEPARATION PISTON SKIRT CRACKS FUEL LINE FAILURES - FIRE CYLINDER HEAD CRACKS l TURB0 CHARGER PROBLEMS - PUSH ROD CRACKS GENERATOR SHORT DUE TO ENGINE FASTENER FAILURE AIR STARTING VALVE PROBLEMS
O O SH0REHAM THREE TDI DIESEL ENGINES INSTALLED, MODEL DSR-48
- SERIAL NO. 74010-12, RAT 5D AT 3500 KW OPERATING HOURS AT TIME OF CRANKSHAFT FAILURE (8/83)
#101 = 646 (CRACKED CRANKSHAFT)
#102 = 718 (FAILED CRANKSHAFT)
#103 = 818 (CRACKED CRANKSHAFT)
FIRST STRAIGHT-8 ENGINES IN U. S. NUCLEAR SERVICE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS TO DATE JACKET WATER PUMP PROBLEMS FUEL OIL LINES RUPTURED CYLINDER HEAD CRACKS CRANKSHAFT FAILURES CONNECTING R0D BEARING FAILURES PISTON SKIRT CRACKS FAILURES OF SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPE FASTENERS i l
l MARINE EXPERIENCE INFORMATION FROM THREE DIFFERENT OPERATORS OF MARINE ENGINES - V-16 AND V-12 ENGINES , ENGINES OPERATING HOURS TO DATE RANGE FROM 3000 TO 30,000 SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS TO DATE CYLINDER HEAD CRACKS (ALL OPERATORS) PISTON CRACKS AND COMPLETE FAILURES EXCESSIVE BEARING WEAR TURB0 CHARGER PROBLEMS CRACKS IN PUSH ROD WELDS CRACKS IN CONNECTING RODS CYLINDER BLOCKS i
.O s l
STAFF ACTION TDI PROJECT GROUP FORMED WILL INTERNALLY C0 ORDINATE NRC EVALUATION OF TDI ENGINES CENTRAL P0 INT-0F-CONTACT FOR INTERACTION WITH APPLICANTS AND 0WNERS GROUP COORDINATION OF STAFF TECHNICAL REVIEWS AND OVERALL STAFF ; POSITION ON TDI ENGINES i I 1 ( l (
I o
- Delaval Diesel Generator Operation Experience U. S. Nuclear Experience i in 1974, the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCo) contracted with TDI to purchase three emergency diesel generators for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. This was the first order received by TDI to provide an EDG for a commercial nuclear power station. In the next seven years, engines for 14 other plants were ordered.from TDI. -
San Onofre 1 Two TDI Diesel Engines Installed in 1976 - DSRV-20 Serial No. 75041/42, Rated at 6000KW (nominal) 8800KW (peak) Engine Run Time to Date - 450 hours per engine The first plant to actually place a TDI engine into nuclear service was San Onofre Unit 1 (SONGS 1), which purchased two V-20 units to provide emergency power for its feed pumps, which also serve as Emergency Core Cooling System pumps. The enoines at SONGS 1 were installed in 1976, and declared operational in April 1977. Since then, SONGS has experienced some problems with the operation of the engine turbochargers, a lube oil pressure sensing line failure which resulted in a fire, and several other minor problems. Because SONGS did not commit to meet the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.108, but rather Regulatory Guide 1.9, the program it used to test the engines before they were placed in service was more abbreviated than for a new plant. A detailed list of problems to date follows. Date Problem Cause/ Solution 12/80 Excessive Turbocharger No lube oil during standby. thrust bearing wear. Lube oil system modified. 10 CFR Part 21 report issued because problem generic. 7/81 Lube oil leak and fire. Excessive vibration of a lube oil test line which had inadvertently been left installed by the licensee. Line removed. 12/81 Piston modification to Pistons reworked by TDI to prevent crown separation. respond to Part 21 report. Problem identified at Grand Gulf. 9/83 Unqualified instrument Replaced in accordance with ; cable. Part 21 report.
)
l I i ! Grand Gulf i Two TDI engines installed - Model DSRV-16 Serial No. 74033/34, Rated at 7000KW Operating Hours to Date - Division I = 1100 hours; Division II = 700 hours j In 1981, Mississippi Power & Light (MP&L) commenced pre-operational testing of two V-16 engines installed at Grand Gulf Unit 1. They represent the first V-16 units ordered from TDI, and in fact, one of the Grand Gulf engines was used to qualify the entire TDI V-16 line of machines for nuclear applications. The Grand Gulf engines have experienced significant problems in completing the pre-operational test program, have had several major failures, including a fuel line break which caused a fire, and many minor failures. A detailed list of problems at Grand Gulf follows. Date Problem Cause/ Solution 11/81 Piston crown separation during Holddown studs failed. operation. - Pistons returned to TDI for rework. Generic problem. 3/81 Excessive turbocharger thrust No lube oil during standby. bearing wear. Lube oil system modified. 6/11/82 Air starting valve capscrews Response to Part 21 report. replaced. Too long for holes. 8/23/82 Flexible drive coupling material Replaced with different incompatible with operating material. environment. 8/82 Latching relay failed during Relay replaced. . testing. , 3/8/82 Air start sensirg line not Sensing line relocated and seismically supported. properly supported. 1/29/82 Governor lube oil cooler Lube oil cooler relocated to located too high. Possibility lower elevation, of trapping air in system. 3/23/82 Engine pneumatic logic Pneumatic logic design improperly design. Could corrected. result in premature engine shutdown.
's 4 1
I i Date- Problem Cause/ Solution ) 4/29/81 Non-Class 1E motors supplied Motors replaced with Class 1E with EDG auxiliary system qualified motors. pumps. 3/15/82 Crankcase cover capscrew Capscrews replaced with failed. Head lodged in higher strength screws. generator and shorted it out. Lock tab washers installed. Generator screens installed. 8/2/83 High pressure fuel injection Manufacturing defect in line failed. tubing. Tubing replaced. 9/4/83 Fuel oil line failed. Caused High cycle fatigue of major fire. Swagelock fitting. Additional tubing supports to be installed. 8/11/83 Cracks in connecting push All push rods replaced, rod welds. 1983 Turbocharger vibration. Turbocharger replaced. 1983 Cracked jacket water welds. Excessive turbocharger vibration. Cracks re-welded. 1983 Turbocharger mounting bolt Ex'cessive turbocharger failures. vibration. Bolts replaced. 7/83 Air start valve failures. Cause unknown. Syst'em cleaned and several valves replaced. More frequent maintenance scheduled. > 10/28/83 Fuel oil leak. Tubing replaced. Cracked push rod weld. Push rod replaced. During EDG Cylinder head cracks. Head replaced. Installation 12/83 Cylinder head cracks. Two heads replaced. 12/83 Cracks in piston skirts All Division II pistons on Division II EDG. replaced. Division I pistons to be inspected. 9/83 Unqualified instrument cable. Replaced in response to Part 21 report. l l l
D e Shoreham i Three TDI Diesel Engines installed, Model DSR-48
- Serial No. 74010-12, Rated at 3500KW Operating hours at time of crankshaft failure (8/83)
#101 = 646 (cracked crankshaft)
#102 = 718 (failed crankshaft)
- #103 = 818 (cracked crankshaft)
The engines at Shoreham are the first straight-8 units to be placed in nuclear service in the U. S. One of the Shoreham engines (#101) was used to qualify the straight-8 series (R48) diesel engine for nuclear service. Pre-operational testing of the engines at Shoreham started in late 1981 and I continued until the major failure of the #102 crankshaft on August 12, 1983. After the performance of extensive tests in late September and early October, which were observed by staff members from NRR and Region I, as well as an NRC consultant, LILCo presented the results of its crankshaft failure investigation in a meeting on November 3, 1983. It reported that the crankshaft had been improperly designed, and had failed because the loading function used in the original design calculations was too small. LILCo also reported that it was investigating four failed connecting rod bearings which were discovered when the EDGs were disassembled. Their preliminary finding was that the failures occurred because the bearing material did not meet specifications, and the bearing loads had not been properly accounted for. A detailed list of the EDG problems at Shoreham follows. Date Problem Cause/ Solution 3/81 Excessive turbocharger thrust No lube oil during standby, bearing wear. Lube oil system modified. 12/81 Piston modifications to prevent Pistons reworked by TDI to crown separation. respond to Part 21 report. Problem identified at Grand Gulf. 9/82 Engine jacket water pump Water pumps reworked by TDI. modifications. 6/82 Air starting valve capscrews Response to Part 21 repert. replaced. Too long for holes. 9/82 Engine jacket water pump shaft Pump shafts redesigned and f, ailed by fatigue. replaced. Spring /1983 Cracks in engine cylinder heads. Fabrication flaws. All heads replaced.
Date Problem Cause/ Solution 3/83 Two fuel oil injection lines Manufacturing defect in ruptured. tubing. Tubing replaced with shielded design. 3/83 Engine rocker arm shaft bolt High stress cycle fatigue. failure. Bolts replaced with new design. 8/12/83 Broken crankshaf t. Cracks in Inadequate design. Replaced remaining crankshafts, with larger diameter crankshafts. 9/83 Cracked connecting rod bearings. Inadequate design and substandard material. Replaced with new design. 10/83 Cracked piston skirts. Replaced all piston skirts with new design. Generic problem. 11/83 Broken cylinder head stud nuts. Replaced all head stud nuts. 9/83 Cracked bedplates in area of Cracks evaluated by LILCo and main journal bearings. determined to not be significant. 9/83 Unqualified instrument cable. Replaced in response to
, Part 21 report.
. _ . _ ~. . . _ _ , _ - . __
2 o Operating Experience - Non-Nuclear t fiarine Applications Besides being used for stationary electric power generation, TDI diesel engines have been placed in service as propulsion units on commercial cargo vessels. As part of the Shoreham operating license hearing, an intervenor, I Suffolk County, requested and was granted by the Licensing Board, subpoenas i for the State of Alaska, U. S. Steel, and Titan Navigation, Inc. These three organizations operate vessels which use TDI V-16 diesel engines which are very similar to most of the TDI units installed in nuclear power plants. The responses which were received indicate that the TDI engines in. marine service for these organizations have experienced severe reliability problems. Most have related to faulty cylinder heads, but they have also included problems l with pistons, cylinder liners, turbochargers, cylinder blocks, connecting rods, connecting rod bearings, main journal bearings, and camshafts. A detailed experience list follows. The staff is reviewing this material to see how much of it is applicable to engines in nuclear service. l l l l l
o
- Marine Experience with TOI Diesel Generators l
State of Alaska, M. V. Columbia Vessel fitted with two DMRV-16-4 Engines - Serial No. 72033/34 Rated at 9200 HP (6900 KW) at 450 RPM Vessel and engines placed in service in June 1974. Each engine has approximately 30,000 hours of operating time to date. Document Date Problem Description 12/76 All cylinder liner seals replaced. All cylinder heads have been removed, reinstalled, or renewed at least three times. All pistons have been removed and reinstalled at least once. Turbochargers have been removed, repaired and reinstalled, or renewed 16 times due to leaking oil seals, vibration, rotor damage, or defective bearing seal housing. Exhaust manifolds have been removed and reinstalled because of frozen expansion joints and resulting cylinder head flange face damage, i Lube oil consumption is excessive. 6/15/78 Rapid deteriorations of fire seal rings causing blowby across gasket surface of cylinder heads. Very low lube oil filter life (40 hours). Caused by blowby of pistons and valve guider. Stainless steel exhaust bellows burn out rapidly. Installed backwards by TDI. 11/28/78 (Letter to Alaska from TDI), Recommends timing changes to improve turbocharger performance.
, .s Document Date Problem Description 1/31/79 Valve seats and valve guides not concentric. Results in bad valve contact.
Defective piston rings shipped as replacement parts. Reworked cylinder head received from TDI without all required modifications and with damaged gasket face. Newly furnished cylinder liners received with incorrect surface finish (twice). Connecting rod bearings furnished as spare parts were wrong size - 13" vice 12". Turbocharger exhaust flex section incorrectly furnished by TDI. 2/2/79 Chrome plating failure of piston rings. Caused heavy scoring of cylinder liner. Associated cylinder head found cracked. Seven cylinder heads replaced during 15 weeks of operation. Excessive lube oil filter change out rate. Due to pist'on blowby. Fuel injector spray tips changed at TDI recommendation to reduce carbon buildup and eliminate washing of liner walls with fuel oil. Three major overhauls of engines in 5 years of operation. Carbon accumulations in rocker box areas. Excessive oil vapor discharge from engine crankcases. Heavy carbon deposits on valve springs. Suspect valve blowby. When exhaust valve guides were modified by TDI, they did not follow the procedure outlined in their SIM (Service Information Memo).
9
- s Document Date Problem Description Loose piston pin end caps.
Incorrect piston crown to skirt bolt torque. Bad connecting rod bearings. Excessive wear, cracks. Damaged connecting rod bolts. Valve push rods cracked at weld of ball to pipe. QC problem. C Crankshaft size changed after engines for ship installed. No notice to owners of reason for change. Excessive main bearing wear. I Camshaft lobe hard facing worn. TDI recommended the installation of a new flexible exhaust duct which was too short (new design). Installation attempted at insistence of TDI. Unit damaged by attempt and returned to TDI for repair. 3/19/79 QC or material problems with respect to non-concentricity /out-of-round valve seats, push rods, rod bolts, bearing shells, valve stem plating. 6/14/79 Thermal growth and cracking of exhaust manifold. 12/26/79 Failure of new connecting bearings. Cracks of 25% of connecting rods. l t l l
o . Document Date Problem Description 1/16/80 Ten (10) new cylinder heads have cracks. This includes 8 that were previously repaired. Fifteen (15) valves are defective with chrome flaking off the valve stems. Valve stems are being deformed. Five additional push rods have cracks. Turbocharger air cooler inlet housing is cracked for fourth time. Internal bracing in engine intercoolers is cracked. 2/5/80 Piston rings installed improperly because mistake by TDI in the drawing used by TDI shop. 2/29/80 Piston crown-to-skirt nut torque inconsistent among nuts on various pistons. Excessive link rod bushing bail wear i caused by improperly relieved, drilled oil passages on the m,,atching link rod pins. 3/24/80 Abnormal carbon deposits and formations noted on pistons and cylinder head assemblies. i Fretting of jaw areas of connecting rods. Insufficient turbo (manifold) air except at near full speed operation. Cracked exhaust manifold end plates. Cracking of connecting rod boxes. Cracking of newly installed connecting rod bearing shells at 4500/ hours. l l l l l
o
- Document Date Problem Description Fretting of link rod and link rod pins at their attachment together.
Fretting between link rod bushings and link rod bushing bore. Galling of link rod bushings in way of link rod pin outer drilled oil passages. Improper wear / contact pattern on newly , installed connecting rod bearings at 4500/ hours. Four-point loading. Insufficient connecting rod bearing wear / contact area to journal wherein it is less than 15% of the total bearing area. Upsetting of stems in valve keeper area. Damage to number four piston ring and ring ' groove on all pistons modified during the 1978-79 engine teardown and rebuilt after 4500/ hours operation. Fretting between piston crown and skirts at 4500/ hours since piston modifications. Variations in piston bolt torque, beyond specified limits, at 4500/ hours since piston modifications. Damage to rod bolts, including cracking. and damage to threads on both the bolt and in the rod boxes. 4/18/80 Exhaust manifold conversion kits received with cuts and grooves in finished surface. Required rework by owner before installation. 5/12/80 rods received without New connecting required code (American Bureau of Shipping) approval. TDI did not have record of which rods were shipped with approval or without
- approval.
Some new connectino rods shipped with oversize bearings but no note to custoner informing of difference. l I
a , 1 Document Date Problem Description 5/14/80 Cylinder head returned to TDI has been lost by TDI. Cannot be located. 1 5/15/80 Customer received new connecting rod bolt in rusty condition with damaged threads. 5/27/80 Customer received reworked cylinder heads with lip left on exhaust seats which prevents valves from seating. Customer noted that it now was in possession of two cylinder heads with the same serial number. Could not install lockwire in new connecting rod cap screw. Hole drilled partway through with drill broken off in center of hole. Also noted that edces of lockwire holes on other screws had not been rounded to prevent damage to lcckwire. 5/29/80 Discovered leaks in newly installed exhaust manifcid head plates. 9/4/80 (Meeting Summary) TDI says that all cylinder head problems should be correcttd by new design. TDI reports that connecting rod bearing cracks could have resulted from bad
, bearing alloy makeup by vendors. TDI i
looking at different bearing materials. TDI stated that they had erred on piston modifications. Effected others besides COLUMBIA. 9/30/80 Eleven remaining master connecting rods to be sent to TDI to have oversize bearings and other modifications installed. Many of the original cylinder heads that were returned to TDI for rework were ' exchanged for other used heads. ,
O e
)
Document Date Problem Description - 11/6/80 Cylinder head changed due to heavy external water leakage. Severe smoke causing excessive lube oil contamination and engine room atmosphere ; problems. Engine secured to prevent possible crankcase explosion. 12/10/80 All connecting rods removed. New rod cap screws and washers to be installed because increased torque specified by TDI caused galling. New connecting rod bearing shell found cracked. Heavy wear noted on piston side thrust areas. Heavy hard carbon buildup noted in area of compression rings. Fourth ring groove area to be reworked by TDI due to design / machine error by TDI during previous' modifications. Nineteen (19) of 32 cylinder liners exceed spec for out-of-round. TDI to nodify limits to permit continued usage. Twenty-one (21) of 32 liners lost crush. New phenomena. Repairs require machining of engine block. Fuel injectors removed and to be changed from 140 spray pattern to 135 pattern. Original nozzles had 150 pattern. t 1/16/81 Cylinder block bores found to be distorted. Four new engine camshafts installed. l
O 'a Document Date Problem Description
~
3/13/81 Reworked cylinder heads were returned to I the customer without removing the grinding compound from the valves and valve seats. Two reworked pistons returned to customer ( without roll pins, which lock the securing nuts in place. ? Cylinder liner delivered with wrong surface finish. Cracks found in cylinder blocks. All replaced. Main engine blocks found to be cracked and warped. The main block-to-base through bolts appear to have been improperly torqued during initial assembly. One "new" camshaft found to be a rebuilt unit containing several damaged bearing iqarnal areas. The threaded head stud holes in the new cylinder blteks were not counterbored deeper, at TDI had indicated they currently do. This was to eliminate cracking of the block near the stud holes. The customer re-machined each of the 256 head studs to accomplish the same intent. 4/9/81 Several reworked pistons were returned without groove pins. In response to a request for 20 li"
, capscrews and washers, TDI supplied 1 7/8" capscrews.
Drawings furnished by TDI for head stud modifications were not applicable to the studs in question. 50% of the fuel pump bases would not fit onto the new cylinder blocks because of slight changes in the design of the blocks. l l. l l l l i _ __ . < - , . y -
1 o .
\
1 Document Date Problem Description Two new cylinder liners provided with incorrect surface finish. One new cylinder liner provided with
- flange thickness larger than !
manufacturer's maximum tolerance. New connecting rod capscrews were found to be galled and unfit for use. i 4/29/81 Service manual showed incorr'ect installati;n of engine camshafts. - 2/3 of fuel cam tappet assemblies on one engine could not be installed on one , engine because the new cylinder blocks had , not been properly counterbored.
- Cylinder liner counterbore depths _were off to such an extent that difficulty experienced in establishing proper liner c rush.
Weld spatter noted on many seating surfaces. Dirt, sand, and metal showings found in passages and hole's which should have been clean. Cylinder head water port outlet locations varied considerably, causing a water flow restriction. Air start distributor not properly assembled at factory. 6/1/81 Exhaust manifold head plate developed a l leak. Cracks found around 2 of 3 tie rods due to poor initial welding. 11/19/81 Defective valve springs found on one engine. 7/29/87 Valve rotator failed. Cracks discovered in the intercooler. l i
)
i Document Date Problem Description i 7/29/82 "In nine years of operation every basic l engine component has been modified or : replaced with an improved item, at least I Once, with the exception of the crankshaft (which is obsolete and has not been used for years), the engine base, the fuel pumps and the governor. The last two items are not manufactured by TDf." 10/15/82 Turbochargers replaced. Exhaust valve lubricating system to be t installed. 3/9/83 Cracks discovered in three cylinder heads. Reworked cylinder returned to customer with tap broken off in threaded hole. Others returned with internal cracks and damaged flange faces. I r
Titan Navigation, M. V. Pride of Texas Vessel fitted with two DMRV-12-4 engines, Serial No. unknown Rated at 7800 HP at 450 RPM Engines installed 1981 - no information on total engine hours to date. Document Date Problem Description 7/16/82 Catastrophic piston failure. Due to crack in piston skirt. Engine had 5791 hours of operation. 4/1/82 Cylinder block broken and cracked. 5 Cylinder head cracked. Cylinder liner cracked. Piston skirt fractured. Suspect that all of above problems caused by water leaking into cylinder from air intake manifold. Leaking tubes found in air intercooler. 8/19/82 Cracks discovered in six piston skirts. 7/22/82 Cracked exhaust valve seats in cylinder heads. Engine had,3000 hours service. Camshaft lobe design appears to be deficient. Causes excessive stress on fuel cam lobe and roller. Tappet assembly rollers severely galled. Believed to be due to camshaft and lobe placement and inadequate heat treatment. Fuel cam lobes have failed twice due to improper heat treatment. Chrome plating lost from one piston wrist pin. All four intercoolers have failed because of erosion due to high fluid velocity. Air start valves have suddenly ceased to function, for no apparent reason. l i
.o , n Document Date Problem Description
[ l Plugs in crankshaft oil ways may be , cracking because improper material used. Under investigation. C Fuel oil return lines have failed. To be j replaced with heavier wall tubing. 4/1/83 Exhaust valves fail after about 2000 hours of use. Serious problems with cylinder head cracks. Turbochargers experiencing difficulty supplying sufficient air. (.
. b 4
i I
i
- I l
l U' e U. S. Steel, MV E. H. Gott t Vessel fitted with two DMRV engines (model unknown) Engine Serial No. 75039-40 No information on engine hours to date. Document Date Problem Description 11/13/80 Cracked cylinder head. Replaced. 4 11/1/79 Cracked cylinder head. Replaced. 6/1/80 Cracked cylinder head. Replaced. 10/8/81 Cracked cylinder head. Replaced. [\ Note: This information was summarized from documents provided by U. S. Steel in ', response to a subpoena which asked - specifically for information about cyliner head failures. Many other portions of the documents were deleted by U. S. Steel, and it appears that the deleted portions referred to problems witn'other engine parts.
,8 e
i- aa .
. )!
4 N- Other Applications The staff understands that other TDI engines are in service as stationary electric power generators. The operating history of these engines will
-be taken into consideration during the staff assessment of TDI engines.
l 5 e s
/
o 4 4 P e
.-w-- r " - - - rm- ----*- - --me---w -
---m - -
2- -- ,-r,m- w -s-ir ~+-- --r- --+=4----w- # * * --- -ve--- = +-+---+-t*e'*
21 - Reference List - Shoreham Letter dated 1/6/84 from B. McCaffrey (LILCo) to H. Denton (NRC) Board Notifi. cation 83-160 dated 10/21/83 , Board Notification 83-160 dated 11/17/83 : Letter dated 12/9/83 from J. Smith (LILCo) to T. Muley (NRC) Letter dated 12/9/83 from A. Schwencer (NRC) to M. Pollock (LILCo) Letter dated 12/29/83 from A. Schewncer (NRC) to M. Pollock (LILCo) : Letter dated 12/16/83 from C. Matthews (TDI) to T. Novak (NRC) Letter dated 12/16/83 from J. Smith (LILCo) to T. Murley (NRC) Letter dated 12/16/83 from A. Dynner (Suffolk County) to A. Earley (LILCo) Letter dated 10/20/83 from A. Earley'(LILCo) to L. Brenner (NRC) Letter dated 10/16/83 from R. Boyer (TDI) to NRC Letter dated 11/17/83 from A. Earley (LILCo) to L. Brenner (NRC) IE Information Notice 83-51, dated 8/5/83 IE Inspection Report 99900334/83-01, dated 10/3/83 IE Information Notice 83-58, dated 8/30/83 Grand Gulf I Letter dated 11/15/83 from L. Dale (MP&L) to H. Denton (NRC) Letter dated 10/19/83 from L. Dale (MP&L) to H. Denton (NRC) LER 50-416/83-171/03L-0 dated 11/28/83 Letter dated 10/26/83 from L. Dale (MP&L) to H. Denton (NRC) LER 50-416/83-082/01T-0 LER 50-416/83-126/01T-0 l 1 1
San Onofre Uni J LER 50-206/81-017 dated 8/12/81 I Letter dated 9/15/81 from H. Ray (SCE) to R. Engelken (NRC) LER 50-206/80-039 dated 12/23/80 Letter dated 6/8/81 from J. Haynes (SCE) to R. Engelken (NRC) Marine Applications Letter dated 12/21/83 from A. Dynner (Suffolk County) to A. Earley (LILCo) Includes many other individual documents. ' h
. . - . _ . ._ ., , .,--,_,._c. , m.-_ __ . , . _ -=.--
Vendor Inspection History To date, the Region IV Vendor Inspection program has inspected the TDI facility in Oakland, California, nine times. The following inspection reports have been published in the POR regarding these inspections:
- 1. Docket No. 99900334/79-1, dated 2'20/79
- 2. Docket No. 99900334/80-01, dated 1/22/81
- 3. Docket No. 99900334/81-01, dated 5/27/81
- 4. Docket No. 99900334/81-02, dated 9/18/81
- 5. Docket No. 99900334/82-01, dated 4/15/82
- 6. Docket No. 99900334/82-02, dated 12/8/82
- 7. Docket No. 99900334/83-01, dated 10/3/83 Attached is a summary by the Vendor Inspection Branch of the TDI inspection history. The history includes some results from the last two inspections. -
which are being reviewed for proprietary information, and which will be published when that review is complete. 9 ) 1
. e o
ATTACHMENT TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL INSPECTION HISTORY VENCOR PROGRAM BRANCH FINDINGS 1979-1983 1 0 I MANUFACTURING PROCESS CONTROL:
- 1. Performance of requirec inspections for completed operations on Shop Engine No. 2931 Tank Lube Oil Sump Inlet Compartment could not be verified, in that neither inspection acceptance stamps were present on the i route sheets for the completed operations nor were inspection reports available to indicate rejectable conditions had been found upon ;
inspection.
- 2. Route sheets were not available to confirm required inspection acceptance of assembly operations for the emergency diesel generator (EDG) jacket water pump reflected on Drawing No. 101973, Revision C.
- 3. Absence of evicence of inspection acceptance for components manufacturec curing jacket water-pump modifications performed in September anc Octocer 1982.
4 a. Acceptance signoff by QC inspectors was made on route sneets in regard to installation of rocker arm hold down bolts. These bolts were subsequently found to be missing on inspection at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (SNPS). .
- b. Shipment. of reworked pistons to' San Onofre, Unit 1, prior to dates indicated on route sheets by CC inscectors that various manufacturing operations were accepted.
- 5. a. Route sheets not issued for rework of 92 pistons from SNPS'and Grano Gulf EDGs and there is, thus, no evidence of inspection acceptance of the various manufacturing operations.
- b. No recorcs of quality activities for rework activities on Granc Gulf ECG sistens wnien was a soecific recuirement of tne p-ecurement specification.
- 6. Absence Of -equi-ec NCE reports f:r SNPS replacement cylinder head castings.
- 7. Acparent use of unqualified personnel for performance of NDE operat' ions on SNPS replacement cylinder neac assemblies.
- 8. Improper signoffs and dates for acceptance of SNPS replacement cylinder heads with esoect t0 pe-senne' identity and use Of a sur-encersc inspection stamp prior to expiration of the minimum 6-month period.
- 9. Use of a different hard facing welcing procecure specification to tnat scecified on tne route sheets for valve seats in SNPS replacement cyltacer head assemclies.
- 10. Recuirements not provided for welcing of anc acceptance of Snearon Ha- 5 EDG fuel oil line clamps.
l
)
o . i l
- 11. Prior to October 1981', manufacture of piston skirt castings did not comply j with engineering component drawing instructions with respect to '
performance of specified stress relief heat, treatment.
- 12. Route sheets for Job No. 02933 did not provice instructions in regard to swaging operations performed on crankshaft oil plugs, i
- 13. No assembly route sheets available for SNPS replacement cylincer head assemblies.
CONTROL OF SPECIAL PROCESSES:
- 1. Absence of procedures for examination of Level III NDE personnel- anm failure to qualify personnel performing visual examinations in accorcance witn ASME Code requiremert;.
- 2. a. Performance of vertical up position welding on ASME Section III piping (Shop Engine No.' 2931, Shop Order No. 94302) by welcer qualified only for flat position welding.
- b. Welding of a 2-inen ASME Section III piping assembly by unqualified Gelder.
- 3. Observations during three different inspections of failure to return unused welding electrodes in recuired 4-hour issuance period.
4 Identification of welders used for certain operations on Shop Engine Nos. 2931 and 2959 could not be verified.
- 5. Unactestable fillet weld size in Shop Engine No. 2931 Tank Lube 011 Sump Inlet Compartment cue to cac 'fitup of tans roof and sicewall resulting in almost frush condition.
- 6. Jse of -elcing electr:ce sizes that aere qct ;e rstec aj sco; cacie weicing procecure specifications on Joo Nos. 94922 and 96632.
- 7. use of Joo No. 95395 of weicing am;erage anc voitace in excess of weieing procedure specification recuirements.
- 8. Performance of welding on Job Order No. 97-485-3085 witnout specified revision of welding rocecure specification being in weicer's possession.
- 9. Certification recc-dr 'or endest ucti.e exa-iret
- n e--sn-re i t*- --*
incicate tne use of ten cnecspoints by ne examiner curing tne practical examination as requirec ey SNT-TC-1A anc fnterna! ;r:ce:ura: PROCUREMENT CONTROL:
- 1. a llure of Quality Engineering to cath upcate Osalifiea Suppliers uts every 3 months and to provice a montnly summary of vencor qua:'tw ra t t n.: 3 to-QC anc Purcnas ng.
- 2. Evidence not available to assure that the seller of auxiliary lube oil and jacket water pump motors complied with the requirements of the purchase order.
- 3. Betts Spring Company, a supplier of critical valve springs, had not been surveyed every 3 years. "The available evidence showed it was approximately 5 years since a survey had been made.
4 Associated Spring Company (Barnes Group) was placed on the Approved Suppliers List and used for procurement without completion of a survey or audit.
- 5. Kobe Steel Ltd., a supplier of crankshaft, was not surveyed every 3 years as recuired by the quality assurance orogram. The only available record was a self evaluation survey form completed by Kobe Steel's American representative.
- 6. Fuel oil tub'ing for Purchase Order No. 45333 was accepted by receiving inspection without issue of a nonconformance report, although required mill test reports had not been received.
- 7. Purchased Material Specification No. RL 019000 cated October 6, 1982, was not approved as required by Engineering Operating P~rocedure 7.
- 8. A 0A program was not imposed on the manufacturer of exhaust silencers for EDGs furnished to Ferry, Units 1 and 2, as requireo by Perry Specification Nos. SP-750-4549-00 and SP-706-4549-00. .
- 9. Purchased material specifications for eng.ine mounted electrical control cables required only commercial grades of caole anc dic not invoke applicable customer specification requirements.
- 10. a. No availaole evidence to incicate that materials wrich were use: t:
f aoricate ECG ASME Section III Code Class 3 component supports (Midland) and fuel oil systems (Midland and Grand Gulf) were procurec
# rom vendors who were either identified on the Aporoved Suppi'ers List or had been suoject to audits,
- b. Prior to 1982, ASME Section III Code fasteners were procured from
, vencors who had neither been audited nor were identified on tne Approved Suppliers List as Deing approved for supply of tnis procuct.
- 11. Acceptance by eceivirg instect'0- of ASPE Se:t'cr !!! C:de 'astece-certifications wnich did not comply with purchase order reauirements with respect to: (a) con'ccmance af :nemical concas t n t; notr~ P specification requirements, (b) completeness of mecnanical test cata. ina (c) compliance with ASME Section III Code recuirnments v or reportim; "
material neat treatment. C
- o. -
o-
- 12. Failure to comply with testing requirements of paragraph NCA-3867.4(e) in
, the ASME Section III Code when purchasing stock materials from unsurveyed vendors.
MATERIAL IDENTITY AND CONTROL: Eleven discrepancies in material identity observed in a. sample of 45 between the identity of material issued and that recorded as being used for Midland EDG S/N 770n2 piping system component supports. DESIGN AND DOCUMENT CONTROL:
- 1. Failure to comply with Division Standard Practice Nos. 4.101 and 4.201 ;
requirements with respect to:
- a. Release of a drawing revision to the snop without receiving approval of tne applicable Engineering Change Notice from Industrial Engineering.
- b. Maintenance of the Engineering Change Log, classification of changes as major or minor, and initiation of required forms. ,
- 2. Parts list and component drawings released by Engineering did not define acceptance criteria for irtstallation of crankshaft oil plugs.
- 3. Absence of any instructions in regard to installation location of governor lube oil cooler to engine.
4 Failure to comply with Draf ting Room Practice during 1982 redesign of the EDG jacket water pump in regard to certain layout drawings not being either drawn on tracing paper or signed and dated.
- 5. Dynamic analys's or testi.19 not performed in acccccance eith Stone &
Webster Specification No. SHI-89 af ter recesign of tne SNPS EDG jacket , water pumps.
- 6. Failure to comply with Engineering Operating Procedure 4 and Oraf ting Recm Practice requirements with respect to signing and dating of calculations by the designer for the SNPS jacket water pump redesign.
- 7. No evidence of required approval of "O Sheets" by the applicable Engineering manager. Examples noted were 0-4986 and 0-4956 wnicn were entitied, " Asset.bly Instructions," anc pertaine: to the EDG faa.+ wate-pump.
- 8. Jacket water pump analyses dated Septemoer 24 anc Octooer 4, 1952, and July 15, 1983, for SNPS had not r?ceivec recuirea certificat on from tae i
staff Registerec Professional Engineer.
, 0 4 3 NONCONFORMANCES AND CORRECTIVE ACTION:
- 1. No evidence to indicate that required quarterly submittal of completed corrective action activity to the Division General Man.ager had ever been accomplished.
- 2. Failure of Quality Engineering to process a required Corrective Action Request Form after customer identification of TDI failure to meet weld <
quality requirements in ASME Section III Code Class 3 diesel generator piping.
- 3. a. Removal and replacement of a defective weld i'n Shop Enginer No. 2931, Part No. 02-717-02YR without required rejection and documentation on an Inspection Report. t
- c. Disposition of a cimensional nonconformance on Shop Engine No. 2931.
Part No. 02-540-07-87, made by QC supervision witnout required submission of the Inspection Report to the Material Review Board for review.
- 4. Failure to comply with ASME QA Manual requirements with respect to immeciate icentification of nonconforming items on Inspection Reports and segregation of the items.
- 5. ' Weld shop audit not performed in the fall of 1981,in accordance with corrective action commitments mace to the NRC.
EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION: ,
- 1. Actual calibration measurements for micrometers and a pressure gage were not recorded as require.d oy Quality Control Procedure No. IP-100.
2 .- Gage usec to measure, acceot/ reject the ciameter and cepth of tne lin< ecc coael countercoce nac ot Oeer, icentifiec in accarcance .v tn OA progran - requirements for calibration equipment.
- 3. Measures were not establisnea to assure snat tools usec in cranksnaft oil plug installation were properly controlled and acjusted at specifiec periods to maintain accuracy within necessary limits.
4 a. A welcing machine in Weld Area No. 3 (Founcry) was coservec in September 1983 to have calibration stickers showing a calibration due d.te of August 30. 1980. The OA crograr :3 1'b 3t #:r ' eeue-:v requirement for this equipment is 12 montns.
- o. A neat treat furnace was coserved in Septemoer 19d3 to nave calibration stickers on the meters and temoerature recorcer snowiaa a calibration due cate of Varen 13. 1953.
o e i INTERNAL AUDITS: Failure to perform required semiannual audits of the Foundry, Manufacturing and support activities. 10 CFR PART 21 PRACTICES: .
- 1. Records were not available with respect to fractured thermostatic control valves in Grand Gulf, Unit 1, EDGs to indicate either that an evaluation ^
had been conducted in accordance with 10 CFR Part 21 requirements or that actions had been taken to determine whether the product deviation contributing to the valve fractures (i .e. , improper use of raised face flanges in connecting piping) was present in equipment supplied to other
- customers.
- 2. Noti.fication to affected parties in regard to a potential problem witn isoprene flexible elements of drive couplings was made after tne committed date in the 10 CFR Part 21 report.
- 3. Failure to notify the NRC in regard to:
- a. Jacket water pump shaft failures at SNPS. .
- b. Potential defect in fuel injection line tuoing that was used on EDGs furnished to Grand Guld and San Onofre, Unit 1.
0A RECORDS:
- 1. Records not available to demonstrate environmental qualification of auxilicry lube oil and jacket water pump motors witn respect to Becntel Specification Nos. 9645-M-018.0 and 9645-G-QA-1.
- 2. Failure to orotect records against fire in accoedance with CA Manual requirements notec curing two separate inspections.
MISCELLANEOUS: Failure to have Certificate of Compliance for SNPS replacement cylincer nead assemblies notarized in accordance with customer specification requirements. l i l t
Lo . - . TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INCORPORATED VENDOR PROGRAM BRANCH INSPECTION HISTORY
SUMMARY
OF NINE INSPECTIONS OURING 1979-1983 Number of Subject Nonconformances/ Violations Manufacturing Process Control 13 . , Control of Special Processes 11 Procurement Control 12 Material Icensity and Control . 1 Design and Document Control 8 4 Nonconformances and Corrective Action 5 Equi.nment Calibration 4 Internal Audits 1 10 CFR Part 21 Practices 3 (Violations) QA Records 3 Miscellaneous 'l I i i
- . -- , ,.c
---v -
a b IRANSAMfRICA DELAVAL, INCORPORATED VENDOR PROGRAM BRANCH INSPECTION til5fORY SlM4ARY Of NINI INSPECTIONS DURING 1979-1983 NUMtllR OF SUBJECT NONCONIORMANCIS/VIOLAll0NS MANUFACIURING PROCESS CONIROL 13 CONTRui Of SPECIAL PROCESSES 11 PROCUR[N[Ni CONTROL 12 MATERIAL IDINilIY AND CONTROL 1 DESIGN AND DOCL54fNT CONTROL 8 NONCONf 0RMANCES AND CORRECTIVE ACTION 5 EQUIPMENT CAtl8RAll0N 4 IN1ERNAL AUDlIS 1 10 CfR PARI 21 PRACTIC[5 3 (V10LA110N5) QA RECORDS 3 MISCEliAN[005 1 - j . 1
O MANUFACTURING PROCESS CONIROL ROUTE SHELIS WERE NOT AVAILABLE TO CONFIRM REQUIRID INSPECTION ACCEPTANCE OF ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS FOR THE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERAIOR (EDG) JACKET WATER PUMP REFLECTED ON DRAWING NO. 101913, REVISION C. ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE OF INSPECIl0N ACCEPTANCE FOR COMPONENTS MANUFACTURED DURING JACKET WATER PUMP MODIFICATIONS PERFORMED IN SEPilMBER AND OCTOBER 1982. ACCEPTANCE SIGNOFF BY QC INSPECTORS WAS MADE ON ROUTE SHEETS IN REGARD 10 INSTALL All0N OF ROCKER ARM HOLD DOWN B0liS. THESE BOLIS WERE SUBSEQUENilY FOUND 10 BE MISSING ON INSPECT 109 AT THE SHOREllAM NUCLEAR POWER STAl ION (SNPS). SHIPMENT Of REWORKED PISIONS 10 SAN ONOFRE, UNIT 1, PRIOR TO DATES INDICATED ON ROUTE SHEEIS BY QC INSPECTORS THAT VARIOUS MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS WERE ACCEPIED. ROUTE SilEE15 NOT ISSUED FOR REWORK OF 92 PISTONS FROM SNPS AND GRAND GULF EDGs AND THERE IS, THUS, NO EVIDENCE OF INSPECTION ACCEPIANCE OF IllE VARIOUS MANUI ACIURING OPERATIONS. NO RECORDS OF QUALITY ACTIVITIES FOR REWORK ACTIVITIES ON GRAND GULF EDG PISTONS WHICH WAS A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT OF THE PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATION. APPARENI USL OF UNQUALIFIED PERSGW!!! FOR PERFORMANCE OF NDE OPERATIONS ON SNPS REPLACEMENT CYLINDER HEAD ASSEMBLILS. RIQUIREMENIS NOT PROVIDED FOR WELDING OF AND ACCEPIANCE OF SHEARON liARRIS EDG FUEL OIL LINE C' LAMPS. PRIOR 10 OCTOBER 1981, MANUFACTURE OF PISION SKIRT CASilNGS DID NOT COMPLY WilH ENGINEERING COMPONENT DRAWING INSTRUCil0NS WITH RESPECT TO PERf0RMANCE OF SPECIFIED STRESS RELIEF HEAT TREAIMENT.
~
NO ASSEMBLY RGUlf Silf t IS AVAIL ABLt IOR SNPS REPLACEMENT CYLINDER lilAD ASSEMBLIES.
PROCUREMENI CONIROL PURCHASE 0 MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ENGINE HOUNIED ELECTRICAL CONIROL CABLES REQUIRED ONLY C0094ERCIAL GRADES OF CABLE AND DID NOT INV0KE APPLICABLE CUSIOMER SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. NO AVAILABLE EVIDENCE 10 INDICATE THAL MAllRIALS WillCH WERE USED Td FABRICATE EDG ASME SECTION III CODE CLASS 3 COMPONENT SUPPORTS (MI0 LAND) AND FUEL OIL SYSTEMS (MIDLAND AND GRAND GULI) WERE PROCURED FROM VENDORS M10 WERE EllHER IDENilfIED ON THE APPROVED SUPPLIERS LIST OR HAD BEEN SUBJECI 10 AUDI15. PRIOR 10 1982 ASMI SECIION 111 CODE I ASTENERS WERE PROCURED FROM VENDORS M10 HAD NEITHER BEEN AUDITED NOR WERE IDENTIFIED ON IHE APPROVED SUPPLIERS IIST AS BEING APPROVED FOR SUPPLY OF THIS PRODUCT. ACCEPTANCE
- BY RECEIVING INSPECil0N OF ASME SEC110N III CODE FASTENER CERilFICAil0NS WHICH DID NOT COMPLY WITH
*< CHASE ORDER REQUIREMENTS WIIH RESPICT 10: (A) CONFORMANCL OF CHEMICAL COMPOSlil0N TO MATERIAL SPECIFICATI0u REQUIREMENTS, (B) COMPLllENESS OF MECHANICAL TEST DATA, AND (C) COMPLIANCE WITH ASME SECTION Ill CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTING OF MAIERIAL HEAI TREATMENT.
a e 4
3 4 O 4 . D ._ N _
'A D
E U S S I L 9 A I = R E _ T _ A M t f O Y 1 1 1 S. _ NT . ER e DO e I P P EU HS T T NN EE L EN O WO R T P EM I N BO O C C 5 4M e D E N FT e A OS Y Y ES e 1 L l PG i N MN AI E SP D I I AP L N2
. A I 0 I
0 R D7 E E7 T V A RN M E/ SS B OG D YE _ T m I D I N NA EL DD
. I I M
L AR I O RF E TD AE MS U N I G N 5l l i iB C N5 AA P ED RE CD 5R 1 O DC E NR E V1 EA
,. LH ET
, l
- i J 1 l t l t 1 ):
O NONCONFORMANCES AND CORRECTIVE ACTION NO EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT REQUIRED QUARTERLY SUBHlilAL OF COMPLETED CORRECTIVE ACil0N ACTIVITY TO THE DIVISION GENERAL MANAGER HAD EVE R BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. 1 FAILURE OF QUALITY ENGINEERING 10 PROCESS A REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST FORM AFTER CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION' Of IDI FAILURE TO MEET WELD QUALITY REQUIREMENTS IN ASME SECTION Ill CODE CLASS 3 DIESEL GENERATOR PIPING. WEtD SHOP AUDII NOT PERFORMED IN THE FALL OF 1981 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CORRECTIVE ACTIGN C000411MENTS MADE TO THE . NRC. g a
=
e t i
>MM#
==u.ms.anyimmssa.we.wm.A- .-ae-.mq. h -4.wdE6h --&'b-hM*h-a4p-- imeb ee-_a+h.a%-- hh W WC+-=&==b.4ame meh. 4.U-- -- ,A%%M--@- H h- :% 4Eh*'-"
i o w . 4 a . L l t ! i 4 ! INIERNAL AUDITS l
. [
f 6 FAILURE 10 PERFORM REQUIRED SEMIANNUAL AUDITS Of THE FOUISRY, MANUFACTURING Als SUPPORT ACTIVITIES. s , n ! = I f f i i 1 .
?
. l 1
m i I e h 1 1 ' t
- I I
i }, l l t -l ! i --___ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . ._ _ ._. . , , _ _ . -
e i
- 10 CFR PARI 21 PRACTICES I RECORDS WERE NOT AVAllA8LE WITH RESPECT 10 FRACTURED THERM 0 STATIC CONTROL VALVES IN GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 EDGs TO IMOICATE EIIHER THAT AN EVALUATION HAD BLEN CONDUCIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 10 CFR PARI 21 REQUIREMENis GR THAT ACil0N5 HAD BEEN IAKEN TO DETERMINE WHETHIR THE PRODUCT DEVIATION CONTRIBUTING 10 THE VALVE TRACIURES (1.Er, IMPROPER USE OF RAISED FACE FLANGES IN CONNECTING PIPING) WAS PRESENT IN EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED 10 OTHER CUS10MERS.
j FAILURE TO N0ilFY IHE NRC IN REGARD 10:
~
JACKET WATER PUMP SHAFI FAILURES Ai $NPS. POTEMilAL DEFECT IN FUEL INJEC110N LINE TUBING THAT WAS USED IN EDGs FURNISHED 10 GRAND GutF AND . SAN ONOFRE, UNIT 1. , a i O a .
0WNERS AGENDA TDI GWNER'S GROUP MEETING WITH NRC l DATE: 01/26/8'4 TIME: 3:00 P.'M. LOCATION: PHILLIPS BUILDING - BETHESDA
- 1. 0WNER'S GROUP FORMATION AND CHARTER J.P. McGAUGHY II. 0WNER'S GROUP PROGRAM DESCRIPTION W.J. MUSELER III. CURRENT STATUS OF MAJOR GENERIC FAILURE ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES -
FAAA IV. DESIGN REVIEW / QUALITY REVALIDATION PROGRAM C.K. SEAMAN V. TRANSAMERICA/DELAVAL ACTIVITIES - TDI ' C. MATTHEWS VI. INTEGRATED PROGRAM APPROACH W.J. MUSELER SCHEDULE VII.
SUMMARY
J.P. McGAUGHY
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S GROUP ACTIVITIES
- 1. TIE MEETING NEED FOR A UTILITY TECHNICAL INFORMATION EXCHANGE ON D/G RELIABILITY EXPERIENCES PROMPTED MP&L To SPONSOR 1ST D/G TIE MEETING IN ATLANTA ON 10/25/83, o 26 UTILITIES REPRESENTED ,
o 59 INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES INCLUDING INP0, NRC, AND NSAC/EPRI O PRESENTATIONS GIVEN BY SEVERAL D/G OWNERS o REVIEWED MUTUAL PROBLEMS AT. BREAKOUT SESSIONS a o ATTENDEES MADE 2 RECOMMENDATIONS (1) HOLD WORKSHOP OF D/G 0WNERS (2) ORGANIZE D/G OWNERS'S GROUP O STEERING COMMITTEE FORMED 1 1 4 e
. . , _ . ~ _ . . - . .-- . _ _ . . . _ , _ _ - . _
I .
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S GROUP ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED)
- 2. STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD N0vEMBER 30, 1983 AT 0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA.
0 12 STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND 23 OTHER REPRESENTATIVES FROM UTILITIES, TDI, EPRI/NSAC, FAA REPRESENTED ~ 0 PRESENTATIONS ON SHOREHAM TECHNIC 4L PROBLEMS GIVEN BY FAA 0 LIST OF D/G PROBLEMS WERE DEVELOPED FOR DISCUSSION iilTH IDI O DRAFT CHARTER PREPARED BY AN OG SUBCOMMITTEE 0 TDI CONDUCTED TOUR AND PRESENTED INFORMATION ON CRANKSHAFTS, PISTONS, CONNECTOR ROD BEARINGS, PUSH RODS, QA PROGRAM O STEERING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS IN TDl'S 0A i AND PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND COMMUNICATIONS 0 STEERING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IDI RESPOND WITH WRITTEN l REPORT 0 COMPREHENSIVE REPORT WAS PREPARED BY TDI AND DISTRIBUTED TO OWNER'S GROUP MEMBERS 1 l i
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S GROUP ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED) 3. EXECUTIVE MEETING DELAVAL D/G 0WNER'S EXECUTIVE MEETING HELD DECEMBER ATLANTA, GEORGIA. O MP8L AND LILC0 VP'S SPONSOR EXECUTIVE'S MEETING PURPOSE OF MEETING: 0 UTILITIES TO MANAGE EFFORT 0 DEVELOP COORDINATED EFFORT - BACK TO BASICS 0 ADDRESS NRC AND UTILITY TDI ENGINE RELIAB O DESIGN, MANUFACTURE, IESTING O MuST HAVE TDI INVOLVEMENT 0 ALL UTILITIES TO SUPPLY ACTIVE TECHNICAL PA O BUILD ON LILC0 EFFORT - HIT THE GROUND RUNNING 0 LILC0 APPOINTED AS IECHNICAL PROGRAM MANAGER 0 MPal V.P. WAS APPOINTED TO CHAIR COMMITTEE i
= -
l
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S' GROUP ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED) i
- 4. TDI OG TECHNICAL MEETING TDI - OWNER'S GROUP IECHNICAL PROGRAM MEiTING HELD JANUARY 6, 1984, AT LILC0/SHOREHAM SITE, N.Y. '
O LILCO, TUGCO, DUKE, MP8L REPRESENTED 0 PROPOSED TDI-0G PROG AM OUTLINED 0 MAJOR ELEMENTS DEFINED O COSTS ESTIMATED 0 AGENDA FOR OG AND NRC PRESENTATION APPROVED I O RECOMMENDATIONS MADE FOR UTILITIES TO IMMEDIATELY IMPLEMENT COMPONENTS SELECTION PHASE,0F PROGRAM 0 SCHEDULED PRESENTATION TO OG EXECUTIVES FOR APPROVAL
, 0 UTILITY PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO IECHNICAL REVIEWS i
i I i
,- . , , , -, , - - - +- , , , , , - - - --p,- ,,,n,--,, ,c , + - - , y- , _,,en- ,--,-n.,..e--a. --,,ns--n.--pr-w. ,sm.---,e---,. ---- p,, rn--
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S GROUP ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED) t
- 5. PROGRAM APPROVAL - ALL TDI OWNERS 0 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MET JANUARY 16 '
O FINAL PROGRAM PRESENTED TO OWNERS 0 PROGRAM WAS APPROVED BY ALL PARTICIPATING UTILITIES
+
0 IDI COMMITTED TO EFFORT I J i
l . . .
SUMMARY
OF OWNER'S GROUP ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED)
- 6. 0G UTILITY PARTICIPANTS GULF STATES UTILITIES (GSU) ,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON (SCE) CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT (CP&L) DUKE POWER
, SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO. (TUGCO) CONSUMERS POWER MISSISSIPPI POWER AND LIGHT (MPL) CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING C0. (CEICO) LONG ISLAND POWER AND LIGHT C0. (LILCO) 4 GEORGIA POWER I i i
-----r,.y---, -- . , , - , , ,r.-, -. -- - -- w.. . . , = = -w -w+-*- +- *e-wp* m we" '
_. . .- . - . ~. .. . . . _ - _ _ - - - - - e
. A L LdCIUitCn t 2 , ,
TDI DIESEL GENERATOR OWNERS' GROUP Chairman J. McGaughy (MP&L) vice Chairman J. George (TU) Executive Committee Program Administration 11 Utilities W. Angle (MP&L) Technical Program Director W. Museler (LILCO) Design Review and Quality Generic Problem Revalidation Program Resolution Testing Program (Pa AA , S&W, Consultants, Definition (FaAA Lead) TDI, Utilities) (FaAA, Utilities) O _O.. b PM- Mm
- 9 -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i + I i D.G. DESIGN REVIEW QUALITY REVALIDATION PROGRAM 3H-2 PROGRAM MANAGER C.u.sgauaN top
]
i i I I DESIGN GROUP COMPONENT SELECTION OUALITY GROUP j CH AIRM AN CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN s e accraserl J C.NauutVta is) n.J, N AJUCN is) 4 l - f TASK LEADERS DIESEL OWNERS FoAA LEAD SEW LEAD OWNER LEAD
! t. SITE ENGlt4EER CONSULTANTS REPRESENTATIVES j J C. m a nutvEn ist 1.TEV 1. SITE ENGINEERS j 2. VALVES ',,' f,5,,C"'"','
g " , ,' 2.0ESIGN SPEC. 4 Aosuant est P. Taot t u C3 3.TDI REP.
- 3. P
- 2. samt scuusor 1 4. E MD l J.sattuau/ ts
- o. Esit Lione s ist g g S.IEC T.m Jacos
__ l l ist DOCUMENTATION RVW OUALITY ENGR 4 FIELD INSPECTION
- 6. TURBO DER TASK LE ADER TASK MAMR a saatte tra COMPONENT OWNERS
- o.ascusmo (si J.atstLy est J.tanaisTEest l
- 7. BEARINGS -RCDS-i GEARS 1.FoAA t.R48 E l
E E E j = = coorgaaiota tr a
- 2. S E W 2. RV 16 J. PNILLIPs ts) a. A. CHIN isl E.HEss is)
- 8. HE ADS-CASTINGS =
- 3. DIESEL CONSULT. 3. R v 12 o.JEanste is z.Jacossom ist E.suwas ess 4 OWNERf nEP. 4. R V 2 O P.utLtuta ist a. wnset ess 4
- 9. STRUCT UR AL /
i MECHAt4ICAL S. TDI REP.
- en.Jo== stow tr i
TOTAL ESTtuATE 14 PERSONNEL l5 PERSONNEL l 11 EST. PERSONNEL l 8 EST. PERSONNEL l 5 EST. PERSONNEL l 8 { 3 E NGtt4E ER'S STAFF 50 { *- rastvec amatvs s associates
- .s -,om ,tas .m -== u t na 0- out
- ca atPREs!4Taf tvt j C- CONSULTANTS
) i i _ _ , . - . -
TDI DIESEL GENERATOR OWNERS GRGUP 3E-l CHAIRMAN i J. McGougby (MPGL) VICE CHAIRMAN J. George (TU) PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION-EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 11 UTILITIES W. Angle (MP & L) TECHNICAL PROGRAM DIRECTOR W. Museler (LlLCO) I _ l GENERIC PROBLEM TESTING PROGRAM
' DEFINITION R E S OLU TION (FA AA, S G W, CONSULTANTS (FAAA, UTit.lTIES)
TDI, UTILITIES) g-t 1
~
N2 PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS
- 1. OWNERS' GROUP UTILITIES (11)
- 2. FAAA L
3.TDI .
- 4.SWEC
- 5. D.G. CONSULTANTS I
L _ - - - - - - - - - - -
K-3 DR. FRANZ F. PISCHINGER e CURRENT POSITION
- DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED THERMODYNAMICS, AACHEN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, AND
- VICE PRESIDENT, FORSCHUNGSGESELL . SCHAFT FdR ENERGIETECHNIK UND VERBRENNUNGSMOTOREN (FEV)
- 30 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN ALL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ASPECTS OF DIESEL ENGINES e FORMER POSITION
- DIRECTOR, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, K.H.D. AG, DIESEL ENGINE MANUFACTURER, WEST GERMANY
- RESEARCH DEPARThilENT HEAD, INSTITUTE FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES GRAZ e PUBLICATIONS
- AUTHORED TEXTBOOKS AND TECHNICAL PAPERS ON DIESEL ENGINE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
E4 PAUL THOLEN
- CURRENT POSITION
- CONSULTANT TO DR. F. F. PISCHINGER, FEV '
1 e FORMER POSITION l - DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, K.H.D. AG, DIESEL ENGINE MANUFACTURER, WEST GERMANY
- - RESPONSIBLE FOR:
- DIESEL ENGINE DEVELOPMENT ll j
- TESTING AND MEASUREMENT
- THERMODYNAMICS ,
- DESIGN ANALYSIS
- DEVELOPED HIGHLY-TURBOCHARGED DIESEL ENGINES l e PUBLICATIONS -
- " WEAR AND FUEL CONSUMPTION IN DIESEL ENGINES", S.A.E.
MILWAUKEE CONFERENCE, SEPTEMBER 1983 l - "TURBOCHARGING OF DIESEL ENGINES", PRESENTED IN TOKYO, l JAPAN 1977 "NEW PROCEDURES IN TURBO CHARGING OF ENGINES", SIEMAG CONFERENCE, WASHINGTON, D.C.1973 l ,
a 4 E-5 DR. CLIFFORD H. WELLS (FAAA) l
- CURRENT POSITION
- VICE PRESIDENT, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
- RESPONSIBLE FOR:
- FATIGUE AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
- NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION l e FORMER POSITIONS
! - DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS, SOUTHWEST l RESEARCH INSTITUTE
- - ASSISTANT MANAGER, MATERIALS ENGINEERING AND i RESEARCH, PRATT & WHITNEY AIRCRAFT CORP.
! - CHAIRMAN, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, MATERIALS DIVISION, ASME 1 l e PUBLICATIONS
- EDITOR," FATIGUE OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES" I
~
l N-6 i GkRY W. ROGERS, P.E. (FAAA) e CURRENT POSITION ' - DIRECTOR, FAAA, PHOENIX OFFICE
- RESPONSIBLE FOR:
l
- RECIPROCATING AND TURBO MACHINERY DESIGN
- VIBRATIONS ANALYSIS AND FIELD TESTING L - CONDUCTED:
- DIESEL MAIN BEARING AND GENERATOR SHAFT FAILURE
! ANALYSIS, A.RKANSAS NUCLEAR - 1
- MOTOR BEARING FAILURE ANALYSIS, SAN ONOFRE- 2 1
- RCP SEAL FAILURE ANALYSIS, INDIAN POINT - 2 s FORMER POSITION
- GdRRETT CORPORATION
! - RESPONSIBLE FOR: i - G T ENGINE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT l
- DESIGN ANALYSIS OF DRIVESHAFT TORSIONAL INSTABILITY
- MEMBER MATERIAL REVIEW BOARD (DESIGNIQUALITY REVIEW) l l
_ _ _ = _ _ _ - __=__:_-. .
~
DR. LEE A. SWANGER, P.E. (F A AA) m-7 e CURRENT POSITION
- MANAGING ENGINEER
- RESPONSIBLE FOR:
- - PALO ALTO EXPERIMENTAL LABORATORIES
- METALLURGICAL ANALYSIS e FORMER POSITION
- DIRECTOR, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, IMPERIAL CLEVITE INC.
- RESPONSIBLE FOR:
- COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
- BEARING FAILURE ANALYSIS
- COMPONENT MANUFACTURE PROCESS DEVELOPMENT e PUBLICATIONS -
" SELECTION OF CRANKSHAFT MATERIALS FOR OPTIMUM BEARING PER FOR M ANCE",
SOCIETY OF MANUFACTURING ENGINEERS CM80-392 l - "DEVELOPMEN1 IN BEARINGS AND PISTONS", PRESENTED AT
- O MOTOR NO FUTURO, SAO PAULO, BRAZIL, SEPTEMBER 1980 e U.S. PATENT NO. 4333215 " BEARING MATERIAL AND METHOD OF MAKING" h.1-36,260 l ,
E8 PROGRAM CONCEPTS
- 1. FOCUS ON SPECIFIC COMPONENTS
- 2. CONSIDER ALL_ ENGINE COMPONENTS FOR POTENTIAL REVIEW
! 3. NUCLEAR AND INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE FACTORED IN
- 4. HIGH QUAllTY RESOURCES
- 5. UNIFIED TEAM APPROACH
- 6. ADDRESS SUBSTANTIVE ATTRIBUTES (SMALL "q" VS. CAPITAL "O" FOR QUALITY)
- 7. ADDITIONAL TESTING WHERE REQUIRED
- 8. ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS WHERE REQUIRED i
i _ _ _ _ _ _ w _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
E9 OWNERS' GROUP PROGRAM ELEMENTS
- KNOWN PROBLEM RESOLUTION
- (GENERIC AND ENGINE UNIQUE) e DESIGN REVIEW AND QUALITY REVALIDATION (DRQR)
- ADDITIONAL TESTING AND INSPECTION (WHERE REQUIRED)
- RESPONSES TO NRC QUESTIONS j
33E-10 SIGNIFICANT KNOWN PROBLEMS
- 1. CRANKSHAFT
- 2. CONNECTING ROD BEARINGS
- 3. PISTONS
- 4. CYLINDER HEADS
- 5. CYLINDER LINERS
- 6. CYLINDER BLOCK
~
l 7. ENGINE BASE
- 8. HEAD STUDS
- 9. PUSH RODS
! 10. ROCKER ARM CAPSCREWS
- 11. CONNECTING RODS i 12. ELECTRICAL CABLE I
- 13. FUEL INJECTION LINES
- 14. TURBOCHARGER l 15. JACKET WATER PUMPS
! 16. AIR START VALVE CAPSCREWS
N-11 l DOCUMENT PACKAGES FOR NRC REVIEW (FOR EACH OWNER)
- 1. SPECIFIC REPORTS ON EACH KNOWN PROBLEM
- GENERIC
- ENGINE SPECIFIC l 2. ENGINE SPECIFIC DRQR REPORT
- 3. PREOPERATIONAL TEST REPORTS (VIA I&E?
- 4. SPECIAL TEST REPORTS (IF APPLICABLE) l S. RESPONSES TO NRC QUESTIONS
- GENERIC
- ENGINE SPECIFIC l
l
X-1 CRANKSHAFT FAILURE RESOLUTION
- 1. CAUSE IDENTIFIED VIA MULTIPLE METHODOLOGIES
- HOLZER ANALYSIS
- MODAL SUPERPOSITION
- FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS 4
i 2. TEST OF 13 X 11" SNPS CRANKSHAFT CONFIRMED ANALYSIS
- 3. ADEQUACY OF NEW 13 X 12" CRANKSHAFT CONFIRMED
- ANALYTICALLY -
!
- TESTING -
- 4. PROBLEM WAS SHOREHAM UNIQUE
- 5. OTHER CRANKSHAFT TYPES BEING CONFIRMED i
l < 0 0
. 2 2 -
. - 7
- . _ _ 7 p
J
) )
s s e e e e r r g D g e E e D d ( T d E ( l A i 0 E L 0 E v
, 3 6 L U i I 6
3 L d 3 G A G C N L N i: A AC A K K N N A A R R C C i
- - - - - ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 m2xAO m30cOF u.<IM Sx: wwaOOHFu.<IM neyeI$15
!l ,. '
Connecting rod
/
1/4 1/16' Connecting rod c h a mf e r_., [//// chamfersy. / / / / / / 1,6 ' , Connecting rod bearing CConnecting rod bearin0 inner surface
" ~
, <r i
UNSUPPORTED END , COMPLETELY SUPPORTED END Bearing: Connecting rod configuration Bearing: Connecting rod configuration with original 11-inch Journals. with replacement 12-inch Journals. Fa A A-M-84-1-8
CRANK PIN JOURNAL BEARING 11 INCH 12 INCH
- PIN DI AMETER .
PIN DI AMETER _ ! Peak Oil Film Pressure 2 9,745 psi 26,780 psi i l Max. Predicted Yaw 0.00 7 9 inch 0.0052 inch ! Max. Calculated Stress 10,931 psi 5,412 psi l l Crack Growth Life from 250 hour 38,000 hour i From 0.7mm Diameter Defect i 1 1 . ,. o .........
i t i . .
- l i
'l Y2 , BEARING FAILURE RESOLUTION
- 1. CAUSE IDENTIFIED
- 2. PROBLEM WAS SHOREHAM UNIQUE l
- 3. NEW SHOREHAM DESIGN FOUND l
- ANALYSIS ,
= INSPECTION
- MATERIAL TESTING
- 4. BEARINGS ON OTHER ENGINES TO BE CONFIRMED VIA
- ANALYSIS
+ INSPECTION
- MATERIAL TESTING
a e l l
- 2. 2 AF /
/
AE
! I i
AF AF [ l y AE i l I Fa A A-M-8 4-1-6
Crown V-
/ E <
f
-[
__ N inner ring Outer edge gap contact area figure 3-2. Cross section of crown and skirt indicating the two areas of load transfer from the crown to the skirt. 0 k
e o I t J l f '
- w
\
N N
\
N \ N
\
k. N\
\
\
\/\ g;
/
N s \(
\
Region of peaks .s s stress selected F 1 1 for local refined iinr ' model \\\ (see Figure 3-11) I ! I r
/// / j z lIIi mq$f ,,
I
% //// n y
/ =x llll[g!_- ii i ' illi TIh Figure 3-10. Global rnodel of AE piston skirt.
l I F a A A 11- 13
e V-3 - I STATUS OF PISTON ANALYSIS l 1. Three piston skirt types involved , I (AF, AN, AE)
- 2. Analytical model still under development by Fa A A l 3. Strain gage rig test planned ,
I i 4. German piston consultant engaged for addition 51 analysis f
- 5. AE piston operating experience good
- TDI test engine (2)
- Kodiak utility engine (16)
FaA A-M-ud-i-9
== - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
E1 DESIGN REVIEW / QUALITY l REVALIDATION PROGRAM e ORGANIZATION ! e PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ) e SCHEDULE AND STATUS I e SAMPLE TASK DESCRIPTIONS l 1
+ _.___.___.___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _v -__ .. _.- __ __ ___
D.G. DESIGN REVIEW QUALITY REVALIDATION PROGRAM 3ZI-2 PROGRAM MANAGER c.u.stauan ton I I DESIGN GROUP COMPONENT SELECTION QUALITY GetOUP CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN s e mostas sei Jc.saumtvEn tel n., maJucu ist I I I I TASK LE ADERS DIESEL OWNERS Fo A A LE AD SCW LEAD OWNER LEAD CONSULTANTS REPRESENTATIVES I. SITE ENGINEER L. A. swameta trI w.onn tel u.a.scmusita sol J c. sauutvga ese I.FEV t. SITE ENGINEERS
- 2. VA LV E S 'j ' ,*,C
, , "'",",' " g'[,' 2. DESIGN SPEC.
' '"'"" 85' P.TwoLEN (cl 3. T DI R E P.
, ,",)c , ,,, 2. um umM 3' '"'"*
- 4. E MD i J. a n g e w a u / Isa l o. t sit t soma s ts:
5 IEC u Tu saCos tal g ,g DOCUMENTATION RVW QUALITY ENGR'S FIELD INSPECTION 6 TUHbO m a TASK LE ADER TASK LE ADER TASK LEADER a maDisc ar e COMPONENT OWNERS
- o.asouino te J.atiLLv ts: J. tananic est T. DE AHINGS RODS-GEARS 1.FoAA 1.R48 lm la lm N N COOPERatDE A trI 2.SE W 2 RV16 J PHILLies ist a. a. cNim E.ptss ist ist 8 HE ADS-CASTINGS 3.R v12
,, 3. DIESEL CONSULT. c. Jtanste est s.Jacossou ts: E.aunus ist e.stLturn tot n. wHeTE isi i 4 OWNERS
- REP. 4. R V 2 O
- 9. ST RUC T UR AL /
MECH ANIC AL 5. T D I RE P. TOTAL ESTIM ATE 14 PERSONNEL l5 PERSONNEL l 11 EST. PERSONNEL l 8 EST. PERSONNEL l 5 l EST. PERSONNEL l 8 E NGINE E R'S STAFF 0O F - Faltunt amatvses associates s20 TOTAL PERs0NNEL
. o- OWNER REPRESENTATIVE l
c - CON % t". T aN T S l
O 3EE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
- PROGRAM IS CONDUCTED IN FIVE PHASES
I L ASSEMBLE EXPERIENCE DATA IL COMPONENT SELECTION IIL PREPARATION OF TASK DESCRIPTIONS IV. IMPLEMENT TASK DESCRIPTIONS Y. PREPARE FINAL REPORT
I DR/QR PROGRAM FLOW CHART 3rr-4 IDENTIFY ENGINE COMPONENTS 4 ASSEMBLE INDUSTRY ASSEM8tE SITE > PHASE y EXPERIENCE DATA: EXPERIENCE DATA:
- 8. NUCLE AR I R-48 2.TDI M ARINE
- 2. RV-16 3 TDI STATIONARY
- 3. R V-12 4 RV-20 l
l # 4 PHASE SELECT COMPONENTS FOR REVIEW QU ALITY REVAl.lDATION l DESIGN REVIEW l b b PREPARE TASK PREPARE TASK DESCRIPTIONS DESCRIPTIONS a I l PHASE PERFORM INSPECTIONS PERFORM CALCULATIONS, EVALUATIONS, REVIEWS TESTS. REVIEWS I I A PHASE PREPARE AND ISSUE y FINAL REPORT 4
O l 3l15 I. ASSEMBLE EXPERIENCE DATA A. SITE EXPERIENCE
- MAINTENANCE RECORDS l OPERATING LOSS i
! DESIGN CHANGES & IMPROVEMENTS 4 FAILURES B. INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE NUCLEAR - ALL MANUFACTURERS NON-NUCLEAR - TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL ONLY
- C. COMPUTER
SUMMARY
REPORT 1 i
E6 . H. COMPONENT SELECTION ) A. TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL PARTS LIST
- BASE DOCUMENT i IDENTIFY COMMON PARTS B. SELECTION COMMITTEE 4
OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE
- SWEC i
- FAAA i
- TDI DIESEL GENERATOR SPECIALIST C. SELECTION BY CONSENSUS COMPONENT FUNCTION (CLASSIFICATION)
REVIEW EXPERIENCE DATA D. OUTLINE MINIMUM REVIEW REQUIREMENTS s IDENTIFY IMPORTANT QUALITY ATTRIBUTES
- OUTLINE DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS E. SHOREHAM R-48 COMPONENT SELECTION
- TOTAL COMPONENTS -
217
- DESIGN REVIEW 4
152
- QUALITY REVALIDATION -
133
- TOTAL COMPONENTS REVIEW OR REVALIDATED -
163
~ ~, , _
y17 l III. PREPARATION OF TASK DESCRIPTIONS A. TASK LEADER ASSIGNED
- ENGINEERING OR QUALITY SPECIALISTS l
- RESPONSIBILITIES
- B. QUALITY REVALIDATION
!
- NDE.
!
- DESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATIONS
- IDENTIFY SAMPLE SIZE
- PROCEDURES SPECIFIED 4 C. DESIGN REVIEW
- INDUSTRY STANDARD'S
- DETAll METHODOLOGY & REQUIRED INFORMATION
- UNIQUE ANALYSIS (FEM)
- EVALUATIONS D. TASK DESCRIPTION REVIEWS
- OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVES
- TDI l!
- GROUP CHAIRPERSON & PROGRAM MANAGER i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - . _ - _-. . __
~
l YIa l N. IMPLEMENT TASK DESCRIPTION l A. REVIEW / REVALIDATION IMPLEMENTED BY TASK l LEADER ! B. QUALITY REVALIDATIONS l
- USE OF SPARE OR REPLACEMENT PARTS j
- ENGINE INSPECTIONS & TESTS DOCUMENT RESULTS ANALYZE RESULTS (USE DESIGN GROUP IF NECESSARY)
C. DESIGN REVIEWS
- REVIEW EXPERIENCE DATA
- CALCULATIONS PERFORMED e EVALUATIONS BY CONSULTANTS
- FEEDBACK TO QUALITY GROUP D. IDENTIFY RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- REVIEWED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVES, TDi, GROUP CHAIRPERSON AND PROGRAM MANAGER
- COMPONENT ACCEPTABLE
- INCREASE INSPECTION I MAINTENANCE FREQUENCY
- UPGRADEIREPLACEMENT
O Y19 Y. PREPARE FINAL REPORT EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING COMPONENTS
SUMMARY
LIST OF COMPONENTS AND CLASSIFICATION i METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS OF COMPONENT DESIGN REVIEW METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS OF COMPONENT QUALITY REVAllDATION i TABULATION AND DISCUSSION ON ANY DEVIATIONS THAT WERE FOUND l l CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS i i ~. l
e l SCHEDULE / STATUS H -10 R48 LEAD ENGlHE (SHOREHAM) il/l 12 /1 1/1 2/1 3/l 4/l I. ASSEMBLE EXPERIENCE II. COMPONENT SELECTION i . III. PREPARATION OF TASK l I DESCRIPTION I 1 { N. IMPLEMENT TASK r l j DESCRIPTION I j Y. PREPARE FINAL REPORT i l
SCHEDULE / STATUS E - li
- LEAD V-ENGINE (GRAND GULF, V-16) l l/l 2/l 3/1 4/l 5/l 6/l I. ASSEMBLE EXPERIENCE l DATA I H.. COMPONENT SELECTION IR. PREPARATION OF TASK l l DESCRIPTION I I JZ . IMPLEMENT TASK l
l DESCRIPTION I E PREPARE FINAL REPORT i i
O
~
PRELIMINARY DRQR SCHEDULE 3ZI-12 (ALL PLANTS) 1/1 2/l 3/l 4/l S/l 6/I 7/l I ASSEMBLE EXPERIENCE DATA f//////d l E COMPONENT SELECTION R- 4 8's ] v- is's v i2*. I V-20 IE.PREPAR ATH)N OF TASK DESCRITIONS ( ALL UNITS) f///] l IY lMPLEMENT TASK DESCRIPTION ( ALL UNITS) DES 1GN '////j
/ ]
OuALITy * '///// l E. ISSUE FIN AL REPORTS R- 4 8's 6 A O v- Is's D D0000 v-12* O V- 2 0's D J
- INSPECTIONS NDE.ETC.WILL 8E PERFORME0 IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING SITE CONSTRUCTION AND S/U TESTING SCHEDULES
M I TIK-1
- INTEGRATED PROGRAM APPROACH e GENERIC CONCERNS RESOLVED ON '
l LEAD ENGINES o DESIGN REVIEWS OF LATER ENGINES l BUILT ON EARLY UNITS ) e SAMPLE INSPECTIONS ON ALL UNITS i INCREASE SAMPLE UNIVERSE I e CONFIDENCE BUILDS AS PROGRAM l PROGRESSES i j
GENERIC PROBLEM RESOLUTION 6 Phost(W. 5ttokt HAM CW AN65HAf i f at UN(5 5 bl 508 tJI80N UNIT ANAL.YTIC AL WORK HARDWARE CHANGES INSPECT RE E N5 S - 4 4 ( NGlhE S: e hoi ZER AN At Vils e 100 HR5 AT 100s POWf R-) ENCWJf 5
. SHOGL H A W e WOOat 514,( DPO 5sliON e NOT INSPsCl80N OF 3 CR AlekSHAf15 e R(PL ACf 13* Ell
- CRANM5HAFI e f 4 Nil ( (Lltd NI ANAll515 e TOR $aOGetAPH IL5I-l (NGINE IIIIH 13*312'
, gyggg ggggg gggg g gggggg ,
*h8 #" ' $'$ e 500 HRS. AI 800* POWIR-3 (NGINC kiV(R If(NO Dail(W(NI fSOW a'so,tl e NOI INSP(CllON OF l CRANs5NAII e esOast l
e IOA510 GRAPH IE 5I-l (NGud S A NCHO S ACHO 9 ,2[H gp( A,NALV56 si y g Asov( , ggggggggpg ggg,, ggg , V-la (NGIN( 5: e 100 Hfs5 AI 800 POttR-1 (seG4N( r CW AND Ct3i e 140L if R AN AL v515 e 8401 $NSPECIlON OF l CSANn5 HAT 1 e leOed s TOR 5 OGRAPH TE ST-l (NGtNE e HOL 7tR ANAL V5s5 og e TOR 5sOGRAPH Tf 5i-1 (NGIN( CAIAesA e NOT us5P(CilON Af1(R PNEOP e h0W OWilk(NI I SOM A50VE8 IE 51 seC-1 (secoat e HOL 2(R AN AL V585 tai e TOR 510 GRAPH 115I-8 ENC 8NE pgg y - e NOI aNSPECIsON Af 1(a PNEOP OWI(N!NI (SOM ASOVES e 8804st
- -f( SIpeG-l (NG#d C ouw A NC HE P( A u ,2[
gpA A,Nal V 5l5A OVEl e IONSIOGR Arts H 5I-l (NGlost e LEONE g y9g Na is * "?,i'4 'i" M 5 4 cl >=secR Ara n si- .< == c ==
*oc 't <
- W,i'",'i e'54,il 'asacRAPa a si-i <ac < ==
W- 82 (NCitd 5: ! Wiet At40
- HOL ZE R AN AL T 545
- TOR 580GaAPH TE51-1 (84Giast e esOset j V- 20 (NCJNE S:
5 AN GtJos et e 640t 189 ANat Vits e TOR 540G8APH M 51-0 (NGINC e hOtti i
- G Act e.e mooi
e GENERIC PROBLEM RESOLUTION t PH084 L u ComhtCleNs,poO INAkiNG5 N HI 50t esitON UNIT ANALYTIC AL WORK C C g . HARDWARE CHANCES R- 4 8 (NGlNE 5 e JOURNAL ONb!I ANAL D 515 e 100 HR5 Al soon POutss-3 (NGeds e R(Pt ACE e Of CHAuSE R CONN (CLING 5 HOR ( HA u o fiNilt (Lind NI AN ALISIS e N01 INSP(CllON Of S( ANpdGS- ' " C" *" e 5 A llGu(/f M ACIUR( k1 CH ANIC S C CI OD S AMPt f G A585- ALL (NGedl 5 gg pg g g g, g g. g g e NN AL Gkull A N AL v 515 e 400 HR5 Al 100 POW (R- 3 (NGINE 5 Ravn R Bt #40 Bl A R eNON[ st Of f(p(NI ikOW Auovf 4 e NOI INSP(Ci,lON Ofgggggg gggg,ggg g,g,ING5-gg e NOI IB15PE CllON Of SC ARmG5-WANCtk.a SACHO e JOURNAL OWull AN AL Vil5 Af l(R PR(OP f( SleNG-
- is OWI(R(NI IROW ABOVII S AMPt [ S A 545- At t (NG4N( 5 flf R(Outk(OI w - to (NGdet 5:
- JOUNN AL 06tsel AN AL YSIS e 100 HRS. Al 100m P0egR-I (NGNg GN AND Gul f e f 4 Nill (Likt NI ANAL 1565 IOts Of SE ARsNGS Af 1(R e pgggp NOI m5PfCI,gg,g, yggy g gag,p e NON(
e I AllGU( /f R ACTURf W(CHANICS Att (NG4Nf 5 g,,, , e JOUhN AL ORisil ANAL Y SIS e NOI INSP(CIlON OF Sf ARWGS-si DWI(R(NI ) ROM AHOvtl Af t(R PRE OP f(514NG- e $ SONE ggypgg ggggg_ggg ggggg e NOI INSP(CIBON Of St ARIN55-II "I e JOUNNAL ONBil ANAL Y515 , Af f(R PR(OP f(SIwdC-et Od f(NINI # NOW Alsovt) SAMPt( S AS45- At t (NGspeE 5
- ter R(OUS(On
- N05 as45Pt CllON Of 84 AftskG5-Couuatu ut etAm e JOOHNAL OWh68 AtaAL1515 Af t(R PRt'OP l(SleNG-Id Dis f(WI NI IROM AUObD SAMPt t B A SIS- AL L ( NGINE S e ONE sof h( OUaR( 0) e N01 MSP(CilON Of St ARING5-
"# 'b e JOuMNAL ONUlf ANAL v545 Af lip PR(OP I(SilNG-it Dif f(WE NI TROW ADOVE B SAMPt( SA585- AL L (NGW(5 sIf p(Oues(On e NOI INSPf CISON Of 8( ARING5-
'"O I' I e JObHN AL ONHit ANAL v515 Af lL R PWL OP II 5leNG-ss DWith(NI f MOM AHovfl S A MPL E B A 5:5- At t 04Gm! 5 taf Rf outre On NO lt IHf Si t i C 18bN 08 Of Akm4G5 # GW NOT & O(SINt#Cilwt 1[5134G tlL L ENSUN( COV[N AGE Of IHf (NiaWC P(R400 OtrR6NG WHICit IHf WasIAtt(D A SPaki Sl akiNGS We IH( OWNI N5* GNOut* t r4 CINE S W( 91 M ANtif At. luGID IHE Ovfpatt S AWPa t Wit t IH(N(f0NE bl FRu6 t HL Y ht PMt il N1I A llVI & T HL S A MPI ( Sill #st t ut SUIFUCU(Nil 1 t AhC[ 10 PR0v10( A0(OUn t( CONE 40(NCE $N Att 184E (p( ARINGS G A G4 9WN6ptf f
--n . - _ . . - . _ . . - . , .
GENERIC PROBLEM RESOLUTION (CON'T.) *" e PHOBa a u CisNht C llHG POD &ll AkiNGS m RI504 ullON UNIT ANALYTIC AL WORK CONNECTING R00 BEARING I TESTING & INSPECT. RE0MTS. HARDWARE CHANGES l v 12 iNG8JE 5.
- NOT INSPf CllON OF Sf ARING5-uibtANO
- JOURN A L OWtHI A N A t v $s5 AF I( R PWl OP I( 511NG-su c Ff t kE NT f acu AHOVII SAMPt f B ASIS- At t (NGaN(5 4eF RtOUskt08 V 20 i tK.IHLi
- NOI sN5PiCllON OF SC ARWG5-SAN tiNufHE e JOURN AL OWHil AN A4 )S45 AF IE S Prion II SIN 4G-81F Dif fiht N1 f POW AB0Vil 5 AuPt E B A54%- At t ( NG4Nt 5
- Gef R( OutRt Cl N0ft.
1Hf ',ltttfloN Of HE ARING5 FON NDI & DE 5 B kUC livl I(51pHG WE L (NSUR( Cov[RAC[ Of lH( (N11R( PiplOD DUPING weaCH I H( pr I Atl E D & SPAR [ 81 ARING514 lill Ontd N5* GROUP (NGINf 5 alR( MANUfACIURfD IHE Ob(Rat t 5 A uPt f es t IHt htf ONC tsi PivoetNav 6(PWhalHilAlfVf & IIst S Awes t sitt wa t 0t Suf f uCUt nit 1 L ARL,5 10 PkOwlDC ADt 00AIC CONF a0(NCE IN At t Ilt( 8( ARING5 G a s,g u, . . , f _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - " ~ - ^ ^
O 4
- - - +.-- - ~ . _ _ . . _ _ .
I
- GENERIC DESIGN REVIEW AND ""'-*
- OUALITY UNIT REVALIDATION (DROR) PROGRAM MATRIX COMPONENT SELECTION DESIGN /OUALITY REVIEW HARDWARE INSPECTIONS R 4 8 I NGildf S. IS AMPLE OR 100m BAsiss
= Sil0 R( el A u f ut t 'e FULL WWON PAR 15
- * [NCINE UNIQUE PARI $
RIVf R UIND FULL N A FUL L IMINUS COWWON PARIS) l OW $ f OUIR( D) QUE P p g NANCilu SACHO FULL f ull IMINUS COWWON PARISI $' ' L ' fN to P RI V- 16 [ NGIN[S. GRAND GULF f Ut t .COWWOW PART$ FUL L IWINUS R- 48 COMMON PAR *Si IV-16/R-4 8 - If R[OulHEDI
. COWWON P AR IS IV-161 a [NCINT UNIOUf PARI 5 CAlAWUA Full FULL IMINUS COMMON PARIS) " 8$ ' L '
^fN 00[ P RT ~
PERRY FUL t
- TULL IMINUS COWWON PARTSI ,fMClN
- N ARIS fif R OUIR[DI COWW ANClit P( Ah F Ull FUL L IMINUS COWWON PARISI " "
fN 1N O 80D[ P RI H A RRIS F UL t
- f Ui t f ulNUS COWuGN PARISS fNIN N ARIS I f R OUIRf DI VO Il l FUL L T Ut l IMINUS COWWON PARTSI A ' ' f
*f ,WGN g O f P kl
.V - 1_2.i_HGlut S--
WIDLANO f UL L TULL
- COWWON PARIS 3
fulNUS R-4 8/V-16 COMMON PARISl IV-12/ V-16/R- 4 8 - If REOutRf DI V - 20 i N68tJ[ 5.
+ [NCINE AND V-12 UNIOUE P ARIS S AN Ot40f RL IDLL FULL j = COWWON PARIS IWINUS R- 48. V-16. V- 12 COWWOH PAki$l '
5 IV-20/V-12/V-16/R If Rf outRt M e (NCIN[ ANO V-20 UtpOU[ PARIS 6 GAGtW mou3 1.
.-- . _ _ . ..- _ . , . . - k .,.. .
e TDI OWNERS' GROUP TESTING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
UNii PRE-OP TESTS INSPEC TIONS R 48 iNGIN[5: *
- HRC PREOPS e NDE CRANKSilAFI IALL [NGIN[$1
* *I ii [if ( OOA R1 .NDE CONNECllNG ROD BE ARINGS ESAMPL[l e10lAL Il SilNG 300 inRS.
- NDE PISIONS IS AMPt [I klVLR b1840 *NRC PRCOPS
- NDE CONNE CIING ROD BE ARINGS iSAWPLfl
+1D0 NRS A l F UL L POWER ll [lJCINEl
- NDE CRANK SN AFI el E NGit4[ - S AWPL E S
- SIWUL Ai[D L OC A RUN ll [NGINE) + NDE Pl5 IONS iS AMPt El
. " "- 8 5_A, 10,,,, e N, didy ,PR[ OPS
, e NDE CONNECllNG ROD SE AltlNGS IS AWPt [I GRAND Guti e NRC PR[ OPS
- NDE CRANKSilAF 1 Il [NGIN[l e 100 NRS. A l filt L POW [R ll [NGINES
- NDE CONNECIING ROD SE ARINGS ISAWPLED
- E NDURANCE RUN ll (NGINE)
- NDE Pl510NS Il [NGIN[ - S AMPLll CAIAWHA
- NRC PREOPS e ND[ C R A NN SN A F I II E NGINE - S A MPL ()
- NDI CONNECilNG ROD S[ ARINGS ES AMPL EI
- ND[ P45 IONS tl [NGIN[ - S AMPL il _
I,L H R v
- N h .- P R[ Of,5
- HDE CH ANkSN AF I Il [NGINE - S AMPLE, if RC OutR[DI
- NDE CONNECilNG ROD BE ARINGS 4SAMPL E AS R[OUIREDI
- NDE Pl510N5 IS AMPLE - IF REQUIRE DI COWW ANCil[ PE AK eNRC PR[Of,c "
- HDE CR ANNSH AFI 19 [NGINE - S AMPLI, IF REOutREDI
- NDI CONNF C ilNG ROD BE ARINGS IS AMPL E, AS REQUIRE DI
- NDE Pl5 IONS ISAMPl[ - IF RE OUIRE D)
N A RRl
- HRC PRE Of*S ,
- NDE CR ANkSN AFI el [NGINE - S AMPL E. IF RE OUIRID)
.NDE CONNE CllNG ROD BE ARINGS IS AMPLE, AS R[OlllHEDI
- NDE PISI ONS IS AMPL E - IF RE OUIR[0I VOG il f *HRC Pk[0PS e NDE CR ANKSN AF I 41 E NGIN[ - S a WPL E, if R[OUIR E DI
.NDE CONNECIlNG ROD BE ARINGS ISAMPLI. AS 1.[OUIREDI
. ND[ Pl510NS 15 AMPL E - IF RE OUINE DI V - 82 [ NOINE 5' W1DLAND
- NRC PR[ OPS
- NDE CHANKSNAF I il [NGINE - SAMPLEI
.NDE CONNICIING ROD BE AlalNGS IS AMPL EI V - ?O E NGINE S __ , , , _ . _
S AN ONOFR[ =NRC PR(OPS + NDE CRANkSil AF 1 11 [NCINE - SAMPL[1 e NDE CONNECTING ROD D[ ARINGS ISAWPt El 4, A .. #u w o u s
. . . _ ~ - - - - -
o TDI OWNERS GROUP
SUMMARY
SCHEDULE II-I . (PRELIMINARY) ! ACTIVITY JANI FES I MAR I APRI MAYI JUNEl JULYI AUGl SEPTl OCTI NOVI DECl JANI 4 1 KNOWN PROBl.EM$ A" L 8 8 (LEAD UNIT INSPECTIONS)
- 1. CRANKSHAFT COWPL TE l l l (LEAD UNIT INSPECTIONS)
- 2. B E ARINGS V
$$pLyTE l 3. PISTONS A N ALYSIS l
! DNOUSTRIAL ( UNIT [ INSPECTIONS) (LEAD UNIT INSPECTIONS) I l l 4.OTHERS AN ALYSIS l INSPECTION & TESTING AS REQUIRED I U. DESIGN & OUALITY REVIEW (DROR)
- l. COMPONENT SELECTION EmI ,
- 2. TASK DESCRIPTIONS 7///J l i i
- 3. DROR IMPLEMENTATION 7///l I
- 4. FINAL REPORTS i R - 4 8's , A h 8
- V- 16's o a nonia i V - 12 O V-20 Q l
i
- III. TESTING / MAJOR INSPECTIONS l
l.R-48 7///] LEAD R-48 (OTHERS TBD) I I I '! 2. V - 16 lLEADV-16(TENT) (OTHERS T80) i
- 3. V - 12 TBD l 4. V- 20 tad i
l i l
. 1 l
K2 ! i REQUIREMENTS FOR LICENSING <
- 1. RESOLUTION OF SIGNIFICANT KNOWN
, PROBLEMS i
- GENERIC (IF APPLICABLE)
= ENGINE UNIQUE
- 2. COMMITMENT TO DROR PROGRAM
! 3. COMPONENT SELECTION (DRQR) AND PRELIMINARY ~ REVIEW OF SELECTED COMPONENTS FOR SIGNIFICANT ITEMS ,
- 4. COMPLETION OF PREOP TESTING AND ANY ADDITIONAL TESTING (100 HRS. @ FULL POWER FOR SOME UNITS)
- 5. COMPLETION OF ANY MAJOR INSPECTIONS (CRANKSHAFTS, BEARINGS, AND PISTONS) l l
t> , 1 Enclosure 4 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR . REGULATORY COMMISSION 2 3 4 i 6 l 4 7 8 9 A Meeting on TDI DIESEL GENERATORS 10 11 12 13 4 14 Phillips Building 15 Bethesda, Maryland Thyrsday, January 26, 1984 16 17 l , i 18 I i 19 A meeting on TDI Diesel Generators convened l 20 at 3:04 p.m., Harold Denton presided. ' 21
~
22 4 4 24 25 l 1 i __ & # 4 M M 4 1 4 7 i' I () iui n i Iy)i V '
= . 2
.I 1
APPEARANCES: l 2 l 3 l ( Attendance List will be Generated.) 4 5 I 6 I 7 8 9 I 10 i 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i la i 19 20 1 21 22 23 24 25
3 ! l 1 MR. DENTON: Good afternoon. My name is 2 Harold Denton. What we are going to discuss today is l 3 the results of the staff review of the reliability of 4 the Delaval diesel. 6 We started looking intensively in this area / 6 ! when problems began to' develop at San Onofre, Grand Gulf, 1 7 and at Shoreham. Since that time, our review has ex-a panded. 9 We are prepared today to discuss with you in to detail the results of all the information that has come 11 to our a'ttention regarding the operating performance of l t 12 these diesels. 13 I We also have with us today the Regional Ad- l 14 ministrator from Region IV, John Collins, who conducts 15 our vendor Anspection program. He.will describe the 16 results of his vendor inspections at the factory of l 17 Delaval Diesels. 18 I understand that the Owner's Group has f 19 been informed of the utilities who own these diesels, i 20 and they are represented today by Jim McGaughy, who is l l 21 the Chairman of the Owner's Group. I understand that l Z2 i the Chief Executive of Delaval Diesel Corporation is ! 23 also present, and that his representatives will be l 24 making a presentation. l t a Let me discuss a few ground rules to begin I 1
b e 4 l I I with, to make the meeting go smoother. ! We are taking a l 2 transcript of this meeting. The issue is in contention, 3 as you know, at several proceedings. And this makes it 4 easier for us to provide the Hearing Boards a complete 5 . 6 and accurate record of what information is made available today. Because of this transcript, it's very important I 7 that anyone who has questions or comments be sure to a identify themselves for the record when they ask questions . 9 The way I would like to walk through this pro-10 cess is to have the staff first describe in some de- . 11 l tail the information that has become available in the 12 last few months on the performance of these diesels in 13 the field. This is mainly at nuclear power plants, but 14 I we also collected data from some non-nuclear sources. 15 Then, we will cover the Vendor inspection, as 16 I mentioned. Then, we turn the meeting over to the 17 utility owner's Group, who I understand is prepared to 18 describe their remedial program to try to establish the is reliability of these diesels. 20 I understand, Jim, that you may have an open- ! 21 ing -- opening remarks to say before we begin. Why don't , 22 you do that now? M i MR. McGAUGHY: Good afternoon. My name is 24 Jim McGaughy. I am Vice-President of Mississippi Power 2 and Light Company. I am speaking to you today as Chairman
b o I of the Delaval Diesel Owner's Group. 2 The issues that will be presented here , we 3 i 4 feel' the problems that have been found in-operation our pre 1 testing program and our subsequent research and reported 5 ; 6 to the NRC, as they've been found, using the proper pre- i scribed methods. 7 For some time, all the owner's of these r engines have bound together putting the best minds avail - 8 , 9 able in the world on _ these issues in the one jeffor study and correct these issues. 10 Our goals and the goals of the NRC are the 11 ; same. We are committed to provide our plant to reliabl e 12 emergency backup power supplies. 13 We feel this comprehen- , sive program we have in place, ! 14 in place now, working now, will do just that.
- 15 !
We are here today to tell you about what it 16 is that we have been doing. 17 The elements of our program are four. 18 l The first element is resolve the known problems ! , 19 both generic problems and problems in the specific e ther.selves , to design and find fixes to these problems 20 . l In addition, we will take -- and are in the ! 21 ! 22 process of taking each engine from the ground up, review-ing its design, its construction, its procurement and 23 l doing a quality revalidation on each and every engine . 24 , From the results of the quality revalidation then we 26 go into testing, and the testing involves non-destructive n
l e . 6
! l 1
testing, destructive testing, operational tes ti ng of 2 components, operational testing of the engines 3 . This work is in progress now. 4 5 .And also then we will, through this group , respond to the questions, of course, I 6 put to us. that the NRC will 7 The participants l'n our program are as ! follows. We have the eleven owners, 8 and I.will have a list of those for you later. 9 Eleven utilities. FaAA { Associates, who are renown h doing failure anal to ysis work. ' We have the wholehearted support of Delaval in thi s 11 e f fo rt, both in gathering of information and gathering 12 of design data, and in review of this data. Stone and 13 Webster Engineering is supporting this effort i 14 And also ' I several diesel generator consultants from around the to I world. 16 , 17 i The organization the Owner's Group has set up has me as Chairman, Mr. } 18 i Joe George of Texas Utilities as Vice-Chairman. 19 Executive Committee made up of the eleven l utilities. 20 The Technical Director of the program is Mr . Bill Museler of LILCO. 21 We have taken the program that LILCO has started on their site, adding to it 22 i . The work l is being done at the LILCO site. r a 24 As you see, in resolving the known failures a determining solutions to those problems, 26 FaAA is taking the leads that is their speciality. \ In terms of design l 1 y l . - - -. .
o o 7 l 1 review and quality revalidation, we have FaAA, Stone and 2 l 3 Webster, our various consultations, and we have engi neers from each utility working in this effort. The testing 4 5 program definition and carrying out the testing program will be donc, of course, by the utilities who own the e engines and operate them, and by FaAA who will assist us ! 7 in that e f fort. . 8 g 9 To 41ve you an idea of the extent of this pro- l gram, I would lik*e to put this chart up. This is the 10 organization tnat is in place. 11 We have over a hundred and twenty peopic full-time working on this effort, working on ! 12 this effort now. This is in progress. We are confident 13 . t; hat when we complete this program, that we will have 14 reliable encinos to provide backup power supplies for these 15 plants. 16 Thank you. 17 I MR. DENTON: i
!' As those of you know, who own la these diesels, this is a very important safety issue for 19 !
the NRC. There are about fifty-seven engines made by 20 Transamertea Delaval that are in this, owned by the six-21 teen utiltt.Les that are on our list. None of the Delaval I 22 diesels are at operating plants, which means it's not an l 23 ! imminent sa f oty problem today, but certainly it has oro-24 found imol t ea t ions for schedules 28 for some of the utilities , if the problem is not adequately addressed. , I L-- -
w > 8 I ' i 1 I did want to mention my perspective on the I l 1 safety side to be sure it's well understood. The only l 3 plants that are operating that have Delaval diesels are 4 San Onofre Unit 1. That plant is shut down for a seismic , a modification. Grand Gulf, which is limited to a five a percent power license and is presently shut down. And, 7 Rancho Seco, which is using other diesels, but I under- , 1 g stand has ordered, or has in place, several Delaval diesels g which they have intended to install. to We view this as a very serious problem for the it industry. It is unique to have a problem in what I will l 12 call a convention component of American technology. You i 13 wouldn't think that diesel generators would get on the ; 14 critical path of the nuclear power reactors, but that's 15 very likely wnat has happened. , 16 And just so there is no doubt about where the [ 17 staff stands on this issue, we are not prepared to go 18 forth and recommend the issuance of new licenses on any l 19 plant that has Delaval diesels until the issues that are 20 raised here today are adequately addressed. It sounds 21 like we have a very ambitious program. What I want to do 22 is make sure you have all the information we have. ' 23 And if we come to an understanding about the 24 factual basis that we are working with, so we can move ; i 28 to a discussion of the information we have been able to L_
. b 9 1 i 2 gather, and if everyone would hold their questions to e th extent they can, we can get through the presentations 3 faster. 4 We will . provide ample opportunity for discus - 3 sion after we have gotten the factual basis on the table . e , Then, we will turn to a detailed presentation of y our - 7 program. And I plan to provide a break somewhere in the i a meeting. But we will probably go until about six o' clock . ! 9 F The first presentation will be made by Frank i to Miraglia and assisted by Carl Berlinger. Carl Berlinger 11 is a Senior Manager on the NRC staff. We designated him ' 12 as the person responsible for ultimately reviewing your-g3 program and making sure that it is an acceptable, adequate > g4 program. 15 S , Frank, why don't I turn over to you to le cover what we know about the operating experience. g7 MR. MIRAGLIA: N U My name is Frank Miraglia. I 18 I am the Assistant Director of the Safety Assessment Divisicn'! 19 of Licensing. f 3 The first view graph is a list -- the first 21 view graph indicates the fif ty-seven Delaval diesels that 22 have been procured for use at sixteen dif ferent nuclear l 23 j power plant sites. May I have the second view graph? 1 24 We are going to discuss the U.S. experience 26 with these diesels in the operating stations to date .
d s ! I 10 1 The next slide is a brief summary of the operat-2 ing experience with San Onofre 1 station. The informa-3 I, tion on this view-graph is in a very summarized fashion. 4 We have a more detailed handout that will be available 8 at the end of the meeting that has additional details 6 about the operating experience and chronology with some , 7 of these machines at the various nuclear power stations. 8 There are two Delaval diesels at San Onofre 1. ! 9 They were installed in 1976. They are Delaval V-20 to engines. They were declared operational in 1977. The 11 operating time on each engine at San Onofre is approximate ' 12 ly 450 hours. These are actually the first Delaval diesels; 13 to enter nuclear service. 14 Problems to date are indicated on the slide. 15 They've had turbocharger thrust bearing problems. This 16 event resulted in a Part 21 report, was issued and pro-17 blem was considered to be of a generic nature. 18 They've had a lube oil . leak and fire, which 19 was a result of a fuel line failure, test line of f a lube , 20 oil line which failed because of vibration. And it was a 21 small fire. ' 22 The pistons have been modified at San Onofre 1 23 to correct a problem that is noted at Grand Gulf and 24 resulted in a Part 21 notification there, to prevent crown ; 28 eparation. l
. h j I
e b 11 ll 1 They've had an unqualified instrument cable, 2 which also was replaced in conformance with reported 3 Part 21 occurrence. And just recently in another Part 21 4 report, there is potentially defective coupling material. 6 That Part 21 report was filed earlier this month. 6 The next slide is a summary of the experience , 7 on the -- of the Grand Gulf diesels. They have Delaval l 8 diesels. They are the V-16. The operational hours on
}
9 the diesels are 1100 hours on the Division I diesels, ; 10 and seven hundred hours on the Division II diesels. 11 These are the first V-16 Delaval diesels to 12 enter nuclear service. The problens to date are the -- 13 Number one is the pistol crown separation. That was a , 14 generic problem and identified this particular problem i 15 as a Part 21 for the Delaval diesels. Is They have experienced piston skirt cracks, 17 ; and piston skirts have been replaced on the Division II is diesels. ! ig They've had a fuel line failure, which resultedi 20 in a fire. And the fuel line failure was due to fatique. j 21 They have experienced cylinder head cracking on these i 22 diesels. The heads have been replaced. I n In addition to those, they've had the turbo- ' 24 charger problens. I believe three different ins tances of 25 turbocharger problems. And, again, you can see commonality l w a - - - - , ,
- a la l I
between this experience and the San Onofre experience. ! 2 They have experienced push rod cracking pro-3 blems. In addition, they've had the generator short due 4 to an engine fastener. This was a crankcase capscrew 5 failed and had lodged in the generator and shorted the , 6 generator out. 7 In addition, Grand Gulf has also experienced 8 problems wttn their air starting valves which has resulted , 9 in failure of the generators to start.
. j to :
This summarizes the experience with the San ' 11 Onofre and the Grand Gulf units. I would like to have 12 Ralph Caruso summarize for you the experience to date 13 on'the Shorenam machines and also to present a brief 14 summary of the information that we have been able to 15 gather from non-nuclear marine experience with similar 16 type diescis. l 17 [ Ralph Caruso, 13 it R . CARUSO: The engines installed at Shoreham ! 13 are Model DS R-4 8, s traight-8 engines. They are rated at a) 3500 kilowatts and O approximately 700 hours roughly 3 21 on each enorno at the time of a major failure of crank-22 shaft in August of 1983. 23 , These engines were the first straight-8 engines 24 to be installed in the United States in service. Shoreham l 25 , has had a number of minor problems and one major problem. l
. =
13 .l 1 To date, they've had problems with jacket water 2 pump propellors. This problem occurred twice. Two fuel 3 oil lines have ruptured due to manufacturing defects. 4-Those two ruptures resulted in Part 21 reports being is-5 sued for San Onofre and Grand Gulf. 6 In August they had the failure of the crank-l 7 shaf t in the Number 102 diesel generator. Subsequent 8 inspections of Number 101 and 103 engines revealed cracks e in the crankshaf ts of those engines , and in approximately go the same location as the failure of the 102 engine. gg Upon disassembly of the engine to repair the ! 12 b ear,'re crankshaf t problems, connecting rod faikures were dis 4 f 13 covered, not just on the engine with the failed crank- ! 14 shaft but also on another engine. Subsequent inspection 15 revealed problems with piston skirds, with cracks in the 16 piston skirts. Those piston skirts have been replaced at { 4 17 Shoreham. is And, in addition, over the life of the plant 19 they have experienced several problems with different f M . types of fasteners used to attach critical components to-21 gether in the engine. ' 22 The staff has received a. considerable amount i 23 of information regarding marine experience from three '
- 24 different M t.
operators of marine engines. 4 Marineengireswe[ 25 nrL A l are talking about,<MS the V-16 and V-12 engines. They arepls' t l
o o 14 l 1 very similar, if not identical, to engines that are being l 2 installed in nuclear power plants in the United States. 3 The operating experience for these engines is 4 varied at this time, with engine operating hours varying 6 from 3000 to 30,000 hours. To date, all three operators 6 have reported cylinder head cracking to various different 7 extents. > g Two operators have reported piston cracking. l
, One operator reported the complete failure of two pistons.
to Problems have also been noted with excessive it bearing wear, turbocharger instability, and turbocharger 12 vibration. Cracks have been noted in push ro%,ril": . ((, i 13 Cracks have been noted in connecting rods. 14 In addition, cylinder blocks have been replacec 15 by one of the operators.
- 16 This is a summary of the marine experience to l 17 date.
18 MR. DENTON: We have given you a very quick to summary, but there is extensive information available in what we will hand out later in the presentaticn.
~
20
~
21 And just because we have gone through it quick 1-n I don't want you to think that this is all there is. Ther( 23 is really quite a bit of poor operating history with this 24 piece of equipment in the time that we have been able to
, 26 assemble it.
t l l
. o 15 g
1 I think some of the reasons .for this poor 2 performance will be obvious when you hear from our next 3 speaker, John Collins, who I mentioned heads up the 4 vendor inspection program. John. 6 MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Harold. Now, we are ! 6 l passing out the view graphs which cover a summary of the 7 major findings that we've had of the inspection. 8 Since 1979, we have made nine inspections of j 9 Delaval . Seven of those inspection reports are identified 10 in handout material. They are available in the PDR. If l 11 you would like copies and you cannot get copies , contact 12 myself in Arlington or Ian Barnes of our Vendor Branch, 13 we will be very happy to see that copies of these reports 14 are sent to you. 65 The remaining two reposts have been forwarded 16 l to the Comoany for proprietary review. That review i i 17 l period should be up tomorrow. If there are not any pro-to prietary problems, they will be placed in the PDR and they: to will be available, too. So, if you want to contact me, 20 my number in Arlington is Area Code 817-860-8225. Or, 21 Mr. Barnes, same area code, 860-8176. 22 We have -- as I hope everybody has the slides a now, our finding of deficiencies covered just about every 24 subject. They included areas on manufacturing process 2 control, control of special processes, procurement control, e i
n .
. .4-16 j.
1 2 material identity'and control, design and document co equipment calibration, lack of internal audits or improper ! 3 or not mufficient disposition of audit findings, and then i deficiencies in Q A records. a At this time, I am going .to . ask Ian Barnes, l 8 who is the Chief of the Reactor Section for the Vender. 7 Program to go through some-of the highlights of the a inspection findings with you. We are not going to read
}
9 them to you. You have them, but I think it's important 10 we at least identify some of them. l 11 The other handout material has a more complete 12 summary of all of the findings that were made or documenter: 13 in the nine reports. So, Ian, why don't you walk us g4 through some of the significant findings? 15 MR. BARNES: Good after, noon. The first slide 16 that is on now shows a categorization of the vendor 17 program branch inspection findings by subject area. It la represents a total of sixty-two non-conformances and l 19 violations that were issued as a result of the nine_in- i 30 spections. ' 21 As John has just indicated, a description of ; 22 all of the findings in that particular slide are in-n cluded in a handout that is being passed around. From i 24 this inspection history summary, we have extracted n examples of inspection findings that raise concerns with i (
- p. . .
.O O 17 1
regard to the adequacy of implementation and the effective-
\
2 ness of the Transamerica Delaval program. 3 The next slide, please. The first subject I 4 , am going to address is manufacturing process control.
, ,t 5
We have pu . specificJexamples of inspection findings in i f 6 a subject ares, but' bringing the question of implementa- , 7 tion ef fectiveness, manufacturing process controls, and 8 the performance of quality function of Transamerica iU i 9 Delaval . 10
.\s you will note from this slide, instances f 11 were noted waere route sheets were not available to ,
12 the Vendor Franch review. For example, the first item on 13 the slide, jacket water pump. Reworked operations' for 14 ninety-two pistons that were supplied to Shoreham and Grand 15 Gulf, that's the fif th item. Replacebents of cylinder 16 head assemolies for Shoreham, that's the final item on j 17 . I the slide. 13 Route sheets from Transamerica Delaval ' provide i 19 the primary basis for verifying that the inspection opera ' 20 tions havo been performed. Thet absense of those route 21 sheets did not allow us to verify that required ' inspections 22 of manufacturtng operations had, in fact, been accomplishec. n
..xamples of findings which address the per-24 formance of the quality. control function is shown in the t 2
second, third and fourth items, i.e. there was no evidence. I J s-
o e 18 1 of acceptance of certain operations on components for 2 jacket water pumps pertaining to modification efforts.
~
3 As Ralph indicated earlier, there had been 4 two successive problems involving jacket water pump pro- f 5 blems at Shoreham. And, so evidence of sign-off to i 3 6
- installation of rocker arm hold down bolts were found .
7 subsequent at Shoreham, were found subsequent to be mis-8 sing. l 9 In regard to San Onofre, piston reworked, with 10 the date*'of sign-off for manufacturer operations occurring . 11 actually two to three weeks af ter the pistons had been 12 returned to San Onofre. 13 If you look, in regard to the seventh item on 14 this list, is the apparent use as indicated by the route 15 sheets of unqualified personnel' pefforming non-descriptive 16 examinations on SNPs replacement cylinder head. l 17 j The eighth item, which is an absence of any le documented provisions for control of installation of I 19 fuel oil line clamps in regard to Shearon Harris. We , 20 believe that's generic to all of the engines, in that one t 21 of the fuel oil line failures at Grand Gulf has been 22 i attributed in part to the absence of required line clamp. i 23 We believe this finding is quite significant. ' 24 I It has been mentioned earlier about crackino 25 problems in piston skirts. . Review of engineering drawines ;
- j. :
1.4
> 0 19 l 1 for the various designs of piston skirts show, in fact, 2 that there was an engineering requirement to perform l 3 stress relief heat treatment af ter normalizing of the 4 castings. The corrective action that, in part, is being 5 carried out for piston skirts is to perform stress relief. , 6 There was an initial requirement always in effect to do 7 that very thing. g The next slide. This slide shows a few g examples of inspection findings in regard to procurement i to document control deficiencies, une of vendors, thematerialh 11 that without performing any service or audits of those 12 vendors to establish adequacy of their own programs, and 13 inadequate receiving inspection. 14 In the more comprehensive handout that is being 15 distributed, you will find additional examples of inade-16 quate receiving inspection and using other vendors without j 17 performing required service or audits. t tg Next slide. In the area of material identity l 19 and control, an inspection of this subject showed eleven ' 20 discrepancies were observed in a smaple of forty-five, 21 I believe, in material identity between that recorded at i i
\
22 the time of the misuse of the material to a given job and 23 the identity of the material that was ' recorded on the i 24 finished engine. 2 Next slide. We have included the next slide l
20 l 1 to show examples of the failure of the quality issuance - ! I 2 function to comply with both QA program requirements for 3 correceive action and non-conformance conditions to be 4 identified and the specific instance of failure to comply 5 with corrective action commitments made to the NRC in ; 6 regard to the performance of their ASME weld shop. 7 In the same context, their ASME weld shop, recurring ex-g amples were noted during successive inspections for l ' g failure te enforce program commitments with respect to ! i 10 control of welding electrodes in regard to that console ' 11 moisture. 12 Next slide. The next slide is an additional 13 example of the failure of the QA function to comply with n 14 program requirements for audits of their manufheturing 15 activities. , 16 The final slide, John. We have includeo this , 17 to illustrate that we have certain concerns in regard tc 18 the adequacy of the Delaval evaluation and reporting i 19 practices in regard to 10 CFR Part 21. - 30 MR. COLLINS: As we indicated at the beginning, 21 we have summarized in these slides the findings. But, 22 as I also indicated, I think there is a lot more that's 23 of interest. If you carefully review the findings that 24 were handed to you that were documented in the handout to
, 26 you, one thing it says to me, in my opinion, is that l
~- --
, o 21 i 1 f not only has there been problems at the manufacturing ' 2 shop but also, in my opinion, calls into question the 3 adequacy of the vendor programs or surveillance programs 4 that are being conducted by the utilities. Had some of l 5 these been identified up front by utilities on-site ' 6 inspection programs, or receiving inspection programs, or 7 procurement programa, I think they could have been identi- e 8 fled even sooner than now. l g So, it really calls into question your own to programs. Darrell. ! I 11 MR. EISENHUT: Well, let's see, we went through 12 the two aspects in such a short summary fashion, the 13 operating experience and the inspection findings, that one 14 might draw connections that they infer, or might leave it 15 to the operating experience, these were meant to be short 16 summaries. We certainly are going to be, on the staff, l 17 . undertaking a more detailed look at all these aspects, 18 in both the experience, the inspection results. I gg As mentioned earlier, Carl Berlinger is headingI 20 a major review effort. But I, guess you have to sit back 21 and say: Where does this leave us right now? 22 And right now, our preliminary conclusion -- n and that conclusion is based on these limited looks -- is ' 24 that certainly our level of confidence in the overall 3 reliability of TDI diescis in general it significantly i I
o . 22 l 1 reduced. We've got to say that from the front end. 2 And, secondly, as Harold Denton mentioned in 3 the beginning, is that before we undertake the licensing 4 of any plants with TDI diesels at this time, these issues l 5 clearly are ooing to have to 'be addressed. These issues 6 are clearl'/ the quality aspect from both the design, the 7 construction, the operating experience is going to have ; 8 to be factored in, and the overall ability of these diesels 9 to reliabl. ;>erform their function is going to have to I 10 be demonstrated. 11 Tnat's basically where we are today. As we 12 said early, and Jim McGaughr pointed out, there is a i 13 major industry undertaking, a major program has been laid 14 out, that we hope is going to address all of these issues. 15 And, obviously they are going to have to address them to 16 the staf f's satisf action. i, 17 . With that as a short summary, I guess I would 18 like to open it up to the staff presentation for any l 19 questions before we go to the second part this afternoon i 20 on either niece, the operating experience piece, or on i 21 the inspection results found today. Any questions? 22 (No reply.) Can't get off that easy. f 23 'ie l l , if there are no questions, why don't 24 I suggest tt'vould probably be easier, Jim, on your 25 presentation if we took a short break now rather than l k
o . 23 1 I start into it. . 2 MR. BECK: Darrell, one question. 3 MR. EISENHUT: Excuse me. Could you identify 4 yourself? 5 MR. BECK: Larry Beck, Cleveland Electric. , 8 Does the staf f have any experience, vendor experience, for 7 the plant period in 1979? g MR. EISENHUT: No. I think the first inspection 9 report is, in fact, March 1979. I to MR. BECK: Most of our diesels that were 11 manufactured and built were before that. l 12 MR. EISENHUT: No. I understand that. That's ! ! 13 why we have to do a detailed review and a detailed look 14 at what that experience tells you about the diesels that i 15 i were built earlier. ' l 16 I want to caution you in two areas, though. i 17 l When you look at that, one aspect was documentation re- l 18 view. And the documentation is required to be there, 19 regardless of when they were actually manufactured. And 2 the second piece is that a number of these findings re- l 21 late to the reword of the diesels. n so, we clearly are factoring that into con- , t a sideration. Any other questions? If not, why don't I i 24 suggest we take a.short ten-minute break and then return i. 2 and turn it then over to the Owner's Group for their i i 4
.--,~.
o e ' 24 1 presentation. 2
, (Whereupon, a recess is taken at 3:41 p.m.,
3 to reconvene at 3:51 p.m., this same day. ) 4 MR. DENTON: Let us resume. I would like to 5 have Carl Berlinger stand up in case there are those of 6 you who haven't met him in his corp performance role. 7 Carl is a person we have assigned to review 8 the utility proposal in this area, and he will be the ! l 9 person you will be dealing with mainly. We have a number l 10 of NRC staf fers in the room that you should know are here. it We have representatives from the Probability Assess-j 12 ment Branch , the AELD, mechanical . engineering. So, we 13 are represented here in various skills. And I expect the I 14 NRC representatives to ask questions during your pre- ; 15 sentation. We will try to hold our, questions to the extent! I I 16 we can. 17 I think what we have done this morning is , 18 provide you with a basis on our opinion on the reliability 19 of these diesels. I take it from the lack of questions j 20 that not much of this information comes as a surprise to i 21 you, and that your program is designed to cope with these 3 22 kinds of problems. I n Why don't I turn it over to Mr. McGaughy to , i 24 describe them further in detail, what utility is playing I m who collectively. ' , I i
e- e 25 l i 1 MR. McGAUGHY: Thank you for the opportunity 2 to re, view your findings with you. Most of these we have 4
'3 known of, or some we have not known of, all of which we wilk 4
f actor into our program. 5 I would like to briefly describe what it is i 6 that we are going to talk to you about. I've already 7 talked to you about the formations our charter is to do j 8 everything that's required to make these units reliable 9 backup power supplies. 10 l Mr. Bill Museler, who is the program technical ' 11 manager, will talk about the program description in some 12 more detail. 13 Mr. Wells, who is of FaAA, will give you some 14 background and some detailed descriptions of some of the 15 analytical work that has been ongqing. 16 Mr. Seaman will talk about the design review, 17 the quality revalidation program. I 18 Transamerica Delaval, Mr. Clint Matthews and 19 Mr. Bixby, will tell yoo a few things about what they are 20 doing in their commitment to this program. 21 Then we will review the schedule with you. So, 22 witncut further aco, Bill. 23 MR. MUSELER: Good af ternoon. My remarks will 24 be brief to introduce the three next speakers who will u focus on some of the detailed elements of the program. l 1 I
o , 26 1 However -- 2 ! MR. McGAUGHY: Excuse me. There is one other 3 thing I forgot to say. Some of you will have questions. 4 Don' t ask them. We've got a limited amount of time. Makej 5 note on your handout if you have one. And when we get l 6 : through, we will answer you. 7 MR. MUSELER: I am going to attempt to put the 8 Owner's Group program in perspective and focus on some of . 8 the concepts that the technical folks who put the program to together included in the program; then, review briefly the, t 11 elements of the program again, and go into-a little bit of 12 detail as to the resources that we have dedicated to this 13 program. 1 14 When we first focused on the need to produce a 15 rather comprehensive program, rather than dealing with the 16 problems as they came up one after another, we decided l 17 early on that we would focus on a component basis to ' 18 ensure that the components and, therefore, the entire l 19 engines of these eleven plants, when we get done, are 20 sufficiently reliable to provide backup power for our 21 nuclear plants. n We also decided that all components on the 23 engines would be looked at and considered for potential 24 review. 26 In assembling our data base for this, we ! 6
o . 27 l 1 utilized both the data available through the NRC, through 2 our own contacts,
. through industry organizations such as 3
INPO and AIF, as well as what information we could gather 4 from the commercial field, both stationary units and from l 8 marine applications. 6 As Jim said, the Owner's Group has been together'l 7 more or less since October and has been a formal entity a since that ,;otat in time. So, we also decided early on l 9 that a uni fied team approach would be needed in order to 10 ensure that we captured all of the available data and 11 addressed all of the problems or concerns that might be 12 applicable to these engines. 13 Uc also decided that we needed to do more than 14 just approach quality assurance from the standard quality 15 assurance program aspects. And by'that, I mean we have 16 decided that as part of the design review and quality re- ! 17
, validation effort,
! the quality engineers and indeed the 18 specialists are evaluating the need to perform either 19 I inspections or evaluations of components on the basis of 20 their 'funet ton and their real requirements as opposed to 21 just doing iluality assurance program review. I 22 do not only our quality assurance engineers are 23 involved in picking attributes that need to be checked from 24 a quality standpoint, but the design engineers are also 25 involved in picking those attributes and decide what needs
n , 28 1 l to be checked or inspected to ensure adequate reliability. l 2 The last two items, clearly, we anticipated and, 3 in fact, in the early stages it's turning out to be true, { 4 that additional testing will be required, both engine l l 6 testing and component testing, and additional inspections { 6 of components will be required in some cases. ! 7 To review the basic elements of the program, 8 when we evaluated thr data base and looked at the concepts, 9 we decided what would be needed in order to form a viable I 10 program and we broke it down into these four major areas. I 11 The resolution of known problens, whether those problems 12 come from our own engines or if they come from an outside 13 experience, if those problens are applicable to our en-14 gines we are going to ensure that either that's corrected 't 15 or that the applicability does not result in any detriment 16 to our engines. An ov rail design review and quality , 17 revalidr .lon of each engine is part of the program. And, 18 Mr. Seaman will expourid in quite some depth on the in- i 19 dividual elements of that progrem. 20 Additiona'. testing and inspection clearly are 21 part of the owner's Group program, and a significant 22 amount of that testing and inspection is already underway. 23 Finally, responses to NRC questions are being ' 24 handled generically by the Owner's Group. For those ques-25 tions which are clearly best handled generically, and . l 9
o e 29 1 i individual responses from the individual utilities to the 2
, balance of the NRC questions, will also be provided.
3 I am going to focus now briefly on the resources 4 that we have devoted to this program and that are in place l 5 in order to accomplish the activities that will be laid 6 out by the following speakers. All eleven utilities are 7 participating in the program; and, in fact, are providing 8 utility engineering manpower to the program. I think l 9 Jim McGaughy pointed out that we think this effort needed t 10 to be managed both at the overall level and also at the ' 11 lower level by ourselves because of the immediacy and 12 because of the importance of this particular Owner's Group 13 situation. 14 Right now at Shoreham there are approximately 15 twelve utility engineers and over , thirty otner consultant 16 and contracting personnel working full-time on it. And j 17 the overall number of people working on the entire Owner's is Group program approaches one hundred and twenty. And, 19 Craig will outline where those people are a little later. 20 MR. DENTON: I don't want to start a pattern 21 of questions yet, but we have different counts on the ' 22 number of utilities. Maybe it's due to cancelled units. 23 Are all the utilities that own these ;i ecels l 24 members of your Owner's Group, or is there someonc that is-
- 26. i not a member? ,
o e 30 1 MR. MUSELER: It's two cancelled units. TVA 2 and WHOOPS are not members. 3 Failure Analysis Associates is involved in 4 several aspects of the program, both in the design review ! 5 area naturally, ~ and in the resolution of the known problems 6 f where they have the lead responsibility. 7 Transamerica - Delaval has been assisting the 8 Owner's Group, both in terms of providing the necessary l 9 design documentation and also in' providing a review functic 10 of what we are doing in addition to the diesel generator 11 consultants that we have providing an overview to the ef-12 fort. 13 1 Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation plays 14 a major part in the quality revalidation role. And they 15 constitute the largest block of pefsonnel at the Shoreham 16 site working on the program. i 17 j Finally, we have employed a number of special 18 diesel generator ansultants, and I'm going to jus t cover ~i 19 i the credentials of just a few of these additional consul-20 tants along with Failure Analysis Associates. 21 Dr. Pischinger is a renowned diesel generator 22 expert from Germany. He is currently Director of the 2 a Ins titute for Applied Thermodynamics at Aachen University, 24 , and also Vice-President of a diesel generator analysis 2 consulting firm. His overall experienci in the diesel ; I. 6 h _ . . _ , .._. . _ , 4
o , 31 1 generator field is over thirty years. Formerly, he was 2 head of Research and Development for K.H.D.AG, a major 3. diesel engine manufacturer in West Germany. And also 4 head of the Research Department for the Institute for 5 Internal Combustion Engines in Graz, which is in Austria. 6 Dr. Pischinger has authored numerous papers on 7 the subject of diesel generator design and testing, and I 8 has also authored several textbooks on the same subject. 9 I note that we visited Dr. Pischinger in 10 Germany. He has been involved directly in the component 11 selection process through his representatives and by ; 12 telephone, and he has also visited the Shoreham site and l 13 ! reviewed Shoreham's diesel engines when they were apart 14 l and availacle for inspection.
. t 15 Paul Tholen is a consultant to Dr. Pischinger, I 16 and he is currently resident on the Shoreham site, is a i 17 full-time member of the Owner's Group.
18 He formerly held Dr. Pischinger's position as 19 Director of R&D for K.H.D. , and he was responsible for 20 a number of developments in the diesel generator field, 21 notably highly-turbocharged diesels in the 1950s. Z2 Some of his publications are listed there on ' Z3 the slide. 24 Dr. Clifford Wells will be speaking to you next,j m is in charge of the overall effort of f ailure analysis
o , 32 l 4 1 which encompasses the resolution of known problems as well 2 as participation in design review effort. 3 Currently, he is Vice-President of FaAA, 4 responsible for fatique and reliability analysis and 5 NDE evaluation. 6 l'ormerly, he was the Director of Engineering 7 Mechanics for 3RI, Assistant Materials Engineering Manager 8 for Pratt > .ihitney Aircraft Engine Division. 9
.x has previously been Chairman of the Executive; 10 Committee o f the Materials DiJision of ASME, and is 11 currently tne editor of "Fatrque of Engineering Materials i
12 and Structures". ! 13 Cary Rogers is responsible for FaAA, for the I i 14 design review part of the DRQR program. He is Director 15 , of FaAA's Phoenix Office, where he,is responsible for i 16 reciprocating and turbo machinery design, vibrations l 17 analysis and field testing. i 18 Gary Bogers has been responsible for the 19 strain gage testing of the Shoreham crankshaf ts, both the 20 old 13x11 crankshaft and the new 13x12 crankshaft. He , 21 was in charge of the investigation of the Arkansas Nuclear-t 22 diesel main bearing and generator shaft failure, and he i 23 has also beon involved in other f ailure analyses of pro-24 blems at otne r nuclear plants. ; 26 Fo rmerly, he was at Garrett Corporation, : , j 1 l t
- o. ,
33 l 1
\
1 responsible for gas turbine engine design and develop-
- i i 2
ment, and design analysis of driveshaf t torsional in-3 stability. 4 I think it's worthy of note that while at ; 5 Garrett, Mr. Rogers was a member of the Materials Review i 6 Board whose function is very similar to the design, re-7 view and quality revalidation effort that we currently ; 8 have underway for our diesel engines. g The final brief resume I would like to review , 10 with you is Dr. Lee Swanger, who in with FaAA. His current: l 11 position with FaAA is Managing Engineer for Palo Alto's 12 , Experimental Laboratories and metallurgical analyses for 13 FaAA. 14 Formerly, he was Director of R&D for Imperial 15 Clevite, which is a major bearing panufacturer. And he 16 was responsible for component development, analysis of j 17 bearing failures, and manufacture process de velopment. l 13 Dr. Swanger also has a number of publications , 19 to his credit, which are listed here, and one U.S. Patent M on " Bearing Material and Method of Making". 21 The last item I would like to review with you Z2 before the next speaker goes into this program in con-23 siderably greater depth is what we intend the output of - ! 24 the program to be and what we plan to submit to the NRC 28 for your review. l
e e 34 1 First is specific reports on everyone of the 2 known problem areas.
, And we will talk near the end of 3
the program about how many that constitutes, whether the 4 i I 4 problem is generic or engine-specific. So that we will 5 attempt, where time permits, to have all engines addressed 6 in a single report and where time requires us to sequence 1 7 it, we will issue a series of reports addressing those f engines that need to be addressed first. 8 Butallproblemsj g will be addressed for all engines. - l 10 second, an engine-specific design review and 11 quality revalidation report will be one of the outputs of 12 this program. Mr. Seaman will show you our tentative 13 schedule for those reports. 14 The preoperational test reports that come out 15 of those plants that have yet to phrform. Preops on the 16 diesels will naturally be part of the package. And we i 17 . expect that that will come through I&E. 18 Special test reports, as required. For example. I 19 a test report on the instrument, the crankshaft run of the 20 Shoreham R-4 8 engine will be a special report. And various l l 21 other reports on specific aspects of the program, as re-22 quired, will also be prepared and filed. 23 Finally, responses to NRC questions. We ' ( i 24 already mentioned we will respond generically to the 25 appropriate questions posed by the NRC, and will respond i
- o.
- 35 1
specifically on a plant-specific basis where applicable. 2 Dr. Wells of FaAA, Failure Analysis Associates , 3 is now going to cover the status of three of the major 4 known problem areas, crankshaf ts, bearings and pistons. 5 Dr. Wells.
- 6 DR. WELLS: Let me start out by bringing you 7
up to date on the resolution of the DSR-48 crankshaft 8 failure problem. As I'm sure you know by now, five cracks 9 were experienced in the three crankshafts at the time 3 10 ! that cur firm was brought into the f.nvestigation of the 3 11 diesel engine problens. 12 We first identified the cause as tortional 13 fatique. First of' all, by conducting an analysis accord- , 14 ing to 'an industry accepted practice called the Holzer 16 analysis. The Holzer analysis is actually a rule of 18 thumb that has been adopted by the Diesel Engine Manu-17 l facturers Association to come up with a reference value, 18 or relative figure, for torque and tortional stresses in l 19 the design of diesel engine crankshafts. I 20 ! We went beyond that analysis by conducting our ; 21 own complete dynamic analysis, given the exhortation of 1 22 all key f actors influencing the response of the engine. l t 23 ! We call this a modal superposition analysis, because it i 24 takes into account all the possible modes of crankshaf t I 26 : response and allows us to calculate the variation of I 4
-- ~ - -,
O d 36 l 1 torque at each of the locations of the engine, which are 2 critical which were found to have cracks during the in-3 vestigation of the Shoreham engines. 4 With those torques at hand, we next modeled 5 the detailed geometry of a typical flow of the engine in
?
6 I order to get the detailed stress distributions. From i i 7 those stress dis tributions that gave us the complete os-8 cillating history of stresses and all components of stres-9 ses, we were able to determine the endurance limit for I 10 that material under those machining practices that led to 11 the design o f the shaf ts and concluded, in fact, that l 12 these oscillating stresses were well in the range of the 13 endurance limit for the particular material. 14 Next, we instrumented one of the DSR-4 8 crank-15 shaf ts to determine whether our analysis was correct and 16 also to come up with a complete understanding of this l 17 distribution of torque and stress in the crankshaft. This 18 test verified, in fact, the predicted amplitude of the ! 18 ~ stresses, even including some of the fine details, as you M l will see tn a moment some of these stress responses are ' 21 quite complex. ! 22 Therefore, we concluded that we had a very ; 23 complete understanding of the problem of tortional vibra-24 tion in the engine. From that unders tanding, we next 25 applied the same analytical procedures to the new crankshafts l
o , 1 37 1 1 1 which had a one inch larger crankpin diameter; that is, 2 the change was made from 11 inch to 12 inch diameter 3 And, of course, required replacement of connecting rods 4 with a larger diameter bearing. 6 Following that prediction, we just recently 6 completed a test, instrumented test, of the new crankshaft.i 7 This was done by three different methods. We measured the 8 tortional oscillation of the free end of the crankshaft . j 9 We measured the variations of the output torque at a 10 location just forward of the fly wheel. And we also put 11 i strain gages on the two throws that we found from the 12 original test i represented the locations of the maximum 13 stresses, and as accurately as we could the locations of , 14 the cracks that initiated in the original shaf ts . 16 , Next slide, please. Just to indicate some of { 16 the features of this analysis -- and, incidently, the 17 { results have only been obtained recently and are still 18 undergoing evaluation. We do not yet have complete re-19 cords of all the stresses at all the locations. 1 20 i So, here, then, is a preliminary comparison ' 21 between what we predicted last fall in our November pre-22 sentation to the Commission and what was actually measured I 23 in the last few days. And you can see, I think, quite i { ' 24 excellent agreement between what was calculated and what i 25 i i was actually measured considering the output torque that i I t l l
O 4 38 , 1 is experienced at the fly wheel. of the engine. Just point l j 2 [yo these -- some of these distinguished features. You f 3 see here that some of these fine features of this ir-4 regular cycle which, of course, is repeated every two re- ' 5 i volutions of the engine are, in fact, matched by the 6 measured values. 7 There is a slight difference in. amplitude. You 8 will see here that the amplitude of torque is somewhat i 9 higher, about ten percent, than was predicted. But we j to feel that understanding is not far away. And we are ' 11 confident, then, that we have a very accurate understandin, 12 of the performance of the new crankshaf t. 13 Next, please. We turn now to the bearing 14 analysis. You recall that there were several bearings i 15 found that failed during the disastembly of the engines 16 at Shoreham. We did a complete stress analysis of the l 17 bearing and applied fracture mechanics and fatique life 18 initiation analysis to the material, which happens to be 19 a cast aluminum alloy. And you can see here the design 20 feature that we concluded was responsible for the failure 21 of the bearings. 22 That is to say, the bearing shell was inade- ! n quately supported by the connecting rod. In the original 24 ll-inen connecting rod design that you see on the left ; 28 < hand side of this figure, you can see that theonequarterl
*O a 39 1
inch chamfer leaves an exposed edge of that bearing which 2 is subject to a high oil film pressure and, therefore, 3 bending stresses are produced each time the oil pressure 4 is applied on the underside of the bearing shell, and 5 the bearing shell bends. 6 That particular detail has been eliminated 7 with the new connecting rods. Now, the chamfers are i 8 reduced to a sixteenth of an inch. And, a comparison of I 9 the stresses that we predict in this case, first of all, 10 the one-inch larger crankpin diameter from 11 to 12 11 inches reduces the oil film pressure. Also, because the 12 shaft is stiffer and oscillates less under tortional vibrar. . 13 the yaw, the angular variation of the center line of the 14 crankpin relative to the center line of the connecting rod 15 bearing, is reduced substantially by these figures. 16 The maximum calculated stress is reduced a l 17 factor of two. Therefore, given the quality of the 18 material of the casting which we characterize as a typical ! 19 seven-tenths millimeter diameter, we predicted that the i y ll-inch bearing shell would fail in a very short time, 21 250 hours; however, we predict with the same analysis I that 22 the new shell will be good for essentially the life 23 of the engine. 24 Next, please. We concluded, then, that we 3 have identified the cause since this chamfers situation l 1
"o ,
40 1 does not exist in any of the other engines of which we 2 are aware, the problem is -unique to the Shoreham engine: i 3 and, in fact, the original connecting rods are no longer j 4 in service. j 5 Through analysis, inspection of the bearing 6 shells, and testing the mechanical properties of the 7 bearing material, we have concluded that the new design i 8 is completely adequate. And we will essentially take the j 9 same approaches as appropriate to confirming the udequacy ; i 10 of the other bearings, particularly for the V engines. ' 11 Next, please. Now, to address the problem of 12 piston skirt cracking which is only in its preliminary 13 stages of analysis -- and this is really a progress report,. 14 I have no final conclusions to present to you. But the 15 original Shoreham pistons had a configuration that resultec 16 from a spot-facing rework of the first AF series of piston 17 skirts delivered for nuclear diesel engine application. 18 That rework led to a configuration which is to schematically illustrated by this cross-section and this ' 20 shaded plant view. You can see the area that is involved. 21 That essentially provides a reinforcement for attaching n the piston crown to the top part of the skirt and distri- ' I. 23 butes the load from the gas pressure in the cylinders ' 24 through the piston crown, forces this top of the skirt i l. 2 drwn, distributes the load through the wall of the skirt, , i
41 1 1 and through this reinforced section here into the wrist 2 i end and from the wrist pin of the skirt through the connectp 3 ing rod and the connecting rod into the crankshaft, and off: 4 l we go. 5 The failure location was in the intersection 6 between the rein forced boss and this heavy section. In i~ f 7 other words , cracks would initiate essentially in this i a location. And cracks were found in virtually all of the I g AF modified piston skirts at Shoreham and, in fact, cracks 10 were observed in similar piston skirts in the Grand Gulf 1 j 11 plant. 12 On finding this indication of cracking in 13 this design, LILCO determined that they should replace 14 all the skirts with a model called by TDI, the AE type, 15 which is the latest type currently,,in production. This 16 type, as you can appreciate, is stronger by reason of 17 , a much thicker boss area. This reinforcement lowers the i 18 stress in tne critical area. Youcanseefromthiscross-l 19 section. m In addition to that improvement, the boss l l 21 area has been widened to this contour. More cross-sectiona. 22 area has ocen added in the wrist pin reinforcement area 23 and early changes made that enhanced the ability to 24 transfer 'uad f rom the crown to the skirt. 3 Ne are currently attempting to analyze that I l
m o
- 42 1
load distribution between the crown and the skirt and the 2 resulting detail stresses. The problem is somewhat com-3 plex, because in the attachment of a crown to the skirt 4 there are two load paths. There is a path represented by 5 the contact circle where the crown is bolted to the under-6 side of this skirt, mounted through this boss. It's a 7 nut here, of course, not shown in this picture, and that 1 l a clamps the crown down on to the top of the skirt. 9 There is a gap on cold assembly of between l r 10 seven and eleven mils. But by the first application of 11 pressure to the top of the crown results in loading only 12 this inner ring. Upon applying more pressure, this gap 13 , begins to close down and eventually does transfer a sig-14 nificant amount of present loading from the crown into the 15 skirt at this outer diameter. - 16 The stresses produced in this critical area, 17 l which is subject to fatique, depend critically upon this 18 distribution of load. Therefore, we have modeled the j 19 structure of the piston skirt -- and this latticework : 20 here represents the degree of detail necessary in coming 21 up with a structural model to be subject to detailed 22 stress analysis. kud there are many, many elements. 23 All you see here are the surface elements. And 24 we are currently analyzing the detail stress distribution i 2 in the vicinity of the cracks. 1 l l w-
-s ,
43 1 The AN skirt configuration'is involved in 2 several of these skirts in nuclear application. And it 3 is essentially the same as the AF configuration. The , t 4 main difference being primarily that it is produced by 5 casting rather than by free-machine, the original design f 6 of ti:e AF skirt. . 7 There are three -- and so far as we know, only 1 8 three -- basic types of geometries required. We are 9 currently doing the detailed analysis of the original . I 10 Shoreham and the new AE version, and we will be doing the l 11 AN. These analytical models are still under development. 12 Because of the complexity of the stress analysi 13 and the dif ficulties of determining the precise load dis-14 tribution between the crown and the skirt, we plan to 15 assist TDI in planning and conducting a strain gage test 16 to determine the -- experimentally the actual magnitude of , i 17 stresses. We have engaged a major manuf acturer of pistons 18 in West Germany to provide a complete three-dimensional 19 stress analysis of the entire assembly of piston, crown, 20 skirt, '.tr is t-pin , including site loading and everything 4 21 else involved that can be anticipated. 22 In addition, we have begun to obtain operat-ZI ing experience with the new AE piston skirts. We first 24 were able to look at two AE skirts th at had been engine-3 run for about 700 hours by TDI in a development engine anc l
= , 44 1 subject to apparently more severe conditions than ex-2 perienced in nuclear standby operations. And we were unablp 3 to find any significant linear defects that suggest any 4 fatique initiation in the regions for concern. I 5 We have just begun to take information from an i 6 engine, a V-16 engine, in operation in Kodiak Island, 7 Alaska. So, far we've looked at one skirt that has been l 8 operated in excess of 9,000 hours and have found that 9 there are no indications in that skirt of fatique, cracking! 10 That skirt is now on its way to our laboratory in Palo 11 Alto and will be given a detailed metallurgical examina-12 tion. And we anticipate having the opportunity to look 13 at additional skirts. 34 Thank you. 15 MR. SEAMAN: My name is Craig Seaman. I will 16 explain for you in a little bit more detail our diesel 17 generator design review and quality revalidation program. Is As you can see from the utilization chart, the j 19 program is broken up into three major groups. The design 2 review group, the component selection group, and the 21 quality revalidation group. The design review group is 22 made up of a number of task leaders who are engineers 23 who specialize in the various components we are going to 24 be looking at. 26
- Associated with them are our diesel consultants.
I
= . 45 1 the Germans as ~well as Failure Analysis people, Karl 2 Schmidt who we are using for some of our piston reviews, 3 and other consultants as necessary who will bo consulting 4 with the task leaders. j 5 In addition, the design review group also has i 8 Owner's representatives, people from the various utilities ' 7 who are both site engineers familiar with the unique ex- . 8 ~ periences that we've seen at the various sites, and de- > 9 sign specialists, valve specialists, various component 10 l type specialists from utilities, and th'e representative ' 11 from Transamerica Delaval. 12 The component selection group is really made 13 up of two sub-sections. One is the component selection 14 groui -- component selection committee, rather, who will 15 go through the detc.iled component list for each engine 16 design, and includes representatives from Failure Analysis 17 As sociates , Stone and Webster, our diesel consultants and 18 Owner's representatives, and representatives from Trans- l 19 america Delaval as part of the component selection process' 20 We haveiset up a group of Owner's representa-21 tives who will be dssembling the various site experience i 22 data to be used during the component selection process, 23 which I will explain in a little hit more detail in a 24 minute. 28 In the quality group area, again you can see 1 s
s, "e s 46 l l 1 l 9 I ! that we have representatives of Failure Analysis, Stone andj 2 Webstar and owner's, who will be overseeing the entire 3 program. And, again the quality group is divided into 4 three sub-sections. Thedocumentationreviewtaskleader,j 5 This indivi,8ual is responsible for assemblying various j i 6 site and Transamerica Delavhl documentation by component 7 so that that information is available, both to design i
)
a group and tne quality group for review purposes. ' I g A quality engineering group, who will assist 1 i 10 t in an engineering capacity, both the documentation group l 11 and the last group that I will talk about, which is the 12 field inspection group. Now, these people are the people 13 that will go out into the engines and actually conduct 14 inspections and tests on the engines as specified by the 15 group.
- 16 MR. DENTON: What's your confidence in the l
17 :, ultimate success? It's a very impressive group you've
-' 18 put together here. I 19 Do you have a group on just replacing the I N engine witn one of the different design? Why didn't you 21 go that route versus this route?
n '1 R . SEAMAN: We don't have a group to consider n replacement o f design. I 24 ATTENDEE: Replacement of engine is a very 25 long term project. This is something we can do_over a i a
s c 47 1 1 period of months ~as opposed to period of years. We are -- 2 we feel confident that this program will be successful, l 3 and we will not know until we get further into it. 4 MR. COLLINS: Cot .d you put that back again? 5 It isn't clear to me. Maybe you could talk a little I 6 more about the task of what these people will be looking 7 at in field inspection. 8 MR. SEAMAN: Okay. As I go through my pre-9 sentation, I will be describing each of the functions of 10 the program and in a lot more detail. So, hopefully 1 11 that will become clearer in a minute. 12 The next thing I would like to discuss is the 13 program description itself. Basically, the program is 14 conducted in five phases. The first phase is to assemble 15 experience data. The second phase' is component selection. 16 The third phase is preparat ic7 of task descriptions. The ! 17 fourth phase is implementation of task descriptions. And, 18 then, finally we will prepare a final report for each 19 engine. 20 I will be discussing each of these in more 21 detail in just a minute. If we look at the flow chart, 22 that explains how the program will be conducted. Again, i 23 our first task is to identify the engine components. And, 24 then we actually break into two sub-groups which will be 2 assemblying, and have been assemblying, experience data.
-. 4 48 I
~1 One of which is the site data from the various sites, 2
including the i.-4 8s , the V-16s, V-12 and V-20 engines. 3 And the other group will be assembling industry data, 1 4 which again I will be discussing in a little bit more de-5 tail. But basically we are going after nuclear industry 6 experience, as well as Transamerica Delaval marine ex-7 perience and Transamerica Delaval stationary engine l a experience. g Next step is to select the components for i 10 review. After that, again we break into two phases , j 11 the design review phase and the quality revalidation 12 Phase. Common to both of them is the preparation of the 13 detailed task descriptions. And, then the design review , 14 group will perform calculations and evaluations and re-15 views, as described on the task descriptions. Likewise, 16 the quality revalidation group will perform inspections, i 17 tests and/or review documentation as appropriate, in 18 accordance with task descriptions that have been establishk 19 ed in the quality revalidation group. { 20 And, then, finally is preparing and issuing 21 the final report for each engine. I 22 I would like to discuss in a little bit more ( 23 detail now how we are assemblying this experience data , 24 and the type of documents that we are going af ter. Again, 25 this is basically being done with two groups. One is- I f
e < 49 l 1 utility representatives, Owner's representatives, that l i 2 are b,eing supplied at the Shoreham site who are assembly- I 3 ing site experience data at the specific power plant sites. 4 Now, the types of data that they are looking ! j 5 i for are maintenance records, operating loss, any design 6 changes and improvements that each individual site has 7 recommended and implemented, and any failures that have 8 occurred at any of the sites. ! 9 With respect to industry data, again what we . l 10 are doing is in the area of nuclear. . We have , as Mr. 11 Museler pointed out, earlier gone to 10 CFR 21 reports, 12 any information we can gather from INPO or other industry 13 sources that are associated with nuclear diesel engine. 14 And we are not limiting this to Transamerica Delaval 15 engines. The reason is that there are many components 16 on these engines that are shared among manufacturers, and ; g7 we want to make sure we understand what the historical gg operating experience is on any one of these shared com- i gg ponents. 20 In a non-nuclear area, as I mentioned earlier, 21 we are doing our best to assemble marine data Trans-22 america Delaval is being very helpful in this area. 23 And, again, also any non-marine data, stationary diesel 24 engine experience is also being assemblied. 3 All this data is being summarized in a computer
O :s
.i
[' 50 1 report that we are using. It's used during the selection 2 process which I will be discussing in a moment to make 3 sure that the people that are selecting components are 4 aware of industry experience, and also to be sure that 5 the design review and quality revalidation groups are ! 6 also well aware of this experience when they conduct their 7 reviews. 8 MR. DENTON: Can you give me a feel for how , g many diesels there are in a non-nuclear data field? If to you are aware of the fif ty-seven or so that have been ! 11 sold to utilities, how many are there of a similar design 12 or use in the non-nuclear field? 13 MR. SEAMAN: Gross numbers, I couldn't recall 14 again of f the top of my head. What we are looking for is 15 experience data from the marine industry, anybody we can i 16 contact that has marine engines. Again, we are using ; 17 ' Transamerica Delaval to help us out with that, to let us 18 know what type of experiences they are aware of. We do 18 have a listing of all Transamerica Delaval engines that 20 have been manufactured, going way back in time. 21 And so we do know what engines are where, fo r 22 l specific design types. So, we are contacting those peoplc 23 to get what data we can from them. 24 ATTENDEE : Harold, to give you a feel for that 2 in the case of cylinder heads, which was an early issue ,
.i
- - , _ - _ _ . . - -_ _ - - _ _ - -y, _4
o , 51 1 on Shoreham, the data base on cylinder heads is several : 2 hundred cylinder heads which accounts for fif ty or sixty 3 engines at least. So, that's the order of magnitude for 4 that component. For different components, the number of 5 engines that we have data on is different, because the ! 6 recording on the non-nuclear engines is on an exception 7 basis. It's only when something really goes wrong. 8 But that's the order of magnitude, g :-1 R . SEAMAN: Okay. Component selection. 10 .4 R . QUIDLE : I have a question. I'm Tom 11 Quidle, AE00. Do you know now, or is your program going 12 to find out, what components of the Delaval engine might 13 be common to othar engines? 14 Do you know that already? 15 MR. SEAMAN: Absolutely. As I go through the 16 component selection process, I will describe that in a i i 17 little bit more detail, which is the next item. 18 The common data base we are using-to select i l Ig our component selection organization is the Transamerica 20 Delaval parts list. That is the base document for our 21 review. And each site is taking the Transamerica Delaval n parts list and bringing it to Shoreham to be broken into 23 components. 24 One of the first things we will do is identify
. g common parts among the various utilities. And there are l
i I
e , 52 1 quite a number of them. And, again, that's part of the 2 component selection process. i 3 The selection committee itself is made up of l 4 an Owner's representative, Stone and Webster, Failure 5 Analysis, a representative from Transamerica Delaval, and 6 one of our diesel generator specialists, who is at the ; i 7 Shoreham site right now. ; a The next thing that the selection committee , g will do is take the component list and the experience l 10 data and review these components and specify either a f 11 design review to be performed and/or a quality revalida-12 tion, or both. In general, the way the selection occurs I 13 is that the importance of the part to the engine is the i 14 overriding criteria; however, experience data is also 15 factored into it to make sure that,everybody else is well 16 aware of any problens that have occurred with a specific I i 17 , component. Is MR. COLLINS: Could I just touch on that a j gg minute? What kind of criteria are you using for your i 20 selection of components? 21 f you take the experience data, the fact you s 22 may not have many hours on it may show you to have good t 23 experience. And I don't think you can really take much 24 comfort in that. l 26 MR. SEAMAN: In answer to your question, again 1
= o-53 1 the prime consideration for picking. apart for review is 2 the function of thac part in the engine. In other words , ! 1 3 if a part is important for the operation of the engine, 4 regardless of experience data, good or bad, that part 5 would be selected for review. The experience data comes 6 more into play in the next item where we outline minimum 7 review requirements. g ATTENDEE: Let me just jump ahead to address , g this. If you look at Item E there, there are 217 groups to of components on Shoreham, of which a total of 166 were 11
! selected. The number of components with known problems 12 is much, much less than that, so that the number of com-13 ponents being looked at is f ar greater than the number of ,
14 components with known problens, 15 MR. DENTON: Well, let's ask. Why not look at 16 all components? l 17 MR. SEAMAN: That's exactly what we are doing 18 as part of the selection process. We are looking at + i 1e every component on the engine, and picking those parts 20 that serve a purpose to the operation of the engine and 21 specify a design review and/or quality review on that 22 part. ! n The types of components that we have eliminated ; 24 from the process would be things like maintenance plat-l'
-- 25 forms, things along that line, nameplates. So, we are, r- - .-, - - + . -
= ..
54 1 in essence, reviewing any part that has an operability 2 type function on the engine. 3 Okey. Again, the experience data is utilized 4 to specify the minimum review requirements. In other words , I 5 we will always be reviewing the primary attribute of that 6 component to make cure that that is reviewed by our engineers 7 i-d/or quality people. But we also want to make sure thr* a we are well aware of any experience data that would in- { 9 dicate we have to do something special on that component.
! i 10 That's really where the experience data comes into play. I 11 Okay. As Mr. Museler pointed out, for the 12 Shoreham case, specifically we identified 217 total com-13 ponents. We specified a design review to be conducted on '
~
14 15 2 o f tho se , a quality revalidation to be conducted on 15 133, and the total components that were subjected to ' 16 either a design review or quality revalidation is 166. 17 So, again we are reviewing a very large per-i' i 18 contage of the components. 19 The next step in the process is the prepara- < 20 tion of task descriptions. And the first thing we do t l 21 in this area is we assign a tssk leader. Generally, he 22 is an engineering or quality specialist <ith respect to M that specific component. And this individual is responsi-24 ble for preparation of the task description, as well as ) 26 implementation of the actual review and/or revalidation. f I
o o 55 1 In the quality revalidation area, typically t!e 2 task descriptions call for NDE to be performed, or des-3 tructive examinations to be performed. In general, they 4 will identify sample size, if that's appropriate. And 5 also specify the procedures that will be utilized to con 6cc-6 a review, i.e. NDE procedures or any destructive examina-Y' i 7 tion procedures that should be employed. ; 8 The design review task descriptions in genera _ i I 9 try to find industry standards wherever they would be 10 appropriate to spell out the requirements for the design ' 11 review. They will detail the methodology and any inforr-12 tion that is required from, let's say, Transamerica Dela. 13 in terms of engine parameters. And, where we can' t find 14 industry standards that would be appropriate for a speci. 15 component we would specify a uni'que analysis such as 16 finite element modeling, or something along those lines. - 17 , The other thing we are doing are evaluations i 18 that are recommended to us by our diesel generator con- ' 19 sultants. The diesel generator consultants work very 20 closely with the task leaders in the design area to make 21 sure we cover all the bases with respect to design. 22 The task descriptions are after preparation a through the task leaders, are subject to review by the 24 Owner's representatives, Transamerica Delaval, and the 3 Group Chairperson and program managor.
o e 56 1 MR. EISENHUT: Quick question. When you said 3 2 upon the selection of components it's going to be a sample 3 size, is that -- what's the basis? Isitstatisticalbasedl 4 or how are you going to do it? 5 M it . SEAMAN: Well, it's not always the sample 6 size. It re.311; depends on the specific review they are ; 7 talking aLoat. .In some cases, it will be all parts. Int . 8 itsome cases :t will be a sample. Again, that's based en j 9 a lot of factors that are used by the task leaders, such 10 as experience <!sta and the amount or numbers of componentr 3 11 like that that are available in the engine. 12 ITTENDCE: I have a question. If a particula: 13 component has failed in one engine, would it be considere-. 14 as a component for design review on an engine which it 15 hasn't been? . 16 'IR. SEAMAN: Absolutely. Any component that's l 17 typical o f any of the engines that has failed. Tc give is you a typical way we would handle that, we would subject ! 19 it to a design review to find out why it failed, in ad- i 20 dition to checking its primary operational attribute. 21 .ind we would also have the quality group do , 1 22 some spectite examination so we could assure o.2rselves 1 23 that wo . ion't have a similar failure. 24 ATTENDEE: Since crankshafts in all the di f-25 ferent en,;ines will be analyzed? , I
i i C s l 57 ,j
! i 1 M P.. SE AMAN : That's correct. And I think Mr.
2 Museler maybe touched on that earlier. And maybe he will 3 in a few minutes also. l 4 Once the task descriptions are reviewed and 5 approved, it's up to the various task leaders to actually 6 implement the reviews or revalidations that are called ; I 7 for. Again, in the quality revalidation area, we will {i 8 use where possible spare and/or replacement parts. Whert l t a that isn't possible, we will actually go into the engine to and conduct inspections and tests on the engine. The l 11 results, of course, will be documented and analyzed. l 12 And, if necessary, those results will be i 13 forwarded to the design review group for analysis. 14 Design reviews, or the first aspect thac is 15 checked on all design reviews is the experience data. I: 16 we have some experience data on the component, everyone , 17 h of those pieces of data will be reviewed by designers to 18 make sure that that particular situation and particular 19 experience is addressed for that component. Calculations - 20 will, of course, be performed as called for. 21 Evaluations will also be performed by our
- 22 consultants. And any feedback that the design group 23 would -- for instance, if they were to find thero is'a 24 particular attribute that was particularly critical for j 25 that component that ought to have some sort of non-destructi-l
58 1- test performed as a result, that information would be 2 fed back to the quality group so that the proper inspection 3 would be performed. 4 And, finally the task leaders are responsible 5 to identify any results and/or recommendations that would be the result of their reviews. This final package would 6 7 be reviewed by the Owner's representatives, by Transame- i i 3 Delaval and the Group Chairperson and program manager. g Typically, we would expect things to fall intt one of three categories as a result of our reviews. And to 11 that would be the component is acceptable as designed an< 12 fabricated. We would possibly want to increase inspecti 13 and/or maintenance frequency, or possibly upgrade or 14 replace the part. 15 ATTENDEE: I have a , question back here. Will . 16 someone be defining maintenance and maintenance programs l 17 for components under this list? 18 MR. SEAMAN: That's exactly correct. Where l 19 that's appropriate, if increased maintenance or inspection, 20 is warranted, that will be specified by the group. 21 ATTENDEE : In this design, will they also be i 22 considering potential f ailurcs to the standby diesels a sitting around the plant for a number of years? llave a 24 lot of maintenance people running in policing it or not , I' l 2 policing it. That sort of thing. Will there be any c1
.o e
_ 59 l i i 1 those pos tulated? ! I 2 MR. SEAMAN: Well, maintenance type activities 3 will be addressed by both design group and the quality j 4 group. If there is an appropriate maintenance type f 5 item like greasing or fitting, for example, that might i 6 be something that the quality group would be asked to i i 7 check on that engine to be sure that it has been done. ' l 8 In the area of design review, we will also bc - l 9 reviewing maintenance programs to make sure that the j i proper maintenance programs are in effect. 10
] 1 11 ATTENDEE: Primarily, my question was relatiro. p
, i 12 to just setting up specific maintenance periods. But m; i 13 concern to us is the alternate standby people looking at ! 14 a potential for maintenance -- 15 ATTENDEE : Excuse me. Could we hold the 16 questions until the end and we will have someone else who i 17 can address that? If you will hold it until the questic-18 time period. ; 19 MR. SEAMAN: Okay. With respect to the final m report, I will just go through this very briefly. It 21 will contain an executive summary, a description of the ' 22 program, the methodology that we used for selecting com-Il ponents, as well as a summary list of the components and ; 24 classification, the methodology that was used both by 25 the design and quality groups, tabulation and discussier I d l
- r ,
60 l I l l 1 of any deviations and/or recommendations that we have, and 2 i any corrective actions that are recommended as a result 3 of the design review or quality revalidation. 4 This slide illustrates the present schedule and 5 current status for the lead R-48 engine which is Shoreham. 6 As you can see, the actual review commenced in late < l 7 October and assemblage of experience data is essentially i 8 completed. We have also gone through our component j 9 selection process for Shoreham, and are well along with I 10 the preparation and actually started implementation of 1 11 the task descriptions, i 1 12 Regarding the lead V-engine plant which is i 13 the Grand Gulf V-16 engine, we have Grand Gulf representa-14 tives at Shoreham who are presently assembling their i 15 experience data. As you can see, we are expecting to 1 16 get a final report out in May on the V-16 engine. [ 17 ATTENDEE: Did you mean Grand Gulf? You said 13 , Shoreham. l tg MR. EISENHUT: They are at Shoreham. ! 20 ATTENDEE: The work is being done at Shoreham, i 21 MR. SEAMAN: Okay. Again, this slide is fairly. i 22 sel f-expl anatory . It's the overall schedule for all i 23 plants for the DRQR program. And I know Mr. Museler will ! 24 be touching on this in a couple of minutes in a little t
' 2 bit more detail. So, I won't go into more detail than l
l
o
- 61 l
1 just show you this. And that's it. 2 MR. MUSELER: Mr. Clint Matthews of TDI and 3 Mr. Don Bixby of TDI would like to take a few minutes to 4 give us their perspective on the program. 5 !!R. MATTHEWS: Thank you. I am Clint Matthews, 6 General f!anager of the Transamerica Delaval Engine Compres-! 7 sor Division. And I will talk a little about Transamerica ! 8 Delaval's activities. i g our first activities were directed towards 10 correction of the problems. This is the mechanical 11 problems, broken parts. In the case of the crankshaf t and 12 bearing problems that occurred at Shoreham, we sent 13 technical people to investigate the failure and to advise i 14 means of repair, followed up with a team of factory 15 mechanics to Shoreham to work arou'nd the clock on the 16 crankshaft replacement. 17 l In order to provide the parts needed, we l 18 interrupted f actory production of two other engines to 18 provide the replacement crankshaf ts and connecting rods 20 and other matcrial and expedited production of a third 21 set so that all three Shoreham engines could be changed 22
- to the now stronger crankshafts.
I 23
'lc have continually provided, and are providing.'
24 dimensional information, material properties, and operating , 25 parameters, as well as field history, to aid in the analysds I
e r 62 l 1 of failures. 2 We conducted a static strain gage test on an , 3 lix13 crankshaf t similar to Shoreham -- not identical, 4 but similar to Shoreham -- to enable analysis of tortion-5 induced stresses and force-induced stresses to separate < 6 the two. This was an aid to the other work that was being 7 done at Shoreham by Failure Analysis and others. , a We conducted an analysis of one of the failed ; , t g bearings from Shoreham. And we are currently proposing 7
- 10 a static strain gage testing of the 12x13 crankshaf t, i 11 again to enable analysis of tortion-induced stresses and 12 force-induced stresses.
13 on piston cracks, as soon as we heard of these 14 occurring at Shoreham, we sent technical people to in-l 15 vestigate the indications and creeks, provided replacement 16 of stronger piston skirts to Shcreham. Thosewereidenti-l 17 fied earlier as the AE piston skirt. We have provided, 18 and are providing, field operating history and factory 18 test history of pistons to support the AE design and the 20 other designs. 21 We are currently providing a factory strain 22 gage test which will provide information to aid Failure n Analysis Associates, independent analysis of the stresses i 24 in the piston skirts. As Clif f Wells told you, the
- 2 distribution of loads in the piston is a very dif ficult h
f
i
- e. a s
63 l l I thing to do analytically, so we are helping by doing some 2 measurements, direct measurement of that distribution of 3 load. . 4 Transamerica Delaval's support of the Owner's 5 Group program. First of all, we encouraged the formation 6 of the Owner's Group, because it provides, as we see it, 7 the best way to separate generic concerns that might be 8 a concern to all groups, from specific concerns, as the 9 most efficient, the most effective way, of pinpointing i 10 what actual problems are in dealing with chose problems. 11 The Owner's Group was formed, and we had a meeting on 12 November 30th in Oakland, primarily directed towards 13 generic problems, also addressing some specific problems. 14 As a result of _ that meeting, turned out a lengthy document to providing written answers to the questions that had 16 arisen among the Owner's Group. l 17 We have provided blueprints and other informa-18 tion -- by other information, technical information such i is as specification sheets, operating history, quality docu-20 mentation, test records and so forth -- to assist the 21 Owner's Group in design review, quality review, quality 22 revalidation program. We have supported it in that way, 23 and will continue support of it in that way. 24 We are providing full-time technical support 2 partly at Shoreham and partly in our own operation in !, l
O' ' 8 64 )! l 1 Oakl and , California, to the owner's Group design review ! 2 quality revalidation program. 3 We realize that the NRC has serious concerns 4 about the adequacy of the Transamerica Delaval quality . 6 assurance program in view of a number of serious problems ' 6 and lesser problems that have appeared at nuclear and :' non-nuclear. plant installati.ons, and from findings of 7 a NRC inspections of operations at our plant, g Prior to the August 1983 crankshaft failures ' 10 at Shoreham, our quality program had been audited dozens i 11 of times over a ten-year program by representatives of 12 all of you. And we had been audited seven times by NRC 13 te ams . We have incorporated many changes in our written 14 program and in the implementation of the program as a 15 result of the findings and recommendations of these audits 16 Since August 1983, we have been audited twice 17 by NRC, September and October. 1 Their written report was 1 18 sent to us last week and arrived on Friday. The report ! 19 contains numerous findings of non-conformances, some we 20 believe are misunderstandings. But the report raises 21 questions which we have to address about the adequacy of 22 our program, u We recognize the great need to take steps to 24 reestablish confidence in our Company and in our products,
, g and we fully recognize the responsibility we have toward
s < - 65 ? I public safety and toward reestablishing public confidence 2 in our quality assurance program. To that end, we made 3 the decision to engage the consulting services of a 4 reputable firm to give us an independent evaluation of I 5
'our current program and to assist us in correcting any 6
deficiencies that are revealed by their study. We expect 7 to have this underway within the next three weeks. 8 In the meantime, we will respond promptly to l 9 ! the latest .';RC findings, with the need toward correcting to whatever dofteiencies do exist, clarifying misunderstand- ' 11 ings and generally to cooperate to reestablish confidence. 12 In addition, we have been told that the NRC , 13 has referred some of their observations to the NRC Office > 14 of Investigations for further work. We have not had any 15 direct information, and still do nbt know if, in fact, 16 such investigation is taking place or what its content l 17 is. ga In summary, Transamerica Delaval is fully is prepared to r. cot, to apply all available resources to 20 resolve whatever problems arise from NRC inspections, 21 investigat tuns and from the Owner's Group design review 22 quality revalidation program. We are dedicated to z3 quality assurance, to the support of the nuclear industry, ! 24 and to clearing our tarnished image. n I would like to ask Don Bixby -- Don is the
-O 3
- 66 ,
i 1 Chairman of the Board of Transamerica Delaval and Chief 2 Executive Officer. Don will say a few words. 3 MR. BIXBY : I will be brief. My name is Donald 4 Bixby. I am at Lawrenceville, New Jersey, where we have r > 5 our corporate headquarters. ' i 6 We are responsible there, and run a Company 7 that is made up of sixteen operating divisions around a the world, of which the Engine and Compressor Division in i 9 Oakland is one. I am not a diesel expert. I think many to of us in this room will be before we get through. But at I 11 the moment, I'm not. 12 But I have been attending the user meetings, g3 and I am here today to make certain there is no question 14 about our commitment to the users and to the NRC in givine 15 full cooperation in this program., 16 We are pleased that the user group has been ; 17 fo rmed . And I'm especially pleased that it involves so 18 many outside consultants of established reputation. It ' 18 would obviously be very dif ficult for us on our own to i 20 be very conclusive and convincing the users and NRC that 21 everything has been properly cared fo r . So, we are glad 22 that those talented consultants are in the picture. t 23 The main thing I want to leave with you -- 24 and incidently, the name Transamerica Delaval may not l . 2s mean much to some of you. Initially, we were the Delaval ,
8 O 5 . 67 1 Steam Turbine Company, and over the years we have had some 2 transition in name. And those of you that may have served I 3 on naval vessels would know of us. And, of course, we i 4 have been a major supplier to the utilities for many i 6 products for many years. 6 And the thing that gives us our thrust in the 7 marketplace has been our reliability. And, so it is i 8 absolutely essential that we restore that, that concept, l i g and there is no question of it. And we will have to 10 dedicate our total effort to that. 11 But, the main message is, we are committed to 12 the program. You can count on us. If anyone at NRC or 13 the user group has any moment of feeling that's not hap-14 pening, I wish you would call me in Lawrenceville, New 15 Jersey and let me know. 16 MR. EISENHUT: Mr. Bixby, if I could interrupt 17 and follow up on that, a couple of quick questions, then. Obviously, one of the things we are going to I 16 4 is be looking at is the overall experience , manuf acturing m experience, the QA problems, what they m3an, et cetera. 21 I think onc thing we want to do with you is take you up 22 on that offer. g We will be asking you to -- if you can follow j 24 up on that commitment, we will be asking you to make i _. available to us the manufacturing records, the engineeri..: 26 I
o s . 68 l, 1 records, the operating experience, whatever you know and 2 are aware of, we certainly intend to have a team of people 3 following this problem, pursuing it, all aiming towards 4 really trying to understand the problem, correct the t 5 problem, figure out what it takes to get in front of it. 6 MR. BIXBY: And you can count on that. And 7 my belief is that is already happening with the user 8 group, that many of these probleum that have been identifi-l i 9 ed were identified by us. We have disclosed the -- l 10 MR. EISENHUT: Part of the reason I asked that 11 is, while I notice in your overall schedule you have 12 operating experience, some recent reports, et cetera. The:q 13 is very, very little information that has been provided to 14 the NRC in terms of summarizing the problems, either via 15 the owners, the particular owners, or TDI, up to this to time. j 17 So, I think it's something we will want to 18 pursue with you. t g, MR. BIXBY: You can count on us. ! 20 MR. EISENHUT: Another quick question. It 21 was Mr. Matthews that referred to your engaging an in-22 dependent firm to get some of the problems -- have you n identified who the firm is ? Can you tell me now? I 24 MR. BIXBY: We think we know who it is, but we
, 26 would rather complete our agreement with them before they l.
o -e - 69 ! 1 know they've got the order. But, I will tell you later. , 2 l MR. EISENHUT: Jim, I know it's a short piece J l' 1 3 of the presentation yet, but I do know it's a whole series i ! 4 of questions yet. j i 6 Maybe what we ought to do is take a short five ! ; 6 minute break, if we could, if that's agreeable. F 7 (whereupon, a recess is taken at 5:04 p.m. , 8 to reconvene at 5:22 p.m., this same day.) l 9 MR. MUSELER: We have two more items. One is j i 10 a description of how the various parts of the program i 11 described by the previous speakers will actually get 12 integrated into an action plan on a component, say, 13 with all the engines. And I will attempt to do that, as 14 well as describe to you what we currently feel is our 15 overall schedule. , 16 - The integrated program approach will allow us 17 to resolve the generic known problems on the lead engines , is providing we have the data base of all the engines assembled 19 as quickly as possible. And we think that's going to occur a very rapidly. 21 'he design reviews and the quality revalida-22 tions of later engines beyond the lead engines will build 23 4 on the early units. And that we will see in the followi.'.c . 24 slide exactly how that will progress. I 3 Sample inspections on all the units will enable I i
o t 70 1 us to have an adequate universe for sampling of whichever i 2 parts we need to look at the design for. And whichever 3 parts we need to call destructive or non-destructive 4 inspections on. 6 We believe that as this program progresses, and - 8 it's moving very rapidly right now, that confidence will build very rapidly, proportional to the progress we nake 8 in each of tne program areas. I g ' Now, this is a very busy slide, but I think 10 it's very useful to spend a little time on it, because 11 it does put in perspective how we are approaching any 12 given problem or any given design review for all the en-i 13 gines. This particular slide is on the crankshaf t situa-14 . tion, and you can see it's broken down into groupings of , 15 engines, the three R-4 8s, the six V-16s , the V-12 and the 16 V-20 engines. 17
, for Shoreham, we performed conventional analyses' i
18 on the crankshaft tortional situation. FaAA has performed I 19 refined analyses along the same manner to validate the 3 conventional methodology, and has performec finite element 21 analyses. They have also done this instrument test that n Cliff Uo11.3 !cscribed earlier. I n in order to validate those analyses, the I 24 Shoreham engines are all going to be ran for 100 hours at I 26 a hundred screent power. The reason for the 100 hours is i
e i 1 l i 1 that l that provides ten to seven stress cycles which gets l 2 you out beyond the endurance limit, and that will validate 3 that these shaf ts are acceptable for the life of the I 4 engine. 6 Following those runs, and essentially following 6 the entire preoperational test program, which has been . 7 submitted to the NRC and accepted, we are going to perform j 8 NDT inspections of the three crankshafts in the critical j 9 stress areas. We are going to run a torsiograph test on I 10 the engine, which is the conventional methodology for the 11 industry, to insure that that torsiograph matches the 12 conventional methodology of the crankshaft analysis. And 13 we've already mentioned that we've done strain gage test- ! 14 ing on both the old shaf ts and the new shafts. 15 Follow that down, River Bend, the next engine, 16 we believe will require a conventional analysis, Holzer l 17 analysis if it's different than Shoreham. The metallurgy 18 of the shaft, for the shaf ts from River Bend, and the 1 18 i detailed design. configuration need to be checked. But i 20 if it, in fact, is identical to Shoreham, then the Holzer 21 analysis might be applicable. In fact, I think we know ! 22 enough about River Band to know that since they have a 23 dif ferent generator then that affects the tortional I 24 analysis, tha t there will be a unique analysis done for 26 River Bend. I
- - - . _ _ _ ~ ._
e .
, 72 l 1 River Bend will run at least one engine for 2 100 hours at a hundred percent power in order to get 3 beyond the endurance limit of the crankshaft, and perform 4 NDT inspections of those crankshafts, and also perform 5 a torsiograph test.
6 We get down to the third R-4 8 engine -- 7 MR. EISEN3UT: Excuse me. But before you go 8 by that, what does the "None" mean in the Hardware Changes- l 9 column? 10 MR. MUSELER: The None means that because this 11 is a known problem. The Shoreham engine had to replace , 12 the crankshafts for obvious reasons. We believe that 13 since the replacement crankshaf t for Shoreham and the 14 original installation for River Bend and Rancho Sacho are 15 the same, that no replacement parts will be required. 16 With respect to the V-16 engines, a Holzer l 17 analysis or conventional analysis will be done by FaAA 18 for the Randolph engine.- Those engines have already been 19 run at a hundred percent power for over 100 hours, and the
*) crankshafts inspected. A torsiograph test will be run 21 on the Randolph engine, on at least one engine to validate '
M the conventional methodology. 23 Preliminary indications on Grand Gulf, based 24 on factory torsiograph tests, indicate that there is l 2 agreement between the torsiograph and the conventional L I i
} ,
I s
, 73 1 analysis. But FaAA is going t[o perform an independent 2
conventional analysis for those, shafts? : 3 ATTENDEE: Iftherewasnotan$agreementbetween 4 the torsiograph and the Holzer analysis, what would you 5 do? 6 MR. MUSELER: I think. that would depend onLwhat y the disagreement was, the magnitude of it. For example, 8 it could -- if the torsiograph showed that the loads on r 9 the crankshafts were much higher than predicted, for to example, and validated that, but we double checked the 11 calibration and we were sure that that's really what we 12 were looking at, then probably- one of two things would 13 happen. 3 14 If that occurred, we probably would wind up - 15 doing more refined analyses, and we might wind up doing 16 a strain gage instrumental test to find the actual stress, j 17 in the highly stressed areas. So, it's difficult to 18 predict the entire chain without knowing exactly what l l. 1C disagreement might occur. ' 20 But, clearly we would have a problem at that 21 point and would either do additional analytical and/or 22 testing work to find out whether we have a crankshaf t < i 23 problem. ; 24 Let me just say, the stresses in the V-16 25 - based on the preliminary work that we've dono are lower {
o - f ' 74 l 1 than they are in the revised Shoreham R-48 and lower than 1 , l 2 the other R-4 8s. But, if that happened, we would have 3 to address it, depending on what the facts were. ,! 4 ATTENDEE: In light of the fact that the torsio-5 graph test that was done on the original Shoreham, the 6 13xil crankshaf t didn't show that there was a problem with 7 the Shoreham crankshaft, why do you think that the torsio- l 8 graph test will be able to show you if there is a problem 6 9 hith the V-16s or the V-20s or the V-12? 10 MR. MUSELER: We are going through some itera-11 tions on torsiograph testing right now. And we are not 12 prepared to say what the validity or non-validity of the ; 13 original torsiograph tests on Shoreham are. I i 14 If what you propose turned out to be true; 15 in other words, if the original ~tofsiograph validated the 16 fact that they were below limits, we would have to address l 17 that in terms of how far below the limits were they. 18 In other words, suppose it indicated, which I 19 think the raw data indicates, it was very close to the 20 margin. I think being very clost to the margin as opposed 21 to be being twenty or thirty percent away from the margin n is indicative of the situati~on, because the situation is I i 23 that those shafts originally were close to being adequate, 24 although they weren't. And, again we are not prepared 25 at this point to say clearly what the original torsiegraph j f
i .
- e 75 1 on Shoreham engine means.
2 I think I had gotten to Grand Gulf and said i 3 that we would do a unique analysis. FaAA will do a unique i 4 analysis for Grand Gulf. 8 And if you follow down the other V-16s, clearly 6 if the engire configurations are exactly identical to 7 Grand Gulf, then the analysis would be applicable to them. j 8 If they arc lifferent, a unique analysis will have to be 9 done for that engine. And we haven't gotten to the point , l to where we know which ones can be piggybacked in that j 11 respect. 12 Torsiograph testing, we believe, is appropriatt 13 for all of the engines, because at the current time we 14 believe that the conventional crankshaft analysis methodo-15 logy is adequate to predict the h,ehavior of the crankshaft 16 on a microscopic level. Therefore, torsiograph testing j 17 is appropriate to validate that. If something happens to 18 change that over the next several weeks, we would have to i 19 reevaluate that. I m But right now we believe that is the case. 21 The conventional methodology is appropriate, and we would 22 reaffirm that for all of the engines, and check it with 23 torsiocraph resting in place in olant. i 24 **R. COLLINS: Why wouldn't you do the NDT on
.- a the 12 and 20?
i e 76 1 MR. MUSELER: Why wouldn't we do the NDT on 2 the 12 and 20, I think these engines are right now -- and, 1 1 3 again this is a preliminary order of doing things, but l 4 we haven't had a chance to really decide which engines 5 need the first priority beyond Grand Gulf. But, if they 6 were done in this order and we had validated that con-7 ventional analyses and the metallurgy and the fabrication i 8 had resulted in no proclems with crankshafts on the three l 9 R-4 8s and six V-16s , we feel f airly confident that one 10 would not need to do that, although that is -- ! 11 ATTENDEE: Bill, don't you have at the start 12 of each examination of these components an understanding 13 of what you have in each of the machines now, what their 14 pedigree is now so you can make some judgments as to what 15 you can see? - 16 MR. MUSELER: That's correct. We need to know l 17 exactly what the design configuration of each component is is. We need to know its history in terms of its metal-g, lurgy and its manufacturer. That's a true statement. I 20 And that data is being supplied by the ' Owner's ' 21 representatives directly from the sites and then by TDI, 22 where they have it. 23 ATTENDEE: So, these conclusions are predicated l 24 on someone understanding that these components are coming 25 , from at least a similar, if not the same -- if there is 1* l
77 1 a distinct variation in that, you may have to do something I l 2 different. l \
.3 ,
MR. MUSELER: That's also a true statement. ' 4 ATTENDEE: Another way to look at it would be l
}
5 if the quality assurance program, the manufacturer of all l I. i 8 cf a particular model, like the V-16s, can' t be at a 7 level of confi:lence, then it puts in the question of your 8 program, because you may have to first prove that the , 8 components and the machines have been built to an adequate - 10 quality standard, and that they are consistent from unit 11 to unit as they come off the assembly line before you can 12 make any generalizations as to what would be adequate in i 13 the way of inspections and testing to verify the design. 14 MR. MUSELE R.: That also is a true statement. 15 We need to verify that what came out the other end is 16 what we are basing our analysis on. i 17 We will be examining the metallurgy of the 18 shaf ts as well as the -- gg ATTENDEE: As f abrication? MR. MUSELE R: 20 Yes. This is just one other 21 example which I believe is useful to illustrate, because - n it requires a different approach to the crankshafts, in our 23 view, and that's the connecting rod bearings, the problem j
- 24. which we think was unique to the ll-inch bearings on g Shoreham.
78 1 For Shoreham, we have done the journal orbit 2 analysis, which is a detailed bearing manufacturer type 3 analysis. We have done a finite element analysis, and 4 we have done a fatigue and fracture mechanics analysis on 5 these bearings. We've also done a considerable amount of 6 NDT inspection and destructive testing on bearing materials.. 7 After the same 100 hour runs -- and, in fact, a after the whole preop test program,at Shoreham, we are g going to be sampling those bearings to make sure that they ' 10 in fact are performing as adequate, performing as advertis-11 ed. 12 And in addition to inspecting bearings througho: 13 the program, in terms of verifying that they are performed 1 14 properly, we are going to be inspecting bearings prior to 15 operation to ensure that they have, the appropriate weight 16 size, which is the critical parameter for this particular ; 17 Situation. And also to verify that we do have the is appropriate material. ! ig Le t me just say that there was flying back - 20 and forth in terms of material properties in these 21 bearings early on, and we had one -- I will say -- error l l l 22 made in the test early on in the program. It turns out ! l l 23 that material-wise now, we are going to be doing more ! l 24 material testing. But material-wise now, I don't believe 25 that there is a material properties problem with the
79 I bearings. But there is going to be more of that testing 2 done. 3 At any rate, the same basic philosophy applies 4 in what we do for one engine, if it's applicable from a 6 design analysis stcudyoint to the next engine, we would 4 e apply that if it needs to be done differently, it would 7 be. Clearly, the V-16 engines, which have 13-inch pins, a will receive their own unique analysis on the first , t 9 engine and if all the other engines are directly applicableg to they will just reference that. 11 Inspection of bearings, however, is going to 12 be done on a dif ferent basis than we are doing the crank-13 shaft inspection. For example, these bearings are manu-14 factured over a period of eight or nine years. An d Dr . 15 Swanger, whese resume you saw earl,ier, is the bearing 16 expert. And he is going to design a sampling plan, both , l 17 preoperational and post-operational to ensure that we is have adequate coverage over this universe of bearings from i 19 over the last eight years. 20 That sampling plan, in terms of how many bear- ' 21 ings for which engine, is not fully defined at the present. 22 time so I can't tell you how many bearings are involved. 23 The idea, however, is to ensure that we have coverage l l 24 over this entire period, so that when we are through we i l i l 26 can say that what we've got, if the results are positive I 7
\
I I
i l o n 1 80
\
1 we are talking in terms of reaching the same conclusions \ 2 that we have reached today, that's not to say that the 3 different data might not tell us something else. 4 But if we do reach the conclusions we believe 5 we will throuq;. this sampling plan, that will give us 6 confidence that this universe of bearings are adequate. 1 7 This matrix is designed to describe in summary 8 form the appi teation of the design review and quality - { 9 revalidation program, the DRQR program, that Craig Sea nan ' 10 described. Fo r all plants, the component selection process 8 11 will be gone tnrough in full. And the components that 12 require dos t.Jn review and quality checks will be identifi-13 ed. 14 Lc me emphasize again that the selection of a 15 component for review, while it clegrly is influenced by the 16 available data base of problems, is far from exclusively j 17 influenced by that. In fact, if you took the total number 18 of known problems, it would give you a very small number I
, 19 of things in terms of universe of parts to evaluate.
20 So, the function of the part is what makes the primary 21 decision on W.lether or not it requires a review. If it's 22 an important part at all, it gets reviewed. 23 1 Lt's a maintenance platform, it probably l 24 doesn't get reviewed unless it might fall on somethina. l g ATTENDEE: Will you be providing some basis I
1 l o 4 i 81 1 for exclusion of a component from the selection process? 2 MR. EISENHUT: Let me help that. Yes,wewill.l 3 You will have to do that. 4 MR. COLLINS: I would like to see a documenta-6 tion. 6 MR. MUSELER: Le t me say this . I think you, 7 the NRC, looks at the first part of this which is what i a components were selected, which components were not 9 selected. ' I don't think that's going to be an issue, to just from what I've looked at in terms of what has not 11 heen selected. It is not things that are relative to the 12 operation of the engine. 13 But clearly we need to convince ypu that that 14 choice was appropriate, and we intend to do that. 15 In terms of the reviews, the lead engines, 16 Shoreham and Grand Gulf, will be performing, let's say, 17 the largest number of reviews because they are the first ' 18 ones up. And you follow on, River Bend will go through l 1e a selection process, and we will do the design and quality i 20 reviews, minus any common parts associated with Shoreham 21 engines, and so on down. I 22 In regard to Grand Gulf, they would do design n and quality reviews on those items that were not common i 24 with R-4 8s , and there are'quite a few parts that are 28 common to all the engines. Now, that philosophy --
o t 82 1 ATTENDEE: Minus the common parts? I'm trying 2 to un,derstand you. In the previous slide, you indicated 3 that there was a wide variation in the pipes, a type of 4 bearing material. 5 MR. MUSELER: Stay with me a moment. I know 6 where you are going. 7 ATTENDEE: You have that same kind of concern . 8 with respect to deciding what was common and why it should 9 be excluded, unless you understand it's very similar in , i 10 each engine. l 11 MR. MUSELER: Okay. The answer to your question 12 is that in terms of items that need to be considered, that 13 have quality attributes, why it the right material, was it 14 manufactured the right way, we may have done a design 15 review on a component on Shoreham and it's an identical 16 component on Grand Gulf, so we won't redo the design re- ; 17 ; view but we will in the universe of inspections include 18 common parts that are common to Shoreham, Grand Gulf and { 19 anybody else in'the universe of inspections of that common; 1 20 part. 21 So, I believe that -- is that responsive to 22 3Sur concern? g ATTENDEE: You said design / quality review? 24 MR. MUSELER: Yeah. We wouldn't do a quality 26 review on it, because we know what the quality attributes
o , . 83 1 are. But it would be included in the universe of in-2 spections to validate that quality. So, it would be valid. 3 All parts -- let me say, if I'm . talking about 4 widget X and it happens to be a widget that's common to 5 all the engines, when I establish that I say: Well, I 6 only have to worry about the design of that thing once 7 unless it operates differently in a different engine. 8 And I have a quality plan for what needs to be i 9 looked at, but I don't just look at that part on the lead to engine. I decide, via the quality review group, how many 11 of these widgets are there, how many need to be looked at, 12 in each engine or in each grouping of engines, in order tc 13 be sure that we have confidence that it really does meet
~'
14 the manufacturer requirements. 15 So, that follows through the -- that philosoph; 16 follows through the design and quality review area, just 17 as it does in the resolution of krown problems. And, gg in two slides down, very briefly I'm going to go over l 19 what our current list of known significant problems are. m _ With regard to the testing program -- and this i
- 21 slide combines the overall preop testing program and some 22 of the inspections that we talked about previously, but
%I just to give you a feel for what will be done throughout l 24 the universe of engines, Shoreham's program has been 1
26 submitted to the NRC and that will total 300 hours on l
l o 4 . 1 each engine roughly with these 100 hour durations at full 2 power. 3 River Bend will do that 100 hours at full power 4 in one of the engines, and we will also perform an endurance 1 5 run of the saiae general type of Shoreham's. Following 6 that, the major inspections we talked about earlier are 7 to do NDE on the crankshaf ts to make sure that they are, l 8 in fact, beyond the endurance limit so that they have the 9 same life as the engine. Bearings will be included in to t.nis universe of bearing inspections that we discussed 11 earlier. And pistons, in the case of the lead engines, 12 will also be pulled and reinspected. 13 In the case of Shoreham, for example, we are
~~
14 going to pull three AE pistons on each engine, and that 15 same type of philosophy will apply to following engines, 16 with reduced frequency if the results indicate them. 17 ATTENDEE: Is there a specific reason why is cylinder heads are excluded from inspections? j 19 MR. MUSELER: Cylinder heads are not excluded l l 20 from inspections. This slide was just meant to illustrate ! 21 major inspections you have on these runs. We have not i 22 established the inspection plan for cylinder heads at l n the present time. That's one of the lead design and ' 24 quality review ef forts. I 25 So, just because a component doe =.."L appear ;
O 6 - 85 1 here doesn' t mean that it is not going to be inspected 2 after the preop testing. 3 In other words, I don' t intend to say that 4 only these components are going to be inspected. I'm
, 5 just tryinc to give you a feel for what the nature of 6 this is. I 7 ATTCNDEE: The total list won't be confirmed 8 until you <!o all your component design reviews? ,
l 9 *1 R . MUSELER: Until we do our component . 10 selections ind perhaps design review, which in the case I l 11 of Shorehan and Grand Gulf -- well, Shoreham's is done. 12 Grand Gulf's is going to be done the first week in 13 Feb ruary . So, that information will be available very 3 14 quickly. 15 h'ith respect to Grand Qplf, they've got 16 actually more than 100 hours at full power on each engine,j 17 and they've run the engines for a considerable amount of 18 time. I think of the nuclear units, Grand Gulf probably l 19 has more nours on the engines at the present time than 2 anyone else. 21 Crankshaft inspections hate already been done 22 on Grand ' air, and they are positive there are no indica-23 tions in uw 'tller areas; therefore,.while the analysis 24 isn't complete, we conclude that based on available data 26 that those erankshafts are in that category.
o i . 86 i So, the'same philosophy follows, goes on 2 through -- follows on through the others. We believe i j
\
3 that if we prove those components that have an endurance 4 limit requirement on the early engines, and if we 5 establish that the quality attributes of those components I I 6 are reliable, that we won't have to repeat those kinds of t 7 major engine tests. Again, this -- obviously whenever 8 you put something like this together, you assume favorable i 9 results. I 10 The program will be modified as we see things 11 that require additional testing or additional inspections. 12 ATTENDEE: Bill, before you go on, perhaps it 13 would be appropriate to point out that those inspections 14 you have on that slide, some of that has already been 15 done. 16 MR. MUSELER: I think I indicated on Grand Gulf, 17 the crankshafts have been inspected and the bearings. Scr r-18 of the bearings have been inspected, and have both crank- l 19 shafts been inspected? ' A) ATTENDEE: Right. 21 f tR. MUSELER: Based on the information we 22 currently have, we have to finish the analysis. But on ' u what we currently have, we have no reason to believe there 24 is any problem with the V-16 crankshaf ts. But the rest 28 of the things have yet to be done. I I I i
o 6 .
., 87 l i
1 The ovtrall senedule looks like this at the 2 present time.
~
The maier. problems, we believe that the 3 crankshaft problem, while analysis will have to be done 4 I on some of the subsequent engines, that the lead units 5 and their inspections will be done in mid-March to early 6 April, so that the crankshaft situation, subject to 7 confirmation of material attributes , and some analysis 8 on the follow on engines, will be resolved at that point. 9 Bearings, we believe we are at the point where 10 we understand what the initial problem was. We believe 11 that the bearings are adequate, and that there is no 12 problem with them. However, the inspection programs that - 13 cover that universe of eight years of manufacture still 14 does have to be performed. 15 , Pistons, it's difficult'to determine exactly 16 when that analysis will come together. The analysis by
- i 17 ,
FaAA is reasonably far along, although not nearing comple-18 i tion. The subsequent analysis by Karl Schmidt in i 19 Germany is about six to eight weeks away at the present N time. 21 In the meantime, we will be doing the inspectiom i 22 on the units. We are going to be able to look, I believe, i 23 at several more pistons from the Kodiak engine which has 24 over 9,000 hours en it. I believe either 7 or 9,000 is ' 2 the number. And by the time we get to early or late l t
o -6 ud 1 March, we will have had significant running time at high j 2 power levels on the Shoreham and Grand Gulf pistons and, ' 3 therefore, the results of those inspections are obviously l 4 ! keyed to the adequacy of at least one type of piston. I 5 We are analyzing all three types of pistons. 6 And we need to ensure we have all the available data on i 7 all types. 8 Let me say one thing that didn' t come out j g earlier. We know they are having problems with AF pistons.I 10 We also know there have been_some problems with AN pistons. 11 However, the current data base indicates that those 12 problems were related to the Part 21 heat treatment 13 problem. So, based on that current available data, we , 14 i do not have evidence of problems with AN pistons, excuse mt 15 with AN pistons, if they had been properly heat treated. 16 But we don't have the entire data base assembled. j 17 The currarc data does not indicate any field gg problems with those p:.stons. 1 gg Finally, de list of other problems which i I m I will discuss in a ?toment, we think is going to take 21 us out to early Apri., and those problems -- a number o f 22 them have been looked at by various entities , MP&L, FaAA 23 and various vendors. We have not pulled all of that data ' I 24 together to be able . to say we have a comprehensive answer 2 to each of them. But we currently expect to be able to i
o 6 89 1 do that by early April. 2 The DRQR program, Craig described this, these 3 are the issuance of the various reports which carry us 4 out into the early summer of this year, by 1984. And, 5 finally the testing requirements for all engines, we have h i 6 not put back together -- some units are still a year or i 7 more away from operation, so we are still in the process ; 8 of assemblying that composite schedule. And it depends to 9 a large extent on the results on the early analysis of i 10 the DRQi program, in terms of what tes ting might need to 11 be done, i 12 At any rate, we believe that the lead engines 13 by the end of March will have significant operation on i 14 them in the areas of concern. 15 This is our current list, of items which we 16 believe need to be addressed for all the engines for us { 17 to ensure that if this problem was a serious problem that ! 18 it either is not applicable to these engines or different l 19 classes of these engines, or that if it does have ap- ' 20 plicability to any of our engines that it has been ap- . 21 propriately handled, either by replacing parts or by j 22 analysis if the particular operational situation is dif- j 23 ferent than what we have. l l ' l 24 But this list is subject to some change, but l' 3 I'm sure that the items on this list are not any surprise l l l l
-o s. .
90 l l I 1 to the NRC. They were no surprise to us when we tried 2 to develop the overall list. This is not to say that 3 this is a total list of all problems that are in our 4 data base. There are obviously more problems than that 5 in the data base, but we've made judgments as to which 6 problems we t.unk are of such significance that they need ; 7 to be handled early on and addressed in a very short turn- l 8 around time. i g ~ho final item that I would like to address 10 is our licensing situation. And, then Jim will sum uo ; 11 for us. We celieve that it will be necessary to resolve 12 all of these significant known problems for each engine i 13 that comes up for licensing. As I said before, we are 14 attempting to do that in one document wherever possible 15 to address the situation for all the plants at the same 16 time. In some cases, that won't be possible and we may 17
! do it in groups of one, two or three plants at a time 18 in order to accommodate the schedule requirements. l 19 But the problems with generic are engine- '
4 2 unique, or engine-unique if they are of significance will 21 be resolved prior to any decision on licensing. I guess 22 I don't n wo.1 to say that. We believe that a commitment D to the ov.rall design review program is appropriate for i 24 licensine. 2 All eleven utilities have committed to this l I i
o ( 91 1 program, so I think it's in_ place. With respect to the 2 early part of that program, of the design review program, I 3 we believe that the component selection process needs to
-4 be accomplished for the plants prior to licensing. By l l
5 th at , I mean that any common parts ne'ed to be addressed 6 so that they have been adequately treated and any engine-7 unique parts. In addition to the known problem list that i 8 come out of the design review process, as needing atten- l 8 tion -- in other words, as being potentially -- having a ' 10 potentially negative effect on the engine's reliability, 11 would need to be addressed early on. 12 But tnat the overall completion of the design 13 review program for those items that are not significant 14 to the engine's operation, would be a follow on effort. 15 Clearly, the completion.of preop testing, both 16 as specified in the regulations and any additional testingj 17 that's required, such as the 100 hours full power runs, 18 would need to be accomplished prior to -licensing. l 19 And, finally any major inspections that are 1 20 indicated by the program would need to be accomplished 21 prior to licensing. For example, any of the crankshaf ts 22 that require NDT af ter preop testing, that would have to ' 23 be accomplished, as would any bearing inspections that are! 24 1 called for in the program. ' Mi That summarizes the entire program. And Jim ' l l i 1
i o 1 92 l l 1 McGaughy will wrap 17 up for us. 2 MR. EI.SENHUT : Let me ask you a question on 3 something you said. On Item 3 on the last slide, about 4 the items that were significant to the operation of the 5 l machine would have to be resolved prior to operations. e That list you r.ad up, some one to fifteen significant 7 items. Do you consider those items to be significant to ! a the operation of the machine? : 9 MR. MUSELER: Yes, sir. l l 10 i MR. CARUSO: Some of my questions are sort of 11 technical. In evaluating the' engines , or various dif- l 12 ferent parts of t'le engines against known standards, for 13 example, the Demis standard, there are other standards i 14 available for evaluating engines such as the American 15 i Bureau of Shipping Standard; which standards do you plan 16 to use, or do you plan on using a composite of Demis, 17 ABS and ASME? i 18 MR. MUSELER: Let me say with respect to that i i 19 particular component, we are going to be looking, at leasti 20 in one case, at what .the ABS standard says in terms of, i 21 if we apply the ABS standard what would it tell us about { 22 the crankshaft. The standard of record, at least in all 4 1 23 the specifications that exist, I believe, that were 24 { specified, for example, calls for evaluation against ' 26 Demis standard. l l l i
-o t.
93 1 As you know on Shoreham*-- and they got mixed 2 i and matched along the way, and we are going to evaluate 3 the situation vis-a-vis. In other words, if Shoreham's 4 design were evaluated against the ABS standard, what would :I ) 5 i that tell us. We don't presently plan to go through that l 6 exercise for all the units, because as I said earlier the I 7 problem with the Shoreham crankshaft we believe has been 8 clearly identified. And the analysis that has been by J 9 FaAA indicates that had the appropriate parameters been , 10 utilized in the conventional methodology against the ! i 11 Demis standard, that those crankshafts would have been 12 okay. 13 In fact, when one does that for the 13x12 14 crankshafts, one gets agreement between the more refined 15 analysis and the testing, and that validates the conven-16 tional methodology. So, we are going to have some informa-17 tion to see what that means but we don' t have any reason 18 to doubt the original design standard. 19 MR. CARUSO: I was just wondering if you were 20 going to consider other standards besides the Demis 21 standard, because there are other standards with different 22 specifications or dif ferent allowable limits out there. 23 Considering the sensitive use of these engines 24 in a nuclear power plant, then you consider an appropriate 26 standard to judge them against. i
. t 94 6 P.Ml 1
MR. MUSELER: There are parts of the engine l 2 ; that wind up being judged against the Demis standard. ' 3 For example, we are using IEEE standards where they 4 are appropriate, using ASME standards where they are 6 appropriate. So, there are many more standards than Demis. 6 That's a relatively small population. 7 MR. CARUSO: That's fine. That's basically what i 8 I wanted to know. s MR. MUSELER: Yes. I 10 MR. McGAUGHY: That covers our program. The ! 11 only thing we haven't discussed is what our interaction 12 will be with you along the way. And I know you would 13 t like to see our program, and we would like to get some
- 14 feedback as we go along.
15 I don't propose that we hammer out those ! 16 details today, but I would hope that perhaps maybe in the 17 l next week meetinc on a technical level we could reach some ! 18 kind of resolution on how we should handle this. We feel l 19 we have outlined here an aggressive program. It's I thorough; it's extensive; it's also expensive. And when 21 we are finished with this program, we feel we will be 22 able to defend the reliability of these engines to anyone. M So, any questions we will be happy to try to l 24 answer. 26 MR. EISENHUT: I Jim, let me go back and jump up ' l l 11 i : _ -. .. -- -l
o i 95 1 away from the details. - Clearly, you've laid out a program 2 which is, I think, impressive in its sense of, you know, 3 it's quite thorough. It's going to cover all the machinery. l 4 And it really gets down to a question, I assume you do l 1 5 want us on board with you, so to speak, as you go along. 6 At some point in time, you are going to say 7 for the lead nachine that vou have a little interest in, i 8 you will say -- or one of the leads anyway -- we have now ; I 9 completed our job, and we are happy with it. This program i 10 you laid out is a very ambitious program. I'm very 11 pleased by that. I 12 Put I want to impress upon you that clearly ' 13 the program, a description of the program is going to i
' l 14 have to somehow be submitted to the agency, formally 15 submitted for our review. It's going to have to be re-16 viewed by the agency. And I presume you will want it 17 approved by the agency.
18 There'are lots of questions. You know the j 19 staff as well as I do. They have probably got hundreds i 20 of questions out here. There are some basic questions, ' i 21 though. 22 o l n..cmber going in that we want, on any given , M pl an t , prior to licensing, even a low-power license, you 24 are going to clearly have to have a certain level of l l
, 26 confidence, and I don't know whether the last slide here "
l l l
O i 96 f l l 1 I don't want our silence on the last slide to -- I mean, 2 I'm going to make it clear, it's not acceptance by us. 3 But it's going to have to clearly be something -- like, I 4 accounting for the fact that there were QA problems ac- f I 5 counting for where the known experience problems are, 6 addressing that this machine is, now we are confident 7 that the quality is in it, by whatever way you got there. 3 The known defects have been solved. And, in fact, the l e ones that may not have experienced themselves yet are , to low enough in probability of occurring, that this machinery;l 11 we believe is adequate to do its job. 12 That's going to be the standard obviously prior i 13 to getting a license. And that's a big standard. That's , 14 why I think you have got to appreciate there is very little 15 detailed information before the staff right now. For 16 example, you go back -- if I go back to Part 2 of your l 17 briefing, Part 3, one of the first things you are going 18 to do before you address the problem in any class of I 19 machinery is , you are going to understand what all the > problems are, developing an operating experience report, 21 or something to that effect. 22 And one of them -- if Inead the schedule right,!
%I one of them on Shoreham, it's done. Those reports, I 24
- would expect, would have to be submitted to the agency.
! 26 I don't think you would want to wait until you are i ! l
o L 97 , 1 conpletely in the end. Sa, you are going to have to work I , 2 out some detail of getting that before the staff so that l 3 as you go along the staff and you folks are agreeing on 4 what the problems are and how then to solve the problens. . l' 6 We are agreeing with you that your solution is . 6 right. You are using -- at several levels, you are going 1 7 to be using design reviews, you are going to be using ; 8 sample approaches. We will want to make sure that we 9 concur with you on the approach, the way you decide on an 10 example, what is the specific item. Lots of terms were 11 used here that are going to have to be ironed out, iron-12 clad, before you get to the end of the line. 13 And, obviously the lead plants are in a much 14 more critical situation than others , because I want to 15 emphasize it is going to have to be submitted, it has got 16 to be reviewed, and that's going to take time. So, what- ; 17 ever you do in defining this program, be sure you don't 18 get yourself to the point where you are ready to say : i 19 Today I'm happy. Tomorrow I want your approval. m That will not happen unless it has been a very 21 thorough program as we go along. So, even though we are 22 passing by and say we are not working out the details 23 today, it's a very significant item, particularly for the 24 lead plants. I don't want to under-emphasize that. 26 Also, there are a lot of questions about -- l 1
1
- L l vn ,
4 i 1 I'm sure the staf f has got literally dozens of technical 2 questions that I would strongly suggest we get together 3 and hopefully in smaller groups and work through the de-4 tailed technical questions. We are going to have to lay 5 those schedules out very shortly. 6 It's going to be -- to say that's not going to 7 be a big challenge for everyone would be contrary to 8 reality, because on one hand you want to get on with l P solving the problem and on the other hand, you are not 10 solving the problem unless the staff is along with you. I 11 The staff is going to be using its set of consultants. 12 And by the time they sit down and go through 13 each piece, I would encourage you in this program to have 14 in it, submitting whatever pieces you can submit formally 15 for the NRC review as you go along. For example, if you 16 have -- if the Shoreham report, as each phase is completed, l' 17 or whatever -- and I'm not sure what detail some of this
't 18 is done, but if I look at the lead Shoreham engine, it j up says about January 15th on this ' chart the operating j
M experience or operating data report is done, I would 4 21 expect that to be submitted for our review. ; I 22 And presumably our approval. The component 23 selection of Shoreham, it says is done. I don' t know to l 24 what degree -- i
, 3 MR. CARUSO: To date, the staff has received l
l
- L 99 l
1 one description of the core review program, which is the I 2 Shoreham program. l And that does list the components, and j 3 it provides a bit of an outline on where this program is 4 going. But a lot of the details that are discussed in ' 5 your slides are not developed very much, and we were 6 hoping to see a little bit more detail on the development 7 of those ideas. 8 MR. MUSELER: We have, and we will start sub- . l 9 mitting the actual task descriptions. They are largely 10 done, and we can submit those on a real time, near time 11 basis, on all the engines as we go through it. So, there 12 is no problem with providing things as they are done. 13 t 21R. EISENHUT: I appreciate that. As I say, 14 on one hand we would like to do it all generically. But is on the other hand, particularly to, the people out front, 16 it is clearly going to be an impact if it's done dif-17 { ferently. There is a basic general question I have, and 18 it -- even Lhough l'm applying it to the crankshaf t l 19 problem and look at it in the general context, you feel i 20 i you understand what the problem is, you feel you under-21 stood the problem enough to have gotten it fixed on ' 22 Shoreham. ! 23 But I think you've got to address another i 24 question and that is, was it basically a design goof or 25 wnat was the problem in the first place? Why did it occuri
a 4: 100' l 1 How did it occur? And you have to address that question, 2 I believe. Sort of the root cause of that problem. 3 Because then you have to ask, whatever that root cause ' 4 was, could it lead you to the conclusion that there may 5 have been other random -- if it's design, I don't know, 4 6 I'm speculattna, but let me say, it was a design goof, i 7 you would have to ask the question, does the root cause g a behind that icsign goof lead you to question another com-9 ponent at random? , 10 And you are going to have to address that 11 question, as I see it. Now, you don't get there statisti-12 cally or any-nther way. You've got to go back to what the i 13 root cause of that problem was. And, then you have to say g4 that addressing the significant experience problem or I 15 experience ,Iata by itself would not cover that problem, 16 because addressing every problem that you know of to date 17 doesn't tell you necessarily that you solved all the Is problems that are out there, because these machines do l 19 not typically have that much experience. I 20 I'm just saying those are the kinds of question $ 21 you are coing to have to address. ' You may very well have 22 ' the answer to that. I want to give you that benefit. D qut at the same time, those are the kinds of I 24 questions that you are going to have to be looking at. 26 We are going to be looking at it in both the broad context
.- L. 101 1 and the detailed context of item by item. 2 I don't know, Jim, to what degree you want to 3 go through staff's detailed questions today. I don't 4 know whether you want to schedule right away another 5 meeting next week with the appropriate detail staff 'to 6 start looking at it in more depth. Really, I don't know. ' 7 Whatever your thoughts are, whatever the staff's thoughts a are. 9 MR. McGAUGHY: We are willing to stay as long to as you want to stay. 11 MR. EISENHUT: I'm not sure -- there is a lot 12 here to look at. 13 ATTENDEE: I would like an opportunity to 14 digest some of this. Maybe the best thing would be to 15 get back in touch with you early,next week and set up 16 another meeting. We can have a working type thing. j 17 ATTENDEE: We really only have a formal sub-h 18 mittal of the program and this kind of thing before us, t a 4 which you have outlined today. And in that is a signi- ' 20 ficant amount of detail. 21 MR. McGAUGHY: We will try to get a formal 22 program submittal to you. l
%3 MR. MUSELER: Let me say, Jim, not all aspects 24 of the program have been submitted. But, for example , -. 26 1 the design review and quality revalidation program has l
+ L 102 1 been submitted formally to the NRC. It happens to be 2
, in the Shoreham document. That program is exactly what ,
3 is being applied. ' 4 MR. EISENHUT: Good. Then, that means it's 6 easy for you to submit a description of your program by 6 simply xeroxing the pages out of the Shoreham -- 7 MR. MUSELER: That's no problem. 8 MR. EISENHUT: You can look at that either way. 9 I would think you want -- certainly as utilities, you 10 would want, and I know the staff wants, to review your 11 program plan early in the process. And short of approvinc 12 that program plan, I know we are not going to Step Numbei 13 2. ! 14 So, I think that is clearly on the critical 15 path as far as I see it. So, you will need to work on 18 when you can do thar. 17 ATTENDEE: Jim, may I ask a qucstion along 18 these lines. Excuse me. I am Harold Tucker, Duke Power l 19 Company. 20 Lis tening to what you are saying, and as a . 21 member of the Owner's Group, I'm interested in a parallel j 22 understanding, by your comments the implication is you ' 23 , are going to pursue independently to your satisfaction I l 24 manufacturing process of their records. Now, we are
- 26 very much appreciative of your questions and are willing l e
- L 103 1 to provide you progress as we go along and make sure you 2 understand what we are doing. I would like to have an 3 understanding with you that if, in your review, you find 4 something, don't wait until you corglete your progress to 5 bring it to us. Let's have a dual understanding as we 6 embark on these independent programs, that we keep each 7 other advised. 8 MR. EISENHUT: I agree with you one hundred ' s percent. And, clearly it's in everybody's best interest : 10 to get to the bottom of this problem as soon as possible, 11 what was the cause, how did we get here, what's the 12 solutions. And you have certainly got my assurance that 13 that's what we are going to do. 14 We do have, of course, another parallel effort 15 and that's-the vendor inspection program. We have, as 16 Mr. Bixby referred to, l the Of fice of Investigations looking, 17 I at things. So, there are a number of efforts going on. 18 We will be looking at this thing, and whatever j 19 significant safety information we find, we certainly will 20 share promptly with you. And that was really the thrus t 21 of us going through the summary of operating experience 22 and summary of QA findings, inspection findings, which is 23 sort of an unusual situation to start with. We hoped 24 that everyone in the room was certainly apprised and aware 25 of everything we said. They may not have been. i l
1 s v 104 g And I know a month or so ago, there were cases l 2 i where we had information that certain elements of the ' 3 indu'stry did not. t Sort of a clearing of the overall datt., 4 as we see it, and the way you see it. I think it was 5 very valuable to put it together. 6 Let ma ask if there are any questions from 7 staff? Any questions at this time, or would you prefer 8 to wait? (No reply. ) No questions? ' s Let me suggest, Jim, what we do is set up a 10 meeting, I think a technical meeting. I would strongly { 11 encourage it to be some time next week. Otherwise, you 12 lose another week. I know this is a program. I can en-13 vision that the -- you folks will be af ter us for approval
,j 14 being together on this program, in a very short order.
15 So I would strongly encourage us to get togethc 16 and I want to reiterate also that I'm very pleased to see 17 the industry's commitment to the program, a very impres-18 sive program laid out. I hope it continues. And I'm 19 sure we are going to have some tweaks to the program, some 20 you folks may not like. But at the s ame time , I'm very 21 encouraged the program is succeeding along these lines. 22 Basically, if you go back to it from a very ' 23 simplistic view where the staff is, there have been so ' 24 many questions raised about the overall quality of the 28 machine;
.- that is, was the quality built in or not, that 1
l l I
-. n i
105 1 it's very hard to know from the front end that you've got 2 a quality machine. So, then you have to lay out a program 3 and rigorously go through it, machine by machine. l 4 Any other questions? Any other comments? Not I l 5 staff, not utility. You are staff. 6 ATTENDEE: I'm sorry. 7 MR. EISENHUT: Go ahead. 8 ATTENDEE: There was mention made in one of 9 the presentations that a set of questions had been raise. 10 and written answers generated at the Owner's Group meet-11 ing at the end of November. Would it be possible that**.
- 12 could get a copy of those questions and answers that were 13 raised by the Owner's?
'~'
14 MR. MUSELER: You have a copy. We would 15 prefer, however, that -- and we don' t think there is 16 anything necessarily wrong with that information, bu* l 17 that was generated prior to, let's say, the overall 18 Owner's Group -- I think the NRC has that information. l Ig We would really prefer for you to look at that and look ' I 20 at your otner questions, and then if you have additional ; 21 information you want, to get it to us in the form of 22 ad,ditional ques tions, j u ATTENDEE: Were you referring to the TDI , 24 responscs? , l
.,_,. g **P. EISENHUT: No. Whoever has got the i
_ ~ -
~ p 106 1 questions in staff. Let me clear up one thing. Any 2! information we get on this matter is going to go in the 3 PDR; I will tell you right up front. Standard golden 4 rule. l l' 5 And it's going to also -- my full intention is 6 to serve every piece o'f information we get on this subject i i 7 to those Hearing Boards where diesel reliaDility is an 8 issue. You know, you all are going to go through the i 9 process, the formal process, by whatever means it is. 10 I just believe the only way to do it is every-11 thing goes into the PDR. So, whatever we -- whatever 12 information we get will be in that context and promptly 13 sent out. Similarly, that means any information we get 14 will -- to answer Harold Tucker's question -- be provided 15 utilities also, regardless of the source they come from. 19 Are there any other representatives of any , t 17 other group? I know there is a representative from 18 Suf folk County here. Any other representative of any otheq 19 groups that would like to make any comment? (No reply.) . 20 Okay. I want to thank all of you for coming i 21 today. I appreciate the meeting. And I think the staff , 22 finds it very helpful, and we look forward to seeing where i l 3 we go. 24 (Whereupon, the meeting is adjourned at 6:18 p. ., 25 this same day.) l i
'~
~1 t r- .
107 1- CERTIFICATE OF PROCEEDING 2 This is to certify that the attached proceeding before 3 the NRC Staf f In the matter of: Meeting on TDI Diesel 4-Generators t 5 Date of Proceeding: January 26, 1984 , l 6 Place of Proceeding: Phillips Building, Be thesda , Maryland 7 , was held as herein appears , and that this is the original I' transcript for the file of the Commission. 10 f 11 12 MYRTLE H. TRAYLOR , Of ficial Reporter - Typed 13 14 enTls > Y.
~
AA &j 15 Of fidia . Reporter - Si~gne 16 17 18 19 M
)
I 21 22 23 24
~
2 f _r- - - 9 7
0- .6 1
,8v u%,[%, UNITED STATES
! g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{.., j wAsmucToN. o.c.2osss 4
.***.....*# February 13,1934 Docket Nos: 50-312 50-416 MEMORANDUM FUR: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gilinsky Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine Comissioner Bernthal FROM: Darrell G. Fisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
STAFF INSPECTION REPORTS OF TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC. ' FOR INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED FROM 3/79 TO 7/83, ' BOAPD NOTIFICAT!0N 84 021 In accordance with the procedures for Board Notifications, the following infonnation is being provided directly to the Comission. The appropriate boards and parties are being informed by a copy of this memoranoum. This information is relevant to all facilities that have diesel generators manufactured by TDI, including Rancho Seco, which is before the Comission, and Grand Gulf (an uncontested case), which is scheduled to come before the Comission for full power authorization in the near future. The encloser inspection reports detail inspection findings of the TDI facility in Oakland, California, from March 1979 through October 1983. One of the reports, IE, Inspection Report No. 99900334/83-01, dated 0:tcter 3,1983, was previously provided to the boards and parties as an enclosure to Board Notification 83-160. The staff will review this information as part of its overall assessment of the reliability of TDI diesel engines. e/ a' e E hh o, Division of censing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
~~ ' %
" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
Enclosure : As stated x f i
, - 4 ys
a , : m w l cc: SE Y (2) OPE OGC
- EDO ASLB FOR: .
Shoreham 50-322 (Brenner, Ferguson, Morris, Laurenson, Kline, Shon) Perry 50-440/441 (Bloch, Bright, Kline) Comanche Peak 50-445/446 (Bloch, Jordan, McCollom) Midland 50-329/330 (Bechhoefer, Cowan, Harbcur) Catawea 50-413/414 (Kelley, Purdom, Foster) ASLAB FOR: 1 Shorenam 50-322 (Pesenthal, Edles, Wilber) P.ancho Seco 50-312 (Rosenchal, Buck, Kohl) [ PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING l e e ( l e
'C
DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR BOARD NOTIFICATION ASLB -Catawba Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-413/414 Dr. Feter F. Riehm ASLB -Comanche Peak Units' 182, Docket Nos. 50-445/446 Mr. Jesse L. Riley ASLB -Midland Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-329/330 - Ken Robinson, Esq. ASLB -Perry Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-440/441 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq. ALAB/ASLB -Rancho Seco Nuc Gen Station, Docket No. 50-312 Cherif Sedkey Esq. ALAB/ASLB -Shoreham Unit 1, Docket No. 50-322 Ralph Shapiro. Esq. Mr. Frederick J. Shon Jay 511 berg, Esq. Martin B. Ashare, Esq. Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith Ms. Mary Sinclair Edward M. Barrett, Esq. Robert Guild, Esq. Mr. Lanny Alan Sinkin Thomas A. Baxter, Esq. Dr. Jerry Harbour Mr. Jeff Smith Charles Bechhoefer, Esq. Mr. Bruce L. Harst.e Ms. Barbara Stamiris Ms. Lynne Bernabei Samuel A. Haubold, Esq. s Mr. Robert G. Taylor Howard L. Blau, Esq. Mr. Wayne Hearn Howard A. Wilber, Esq. Peter B. Bloch, Esq. Ms. Susan Hiatt Mr. Donald R. Willard Ms. Nora Bredes Dr. Walter H. Jordan Frederick C. Williams, Esq. Lawrence Brenner, Esq. David S. Kaplan Esq. Richard ,P. Wilson, Esq. Mr. Glenn 0. Bright Mr. James R. Ka'tes Herbert H. Brown, Esq. Frank J. Kelley, Esq. James E. Brunner Esq. James L. Kelley, Esq. Dr. John H. Buck Dr. Jerry R. Kline MHB Technical Associates Mr. Ronald C. Callen Christine N. Kohl, Esq. Palmetto Alliance Mark S. Calvert, Esq. Stepheri B. Latham, Esq. John G. Cardinal, Esq. James A. Laurenson, Esq. Gerald Charnoff Esq. Dr. J. Venn Leeds. Jr. Atomic Safety and Licensing Myron M. Cherry, p.c. Mr. Howard A. Levin Board Panel John Clewett, Esq. Steven Lewis, Esq. Atomic Safety and Licensing Hon. Peter Cohalan Terry J. Lodge, Esq. Appeal Panel Dr. Richard F. Cole Karen E. Long, Esq. Docketing & Service Section Mr. John T. Collins Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Document Management Bran .h Barton 2. Cowan. Esq. Mr. Wendell H. Marshall Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Mr. Brian McCaffrey Mr. T. J. Creswell Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom Gerald C. Crotty. Esq. J. Michael McGarry III.Esq. ACRS Members James B. Dougherty, Esq. Janine Migden. Esq. Dr. Robert C. Axtmann Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Marshall E. Miller, Esq. Mr. Myer Bender Anthony F. Earley, Jr. Esq. Michael Miller, Esq. Dr. Max W. Carbon Gary J. Edles Esq. Dr. Peter A. Morris Mr. Jesse C. Ebersole Mrs. Juanita Ellis Chris Nolin Mr. Harold Etherington Christopher Ellison, Esq. Fabian G. Palomino Dr. William Kerr Peter S. Everett, Esq. Spence W. Perry, Esq. Dr. Ha old W. Lewis Donald T. Ezzone Esq. William L. Porter Esq. Dr. J. Carson Mark Mr. Jonathan D. Feinberg William C. Potter, Jr. .Esq. Mr. William M. Mathis Dr. George A. Ferguson David J. Preister, Esq. Dr. Dade W. Moeller Dr. Richard F. Foster Dr. Paul W. Purdom Dr. David Okrent ' Leon friedman, Esq. Mr. Paul Rau Dr. Milton S. Plesset . Eleanor L. Frucci, Esq. James S. Reed, Esq. Mr. Jeremiah J. Ray Steve J. Gadler, P.E. Harold F. Reis. Esq. Dr. Paul C. Shemon Mr. R. J. Gary W. Taylor Reveley III.Esq. Dr. Chester P. Siess . Stewart M. Glass, Esq. Nicholas S. Reynolds. Esq. Mr. David A. Ward n-..g ---
BN 84-021 Branch Service List SHOREHAM Mr. M. S. Pollock Resident Ins,'ector Energy Resear ch Group, Inc. Mr. James Rivello Ezra I. Bialit Dr. M. Stanle,r Livingstone PERRY Mr. Murray R. Edei.can Donald H. Hauser, Esq. Resident Inspector Regional Administrator, Region III C0;1ANCHE PEAK Spencer C. Relyea, Esq. Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Mr. H. R. Rock Mr. A. T. Parker MIDLAND Mr. J. W. Cook
- Stewart u. Freeman Ms. Julie "crrison Mr. R. B. norsum Mr. Den van Farrowe ,
Resident Inspector Mr. Paul A. Perry Mr. Walt Apley Regional Administrator, Region III Mr. Ron Callen Geotechnical Engineers Billie Pirner Garde. Commander, Naval Survace Weapons Ctr. Mr. L. J. Auoe Mr. heti Genring Mr. I. Charak i Clyde We-efck Mr. Patrick Bassett f . t f
r CATAWBA Mr. H. B. Tucker North Carolina MPA-1 i Mr. F. J. Twogood i Mr. J. C. Plunkett, Jr. Mr. Pierce K. Skinner North Carolina Electric Membership Corp. j Saluda River Electric Cooperative , Inc. Mr. Peter K. VanDoorn Regional Administrator, Region II Spence Perry, Esq. RANCHO SECO Sacranento County, Board of Supervisors Regional Administrator, Region V EPA Region IX, Reg. Rad. Representative Mr. Robert B. Borsum Halen Hubbard Ms. Eleanor Schwartz Resident Inspector Joseph 0. Ward 1 4
- , , _- - , - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - , - wv-, , , , - ,,- n -, - - --,
u 5
' op l 4
4
- 6. .-
, Dockst No. 99900334/79-01. g .,
De Laval Turbine Incorporated Engine and Compressor Division
- Subsidiary of Transamerica Corporation Attn: Mr. D. H. Martini Vice Pnesident and General Manager 550 85th Avenue
( Oakland, Califumia 94621 Gentlemen: - This refers to the QA Program inspection conducted by Mr. W. E. Fostar of this office on March 5-9, 1979, of your facility at Oakland, California associated with the manufacture of diesel generators and to the discussions of our findings with you and members of*your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. - This inspection was made to confinn that, in the areas inspec*ad, your QA Program is being effectively implements:d. The inspection effort is not designed to assure that unique quality requirements impcsed by a customer are being imolementec; nor to assure that a specific onsduct, component or service provided by you to your customers, is of acceptable cuality. As you know, the ?!RC requires each of its licensees to assume full responsibility for the quality of spec.ific products, comoonents or services procured from others. You should therefore not conclude that the NRC's inspection exempts you'from inspections by an NRC licensee or his agents nor from taking effective corrective action in rescense to
,,their findings. . .
Areas examined and our findings are discussed in the enclosed report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of an examination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and i observations by the inspector. Ouring the inspection it was found that the imolementation of your CA Program failed to meet certain MRC recuirements. The s,ecific findings ano i references to the pertinent requirements are identified in the enclosures i to this letter. Please provide us within thirty (30) days of your receipt of this recort I a written statement containing, (1) a description of steps that have ' been o'r will be taken to correct these items, (2) a description of steos that have been or will be taken to prevent recurrence, and (3) the cate ;
.7 . .. - . . '.
. J. " . /
~n
.+,,:......nv..$.Su......3..,,,.-.Q.,.g...._......;,,Ot;n;':tM........
uw. t ......4.............
........q.c.2......
.n ....
. ....................... .. . r a...
.g.C.h
I l l l De Laval Turbine Incorporated .In accordance with Section 2.790 of the Comission's " Rules of Practice," Part 2. Title 10. Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter with enclosure and.your reply, together with the enclosed inspection , report will be placed in the Comission's Public Document Room. If this
. report ccntains any information that you believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within thirty (30) days 0 to this office to withheld such information frem ;:ublic disclosure. Any such application must include a full statenent of the reasons on the basis ,
of which it is claimed that the infomation is proprietary, and should be ' prepared so that croprietary infomation identified in the application is contained in a separate part of the document. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Pcom. Should you have any questions cor.cer.ing this inspection, we will be
- pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, tPa! 5 ped by: C. ). Hs'e . Uldis Petacevs. *Pief
\ Vendor Inspect.cn 3raren
Enclosures:
- 1. Nctice of Deviatien
, 2. Inspection Report, tio. 99900:34/79-01 Scc: 0 AC/'CI(Reinmuth)
IE FILES
, NRR:0PM:0AB REG. I, II, III & V POR H0S CENTRAL FILES WEV C ER, RIV i
l
- o
l
. , I
~
l De Laval Turbine Incorporated Engine and Ccmpressor Division Docket No. 99900334/79-01
. NOTICE OF DEVIATION Based on the results of an NRC inspection concucted on March 5-9, 1979, it appeared that certain of your activities were not conducted in full accordance with NRC requirements as indicated below:
A. Criterion II of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, states in part, "The applicant shall identify the structures, systems, and components to be covered by the quality assurance program and the major organizations partici-pating in the program, together with the designated functions of these organizations." Paragraph 2.7.2 ef the Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 11, dated July 6,1978 states, "Each Ce Laval department identified as having
- responsibilities in this manual establishes and maintains its own procedures and procedures manuals."
Organization charts in the manual are identified as: " Engineering Decartment . . . ," " Manufacturing Department . . . . " " Material Control Cepartment . . ., " and " Quality Control Department." Also, each of the foregoing departments is identified in the m,anual as having . responsibilities. Contrary to the above, procedures and procedures manuals had not been established for the Manufacturing and Ma'terial Control Cecart.ments. S. Criterion XII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 states, " Measures shall be estabiished to assure that tools, gages, instruments, and other
- measuring devices used in activities affecting cuality are crocerly controlled, calibrated, and adjusted at specifiec periods to maintain accuracy within necessary limits."
Paragraphs 4.11.7, 4.16.4 and 4.53.3 of the Quality Control Manual No IP-100, Revision 3, dated January 30, 1978 state, " Record Cata", for Outside Micrometers, Thread Micrometers and Pressure Gages, respectively. This referred to recording actual reacings of measuring , and test equipment uncargoing periccic recalibration. Contrary to the above, data (actual readings) had not teen recorced for:
- 1. Outside Micrometers, Serial Numbers (S/N) DTE-001-3.anc OTI-014-3, i last recalibrated in January,1979 and February,1979, respectively.
- n 0 r I , 0 ,. , m G j , m . _. -
g i e_-. - , - - - * -e ,~ r.- . ,, ,., -w., ,- - - - - - - - -r - . - - - - - - -g - . ,, -,--- r r~
- 2. Pitch Micrometer, S/N DTE-002J and Thread Micrometer, S/N OTE-CO2-AC, both were last recalibrated in January,1979.
4
- 3. Pressure Gage, S/N DEC-007-AAM, last recalibrated in July,1978.
C. Criterion VII of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR 50, states in part, " Measures shall be established to assure that purchased material, equipment, , and services . . . conform to the procurement documents. These ! measures shall include provisions, as at;repriate, for source evalua-tien and selection, objective evidence of quality furnished by the contracter or subcontractor, inspection at the con:rac cr or subcon-trac Or source, and examination of Oroducts u en delivery. The effectiveness of the control of ouality by contractors and subcun-tract 0rs shall be assessed . . . at intervals : nsistent wi 3 the importance, complexity, and quantity of tne pr:cuct or services."
- 1. Paragra:n 3.1.2 of the Quality C:ntrol Manual Nc. IP-700 Revision 1, dated January 30, 1978, states in part, "The Quality Engineer assigned the responsibility will update tne Qualified Sucolers List every 3 months!'
- 2. Paragra:h 6.1.1 of the Oualified Su : liers Lis: Proceduras ,
dated February 3,1976 states, "The OSL Cualifiec Su:cliers List will be issued at the beginning of ea'ch mon n."
- 3. Faragra:n 5.2.4 of :ne uality :n:rti Manuai Mc . ;;'. , "evi s;:n ' ,
dated January 30, 1978 states, "A monthly summary of the cuality rating of venders is forwarded to Quality Control and :urenasing anc is a:ded :: :ne matrix :# data used :: estatl'sn : e vencer quality rating." 1 00ntrary :s the above:
- 1. The Qualified Suppliers List (QSL) had not been u: dated every three (3) renths nor monthly. The most current CSL exhibited a date of August 24, 1978.
- 2. A monthly summary of tne quality rating of vencers nad not teen f:ruar:e: :: Ouality Centrol anc Sur:nasing.
- . Criteri:n tV: :# ::en:ix 3 :: 10 FR 50, states 'a ;a- , *easa es shall be established to assure that Conditions adverse to cuality . ..
are pr0:: ly icentifie: ard Orrected. The iceati'1:a:i:n # tre significant c:ncition adversa t0 cuality, tne cause of ne ::nditt:n, and the ccere: ive acticn taken shall be d:cumented anc *e:cetec :: a::rece' ate levels of management."
- o Paragraph 6.4.5 of the Quality Control Manual No. 0C1, Revision 2 dated January 30, 1978 states, "When the Corrective Action Request has been completed; then all problem areas identified, corrective actions required, and problem resolutions shall be reported by the '
Manager of Quality Control to the Division General Manager on a. quarterly basis." Contrary to the above, completed Corrective Action Request activity had not been reported to the Division General Manager on a quarterly basis; i.e., there was no indication this had ever been accomplished. E. Criterion XVII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, states in part, " Consistent with applicable regulatory requirements, the acclicant : hall establish requirements concerning record retantion, sucn as duraticn, location, and assigned responsibility." Paragraph 16.7.1 of the Quality Assurance Manual, Revisior,11, dated July 6,1978 statas, " Records will be securely stored at Ce Laval ano shall be protected against fire, damage or loss." Contrary to the above, records in the Document Control Center had not been protected against fire 1nasmuch as the/ occu:y 10/5 drawer and 1/4 drawer file cabinets. The latter (1/4 drawer files) is tne only one fira-rated (3500F for one hour). " F. Criterion XVIII of Ascendix B to 10 CFR 50, states in part, "A comprehensive system of planned and periodic audits shall be carried out to verify comoliance with all ascects of the quality assurance program and to determine tne effectiveness of :ne program." Paragraph 17.1.1 of the Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 11, dated July 5,1975, states in part, "Aucits of the Civisions quality assurance programs, processess and procedures snall be parformed semi-annually by Quality Control Engineering to determine their effectiveness." Contrary to the above, audits had not been performed semi-annually for the Foundry, Manufacturing, and Support activities. Records indicated audits had been performed as follows : Foundry, March 14, 1977; Manufacturing, June 2t, 1977 anc May 31, 1978; anc Sucpert, August 15, 1977. G. Criterion III of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, states in part, " Design changes, including field changes, shall be subject to design control measures commensurate with nose applied to tne original design anc be accreved by the organization that performec tne original design unless the applicent designates another res:ensible organization." 9
I $ e 4 4
- 1. Paragraphs II.3. and .4. of Division Standard Practice (DSP) ^ -
No. 4.101, dated September 15, 1969, require that Industrial Engineering review all design changes or new designs, approve ; or disapprove and sign the Engineering Change Notice before drawings are released to the shop.
-h
- 2. OSP No. 4.201, dated April 15, 1970:
i (a) Paragrach A.d. recuires that an Engineering Change L:g be
- maintaired, ins. uctions for completion are in the CSP and on the f:r-n.
(b) Paragrach A.S. requires that all accepted requests te classifiec major or minor. (c) Paragrach S.I. requires the originator of a change to obtain Re:uest for Crawing and Parts List Change, Fem Nc. E-219A and complete Jection 1. Contrary to the above:
- 1. Industrial Engineering had not reviewed, a;oreved er disa:ct:ved and signed Engineering Change 'lotice, Control No. 8-g2 tefere the drawing had been released to the shod.
- Z. (al The Engineering Change ;,,0g nac rot :een .ain:atne: as evidenced byd lack of required entries in the " Change Class" i and "R Code columns and changing the " Action Ta<en" neacing te *Cas- Ceb.'
(b) Accepted requests Control Nos. 8-42 and 8-217 had not i been classified as major or minor, b-(c) The originator had not initiated Request fer Draw 1ng and Parts List Change, Form No. E-219A, for enanges identified on memoranda as Controi Nos. 8-19 and 8-60. 4 C (
- - ' ~-
I I i
)
i U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION
~
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900334/79-01 Program No. 51400 Company: De Laval Turbine Incoroorated Engine and Compressor Division 550 85th Avenue Oakland, California 94621 Inspection Conducted: March 5-9, 1979 Inspectod . - I# h$ mlaY W. E. Foster, contractor Inspector, vencor
~3l/il7Y-Cate ll\V Inspection Branch .
Approved by: D lbM.$1f s0 m<.uf Hunnicutt, Cnief, Components Section II,
$9l7 ?'
' Cate Vendor Inspection Branch Summary
- Insoection on March 5-9, 1979 (99900334/79-011.
Areas Inscectad: Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Accendix B criteria, and applicaole coces anc standards, including organization, quality assurance program, and change control. The initial management meeting was also conducted. The insoection involved thirty-five (35) inscector-hours on site. Results: In the three (3) areas inspected, the following deviations and unresolved items were identified. Deviations : Quality Assurance Program - Practices were not consistent with
. 10 CFR 50, Aapendix B and QA/QC Manual Cennitments (Enclosure, Items A. ,
B., C., D., E., and F.). Change C:ntr:1 - Practices were not consistent ai:n 'O CFR 50, Appencix 3, and Division Standard Practices (Enclosure, Item G.). Unresolved Items: Organi:ation (Cetails Section =aragrapn C.3.b.); Ouality Assurance Program (Details Section, paragraon D.3.b.).
,w t
/ 4#A Y
( Details Section A. Persons contacted N. J. Arhontes - Liaisen Engineer R. E. Boyer, Manager - Product Engineering
*0. R. Cady, Manager - Quality Engineering (NDE)
*E. G. Deane, Manager - Quality Control C. McFaddin, Technician - Document Control . .
A. R. Fleischer, Manager oroject Engineering l C. He mann, Pur:nasing Agent
*0. H. Martini, Vice Presidant and Gectral Manager L. L. Mills, Director - Purchases A. B. Norman, Manager - Manufacturing Engineering C. Ostrancer, Inspector
*P. J. Pabers, Manager - General Sales "W. Rhoades, Manager - Engineering
*L. E. Silvey, Manager - Materials
*E. H. Wilson, Manager - Manufacturing
' Attended exit interview.
- 3. M '.ial Manage en Meetinc
- In n' f al mar.1;emen: eeting aas ::n:;,.::a: :: a:::,.a f n: :ne se.::r s management with the NRC responsibility to protect the nealth and y safety of the public and to inform them of certain res onsibilities im:csed On vend:n by ne " Energy De0 gani:stderca : Of 1974 ':u:'d:
aa 33 433,. Incse in attencance were. D. R. Cady, Manager - Quality Engineering N E; b E. G. Deane, wanager - Ouality Cen:r:1 E. Ocbrec, Managar - Foundry M. Klapperich, Manager - Industrial Relations ; D. H. Martini, Vice President and General Manager C. S. Ma: news, assistant General Manager l R. J. Pabers, Manager - General Sales W. Rhcades, Manager - Enginee ing L. E. Silvey, Manager - Materials E. O. Staut. Centroller G. E. Trassell, Manager - Cus:cmer Service E. W. Wilsen, vanager - Manufa::uring
- 1. Objectives The Objec:ives of :ne 'nitial Managemen: Yeeting were ?::
0 L L
- 9
- a. Meet with the vendor's management personnel and establish channels of communication.
- b. Acquaint them with their resconsibilities under Section 206 of, Public Law 93-438.
- c. Learn how the company operates and its policies and prac-tices concerning quality assurance and quality control.
- d. Obtain information related to the company's contribution to the nuclear industry.
- 2. Method of Accomolishment The preceding cojectives were ac:cmplished by:
- a. Explaining the inspection base and how the inspections are conducted.
- b. Describing how inspection results are documented anc how proprietary items are handled, including the vendor's opportunity to review the report for the curpose of identifying items considered to be proorietary.
- c. Cescribing the vendor's resocnsibility in resconding to identified enforcement items relating to:
(1) Correction cf the identified deviation. (2) Action to be implementea to prevent recurrence. (3) The dates ahen corrective actions ' r both (1) and (2) above will be implemented or completed. Explaining that all recorts and communications are placed c. in the Public Document Room (DDR).
- e. Explaining the publication and functicn of the "Wh'ite Book.
- f. Requesting the company's management to explain its policies and cractices concerning qualdty assurance.
- g. Listening to management's connents during this session and plant tour.
l
a . 4
- 3. Findings Management indicated that De Laval is the largest su:Olier of ciesel generators cestined for use in comestic nuclear generating stations . They estimate that 45 to 50 percent of their pro-ducticn is dedicated to this market.
The company currently has eight (8) active centracts with Ebase: Services, Inc., Texas Utilities Generating Ccepany Stone anc We ster, Duke Power Company and others. Among the major sucoliers are: E.P. Portec, In:cr:cratec, !"O Pum: Division, RTE- elta Corporation, Ingersoll-Rand Company, American Air Filter and Basler Electric Cem:any. C. Organization
- 1. Objectives The objectives of this area of the ins:ection were to veri #y that:
- a. Authcrity and duties of :ersens and organizations aeaferming activities affecting safety-relatec functicns nac been clearly established and celineated in " writing.
- c. Performers of the quality assurance functions nac sufficient autnority and freecem to:
l *. ', ::entify qua ity r::~. ems. (2) Initiate, rec:mm.end or :revide solutions, anc i (3) Verify implementation of solutions.
- c. The individuals res:cnsible for assuring ef'ective exe:utien of any :cetien of 1e cuality assurance r: gram nac inde:encence from incse directly resconsible for :erforming the s:ecific activity.
- 2. vetneds ed ac :Om:lisbeeat The receding objectives were ac:Om:lishe: by:
- a. Review of the following cust:mer orders and atterda9-c0cuments :: verify that organi:atien ae:uirements a: :ee':
invokec: s E I
. . - . ~ -
f (1) Ebasco Services Incorporated No. NY-435079, dated August 1, 1974 (2) Texas Utilities Generating Company No. CP-0034: dated April 3, 1976. (3) Stone and Webster No. RBS-244.700-041, dated January 2.- 1975.
- b. Review of the following documents to verify that authority and duties of persons and organizations performing activities i affecting safety-related functions had been clearly established and delineated in writing:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Section 1, dated June 12, 1975 and January 30, 1978, and Section 2, dated March 1, 1974. Novemter 30, 1976 and January 30, 1978. (2) Manufa:turing Engineering Departmental Precedures Manual, dated April 12, 1970 Sections I and II. (3) Inventory Control Cesartment Manual, Undated. (4) Engineering Ccerating Procedure No'. ECP-1, dated March 17, 1973. (5) Engineering Cesartment Organization Chart, da:ed C;t::er 20,1977 anc Jc: Des:ri:tions f:r: Design Engineer, Controls Engineer, Manager - Controls Engineer, Manager - Design and Development and Senior Cesign Engineer. , (6) Purchasing Procedure Manual, dated February 7,1978.
, (7) Shipoing enc Receiving Manual, dated July 27, 1976.
(8) Various Job Descriptions of various dates located in the personnel office. (9) Quality Control Manual No. 0C1, Secticns 2, 3, and 4, all are dated Maren 1,1974 and January 30, 1978.
- c. Review of the following documents to verify tnat :erformers of the quality assurance functions had sufficient authority and freedom to: (1) identify cuality problemst (2) initiate, reccenend or provide solutions; and (3) verify imolementation p of solutions:
. o 6-i (1) Quality Assurance Manual Section 1, dated June 12,
- 1975 and January 30, 1978; Section 14. dated March 1, 1974 and Jcnuary 30,1978; Section 15, dated March 1, 1974 and January 30, 1978.
(2) Quality Control Manual No. QC1, Section 6, dated varen 1, 1974 and November 5,1975; No. IP-200, Section 4, dated { May 10, 1972; and No. IP-400, Section 4, dated May 10, 1974.
- d. :eview of the following documents :: verify that incividaals responsible for execution of any portion of the auality assurance pregram had independence frcm those directly responsible for performing tne specific activity:
(1) Ouality Assurance Manual, Section 1, dated June 12, 1975 and January 30, 1978. (2) Quality Control . Manual No. CC1, Section 2 dated March 1,1974 and January 30, 1978.
- 3. Findint:s
- a. Ceviation rom Ceevnit: ent Nene.
- b. Unreselved Item The inspector was unacle to de:emine :na au:nority anc duties of manufacturing and material c:ntrol perso1nel cerf:r-.ing activities affecting safety-relatec functices {
nac been clearly establisnec and celineated in neiting because the Job Descriptions maintained in the personnel office are of the Cor orate rather than the Civision structure. As such, there are instances *nere titles. authority and duties did not directly correlate. In orcer for the inspector Oc make -he cate-minatien :ne c:ntracter needs te exercise scme effcrts :: ensure ct
- escriptiens accurately reflect tities, autacr :y anc duties o' emeleyees assigned :: the Engine are ::::resse-Oivision.
C. 00"T"en
- s
The identified customer orders invoked the requirement for organization. D. 04ality Assurance program
- 1. Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
- a. The program hac been documented by written policies, pro-cedures, or instructions and performance was in accordance-with them,
- b. Identification of hardware covered by the program, major organizations carticipating in the program together with their designated functions nac been estaclished.
- c. Controls had been established over activities affecting quality to an extent censistent with importance to safety.
- d. The program provided for:
(1) Saecial control, processes, test eiuipment, tools and skills to attain required cuality anc inspection anc tes ts , (2) Indoctrination and training of cersennel performing activities affecting quality. i e. Management of other organi:ations :artici:ating in the quality assurance program regularly reviewed the status and adequacy of that part of the quality assurance program they were executing.
- 2. Methods of Acc0molishment The preceding objectives were acccmplished ty:
- a. Review of the following customer orders and attendant documents to verify nat quality assurance program require-ments had been invoked:
(1) Ebasco Services Incorporated No. NY-435079, cated August 1, 1974
1 8.- 3 (2) Texas Utilities Generating Company No. CP-0034, dated April 8,1976.
)
(3) Stone and Webster No. RSS-244.700-041, dated January 2. - 1975.
- b. Review of the following documents to verify the program had 0 been documented by written policies, procedures, or instructions :
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 11, dated July 5, 1978. (2) Quality Control Vanual No. 0C1, Revision 2, No. :D-100. Revision 3, No. IP-200, Revisien 3, No. :D- 300, Revision 3, No. !P 400, Revisien 2, No. !?-700, Revision 1, all are dated January 30, 1978. (3) Qu'alified Suppliers List Procedu,re, dated February 3, 1976. (4) Qualified Suco11ers Lists - A1;hatetical inc Nurerical, both datec August 24, 1978. li; :.!!ity ::r. r:1 Or:ca:ure 'l0. 'CF-;.',. Rav'si:r. *, . dated May 23, 1973. ,, (6) w anu'acturing Ce:artment's :-f entati:n ': -::-eat':a Training Program - Fcuncry - Assemcly - Macr.ine inc:.
- c. Review of hardware covered by the :r: gram to verify b identification had teen estatiisnec.
- d. Revimi of Engineering, Manufacturing, Material Control and Quality Control organization enarts to verify major organica icns par-ici;ating in the program nac teen esta:!'sree.
- e. Observation of machining, assembling, and tasting in-:r: cess activities to verify accomolisnment in accorcance w1:n decurented prececures or instructions.
- 3. Nndines
- 4. Ceviations Frem Cennitment (1) See Enclosure, Item A.
k N
e . i (2) See Enclosure. Item B. (3) See Enclosure, Item C. (4) See Enclosure, Item D. (5) See Enclosure Item E. (6) See Enclosure, Item F.
- b. Unresolved Item Documeats (paragraph 4.2.2 of the OA Manual and parag ach 5.3.2 of the CC Manual) co not agree regarding the perchasing {
representative responsible for review of the procuren.ent i package prior to its release to the vendor. The latter indicates it is the purchasing Manager while the former indicates it is the Responsible Buyer. The company needs to align these documents.
- c. Ccmrent The identified customer orders invoked the recuirement for cuality assurance program.
E. Chance Control
- 1. Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
- a. Design changes, including field changes, had been accroved oy the organization that originated the design, or a desig-natec responsible organization.
- b. Measures had been established to control deviations from cuality standards which had been speci#ied and made a part 4 of design documents.
- c. Changes to procurement documents had been subjectec to tne same degree of control utilized in the origination.
L d. Measures had been established to control enanges :o docu-ments, such as instructions, crocedures, and drawings, which prescribe all activitiec affecting cuality anc assured that changes are:
~.
O O i (1) Reviewed for adequacy and approved for release by authorized personnel, (2) Distributed to and used at the location wnere the prescribed activity is performed.
*- (3) - Reviewed and approved by the organizations that per-formed the criginal review and accroval, or a designated resconsible organization.
- e. Measures had been established to control materials, parts, or comconents which did not conform to requirements,
- f. Established measure,s had been implemented.
- 2. Methocs of Accomolishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
- a. Review of tne follcwing customer orders anc attencan:
documents to ' verify that requirements for scf tware and hardware changes had ceen invoked: (1) Ebasco Services Incorocrated No. Nh-435079, dated Augus '. *.974
~
(2) Texas 'Jtilities Generating Cc=cany No. C?-0034, dated Acril 5,1975. 4 (3) Stone and Webster No. RSS-244.700-041, dated January 2, . 1975. b
- b. Review of the following documents to verify measures had been established to control changes to hardware and softwa e:
~(1) Quality Assurance Manual - Section 2, paragraon 3.0, dated January 30, 1978; Section 4, paragraon 4. 3, dated March *.,1974; Secticn 6, paragraon 6.5, catec May 31, 1978; Section 14, dated Maren 1, 1974 are January 30, 1975.
(2) Ouality C:ntr:1 Manual No. CC1, Section 5, catec March 1,1974 and Novemoer 5,1975; Nc. IP-2CC, Secticn 2, dated May 10, 1971; and No. ID-aCC, Sec-icn 4, :atec May 10, 1974
(3) Division Standard Practices - No. 4.101, dated September 15,1969; No. 4.201, dated April 15, 1970; and No. 4.202, dated January 13, 1971. (4) Review of Engineering Change Log and file of Requests for Orawing and parts List Change for 1978, to verify implementation of Division Standard Practices identified in b.(3) above.
- 3. Findincs
- a. Ceviations Frem Ccmmicment See Enclosure, Item G.
- b. Unresolved Items None.
- c. Ccmment .
The identified customer orders invokec the requirements for design controi, precurement document control, cccument control, and non-conforming material .
- nsufficient time precluced completien of this area of the inspection.
F. Exit !nterview '
- 1. The inspector met with management representatiyes denoted in
- aragrach A. at the ccnclusien of the ins:ecti:n :n Mar:n 9, 1977.
- 2. The following subjects were discussed:
- a. Areas inspected.
- b. Deviations identified.
- c. Unresolved items identified.
- d. Contractor response to the re; ort.
The centracter was recuested t: structure his res:ense uncer headings of corrective action, Oreventive measures, and dates for eacn deviation. I i
B F t 1
- 3. Management representatives conrnents related generally to clarification of, and response to, the findings.
f ( ( 1 1 I h C
~
.S 2 Jia in Docket No. 99900334/80-01 1
Transamerica Delaval Incorporated l Engine and Compresscr Division , l 4 Attn: Mr. D. H. Martini' Vice President and General Manager . 550 85th Avenue 1 Cakland, California 94621 - Gentlemen: This refers to the reactive and QA Program inspection conducted by Mr. W. E. roster of this office on Gctober 12.-17, 1980, of your facility at Oakland, California, associated with the manufacture of diesel ger.crators and to the discussions of our findinct with you and members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection. This inspection was made to confinn that, in the amas inspected, your program ; is effective in msponding to idencified problems and your QA Program is ' effectively implemented. The inspection effort is not designed to assure that unique quality requirenents imposed by a customer are being imolemented; . nor to assure that a specific procuct, c:roonent or senice provided by ycu to your customers, is of acceptable quality. As you know, the NPC requires eacn of its licensees to assume full responsibility for the quality of specific products, cannonents or senicas precund from others. You should therefore not conclude that the NRC's inspatc1.$n exergts you from inspections by an riac licensee or his agents nor fran taking effective corrective action in msponse to their findings. Areas examined and our findings art 1scusred in tM cnclosed moort. Within these areas, the inspection consista.t of an examination of procedures and rupresentative records, intaniews t tth personnel, and obsenations by the inspector. .
-During the inspection it was found that the effectiveness of your response to l
identified problems and your CA Program implementation failed to meet certain l NRC requirements. The specific findtras and references to the pertinent require-monts are identified in the enclosures to this letter. The Notice of Violation is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201. You are recuired to submit to this office within twenty-five days of your receipt of this report, a written statement containing, (1) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to correct these iter:.s, (2) a descrio-tion of steps that have been or will be taken to prevent recurnnce, and (3) the dates your corrective actions and preventive measures were or will be completed. l m.a p . .RI.Y/WP'W
. . M . ...... d .. .
upotapovs . 1 @<etter,s
?. .. . .
l t ,, . ,,g w er o s te rd. . . . . .Isarnes ws
. r .
Transarr.eMea Delaval Incorporated 2 You are also requested to submit a similar written statement for each item which appears in the enclosed flotice cf Deviation. ; In accordance with Section 2.790 of the Comission's " Rules of Practice " Part 2. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a ccpy of this letter with enclosure and your reply, together with the enclosed inspection riport will be placed in the Comission's Public Occument Rcom. If this report contains any infonnation that you believe to be proprietary, it is neesssary that you make a written application within thirty (30) days to this office to withhold such
- infonnation fran public disclesure. Any such application mst include a full statement of :ne reasons on the Jasis of whien it is clatted that the inferea-tion is croprietary, and should be prepared so that propHetary infor ation identified in the application is contained in a separate part of the doctrent.
If we ce not hear from you in this regard within the specified pericd, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room. Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with yQu. Sincerely, j asp
~
U y, p. t APG Uldis Potapevs, Chief Vender Inspecticn Branch
Enclosures:
- 1. Motice of Violation
- 2. .Netice cf Ceviatien
- 3. Inspection Repcrt .No. 9950G334/60-01
+
bec: AD/RCI (Reinmuth)
- IE FILES NRR:0PM:0AB i RIG. I, II III & V PCR HQS CENTRAL FILES WEVETTER, RIV ASME
, NBB&PVI I 1
Transamerica Delaval Incorporated Engine and Compressor Division Docket No. 99900334/80-01 NOTICE OF VIOLATION As a result of the inspection conducted on October 14-17, 1980, and in accor-dance with the Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR 66754 (October 7, 1980), the following violation was identified:- Paragraph 21.51 of 10 CFR 21 requires that: (1) "Each licensee of a facility or activity subject to the regulations in this part shall main-tain such records. . . as may be required to assure compliance with the regulations in this part;" and (2) "Each individual, corocration, partner-snic, or other entity subject to the regulations in this part snall pre-pare records in connection with the design, manufacture, fabrication. . . inspection, or testing of any facility, basic comconent supplied-for any licensed facility or to be usec in any licensed activity sufficient to assure compliance with the regulations in this part. After celivery of the facility or component and prior to the destruction of the recorcs relating to evaluations. . .or notifications to the Commission. . .such-records shall De offered to the purchaser of the facility or component."
, Bethtel Power Corporation Purchase Order No. 9645-M-018.0, Revision 13, dated January 17, 1978, invoked 10 CFR Part 21.
Contrary to the above, records had not been maintained with respect to f*acturec thermostatic control valves in Granc Gulf Unit 1 emergency diesel generators, to indicate taat:
- 1. An evaluation nad seen concuctec in acc rcance with 10 CFR Dart 21 requirements.
i 2. Actions had been taken to identify wnether the product deviation i contri:uting to tne valve fractures, i.e. i t.creper use of raisec face flanges in connecting piping, was present in equipment supplied to other customers. See Details Section I, paragrach S.4.b. This is a Severity Level IV violation (Sucolement II). - v d h i l
T-ansamerica Delaval Incorporated Engine and Ccmpressor Division ! Docket No. 39900334/80-01 NOTICE OF DEYIATION Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on October 14-17, 1980, it appears that certain of your activities were not concucted in accordance _ with NRC requirements as indicated below: Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 states: " Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomolished in accordanca with these instructions, procedures, or draw-ings. Instructions, procedures, or crawings shall include appropriate cuantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that imcortant activities have been satisfactorily accomplished." Deviations from tnese requirements are as follows: A. Section 10, dated June 30, 1979, of the Quality Control Manual, contains tne following requirements:
- 1. Paragraph 10.6.4 states, "New tools and gages will be identified with a tool and/or Gage Tryout Tag (Quality Control Form P-270). This is a temporary tag reflecting tne fact of dimer.sional acceptance of the tool and/or gage. The tempcrary tag is remove: and replacea with the calibration decal after the tool and/or gage accurately creduces or accepts a first part." -
- 2. Daragrach 10.6.5 states, "All gages and ecuicment will be identifiec cy Company name, gage or equipment name, part anc/or serial numcer, as applicable."
Contrary to the acove, tne gage usec to measure, accect/ reject the ciameter and cepth of tne link rac cowel countercore nac not oeen identified with: (1) A tool and/or Ga decal; or (3) Com:any name, gage or ui: e ge ment Tryout name. Tag; cart(2)anc/cr A calibration serial numcer, as applicaole; althougn the gage has been in use since Fecruary 1980. B. Paragraoh 7.1.1 in Section 7 of Quality Control Procecure I.P.-700 states in part, '. . . Quality Engineering will process Corrective Action Request F.orm P-260 when requirec by any of tne following conditions: . . . 7.1.1.6 Internal and external failures to meet contract requirements."
, r?
() / V +- I ~G s. '( w
-...,n ,. ---
~n. -
w-- ,-, n,- -
o 2 I
. Contrary to the above', Quality Engineering did not process a Corrective Action Request Form with respect to customer identifiec Transamerica Delaval (TO) failures to meet weld quality contract requirements in ASME Section III Class 3 diesel generator piping (See Details Section II, para-graph 8.4.a.(1)).
C. Paragraph NO-SS21(a)(2) in Section III of the ASME Code states,."The procedure (s) usec for examination of Level I, II, and III noncestructive examination personnel shall be described in the Employer's written practice wnich is requirac by SNT-TC-1A, paragraph 5 and shall ce referenced in tne Employer's Quality Program." Paragraph NO-5521(a)(6) states, "For non-destructive examination metfods not covered by SNT-TC-1A documents, cer-sonnel sna11 be cualified to comparable levels of competency cy sw:jection to comparacle examinations on the particular methoc involvec." Contrary to the acose:
- 1. The TO written practice (Section 4 of Quality Centrol Procedure I.P.
-600, " Qualification-Certification of NOE Personnel") cia not ce-scribe tne orecedure(s) usec f:r examination cf Level III noncestruc-tive examination personnel.
- 2. Personnel performing ASME Section III, Subsection NO and NF requitec visual examinations, hac not :een qualifisc by being sa jectec ::
an examination of ccmcaraDle standard to mathecs c:verec :y SNT-7C-1A c cuments.
- 0. Paracrach a NO-4301(a) in Section III of the ASME Code states. "Each Ce-t'-
f'cate sc:cer is res:ensic:e fer t..e .e cing cene :y es : ;a :ati:- a : ht sNll estaD11sn the procedure and concuct the tests requirec Oy th15 Article anc by Section IX in orcer to cualify both tne we!cing :Pocecures anc t e :eed:-ma :e Of .eice-s are .el S; cce-at: s -ne 3:: j ese
;r:ce:eres. ' 8aragra:n 50-4323 states in : art, '
. .;nly .e;:e-s a c welding operators wno are qualifisc in accordance witn NO-4320 anc Section IX snali te usec." {
.e Contrary to the a:ove: ,
- 1. Shielded metal arc welding of a six (6) inen Senecule 40 ASME Section III Chss 3 oicing assemoly (Snco Engine No. 2931, Sn::
Orcer No. 94302, Pa-t No. 02-717-02 YR, ! em F to Itea :) was observec being :erf:emec in the vertical we csiti:n (3G), ai-tnougn tne =eicer nac caen cua!iffec in accoccance witn ASPE Sect en :.' -ecuf ements f:e tre 'ist :csiti:n (*.G: :Cy f
i
. 1
= . 3
- 2. Shielded metal are welding was identified to have been oerformed on a two (2) inch ASME Section III Class 3 piping assemoly (Part No.
02-717-02 YE) by a welder who had been qualified in accorcance with ASME Section IX requirements only for pipe outside diameters
, of 2 7/8 inch (2 1/2 inch nominal pipe size) and over.
(See Details Sectien II, paragraph B.4.a.(3)). E. Paragraph 5.5.4 in Section 5 of Quality Control Procecures I.P.-500 states in part, " Rod shall be issued from the storage area to the welder. The welder will return unused rod to the storage area within fou- hours of issuance. . . ." Contrary to the above. unused rod was not being returned to :ne storage area within four hours of issuance, as evidenced by the following examoies:
- 1. On Octocer 11, 1900, rods were returned my three (3) welde-s after respective issue times of 5 nours 55 minutes, 4 hours 20 minutes and 4 hours 30 minutes.
- 2. On October 14, 1980, rods were returned by a welcer after an 8 neur issue time.
F. Paragrapn 4.2.4 in Section 4 of Quality Control Procedure I.P.-500 states,
" Verification of weld procedure and welder will be ac..mplishec by pro-viding space on the Route Sheet for entrance of the weld'orocedure number and welder identification. Records cf eacn weld including welding anc weld rod, will ce crovided by the Weld Report.
Contrary to tne accve, although soace was orovicec on :ne Route Sheet for welaer identification, verification of the use of cartain welcers could not be accomplished, in that:
- 1. 'aelcing of : tem to Item F, Snoo Engine No. 2931, Snoo Orcer Nc.
94302, Part No. 02-717-02YR, was observed being perf ormed oy a different welder than the individual identified on the Route Sheet.
- 2. Welding on Coeration 140 of the Route Sheet for ihoo Engine No.
2957, Shop Order No. 94583, was oeserved being performec ey a different welder than the indivicual icentified on the Route Sheet.
- 3. Welding records were not provided, in that Weld Reports h"; not been orecared as of the inspection for the coerations coserved.
(See Details Section II, paragrapn B.4.a.(5)). G. Paragraon 10.3.2 in Section 10 of Quality Control Procacure I.P.-500 states in part, "All in-process and comoleted components,' parts or pioing
i 4 sucassemblies found to be defective will be immediately rejected anc documented on ait Inspection Report and placed in Bonc. The Material Review Boarc will review all defective components, parts or piping sub-assem$11es . . . ." Contrary to the acove:
- 1. A cefectifeWItem F to item F, Shop Engine No. 2931, Shoo Oeder No. 94302, Part No. 02-717-02YR) was removea anc repla:ec without rejection and documentation on an Inspection Report.
- 2. Dis::sition was mace ey Quality Cent c1 suce visden of a cimens':ra ,
none:nformance in Shop Engine Nc. 2931, Shop Orcer No. 94749, cart No. 02-940-07-37, without sucmission of :ne Inspe: fon Recor :: ! the Material Review Ecare for review. H. Paragra:n 11.2 in 0F Braun & Co. Project 4940-P 5:ecification 164 03 states ir. part, ". . . Fillet welds shall be of the specifiec size witn full throat and legs of uniform si:e. . . . " Orawing 02-540-07B7, Revision 0 requires the welc of Item A to' Item 3 (Roof to Sicewall Joint) of the Shop Engine No. 2931 Tank Luce Oil Sum: Inlet Comoartment to be a single full penetration weld with 1/4 inch fillet. C:ntrary t: :Ne at:ve. One icenti*iec e'c was c:se vec .: ::ntain - area witn less tnan a 1/4 inen fillet resulting from a fit.o conoitier
.re e ne tare r:o' arc sicewai' were a'? cst usn.
(iet :etatis Se:: ten lI, Paragracn 5.4.a.(7)). I. 8aragra:h 4.3.1 in Section 4 of Quality Centrol paccecure I.8.-500 states. ( T * :: :: e-:3. :a- s a : :':' g s.:asse :es na ,;'a ;. e: n:::-:a :t ita ASME Se: ion *II, Class 3 will :s inspecie: cucin :ne pr: cess :f fabrication after eacn manufacturing operation is como ete. The item wi'1 :e examfee: fer acherence to s:e:4*1 cati:n f:e ea:- inci<':Lai ( cnaracteristic affectec ey tne oceration. If the i:em is ac:ecta:1e at tne coeration insmectec, the inspector will enter his inspection stamo 1 in the space proviced on the Production Routing Sheet." Contrary to :ne above, performance of recuirec ins:ections 'er ::m lete: Operation Nos.10 through 130 on the Produc*1on Route Sheet for tne Shoc Engine No. 293; Tan ( Luce 011 Sump Inte: Oce:artme.: ::ule no: :e I verifiee; in that neitner ins:ection ac:e:tance stamos nao :een ente e: for tne oce ations en tre 8 ocue:fon R ute Sheet, nor a: :ns:e::':- < Re::r:s seen orecarec to carote a reje::e: :encition after irs:e::f:n. (See Ostatis Se::fon ::, :aragra n 3.4.a.(8)).
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900334/B0-01 Program No. 51300 51400 1 Company: Transamerica Delaval Incorporated
- Engine and Compressor Division 550 85th Avenue Oakland, California Inspection Conducted: October 14-17-1980 Inspectors: i.-
N- ~, ~
- A ? he e
j- W. E. Foster, Contractor inspector Date Components Section II Vendor Inspection Branch
./ A~J =.~ a , m er '
I. Barnes, Cnief Qate Components Section II - Vendor Insoection Branch
/ o Approved by: # 4=~s , i. -7 /r, I. sarnes, Onief Cate Components Section II Vendor Inspection Branch Summary: . Inspection on October la-17, 1980 (9990033a/80-01) 1 Areas Inscocted: Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Apoencix B criteria, ano acclic-acie coces ano standards; including follow-uo en regional recuests; and follow-uc on a Part 21 report. The inspection involved forty-two inspector-nours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Resuits: In the tnree areas inspected, tne following violation, nine ceviations, anc two unresolved items were identified: 1 1 i
,mmf2.=mussuadisegu!!m'8)E----
1 2
\loiation: Follow-up on regional recuests pra'ctice was not consistent with paragrapn 21.51 of 10 CFR 21 (See Notice of Violation).
Deviations: Control of Measuring and Test Equipment: Practices were not consistent with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, paragraphs 10.6.4 and 10.6.5 of Section 10, dated June 30, 1979, of the Quality Control Manual (See Notice of Deviation, Item A). Follow up on Id ntified Deficiencies in Diesel Generator Piping Welds: Prac-tices were not consistent with Criterion V of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR 50; paragra;n 7.1.1 of Section 7 of Quality Control Procecure I.P.-700 (See Notice of Deviation, Item B); paragraon NO-5521(a), subparagraohs (2).anc (6) of Section III of the ASME Coce (See Notice of Deviation, Item C); paragraons NO-4321(a) and ND-a323 of Section III of the ASME Coce (See Notice of Deviation, ! tem 0); paragrapn 5.5.4 of Section 5 of Quality Control Procecure I.P.-500 (See Notice of Deviation, Item E); paragrapn 4.2.4 of Section 4 of Quaif ty Control P-o-cecure I.P.-500 (See Notice of Deviation, Item F); paragra:n 10.3.2 of Section 10 of Quality Control Procedure I.P.-500 (See Notice of Deviation, Item 3); paragraoh 11.2 of C.F. Braun and Comoany's Specification 164-03 anc crawing num:er 02-540 757, Revisio: 0 (See Notice of Deviation : tem H); anc :aragra:n 4.3.1 of Secticn 4 of Quality Control Procacure I.P.-500 (See Notice of
- Deviation, Item I).
Unresolvec Item: Part 21 Report Follow up: Inspection Form anc At.encar.t Reworu Tag cic not indicate insoection of rework (Details Section I, paragraer
- 0. a.c).
Follow co on Regional Recuests: Battery rack seismically testec sutsecuent te tre :ates 'ce .ti'iec in t. e Sef smic teccet (:ecas 3+c- :n :, :a-a;-a:r B.4.c). , f i l I
3 DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by W.E. Foster) A. Persons Contacted "R. E. Boyer, Manager, Quality Assurance "D. R. Cacy, Manager, Quality Engineering (NDE)
"B. Durie, Manager, Customer Services K. Kropf, Supervisor, Quality Control "D. H. Martini, Vice President and General Manager A. Nance, Engineer, Quality G. Spease, Senior Engineer, Quality "G. E. Trussell, Manager, Engineering "E. H. Wilson, Manager, Manufacturing
" Attended Exit Interview
- 8. Follow-uo on Recional Recuests
- 1. Backcround
- a. Mississippi Power and Light reported a diesel generator jacket water tnermostatic control valve problem to the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region II. The preolem as revealed during : urge test'ng at Grand Gulf, Unit 1 a6e icentifiec as a fracture in the valve tocy.
- b. Duke P:wer Corporation reportec a diesel generator tattery rack problem to the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region II, The battery racks at Catawoa 1 and 2 were determinec to be sef s-mically uncualifiec. The battery acks were manuf acturec cy Ne, Incorporatec, but suppliec by Transamerica Delaval Incorporatec -
Engine and Compressor Division.
- c. Mississippi Power and Lignt reported damaged generator stator coils, at Grand Gulf 1, to the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region II.
- 2. Objectives
- The objective Of tnis area of the inspection were to veri'y that adequate corrective actions and preventive measures had oeen taken, and gene ic c:nsiderations had been assessed regarcing the ca olems accresse:
in paragraph B.l. r
j il 3 4
- 3. Methods of Accomolishment Tne preceding objectives were accomplished by:
I
- a. Reviewing the following documents to verify the objectives had been satisfied:
(1) Transamerica Delaval Incorporated - Engine and Ccmpressor Division's t.etters - (a) Dated August 29, 1980; to Beentel Power Corporation. l Attenticn: Mr. A. Zaccaria; Referenra: Secntel Request en Corrective Action For Thermostatic Valves, (b) Dated August 8,1980; to Becntel Power Cor:oratien, Attention: 9r. A. Zaccaria;
Subject:
Failure of Ther estatic Cert :1 valse 30cy, (c) Dated June 30, 1980; to Duke oower Company, Attention: Mr. Tom We::, Sutject: Cataw:a riuclear Station Units 1 and 2, (d) Dated July 11, 1980; to Bechtel Power Corocration:
Subject:
Damagec Generator Stator Coils, anc (e) Datec July 10, 1980; :: Bechtel Pe*e- Cc :crati:r; Suoject: Damagec Ciesel Generator Coils. 1 (2) D:*er C:nversien Fr:cuc s, :nc:r;cra:ec le::e , :a e: Septencer 3,1980, to Transamerica Delaval, Attention: j Karen Orr,
Subject:
Duke /Catawea Battery Racx Re:1acement. ' (3) 70 er C:nve sien :c. cts, :nc: pcra ec Tax, :atec August 25, 1980, to Transamerica Delaval, Attantion: - Karen Orr,
Reference:
Batte y Racks. (4) Transamerica Delaval Inc:rporated-Engine anc ~:meresser Division's TWXs-(a) Catec August 25, 1980, to Cuxe 8ower, Atte n'en:
- J. Voglewece,
Subject:
Catawea Stancey Ciesel Generater Battery Racxs,
~
(:) Cate: August l', . '.950, :: : wea :nve s':. : :c.: 2 Attention: Don Ogden,
Reference:
Transamerica :elaval
- .0. .Dur.e Cata-ca, f
\
1 5 (c) Dated August 1980, to Power Conversion Products, Attention: Don Ogden,
Reference:
Transamerica Delaval P.O.. 0 uke Catawoa, (d) Dated July 14, 1980, to Duke Power, Attention: Joe Voglewede, Tom Webb,
Subject:
Battery Racks, and (e) Dated July 7, 1980, to Duke Power, Attention: Tom Webb, Suoject: Battery Racks-(5) Duke Power Company Memo to File: CN-1301.00,
Subject:
Battery Racks, By: J. P. Voglewece. (6) Drawings, Nos. (a) 101776, Revision G, dated July 1,1980, entitled - Jacket Water System Assemoly, (b) 02-717-01-ES, Revision A, dated Octocer 12, 1976, entitled-Pipe, Jacket Water Sy-Pass, Amot Valve to Cooler,
* (c) 02-717-01-FB, Revision B, dated May 17, 1977, entitled Pipe (Jacket Water Pump to Amot Valve),
(d) 02-717-01-EQ, Revision A, dated October 12, 1976, entitled Pice, J. W.- Amot Valve to Cooler Inlet, (a) 64-12305, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1980, entitlec, Sattery Rack for PCP for 92 cells MOP 24 and i (f) Source Ins:ection Report for P.O. No. 62551. at Nife, Inc. for. . 4 sets Battery Racks,
- b. Reviewing Bechtel's Release Form No. G-321, dated Sectember 15, 1977 for Jacxet Water and Luce Oil Heat Excnangers ano Piping to verify the ecuipment had been released for shipment.
- c. Reviewing Bechtel Powea Corporation's Purchase Orcer No. 9645-M-018.0, Revision 13, catec January 17, 1978, to verify nat 10 CFR 21 had been invoked regarding the thermostatic control valves.
- c. Reviewing Structural Dynamics Researen Corporation's Seismic Qualification Recort No.1532-1, Dated January 1 to March 30, 1979 to cetermine the results of cattery rack test.
6
- e. Reviewing Purchase Materials Soecificati on Revision 2, dated January 25, 1977, for Part No. 75017-116, Battery Rack and Accessories from Nife, Inc. to determine the requirements for source inspection.
- f. Reviewing Purchase Material Specification, dat'ed July 28, anc hovemeer 5, 1975, for Part Nos. 74033-101 and -102, Generator, Exciter and voltage Regulator to determine the requirements for source inspection.
- 4. Findings
- a. Comments (1) The jacket water nermostatic control valves were manufacturec by Amot, utilizing a cast iron valve bocy material. Availacle recorcs indicatec that: (a) incorrect flanges nac teen instal-led (en pipe s:cols), (b) tne incorrect flanges hac been replaced with correct flanges and (c) cause of failure hac been variously ascribed in correspondence to ce inceterminata, resulting from use of incorrect pioing flanges, or a comoina-tion of incorrect piping flanges and imposition of abnormal stresses on the valve bodies by site erection and test personnel. Discussions with the QA Manager revealec :nat Sechtet would purenase replacemsnt valves.
(2) The cattery racx selected for the seismic test failec during the initial excitation of the set uc. he tatte*/ racs was s.c:essfully testec after rewer<. :n toe meanume, three battery racks had been shipped to the site. Four I new battery racks were manufacarec, source insoectac
- y 7 ansamerica Oe:ava' anc a u<e 3:we : :a e: e-sentative, anc 111 te snippec to ne site. A :arrer, orcer for the Cherokee Nuclear Station required supplying Datteries, batteay chargers, and tattery racks. ' norm is in :r:q ess (
to celete these items from tne orcer. (3) It apoears that camage to the generator stator coils occurrec at the site. The generator on wnich the camage was obse vec. nac caen sucjectec to source inscection; newever, availa:le records were not definitive regarcing visual inscection. The damagec stator is to :e returned to the manufact rea (Electri: Procucts) for rewinc.
- b. Violation Accorcing to availa:le recorcs anc ciscussions =*tn :oqM : art
- ersonnel, cir:amferential fra:;ures at ne sah e 'ian;e a: :een founc in two Granc Gulf cast iron jacket -ater tnermostatic :or roi valves. Transamerica Delavai investigation finally ascritec :ne failures to be a result of comuination of imoosition of acnormal i
( 5
7 stresses on tne valve body by site erection and test eersonnel and installation by Transamerica deleval of incorrect flanges on the connecting piping spools. Raised face flanges were identified to l have been installed on the spools and not the flat face flanges required by the applicable drawing. Connection of these flanges with the valve flat face flanges would result in deflection of the valve flanges and consequent fracture of the non-ductile valve material. In response to questions by the inspector, it was ascar-tained that torque instructions had not been provided to site per-sonnel. - No records were available to indicate that this deviation from drawing requirements hac Deen evaluated uncer 10 CFR Part 21. Three other users were identified during the insoection where installation of raised face flanges may possibly exist; i.e. (1) Long Island Lighting, (2) Southern California Ecison anc (3) Tennessee Valley Authority (Bellefonte). None of tnese customers had been notified as of the inspection with respect to verification of flange type used on piping spools.
'See Notice of Violation
- c. Deviations From Commitment None
- c. Unreselsec Item The Structural Dynamics Researen Corporation's (5:RC) Seis ,ic Qualification Report No. 1532-1, dated January 1 to March 30, 1979, indicates the battery rack (Section V.19) was tested June 12, 13, 1979.
Additionally, Transamerica Delaval Incorporated-Engine and Comoressor Division's Seismic Certificate of Como!iarce ' r this recort is satec July 19, 20, 1979. As a result of the discrepancies in dates, the NRC ins;ector was unaele to determine whether or not acceptance of the Seismic Recort incluced the battery rack. C. Control of Measurine and Test Ecuiement
- 1. Obiectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify tnat measures Mac ceen estaclishec to assure that teols, gages, instru-ments, anc otner measuring anc testing devices usec in activities affecting cuality nad been procerly controlled, calibratec, anc acjusted at scecified oeriods to maintain accuracy within necessary limits.
i
. o J
8
- 2. Methods of Accomolishment e
The proceeding objectives were accomplished by:
- a. Reviewing the following documents to verify the' objectives hac been satisfied:
(1) Quality Control Inspection Procecures, No. I. P. 100, catec June 30, 1979, entitled- Calibration Manual, I (2) Quality Control Manual, Section 10, datec June 30, 1379, ( entitled- Calibration of Measuring and Test E:uiceeat,
, anc r
(3) Ouality Assurance Manual Section 12, cate: 3e:temce- 30, 1980, entitleo- Control of Measuring anc Test E:uiement.
- b. Ocserving the link roc cowel countercore gage anc a cemonstra-tion of its use.
- 3. Fincinas
- a. Deviation Frem Commitment See Notice of Oeviation, Item A
- . Unrescivec ! tem None D. Part 21 Reoort r ollowuo I
. Sa:ve-et :
Transamerica Delaval's Engine and Comoressor Division filed a ( 10 CFA part 21 at:cet on Se:te ea 19, 1980, regaa:im; a ::teet'il preolem in tne linx roc assemoly of oiesel generators manufacture: by them. The potential defect is tnat the cowel counter:cre in tse ' link roc may be too snallow anc cause Ifnc roc belt failure anc result in failure of tne ciesel geaerater.
- 2. Obiectives The : fectives Of this area of tne ins:ecti:n .ere to veri'y inat.
(1) ne ra: rt a::arately :escribe: tne crc::em an: sat.sfiec t e re:Ortis; re:uiremeats; (2) the :r::lem tac tee 9 evatuate: as re uiae:: (3) tre ge eric 'm::icati:n 9a: :een assesse:; a : ;: te state: corrective action is a:creoaiate, acecuate are imc'emeate: Or plannec. e e
9
- 3. Methods af Acc:molishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
- a. Reviewing the following Transamerica Delaval Incorporated -
Engine and Compressor Division's letters and an attachment-Transamerica Delaval Service 1*nformation Memo No. 349-to verify that customers had been notified and had been proviced instruc-tions fer detecting the potential problem; all letters were dated Septemeer 22, 1980, while the Service Information Memo was dated Septemoer 18, 1980: (1) Mill Power Supply Company, Attention: croject Manager-Catawba Nuclear Station,
Subject:
S/N 75017-20, 0$RV-16, (2) Washingten Public Fewer Supply System, Attention: Mr. J. P. Thomas,
Subject:
Engine S/N76031/32, (3) Mississippi Pcwer and Light Company, Attention: Mr. N. L. Stampley,
Subject:
Engine S/N 74033/36 and (4) Tennessee Valley Authority, Attention: Mr. C. A. Chandley,
Subject:
Engine S/N 77032/35.
- b. Reviewing Custemer Service Reports, cated Sectemcer 15-21, 1930 and day 22-28, 1980 (sic), regarding ins:ection of Engine J/Ns 75041 anc 75042 located at the San Gnofre Nuclear Generating Station to verify that the stated corrective action is unde ay.
- c. Reviewing Inter-Cffice Correspondence, dated Septemcer 13, 1980, To: G. E. Trussell, From: R. A. Pratt, to verify that tne roelem hac :een evaluatec.
- d. Reviewing the following drawings to verify that the report accurately described the :r:blem:
(1) No. 02-340-0380, Revision E, cated August 12, 1980, entitlec-Connecting Rod Link, (2) No. 02-340-01-0C, Revision E, catec August 12, 1980, entitiec-Link Rod Pin, and (3)' No. 08-340-01-AO, Revision 8, dated August 15, 1980, entitlec-Oowel Link Rod to Pin,
- e. Cbserving the link rod in the machine snoo for fniliari:ation with tne nareware and a :etter cefinition sf tne suscactee stea .
to verify tnat tne recort accurately cescri:ec tne roolem. l
.r, . ' ' . ...' ,
l
-_ - . -. , . - _- 1
10
- f. Reviewing the following documents in the Macnine Snop, to verify that preventive suasures had been impleveented:
(1) Inspection Form Nn. P-262 for Link Rod Assembly, Part No. 1A-6283, (2) Production Routing Sheet, Revision 06, cated February 13, 1980, for Part No.1A-6283, and (3) Rework Tag No. R-0959, dated June 13, 1980, on five Link f Rods, Part No. lA-62C'
- g. Observing a comonstration in the Machine Shoo, of tne ~*
gage wnich was cevelnoec to measure, acce::/ reject tne link roc dowel counter: ore.
/. . Findincs -
- a. Com-ents Customers had been notified and had been provided with instruc-tions for determining wnether or not the cowel counter ore was too shallow in th.e link rod. In an effort to precluce recur ence, (1) affected crawings nad been revised to ce:ict cecimalizec cimensions, (2) a gage nac ceen cevelo:ec te measure t.ae ::.ei 4 counter: ore, anc (2) one-nuncreo percent ins:e:ti:n is te'9; concucted on the do4e1 counter: ore curing manufacture.
D. Ceviations From Commftment - None
- c. unresolvec Item An Ins
- e:tien Form P-262, ancatec. 'c:atec 1- t.e wa :-'.e I ::. (
for Link Rod Assemoly, Part No. 1A-6283, indicated that five j items had failed the 1.3777/1.3772 diameter anc 7/8 inen ce:tn and recuired reworn. The form did not incicate tnat ewort j hac :een ac::molishec. Re= ort fag No. 4-0959 '.c':ste: tne cowel c:unter: ore was smallow anc recuirac reworn to cra ing. The tag reflected a completion cate of July 25 (?), 1980, wit-a space for ins:ection acxnewiecgement, out no name, initials. stamp or num:er, had caen enterec. . I As a result of tae feregeirg, the NRC 49s:ect:r .as .na:'e :: cetermire anetner or rot the : unter: ore nac :ee. sat's'a::: d'y reworKec. I i e ,* i (
1 1 11 E. Exit Interview -
- 1. The inspectors met with management representatives denoted in para-graph A. at tne conclusion of the inspection on October 17, 1980,
- 2. The following subjects were discussed:
- a. Areas inspected.
- b. Violatien identified.
- c. Ceviations identified.
- d. Unresolved Items identified,
- e. Contractor response to the report.
The contractor was requested to structure his response under teacings of corrective action, preventive measures, and dates for each deviation. Additionally, management representatives were recuested to notify the Commission in writing if dates require adjustment, commi tments require modification, etc. .
- 3. Management representatives ackncwlecged the c mments mace by the inspecters.
a
- . . - . , . , c,n., - n v -
o I 1
~
I 12 OETAILS SECTION II A. Persons Contacted . R. E. Soyer, Manager, Quality Assurance D. R. Cacy, Manager, Quality Engineering ( 8. Followuc en Identified Deficiencies in Diesel Gererator Picino Weids -
- 1. Back:r:end Imore:er welcing by Transa.: erica Delaval (TO) of ciesel generat:r ASME Section III Class 3 ci:ing furnisnec to the WDCSS Un is 1 anc a facility was icentified in early 1973, witn subsecuent transmittal of Nen :nformance Reports to TD by Unitec Engineers anc Constructors (UE&C) on April 3, 1979. The reported ceficiencias incluced:
are strikes, excessive undercut, lick of fusion, lack of penetra-tion, excessive :eretration, undersize socket welcs anc ;c sity. The icentified ceficiencies were subsequently resolved my return to TD of sucassemelies containing unacceptable welds for performance of required repair and rework.
, 2. Inscection Cbfectives '
l . Tre ::,fectives of this area of the inscection ere to review tne nature and scoce of tne reported deficiencies and ceteamine any gene ': tm:'4:st' ens.
- 3. Methee of Ac: melishment '
e : e:e:' ; :::e:t"<es ae e a:::.:'".s e: :..
- a. Review of UE&C Specification No. 9779-53. Division 17. Sectice
".7A,
(
"Su::lementaay Recuirements ':r ael:ing an: Ncccestr.ct've Examination of Nuclear Pressure Comconents anc Nuclear Ccwer ,
Piping." Examinati:n O' UE&C Nere:nf:rmance Re: Ort Ncs. ."-NOR-53 *.2 an; 1-NCR-53-13.
- c. Review of TD Quality Centrol Noncestructive Examination Pro:ecure No. 5C0-11, Revision 1, cate: Maren 25. 1977,
" Visual dele :ns:e:*:en."
- . Revde. ' tra'ning anc sce:'s: =a::ess e:u+ ereats in t e OA Manuai, s
( (
e .
, J i
13 .
- e. Review of inspection, process control, nonconforming material control, welding and nondestructive examination requirements in Quality Control Procedure I'.P.-500, "ASME Nuclear, Section III 4 Class 3."
Review of Quality Control Procedure I.P.-600, " Nondestructive f. Examination. "
- g. Examination of nondestructive examination personnel qualifications and discussion with QA management on the qualifications and train-ing of welding inspectors.
- h. Review of Quality Control Procecure I.P.-700, " Quality Engineering Manual."
- i. Discussion with QA management on the formalized actions ta<en to oreclude recurrence of similar welding deficiencies in A3PE Section III components furnished to nuclear sites.
J. Examination of in process Tank Luce Oil Sump Inlet Components
. for Shop Engine Nos. 2931 and 2957 with respect to:
(1) Compliance with Production Route Sheet operational sequence and instructions. (2) Signoff of comoleted operations. * (3) Identification of welding and nondestructive examination personnel performing applicable aalding anc examinaticn operations. (4) Verification of use of welding personnel cualified in acccccancs witn Section IX of tne ASME Coce. (5) Conoliance of fillet welds with drawing dimensdonai requirements. (6) Comoliance of welds with visual inspection criteria contained in Procedure No. 600-11. (7) Use of welding procedures specified on the appropriate drawings. (8) Comoliance with OA crogram nonconformance and orocess contrcl requirements. _~. - -
14
, (9) Use of welding materials s:ecified in designated welding
, procedure specifications (WPS).
- k. Examination of welding material storage anc issue area with 1 respect to:
(1) Centrol of welding material identity to the coint of c:n-sumption. i l (2) Electrode oven temoerature control and segregation of l
! materials. .
I (3) Comcitance with QA program electroce 14. e time recuirements.
- 1. Caservation of shielcec metal arc welcing oceentions on ,;ce No. 94302, She: Engine No. 2931, six (6) inen Senecule 40 piping sucassescly with res:ect to:
(1) Compliance with Procuction Route Sheet instructions. (2) Occumentation of welding ooeration and personnel. (3) Conformance with WP5 parameter and welding material requirements. (4) Quati*icaticn f co scenet fer ::e-atf or :eed:-me:. s .- Examination of a two (2) inch :foing su: asset:ty 8a : Ne C2-717-02YE, .itn aes:ect t: :er*cemance :. alt *1:at'Or stat.s
- of welder.
i 4 es et es j a. Deviations from Commitment (1) Paragra:n a.2 ( age 17A-29) of UEtc S:e:'*4:std: 9 No !!'i-53, Division 17, Section 17A, requirec visual examination to be performed to a written procecure in acc:rcance .it-Article 9 of ASME Section V, witt ac:e:tance : 4teada as i s ecifiec in ASME Section I!!. The a::licacie ?*, specification for visual examination, No. 600 ;* Revisice *. proviced, w th tne exce-tion of peemissi:le :utt .e*: i i internal anc external reinforcement, sufficieat Cedte*'4 ' : :er*cem . eld ins:ecti:n c esiste-t .dt* tre :: t-s:t a*c AD4E Section !!! Class 3 recuirements. Reinf0rcement criteria nas alsc :Pov':e: :y e a:ti':a:*e *: .e':' ; 1 :rocecure s:ecifications *cr tutt .4 1cs, t t 1 \ l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - ----- -
O 8 l 15
. The identified piping 'neld deficiencies at the WPPS3 Unit 1/4 facility is therefore indicated, from the foregoing, to be related to a failure to implement existing inspection requirements. Discussion with QA management failed to reveal any formalized corrective actions that had eeen taken to preclude recurrence of similar inspection failures.
See Notice of Deviation, Item S. (2) See Notice of Deviation, Item C. (3) Observationofshieloedmetalareweldingoperationson Snop Engine No. 2331, Snoo Order No. 943u2, Part No. 32-717-02 YR, showec the welding of the 6 inen Senedule 40 pice being performed in cuadeants using from the 3G to *3. positions. Examination of the performance qualification records for the welder indicated, ecwever, cualification only in the 1G position. Tacle QW-a61.7 in Section Ix of the ASME Code qualifies only for 1G and IF welds, when a 1G qualification test is utilized.
. Taeles QW-353 and QW-452.3 in Settien IX of the ADE Code qualify .a welcer for pipe outside diameters of 2 7/8 inenes and over, when a performance cualification samole si:e of over 2 incnes is used. Review of the cerformance cuali-fication records for a welder, identified as meing emoloyec for a 2 inch piping assemoly, failed to' snow act6al samole size usec for the cualification. The inspectJe was informed oy CA managemert snat all cine cerformance cut!fontions nac coen made using a 6 inen diameter sample site.
(a) See Notice of Deviation, Item E. (5) Examination of the Production Route Sheets for tne tno assemolies ider11fied in Item F of the Notice of Deviation, failec to snow the icentity of the =eleers wordrg on the assemolies. The inspector was informed that welo recorts whicn would nave provided an additional metnce for icentifying personnel used to perform welding, are made we from the Procuction Rcute Sheets and not until after completion of assemoly. See Notice of Deviation, Item F. (6) See Notice of Deviation, Item G. (7) The Procuction Route Sheets for the Shop Engine No. 2931 Tank '.uce 011 Sumo Inlet Comcart.?ent 'edicated a eicia; cate of July 29, 1980, for tne. weld cf tem A to l tem ! , with a magnetic particle examination acceotance 09 tne same date. No record was made on the Production Route
i t 1 16 Sheet to indicate a visual inspection accectance Pac coen ease. Paragraon 5.4.4 in Section 5 of Quality Control Procedure !.P. 500 states wita respect to weld inspection, however, "The welder will request the inspector to inspect the weld upon comoietion of the operation or as requirec. The insoector will indicate ac:ectance of the weic in the s: ace groviced en the Procuction Route Sheet." It was not ascertainec au*ing
, tne inspection whether the magnetic particle examina-tion actectance si nified final QC acceptance of the welc. See Notice o Deviation, Item H. I (3) Review of sne Pr:cuction Route $Peets far tne $nce Er;t9e No. 2931 Tane twee 011 Sume Inlet Compartment snewe: eo inscoction ee:e:tance stames for Oceration Nos 13, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 90, 90,100,110, IM. anc 130. fnese oceratiers includec: curning material ta si:e anc recuired snaces: Iayout of ocenings for nursing anc sucsecuent turning cperations; layout for crilling etc. Inscoction Re: orts :enotieg a aeje:tes status e's als net availa:1e for these coerations to con *1rm an inspection Mac coen sace. See Notice of Osviation, Item !.
l
- . '#eese1vec !tems
; scee .
- c. Otnea 81mdimes Caments
* (1) The 70 crawing practice aces not provice a systes for unique identification of welcs in assemolies. 9.e. a s:e:'**: 9urcea :a lette symce' *: et ass'; e: :: a
; .e e':. !ase sate a's a e ass *; e: a 'ette s ::
for eacn ites, out duplicate syme. items of the same configuration arcareassifneofor 1:e. Th s tra:tice I c:wie es: to e c re:an we exaesats: trues:e tj j anc control Cro0109s, e.g. if two welds esiste$ in an a assemoly witn the same Dese mattei 1 items wtili:e: for each weld. I (2) The m:0 used 10 thew tybe and si:e af elettroces in tne holding oven did not contain tPe lot identity of tPt ele:troces. NC caviation fram 45ME *Cce trattaci'ity ' reQuireSents =es icentifie2 Curing 150 instectier, heat've' in 13 1 only One ICL nuece* ens in 130 st:Psge s'ea a*c I in Jse #*r e:C." li e anc ty*e a' eIottr3:4. l k
e I i 17 C. Followuc on ReDorted Ceficiencies in Diesel Generator pioino System ; j , comoonent succorts l 1. 8ackaround Region IV of the Office of Insoection and Enforcement was notified on Sootemoer 26, 1940, concerning irregularities in 70 emergency diesel generator piping system component succorts furnished to j tne Comanene Peak Units 1 and 2 facility. The reported problems included botn welds not meeting visual inspection re:iuirements and l the comoonent supports not beino certified to have been manufactured l 11 accordance with Subsection NF of the ASME Ccde, l . l 2. Ins:ectium Obfectives The oejectives of ta s aesa of tne inspection were te review tne nature and scope of tM reported ceficionedes and c.etermine any generic impitcations, f I 3. 4 tned o' Ac::mc14soment - Theprecedingobjectiveswereaccomplishedby:
- a. Review of Gibes & Hill $cecificatien No. 23*F MS-JA, Revision 1, with respect to factication recuirements and cesignated Ceces anc standarcs for the C:manene peak efesel genertt:r c:ncenent succorts.
D. Review of 70 internal corrasconcence on the recorted croelems.
- c. Discussions with QA sanagement.
4 Fiadires
- 4. Within this area of the inscection, no deviations from ,
ecmmit. ment or unresolved items weae icenti'*ed.
- c. Review by the inspector of the customer Durchase scocificati:n failed to reveal any specific reference to or recuirement for ,
faerication of sne diesel generator comconent supports in ' accordance wita $wesection NF of the ASME Ccce. I
- c. Insufficient information was available to determiae the 94ture of the weld visual inspection proolems. This sucject will be furtner esamined during a future insciction.
l l l I
J. "%t .s, uNITID 5 ATIs
-; ...h .
e .. NUC'.JEAR REGULATCRY CCMMISSICN
, f 9EcICN IV 411 4YAN N7.A = RI'v E. SUIT 1 '000 A AUNGTcN. ?ExAS 78011 2 7 MAY 1931 Cocket No. 99900334/31-01
.iransamerica .e.ava.
.i i ..nc.
.-ngine u.ccaresser vivision ATTN: Mr. R. E. Scyer <
Quality Assurance .vanager 1 550 S!th Avenue Oakland, California 94621 Gentlemen: Tnis refers :: me CA pr gram c:ncuc:ac by Mr. l. M. Huntar of nis of#ica en Acril 5-4,1981, of your facili y a: Caklanc, Calif:rnia ass: cia ac wi= ce facrica:icn cf diesel geners: Ors and : ce ciscussicns c' cur f'ncings 41:n Mr. C. 5. Mathews anc mem=ers of your s.aff a: ne conclusien of =e ins:ec:10n. his' ins:ection was mace = c:nfirm nat, in te areas ins:ectac, ycur CA r: gram is :eing effectively im:i'emented. Tne inspection e#f r is nc: cesigned :: assure Ma uni ue cuality recuiremenu imecsec by a cus.:cer are teing acnievec; c.cr :: assure Ona: a s:eci#ic precuct, c:mcenent, Or service Or viced ty ycu = ycur cus=mers is Of ac:a :a:le :ual' y. Is ycu
'ecw, =e NRC recuires eac. Of in I:cansees = assume fu:' *as:cnsi:i' t:y f:r ce uali y of 3:eci#ic Oracuc.s, ==:cnen s , Or servicas :r curec m
- = e's . Y:u sacule, ce efere, nc: =ncluce ma: =e 'tRC's ins:ect :n exem :s ycu fr m ins:ections by .an MRC licansee or h.is acenu , nor f :m axing e"ective ::rrective action in response t: Oeir findings.
. r =. .= s a. .x.= .. .. . . e . .= ... - . " e-a e . . . . . a. a. . . ' .. e e . -=. .- . . . . , - . . . .
. ' ' . . c d. . .3- e . = . ~ . .". . s .-". .
mese areas, ce ins ecti:n c:nsistad of an examination of recacures inc re:resentative
;ns:ec= r.
rec:r:s , intarviews wie :ers:nnel, and Oese-va ices :y =e
- uring :ne ins:ecti:n 1: vas found Oa: ce im lementa icn f jcur :A :r: gram
'silec = eet :artain .'!RC ecuirements. 'e s:eci'i: 'd ncings anc e'erencas
= ce :er."nen: ecuiremer.n are icen:1#dec in ne en: csures = mis t a=ar.
31 ease crevice us wi nin - =d s le=ar a 4r - an sta: ament entaining,,.; . .
. ',a0cescripticn
- ays f-em ce of sta:s':ata of na: nave :een, Or 41:1
- e :aken, :: cer sc: =ese i:ams , (2) a descri: icn of stats . .a: ' ave :eer. -
Or 4i1'. :e =xen, = ;reven: recurrenc:; anc ;;; ne ca:e / cur errec-ive aC icns arc Oreventive ' easures aere, Or uill be, =m:le .ac.
'. .. .a,r.. c -. ,..4. ..g '.g
. . . . . .n... ..q .. . .r, . J. ...
. ~ . . .. .. .. . s s ". *. .. ' 2
.=.,'..."..'.s.=.-./.#
IS::ar inc ne enCICsec ins:PC:icn "e:Cr aill :e :lacac 'n te 'IRC's :uci ;
- cument :.ccm. :' mis recer: =n:2 s any ' :': - .a: :n ra: /cu :e: eve = :e exem:: f :s disc!csure uncer .'0 C.R 9.3(a;(a), i- is necassary ma: e c - #v
=is :' dice :y :aie:nene .vi n'n 10 :ays # :n me a:a :f s :enar"cu 'a::p i:ur
~
.< ^
c ,- - p-
-si v v . - - -mune ,
l
Transamerica :elaval Inc. 2 intent on to file a request f:r withnolding; and (b) su:mit witnin 25 days frem the date of this lettar a writ.an a;clication to this offica Oc witancic sucn 1 infor-nation. If ycur receipt of this lettar has been delayec such .ha: less :han i seven cays are avaiia:le f:r ycur review, please notify this office pr:m::1/ , so that a new cue ca e may be as,.aclisned. C:nsistant with Secticn 2.79C(:j(*J , a any sucn acclica:icn must be ac=mcanied by an afficavi; executad by ne Owner l cf the inf;rmation wnich identifies the dccument or part scugn: :: be wi nneic, ! and which =ntains a full sta ament of the reascns en tne bas's wnien i; is I claimec tha: the infomation snould be withheld fr m pucif e disclosure. ~his , section fur *ner recuires the statament to accriss with s:ecifi:i y ne =nsicart- l
- 1:ns listac in '.0 CR 2.790(m)(0 The inf: m a::en s:cgn = :e ni nnei: snail
- e inc:r:ces ac as far as :cssible in:: a se ara a :ar: Of :ne afficav :. '
we = nc near f em ycu in nis regar: ni hin =e s:eciffec :er =s ac ac a=ve, ne re;cr will :e ciacac in :ne pu lic Cocument icem. Should ycu nave any cues:1:ns c:ncarning inis ins:ec:icn, we wt11 be :leasec l 1
- ciscuss them witn you.
Sincerely, u s -::a:c ( D...e- & e Venc:e :ns:e: :n'Brancn Inci:sures: C. Nc :ca Of Cevia:::n
- 2. Ins:ecticn Raccr: No. 999C0334/81 01
\ t I i I
+
l Transamerica Delaval Inc. Docket No. 99900334/81-01 NOT!CE OF NONCONFORMANCE Basec on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on April 6-3, 1981, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in accorcance witn NRC requirements as indicated below: . Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part- 50 states: " activities affecting quality shall be crescribed by document 3d instructions, crecedures, or crawings, of a tyce ap;repriate to tne circumstances anc snall :e acc melisnec in accorcance with nese instructicns, crocecures, or crawir.gs. Instructions,
- rocecures, Or crawings snali incluce a::rceriate cuantitative er cualitative accectance criteria for cetermining that imcortant activities nave een satisfactorily 'acc:mplishec."
Nonconform 'cas with these requirements are as follows: A. Weld procacure No. 100-W-1A, revision two and weld procecure No. 100-W-27, revision three list the size range of welc rod acprovec for use wi h eacn procacure. s Centrary : the a:cve recuirements a welder was using 3/32 .e.i: rec n jcc No. 96632 hat hac not een 3: r0vec f0r use witn'tne 5:ecifisc weld prececure, No. 100-W-1A. On jee No. 94922, anctner welcer was usfrg 3/~.5" eld rec tnat nac not :een a:Orevec for ne s:ecifiac wela procacute, No. 100-W-27. B. Paragracn 9.1 ef s:ecificatien No.100-A-3, revision f:ur, recuires all wel: atarial te returnec :: st:res at t. e enc f eacn ':ur cur :e-ice. Contrary to tne acove recuirements, 3/32" weld red being used on fee No. 35395, eic No.14 nac een issuec five neurs previcusly. C. Welc =rocacure No.100-W-18, revision two, speci fiec a maximum of 24 volts anc 100 ames :: be usac. Contrary to the acove requirements, jce No. 95395 was :eing welcec using crececure 100-W-18 with 29 volts and 150 ames. J ' J ,
- - - - .- , - - - - -n- - - , , - - - - - , - - - , - - - - - . . , , , ,ee-,e,, -- - - -
( 2 1
- 0. Uncer the heading ofa paragrapn 7.3 of the ASME acce::ec QA manual titled
" Welding in Process , paragrapn 7.3.3 requires that all nonconforming fabrications be cocumented on an Inspection Report Form. Paragrapn 7.3.3 further recuires such nonconforming items to :e ::ntrolled in ac:ordance with Section 10.0 of the ASME ac:aptec QA nanual.
I Section 10.0 requires that all nonconforming items be immeciately ' identified with an Inspection Report Form and placec in bond. (Segregatec) Contrary to the acove requirements, all of the :omeonents for ich numbers 1*sted in Items B, C, anc 0 acove were sti'l in the manufacturing :r:: ass 24 nours later anc nac not been icentifiec with an ins:ection report or placed in tone. { r o
- e I
C 5
. o 9
U. 5. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSICN OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900334/81-01 Program No. 51300 Company: Transamerica Delaval Inc. Engine and Comcressor Division 550 35th Avenue Oakland, California 94621 Inscaction Concuc:ac: . Ins ec:ce:" -A;j:rF i s F M5-5, r* 581
/$- / ,
w r,.
- v. n. nunter, Centfac:cr inspect:r, cII'c/d /
Gate Comconents Section Vencor Ins:ection Branen
/~' D
.u --
Accroved by: '5 A_wmM D. d. wniteseli, Calef er/z, /p/ . Cate Ccmcenents Secticn . Vencer I.ns::ection Branch . Summarv Ins:ecti:n :n 2cril 5-5, 1981 (39900224/E -01) Areas Ins::ectac: !molementation of 10 CR Part 50, Accencix 5 Cr :erien incluc-4 ing auc1 ::n:r:1, anc centrol Of s::ecial recesses. T e ins:e:,i:n ' vcive: 20 inscec :r ncurs en sita. Results: In the three areas inscected there ' ere ao at arer: enc:nf:r arcas 1cen:1fiec in :no areas. The fellcwing apparent conc:nformancas were icentifiec in the remaining one area. Nenf:ne:r ances: Centrary to the recuirements Of Criterien V, of 10 CFR Par: 50 Ac;;encix 5 acc :ne QA ::regram c:mmitments;
- 1. Two elders were using una cr:vec -eid :c. (See N:: ice of Ncnc:n-formance, I:em A).
- n. e- ? i r //f l
o . I l
. *g
. (
2
- 2. 'A third welcer was using weld rod material that exceeced weld material return requirements (See Notice of Nonconformance, Item-B).
- 3. Also the thicc welder was not welding within the recui ed volt /a::::
range (See Notice of Nonconformance, Item C).
- 4. Components found to be in ncncomoliance were not identified by an inscection reecr or segregatec (See Notice of Nonconformanca, Item D). f d
( l t l
. .-~
3 OETAILS SECTION A. Princical Persons Contracted C. S. Mathews, General Manager R. E. Soyer, Quality Assurance Manager G. Trussell, Engineering Manager < E. Wilse1, Manufacturing Manager
- 0. R. Cacy, quality Engineering. Manager All of tne acove listec personnel attenced :ne exit meeting.
S. Genera! The Engine Ccmpressor Division (ECD) of Transamerica Delaval Inc. 'em: ley a total of aporoximately 834 personnal. The facility is situatec on 50 acres wi n appecximately 642,000 square feet under cover. ECD nolcs ASME Class III certificates of authorizations N-111h (N), N-1566 (NA), anc N-1115 (NPT) which exoire on June 16, 1981. An ASME resurvey has been' scheduled for April 20-22, 1981, to renew their ASME certificatas. of Autnerization. The princioal product of ECD for tne nuclear industry is the diesel generat:r of which several parts are su:Oliec by Outsice :rgani:ations, i.e. , hea; exc angers Oy Thermxcnanger Inc. (Occket No. 99900700). The 1981 estimate of EC3 precucts intancec for use in the nuclear incustry is currently estimatec :: :e SC% :f snco capac1:y. 9 C. Aucit C:ntrol
- 1. Obiectives 8
The 00je::ives Of :nis area cf :ne ins:ectica .ere to verify :na: procecures had been precared anc acor0vec Oy the vencer that ;re-scribed a system for auciting wnica is consistent wita :ne commit.ments of the ASME accectec Quality Assurance Manual. Also, verify :na: :nesa aucit ;recacures were being Or:cerly and effectively i lementec Oy the vencor.
- 2. .Ve: hec of Ac::m lisneen:
The : jectives Of Nis area Of :ne ins ecti:n aere ac :::lisnec :y; i
- a. Review of Section 11.0 Of the ASME ac:ectec OA vacua * :: veci'y na ;r:cacures nac :een asta:iisnec :: Orescr4:e a syste.m ':r internal aucits.
, .,-,v. ,.,n. .- - - - - , . . - . , , ,
M i 4 l
- b. Review of the following documents: i (1) Current audit check list. I s
(2) 1931 audit senedule; and - (3) Audit personnel qualifications; to verify that they had been reviewed and accreved by manage- { ment, and issued, in c:mcifance with the QA Or: gram ::mmitments.
- c. Review of internal auci:s ":e tne cast calencar year : ee ri 'y tnat tne a::lica:Ie crecacures were avaiia:le :: :ne auci team persennel, and that tne aucit procacures ere effectively imclemented.
- 3. Ins:eetien Firdincs Witnin the area ins ectec, there were no apparent nonconformances or unresolved items identified.
O. Centrei ef 5:ecial Precesses
- 1. ~tdect'res
- The objectives of this area of the ins:ection were :: verify that
.ei:i g :r:cecures ac :een : eve::pec, a::r:vec, anc i ::ementa: "a sanner consistent with NRC rules anc regulations, ASMC Ccce recuire-ments, and the vencer's c:nmitments in tne ASME acce: ec OA wanua' vet :: :" :c:: :s me-:
The objectives of this area of t.*e inspec-icn ere ac::::i'snec as
#0ilews:
- a. Review of Section 7.0 of :ne ASPE accootec QA wanual ti-;ec "Centrol of Special 3 recesses 'delcing, Nencestruc-ive Exami a-tien Ins:ecticr :: serify na: :ne sencer nac estaclisnec prececures f:e tne =re:aration, cualification, certi'icati:n, cistributien anc -4/'sica ' ~
. . ,r.....re s:ec';icati:ns.
Review O' -eic :re.:ecures .00 *-13 ar.c .* 00-4-27, :: ee d'y :na: ali essential var'>cles, su: lenentary essentia? < aria:1es,
- l. anc nonessertia' .ardacies are inciucec ' 3::: ca ce .' :.e c:ntracts anc a::lica:1e sections :f :ne :5ME ::ce ateu1 ements.
4 k
f l 5
- c. Review of Certifications and qualification records for four
- welding procedures to verify that:
. (1) The precedures had been qualified in accordance with the requirements of the contracts and Section IX of the ASME Code and to verify that the supporting procecure qualifics-tion recorcs were on file. (2) The procedures qualification records had teen certified by the vendor, and the mechanical test results i.eet er exceed tne minimum ASME Cece requirement.s. (3) The precedure cualificati:n recorcs list the essential variaoles for the scacific welding precesses anc the values and ranges of the varia les are within tne accactance limits of Section IX of the ASME C:ce.
- c. Observec the follcwing in procass welding:
(1) Weld of flange to luce oil sump inlet compartment, jcb No. 94922 in accordance with weld precedures 100-W-1A, revision 2 and 100-W-27, revision 3. (2) Weld Nc.14 cf nipcle t: elbcw, joc Nc.' 35395, in acc:rcance with weld procecur'e 100-W-lS, revision 2, anc crawing No. 02-717-03-JS. To verify that weld procedures were being effectively imolemented.
- 3. Inscection incincs
- a. Ncnc:nformances - (See Notica Of Ncncenfermance, I ams A :nru i).
- b. Unresolvec Itams - None were icentifiec.
E. Exit Interview i i The inspector met with management representatives (denotec in caragracn A.) at the c:nclusica of the inspection On April 3,1981. The management representative acknowledged the statements by the inspector concerning tne ncnc nformancas f:enti#iec curing nis inspecti n. , A e n - - - ,+ -- m-w w re
- o. =..s
, = .
/ $
~*
- UNITED STATES l' .,.
, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- .I REGION IV I
- sti avAu et.4zA canvt. suite coo p C{./ anuncteu,isxAs 7soit September 18, 1981 Occket No. 99900334/81-02 Transa.merica Celaval, Incer; orated Engine anc Ccmcresscr Division ATTN: Mr. C. Mathews General Manager 550 85th Avenue Oaklanc, California 94261 Gentlemen:
This refers :: :he ins;ection : ncucted by Mr. W. E. Foster, Of :nis office en July 13-17, 1981, of your facili y at Cakland, California, associated with the manufacture of stancby diesel generators and to :he discussicns Of cur findings witn you anc members of your staff at the conclusion of the ins;;ection. This ins;:ection was made as a result of the issuance of 10 CFR Far: 21 re::cr:s by the Transamerica Celaval, Incer;oratec, Engine and Ccms:ressor Divisien. The reports certained to the diesel generator's: (1) tur ccharger thrust bearing lubricatten system; and (2) crankshaft oil plug installatien. The forner affectec numerous nuclear power plants wnile tne latter was limitec to :ne Phi::s Benc Nuclear Pcwer Plant, ',1i 2. Also, there were ::ne- re:ce:s regarcing: (1) unqualifiec not:rs usec for auxiliary lu:e 011 anc Jacke: water pum:s; anc (2) malfunc:icning of a six inen enecx valve. These conci-tiens af fec;ed :ne Grand Gulf Nuclear Power Plant, Unit i f:r :ne me: Ors anc L' nits. " anc Z f:r :he valve. Areas axaminec and our fincings are ciscussed in :ne enciesec recer . Wi nin
- nese areas, tre ins:ecti:n ::nsis ac of an examina-icn Of :r:cecures an: e:re-senta:ive rec::r:s, interviews wita personnel, anc Ocserva:: ens :y :ne ins;;ec .:r.
During the ins:ection it was f:und tha: he 'm:lemen a:::n :f y:ur 3 :r: gram failec :: met: certain NRC requirements. The s::ecific fincings anc references to the pertinent recuirements are ide.atified in the enclosures :: this ie: er. Please previce us within 30' days fr:m the date of : Mis le::ar a written s:2:e-l ment c ntaining, (1) a cescriptien of ste::s :na: nave :een r w1;i :e :axen to correct these items. (2) a description of steps that have ':een er will te :aken
- prevent recurrence, anc (3) the :a:e y ur ::r ec-ive a:-icns anc =rever:'ve measures were or will ce c mpletec. C:nsiceration may :e given :o extencing four res:ense time for a 90cd cause snewn.
The res:enses cirec:e: by :nis ie: er are no: su:jec: : :ne :learance :r:- l Ce:ures f :ne Cffice Of vanagemen arc Su:;e: as ecu re :y :ne :1:e w:r< Reca icn Oct Of 1950 :L 96-511. In ac: rtance wi:n 10 CFR 2.790 Of :ne C:missi:n's regula:i:ns, a c:::y c'
- nis ie::er and :ne enciesec ins:ection re:or: will :e :iacec in the 1RC's
) Puolic Occument Room. If :nis repor :ntains any informa: ice :na you l
Transmerica Celaval, Incorporated 2 believe to be exempt frem disclosure under 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4), it is necessary that you (a) notify this office by tclephone within 10 days from the date of I this letter of your intention to file request for withholding; and (b) submit within 25 days from the date of this letter a written applicatica to this I office to withhcid such infonr.ation. If your receipt of this letter has been I. delayed such that less than 7 days are available for your review, please notify this office promotly so that a new due date may ce estaclished. Consistent i with section 2.790(b)(1), any such application must be acccm:anied my an affidavit executed by the owner of the infonnaticn which identifies the document or part scugnt to be withheld, and which contains a full statement I of the reasons on the basis which it is claimed that the information should be witaneld fr:m ;uclic casc1:sure. This sec:1cn furtner requires :ne sta:emen; i to accress with s:ecificity the consiceraciens listec in 10 CFR 2.790(:)(a). The infer::atien s:Lgn: :: :e wi:nneld snall te ine:r: crate as far as :csst::e in:0 a se;arate ;ar of the affidavit. If we do not near fecm ycu in Ms regarc witnin the 5:ecified periccs notec above, te reper will te place: in
- ne Puolic Occument Rcom.
Sheuld you have any :uestiens c:ncerning this ins;ecticn, we wil; :e :leasec c Ciscuss them wi n yeu. Sincere - l fy'
,a, cts ec:a:cvs unje.
Vencer Ins:ection er:nca Enci:sares:
- 1. Notice of Ncnc:nfermance i Z. Ins:ee:icn Re:ce: Nc. 999CC22c/81-C2
- 2. Ins:e::1:n ata Inee:s 'S : ages; I
1 l J i
4 Transamerica Delavai, Incorporated Engine and Compressor Divisien Occket No. 999C0334/81-02 NOTICE CF NCNCCNFORMANCE 3asec en t.e resuits of an .1RC inspecticn conduc ac en July '3-17,' 1981, it . accears -hat certain of your activities were no: concuctec in accorcance witn 4RC requirements, as indicated belcw: A. Criterien V of Appendix S o 10 CFR Par: 50 states: " Activities affecting quality snall be prescribed by documentec instructions, pr:cecures, or crawings, of a ty e a;:ropriate to :ne cir:.mstances anc snail be ac::m-piisne in ac: rcance wi:n :nese instructions, crocecures, er crawi:,gs. Instructions, ;racecures, er crawings snali incluce accre:ria a :uantitative
, er quali stive accea:ance criteria for determining na: im:ce:an activi:1es ! have :een satisfacterily acc:melisne,c."
Nenc:nf:rmances with these recuirements are as folicws:
- 1. Paragra;n 5.1.2 of :ne Ouality Assurance Manual, Revisien 0, :a:ec Fecruary 27, 1981, states, 'The parts lis anc con =cnent.crawings released by Engineering constitute tne final instructions to Manufacturing and Assemoly defining :he acce tance criteria :: wnich the c:meenents anc assemclies must conferm."
C:ntrary :ne a:cve, :ne :ar s lis: anc::::enenk:rawingsreleasec:y engineering nac no: :efinec :ne ac:e;;ance criteria of :ne ins allec cranksnaf cii clugs. Fur ner, :ne route snee: na: Orovicec ins ruc-ice f:r instalia-1:n Of :ne cii plugs c:n:ainec no acce; ance cri aria.
- 2. Paragra:n 5.3.2 of ne Quality Assurance Manuai, Revision 0, catec
~
e:ruary 27, '.931, s a es, "'nstructions :ef 4.irg :ne a::1 :s:le :r:: esses are issuec c Manufac uring Oy use of route snetts, :co;ing snee:s, numerical c:ntrol reaccuts and special written instructi:ns anc sket:nes." Centrary to the above, :ne instrue:icns at Elemen C cf C: era-icn 1c. 55 of :ne Assemoly/ Test Reu:e Sheet, Revis1cn 1, ca:ac June 20, 1981, f:r Jcb No. 02933, cic net provice cetails for ne swaging Oceration Of :ne crannsnaf cil : lugs.
-, , , -- - - , , , > - - - , , , -w,--- -,rn, ,e-, ,..e --
- - ~ , ,, - ,
2 3. Crite-ion XII of Accencix 3 to 10 CFR Part 50 states, " Measures shall te estaclisnec to assure taat tools, gages, instruments, ana other measuring and testing devices used in activities affecting quality are procerly con:rclied, calibrated, and adjustec at specified periocs to maintain accuracy within necessary Ifmits." Contrary to tne above, measures had not been establishec to assure that
- cis used in the cranksnaft oil plug installation are procerly contro11ec and adjustec at specifiec periccs to maintain accuracy within necessary limits.
t l C. Criterion XVII of Accendix 3 to 10 CFR cart 50, states in : art, 'Suffi-cient affe ingrec:r:s sna11 te maintained to furnisn evicence f activities quality." Daragra:n 4.17.1 cf Scecification Nc. 9641.-G-QA-1, Rev sten 5. cated i fdaren 3, 1980, states in : art, "Re::rer s>al! ce maintaine: :: furnisn cccumentary evicence of activities affect;ng cuality." Note: The~ identical recuirement was reflected in Revision 4, catec Novemcer 9, 1973; wnien precated the cur: nase er:er :: Celava!. Scecification (No. 9645-M-018.0) recuires that me:ces te succliac in ac::rcance with Accendix 0. Paragracn 6.3 of Acpendix 0 (Specification No. 9645-i=013.0) addresses servi:e ::ncitions relative t: ;ressure, temcerature, relative humicity, and radiation as aces caragra:n 5.1 Of tne g:ver-ing s:ecificatien (Nc. 9645-M-018.0). Furtner, :ce ;:ver-ing s:e:if':att:n 'ists IEII star. car:s, inclucing 323, anc states na :ne lis- is not limitec to those icentifiec; it also states tnat the -'mest str'nger eeuirements sasii a::'y." Contrary to the above, receres had not been maintainec to furnisn evicence ina: tne act:Ps f:r :ne aux'Tiary lu:e :ii ar: .'a:xet -a a-
- ue:s a: :ee e v' rme taf :.a''e;.
O. Critation VII of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR Part 50, states in : art. "Occumeatary I evicence ments in.at snali mate *ial. an:.ecui:mer.: ce availasie ." ::nf:rm :: :ne :r :.reme-: e:.: e-Paragra:n 4.7 Of 5:ecification No. 9645-G-0A-1, Revisi n 5 : ate: w ar:n 7, 1980, states in :ar , "The selier snail assure that i:we--:'e see s
- moiy al n :ne a::'icacie recei ements Of :ne ;urenase Or:ea. '
Note: The identical recuirement was reflectec in Revisi:n 4 Cated Novem:er 9, ;C73; wnien ;recate: :ne :urenase er:er :: Gelaval. l I i i x
3 Delaval Purchase Order No. 62572, dated April 13, 1976, orcerec tne motors for the auxiliary luce of; oumos. Note f, of the P.O. states in part, "Allis-Chalmers to certify tnat manufacture is in accorc-ance with Allis-Chalmers Technical Specifications as outlined for IEEE 323, 334 and 344 meter requirements . . . 7.0. Addendum No. 1, datec June 8,1976, accea tne motors for the jacket water pumos anc dia not accress the notes of the original purchase order. Contrary to the above, documentary evidence was not availacle to assure that the seller of the motors, for the auxiliary luce oil anc jacket vater pumps, had comc11ed with the recuirements of the purchase order. o
TRANSANERIC 3ELAVAL, INCORFORATED CRGANIZATICN: ENGINE AND COMPRESSOR OIV. 0AKLAND, CALI/ORNIA i REPCRT NC.: 599C0324/31-02 lINSPEC:1CN CATEiS): 7/*.3 - 17/81 llNSPECT.CN ON.Sm! HOURS. 30 i CORRESPONCENCE ACCRESS: Transamerica Celaval, :nc0r;;cratac ! Engine and C:moresser Divisien I AD: Mr. C: Ma: news, General anager 5E0 85:n Avenue . Oaklanc, California 94251 ! I CRCAN!?.AT1CN CCNTAC7: Mr. R. E. 3Cyer, Manager - Cuality assuranca
~
TELEPHCNE: (415) 577-7422
.._' E PRINC: pal. PRCCUCT: Stanc-by ciesel genera crs. i, NUC:.IAR INCUSTRY AC:1VITY: Dic not ct'tain during Mis ins:ection.
t I I i
. ?
I
' ASSIGNED INSPEC CR: _h/ [ /,_ 9 /, f / ;. ,
- a. i. Fes:ar, seac:1ve ins:ec :en sec:1cn- Cate OTHER INSPEC CRISI: "one dw AP8 MOVED BY- ~7 /f r/p . *
.. Ear'es, Catef, Rea:; ve .ns:ec- :n ice- :n ;a a INSPECT CN SASES AND SCCPE:
.A. 3ASES: 10 CFR Dar: 50, A::encix 3.
- .ngine anc ..:::resscr uiv1sien Or._.ransamerica .e.iaval, :nc:r:cr-n~rt:
. _..9e .
a:sc, filec 10 CFR 3ar: 2' re:Cr:s en :ne :iesai genera Or's: t:: :ur:cenar;e-
- nrus: : earing lu:ric nt:n sys am; an: ;2; ran<snaf: :: :iw; ns:al:a:::n.
I The former affec:ec numerous nuclear :cwer :lants anc resui:ac 'n ' iicwu:
- ec'.e s t: ' := ne ##ica :f :ns:ec:::r. in: Inf:r: amen , Re; :n :: ';::.
The la :ar was ii=1:ac :c ne 3hicos Benc Nuclear sewer 3!an , .ni- 2. ::E, i:: also -ecuesta: f:licwu: On: ',1 : ;ncuai ' 'dec c::rs .sec ': 1.x- a-e lu:e ::' an: ;ac:<e aatar :: :s; an 2: maifinc:::ntng :f i 5-:ren :. e:.< valve. Sc:n :f :nese were icca:ac a: ne 3eanc Gui' 'luciaar02 wer I:n::r.
'Jn1 : i for :.e c: Ors; Jnits ; anc 2 f:r :ne raive.
Aisc, lim 1:ac ins: action was c:ncuc:ac en crevicus ins:ec en 9ci9;s. l
TRANSAMERICA CE!.AVAL NCORPdRATED CMGMtZATICN: ENG'NE AND C'MPRE33CR 'IV. CAC.ANO, CAL *.20RNIA REPCRT No.: 99900324.< S1-C2 l INSPEC:1CN RESULT 3. lPAGE 2 ef 5 l INS;EC ION RESULTS i i A. XICLATIONS: Nene.
- 3. NCNC NFCRMANCI5:
Contrary :: Criterien V cf Ac:encix 3 :: 10 C.!R Par 50 anc :aragra:n j 5.1.2 of :ne Cuali:y Assurance Manual, Revision 0, :a:ecrecraary 27, . 198', :ne : arts s; anc ::::enen: :rawing -e: ease :y en; aeer- g nac c16 .iugs. j nc:.... cefinec . . r. . . :".e
.: .,.,e,.,
. ..eac:a::anca
.... s .e..
. .. .. :r . ar'.s
... a.
. ... of
. .v...,.... :ne ..s........,
ns:a:1ec :ran<sna".
. . . . . . . . . . . . e. . .
.3....
.. . . . . . . .. ..., . . 3. . . n, s ..n .a . n. e . n c .a c..= . ...$ a. c .= . . . . .* . . a .
- 3. . . . . . . . . . .. . . ......e.. . . . 7 . e. 2.. . a.n.- i 4 : .. .*.* .~.- .. :ar. :u .=.a.. . .a .- = . . =. .. n 5.3.2 of :ne Qualt:y Assurance .v anual, Revisier. O, ca:e: r ecrua y 27, 1981, :ne ins ractions a- Eismen: C Of 0: era:icn No. 55 Of : e ssee:iy/
Tes: Reute ineet, Revisten 1, :a:a une 20, ;36*,. ' r ;;: 1c . :2.:23 cic nct provice ce: ails of :ne snaging c: era:icn of :ne cranksnaf: Oil clugs.
' r. . . =. r./ . .- P. .- . . .= .- . ,. n
,s... n..s ., .
.1.* .* a '. ,.' .- .e.a. - 1 x .2 . . . ** ':s
. . .. : .n . . : 3. ,
..e >. s ,. r *. e. a.
. . ..e.,
.c. . . . . . . . .. . . ,s.,.r.. . .... ....s .,sa,. s.,.. . ... ,s.. . . -
. . . .. . . . ......x.,
. g... , . :. .,. ,.. . . e. .. ., .. ... ..... e , :. y. .. .. .. .. .. .i i e ,. , .n ,. , e . .i
. .., . e ,. ., .. s . , ... . a a , ,..
- eric:s :: maintain ac:uracy at-a.1n necassary limi:s.
- a. Centrary :: Critarien XV:I cf Accencix 3 :: 10 CFR Par. 50 anc =aragracn a.'.7.'. :# 5:ect :a ::n Nc. 56a5 :-CA *., Revisi:n 5, :a e:
. ... .. ..../...., ........ '3EC,
+
. . . . . .. . . .e.. .......... ..'dar:
evi:er. e na: :..e ::::rs f:r :.e aux ary ..:e :1; a,c ;acxe .a.ar cumos nac :een environmentally cualifiec. 3
.e . .. ... . ..
c?. .. .. ... . . ... .
.e... 7 . : .
- .e.n..x
... s.evisten
.; ....... ..:s :.r.
. . . . . . . . . ..,.,a
. . . ... l
- cect ::a ,.:n J,c .g*..:-2.,n..2,
- .. ca:e: ,ar n ,.., . : C. ...
(anc :revi:us e:iti ns', ::cumer. ary evicence =as no: avaiia::e :: l assure :.a: :ne sei'e- # :ne c::*s #:r tre aux'i tary . .:e : ' ar: ;
,,. ..., g g .. .g.. ...
. . . . .$ . a,. ..-...-id.ea.
. 4 .9 .. . e - *. '. . . *... e .a, . a-
. ...'s. . .. -...se '
Or".e . : i
.. ahn.:. m.u.r.-
. . . n. .
1 I l
.. E*<
emea.- < :3 :: era: :n ',c. 55 0' :.e Assem::y/ es; icate Eieet, :a:e: l
.. ... .., -...... .::. e. .
.. ... ..y. .c.. - : . . .: . . ; 5 2 3,..
. .... . . 7. .:.: ..
.:4 3 s . e ,. . . . . ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . .....t s. . . . . ....,......,...5 ... .. ...
. e..
- sa.... .. .
,,e..
..e
.. . ....e,.....
... ygr. ..$.e...,
- *. a. ..
,,gs 4,s.. . . .. .... .- .
..s.....
...... 4 a . .....4
. . . . .. ..f .*"e'...*.*.*.*..=s*.
seas-*......*.**...-.*..-** i
. . ., 3 ..$.,...,
. . . . .. .. .. ..e .*..*us..a#. . .r * . g 7.'.. .a.*.
.nasmucn as "c ce:11Is are evicent at Ele er.: <, re "RC !
. s . ....., . . e .. .. ..... .a. ... .. .. .. e
. .t e . a . . . s . . , .'. . . .. , . . s.
.. . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . e . . ' a. s : e : : *
.2. ,
. s
1 \ l l l l TRANSAFERICA - LAVAL, INCCRPORATED CRGANIZADCN: E.NGINE AND CCMPRESSCR DI'/. CAKLAND, CALIFCRNIA i REPORT NO.: 99900224 3*.-02 l INSMC':"CN RESUf.TS. PAGE 3 Of 3 r. s e. . a i:J.e . c 2 - :/ .r.a v,5 t...Le:. .-
. . .., ys .: . vD.i I5tC._e
- 1. (Cicsec) Viciation (80-01): Records had not been maintainec to incicate
- nat: (1) The fracturec ther cstatic cintrel valve hac caen evalua:ec;
,and (2) Acticns nac been taken :: :etermine if .ne imprecer valves (raised face flange) had :een su :liec :: c:ner cus::cers.
The ins:ec:Or verified :na:: (1) The :ner csta-1: c:ntrei valve nac ceen evaluatec anc accrecriate rec:rcs initia ed; (2) Acti ns hac Seen taken to determina if an incrocer valve hac been furnisnec :o ciner cust:mers. Also, :ne inspec:ce eviewed receres wnica incicatec :nat user identifdec cr: lems are evaluatec f:r :cssi:le 'm:ac: 2:en :iesai genera Ors su:citec for cemestic nuclear :cwer clants.
- 2. (Ciesec', :evia ::n (30-01): The ; age usec : easure, ac:e: /rejec :ne ciameter anc ce: n of :ne : int r:c ::wel c:unter:cre cac nc: :een icen:t-fiec wita : (1) A ::ci anc/cr Gage Trycut Tag; (2) A : sit:ra:fcn :ecal; or (3) C:=cany name, gage er ecui: men name, :ar an:/Or serial num:er, as a: lica:le.
The inspec:Or verifiec nat: (1) The gage exni:itec a calibra:icn ceca,.; anc (2,3 ine gage exnibitec a numcer wnicn nac :een at:nec . ent it.
- 3. (0:en) Cevia: ten (d0-01): Notice Of :evia:icn :: ems 3 :nreugn : anc anrescivec i:ams in Ce ails Secti:n I, :aragra:ns 3.0.: anc :.l.:.
remain ::en. The ins:ect:r cic not verify ne veneces acti:ns :ur'nq
- nis ins:ec-ten :ue :: ne Oricrity Of ::ne- :ns:ecti:n ecu'-emer s
.nese ? ncings, as weil as tacse icentifiec curing ins:ec::cns 31-01 anc 79-01, will :e verifiec curing :ne next ins:ec: den.
.. .-.:: : ..w- . .u.c e.- ;. .- ..vv
-- . . e_
. .. y . e . ,.
- 1. Elemen C cf C: era ten No. 35, of :ne Assemcly/Tes: : cute Sheet, :evision .
., :a ec June 2C,15E;, for Jc: .1c. C2932, i:enti#ies ne : river an:
swaging ::ci usec :: ins:all tne ranksnaf: cil ciugs. Su:secuen: :: Ouery, ne NRC ins;ec:Or nas inf:rmec na: :ne swaging :ci :s energi:ec nycraulically si n a =ressure of lac - 200 :S:G asing a ; age anc :::ing l arrangement :na: a:: acnes :ne swagin; 001; ccwever. :nis '-#---=- -- is not reflectec in :ne e:ute sneet. re -- s.ee s.c. accve ,3 i l l
- 2. The NRC ins:ect:r n ac :Na: :ne yicn easner is :ns 2:lec :n :ne :r ier i witn a screw; also, :ne swaging ::cl is accustacle in Orcer :na: :ne I swage is ::siti:nec ::r ec :y. -caever, :nere ,as 1: :i:2-' r : a-
- nese :evices are su:;ectec :: :ericcic service. (See 3.2. ac0ve.' !t h
t l t, l I
TRANSNiERICA ..t.AVAL. I.1CORFCFATED CRGANIZA:1CN: E3GINE AND COMPRE$$CR 0[7. l C#KL*ND, CALIFORNIA REPCRT NC.: .999003 34/t!1-02 l Nspect;cN asscLis. lPAGE 4 ef 3
- 3. Becstai .2cwer ::r:cra:icn 3ur: nase Orcer Nc. 96 5-u-013.0, date: '
August i, 1974, anc Revision 22, ca:ec Acril 22, ISEO, icenti'y :ne ; meters for tre auxiliary luce cil anc dacket wa:ar :um:s wi:n a "Q" ' p refix. Paragra;n 13.1 of Scecification Nc. 9645-M-013.0 s:stes ;
- na; ecuipment designatac ni n a -'0" num:er, cerf rms a safety-relatac function. The speci#icat.cn recuires :na: me::rs :e su;:liec in ac::reance wi:n Accendix 0. Paragracn 5.3 of 20:encix 0 (5:ecifica::en Nc. 9645-E-013.0) accresses service ::nci:::ns relative :: pressure, temcera:are, reia:ive humicity, an: ascia:icn as :es paragra:n 5.1 of the g:verning spec 1'ication (Nc. ?645-M-013.0).
Fur:ner, the governing specifica:1cn lists IEEE stancarcs, including 323, anc statas : a: :re l's: is ne: limitac :: ncse icent ec: i t als: sta:as ena: :ne "mos stringen requirements sna 1 1:: y. '
- i The met:rs su: liec *:r :nts :ur: nase :r:e- 9 ave n:: :esa arv'r:n=ec a / !
Ouali#ie:. The Engine anc ::m:ress:r ;ivist:n :f Transamer ca :elava , i l :nc:r:cra:a: maintain :na: envir:n= ental cualf'i:1:icn Or tre me::rs '
-as no: a ::n:rae:aa: :e utremen . (see 5e::icn 5.4 a:cve;
, 4 Oeiaval ?ur nase Cr:er No. 52572, da:ec Acril 13, 1975. :r:erec :ne i m:::rs #:r :ne auxiliary lu:e i :am:s. Nc:a .', f :ne :.0. s:2:as in : art, "A;lis-Chalmers :: carti#y :na; manufacture is in ac::r:- y ance mi n Ailis-Chalmers Tecnnical Scecifica:icns as :u::inec f:r '
IEEE 323, 334 and 3aa meter recuirements . .
- 3.0. Change Or:er N:. 1, cata: ;une 2, 1975, inciucec a enan :ne me::e
- esign are s:a:ac, sil eisa ema ns :ne same. ' ge :. :: Accen:.m N:. .,
l
- ata: .une 3, ;975, acce: ne c::rs ':- :ne ja:xa a:ar :am:s at:
sic 1c: accress :ne ec:as :f :ne original :ur: nasa :r er. 7bere ! e-e 9: ec:r:s : :erti#y na- re : :rs ca: :eer ar;#a::.re:
- n ac::r:anca at n A;i s-Cha:mers Tecnn :a; 3:e:-' :::::ns as :w:- -
linec for IEEE 323, 33a arc 3al. (See 3.5. aceve: I 5- e ::- e:: <e 1:- :r egar:' ; tre :;-:::r a ;e- :--.s :51----
.a:r : ::en ;r::;em is ace:ua:a. -rt:r :: im:;emen:a ::n f ne ,
meci#ication, Resaaren anc Deveicceen: nac ::ncu :ac tas:s anc l t
- ert ec :re a::r::riate ::n#'gura ::n :# a sjsta= :ra: .:.::
- rev :e :ne necessary lucrica::en :: :ne Our:cenarger :nrus- i
- ear ngs ' anile :ne ciesai generat:r aas in :ne stanc:y mcce. ~~e
.iRC ins:ec::r aas in#:rmec :na: ne me::fie: ar:::narger nrus:
tearing .u:r':2:icn system 9a :een 'ne:r:0-a:a: :P :ne :'ese'
;enera rs a: San Onef-e. -cwever, 9e e :r:s ae a :resen a: ::
re#~ec: ac::::lisnmen Of :ne mec fica:icn :r its ef'ectiveness. l i e l
- 1 9
4
l TUNSAMERICA sELAVAL. INCORFCMTED l CPKLANELATH3N: ENG:NE ANC CCMPRE!!CR !v. CA< LAND, CALIFORNIA Rapont No.. i9900324/31-02l INSPECTICN RESULTS: lPAGE 5 of 5 l 6,. The ::rrective acticn regarcing :ne :ranKsnaf Oil :iug :rcolem is acequata. The criver usec o install the oil plugs nac caen mccifiec c eliminate damage to the cranksnaft cil clugs during installation.
- 7. Transameri:a :elaval r.c:r:cra:ac's Engine anc C:=:resser Oiv sten d
was not aware of a pr:clem wi n a 5-inen eneck valve T.anufa::arec Dy One Williams Gange C meany. The information :ney nac certainec 0 a :-inen cnecx valve manufacturec by the Quracia Manufacturing C m any. The la::er valve was reccetecly stuck in an 3: r xima:aly s0 percent :cen ;csition and cecumentad en C:nci icn Re er: No. 4136. The C:ndition Re:ce: aas ':losac ut" :ecause ne -e:ce:ac ::nci-icn coulc net be cu:iica:ec, l I l. i 1 l i l i l l l
,w -
, - ~ - ~ , - -- , --- e w g- -
y -
o l
.- l
\
i
- CRSCNS CON ~'.C~ID '
(p gny En ns oe ss:e, Cela..sl T-e E'< . t^ C . .,, a w. ,, 2, ,;s.. . :Lus Wr ? . o o /t o OCCket/Et*0r* MC. $9 900JJ 81-C A InsteC; r Ll. b. [at t P. 2 19e / "f f
*! t $$$d ** * $ . * @I$6 "
I *.
- b R , h' 8 [h , s e > ., m / *l , .4M .
,3, e t C a sat e F f, 0 b .t O $ . 4 ., . _
e W
/~- < J t .
J
. 7a 71
[ 7 E T s. ' 1
- ft '
Q 1! . "'S 43 ! L: t. e 4 o re L . . . . .. w-
. ., . . n a, , .
/
e 8% J C ,* p af #f\4!. Sw M s .* $ b '. , ' f.
- ( n e ic- (. , D. . n. u.
p f, n -. . . I
.m . . . t , L . . .
a N . .) . P,. k ,e , m 4 -4 g n< C4-<s,/ ( . /., . _ G e. L _r,,ri .
< b ., , , ,
C,-,.- /C. 4 o. .G,. . g c b' JJ. k) l* - /*) < - a _ ., i.h (, L -
. l
- c. c g
;,y> w4 s .
.. . r c.-< c-I :
1
. i I I I
I
.-i, O
1 l. 1
!4 I
l i l , _ . , _ _ _ , . ,. . . _ . - . . , - - , - . . . . . - - - __ - - _ - _ . _ . .. . - - - . , - - , , _ , _ . - , ~ . . _ . - _ _ . . - , , _ - -. ._ --,
g .~ - e- .
. i
' .: i l.l , i, i
. . : i, , :
m.- :
) 5 %
'Y N
1 c(, ' I *l* ,. kP
. - ~ a -
! ! . 't I 4: .
,:!. . I ]
-r . .
gig. -
.i :t= . -
- u.,
- ! I i :
- ! ; , 4 1
',4..
-- C 2 s:
4Ns
., -; ; i 7 .
e i . ' l y . :, I )s i
*<jQ-i N s.kq; 5
=l 1- )'4, q- m Q,
. N g s.'
Iosl=- I i .
-e i.
. # n. :: . ! ;$ -
i h.i !
- a r.
i
. . . l n.i ,: ,I ! I
.)' E ' e: n' l'
.i .-
- :- i 2 ., a
~,) m. :,.
5 !: . ,4 Q s4 J.C ?- bs. 'E* Re.
! . m.! a.:
i *.is 8 l 3%
. , .st 4:
4 of t,,- 2..
,' D.. ! N.ls..S,'
. l.4 Y ~;;
!.,., s :qc,i 2 -f '
14.s l l ;l~4 I d Jid .S E; 9 5.A I I 2
.l $,
, e.
l J. i s.i3
.,d $ 4 $2s 7 w i c
4 d ,.
)
l i
. t.
-! ; s1 : ~, s ,,- .
-( s,. - .
l < -. k=. , i G.
$+ i. b, 6 ,.
'l * .!
.: 4'!- 3 e.,.#9 y i t;,c .' .:: ,e* a e .1 ci cv
=:
m e .a,
- .m .
.,.. . , - . c; . .
sg c e gy m Q ; % ' 3 a d.i . 2 i n. a i A, : I, , '%
.-r .d R.9 ' .yv g4.
9 '9.z ' .1. q J z: I i v- q' I - i S. ~ A ,= s
. , .x .y < , i. ..
. ~, .
.- L !
, < l
, , - - c. = . .. s
- l
1
- i2 2 4: 26, 4 % -ti 0
- , .E, O'i e )' ? t
=
t 6 l O, ewa.
}
I ed Di A k e= is C, T =j at ' t 4 4 .J 9
- 3 , - . , I ,p a=> M '""," *- t.AJ I .=.ddt .
' .l r.2 ,
I I ' = ' " ' .b *
=.* . U O N
. ' t.::,$ >.
.a .,
.a, ; .,. , ,I .
- - s. - -
== 6 a *. '*.
O.
. j*
1 ;'
i % a c xf $W;g =siw r w a i l e 9 4
==
b c y' s .
-+ %
' {'. .f -
- y .
ac ia -. 2n6 e -4 g. U} * )? k or. b
- Y .:., -. I i w g. i - --
'vN -
E
-%-Qe - 4 Aa s ;.;. A3$ N--J 5 :e-4 w.
.? ,, y > c ==a W d
.*t Cl .P *[ ,#
di i . iI3y
~ l l.d d. 2 5 7 .
ez -dr c ~c]s9.J - ::<,aq? d 2 .
- 1 uE5cY h u".
i ' 4 .
= . g% ,., w -
sj u . s . --2:<, ::: ee~e
-i d
si I l 7 .i 3 h C -SQddd5
#1 d l
t
-I , ;
3 i . Q s, s I E.
% 6 Q Y Lh F e b **=
l *i " N I N ' i '
. ,# E 22 E $ I i
1 4 3 l
! N *=.se ed 3 6 V e.
C 4 g C .3
.t. d. . ,
I I lhGt$ c
} l - -
t9 ~1 s t s. ,m. .,o N 6, . .eu m w
*r
.s i tA %l S kn*
amm @ . 4 e
- - - _ - - - - - - , , , - - , , - , - . . - - - . - -- y.._v,_ , -. - - . . - - - . - . . - -
o . w a. ; ? e El
.s a l . ,
lt },
. e . * ' ** ' I I I f b* .' 'y.,
'a *' -
- gi -/
j '- r .9-: .S , ~
'{ 'N .~ %> * '
l $ r
,ar '
4 s, . [E Wa t
,~
k e i , a
. M.l; e
i - 4
- tl.S
.r -lr u-
- a. be. *,,
.,l
.s ;*I in l C V.m 9 -
J
*
- m '
i S
)
jT h # -
,. - j
;* ID i .
b !~ l h l 7h'! E f, ,N 4, t i
- c. g, i e i ,. ar,. . p , g ) I
.- 2,'
a. l
=
w 9' se( % g.vy Si l l
- t. A =a #
. , , / j *.,p
,A d l , b. l N'ti j Ql ,,. Ef -.*
%*, w'l c *f .0-.: ds k
Id
- g
,% L l #l ] I 3 (m t - .J s
1 '. ii ::; %E 4.a 4 l ~
'?! $.,Q f,o"i* (
g
. .e5 i
az l 9. .w .: :
'"l:
33*.s l 4 .b. 's '~ .j ., h h, a ,, -
%p . 'J N .1 P.er 1
- Ex'.j
.' , e e :.-: ! .e i ;a;3'*:ll-l.y) } .9
- .:-l q a. e i
I g *y d .; e 1.tw .s c'$ A . a 4
'3a -
.l t i -i . .
/. gJI as g
gM e > "4 h-u i d) ' 4 $ * '9. ,S .\: l 1 g 3 ~' I
'*E ! I i l 3 i l' 5 :g, c
't
- . E s. ; Ec c 5 =i
- s. : t , s i u'"I n ' t s a '$ :& R ,:;-
=!
2@ I.d. 5.) Q JCl% ~ =I't-
' i' 2;] -w]D i ~'l%. ) R~v7 f
' E '
Cl m.
=t 9;
. gr.
R. g ,,l w - G et 1 9 s n
=
p1 .m.' .J. =
-. cf rc -
*r "'
w , 3. .* c si g ni s-wl , 9 sc a f : .Q
.d I
.j $,
)?).
*' .,4 F .! .c.
- ,y' 4 .,
1 ,, , . e. c.
=.
'e c . -.S . .,
' 5
.). W ,"" 4 , c i
7.s. ', a - , 1, c .'.' ?, .d.; -
.c,, J: .
1,; ;i :s - ew /
- < . . c
'!: w/ .< :::
4 o ,e -. ., , c
' ~. ')
J, l' 4 g.: 45
- O ./ /, O 0
*i - .i :
W 'N' .lrdy O. .a,% j '.*:-
.? - - -
Y '. .
-- g,'
Y. **'". ['
- i. . ,. -
.%,, c' aw , N: P, ,, s 4 -m f,., - . 3 ,
w> r,
.~
i, p 5 :q:: ,p v
,i ' 8 e. ,
.m m g
I - - I ,,,3
*o>c .
w a. g
,,7. -E -:.:6[I!i ~N :C** OJ9 3
0 .~ h j* (.'::i: .
- . = . :; : -
-: ~ :s ~'
. . w- .c : t
- w. '.a, <n y %: cl-m 21 - CA l' E1 l J X E%'bY,'f.Q,3g'8:s'ff e ci e b.
4
. ae - .3 '
I
> ; = ;e t * ;- ':p r;,,,-l::::: ..
8:
=; :i! t': --
v
-::, a. .s e .:::'. e 'g 4 7, -
t ' 5 .y,4 P- 7 e --. c? c,
.#. ..e. 7
=
'* ' m
=., i o .=.' ' * . c)- 4 ' S .5 d G y' 5 i i~t j . 9 =d .,;
s
'"-f .S..- ,
r , , . t E L. z
*' I l .. .::
- ae .,,
':l:: k f F 8r 8 -
- k. fN N ^ .,,.,
3
- p=. , .
N N I
'N as .,,y I -
' EY$E =
- =
l \ i fl l l . lf 1 bll ork - s'
.4 ; ;
1 l
' l
*=t e=rv6 c 5
8 x *
, l '
1 I ! kENEE k ! > % ,,; j ! _ j I J : { g g
- d i I
\ '1 l d, d ;
%es4 s;
s .o s! . E : ~ : .;
- _ a
- I I i
f l
i *
--.- . - i i;;.
s e
;i; i ~~M
~ x , , . .
. i i
=
J i
}\.h,#
- e i.5I '= - i 2 Q.
i< '$ - s.
,i -. .' iY; 9 E-
-g
, 1 l hi :isi. sv .a.
= =C' e. :.
.e-
! l l I
; .i
.,I g )= =e
,, E ,.
- 's. ~ . s,;
N, i .c,,- ' s
,q .J =: ..
- s. s , s, i % .r -
' .3
'?
l
. $. . :k l 'd; 1 q
- yi I
~
[ h,ai ~ 5'" =E il
. . .\ \ .
- i. !-i !.iI$i.[,4
.. s . , . .:f s, "\T
! ,4 w;
/ I .,1 f ;hJ ,,J 9
.C b i. ;g. (.,. EP- jq oi i l J.Wd.. O .
,8
[ M.- e,4 J w!. i
- J *i' '
i ~4 c 1 d 4 %
* . . .i 9 -g '1 7 : + *a * ,, j 1 '%
.I. % h' )
i
> c 4 s .- s 5 Y. 1, :.i. .Ac ~ ~ , > %.l
. r , c~i (1 .:-
d .x
~
k.
. ,a e a o J r. .a 5 w
' .t 4 .,-) . . , ,
j -;
. % e i ;
S j $ .f,i ,*Cs1 a </l -:
- 3 n %
! ,1 - . . s4 ' ta
-i S'- $. ]% e g
i s e.t : a 1!0 ?%.,y q:N,$ . >> 2
=
e ,a, 4 (i l ;a.4. e'q. 2 a
.,: . O c" Q .p I
r
- 4.'9','.o'
- s. s 2:a % . .J,.
a.'
'"9 A
-., i w .s * ., --. *==.4 -i
.r
===
59 9.,.i s 2 f ,I s a
- v , .e . , ~
J.
.m. - 9,, .'.n,j 1 ::::. ~ %w ,
.-., %,. e
. % s. s E, -J '. r= g .,,61 *- C '" .a e .[
*l
- O
- .' ',; 'l. =4 y 7, .<$ 7, 4s.') 5 2 ~< *.)'. 4
~ . ';
m 5 Gl i ;- r*
? 7 G ,J $, *l iS E I -i r s Gd9M 4 .< , J, ..t a., ;, sexE d S
E
. i s.:.i i: ::: I
; , u
-j d. .-.. :1., a.d d d d $& s -e .
z v: -t -
. , u e%'
c.
= ; =
l, 2
'i w
.; e a 2
.+
5- , .:
.. - s ..
,i .-
6 s %S
.- m.;.id:- %
f -"
.c v, s.. . - .x
,l . $. - g.*..w( m';
- a =c -.!:=uJ q 'x) ., s.N
.x i 9 d .a
. ,** e,.
c t u
,e- .
,e r.
- .* f f s.
; ,- s., a,, *.3 - -
- .,, .i t, si = - r Y a: -;2 '$ ; g; gvg= e., b; ; ' "3,.,;
r, Q' r , ygg-7 * * :: k :,r,* 4 .= - c. u d I C1Ok d b-- s'e 4 h I_Q 1r . fl'
,l ,4i fv %-.
k ,,Itd 2 ? ,* 5 mO Na{ jJ
% a ::: r a v -. . w 9 % .,>, , ....
1 i1 i.22Q e-.J
-. , = ' d- d,, ~f - fi 34 ***C
* = el V ed ei = c:
.e
- wo3twJ ot d c; q, 5 '*
1 d-(o -
.. .E.
*
- m, -
s) ' .,,. vm n N A., d
- s. e > I p. *-
. I l . - < . ,
U ' [ l =J 3vv
~
. .I ' I aw e3 : 2" I m m. s- - E:'=
0 2. ( % w s q
'T
~
N y q m N e...- ~-- sn *% 3 I 4,s, em 'l -
e . . I s
- I l 1
!.s,* ' . . l' , e i . I 6
. s .
- i. ' S ,. .
J;
- a, g ; ,
1
-g.
,qi
! q. .5
,N
*-f g, p =j m, y? ' '
.4
- -.+ d -
i
.s
' ~II] j
*a .,
r cc. NEL
-- - *Q-s !i. ,'. !E
. s .f N4 - !
l I
-th
.E ~3 C -
y --
=. c. ;; .
s
. . *-%. *s i , ,
i - i g**
%s, l 'N . l ; l N.. = j. t -
d :o >
<N,
! 's's,. i$l! l'>l i +l.i " D:7t I
.se s. I M'2..
~q
.E -== i-
.i i :
l .i t . ,.o :i, -!. 3 i
- j'si: 3m
.i .
i s,,.....
.6, , , , ,
a s fl.,i ., ai , y; \1 I
- s., .
s .,y y) i
. al e i . , .
i4 .
- f. 1 ,*. U T -
.s
.~
a l .2 a 5. a.. 3d a g-i: i 4* I 5 O J.e.. '
- 34 '
s ~.,r .! i
,I i, T.'.: '.(.3 l .s!
. - .5 4 .e
(
.l
/
. . ' .V }
,,,.y e
! 1' ,,
i ., ',4 y g, 7, se
.o. .
i . i C: - l ,J 1 i s . 4 ' 4 J ; Is> .a yW-.!. '
- 1, i. c
.=. : ..
,. s t i .,. . .c j s.
. .; i . .s.
4 a ~ e 3 rT . m,i E' . O 'd \ ff Q q 4 '- '2.
- g. 1 -:. i .-:- l 4' d i -e,
.i J.,s~., eisn O H: : n: ;
s: #
=. &
.. ., i .
r E' d. l %' l 4 h ~ s 5 og )c * %. -
=.. "*.
* . . y -' ::= -}}