ML20136E642
Text
nneo*
8 o
UNITED STATES g
8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
s WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
%o../
o DEC 5 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing, DL Gus C. Lainas, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, DL FROM:
L. S. Rubenstein, Assistant Director for Core and Plant Systems, DSI
SUBJECT:
EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR EVALUATION AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS WITH TRANSAllERICA DELAVAL DIESELS, POWER SYSTEMS BRANCH The Power Systems Branch has developed initial requests for information (Enclosure 1) to evaluate the acceptability of the Transamerica Delaval EDGs at nuclear power plants identified on the attached list (Enclosure 2).
The enclosed requests and the responses submitted by each applicant may not provide all the information needed to assure the staff that the EDGs C
at their plant will perform as required. Based on Shoreham investigative Q
results, additional requests may have to be developed to complete the staff evaluation.
We suggest these requests be issued as soon as possibl to affected applicants / licensees to give them ample time to respond. We also suggest that a meeting (s) be arranged with the various applicants and licensees to discuss these requests for information needed by the staff to complete its evaluation of the EDGs at their plant.
~~
p D/%t5. coo L. S. fubenstein, Assistant Director for Core and Plant Systems Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See page 2
Contact:
A. Ungaro x29416
(
~=: r es wog y 7b u
-Thomas M. Novak 2-DEC 5 E63 cc:
E. Case R. Mattson D. Eisenhut F. Miraglia i
A. Schwencer G. Knighton B. Youngblood E. Adensam J. Stolz J. Miller D. Vassallo i
- 5. Varga D. Houston 4
E. Weinkam B. Budkley K. Jabbour H. Rood J. Stefano R. Hermann M. Thadani S. Burwell
- M. Miller 2 D. Hood S. Miner M. Srinivasan B. D. Liaw J. E. Knight R. Giardina E. Tomlinson A. Ungaro R. Caruso R. Bosnak O
O i
g i
.)
ENCLOSURE 1 l
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I
DELAVAL DIESEL GENERATOR EVALUATION l
POWER SYSTEMS BRANCH diesel generators (DG) procurement specifications to which the standby Provide a copy of the 430.1 were ordered.
430.2 Provide the perfomance specification and inspections performed upon receiving the DGs to show that the procurement specifications were met.
430.3 Identify the materials used in the design of the DGs at your plant (specifically limiting components such as crankshafts, camshafts, s,
pistons' rocker arms, bearing materials, cylinder blocks, cylinder heads, pumps,turbochargers,etc.). Discuss how you assured yourself that design materials usedin the manufacture of your DGs were as stated and in accordance with materials described ihfhe TDI proposal,
')<
your purpose specifications, and conformance to indu'stry standards.
430.4 Does TDI have a program where parts / components, etc., are modified (such that design margins are reduced) in order to improve opera-bility 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.
I 430.5 If applicable, provide responses to all NRC open items on standby DGs at your plant.
~430.6 Identify each of your DGs by model number and rating (continuous duty and short time overload) as purchased and discuss all tests (including torsional and other design proof tests) perfomed on the DGs that were observed (also those not observed) by you at the manufacturer's facilities.
430.7 In addition to qualifications tests that were performed in accordance with regulatory guides 1.9 and 1.108, and IEEE Std. 387, describe all other onsite tests performed on your DGs.
430.8 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 DGs During this l
period, were any unusual or abnormal operations o rved such as
)(
excessive vibration, noise, etc., and how were th 'se coriditions corrected.
Provide a detailed summary of the complete operating histories of your DGs.
j l
\\
- \\
430.9 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 DGs and describe how the increased loading affects the DG capability with regard to reserve margin.
430.10 If DG loading has increased from that specified in the procurement specifications,hasitbeennecesgarytoupgradethestandbyDGs Y
to meet the new load requirements.
If DG upgrading has been performed, provide a detailed description of the upgrading accomplished on your DGs. What is the revised manufacturer's rating for each upgraded unit.for normal continuous duty and short time p
~
overload conditions.
If the DG built-in design margin (afterT '
upgrading) still within the recommendations of IEEE Std. 387. What 2 is the reserve load carrying capability (margin) of your upgraded DGs.
430.11 Perform an internal visual inspection of each standby DG with regard to potential crankshaft and/or web cracks as identified at the Shoreham Station and provide a detailed discussion of your findings.
In addition totheabove,performanynon-destructivetesting(NDT)suchasdye penetrant testing, etc., as deemed appropriate to assure absence of cracks at these engine parts, or any other location where cracks are g s observed.
V 430.12 Should your inspection and NDT show evidence of crankshaft, web or cracks in any other area (s) of the machine, identify their location, size and depth and provide a detailed plan of how you propose to restore the availability and reliability of the standby DGs to acceptable standards. If cracks are observed., you may be required to respond to additional staff requests.
c>-430.13 Should the results of your visual inspection and NDT show no evidence of cracks, justify that the DGs at your plant are sufficiently reliable so as to provide reasonable assurance that the facility
[can be operated]* 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, inspection, and quality assurance program con-ducted during manufacture of your DGs, (3) your assessment of TDI i
l responsiveness to problems that have occurred with your engines during l
installation and preliminary operation including assessment of TDI
- performance, (4) comparison of your DGs with all other TDI emergency i
!(-
~
- [can continue to operate]
L __
_ _ _ _ _L _
}
DG models now in use or to be used in other nuclear generating sta-tions (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 supportin that may be obtained from non-nuclear installations, (5)g information have you (or others) Independently reviewed or verified any TDI design calculations for critical components of your DGs, and if not how have you assured yourself that the 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 relia 11ty to warrant operation of your plant.
y In addition, provide a tabulation of the number of times (including date of occurrence) voltage was lost at the emergency bus (es) re-quiring operation of the DG(s) including a brief description of each incident.
In the above tabulation, also identify the loss of i
emergency bus voltage due to loss of offsite power.
430.14 Shoreham has identified connecting rod bearing materials are not in q
accordance with design specifications on their engines. This condition may also exist on all other TDI diesels Provide assurance
_.9 that correct bearing design and materials have been used in your V
engines. Should you find that improper bearings have been used in your diesels, +ad how do ypp propose to correct this problem, and d Qe#
schedule of accomplishment.(
430.15 Shoreham has identified cracks in a large number of pistons on their diesel engines, Since all TDI engines provided for nuclear service have common cylinder design (17" bore, 21" stroke) and we presume similar piston materials, this condition may also exist on all other TDI diesels.
In performance of internal inspection of your DGs, observe for presence of cracked pistons. Should you find evidence of cracks provide the following:
a.
Your confirmation that piston design and materials are/are not identical to those used in the Shoreham diesels.
b.
Description of design and. materials used in your engines and your schedule for connecting this problem.
The staff understands that TDI has c piston design modification to correct the above problem. Are you aware of this and ha_s TDI transmitted
, this service information to you?
(
7 430.16 What maintenance and/or operating practices have you developed to assure optimum reliability of your diesel generators at your plant?
430.17 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?
k 4
i O
4
...,h, M
be
- e em 9
r NUCLEAR PLANTS WITH TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL DIESEL GENERATORS l
POWER SYSTEMS BRANCH 4
Transamerica Delaval has supplied the DSR and DSRV engines to the following sites:
Utility Site Serial No.
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 Duke 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 Comandre Peak 76001/04 DSRV 16
~
j Georgia Power V.ogtle 76021/24 DSRV 16 Consumers Power Midland 77001/04 DSRV 12
(*)TVA Hartsville/Phipps Bend 77024/35 DSRV 16 l
SMUD Rancho Seco 81015/16 DSR 48 t
l L
(*)
project delayed or cancelled I
+
inf tial requests have been submitted
.0