ML20101L720
| ML20101L720 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1984 |
| From: | Sorensen G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| To: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101L722 | List: |
| References | |
| GO1-84-0293, GO1-84-293, NUDOCS 8501020351 | |
| Download: ML20101L720 (27) | |
Text
Q ir Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland, Washington 99352 (509)372 5000 Docket No. 50-460 December 20, 1984 G01-34-0293 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Clinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Subject:
NUCLEAR PROJECT N0. I TDI O!ESEL GENERATORS
Reference:
- Letter, E.G.
Adensam, NRC, to D.W.
Mazur, Supply System,
" Request For Additional Information Regarding Transamerica DeLaval Emergency Diesel Generators, WNP-1," dated 1/3/84 Licensability of a nuclear plant using TDI Diesel Generators, as the emergency backup power supply, was questioned by the NRC as a result of the Shoreham crankshaf t failure in August 1983.
The NRC subsequently requested information from each TDI diesel generator owner per the reference.
To resolve this licensing issue, the Supply System joined the TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group, which was formed to justify the use of T0! diesel generators as an emergency backup power supply.
Attached is the additional information requested by the NRC, G. C. Sorensen, Manager Regulatory Programs (340)
CCS:LCO:Iw 000:020351 04:ppo PDH ADOCK 05000460 Attachments 8
PUR cc:
T. Kenyon NRC (116)
NS Reynolds, dLCPl.R j
HW Kwan, UE/.C.PA (08U6)
J FDCC (899)
V ORM (847)
NRC Document Control
RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DELAVAL DIESEL GENERATOR EVALUATION 1)
Provide a copy of the procurement specification to which the standby diesel l
generators (DG) were ordered.
Response
A copy of the current procurement specification (Revision 20) has been provided.
I l
1 l
I 2)
Provide the performance specification and inspections performed upon receiving the DG's to show that the procurement specifications were met.
Response
The performance specification is the same as the procurement specification, a copy of which has been included in the the response to Question 1.
The Project Receiving Inspection Program included both final inspection at the source prior to shipment and receiving inspection when the DG's were received at the site.
The source inspection included a review of the data package documentation for completeness, correctness and compliance with the specification; and an inspection of the hardware for the following:
1.
Final Visual Examination a.
General appearance and canpleteness of assembly was checked.
b.
The units were inspected for typical workmanship items such as neatness of wire and tubing runs, correct hardware, fitting of panels, absence of damage from mishandling or wear, wiring defects, burrs, sharp edges, or loose connections.
c.
Significant and critical welds per specification and code require-monts were inspected, as were welder identification stamps.
2.
Final Dimensional a.
Mountir.3, interface or envelope dimensions were checked.
i b.
Critical dimensions were checked where accessable.
c.
Wall thickness of valve or other pressure retaining components were ch ec ked.
3.
Coating / Lining a.
Verified that paint / coating / lining was applied in accordance with approved procedures.
b.
Verified that material and coverage was as specified.
c.
Verified that surface was free from cuts, tears and abrasions.
4.
Lubricants /0ils a.
Verified presence of lubricants / oils.
J
V 2)
(Cont'd) 5.
Cleanliness a.
Verified that equipment was cleaned in accordance with approved cleaning procedures.
b.
Openings plugged, capped or sealed to maintain internal cleanliness.
c.
Exposed areas masked or coated as required to maintain cleanliness.
6.
Electrical Insulation a.
Verified successful performance of electrical insulation tests (e.g.
motors, generators, control cables, power cable, etc.).
7.
Marking /tdentification a.
ASME pipe subassemblies marked to provide material identification and traceability, b.
Components (valves, instruments, etc.) requiring individual tagging were verified to be correctly tagged.
c.
Identification nameplates on panels, cabinets, cubicles, etc. were verified to be correct.
8.
Nameplate / Code Stamp a.
ASME piping component nameplates were verified to bear the correct information, b.
The proper application of the Code stamp was checked.
c.
National Board Registration was checked.
9.
Packaging a.
Equipment packaging was verified to be in accordance with the approved packaging procedure, b.
Preservative application and the proper use of desiccants was verified.
c.
Containers were verified to be marked appropriately, d.
Equipment was verified to be cushioned, blocked, braced or anchored.
I 2)
(Cont'd)
Site receiving inspection included the following:
1.
Verification of receipt of a completed " Quality Shipment Release" form, indicating vendor surveillance source inspection and documentation review.
2.
Review of site data package documentation for accountability.
3.
Hardware inspection including, as appropriate:
a.
Identification and Marking
- 1) Pressure retaining parted marked to provide material identifica-tion and traceability.
- 2) Components (valves, instruments, etc.)
requiring individual tagging correctly tagged.
3)
Identification nameplates on pancis, cabinets, cubicles, etc.
b.
Protective Covers & Seals Equipment packaging in accordance with the requirements of the procurement specification.
c.
Coatings & Preservatives
- 1) Verified that material and coverage was correct.
- 2) Verified that surface was free from cuts, tears and abrasinns.
- 3) Verified presence of preservatives.
d.
Desiccants Verified the presence of desiccants, e.
Physical Damag
- 1) Fire Damage
- 2) Excessive Exposure
- 3) Environmental Damage 4)
Tie Down Failure
- 5) Rough Handling
- 6) Railroad Car Humping f.
Clea,nliness Verified that the equipment met cleanliness requirements.
J
V 3)
Identify the materials used in the design of the DG's at your plant (speci-fi cal ly limiting components such as crankshaf ts, camshafts, pistons rocker
- arms, bearing materials, cylinder blocks, cylinder heads, pumps, turbo-chargers, etc.).
Discuss how you assured yourself that design materials used in the manufacture of your DG's were as stated and in accordance with materials described in the TOI
- proposal, purchase specifications, and conformance to industry standards.
Response
The TOI Diesel Generator Owners Group has issued several reports covering the key diesel engine components which have had any adverse operating experience and considered to be important to engine operation. Each report assesses the adequacy of the component from a design and material standpoint. These reports also recommend certain inspections and tests be performed on these components to either validate assumptions made in the report or to establish the as-built condition of the component.
Washington Public Power Supply System plans to conduct an inspection of these components in accordance with the Owners Group Recommendations. The results of these inspections will be forwarded to the NRC for review.
The procurement document for the diesel generators was based on a performance spec 1fication rather than detailed design requirements.
As such, the Specification was not specific in identifying all materials of construction, relying rather on TOI operating and manufacturing experience, accepted industry standards (DEMA),
and the applicable codes identified in the spec i fica tion.
Material application for the engine is the sole responsibility of Delaval, based upon experience in the diesel industry.
No material design review was performed by the Supply System.
Annual QA audits were performed during the manufacture of the DG's to assure Delaval's compliance to their approved QA program including receiving inspection, material storage, and material identification and control. Five (5) audits of Delaval were performed during the 1976 through 1980 time period.
Vendor surveillance in-process inspections provided verification (on a sampling basis) of Delaval's receiving, inspection and testing of vendor materials.
In addition, vendor surveillance review and verification of material certification and component records for material traceability (where required) was performed.
The vendor surveillance final review of the site data package documentation prior to final release and shipment, verified material certification compliance with applicable codes and standards.
1
I 3)
(Cont'd)
The following list notes engine parts and their material of construction.
Limiting Component Materials Engine Base ASTM-A48 Crankshaft 0-4774 Crankcase Casting ASTM-A48 Cylinder Block ASTM-A48 CL 40 Master Rod Forging A151-A-4142, D-4169 Link Rod A151 A-4142, D-4169 (Delavel Designation)
Piston Crown ASTM-A148 Gr. 90/60 Piston Skirt ASTM-A536 Gr.100/70/03 Cylinder Head ASTM-A27 Gr. 65/35 l
4)
Does TDI have a program where parts / components, etc., are modified (such that design margins are reduced) in order to improve operationability and DG reliability?
Does this apply to any DG parts at your plant? Provide a list of product improvements made by TDI on your model DG and identify and justify which of these were not incorporated on your diesels.
Response
TDI does have a product improvement program which is intended to improve the operability and reliability of their engines.
Notification of noteworthy modifications are issued to TDI diesel engine owners by the Service Informa-tion Memo (SIM).
The TDI Diesel Genrator Owners Group is not aware of any modification recommendations from TDI which was intended to decrease design margin.
Attached for your review is a summary nf those SIM's which TDI forwarded to the Supply System for WNP-1 equipment. The listing includes a comment and recommended disposition for each (SIM) based upon the Architect Engineers review.
As can be noted, the majority of the memos have been determined to be related to maintenance procedures or inspections, some modifications which have been incorporated at the vendor's shop, and a few others which are not applicable to WNP-1 equipment or plant service conditions.
For example, the cylinder head valve guide and water wash system (SIM's 301 & 328) modifications apply I
to engines of long running duration. No utility has incorporated these modifications in conjunction with stand-by generation and accordingly they will not be incorporated into the WNP-1 design. The several SIM's which will be implemented such as cylinder head nut retorquing and generator coupling repair, are so noted on the listing.
l t
i
5)
If applicable, provide response to all NRC open items as standby DG's at your plant.
Response
There are no open NRC items on the WNP-1 Emergency Diesel Generators, j
6)
Identify each of your DG's by model number and ratino (continuous duty and short time overload) as purchased and discuss all tests,(including torsional and other design proof tests) performed on the DGs that were observed (also those not observed) by you at the manufacturer's facilities.
Response
Diesel Model and Rating The Emergency Diesel Generators at Washington Public Power Supply System's WNP-1 plant, are comprised of two Transamerica Delaval Inc.
Enterprise Units, model number DSRV-16-4, rated at 7,000 kw continuous and 7,700 kw short time overload.
Diesel Testing The below listed tests were performed in the Delaval shop and witnessed i
(except as noted) by Vendor Surveillance personnel of the Architect Engineer.
The data for these performance, quality and reliability i
tests are included for your information.
o DEMA tests o
Factory tests (not witnessed, documentation reviewed for completeness) o Functional test of the Control System o
Functional test of the Surveillance Systen i
L o
Functional test of the Protection Systep o
Sequential loading test o
Rated load test o
Overload test o
load rejection test l
o Overspeed governor test o
Starting air receiver capacity test o
Starting air compressor test o
Auxiliary motor driven equipment test (aux 111ary jacket water and lube oil pumps) o Acoustical test a
Torsianal test (Ver i f ic a t ice w.is by inalvsos not test.
A cnny of i
the in11y<es is prov t:1ed for yaor informition.
7)
In addition to qualification tests that were performed ~ in accordance with regulatory guides 1.9 and 1.108, and IEEE Std. 387, describe all other on site tests performed on your DG's.
Response
The WNP-1 Diesel Generator Sets are still in the erection phase.
To date, no field tests have been performed or specific procedures written for the testing of the units in the field.
Present requirements call for the diesel generators to be field tested in accordance with the OEMA Standard Test Code and the ASME Power Test Code No.
17.
In addition, five normal power failure simulations, to demonstrate equipment design performance to specification requirements, will be performed.
Additional field testing as directed by the Diesel Generators Owner's Group, pursuant to ongoing investigations 'and studies, shall be performed as required.
1 i
i i
i 8)
In addition to any deficiency reports already provided to the NRC, summarize and describe problems encountered and resolved during installation and preliminary operation of the DG's.
During this period, were any unusal or abnormal operations observed such as excessive vibration, noise, etc., and how.
were these conditions corrected?
Provide a detailed summary of the complete operating histories of your DG's.
Response
Construction of. the WNP-1 site has been suspended and the diesel generators are in a partially constructed state.
No significant problems beyond deficiency reports provided to the NRC, have been encountered in the installation phase to date.
l l
t I
. -, -. ~,, - -.......,.
b 9)
Tabulate, compare and discuss differences in present actual DG loading to estimated loads included in the procurement specifications. Identify the magnitude of the increased load (if any) on the DG's and describe how the increased loading affects the DG capability with regard to reserve margin.
Response
The present actual loadings for the diesel generators are as follows:
Proc Spec LOOP ESFAS & LOOP Estimated Specified DG Rating Loads Loads Diesel Load Continuous 2 Hr
" Actual" " Actual" DG A 6922 kw 7000 kw 7700 kw 7376 kw 6525 kw DG B 6922 kw 7000 kw 7700 kw 7376 kw 6525 kw The loads indicated above as " Actual" are the maximum loads.
Though the LOOP load is higher than the continuous rating, it is within the 2 hr rating of each DG as specified in Sec. 3.7.2 of IEEE Std 387-1977.
This condition results from the starting of the Decay Heat Removal (DHR) pump.
However, the subsequent turning off of the Auxiliary Feed Water (FWA) pumps reduces the peak load from 7376 to 6783 kw which is well below the continuous rating.
It can be seen that under LOOP & ESFAS the load is below the 2-: rating. As we have already procu ed the major plant electrical equipments, and accounted for anticipated changes, we do not foresee any increase in kw demand.
l l
4 J
r 10)
If DG loading has increased. f rom that specified in the procurement specifica-tions, has it been necessary to upgrade the standby DG's to meet the new load requirements?
If.DG upgrading has been performed, provide a detailed description of the upgrading accomplished on your DG's.
What is the revised
'manufactuerer's rating for each upgraded unit for normal continuous duty and short time overload conditions?
Is the.0G built-in design margin (after upgrading) still within the recommendations of IEEE Std. 387.
What is the reserve' load carrying capability (margin) of your upgraded OG?
Response
It 'has not been necessary to upgrade the Whr'-l diesel generator to meet new load regiurements. Since no upgrading has taken place, the remaining portions of Question 10 are not applicable.
]
(
11)
In light of the problems that have been identified to date with Delaval diesels, discuss your plans to perform an internal visual inspection of each standby DG with regard to potential crankshaf t and/or web cracks as identified at the Shoreham Station and provide-a detailed discussion of your plans to perform any non-destructive testing (NDT) such as dye penetrant testing, etc.,
as deemed appropriate to assure absence of cracks at these locations or at any other locations where cracks may have been observed. Discuss schedules for such testing.
Response
As a result of the failure of Shoreham crankshaft, the TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group identified the crankshaf t as a generic component for analysis in Phase I of its program.
Failure Analysis Associates (FaAA) completed its analysis of crankshafts for the DSR-48, DSRV-16-4, DSRV-12 and DSRV-20 diesel engines. These reports were forwarded to the NRC for review on 4/20/84 under letter #TDI-17, on 5/24/84 under letter # OGTP-39 and on 6/15/84 under letter # 0GTP-76 respectively.
The FaAA reports recommend torsiograph testing of one crankshaft at each plant and NDE inspection of the oil holes in the main journals number 4, 6, and 8 for the DSRV-16-4 crankshaf ts.
Construction has been halted at WNP-1. Schedules for all additional testing, i
as directed by the Owner's Group will not be developed until after construc-tion resumes.
l i
F.
- 12) Justify that the standby DGs at your plant are sufficiently relicble that there will be reasonable assurance that the tacility can operate without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Your justification should include, but not be limited to the following: (1) quality assurance program conducted by you during procurement, manufacturing and receipt of your DGs, (2) your assessment of the TDI manufacturing process, in spection, and quality assurance program conducted during manufacture of your DGs, (3) your assessment of TDI responsiveness to problems that have occurred with your engines during instcIlation and preliminary operation including assessment of TDI performance, (4) comparisor, of your DGs with all other TDI emergency. DG models now in use or to be used in other nuclear generating stations (and other non-nuclear facilities) to show that the conditions and/or failure modes present at Shoreham will not occur at your plant and at other nuclear plants; provide any supporting information that may be obtained from non-nuclear installations, (5) independent review or verification of any TDI design calculations for critical components of your DGs, and/or other means used to assure that your DGs are designed to DEMA standards and applicable industry codes and standards, and (6) your overall assessment of the DGs at your plant with regard to TDI system design, operating experience to date, and system dependability, availability and reliability to warrant operation of yo.r plant.
Response
.1 The project QA program used for the procurement, manufacturing and receipt of the Diesel Generators provided for source evaluation and qualification, source in spection, source audits and site receiving inspection.
These programs included the following:
A.
Source Evaluation and Qualification Suppliers were evaluated prior to award to assure that their facilities and QA programs complied with the requirements of the procurement docu-ments, and applicable codes and standards.
These evaluations were made based on past performance, and the review of the supplier's Quality Assurance Program.
B.
Source Inspection i
The Project Vendor Surveillance Program provided both in-process inspec-tions and record reviews, and final inspections and site data package review prior to shipments.
The vendor surveillance check plan (attached) identifies the documentation reviewed (i.e., Section A) and the fabrication and testing activities witnessed and/or verified (i.e., Section B) during in-process and final inspections.
A total of (56) inspection visits were made on the WNP-1 Diesel Generators.
The final inspections included a review of the site data package for completeness and correctness, and an inspection of the hardware for the following:
l
F 12)
(Cont'd) 1.
Final Visual Examination 2.
Final Dimension 3.
Coating / Lining 4.
Lubricants /0ils 5.
Cleanliness 6.
Electrical Insulation 7.
Marking / Identification 8.
Packaging C.
Source Audits Annual QA audits were performed during the manufacture of the Diesel Generators.
The QA audits verified (on a sample basis) Delaval's com-pliance with their approved QA program and the procurement specification.
Five (5) annual audits were performed during the 1976 through 1980 time l
period.
D.
Site Receiving Inspection The site receiving inspection program included the following:
1.
Verification of receipt of a completed " Quality Shipment Release" form indicating vendor surveillance source inspection and documentation review.
2.
Review of site data package documentation for accountability.
3.
InspeM ion of the engines for the following:
a)
Identification and marking b)
Protective covers and seals
{
c)
Coatings and preseNatives d)
Inert gas blanket e)
Desicant 1
f)
Physical damage g)
Cleanliness
.2 As detailed in the response to Part (1) of this question, annual audits, vendor surveillance inspections and receiving inspection were performed during the manufacture and receipt of the diesels.
During this verification process, various noncompliances were identified as follows:
Audits Five (5) audits resulting in a total of forty-five (45) audit findings.
Vendor I
Surveillance: -
Seven (7) vendor notification reports were issued during the manufacturing process.
(A VNR is a " Vendor Sur ment used to document identified deficiencies"yeillance Docu-
)
i
I 1
12)
(Cont'd)
Receiving Inspection Thirty-two (32) nonconformance reports were issued during 4
receiving inspection.
The corrective actions to resolve the above identified deficiencies included program revisions, better program implementation, rework or rejection of the hardware, and use-as-is or repair to the hardware. All use-as-is or repairs to hardware / documentation deficiencies were reviewed and approved by the Architect Engineer, as were all program revisions.
.3 Due to the present incomplete state of Diesel Generator installation, interface with TDI has been limited to installation, procurement, and shipping and receiving related activities. Examples of TDI acceptance of responsibility and responsiveness are provided below:
A concern arose with the quality of welds in large bore pipe spools which Delaval had provided.
After an on site examination by Delaval, the spools were returned to their shop for rework and reinspection.
As a result of an inadequate diesel / foundation interface, unacceptable crankshaft deflections occurred which required shimming the sole plate-
/ foundation interface to alleviate the problem.
Delaval's on site representatives who assisted in this rework were very knowledgeable with respect to the engine and its operation.
Over all experiences at the WNP-1 facility indicate satisfactory performance from TDI for installation services.
We have no basis to evaluate Delaval performance for the preliminary operation phase of the installation.
.4 The TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group, of which the Supply System is a member, has developed a program which will address these questions. The program provides for component-by-component comparison of the Supply System diesel engine with failure history developed by the Owners Group for nuclear and non-nuclear diesel engines.
This process is described in the Owners Group Program Plan as the Component Selection process.
.5 The Owners Group will perform an independent Design Review and/or Quality Revalidation of each component as applicable. The results of these reviews will be forwarded to the NRC af ter the Supply System receives its plant specific DR/QR Summary Report from the TDI Owners Group Tecnnical Staff.
J
12)
(Cont'd)
.6 The TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group Program for addressing TDI Emergency Diesel Generator concern is in two phases.
The first phase is essentially complete.
This phase addressed generic problems with the TDI diesel engines. A detailed review was performed to identify the cause of these 16 problems and to recommend corrective action.
The results of the review identified the need for i
increased component inspection, better installation procedures, component design changes and periodic component maintenance and inspection. The Supply System and the TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group maintain that the resolution of these 16 generic problems will ensure that the TDI diesel generator will perform reliably. As a confirmatory effort, a second phase of the program is planned to review nearly all the diesel-engine components. This phase will identify any additional improvements in engine design, operation, and maintenance to further improve its reliability.
4 i
8 J
i i
i j
- 13) Provide a tabulation of the number of times (including each date of occurence) voltage was lost at the emergency bus (es) requiring operation of the OG(s) including a brief description of each incident.
In the above tabulations, also identify the loss of emergency bus voltage due to loss of offsite power.
Response
Due to the incomplete state of erection of the Emergency Diesel Generators, this question is not applicable to the WNP-1 equipment.
i i
h f
1 L
- 14) Shoreham has identified that connecting rod bearing materials are not in accordance with design specifications on their engines.
This ' condition may also exist on all other TDI diesels.
Provide assurance the correct bearing design and materials have been used in your engines.
Should you find that improper bearings have been used in your diesels, state how and when you propose to correct this problem.
Response
The Failure Analysis Associates report on Connecting Rod Bearing Shells discusses the failure mode of the original 11" diameter bearings shells on the Shoreham engines.
The report concludes that the 12" diameter bearing shells will not exhibit the same failure mode.
The report also analyzed the DSRV-16-4 bearing shells and concluded their acceptability.
FaAA was unable to established that the original bearing shells met design specifications in the area of tensile strength and elongation.
The reason for the discrepancy was attributed to the inability to obtain a large enough test specimen on the finished bearing shell. However, tensile and ductile properties of the material were not identified as the root cause of the failure.
The FaAA report recommends radiography of the bearing shells to ensure no casting voids greater than.050 inch are present in the critical areas of the bearing shells.
The FaAA report recommends that this inspection be done on a sampling basis.
Accordingly, inspection of the WNP-1 diesel generator conecting rod bearing shells will be performed in accordance with recommendations provided by Diesel Generator Owners Group.
Upon determination of a material or hardware discrepancy, the bearing shells will be replaced in accordance with the Diesel Owners Group recommendation / acceptance criteria and Transamerica Delaval direction.
i i
l l
}
- 15) Most.of the piston skirts in the Shorenam diesels were cracked. Because of 6 common cylinder design for all TDI diesels, it is presumed that this condition potentially exists on all other TDI diesels.
Discuss your plans, including internal inspection or other means to determine the potential or actual existence of such cracking.
In your response, indicate whether the design and materials are identical to those in the Shoreham units; if not, identify differences.
Identify any corrective actions you have taken to date or plan to take.
The staff understands that TDI has a piston design modification to correct the above problems.
Are you aware of this and has TDI transmitted this service information to you?
Response
The TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group has completed an extensive revicw of the piston skirt originally installed in the Shoreham engines. Failure Analysis Associates reports FaAA-84-2-14 May 23, 1984 and FaAA-84-5-8, June 1984 documents this review.
There are several types of pistons in use in nuclear service. The reports identified above deal with the AF and AE piston type.
The TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group is in the process of reporting on the AH and AN piston type. The Supply System is fully aware of the various piston types as a result of the Owners Group review of this component.
Pistons supplied with WNP-1 Diesel Generator sets are the AH type.
Delaval has notified the Supply System of a potential problem with residual stresses caused by improper heat treating of the piston skirts, but have not identified the skirts supplied with the WNP-1 engines as subject to the defect.
Heat numbers of the spare pistons, however, have been associated with the improper heat treatment. This has resulted in a 10CFR50.55(e) report.
Disposition of all pistons shall be in accordance with'the recommendation of the Owners Group and Transamerica Delaval.
1 i
i f
j l
- 16) What maintenance and/or operating practices have you developed to assure optimum reliability of your diesel generators at your plant?
Response
Maintenance and operating practices shall incorporate the program being developed by the Diesel Generator Owners Group.
There is the possibility of deviations and additions to the Owner's Group Program to accommodate concerns specific to WNP-1 that may conflict with or not be addressed by the program requirements.
.w
- 17) What surveillance practices in addition _to those required by plant technical specifications have you instituted to assure optimum reliability of your diesel generators at your plant?
Response
Due to the present state of plant construction, operating surveillance procedures have not been developed. The Supply System will develop procedures at a later date, incorporating lessons learned as a result of participation in the Diesel Generator Owners Group.
l l
l J
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1.
Specification 9779-53 Rev. 20 2.
Test Report (Transmittal T-121) 3.
Torsional Analysis (Transmittal T-017A) s 4.
Service Information Memo (UEWP-83-5047) 5.
Vendor Surveillance - Check Plar:
e 0
F
"/
CONTR ACT0D 000UttEtJT TR.'.f!CM:TTAL FORM
((C[
UfdtTED EffGINEERS S CONSTRUCTORS INO l
l.
$:Ess -
se so m._. :.7::s h.
r, m e A, r,t b e,c, PACE Or 9
o TR AN$u!TTAL NO. T* 121 T g *-
Prosett (Joao c e r C NEW C RC 3UCulf TAL gg WPPss Nvelser Pf osects Ne 10 4
, DATE CtjDNITT.ED S*3tc her 17 1019 WPPS$ 00NTRt.CT' tio $779 DJCCT: -Oletel Generaters g eg)ttn TOR noEn No750 /85 De Laval Enaine & Ccrr. pressor Divls!.2nR c:. C ;~ 1 V SPEC SECT NO.
- OLt:
P. C. tbx 2M1
~
550 - 05th A n nue tj
- F.
j-TO BE REVIEWED BY DnESS: Caktend. Cniffe-nfa c4521 USC 14 DISC DATC ENG COUuENT$
i ll FOLLowlNG DOCUMENTS ARE SU3 WITTED FOR:
- E DE C
/
I I /N#0
,,,c vie w C t.P P R OVA L 6lNF OR W ATiOOOC. CoggOL WEcM oerse ' u N p,3 a 4 i WECM CER l l
N
- i. OF PRINTS E A0H 1
H0 0F REPRODUOlBLES C ACM t STnuci l
l iInc l
l l
Jcyce Riele 1 NUCLE AR l'l-5-7 t kke"4/A
!CWITTED Dr.
Pro.$ect E:Cineeri:E l'~
tlc:
b23b3 l
l iDYENDOR:
- e C0ff t./P O NO 0 5 3 - v.1/ o
,c 7 i
i i
-Q_ut s : :: v i.w REv
- rru cc
- UMEhT NO M PR.E otSca'PT'ON/uAnurA:TunEn uo g
Ms.rch 20, 1979 I$ @ha.*
Tre.nsn= erica Delaval
- d eS e w r O v e
5 3 - 1 2.s 7som/
l&er42%
re,C ne,cre ter N== D Eng-ine No. 76051
- sppy,
=
(
j l
$.w$ulh Supervu:u23 Muelcar.
j F. qir.cer 4 / 7 f-7 9
}
1 1
T jh
- 8
}
i l
}
f i
it d
.f
-- m - n
.. m n a c,,,,,--
.......,,..-2 1
,