ML20137D602

Memorandum & Order Granting Applicant 850731 Request for Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 14 Re Tdi Emergency Diesel Generators.Contention Dismissed.Served on 851125

ML20137D602
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	11/25/1985
From:	Linenberger G, Margulies M, Paris O Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	GEORGIA POWER CO.
References
CON-#485-321 OL, NUDOCS 8511270105
Download: ML20137D602 (7)

Text

__ _ - - _ _ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.3'A 4-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Docg n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 03' c

~

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD *g3 N0'/ 2 5 p 3 ;g g Before Administrative Judges:

Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr. ((9l0:

-% [ Q' ~ _

M Dr. Oscar H. Paris SERED NOV 251985 In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-424-0L

) 50-425-0L GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al. )

)

(Vogtle Electric Generating )

Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) November 25, 1985

)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Ruling Upon Motion for Summary Disposition Of Contention 14 re: TDI Emergency Diesel Generators)

Introduction In this contention Joint Intervenors Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia and Georgians Against huclear Energy challenge the ability of emergency diesel generators (EDG) manufactured by Transamerica Delaval, Inc. (TDI) to provide a reliable source of onsite power for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP). On July 31, 1985 Applicants filed a motion for sunnary disposition of the contention pursuant to 10 CFR 2.749. On September 23, 1985 the NRC Staff (Staff) filed a response in support of Ap;ilicants' motion. Joint Intervenors requested an extension of time to September 23, 1985't'o filc- their respense. Their request was granted by our order of September 4,1985. No response was received gDR511270105 851125 g ADOCK 05000424 PDR

^ ~

F(-

(

from Joint Intervenors. For the reasons set forth below we grant Applicants' motion.

Standards Governing Sumary Disposition 4

In our Memorandum and Order of October 3,1985 ruling upon Applicants' motion for sumary disposition of Contention 8, we dealt with this subject. That recitation is not repeated here.

Discussion As admitted, Contention 14 states as follows:

There is no reasonable assurance that the emergency diesel generators manufactured by TDI to be used at Plant Vogtle will~ provide a reliable and independent source of onsite power as required by 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria #17, in that inadequate design, manufacture and QA/QC have resulted in substandard engines which are subject to common -

mode failures.

Georgia Power Company, et al. (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2), LBP-84-35, 20 NRC 887, 911 (1984). Although the contention speaks to " emergency diesel generators," only the diesel engine component has been challenged.

10 CFR Part 50 App. A, Criterion 17 - " Electric power systems" --

! states in part that "An onsite electric power system and an offsite electric power system shall be provided to permit functioning of structures, systems, and components important to safety." TDI EDGs are to be used at the VEGP to satisfy the onsite power requirement of this criterion. In their Contention 14, Intervenors advert to the numerous 4

4

-m-,..- . _ . , , . . _ . , . . . , , , . _ , , , , - , _ _ _ , . . - - , . _ . . _ , - - . , ,

c 4

i difficulties previously experienced with TDI diesel engines and engine mounted el,ectrical cables, and allege that use of the TDI units at the VEGP will not adequately satisfy the requirements of Criterion 17. We consider this contention as being directed at the modified and tested diesel engine units ultimately to be placed in service at VEGP, rather than directed at the as-received units initially delivered.

Applicants' motion for summary disposition of this contention states that, as the result of their own EDG Resolution Program and of a TDI Owners Group Program (both programs directed toward extensive examination, repair and testing of the TDI diesel engines), these units will qualify for reliable service at the VEGP. The motion is accompanied by a statement of thirty eight material facts as to which it is alleged that there are no litigable issues. The statement of facts is supported by three affidavits of affiants whose qualifications we find to be satisfactory. As the result of engine component failures encountered by other users, Applicants established the above-mentioned EDG Resolution Program in November 1983. Similar concerns by other utilities led one of the Applicants (Georgia Power Company) to organize a TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group in December 1983, which included eleven other U.S. nuclear utilities. This group established a program to address the TDI diesel engine problems. The program involves four major efforts: (1) resolution of sixteen known generic problems (Phase l

f~

I 1); (2) systematic ' design review and quality revalidation of all components important to the reliability and operability of each owner's design type of engine (Phase 2); (3) appropriate engine inspections and testing, as identified by the results of Phases 1 and 2; and (4) appropriate engine maintenance and surveillance programs, as indicated by the results of Phases 1 and 2. Applicants stated that the Staff evaluated the overall program plan of the Owners Group and concluded that it incorporates the essential elements needed to resolve outstanding concerns about the reliability of the various TDI units for nuclear service, and needed to ensure that these units comply with General Design Criteria 1 (regarding quality assurance) and 17 of 10 CFR Part 50, App. A. Applicants' EDG Resolution Program became Applicants' imple'nentation of the Owners Group Program. The latter was developed independently with respect to Transamerica Delaval, Inc. Its implementation is likewise an independent effort, although safety related imputs from TDI were considered.

TDI supplied two EDG units for each of the two VEGP nuclear plants.

VEGP's diesel engines are designated as model DSRV-16-4, indicating that the engine is a four cycle, sixteen cylinder, V-head type of design.

Since not every unit belonging to every Owners Group member is the same design type, the Owners Group designated an existing " lead engine" for each type of design. The Comanche Peak TDI diesel is the lead engine for the VEGP V-16 engines. Successful testing of the Comanche Peak EDG as well as that of Catawba (also having a V-16 engine) has given i

to confidence to achieving acceptability of this type of engine for VEGP.

The affidavits accompanying Applicants' motion describe in considerable detail the program of examinations, repairs and modifications, testing and maintenance conducted and planned for the lead engine. The

. affidavits also provide a detailed account of what has been and will be done to the VEGP units to render them acceptable for nuclear service.

-The TDI engine problems identified by Intervenors are not specific to the VEGP units; some have been found to be inapplicable to VEGP. Those that are applicable have either been resolved or are being resolved subsequent to engineering reviews of inspections and tests perfomed on VEGP engine components in conformance with the Owners Group Program j recommendations applicable to the VEGP units, including those recommendations dealing with in-service testing and maintenance.

Applicants have an on-going program in place to address these matters. l Joint Intervenors have not challenged the adequacy of the Owners Group Program. 1 7

We find Applicants' statement of facts as to which there are no litigable issues to be adequately supported by the three affidavits, I which are undisputed and complete as to work perfomed to date.

1 We note that a recent Licensing Board partial initial decision I concluded that the Owners Group Program, if followed, provides the requisite assurance of the reliability of an onsite emergency power system having the same engine design as those being readied for service at VEGP. (See Cleveland Electric and Illuminatins Company, et al., (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) Conclucing Partial Initial Decision, Slip Op. at 75 (September 3,1985)).

i

i Staff's response of September 23, 1985 supports the granting of Applicants' requested motion for sumary disposition of Contention 14.

Its response is accompanied by the affidavit of an affiant whose professional qualifications we find to be satisfactory. The affidavit affirms the Staff's agreement with the entirety of Applicants' statement of facts. Staff's affiant confirms the approval by NRC of the Owners Group Program plan and portions of the Phase 1 implementation results therefrom, and anticipates approval of the balance of the Phase 1 implementation efforts later this year. Finally, Staff's affiant

( concludes that Applicants' comitment to actions deriving from the l Owners Group and from results of Applicants' own efforts give adequate assurance that the Vogtle TDI EDGs will perfonn reliably when needed and that the Joint Intervenors' concerns are unfounded. Eight specific l

bases for Staff's conclusions are provided by Staff's affiant.

Based upon our review and consideration of all of the foregoing, the Board concludes that Applicants have undertaken a well-considered, in-depth approach to qualifying their TDI EDGs for reliable nuclear service at the VEGP. The Board further concludes the program provides reasonable assurance that the emergency diesel generators manufactured by TDI to be used at Plant Vogtle will provide a reliable dependent source of onsite power as required by 10 CFR Part 50 App. A General Design Criteria 1 and 17. Whereas evidence of the ultimate success of Applicants' efforts must avait the results of preoperational testing of the VEGP EDGs, we find no basis at this time to challenge the likelihood of that success. Contention 14 is without merit.

ORDER The Board grants Applicants' motion for sumary disposition of Contention -14 and the contention is dismissed.

THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Chairman MortonB.Marguliey)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE GtaveA.Linenbgfger,Jr.

2L.

MINISTRATIVE JUDGE

@V - M ((

Dr. Oscar H. Paris ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of November,1985 1

h