Text

Review of Design Review & Quality Revalidation Rept for Tdi Diesel Generators at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept
	ML20138K824
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	10/31/1985
From:	Laity W, Richmond W; Battelle Memorial Institute, PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATION
To:	Berlinger C; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20138K801	List: ML20138K796; ML20138K824;
References
	CON-FIN-B-2963 PNL-5336, NUDOCS 8510300314
	Download: ML20138K824 (125)
	v • d • e

_

POfL PNL-5336

a

' Technical Evaluation Report t

Review of Design Review and Quality Revalidation Report for the Transamerica Delaval Diesel Generators at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 ,

October 1985 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation under Contract DE AC06-76RLO 1830 NRC FIN B2963 i

Pacific Northwest Laboratory i, Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy lfg s

by Battelle Memorialinstitute e

i'.

! OBallelle e

E 8910300314 851017 DR ADOCK 0500 2

1 DISCLAIMER N This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the ,

United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any g agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legalliability or responsibility for the accuracy, com-pleteness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Umted States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United State's Government or any agency thereof.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830 I

PNL-5336 9

Technical Evaluation Report a

REVIEW 0F DESIGN REVIEW AND QUALITY REVALIDATION REPORT FOR THE TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL DIESEL GENERATORS AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 October 1985 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830 NRC FIN B2963' Project

Title:

Assessment of Diesel Engine Reliability / Operability NRC Lead Engineer: C. H. Berlinger Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 9

(

l I

i

9

PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY PROJECT APPROVALS O

. Date Scd._20, /7t;5 W. W. Laity, Project Manager [

Pacific Northwest Laboratory l

0 --- _

/ Date $#LY# 0f W. D. Richmond, Chairman Senior Review Panel l

Pacific Northwest Laboratory i

iii

f FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the Technical Assistance Project, Assessment of Diesel Engine Reliability / Operability, being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, O . Division of Licensing, by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission funded this work under authorization B&R 20-19-40-42-1 FIN No. B2963.

o l.

h*

4 O

V l

l 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was compiled by PNL project team members D. A. Dingee and J. F. Nesbitt based on technical contributions provided by consultants P. J.

Louzecky, N. Jaffray, N. N. Rivera, and L. Wechsler.

Others whose contributions were valuable in formulating this document include PNL project team members W. W. Laity and F. R. Zaloudek, as well as consultants A. J. Henriksen, B. J. Kirkwood, J. V. Webber, and A. Wendel. ,

A. J. Currie was the report editor.

vi

l

SUMMARY

! This report documents Pacific Northwest Laboratory's (PNL) review of the l- Owners' Group (0G) design review and quality revalidation (DR/0R) of the critical components of the Transamerica Delaval, Inc. (TDI) agergency diesel 9 engine generators installed at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The OG effort, conducted for the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO), is reported in TDI Diesel Generator Design Review and Quality Revalidation Report (June 29, 1984) and Revision 1 (December 21,1984).

PNL and its consultants reviewed this multi-volume report on an audit basis. Based on this review, PNL concluded that the OG study included all of the engines' crucial components. PNL found in general that this OG report ,

addressed the critical engine components in sufficient detail. In addition, f

PNL found that the studies conducted on the individual engine components were l generally adequate and sufficiently detailed to establish that the components I in service are adequate to perform their intended functions.

PNL recommends that additional consideration by given to several mainten-f ance items. These recommendations are not of sufficient or immediate concern

! to require LILCO commitments prior to licensing. However, PNL feels that LILCO should commit to them prior to the end of the first refueling outage.

! On the basis of its audit review for completeness and adequacy, PNL con-cludes that ro further reviews of the Shoreham OR/0R need be done. That is, i PNL concludes that the audit size (70 of 152 components, not including the 16

. Phase I components) and favorable results are sufficient to provide a basis to assume the adequacy of the OG review on the remaining components. PNL there-fore concludes that the OG DR/0R effort for tne Shoreham Nuclear Power Station l has requalified the Phase !! engine components for their intended service.

' 4'$

i i

d I i l t l

vil I i

CONTENTS PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY PROJECT APPROVALS ......................... iii FOREWORD ............................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................ vi s'

SUMMARY

................................................................ vii

, ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................... xix

1.0 INTRODUCTION

..............,........................................ 1.1 1.1 RACKGROUND ................................................... 1.2 1.2 REPORT ORGANIZATION .......................................... 1.3 2.0 OWNERS' GROUP DESIGN REVIEW /00ALITY REVALIDATION EFFORT ........... 2.1 2.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .......................................... 2.1 2.1.1 Component Selection ................................... 2.1 2.1.2 Task Description Preparation .......................... 2.2 2.1.3 Design Review ......................................... 2.3 2.1.4 Quality Revalidation .................................. 2.3 2.1.5 Maintenance and Surveillance Recommendations .......... 2.4 2.2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION STUDY ......................... 2.4 2.2.1 Owners' Group Results ................................. 2.4 2.2.2 Shoreham Plant-Specific Maintenance and Surveillance Plan ..................................... 2.5 2.2.3 Owners' Group Conclusions and Recommendations ......... 2.5 3.0 PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY EVALUATION ........................... 3.1 3.1 SCOPE ........................................................ 3.1 e 3.2 ORJECTIVES ................................................... 3.1 3.3 METH000 LOGY .................................................. 3.2 3.3.1 Assessment of Completeness of Owners' Group DR/OR ..... 3.2 ix

1 l

3.3.2 ' Assessment of Adequacy of Owners' Group DR/QR ......... 3.3 i 3.3.3 Assessment of Adequacy of the Maintenance and ,

S u rv ei l l anc e Pl a n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 i

4.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 4.1 j 5.0 COMPONENT REVIEW .................................................. 5.1 ;

! 5.1 INTERCOOLER (F-068) .......................................... 5.2 5.1.1 OG Results and Conclusions ............................ 5.2 .

I'

] 5.1.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.2 4

5.2 LUBE Oil PRESSURE REGULATING VALVE (00-420) .................. 5.3 i

5.3

! 5.2.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

j 5.2.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.4 I 5.3 JACKET WATER STAN0 PIPE: P!PE. FITTINGS, AND GASKETS

!, (00-700A) .................................................... 5.4 i i

) 5.3.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 :

i

5.3.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.4

r

) 5.4 JACKET WATER STANDP!PE VALVE (00-7008) ....................... 5.5 ,

3 ,

5.4.1 OG Results and Conclusions ............................ 5.5 i 5.4.2 P f;L E v al u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 j

, 5.5 CRANKSHAFT AND BEARINGS: BEARING SHELLS (03-3108) ........... 5.6 i

j 5.5.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 i 5.5.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.7 l l

l 5.6 THRUST BEARING RING (03-310C) ................................ 5.8 [

5 5.6.1 OG Results and Conclusions ............................ 5.8 g(,

1 5.6.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.8 5.7 CYLINDER BLOCK - LINER AND WATER MANIFOLO NUTS (03-315F) ..... 5.9

I 5.7.1 00 Results and Conclusions ............................ 5.9 t 5.7.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.9 i x i r l

a f

)

I

5.8 FLYWHEEL (03-330A) ........................................... 5.10 5.8.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.10 5.8.2 PNL Evaluation ........................................ 5.10 5.9 FLYWHEEL BOLTS (03-3308) ..................................... 5.10

5.9.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.10 i

l 5.9.2 P NL Ev al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.12 l o 5.10 PISTON RINGS (03-3418) ....................................... 5.12

! 5.10.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.12 l

l

'5.10.2 PNL Ev al u a ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.14 5.11 PISTONS - PIN ASSEMBLY (03-341C) ............................. 5.14 5.11.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.14 5.11.2 P NL E v a l u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.15 .

1 5.12 INTAKE TAPP ET ASSEMBLY (0 3-34 5 A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.16 )

l 5.12.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.16 l 5.12.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.17 5.13 FUEL TAPPET ASSEMBLY (03-3458) ............................... 5.17 5.13.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.17 5.13.2 P NL E v a l u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.17 5.14 FUEL PUMP BASE ASSEMBLY (03-345C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.18 5.14.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.18 5.14.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.18

jp 5.15 CAMSHAFT (03-350A) ........................................... 5.19 5.15.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.19 8 5.15.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.19 5.16 CAMSHAFT BEARINGS (03-3508) .................................. 5.20 5.16.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.20 xi

5.16.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.20 5.17 CAMSHAFT - SUPPORTS, BOLTING. AND GEARS (03-350C) ............ 5.21 5.17.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.21 5.17.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.22 5.18 IDLER GEAR ASSEMBLY - CRANK TO PUMP GEAR (03-355A) ........... 5.22 4 5.18.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.22 5.18.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.22 5.19 IDLER GEAR ASSEMBLY (03-3558) ................................ 5.23 5.19.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.23 5.19.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.24 5.20 CYLINDER GEAR ASSEMBLY - GASKETS AND BOLTING (03-355C) ....... 5.24 5.20.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.24 5.20.2 P NL Ev a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.25 5.21 CYLINOER HEAD INTAKE AND EXHAUST VALVES (03-3608) .... . . .. .... 5.25 5.21.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.25 5.21.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.26 5.22 CYLINDER HEAD VALVE - BOLTING AND GASKETS (03-360C) .......... 5.26 5.22.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.26 5.22.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.27 5.23 CYLINDER HEAD VALVE SPRING AND RETAINER (03-3600) ............ 5.28 5.23.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u sions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.28 5.23.2 P NL E v a l u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.28 h.

5.24 FUEL IW ECTION PUMP (03-365A) ................................ 5.28 5.24.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.28 .

5.24.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.29 5.25 FUEL IC ECTION N0ZZLE ASSEMBLY (03-3658) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.30 xit

5.25.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.30 5.25.2 P NL E v a l u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.30 5.26 AIR INTAKE MANIFOLD (03-37 5 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.31 5.26.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.31 o

5.26.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.31 5.27 EXHAU ST MANIFOLD (03-380 A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.32 o

5.27.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.32 5.27.2 P NL Ev al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.33 5.28 EXHAUST MANIFOLD - BOLTING AND GASKETS (03-3808) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.33 5.28.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.33 5.28.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.34 5.29 INTAKE. INTERMEDIATE. AND EXHAUST ROCKER SHAFT ASSEMBLIES (03-390A & B) ..................................... 5.34 5.29.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.34 5.29.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.35 5.30 ROCKER ARM BUSHING (03-390E) ................................. 5.36 5.30.1 OG Resul ts and Conclu si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.36 l

5.30.2 P NL E v a l u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.36 5.31 ROCKER ARM AND PUSH R00 LIFTERS (03-390F) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.36 5.31.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.36 5.31.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.37 5.32 GOVERNOR AND TACHOMETER ORIVE GEAR AND SHAFT (03-402A) ....... 5.37

'48 f 5.32.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.37 5.32.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.38 5.33 OVER$ PEED TRIP - GOVERNOR AND ACCESSORY ORIVE (03-4100) ...... 5.38 5.33.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.38 xiii u.

5.33.2 P NL Ev al u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.39 5.34 OVERSPEED TRIP VENT V ALVE (03-4100) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.39 5.34.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.39 5.34.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.40 5.35 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY - WOODWARD GOVERNOR (03-415A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.40 5.35.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.40 4

5.35.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.41 5.36 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY - B0OSTER SERV 0 MOTOR (03-415B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.42 5.36.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.42 5.36.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.42 5.37 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY HEAT EXCHANGER (03-415C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.43 5.37.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.43 5.37 .2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.43 5.38 ENGINE ORIVEN LUBE OIL PUMP (03-420) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.43 5.38.1 OG Resul ts and Conclu sions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.43 5.38.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.44 5.39 STARTING AIR MANIFOLD - PIPING, TUBING, AND FITTINGS (03-441A) ....................................... 5.44 5.39.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.44 5.39.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.45 5.40 STARTING AIR MANIFOLD - VALVES, STRAINERS, AND FILTERS (03-441B) ........................................ 5.45 5.40.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.45 $pt ,

5.40.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.46 5.41 FUEL OIL FILTERS (03-455A) ................................... 5.46 5.41.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.46 5.41.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.47 xiv

5.42 FUEL OIL STRAINERS (03-4 558) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.47 5.42.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.47 5.42.2 P NL Ev al u a ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.48 5.43 LUBE OIL EXTERNAL LINES - TUBING. FITTINGS.

p AND COUPLINGS (03-465A) ...................................... 5.48 5.43.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.48

, 5.43.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.48 5.44 TURBOCHARGER LUBE OIL - PIPE. TUBING. FITTINGS. AND FL EX I BL E COU P L I NG (0 3-4 67 A ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.49 5.44.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.49 f

5.44.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.49 5.45 TURBOCH ARGER BRACKET (03-47 5 A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.49 5.45.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.49 5.45.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.50 5.46 TURBOCHARGER AIR BUTTERFLY VALVE ASSEMBLY (03-4758) .......... 5.50 5.46.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.50 5.46.2 P NL Ev a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.51 l 5.47 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - CABINET / SYSTEM (03-500A) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.51 l

'1 5.47.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.51 5.47.2 P NL E v al u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.51 - l 5.48 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - CONTROL REL AY S (03-500J ) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.52 .

5.48.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.52 jaqr 5.48.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.52 5.49 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - PIPING. TUBING.

o AND FITTINGS (03-500M) ....................................... 5.52 5.49.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.52 l i

5.49.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.53 l i

r xy l

i

l l

i i

l 5.50 JACKET WATER AND LUBE OIL THERM 0 STATIC VALVES (03-515) ....... 5.53 5.50.1 OG Resul ts and Ccncl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.53 5.50.2 PNL Ev al u a ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.54 5.51 BARRING DEVICE - PNEUMATIC REGULATOR AND SHUT 0FF VALVE (03-5258) .............................................. 5.54 .. ;

! 5.51.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.54 :

l l 5.51.2 P NL Ev al u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- 5.55 .

i 1

i 5.52 BARRING DEVICE - MISC PNEUMATIC FITTINGS. HOSE. FILTERS. ,

AND TUBING (03-525C) .........................................

5.55 l i i l 5.52.1 OG Resul ts a nd Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.55 i l l 5.52.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.55 i

i j 5.53 BARRING DEVICE - MOUNTING BRACKET / SUPPORTS (03-5250) ......... 5.56 5.53.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.56 5.53.2 P NL E v a l u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.56 5.54 PYROMETER CONDUIT ASSEhBLY - THERMOCOUPLES (03-6300) ......... 5.56 ,

I l 5.54.1 OG ' Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.56 ,

5.54.2 PNL Ev a l ua ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.57 f

5.55 GENERATOR (03-650A) .......................................... 5.57 1

5.55.1 OG Resul ts and Conclusi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.57 ,

5.55.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.58 l

5.56 GENERATOR CONTROLS (03-6508) ................................. 5.50 5.56.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.58 ;

5.59 5.56.2 PNL Evaluation .......................................

Kl 5.57 GENERATOR SHAFT ANO PEDESTAL BEARING (03 650C) . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. 5.60 5.57.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.60 j 5.57.2 P NL E v a l u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.61 i l

5.58 ENGINE SHUIDOWN TRIP SWITCHES (03 695C) ...................... 5.61 i

(

xv1 .

F t

l 5.58.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.61 l 5.59 ENGINE SUB-BASE BOLT ING (03-715B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.62 l

l 5.59.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.62 l

l .

5.59.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.62 o

5.60 LUBE OIL ACTU ATOR ASSEMBLY (03-717 C ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.63 T i

5.60.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.63 :

I

o .

5.60.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.63 5.61 LUBE Olt AUTOMATIC SWITCH 0VER ASSEMBLY (03-711L) ............. 5.64 ,

l 5.61.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl u si on s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.64 l

5.61.2 P NL E v al u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.65 5.62 FU EL O I L V ALV E S (0 3 -717 N ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.65 l

l 5.62.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.65 ;

5.62.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.66 I

! 5.63 J ACKET WATER HE ATERS (03-800 A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.66

[

! 5.63.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.66 '

l i

5.63.2 P NL E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.67

! 5.64 LUBE Ott SUMP TANK HE ATER (03-8008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.67 5.64.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.61 5.64.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... 5.68 i

[ 5.65 J ACKET WATER HEAT EXCHANGER (10 103) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.68 j 5.65.1 OG Re sul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.68 j l qf 5.65.2 P NL E v a l u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.70 !

I 5.66 LUBE O tt HE AT EXCH ANGER ( 10 104 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.70 i

!

5.66.1 OG Results and Conclusions ........................... 5.70 5.66.2 PNL Evaluation ....................................... S.71 l

5.67 FULL FLOW LUBE OIL FILTERS (10 106) .......................... 5.71 l

1 xvil ,

I

5.67.1 OG Resul ts and Concl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.71 5.67.2 P NL E v a l u a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.72 5.68 AI R RECE IVER TANK (10-111 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.73 5.68.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usi ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.73 5.68.2 PNL Ev al u a ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.73 5.69 INTAKE AIR FILTERS (10-114)................................... 5.73 5.69.1 OG Re sul ts and Co ncl u si ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.73 5.69.2 P NL E v al u a ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.74 5.70 OIL PRELUBE FILTER (10-117) .................................. 5.74 5.70.1 OG Resul ts and Concl usions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.74 5.70.2 PN L Ev a l u a ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.75 APPENDIX - SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION COMPONENT SELECTION AND RESOLUTION .................................................. A.1 f

i e

t

\

\.

[

avfff

ABBREVIATIONS ASLB Atomic Safety and Licensing Board BMEP brake mean effective pressure -

DR/QR design review / quality revalidation '

E80CR Engineering and Design Coordination Report EDG, EDGs emergency diesel generator (s)

EDGCTS Emergency Diesel Generator Component Tracking System EEAR Engineering Evaluation Assistance Request ESF engineered safety feature ET eddy-current testing l

LOR LILCO Deficiency Report !

L LILCO Long Island Lighting Company l LOCA loss of coolant accident [

1 LOOP loss of offsite power l LP liquid penetrant MP magnetic particle j M/S maintenance / surveillance l NDE nondestructive examination NOT nondestructive testing NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OG Owners' Group; the T01 Olesel Generator Owners' Group l I Owners' Group Program Plan l 4. OGPP 0/R operability and reliability I o

PNL Pacift: Northwest Laboratory ;

SIM Service information Memorandum ,

i XIX l

f OCI quality control inspection QRI quality revalidation inspection SNPS Shoreham Nuclear Power Station TOI Transamerica Delaval, Inc.

4 TER technical evaluation report UT ultrasonic testing 4

XX

_ _ _ _ _ _ . - - _ - - _ - _ - - ---J

REVIEW 0F DESIGN REVIEW AND OUALITY REVAL10AT10N REPORT FOR THE TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL DIESEL GENERATORS AT SHOREHAf1 NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) is supporting the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in addressing questions of the reliability, operability, and quality assurance of the Transamerica Delaval, Inc. (TOI) diesel engines used to provide emergency standby power in some nuclear power plants. These questions were raised because of a major failure in one TOI diesel engine at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (SNPS) in August 1983 and other problems encountered with TOI diesels in both nuclear and non-nuclear applications.

Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) and twelve other U.S. nuclear utili-ties that own generators driven by T01-manufactured diesel engines established an Owners' Group (0G) to address and resolve the concerns pertaining to these emergency diesel engine generators. This group formulated a program that, through a combination of design reviews, quality revalidations engine tests, and component inspections, is to provide an in-depth assessment of the adaquacy of the respective utilities' TDI engines to perform their intended safety-related functions. This program has evolved into a comprehensive review of the crucial components in the TOI diesel engines at each TOI diesel owner's facility.

The OG concluded that 16 components of the T0! cmergency diesel generators (EDGs) warranted priority attention because of known problems or special con-cerns about the component quality. Each of these components has generic appli-9 cation in the TDI R-4 series engines. Each component was evaluated indivi-dually to determine and resolve the area of concern and to ensure that the resultant component and its surveillance are asiequate for the intende<1 purpose.

This effort was designated as Phase I of the OG program, e

1.1

Phase II of this program, the Design Review / Quality Revalidation (DR/QR),

is the OG identification and review of a large number of engine components or systems to ensure the adequacy of their design and manufacture, including quality control and assurance, and the adequacy of their operational surveil-lance and maintenance provisions. Plant-specific data on each of the Phase I components, as well as on the additional Phase 11 components, are included in ,

the individual DR/QR reports for each facility covered.

A principal task in PNL's effort is to evaluate the OR/QR reports prepared by the OG on the diesel engines owned by the respective utilities. This tech-nical evaluation report (TER) documents PNL's evaluation of the OG DR/QR of the TDI diesel engines at LILCO's Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1. PNL's evaluation was based primarily on the OG report, TOI Diesel Generator Design Review and Ouality Revalidation Report - Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (June 29,1984), and Revision 1 (December 21,1984) describing the SNPS OR/QR.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 contains three standby emergency diesel generator (EOG) sets for its emergency service or engineered safety feature (ESF) electrical loads. Each is powered by a T01 DSR-48 engine, l nameplate rated by T01 at 3500 kW, operating at 450 rpm with a brake mean effective pressure (BMEP)(a) of 225 psig. LILCO has designated these engines as EOG 101, EDG 102, and EDG 103. The latest information provided by LILCO specifies the emergency loads for these engines as a maximum of 3300 kW, under design-basis accident conditions coincident with an assumed 10:s of offsite power (LOOP).

In response to concerns about the operability / reliability (0/R) of TOI engines, LILCO (with Owners' Group assistance) has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of all major engine components and has replaced a number of these t "

engine components. To verify or ensure engine 0/R, LILCO has also subjected l

l (a) DMEP is a computed measure of the average cylinder pressure over the working cycle.

1.2

. _ . ._ _. . - _ _ _ _ - ~ _ _

\

2 the SNPS EDGs to additional tests beyond those specified by the manufacturer and the NRC Regulatory Guides, and those routinely conducted prior to actual engine operation. Further details regarding these engine tests and the I requalification activities undertaken by Long Island Lighting Company can be found in the PNL report, Review and Evaluation of Transamerica Delaval, Inc., .

p Diesel Engine Reliability and Operability - Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 (PNL-5342), dated December 1984.

1.2 REPORT ORGANIZATION In Section 2.0 of this TER, the overall Owners' Group DR/QR program is described, followed by a summary of the OG OR/QR efforts and conclusions spe-cifically related to the SNPS EDGs. Section 3.0 documents the PNL evaluation of the OG OR/QR study. The various facets of PNL's evaluation, including the scope, objectives and the approach taken, are described. Section 4.0 provides PNL's overall conclusions and recommendations. Finally, Section 5.0 presents a detailed review of the DR/QR analysis of each of the 70 individual EDG com-ponents selected by PNL for review.

I I

{

h ,

a o

t l

1.3

2.0 OWNERS' GROUP DESIGN REVIEW / QUALITY REVALIDATION EFFORT This section first presents an overview of the Owners' Group Design Review / Quality Revalidation program. The generic description also serves to document the objective of and methodology used in the DR/QR effort conducted

> specifically for the SNPS EDGs. Second, this section sumarizes the outcomes of the OR/QR conducted at SNPS and presents the results obtained and conclu-sions reached by the OG.

6 2.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The Owners' Group OR/QR program was established to provide a standardized means for examining each owner utility's engine (s) in order to assess each engine's ability to reliably perform its intended design function. The exami-nations and reviews are conducted by a centralized team of engineering per-sonnel with specialized skills in appropriate fields including diesel engine and generator design, operation, and manufacture.

Implementation of the DR/QR program involves a stepwise progression of activities. The first is to select the components of each engine that warrant a detailed design review and/or quality revalidation. The engine components selected are then subjected to either a design review, a quality revalidation, or both. When these reviews are completed, the Owners' Group technical staff reviews and approves the inspection results, document packages, design review findings, and calculation results. These activities are described in more detail in the following subsections.

2.1.1 Component Selection The diesel generator components to be included in the DR/QR program are determined by a Component Selection Comittee. Selection is based on e the component's function and role in the overall operation of the engine o

2.1

i e the component's nuclear and non-nuclear industry experience as deter-mined from a comprehensive database [the Emergency Diesel Generator Component Tracking System (EDGCTS)] generated by the Owners' Group e the Committee's engineering judgment.

To ensure that all relevant experience is considered, the selection process =

includes a review of available operating information on TDI diesels and TDI-recommended product improvements.

As part of the component selection process, each component is classified as type A, B, or C, depending on the potential effect of its failure on the diesel generator performance. Type A components are those whose failure would result in diesel generator shutdown .or failure to start in an accident mode.

Type B components include those whose failure would result in reduced capacity of the diesel generator or, if undetected, the eventual failure of a Type A component. Components whose failure would have little or no effect on diesel generator operation are classified as Type C.

2.1.2 Task Description Preparation Following classification, the Committee establishes appropriate design review and quality revalidation requirements. These requirements are then for-warded to the Design Review Group and Quality Revalidation Group who prepare descriptions to define the tasks (e.g., reviews, inspections, calculations) to be performed on each component. The task descriptions include recommendations identified in the selection process as well as component inspections recom-mended by the Design Review Group and/or Quality Revalidation Group.

The design review task descriptions include, as applicable:

o primary component function and required attributes e applicabic codes and standards e alternative codes, standards, or analytical techniques (

e analysis or evaluation to be perfomed to assure satisfactory design e available verifications of TDI analysis (if any) ,

e final documentation requirements.

2.2

The quality revalidation task descriptions (also referred to as the Component Revalidation Checklist) include:

e component to be validated e attributes to be verified e methodology to be used (e.g., documentation review, NDE techniques)

. e acceptance criteria e final documentation requirements.

2.1.3 Design Review 8ecause of the number and diversity of the components and standards involved, the design rotaw is tailored to each component. The actual design review is accomplishad using one or more of several methods, including 1) an independent calculation performed by the Design Review Group; 2) an independent review of the adequacy, appropriateness, or correctness of existing vendor and/or subvendor calculations; 3) testing specified by the Design Review Group; and 4) other methods specified and approved in the task descriptions.

During implementation of the task descriptions, the Design Review Group specifies quality attributes (in addition to those identified during the com-ponent selection process) for incorporation into the quality revalidation process. The Design Review Group also identifies any components for which corrective action may be required to improve reliability of the diesel gener-ators. This may include recommendations for design modifications or for increased frequency of' component replacement and/or maintenance, or additional inservice inspection.

2.1.4 Quality Revalidation Each component requiring quality revalidation is subjected to a documen-tation review. Through this process, all appropriate documentation (e.g.,

material test reports, nondestructive examination results, vendor /subvendor f records, site records) associated with the component is identified and cata-logued. With assistance from Quality Engineering, each document is reviewed e for acceptability. These document packages are then made available to the Design Review Group to assist in the engineering review. Important attributes identified by the Design Review Group, but for which acceptable documentation 2.3 l

did not exist in the component file, are verified by tests and/or inspections performed by the Ouality Revalidation Group.

Tests or inspections required to be performed on components are forwarded to Quality Engineering to develop detailed methodology and procedures to be followed. These instructions are issued to Quality Inspection. Field inspec-tions and tests are performed by qualified personnel. Depending upon the specified test or inspection, a spare or surplus part in lieu of the installed part may be used as the test / inspection article. Results of inspections and ,

tests are summarized by the Quality Revalidation Group and reviewed by the Design Review Group as necessary to make a final determination on the compo-nent's suitability to perform its intended function.

2.1.5 Maintenance and Surveillance Recommendations Appendix 11 of the DR/0R report contains a comprehensive set of main-tenance and surveillance (M/S) recommendations for each component. These recommendations were derived from existing recommendations and the individual component DR/QR Summary reports. The purpose of the Appendix is to provide the utility a basis for its M/S program that will maintain the qualification of its diesel generators for the life of the plant.

2.2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION STUDY The OG OR/0R program described in Section 2.1' was applied to the TOI diesel engines at SNPS. The results obtained and the conclusions drawn by the OG from the SNPS DR/QR are summarized in the following subsections.

2.2.1 Owners' Group Results The Shoreham engine components considered by the OG Component Selection Committee are listed in the Appendix to this TER. The Committee's determina-tion of type of attention needed--design review, or quality revalidation, or g both OR and QR, or no review--is noted for each component considered.

As indicated in the Appendix, most of these components were judged to ,

be acceptable for their intended service with unlimited life, provided that the recommendations identified are fo.llowed. The recommendations deal pri-marily with additional inspection requirements, as well as improvements in 2.4

installation, operating, and maintenance procedures. In some cases, procure-ment specification recommendations are identified to aid the utility in its sp;re parts program.

Some components required modifications, as identified in the Appendix table column headed Recommended Action. The utility's implementation of these recommended actions is intended to result in a component that is acceptable for its intended service with unlimited life.

3 The OG DR/QR effort for SNPS produced a detailed assessment of 168 TDI diesel generator components. The OG indicated that many of these components were examined using analytical techniques exceeding the detailed engineering effort of the original design. The OG also pointed out that extensive component inspections were an integral part of the DR/QR program, and the performance of these inspections contributed to the level of confidence for these critical diesel generator components.

2.2.2 Shoreham Plant-Specific Maintenance and Surveillance Plan The Owners' Group maintenance and surveillance recommendations (Appendix II of the DR/0R report) were not directly adopted by LILCO. Rather, LILC0 provided an Engineering and Design Coordination Report (E8DCR F-46505)

! tilat closely parallels the OG Appendix II. That E&DCR provides modifications to the basic TDI Instruction Manual and includes, as an attachment, the TDI Operation, Maintenance Manual, Model DSR-48 Diesel Engine.

A later M/S plan was provided to NRC in a letter (SNRC 1178) dated May 29, 1985, from J. D. Leonard (LILCO) to H. R. Denton (NRC). This latest plan modified the earlier M/S plan by 1) responding to the NRC review of the earlier M/S plan and 2) responding to commitments and technical information presented at Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings (Shoreham and Perry nuclear

, plants).

2.2.3 Owners' Group Conclusions and Recommendations The OG concluded from the DR/QR effort that the TDI diesel generators 7

j. installed at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station are acceptable for their l intended safety-related function. Further, they concluded that the incorpo-ration of the maintenance and surveillance recommendations into the plant's 2.5

l

, existing program provides added assurance that these diesel generators will ,

cantinue to perform their intended function for the expected lifetime of the plant.(a)

I T

l a

s 4.

3 i (a) LILC0 has implemented the majority of these OG recommendations as docu-mented in the E&DCRs. Some recommendations, however, m'y not have yet been implemented.

2.6 i

Y

, , --y---wy--w .- .,----.--.-m.-y,----e,-, . - . . , . , , , - _, m.------,sm-,., , . . . - - , ,---.--__mm -

~ew v e - '- +-t-'v -

ser <

I 3.0 PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY'S EVALUATION The TDI Diesel Generator Owners' Group document, TDI Diesel Generator Design Review and Quality Revalidation Report prepared for LILC0's Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1, was evaluated by:

~

e D. A. Dingee, PNL project team o J. F. Nesbitt, PNL project team

' ' e N. Jaffray, consultant, Ricardo Consulting Engineers e P. J. Louzecky, consultant, Engineered Applications Corporation e N. N. Rivera, consultant, Designers and Planners, Inc. (TRACOR Hydronautics, Inc.).

L. Wechsler, consultant, TRACOR Hydronautics, Inc.

e A. Wendel, consultant, TRACOR Hydronautics, Inc.

3.1 SCOPE

]

The PNL evaluation addressed the general conduct of the DR/QR program at Shoreham, and focused on the actions taken by the Owners' Group and LILC0 to perform the DR/QR effort. The scope of this evaluation was limited to 4 primarily an audit-type review of specific actions taken and conclusions

reached by the Owners' Group regarding certain components of the SNPS EDGs.

3.2 OBJECTIVES The objectives of PNL's evaluation were

1. to determine whether the CG DR/QR effort included all of the compo-nents considered critical to the continued safe operation of the SNPS EDGs y

i N

3.1

2. to determine if the OG had adequately reviewed the ' critical compo-nents in terms of design and/or quality assurance considerations, such that the intent of the Owners' Group Program Plan (0GPP)(a) was accomplished

3. to assess the M/S plan to provide assurance of continued EDG ,

operability / reliability.

3.3 METHODOLOGY ,

The approach taken to accomplish the objectives of confirming the com-pleteness and adequacy of the OG effort consisted of 1) independent identi-fication of key components, 2) audit reviews of the DR/QR report information,

3) onsite audit reviews of backup and reference information, 4) engine observa-tion, 5) meetings with OG and LILC0 staff, and 6) consultant judgment. These elements are described below as they relate to the objectives of assessing completeness and adequacy of the OG component DR/QR review and the review of the maintenance and surveillance program.

3.3.1 Assessment of Completeness of Owners' Group DR/0R PNL evaluators assessed whether the OG DR/0R study had addressed all of the components considered critical to the continued reliable operation of the Shoreham EDGs. In May and June 1984, prior to the OG issuing any DR/0R reports, four PNL consultants independently identified from 12 to 20 compo-nents or systems (excluding the Phase I generic components) whose importance to engine reliability and operability, in their judgment, warranted inclusion in the DR/QR effort. These lists were developed for both TDI inline and V engines. As a measure of completeness, PNL evaluators compared the consul-tant-g_enerated lists with the OG-generated list of components (see Appendix) considered in their DR/QR, to determine the extent to which the two lists ,

matched.

e (a) The stated intent of the Owners' Group Program Plan (March 1984) is to establish "... reasonable assurance of the ability of the TDI engines to provide reliable backup power supplies for nuclear power plant service."

3.2 l

I

3.3.2 Assessment of Adequacy of Owners' Group CR/QR The PNL consultants were asked to evaluate the appropriateness of the design review performed, and the DR/QR action taken, on each component selected for this audit-type effort. PNL chose most of the 70 components for this audit on the basis of their importance to engine operability and their relevance to a

~

PNL consultant's specific area of expertise. Some individual components were included because of their relationship to other components and systems. _ Th.

PNL evaluators then examined the DR/QR report documentation for each of the components audited.

It was not considered practical for the reviewers to analyze all the rele-4 vant documentation for each of these components. This is particularly true of the OR documentation. Frequently the components reviewed were dispositioned by the OG by technical evaluation reports or by LILC0 documents referenced in the DR/QR but not a part of the DR/OR report.

The adequacy of the OR/0R documentation was determined through a sampling review of the documentation for all of the Phase I components and for a repre-sentative sample of the Phase II components. The backup documentation was reviewed during two onsite visits to the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The first, review was performed by a PNL team in conjunction with preparation of the SNPS technical evaluation report (PNL-5342). The second review was performed directly in support of this DR/QR evaluation. The following eight Phase II components were selected for this second review:

o main bearing shells (03-310B) e flywheel bolting (03-3308) e camshaft assembly (03-350A) e camshaft support, bolting and gears (03-350C) e idler gear assembly (03-355B) e e cylinder head valve springs and retainer (03-3600) e intake manifold (03-375) e external lube oil line fittings, etc. (03-465A).

1 In each review the PNL staff were accompanied by at least three consultants.

The PNL team evaluated the relevant documents pertaining to the design review, component inspections, LILC0 deficiency reports, technical evaluations, 3.3

dispositioning references, and other references, as appropriate. These com-prehensive document reviews were also augmented by clarifications provided by. l LILC0 and Owners' Group personnel.

3.3.3 Assessment of Adequacy of the Maintenance and Surveillance Plan In PNL's review of the TDI Diesel Generator Owners' Group Program Plan -

(PNL-5161, June 1984), maintenance and surveillance (M/S) is identified as "a key aspect of the overall effort fcr establishing TDI engine operability and reliability". NRC also recognizes the importance of a comprehensive M/S pro-gram and has provided guidelines for the development of such a program in the NRC staff SER dated August 13, 1984.

As stated in Section 2.2.2, Long Island Lighting Company's first M/S plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station is presented in the Stone & Webster Engineering and Design Coordination Report (E8DCR) No. F-46505. PNL's review of the first M/S plan for the SNPS EDGs is documented in its Review and Evalua-tion of Transamerica Delaval, Inc., Diesel Engine Reliability and Operability -

Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 (PNL-5342) dated December 1984. The PNL review focused on components and systems critical to engine operation and/or with failure histories. These PNL recommendations were adopted by the NRC in their December 18, 1984, Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SSER) pertain-ing to the SNPS TDI diesel generators. PNL's evaluation of the DR/QR employs that position as supplemental to E8DCR F-46505. As part of this Phase II evaluation PNL did not revisit that earlier review except as it pertained to the 70 sampled components. Consultant expertise is the basis for PNL conclu-sions and recommendations as presented in Section 4.0.

At the time this report was nearing completion, LILC0 had proposed (see Section 2.2.2) modifications to the M/S position adopted by the NRC in their December 18, 1984, SSER. This latest plan is not reviewed in this TER. ,

w 3.4

4.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the audit reviews conducted, PNL has reached the overall con-clusion that the OG Phase II efforts have fulfilled the intent of the Owners' Group Program Plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, which is to estab-

- lish "... reasonable assurance of the ability of the TDI engines to provide reliable backup power supplies for nuclear power plant service."

In particular, the completeness of the Owners' Group DR/QR study was con-fi rmed. PNL evaluators found that all the components determined by PNL con-sultants to warrant inclusion in the DR/QR effort had been addressed by the Owners' Group. PNL also noted that most of the components listed by PNL's consultants had been subjected to both the DR and the QR by the Owners' Group.

The adequacy of the Owners' Group DR/QR effort was confirmed by several means. The principal confirmation was the satisfactory, comprehensive review of the 70 or so components selected by the reviewers as outlined above.

The results of this review are presented in detail on a component-by-component basis in Section 5.0. The results of that effort can be summarized as fol-lows. PNL found that the Owners' Group had adequately addressed the design and/or quality aspects of all of the 70 components included in the audit-type review. In a few cases PNL evaluators recommend additional maintenance and surveillance as summarized in Table 4.1. Further comments on these components are provided in Section 5.0. These M/S comments are generally based on the experience of the PNL consultants.

Further confirmation of adequacy of the Owners' Group DR/QR was gained from the onsite review of the backup documentation. As noted earlier, there was an extensive review of the Shoreham data base pertaining to the requalifi-cation of the 16 Phase I components and a representative sampling of the

Phase Il components. The design analyses were reviewed as part of this effort.

However, the onsite reviews concentrated on the quality revalidation; the focus was on inspection results, nonconformance findings and their disposition, and the method of acceptance of replacement or repair / reworked components. In all 4.1

TABLE 4.1. PNL Recommendations and Suggestions on Phase II Components Discussed in Recommendations [

Component Part Number TER Section or Suggestion [S]{})

Piston Pin Assembly 03-341C 5.11 [S] Use 10 power magnifier to inspect piston pins for chrome plate damage. .

Idler Gear Assembly 03-355B 5.19 [R] Check for thrust bearing clearance at each outage.

[R] Check both faces of gear e teeth for damage at alternate outages.

Cylinder Head Intake 03-3608 5.21 [R] Valve stems with evidence and Exhaust Valves of flaking and loss of chrome plating should be replaced.

Fuel Injection 03-365B 5.25 [S] If high maintenance P!azzle Assembly requirements continue, review maintenance practices.

Exhaust Manifold 03-380A 5.27 [S] Check installation for hot spots and provide shields as needed at oil fittings.

Overspeed Trip Vent 03-4100 5.34 [R] On 6-month basis check Valve valve function.

Lube Oil Heat 10-103 5.65 [S] Pay particular attention Exchanger to tube ends during inspections.

(a) Recommendations [R] should be implemented prior to the end of the first refueling outage. Suggestions [5] deal with matters of lesser importance, and are offered as good practices based on experience.

s e

4.2

cases, the records reviewed were found to be traceable and in order. The procedures for dispositioning component findings following the engine DR/0R inspection were found to be acceptable.

As previously stated, PNL's overall conclusions and recommendations regarding LILC0's M/S program (supplanting Appendix II of the DR/QR) have been

documente'd in PNL-5342, Review and Evaluation of Transamerica Delaval, Inc.,

Diesel Engine Reliability and Operability - Shoreham Nuclear Power Station tinit 1 (December 1984). Elements of that M/S plan that are pertinent to the PNL evaluation of the 70 audited components are provided in the appropriate subsections to Section 5.0 next. The few exceptions to the LILC0 plan that PNL recommends are summarized in Table 4.1. In PNL's opinion, the recommendations in that table should be implemented by LILC0 in the M/S plan prior to the first refueling outage.

4 4.3

)

5.0 COMPONENT REVIEW As part of PNL's assessment of the adequacy of the OG DR/QR report, PNL evaluators selected 70 of the engine components considered by the OG(a) and then reviewed the OG data on these components. The PNL review sought to

~

determine whether the OG had analyzed these components adequately with respect to both design and quality assurance considerations. The findings of this review could then be used as a basis for inferring the adequacy of OG analyses of the other components addressed in the DR/QR effort.

This section presents a review of this aspect of the PNL evaluation. The section comprises 70 subsections with headings corresponding to the components for which the OG documentation was reviewed. Appearing first are the Owners' Group results and conclusions drawn from their review of:

e component design adequacy (as determined by independent calculations; independent review of the adequacy, appropriateness, or correctness of the existing design basis; or the results from testing) e results of the quality revalidation (consisting of their review of existing records pertaining to component quality and inspection results, findings, and dispositions) e analysis of the component service history (as recorded in the Emergency Diesel Generator Component Tracking System).

In documenting the OG results and conclusions, PNL generally summarized sec-

\

tions directly from the OG DR/QR report. This information is followed by PNL's '

evaluation of the OG analysis and conclusions for each component. Additional requirements, comments, or other items noted by PNL during the component review are included where appropriate. The maintenance and surveillance plan for the

< component was of ten an important consideration in PNL's evaluation of component long-tenn serviceability, s

(a) The approach for PNL's component selection is described in Section 3.3 of this TER.

5.1

5.1 INTERCOOLER (Part No. F-068) 5.1.1 OG Results and Conclusions With the exception of Shoreham's experiences, the Emergency Diesel Gener-ator Component Tracking System (EOGCTS) did not uncover any relevant failures.

Shoreham's experience was attributed to an avoidable maintenance error or deficiency that caused a pinhole leak on the shell, with air leakage out of the intercooler. This type of event would not result in operational problems.

Structural integrity of intercooler and supports, bolt loadings, and '

nozzle loads have been evaluated and found to be acceptable.

Maintenance and operation requirements should include the following:

e The intercooler should be inspected for leaks every month.

e The intercooler should be dismantled and cleaned every 18 months.

The drain connection on the intercooler inlet plenum should be verified open and cleaned daily.

These items have been incorporated into the maintenance manual via Engineering and Design Coordination Report (E&DCR) F-46505.

The gasket material on the water side is neoprene, which, in its intended use, is consistent with industry practice. The gasket material on the air side is asbestos, which, in its intended use, is also consistent with industry practice.

Quality Revalidation results (i.e., documents assembled for the three SNPS EDGs from the EDGCTS) were reviewed, and the results were found to be satis f actory.

The OG concluded that the intercooler is acceptable for its intended function at SNPS. ,

5.1.2 PNL Evaluation Based on review of the information provided in the OG DR/QR report, PNL ,

concluded that the OG design analysis of the intercooler was adequate. PNL ,

also reviewed the OR which consisted of results of the EDGCTS and noted no areas of concern. The monthly shell- and tube-side inspection for leaks and 5.2

the LILC0 commitment to dismantle and clean the intercooler at each outage are considered adequate. PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the intercooler is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.2 LUBE DIL PRESSURE REGULATING VALVE (Part No.00-420) 5.2.1 OG Results and Conclusions A valve at Shoreham experienced a problem with sticking. Other items b

documented in the Shoreham records include incorporation of design improvements recommended by TDI and routine maintenance. The only deficiency noted at other installations involved a GM-EMD diesel, which differs in design frJm the Shoreham TDI engine. Therefore, the latter problem was not considered applicable to Shoreham.

The radial clearance of the valve is 0.0015/0.001 inch. This clearance is suitable for an engine that has been through initial startup. During startup, particles larger than 0.0015 inch are common; therefore, the valve may stick and fail. To reduce valve plugging, the following changes were made to the l operating manual via EADCR F-46505:

e Ouring initial startup after a major reassembly or lube oil piping modification, the lube oil regulating valve should be disassembled and cleaned as necessary until abnormal lube oil pressure excursions subside.

During normal operation, the lube oil regulating valve should be disassembled and c!eaned every 18 months.

The valve is constructed of carbon steel and cast iron. These materials are suitable for this application.

, Nozzle loads were reviewed and found acceptable.

The Quality Revalidation Ir.spection (ORI) results were reviewed. This included a satisfactory review of the EDGCTS results. Proper valve clearances were also verified on the three engines.

5.3

The OG has determined that, as a result of this evaluation and the subsequent maintenance recommendations, the lube oil pressure regulating valve is adequately designed for its intended service.

5.2.2 PNL Evaluation PNL examined the OG design review documentation and concluded that the ,

component's significant attributes (i.e., proper materials and design for lube oil service) were indeed verified. PNL also reviewed the OG component revali-dation checklist, which documented satisfactory results of the EDGCTS review a and dimensional verification. Based on these reviews, and in light of LILC0's commitment to follow the recommended maintenance procedures, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion t'.iat the lube oil pressure regulating valve should function as intended on the EDGs at Shoreham.

5.3 JACKET WATER STAN0 PIPE: PIPE, FITTINGS, AND GASKETS (Part No. 00-700A) 5.3.1 OG Results and Conclusions As demonstrated by startup tests and over 1100 hours0.0127 days 0.306 hours 0.00182 weeks 4.1855e-4 months of engine operation, the jacket water system meets its design parameters, e.g., temperature, pressure, and flow.

The review of the EDGCTS documentation for each engine revealed no problems. Proper installation of all pipes and fittings was verified by a line walkdown. As-built piping drawings were issued for each of the three engines.

The small-bore pipi g system, as defined by this component design review, was evaluated to the strasa design criteria and found acceptable. It was therefore concluded by the OG that the system will perform its intended design function at Shorehan under all normal and earthquake loadings.

5.3.2 PNL Evaluation s

Based on the data presented in the Shoreham OR/0R report, PNL concludes that an adequate analysis was made of the subject components in this appli-cation. Noting LILC0's commitment to check calibration of the Jacket water

standpipe level switches and temperature switches at each outage, PNL agrees 5.4

~

with the OG conclusion that the jacket water standpipe components of pipe, fittings, and gaskets are capable of performing their intended functions.

5.4 JACKET WATER STANDPIPE VALVE (Part No. 00-700B) 5.4.1 OG Results and Conclusions

According to the manufacturer's catalog, this valve is rated at 125 lb and is suitable for water, oil or gas service. Because the valve is installed in water service with a maximum pressure of 10 psig, it is acceptable for use.

s The valve body and bonnet are fabricated of cast iron. The valve disc and trim are fabricated of bronze. The jacket water, which has a pH range of 9.0 to 10.5 and contains NALCO 1355 corrosion inhibitor, is compatible with these material s.

No Shoreham/ industry problems are noted in the Emergency Diesel Generator Component Tracking System for this valve.

The review of the EDGCTS documentation yielded satisfactory results for each engine. The TDI manual indicated that the valve installed is to be a Crane 125-1b angle valve. Direct visual inspections have established that the valves installed are manufactured by Powell Valves. The TDI manual, therefore, has been revised by ESDCR F-46505 to reflect the as-installed valve.

Preventive maintenance for the jacket water standpipe valve shall be to visually inspect the valve for packing or seat leaks on a monthly basis.

Depending on the results of this inspection, the valve packing shall be tightened / replaced. These maintenance requirements were added to the TDI manual via E&DCR F-46505.

End reactions on small-bore components (e.g., valves, filters, regulators, etc., 2 inches and smaller) are acceptable because the relative strength of small-bore components is much greater than that of the attached small-bore piping / tubing.

The OG concluded that the jacket water standpipe valve is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.5

5.4.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the DR/QR data, PNL concludes that the OG review was adequate.

PNL ascertained during an onsite review that the alarm-level height (11 f t) is adequate. The planned monthly inspection for leaks is also considered ade-quate. As a result of these considerations, PNL concurs with the OG that this ,

valve is acceptable for its intended service.

5.5 CRANKSHAFT AND BEARINGS: BEARING SHELLS (Part No. 03-3108) .

5.5.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of the EDGCTS shows that no design-related problems have been reported with the main bearing shells at Shoreham. A review of nuclear industry experience showed no design-related problems with main bearings in diesel engines. The problems noted in the EDGCTS are due to abnormal operating conditions, i.e., loss of oil flow and contaminated oil. A review of non-nuclear experiences shows that the MV Columbia experienced significant bearing wear at 12,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , but this is also attributed to inadequate lube oil quality and the thin oil film experienced by some of the bearings.

The minimum oil thickness calculated in the journal orbit analysis is 126 microinches compared to an industry standard of 260 microinches. At Shore-ham the oil is filtered with a 10-microinch filtration system, and the expected usage between TDI-recomended inspections is 500 hours0.00579 days 0.139 hours 8.267196e-4 weeks 1.9025e-4 months . The minimum oil film thickness calculated should not present a problem at Shoreham due to the lubri-cation filtration system, the substantial layer of babbitt on the bearings, and the short period between inspections.

The peak oil film pressure (P0FP) was calculated to be 24 kpsi due to a 178,000-1b load (unit loading of 2517 psi) on four main bearings, with a P0FP of less than 21 kpsi on the remaining bearings. An industry recommendation for ,

the type of material used in the main bearings is 36 kpsi if no misalignment is present. To include an additional margin of safety for misalignment, the recommended P0FP is lowered by 307, to 25 kpsi. The calculated SNPS P0FP is less than the industry-recommended standard, provided bearing alignment is within TDI specifications.

5.6

l After a review of the hearing shell material properties and operating environment and parameters, it has been concluded that the bearing material is acceptable for its intended application. The babbitt layer will serve well as a protective layer for momentary contact of the journal. Due to the calculated loading condition and the material properties (i.e., yield strength and fatigue l

l . endurance limit), it was determined that surface fatigue will not be a limiting

! factor in hearing life.

The T0! inspection schedule and alignment requirements were reviewed. The bearing inspection schedule is adequate to address normal bearing wear. The alignment procedure, performed to the specifications.and schedule stipulated

[

in the TOI Instruction Manual, is suitable to prevent bearing performance j problems.

The quality revalidation documents for all engines were reviewed. Satis-factory results were reported for EDGs 101 and 103. For EDG 102, LDR-1700 (requiring bearing removal and replacement) was still outstanding.

Based on the review of the quality revalidation results, journal orbit analysis, and comparison with industry standards, the OG concluded that the main bearing shells are acceptable for their intended design function at Shoreham.

5.5.2 PNL Evaluation PNL notes that these bearings have a good overall performance record in both nuclear and non-nuclear service. Based on this service experience, j together with the facts that 1) action specified by LOR-1700 was completed in May 1984, 2) the bearings will be reinspected at every secondary refueling outage (typically 200 operating hour intervals), and 3) the hearing alignment will be confirmed at each refueling outage by hot and cold crankshaft deflec-tion measurements, PNL concludes that the main bearing shells are acceptable for their intended function.

4 l

5.7

5.6 THRUST REARING RING (Part No. 03-310C) 5.6.1 OG Results and Conclusions The axial loads on the thrust bearing ring are due to the axial component of the force on the crankshaft from the gear train; the axial load due to a difference between mechanical and electrical center; and the axial load due to rotor, crankshaft, flywheel, connecting rods, and piston weights when the engine is not perfectly level.

The pressure on the thrust bearing due to the full thrust is less than

43 psi. Aluminum tin alloy bearings are rated for a maximum pressure of 4,000 psi. The ratio of outside and inside hearing ring diameter is sufficient to maintain full-film lubrication because the pressure is below 75 psi and the relative surface speed is greater than 25 fpm.

For components in full-film lubrication, the wear rate is low. The thrust bearing rings may be subject to a small amount of wear during startup and shut-down. Recause the bearings operate in full-film lubrication, an inspection of the bearing clearance at each refueling outage will be sufficient to ensure that the clearance is within tolerance. This recommendation has been incor-porated by EADCR F-46505.

The EDGCTS reports five instances in which thrust ring bearings were replaced. None was on TOI engines, and these incidents do not affect the results and conclusions of this report.

The quality revalidation documents for all engines were reviewed with satisfactory results. This included a review of the EDGCTS and confirmation that thrust bearing clearances were recorded as being within manufacturer recommendations for the three engines.

Based on the above review and the established inspection schedule and pro-cedure, the OG concluded that the thrust bearing rings are acceptable for their '

intended design function at Shoreham.

5.6.2 PNL Evaluation .

PNL concludes that the methodology used and the analysis conducted on this component by the OG were adequate. PNL notes that the OG did not consider high 5.8

force loadings due to axial vibrations of the crankshaft / rotor assembly. How-ever, the EDGCTS does not include any evidence of this phenomenon; thus, PNL considers the acceptability of the component not to be affected by this omis-sion. Based on performance to date and on the fact that thrust bearing clear-ances will be confirmed at the manufacturer's recommended frequency and in accordance with manufacturer procedures, PNL concludes that the subject thrust bearing rings are acceptable for their intended function.

, 5.7 CYLINDER BLOCK - LINER AND WATER MANIFOLD NUTS (Part No. 03-315F) 5.7.1 OG Results and Conclusions A cylinder head stud nut cracked while being tightened on EDG 102. The nut was metallurgically examined by FaAA and found to have failed in primarily a brittle manner at the site of a pre-existing material flaw. The material flaw was a forging lap of a size that reduced the cross-sectional area avail-able to support hoop stresses by an estimated 45%. The flaw placement was such

t. hat it was in the tensile stress region adjacent to a wrench contact point.

This is regarded as an isolated incident and does not affect the nut design.

The structural review of the nuts revealed that stresses imposed by assembly and operation are within safe operating limits for the materials selected.

In conducting the OR, the EDGCTS documentation was reviewed, proper nut torque was verified, material in one nut was verified, hardness of one nut was serified, and a visual inspection was performed on all nuts for each of the three engines.

The OG concluded that the cylinder block liner and water manifold nuts are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.7.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concurs with the OG that the subject components are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham. Considering there is only one failure on l record, PNL concludes that the sample size of one nut from each of the EDGs was logical, and that the material and hardness tests constituted a reasonable method to verify the composition of the subject nuts.

5.9

5.8 FLYWHEEL (Part No. 03-330A) 5.8.1 OG Results and Conclusions A review of the EDGCTS report indicates no history of any problems during operation.

For the inline 8-cylinder engines at SNPS, the calculated value of the .

rotary inertia is in close agreement with the value used in the TDI crankshaf t analysis.

1 The maximum stresses in the flywheel at SNPS, calculated at 15% overspeed, are less than 0.081 times the material yield strength.

The OG considered the flywheels to be acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.8.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the data presented in the DR/QR report, PNL concludes that the OG review of the EDG flywheels was adequate. Considering the favorable service history for this component and the commitment by LILCO to conduct inspections /

replacements of the bolting at each refueling outage, PNL concurs with the OG that the flywheels are acceptable for their intended service.

5.9 FLYWHEEL BOLTS (Part No. 03-3308) 5.9.1 OG Results and Conclusions If the flange faces are assembled dry with no lubrication and the bolts are torqued with thread lubricant to the specified torque, the flywheel flange connection can satisfactorily accept the worst-case combination of loads.

However, if the flange faces are lubricated at assembly, the bolts will load in shear and see substantial alternating shear stresses, which may lead to fatigue failure. .

Bending moments due to shaft misalignment have been assumed to be small, based on the fact that maintenance procedures routinely require realignment. ,

Bending moments at the flange have been calculated for deadweight and seismic inertia loads and found to have a negligible effect on the torque transmission characteristics of the flanges and bolt stresses.

5.10

In May 1984, when EDG 103 was disassembled, some fretting was observed on the crankshaft flange and bolts. Additionally, there appeared to be some lubricant on the flange. Verbal confirmation of dry assembly of the flanges was obtained, but there was a possibility that, during reaming operations per-fonned to obtain close fitted bolts, some cutting fluid may have found its way

. into the interface between flanges. To eliminate any concern that the bolts might have been damaged during the last 400 hours0.00463 days 0.111 hours 6.613757e-4 weeks 1.522e-4 months of EDG 103 opt. ration, and to infer whether or not the EDG 101 and 102 bolts may have been damaged, the bolts

' from EDG 103 were fluorescent mag particle tested. No significant indications were found. The OG stated that indications of fatigue would have been found in these bolts if fatigue were going to be a problem in the next 300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months of operation. Because the EDG 103 flywheel bolt inspection was satisfactory and EDGs 101 and 102 have been operating fewer hours than EDG 103, the EDGs 101 and 102 bolts may remain in service for another 300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months or until the next refueling outage, whichever comes first. At that time they will be inspected for indications of f retting or fatigue damage. If there is no indication of fatigue damage, the bolts may be put back in service with the flanges and bolt-ing reassembled in accordance with Service Information Memorandum (SIM) 64H and with special care to maintain the flywheel, crankshaf t, and generator shaf t flange faces clean, dry, and free of oil or grease. Alternatively, the bolts may be replaced with new bolts and the cleaning of the flange faces deferred to the following refueling outage or rext increment of 300 operating hours, whichever comes first.

The EDG 103 bolts were reassembled in June 1984, with special care to maintain clean and dry flange surfaces. Proper assembly of the EDG 103 bolts precludes fatigue loading the bolts. Thus, the EDG 103 bolts require no further special attention.

SIM 64H does not sufficiently emphasize the need for clean flywheel, generator shaf t, and crankshaf t flange faces. The TOI maintenance procedures should be augmented with an expanded precautionary note on flange cleanli-

. ness. This recommendation has been incorporated in E80CR F-46505.

Recent engine assembly in October 1983 incorporated SIM 64H but torqued the bolts to 3000 f t-lb in three lif ts versus four lif ts. For this type of 5.11

flange design, the number of increments of bolt torque application is not as important as the ultimate torque achieved. Uneven compression of the flange joints is not possible due to the large compressive stiffness of the flanges.

There are no gaskets at these interfaces. Three torque increments are acceptable.

Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed and considered in the performance of the OG DR/QR review. That is, Shoreham EDGCTS documents were assembled and reviewed, torque on all flywheel nuts bolts was verified, i

and a satisfactory magnetic particle (MP) test was performed on the bolts of EDG 103.

The OG has determined that, for use at the SNPS, the flywheel bolts used at final assembly of the engines are acceptable.

5.9.2 PNL Evaluation Based on a review of the DR/0R data by PNL's consultants, PNL concluded that the OG review was adequate. PNL notes that, if machining residue remains on the mating flange surfaces of EDG 101 and EDG 102, this could lead to rela-tive motion between the surfaces, with attendant bolt damage. LILC0's plan to replace flange bolts on these EDGs or confirm that they have encountered no fretting or other indications of motion at the next refueling outage, and their plan to clean the flange faces if needed at that time, provide sufficient corrective action. Based on these factors, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the flywheel bolting will be adequate for the intended service.

5.10 PISTON RINGS (Part No. 03-341R) 5.10.1 OG Results and Conclusions The design specifications for the MPR piston rings used on the Shoreham engines are typical of industry practice in conservatively rated, turbocharged s and aftercooled, medium-speed diesel engines, and are therefore appropriate for the intended use at Shoreham.

The results of the inspections indicate no evidence of improper material and no deviations for the geometrical dimensions, i

5.12

The Shoreham rings, pistons, and liners were inspected after several test runs including 100 starts, a 24-hour test run and two 7-day tests with addi-tional 2-hour overload, and a 22-hour run at 75% load. EDG 103 had a total running time of about 300 hours0.00347 days 0.0833 hours 4.960317e-4 weeks 1.1415e-4 months with a 4-hour overinad at 110%. Because this engine had comparatively the highest exhaust temperature and high inlet 4 manifold pressure, it was chosen for detailed inspection.

Buildup of coke in the upper area of liner and piston, down to the second compression ring, was noted. Coke buildup in the first and second ring grooves, pressing the ring against the liner, resulted in wear on the ring and the liner. Minor scuffing score marks were also observed.

Liner wear was apparent. A high percentage of liners showed some mirror-like bright areas without any honing marks. Performance of the ring / liner system was acceptable.

Use of a series 3 oil having greater detergent properties and higher thermal degradation resistance than Mobil Delvac 1240 will reduce coke buildup in ring grooves and reduce wear. Also, the magnitude and types of wear observed on rings and liners were within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptable performance, in addition, Shoreham has fuel injection tips to reduce the spray cngle from 140' to 135*, which will further reduce coke accumulation on the cylinder liner and related coke buildup in ring grooves.

To ensure freedom from harmful scuffing, the cylinder liners are to be inspected at each refueling outage to evaluate liner wear and coke deposits.

In addition, a high detergency series 3 or better oil (such as Mobilguard 412) and 135-degree spray tips are to be used (EADCR F-4655). The inspections, in conjunction with these recommendations, will verify that acceptable lubrication and wear is obtained on a continuing basis at Shoreham.

Quality Revalidation Inspection results consisting of verifying instal-lation, performing dimensional checks (EDG 102) and inspections following endurance tests, and EDGCTS document review results were considered in the o performance of the OG DR/OR review.

Based on the above review, the OG considered the NPR piston rings to be adequate for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.13

l l

t :

! 5.10.2 PNL Evaluation l

The OG review suggests that the ring / liner combination was not optimal.

Subsequent to the confirmatory tests, LILCO changed the rings to the Muskegan brand, changed oil to Mobilguard 412 (or equivalent), and deglar.ed the liners per TDI specification.

PNL consultants viewed the rings / liner area following the 750-hour testing of EDG 103, and noted no evidence of excessive coking, wear or scuffing. In I light of these results, and considering the commitment by LILCO to check com- '

pression and maximum firing pressure at each refueling outage, PNL is in agree-ment with the OG conclusion that the rings are adequate for their intended function.

5.11 PISTONS - PIN ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-341C) 1 5.11.1 OG Results and Conclusions During Quality Revalidation Inspection activities for the piston pin ;

assembly, six of the eighteen end plugs examined were found to be loose at SNPS. End plug loosening has also been reported at other installations. This problem is likely to be associated with assembly procedures. The loose end plugs on the Shoreham engines were replaced using the rolling tool supplied by TOI, plus Locktite.

No evidence of problems with this pin retainer at Shoreham had been reported in the EDGCTS. However, loss of a pin retainer at Grand Gulf has reportedly resulted in scoring of the cylinder wall by the pin.

The spiral lock ring in the piston pin assembly fails to meet Ramsey Lock design recommendations. Because the wrist pin is free to rotate in both directions, a self-locking spiral ring should be'used. Although Shoreham has i experienced no problems with the spiral retaining rings, it is recommended '

that, to increase reliability, the spiral rings on the Shoreham engines be replaced by the Waldes rings, at the next refueling outage (EEAR 84-191). ,

The inspection of chrome plate damage revealed a significant frequency of cracks, blisters, and chipped areas of hard chromium on piston pins from a Comanche Peak engine. These damaged areas are the result of manufacturing 5.14 i

l l

defects due to inadequate cleaning and electroplating process control and/or ;

abrasive grinding of the chrome plate on the finished pins.

t Inspection results for the Shoreham engines revealed no evidence of chrome chippin; n piston pins, but not all pins were inspected. The inspection 4 o results for other wrist pin bushings showed no evidence of damage from detached chrome fragments. Also, lube oil analysis will detect any chrome fragments before excessive chrome peeling could cause any damage.

EADCR F-46505 requires that all new or replacement pins be LP or MP

inspected before installation in Shoreham engines, to ensure freedom from chrome defects.

The consequences of chromium chips that might be detached in the Shoreham i engines are judged not to represent a significant risk relative to the intended service, because such particles will be removed from the lube oil by strainers 4

and filters.

Wrist pin structural analysis results indicate that the design is adequate for the piston firing pressure and inertial loads. l L

Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed and considered in the performance of the OG DR/QR review; i.e., proper installation of wrist pin oil plug was verified by visual inspection; proper wrist pin installation was j verified by data review; pins were visually inspected for distress indications with satisfactory results; wrist pin material was verified; and LP tests were [

! performed on oil holes with satisfactory results. ,

l The OG concluded that the piston pin assembly with applicable E80CRs incorporated is acceptable for its intended design function at Shoreham.

5.11.2 PNL Evaluation I '

Based on review of the DR/QR report, PNL concludes that the OG conducted i an adequate evaluation of the subject components. PNL notes that LILCO has j already addressed the OG recommendation that new or replacement piston pins be 1

inspected with LP or W prior to their installation. In addition, end plugs ,

have been replaced using improved installation procedures. In view of these ;

changes, and noting LILCO's commitment to replace the spiral rings with Waldes !

I i 5.15

! l 4

rings per the OG recommendation at the first outage (EEAR 84-191) and to vitually inspect the piston pin assembly if the piston is disassembled, PNL concurs with the OG that the piston pin assemblies are adequate for their intended functions in the EDGs.

PNL notes that the maintenance plan calls for visual inspections of the piston pins for evidence of chrome plate damage at 5-year intervals. It is

recommended that this be done with at least 10-power magnification to inspect chrome plating porosity.

5.12 INTAKE TAPPET ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-345A) 5.12.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of documentation on the roller failures of the " Pride of Texas" showed that the cams were misaligned such that the rollers were running at or over the edge of the cam. This placed the rollers in a high state of stress.

Also, the rollers on " Pride of Texas" were specified to be less hard than the rollers on the Shoreham EOGs. This is the " inadequate heat treatment" referred to in the component tracking system. After these rollers were replaced with rollers having the same hardness as those at Shoreham, they operated without incident. There is no Shoreham or other nuclear plant experience with this problem. The intake / exhaust tappet assemblies on the Shoreham EDGs have 7

experienced in excess of 10 operating stress cycles with no failures.

Analyses were performed that demonstrate the rollers have adequate strength and endurance to withstand the push rod loads to which they are subjected.

The manufacturing process used to create the interference fit between the roller pin and bushing is acceptable, based on analysis and service history.

The quality revalidation inspection results were reviewed with s satisfactory results. This consisted of confirming roller functionability on three cylinders of each engine, as well as a review of the EDGCTS.

The OG concluded that the intake / exhaust tappet assemblies are acceptable for their intended design functions at Shoreham.

5.16

5.12.2 PNL Evaluation Based on its review of the information provided in the DR/QR as summarized above, and noting the commitment by LILCO to inspect cams, tappets and rollers at each refueling outag2, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the intake tappet assemblies are adequate for their intended service.

4 5.13 FUEL TAPPET ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-345B)

, 5.13.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of documentation on the roller failures on the " Pride of Texas" showed that the cams were misaligned such that the rollers were running at or over the edge of the cam. This placed the rollers in a high state of stress.

Also, the rollers on " Pride of Texas" were specified to be less hard than the rollers on the Shoreham EDGs. This is the " inadequate heat treatment" referred to in the component tracking system. After these rollers were replaced with those havir.g the same hardness as the rollers at Shoreham, they operated without incident. The Shoreham EDG fuel tappet rollers have rotated over 10 7 times with no incidents of failure.

Structural analyses indicate that the rollers have adequate strength and

endurance to withstand the push rod loads to which they are subjected.

The manufacturing process used to create the interference fit between the roller pin and bushing is acceptable, based on analysis and service history.

4 The ORI documentation was reviewed with satisfactory results. As part of the OR, roller freedom and the absence of measurable clearance were verified .

for rollers on three cylinders of each engine.

Based on the above review and analysis, the OG concluded that the fuel i

tappet assembly is acceptable for its intended design function at Shoreham.

5.13.2 PNL Evaluation PNL reviewed the data reported in the Shoreham DR/0R, and noted LILCO's

commitment to visually inspect the cam lobe and tappet assembly at each 1

5.17

refueling outage. Based on this review and L LCO's M/S commitment, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the fuel tappet assembly is acceptable for the intended service at Shoreham.

5.14 FUEL PUMP BASE ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-345C) 5.14.1 OG Results and Conclusions The adequacy of the fuel pump base assembly has been determined via stress calculations, tests, and field inspection. The seismic stresses in the ,

assembly are considered to be negligible. Based on the review of the injector line fatigue tests, it can be. concluded that the injector pump has been tested to loads well in excess of normal operating loads.

The specific pump base used at Shoreham was stress analyzed as a simple short beam for loads imposed by the tappets. Fuel pump base stresses were found to be low, as were the base bnit stresses. Stresses in the base bolting were found to be substantially below the bolt preload stress; thus, fatigue is not a concern with these bolts.

No operational problems have been reported for the pump base assembly.

Fuel injector line loads were negligible.

Based on the above design review, the OG concluded that the fuel pump base assembly is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham. The OG judged that a OR review of the component was not required.

5.14.2 PNL Evaluation PNL examined the 0G design review of the fuel pump base assembly as docu-mented in the DR/QR report. PNL notes that the OR/QR report makes no mention of spring and inertial loading having been included in the stress analysis.

These elements may not be negligible. However, their omission does not invalidate the conclusions drawn by the OG, because the design is conservative. '

Based on 1) successful component operating history, 2) the large factor

- of safety in design, and 3) the favorable results of manufacturer's testing

5.18

reported in the OR/0R and reviewed by PNL during the audit of OR/OR components, PNL concludes that the tappets and guide fuel pump base assembly are suitable for their intended service.

5.15 CAMSHAFT (Part No. 03-350A) 4 5.15.1 OG Results and Conclusions The dynamic analysis of the valve system indicated the peak contact forces

, on the exhaust cam lobe, on the intake cam lobe, and on the fuel cam lobe are all below the endurance limit stress on the cam lobe surface.

Visual inspection of all cam lobe surfaces for cracking, pitting, or spalling is required at each fuel outage. Identification of cam lobe surface j distress shall be followed by a detailed evaluation to determine the expected life remaining and reinspection / replacement interval. This recommendation is incorporated by E&DCR F-46505.

A factor of safety against cam lobe slippage due to the applied torques was found to be adequate. The cam lobes will not rotate or slip on the shaft under normal operation and installation conditions.

I Evaluation of torsional stresses (including resonance effects) and shear and bending stresses (including dynamic effects) confirmed that stresses are within the allowable limits for the camshaft material.

The ORI documentation was reviewed with satisfactory results. This included a review of the EDGCTS. Camshaft material and hardness were verified by NDE. Visual inspections were performed on each engine and documented with photographs after 100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months ' operation at full load.

Based on the above design review, and with the implementation of the recommended inspections, the 0G concluded that the camshaft assembly is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.15.2 PNL Evaluation 4

Although FNL did not perform an in-depth review of the DR dynamic analysis during its audit review of this component, PNL concurs with the methodology used by the OG. PNL concurs with the 0G on the adequacy of the camshaft 5.19

assembly for its intended service on the basis of 1) a review of all DR/QR information conducted at the time of the audit, 2) the positive service history for camshaft assemblies properly installed and maintained as reported in the EDGCTS, and 3) the planned visual inspection of this assembly at each refueling outage.

5.16 CAMSHAFT BEARINGS (Part No. 03-350B) 5.16.1 OG Results and Conclusions i Review of experience at the Shoreham site, as well as nuclear and non-nuclear industry experiences with diesel engines listed in the EDGCTS, shows that no problems have been encountered with the camshaf t bearings.

The peak oil film pressures determined by the journal orbit analysis were within industry recommendation (Hollander, M. and Bryda, K. A., " Interpretation of Engine Bearing Performance by Journal Orbit Analyses", SAE International Congress Exposition, February 1983).

Analyses indicate that surface fatigue will not limit bearing life.

Based upon the material properties of the bearing shell and operating parameters, it is concluded that the bearing material is acceptable for its intended application.

The TDI maintenance schedule requires checking the camshaf t bearings every 2 years (or at alternate refueling outages if these occur within 36 months).

This is considered adequate to address normal bearing wear.

The OG concluded that the camshaft bearings are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.16.2 PNL Evaluation Based on a review of the operating experience, the analysis conducted, and the maintenance schedule cited above, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the camshaft bearings are adequate for their intended function.

t 5.20

- 5.17 CAMSHAFT - SUPPORTS, BOLTING, AND GEARS (Part No. 03-350C) 5.17.1 OG Results and Conclusions The calculated factors of safe' t y indicate this gear 'is acceptable for its

, . intended function.

4 It is recommended that the cam gear be inspected during scheduled refuel-ing outages. The inspection should be directed at potential pitting. Any abnormal situations or indications'of progressive pitting should be reported for an engineering evaluation. This recommendation has been incorporated by

, E&DCR F-46505.

The bolts connecting the cam gear hub to the cam gear are adequate, pro-vided that cotter pins (not called out in the TDI parts manual) are present.

If the cam gear and hub are disassembled and reassembled for any reason, it is essential that the ' nut be relocked at the position corresponding to the pre-4 scribed range of torque. Insertion of the cotter pin must be accomplished I at a torque greater than 50 ft-lbf and less than 90 ft-lbf. If this is not possible, another bolt and/or nut and/or washer should be used. This recom-mendation has been incorporated in EEAR 84-195.

The overhang portion of the camshaft is supported in part by a camshaft adapter.and camshaft support. This outboard support is adequate to support the loads transferred across the overhang.

Experience at the Shoreham site and at other nuclear and non-nuclear installations was reviewed and is considered to have no impact since the only adverse experiences noted were for cases where bolts were not installed (not'

- relevant when bolts are in place) and with an engine that is not a TDI installation.

As part of the QRI, adequacy of the EDGCTS documentation was estab-

! d lished. In addition, support coupling torque values were confirmed; camshaf t gear material was confirmed; material hardness of the camshaf t gear 'was mea-sured; and a visual inspection with photographs was made of gear teeth after a C

100-hour full load run on all three engines.

f 1

5.21

)

3 4

=e e,e~,-m-* ~-*t e- , - -e e-m-4---*-e-c,--+ --g-- -,-,en- n-t--+--e-s+.+--*-r-e--n-vr----*<wwem - T r * & 6 'e re' --' r vnw w w yi-w'-----'--r-------*'~-~-

The 0G concluded that, with the implementation of E&DCR F-46505 and EEAR 84-195, the supports, gears, and bolts are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.17.2 PNL Evaluation In PNL's opinion, an adequate analysis was made of the subject components a

by the OG. Based on LILCO's commitment to maintain the prescribed bolt torque and to follow reassembly and inspection procedures as prescribed in E&DCR F-46505 (alternate refueling outages), PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that i the cam shaft supports, bolting, and gears are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.18 IDLER GEAR ASSEMBLY - CRANK TO PilMP GEAR (Part No. 03-355A) 5.18.1 OG Results and Conclusions The capscrews that connect the crank pump gear to the crankshaft are adequate with respect to the tensile preload in the bolt under the prescribed torque.

It is recommended that the crank pump gear (and the jacket water pump l gear) be inspected during scheduled refueling outages. The inspection should be directed at potential pitting. Any abnormal situations or indications of progressive pitting should be reported for an engineering evaluation. This recommendation has been incorporated by E&DCR F-46505.

As part of the QRI, the adequacy of the EDGCTS documentation was estab-lished by review. In addition, gear tooth material was confirmed, and a gear tooth visual inspection supported by photographs was made after 100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months of I

operation at full load on all three engines.

Rased on the above review, the OG concluded that the crank to pump gear and capscrews are acceptable for their intended service at Shoreham. Ib l

5.18.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the DR/QR report data, PNL concludes that the OG conducted an I adequate analysis of the subject components. Due to torsional vibrations from the crankshaft gears, the inspections at each refueling outage recommended by 5.22 l 1

l l

y.

I l

i

the OG are pertinent to continued and satisfactory engine operation. PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the subject components are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.19 IDLER GEAR ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-3558) 5.19.1 OG Results and Conclusions The calculated factors of safety indicate this gear is acceptable for its i intended service.

It is recommended that the idler gear be inspected during scheduled refueling outages. The inspection should be directed at potential pitting.

Any abnormal situations or indications of progressive pitting should be reported for an engineering evaluation. This recommendation has been incor-porated by E&DCR F-46505.

The bolts that connect the idler hub to the idler gear are adequate with respect to the tensile preload in the bolt under the prescribed torque. If the idler gear and hub are disassembled and reassembled for any reason, it is essential that the nut be relocked at precisely the position corresponding to the prescribed torque range. Insertion of the cotter pin must be accomplished at a torque range greater than 50 f t-lbf and less than 90 f t-lbf. If this is not possible, then another bolt and/or nut and/or washer should be used. This recomendation has been incorporated in EEAR 84-197.

An investigation for available information concerning the bolt failures in the idler gear assembly at Wadi Jazan, Saudi Arabia, and Valdez, Alaska, was conducted. No specific data were obtained. Additional efforts to obtain any potential information are not considered necessary. It is possible that the bolts failed in fatigue resulting from inadequate preload. The dominant l g dynamic excitation of the SNPS idler gear is at a frequency of 30 Hz.

l Therefore, the operating time, in excess of 1000 hours0.0116 days 0.278 hours 0.00165 weeks 3.805e-4 months , on SNDS EDGs 101 and 102 since manufacture should be adequate to demonstrate unlimited life of these

^

! bol ts.

r Design changes associated with E&DCR F-46239A are adequate.

l t

5.23

The peak oil film pressure experienced by the bushing is well below the material fatigue strength. The minimum oil film thickness is well above the industry recommended value.

Adequacy of EDGCTS documentation adequacy was established by review, gear tooth material was verified, and a visual inspection was made and photographs taken of the gear teeth after 100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months of full load operation on all three A engines.

The OG concluded that, with the implementation of E&DCR F-46505 and EEAR ,84-197, the idler gear assembly is acceptable for its intended use at Shoreham.

5.14.2 PNL Evaluation The DR/QR record for this component was audited by PNL, and both the DR and OR are considered to be satisfactory. Considering LILCO's commitment to inspect the general condition of idler gears at each outage, and with the pro-vision for additional maintenance outlined below, PNL concurs with the OG that the component is suitable for its intended service.

PNL notes that the maintenance / surveillance plan does not provide for a measurement of thrust bearing clearance. PNL recommends that this be done because longitudinal gear pounding on the thrust bearing can lead to broken bolts. This measurement should be done at each outage, at the time gear back-lash is checked. The thrust bearing clearance should agree with TDI manual clearances. PNL also suggests that the gear maintenance at alternate refueling outages include an inspection of both faces of the gear teeth.

5.20 IDLER GEAR ASSEMBLY - GASKETS AND BOLTING (Part No. 03-355C) 5.20.1 OG Results and Conclusions A review of site and industry experience was not performed because a formal design review for this component was neither needed nor required. 1 Component Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed. This included a satisfactory review of the EDGCTS. In addition, torquing of ,

5.24 i:

capscrews was verified in all three engines. The gaskets and bolting on EDG 102 were visually examined with satisfactory results.

The OG concluded that the idler gear assembly gaskets and bolting are installed properly and will perform their intended function at Shoreham.

5.20.2 PNL Evaluation i

Considering that the intended function of these components is not load bearing, PNL concludes the analysis by the OG was adequate. PNL concurs with e the OG conclusion that the subject components are adequate to perform their intended function.

5.21 CYLINDER HEAD INTAKE AND EXHAUST VALVES (Part No. 03-3608) 5.21.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of the Shoreham experience listed in the EDGCTS shows there have been relatively few problems directly related to valve design or manufacturing.

Isolated instances of flaking or loss of chrome plating from the valve stem have been reported. Lack of concentricity between valve seating surface, stem and valve guide has also been reportec. Other problems involving valves, such as excessive carbon deposits, relate to engine operation, fuel used, etc., and are not true valve problems.

Stresses acting on the valve are relatively low because the engine operates at relatively low rpm. This is confirmed by the service experience in both nuclear (including Shoreham) and non-nuclear applications. There have been no failures from fatigue, creep, valve warpage, or other mechanisms indicative of high operating stress.

Flaking and loss of chrome plating from the valve stem is an isolated event that has a minor effect on engine performance.

a' Concentricity problems have been eliminated by improvements in the valve grinding process. However, it is recommended that the subcover be inspected after 500 to 600 hours0.00694 days 0.167 hours 9.920635e-4 weeks 2.283e-4 months of operation after rebuild of a cylinder head, for evidence of valve guide blowby (soot) in accordance with EADCR F-46505.

5.25

4 Adequacy of QRI documentation was established by review. Valve heads and valve stems were visually inspected; stem diameter, face-to-stem runout, and I

head distortion were measured; the material of the valves was revalidated; and i

the area where the valve head joins the stem was nondestructively examined on all valves from three cylinders of each of the three engines.

Based on the above review, and upon compliance with E80CR F-46505, the t OG concluded that the valves are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.21.2 PNL Evaluation Based on its review of the OR/0R data, PNL concludes that the 0G performed an adequate and in-depth OR/0R analysis of the subject components. Noting LILCO's commitment to inspections 500 to 600 hours0.00694 days 0.167 hours 9.920635e-4 weeks 2.283e-4 months af ter cylinder head instal-lation or rebuilding, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the subject valves are acceptable for their intended function. However, the flaking and loss of plating should not be regarded too lightly, as they provide a wearing surface, and chrome plate. loss can cause seizure, gross wear, and galling.

Surveillance Recommendation 1

Flaking and loss of chrome plating from valve stems has been noted on several TOI engines during component inspection. PNL recommends that at the time of inspection any units with evidence of chrome loss be replaced.

5.22 CYLINDER HEAD VALVE - BOLTING AND GASKETS (Part No. 03-360C) 5.22.1 OG Results and Conclusions

, A review of site and industry experience was conducted via the EDGCTS.

No major experience due to seal or gasket failure was reported for SNPS.

Industry experience was limited'to problems where the designs and/or operating parameters were different from those at SNPS. g The combustion seal ring and water seal ring are Flexitallic or equal, spiral wound, stainless steel with asbestos iller. They are rated by the ,

manufacturer at 1400*F maximum continuous service. This rating is above the 5.26

local operating temperatures at the seal mating surfaces; therefore, they are suitable for their intended service at SNPS.

The remaining seals consist of push rod tube 0-rings and two types of head to block water passage grommets. These seals are all made of " cured" E60c viton. These seals were specified in Service Information Memo (SIM) 315, which I

replaced all buna N/ ethylene propylene / silicon materials with E60c viton and

" cured" E60c viton.

) The viton seals and 0-rings are in contact with Nalco inhibited jacket water. During engine operation the jacket water pressure ranges from 10 to 30 psi and has a temperature range of 170*F.

According to the manufacturer, viton is acceptable for continuous use at temperatures up to 400*F. It is also compatible with lube oil, fuel oil and Nalco 39L inhibited jacket water. Therefore, it is concluded that replacemer.t viton seals for major engine mating surfaces on the R-48 engines at Shoreham per SIM 315 are acceptable.

The information documented in the ORI was determined to be satisfactory by review. This included a review of the EDGCTS. Installation of proper gaskets was also checked, and the gaskets and seals installed in two or three cylinder head assemblies of each engine were visually inspected for evidence of leaks, distortion or failure.

The bolting and gaskets were addressed in " Seismic Qualification Review, TOI Emergency Diesel Generators at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station".

The OG concluded that the cylinder head valve bolting, seals, and gaskets are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.22.2 PNL Evaluation Based on a review of the DR/QR data, PNL concludes that the OG adequately s'

reviewed the subject components and concurs that the seals, gaskets, and bolts associated with the cylinder head valves in the SNPS EDGs are adequate for

their intended functions.

5.27 v-

5.23 CYLINDER HEAD VALVE SPRING AND RETAINER (Part No. 03-3600) 5.23.1 OG Results and Conclusion Although no deficiencies or abnormalities with valve springs or retainers have been reported at Shoreham, nuclear industry experience indicates one instance where improperly shotpeened springs may have been supplied on some TDI T engines.

Review of the engineering drawings shows the spring and retainer are ,

fabricated using materials and procedures consistent with industry practice.

Review of the Quality Revalidation results shows that all valve springs at Shoreham have been visually inspected to ensure that no defective springs are installed on the engines.

The OG concluded that the valve spring and retainer are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.23.2 PNL Evaluation in PNL's opinion, a complete review of valve spring material and manu-facture would have included consideration of kinematic forces and stresses in the valve train. This analysis was not performed as part of the Phase 11 design review. However, noting 1) the good operating performance to date at Shoreham, Catawba, and other installations, 2) the inspections done to confirm that the Shoreham springs were not from the manufacturer which experienced failures at Kodiak, and finally 3) LILCO'r commitment to inspecting these springs and retainers at each refueling outage, PNL concurs with the OG that the subject components are acceptable for their intended service.

5.24 FUEL INJECTION PUMP (Part No. 03-365A) 5.24.1 OG Results and Conclusions g A review of the operating history of the Bendix fuel injection pumps at Shoreham and other nuclear power plants indicates no reported history of Bendix ,

pump failure to supply sufficient fuel to the engine. Further, any leaks that 5.28

occurred were attributable to loose connections, fittings, and bleed screws, and not to the primary pressure boundary.

One significant failure occurred at the Catawba Nuclear Plant (Duke Power). A delivery valve holder, which sees full discharge pressure, p

fractured. Duke Power had the part examined at the Babcock & Wilcox Alliance Research Center. It concluded that the fracture initiated at a casting defect in the part and was not a design deficiency.

The fuel lines to and from these pumps are tubing and impose nozzle loads calculated to be 45 lb maximum. These will impose minimal stresses and defor-mation in these pumps.

Each pump is shop-tested and calibrated at 225 rpm and the equivalent operating pressure of 12,800 psig at three rack settings.

The materials of the pressure boundary and high stress members of the pump are various grades of steel, heat-treated as required for service. The pump housing is an automotive grade cast iron, which is suitable for its duty.

Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed and considered in the performance of the OG DR/QR review. That is, satisfactory quality of the EDGCTS package was determined by review, and a visual examination of all pumps for signs of leaking and cracking was performed with satisfactory results.

The routine inspection items listed in E&DCR 46404 are being incorporated in the instruction manual and have been implemented at Shoreham.

Based on the above, the OG concluded that the pump is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.24.2 pNL Evaluation Based on its review, PNL concludes that an adequate analysis of the

subject component was performed by the OG. PNL concurs with the OG that the fuel injection pump is capable of performing its intended function.

5.29

5.25 FUEL INJECTION N0ZZLE ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-365B) 5.25.1 OG Results and Conclusions A review of the operating history of the Bendix fuel injection nozzle assemblies at Shoreham and other nuclear power plants indicates that leaks are not a recurring problem. t Bendix Corporation reported that the fuel injection nozzle assembly design pressure is 15,000 psig; it is not subject to a hydrotest. The normal fuel oil ,

operating pressure is 14,500 psig with No. 2 fuel oil.

At Shoreham, the engines have run at full load and speed for sufficient time to prove the sufficiency of properly assembled and adjusted fuel injection nozzle assemblies to deliver the required fuel in the required spray pattern.

The materials of the pressure boundary and high stress members of the fuel injection nozzle assembly are various grades of steel, heat-treated as required for the service.

Nozzle loads have been evaluated and found acceptable.

Routine inspection and maintenance recommendations will be included in the Instruction Manual and incorporated in the LILC0 procedures via E&DCR F-46404.

The OG concluded that the fuel injection assembly is acceptable for its intended design function at Shoreham.

5.25.2 pNL Evaluation From its review of the DR/QR data, PNL concludes that the OG performed an adequate analysis on the fuel injection nozzle assembly. The EDGCTS indicates these nozzle assemblies are a high maintenance item. If problems persist, PNL suggests that maintenance practices and QA be reviewed (e.g., if not already provided, the use of fuel oil purifiers or coalescing filter elements should ,

4 be evaluated). LILCO's maintenance and surveillance plan to clean and reset the nozzles and check their spray pattern at each outage provides PNL the assurance that EDG operability / reliability will not be adversely affected by

this component. Accordingly, PNL concurs with the OG that the fuel injection 5.30 eg

nozzle assembly is adequate for its intended service. PNL also concurs with I

the decision to change to 135-degree spray tips, which are understood to be the current TOI production standard.

5.26 AIR INTAKE MANIFOLD (Part No.03-375) f 5.26.1 OG Results and Conclusions The bottom closure plates of the semi-cylindrical intake manifold were I found to be highly stressed when exposed to 30-psi internal pressure. There-fore, addition of seven transverse reinforcing ribs, to be attached to the bottom closure, was recommended. The recommendation was implemented by means of E80CR F-46462.

All other components were found to be stressed well within the permissible limits. Therefore, the intake manifold assembly, modified as indicated above, meets the intent and philosophy of the ASME Code Section III, Subsection N0 for Class 3 components, and is acceptable for the intended design service.

The Shoreham experience regarding cracks in the inlet elbows was addressed by modifying the TD1 instruction manual to incorporate a more effective assembly procedure for the cylinder heads / intake manifold / elbows. This change is documented in E&DCR F-450890.

Documentation of the Quality Revalidation Inspection results was found to be satisfactory by a review. The proper alignment of the intake manifold piping was verified by field inspection.

~

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the air intake manifold is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.26.2 PNL Evaluation g PNL's audit of this component confirmed that the design review and quality revalidation were adequately performed. PNL verified that the documents confirmed that the seven reinforcing ribs were properly installed, it was also determined that a sealant (RTV) is added at the joints and at the mainfold to facilitate sealing without exceeding bolt torque limits. PNL also noted that, 5.31

even if cracks develop, they would not compromise engine performance. Based on these findings, PNL concludes that this component is now suitable for its intended service.

5.27 EXHAUST MANIFOLO (Part No. 03-380A) 5.27.1 OG Results and Conclusions I Analyses indicate that seismic stresses never exceeded 3,900 psi. The mechanical stress caused by pressure, deadweight, and axial discontinuity at i the inline couplings never exceeded 26,700 psi, with approximately 25,900 psi caused by the axial discontinuity at the couplings. Thermal expansion stresses, because of the compact geometry, are always less than 32,900 psi.

Consistent with the intent and philosophy of the ASME Code, the adoption of an inspection program was implemented in EADCR F-46505. The program pro-vides a means for identifying the possible degradation of the exhaust manifold piping components, particularly the welded joints.

The exhaust water jacket was evaluated for normal operat,ing loads, earth-quake (OBE and SSE), thermal effects, and the effects of all applicable load combinations. Based on this review, it is concluded that the exhaust water jacket is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

Review of industry experience and Shoreham-specific experience showed that past problems with the exhaust manifold have been adequately addressed.

Based on a review of the exhaust pipe slip joint design, the slip joints, properly installed, have adequate margin for the relative exhaust line deformation.

As part of the ORI, adequacy of EOGCTS documentation was established by review, proper installation of supports was verified by line-walkdown, and all as-built sketches were issued through document control. N All pipe loads on engine block and turbocharger have been evaluated, and determined to be acceptable.

5.32

. v .;

1

i Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the subject piping compo- ,

nents and the water jacket are adequate for their intended design functions at

Shoreham.

5.27.2 PNL Evaluation

PNL examined the DR and QR documentation for the exhaust manifold, and concluded that the overall review was adequate. PNL generally concurs with the OG conclusion that the exhaust manifold and water jacket are acceptable for the

' intended service. On the basis of its review, PNL offers the following comments:

e Thermal stresses in the welded joint may lead to cracks; however, these cracks will not affect engine operability or reliability.

I e A conservative precaution would be to check the installation for the existence of hot spots upon which lube or fuel oil could spray, causing fires. If hot spots are found, the use of shields at key l Joints of the fuel oil / lube system would provide one form of protection.

5.28. EXHAUST MANIFOLO - BOLTING AND GASKETS (Part No. 03-3808) 5.28.1 OG Results and Conclusions A review of Shoreham experience listed in the EDGCTS shows that the

) exhaust pipe flange capscrews were vibrating loose. All of the capscrews were replaced with a new, higher strength, carbon steel, closer-fitting capscrew of the correct length. In addition, the installation procedures were revised.

The exhaust manifold support bracket-to-block capscrews were also replaced .

because they may have been exposed to possible overstressing prior to the rework.

s The torque values and thread engagement used for all the exhaust manifold bolting are within the recommended ranges for the material (SAE GRS), based on industry standards for bolting.

5.33

E l

I The exhaust manifold gasket is rated by the manufacturer for service up I to 1500*F. This rating is above the maximum temperature of the exhaust gases.

The QRI results were reviewed. This included a review of the EDGCTS.

In addition, the proper torquing of exhaust manifold capscrews was verified.

Installation of proper bolting was not achieved (this was dispositioned by LOR 2411). Dimensions of capscrews and tapped holes were checked. Proper gasket installation could not be verified through existing documentation. The correct gasket replacement sets were requisitioned from the warehouse for use in reas- ,

sembly of the diesel exhaust manifolds. However, due to an outdated reassembly guideline which references the old gasket, installation of the proper gasket could not be verified. As the correct replacement gasket group was requisi-tioned and satisfactory performance of the exhaust manifold discharge piping has been experienced during the last 400 hours0.00463 days 0.111 hours 6.613757e-4 weeks 1.522e-4 months of operation, it is concluded that the correct gaskets are installed.

Rased on the above review, the OG concluded that the exhaust manifold bolting and gaskets are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.28.2 PNL Evaluation in PNL's opinion and based on data presented in the DR/0R report, the OG adequately analyzed the subject components. PNL therefore concurs with the 0G conclusion that the exhaust manifold bolting and gaskets are adequate for their intended functions. PNL also concurs with LILCO's maintenance requirement to conduct magnetic particle examination of a sample of circumferential pipe welds at alternate refueling outages.

5.29 INTAKE, INTERMEDIATE, AND EXHAUST ROCKER SHAFT ASSEMRLIES (Part Nos. 03-390A A B) 5.29.1 OG Results and Conclusions 4 The maximum push rod and rocker arm forces were computed. These forces were used to compute the peak shear and bending stresses in the rocker shaft assemblies. Both are below the endurance limit stress.

5.34

Conservative stress analysis of the intake, intermediate, and exhaust rocker arms indicates a mininum factor of safety against failure of 1.1. The forces acting on the push rod sockets induce stresses in the sockets con-siderably below the allowable.

The capscrew connecting the rocker shaft to the rocker support is torqued f sufficiently to provide frictional resistance to lateral forces on the intake rocker-side of both rocker shaft assemblies. On the other side (intermediate rocker), the support dowel is engaged by the rocker shaft end, and transfers

' the shear from the rocker shaft to the sub-base assembly boss. Calculations indicate that these shear stresses exceed the endurance limit stress for the dowel. However, there is no evidence (nuclear or non-nuclear) indicating dowel failures. Specifically, Shoreham experience indicates that approximately 400 hours0.00463 days 0.111 hours 6.613757e-4 weeks 1.522e-4 months have been logged on these dowels at full engine load, which exceeds the endurance limit for this material.

The ORI documentation was reviewed with satisfactory results. This included a review of the EDGCTS. Push rod cup installation documentation was reviewed, and visual inspection was performed to verify acceptable overhang.

Rocker arm assemblies were visually inspected for wear indications and absence of foreign material. Material and hardness tests were performed on shafts.

Rocker arm bushing bores were dimensionally inspected.

Rased on the above review, the OG concluded that the intake, intermediate, and exhaust rocker shaft assemblies are acceptable for their intended design function at Shoreham.

5.29.2 PNL Evaluation From its review, PNL concludes that the OG performed an adequate analysis of the subject components. PNL notes the calculated stresses are high; how-ever, no stress failures were noted in the EDGCTS. In view of favorable oper-

/ ating history, and' noting that LILCO's maintenance schedule includes inspection of the rocker shaft assembly at refueling outages, PNL concurs with the OG findings that the rocker arm shaft assemblies are suitable for their intended service.

4 5.35

l I

, 5.30 ROCKER ARM RUSHING (Part No. 03-390E) l I l

5.30.1 OG Results and Conclusions [

The results of the adapted journal orbit analysis for the rocker arm bushings showed that the calculated minimum oil film between the bushings and ,

the shaft is too thin for full-film lubrication, according to data from the g l Cast Bronze Rearing Design manual. However, the bushings for the DSR-48 i f

engines at Shoreham are well within the safe operating limits for mixed-film j lubrication. t l

An inspection schedule for the rocker arm bushings was developed and incorporated in E40CR F-46505. i The estimated life of the intake rocker arm bushing determined from [

measured wear is longer than that determined from the load history and the empirical wear relationship. These measurements show that the recommended inspection periods are conservative. i The EOGCTS list indicates that, on one occasion, a rocker arm assembly was found out of tolerance. This was a result of normal wear.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the rocker arm bushings '

are acceptable for their irtended function at Shoreham.

5.30.2 PNL Evaluation From this review of the Shoreham DR/QR, PNL concludes that the OG made an adequate analysis of the subject component. Noting the maintenance schedule provided in E40CR F46505 calls for annual (outage) inspection of intermediate l

rocker arm bushings, and 5-year and 10-year inspections and measurements for the exhaust and intake rocker arm bushings, respectively, PNL concurs with the '

OG finding that the rocker arm bushing is acceptable for its intended function.

5.31 ROCKER ARM AND PUSH R00 LIFTERS (Part No. 03-390F) f 5.31.1 OG Results and Conclusions The OSR-48 EDGs at Shoreham have experienced a high incidence of collapsed lifters. The problem occurred only at the time of the first start following an extended period of inactivity, and is diagnosed as resulting from the oil l

5.36 i

l-i n-, nn - , , - . . n-_n- .- . - ,,n_,---..-,----

within the lif ter draining out in response to gravitational forces. In fact, at the time this problem arose, the hydraulic lifter installations were incor-rectly specified by T01 resulting in upside down installations. A modification has been made (E&OCR F-45564) at the direction of T01 to reinstall the lif ters right side up.

4 The hydraulic lifter arrangement has proven its reliability at Shoreham by successfully operating through extended engine testing.

) As part of the QRI, the EDGCTS documents were reviewed with satisfactory resul ts. Also, dimensions and leakdown rate were checked on spare components.

Based upon the above review, the OG concluded that the rocker arm and push rod lif ters are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.31.2 PNL Evaluation Based on its review of the OR/QR, PNL concludes that the OG adequately analyzed and reviewed the lif ters for design and quality, respectively. PNL concurs with the OG that these components are adequate for the intended function. Because hydraulic lif ters are sensitive to dirt in the oil, the maintenance at each outage committed to by LILCO is especially important.

5.32 GOVERNOR AND TACHOMETER ORIVE GEAR AND SHAFT (Part No. 03-402Al 5.32.1 OG Results and Conclusions The EDGCTS database was reviewed; none of the items was found to be applicable to SNPS.

A linear dynamic model was fonnulated to determine the dynamic loads on the tachometer and governor drive shafts and on the associated gears. Using the mean and oscillating loads from the dynamic analysis, a fatigue strength analysis was conducted on the two shafts. At the location of the maximum bending stress in the governor drive shaft there is a factor of safety of 23.

At the change in area of the shaf t, a factor of safety of 10 in comparison with

, . the torsional shear endurance was found. The tachometer drive shaf t is

similar, having a factor of safety of 15.

e l 5.37

The analyses of the gears for pitting and bending show that all items have adequate factors of safety (i.e., greater than 1.7 for pitting and 3.9 for bending).

The effects of backlash have been considered and indicate acceptable factors of safety.

As part rf the QRI, the EDGCTS document package was reviewed with satis-factory results. All parts were visually inspected and found to be satisfac-tory or were dispositioned for corrective engineering action. Vertical thrust ,

was verified on two engines. Backlash was checked and verified on two engines.

Material analysis was verified on the spare drive gear.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the governor drive gears and shaf ts are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.32.2 PNL Evaluation Based primarily on recent positive inspection results at Shoreham following over 740 hours0.00856 days 0.206 hours 0.00122 weeks 2.8157e-4 months of testing at and above 3300 kW, and LILCO's commitment to inspect these components at each outage, PNL concurs with the OG that the governor and tachomete drive gears and shaf ts are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.33 OVERSPEED TRIP - GOVERN 0P AND ACCESSORY ORIVE (Part No. 03-4108) 5.33.1 OG Results and Conclusions The results of the analyses of the gears for pitting and bending indicate all items have adequate factors of safety; namely, greater than 1.9 against pitting and 19 against tooth bending.

The alternating stress amplitude was compared with the corresponding fatigue strength for the several shaf ts. These calculations show that the shafting has the strength to withstand the loading.

As part of the QRI, the EDGCTS documents were reviewed with acceptable resul ts. There was one instance of measured gear backlash beyond specifica-

tions. This is expected on helical gears and has no design implications. Al so as part of the QRI, visual inspections were perfonned, and gear backlash was 5.38

measured on two engines. Liquid penetrant examinations were performed on the gears and shaft on one engine.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the overspeed trip and accessory drive gear ard shaf ting are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

V 5.33.2 PNL Evaluation Based on information provided in the DR/0R report, PNL concludes that the 6

OG conducted an adequate analysis of the subject components. Noting that the drive assembly gears were replaced due to excessive backlash, PNL considers the LILCO commitment to inspection at each outage to be important. On these bases, PNL concurs with the OG that the overspeed trip and accessory drive gear and shaf ting are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.34 OVERSPEED TRIP VENT VALVE (Part No. 03-4100)_

5.34.1 OG Results and Conclusions As specified in Amot Controls Corporation literature, the valve is designed for manual and mechanical tripping applications with such actuators as overspeed trip levers. This design application is suitable for the valve's intended service at Shoreham.

There has been no Shoreham or industry experience of inadvertent trip due to vibration or 0-ring leakage. The TDI Maintenance Manual has been revised to include changing valve 0-rings every 5 years.

End reactions on small-bore components (i.e., valves, filters, regulators, etc., 2 inches and smaller) are acceptable because the relative strer.gth of small-bore components is much greater than that of the attached small-bore piping / tubing, f

The ORI results, consisting of a review of all EDGCTS experience docu-ments, were reviewed with satisfactory results.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the overspeed trip vent valve is acceptible for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.39

5.34.2 PNL Evaluation 8ased on the review of the DR/QR report, PNL concluded that the OG perfomed an adequate analysis of this valve. With the proviso that the func-tioning of this valve and its pneumatic shutdown system be checked on a 6-month basis when the setting of the overspeed governor is checked. PNL concurs with the OG that this component is acceptable for its intended function.

5.35 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY - WOOOWARD GOVERNOR (Part No. 03-415A) .

5.35.1 OG Results and Conclusions The following table summarizes the industry experience entries in the EDGCTS.

Problem Category Number of Entries

1. Improperly adjustml governor 13 (24%)

2. Slow response / oscillation (governor replaced, sent to factory) 4 ( 7%)

3. Dirty oil 5 ( 95)

4. Low oil or air in oil 8 (15%)

5. Malfunctioning shutdown solenoid 4 ( 75)

6. Loose electrical connection 4 ( 7%)

7. Problem w/ governor drive motor 2 ( 4%)

8. Miscellaneous / unknown 14 (26%)

These, figures show that the principal problem with the governor actuator has been its adjustments, or at least that modification of the governor settings eli:ninated a deficiency. The slow response / oscillation dif ficulties, which were solved by replacing the actuator, may have also been due to poor adjustment. g The 17 EDGCTS events regarding the Shoreham governors demonstrate that they have a record of difficulties similar to that of the industry as a whole, ,

i.e., problems with ensuring proper adjustment of the governor (and linkage) so that excessive overspeed does not occur during startup, and problems with maintaining clean hydraulic fluid.

5.40

I The problems with the electrical aspects of the governor were more random than the preceding, with no obvious deficiency indicated. The additional itstings in the EDGCTS display no regularity or pattern of fault.

With the replacements of actuators over the years and the discontinuation of early models, the actuators on the SNPS engines were all different as of

' April 1983. Following a TDI recommendation, the governors on all three engines were replaced with a unifom model.

4 The currently approved Shoreham technical specifications were reviewed to determine the surveillance testing procedures and data monitoring for items relevant to the governor. There are no quantitative evaluations to ensure that the engine transient response characteristics are within the specifications. A recommendation is included (below) to address this issue at Shoreham.

l The three-slot ballhead Woodward governor assembly is of a proper design i for use on the T01 engines at Shoreham.

The suggested maintenance schedules outlined in the TDI Instruction Manual should be carefully followed. These include daily checks of the oil level, governor settings, and mechanical connections, .;is well as annual replacement of the hydraulic oil. To improve the governor's reliability, recommendations for modifications to the maintenance, testing, and setting adjustment procedures for the governor have been implemented by E40CR F-46505. One provides for examination of the engine speed transients under both start and transient loading conditions.

The quality status of the component document package was verified through a review. Site procedures for setting the governor were verified to be in accordance with manufacturer's s ecommended procedures.

Based on the above review, and contingent upon implementation of the above

,d recommendations by E&DCR F-46505, the OG concluded that the Woodward governor is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

, 5.35.2 PNL Evaluation From its review, PNL concludes that an adequate analysis was perfomed on the Woodward goverror. Noting LILCO's comitment to the OG-recommended 5.41

maintenance at each outage, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that this component is acceptable for its intended function on the Shoreham engines.

5.36 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY - B0OSTER SERV 0 MOTOR (Part No. 03-415B) 5.36.1 OG Results and Conclusions 9

Industry experience was reviewed. The review indicated that booster servomotor failures were attributable to worn internal components (due to rust and condensation). The starting air system used with Shoreham diesels is designed to prevent moisture buildup within the system. This is accomplished by incorporating refrigerant driers, moisture traps, and moisture collectors into the air start system.

The governor control oil system is flushed and refilled at each outage.

This will further ensure that the internals of the booster servomotor and the governor are supplied with quality oil throughout the life of the engine.

Because the starting air system and the governor control oil system will not cause any of the servomotor internals to corrode, it can be concluded that the servomotor is adequately protected against contamination.

All of the installation guidelines have been confirmed by an engineering inspection of the Shoreham diesels.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the servomotor is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.36.2 PNL Evaluation Based on data in the DR/QR report, PNL concludes that the OG conducted an adequate analysis of the subject component. Noting that the maintenance schedule includes servicing this component at each outage and refurbishing at about 5-year intervals, PNL concurs with the OG that the booster servomotor is ',

acceptable for its intended purpose on the TDI engines at Shoreham, s

5.42

5.37 GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY HEAT EXCHANGER (Part No. 03-415C) 5.37.1 OG Results and Conclusions The governor oil cooler was reviewed for design adequacy. It is an auxiliary device for maintaining governor oil temperature in the acceptable o operating range of 90 to 180*F. Operating experience has shown oil temperature to have been maintained within operating limits, and acceptable viscosity has been maintained, n

Based on the history of satisfactory operation during engine testing, the heat exchanger capacity is considered adequate.

The existing cooler at Shoreham is mounted adjacent to the governor below the oil level in the governor and is supported from the engine block. The installation therefore conforms to the requirements stated in the manufacturer's installation guidelire.

The governor oil is changed once every year or at each plant shutdown, whichever comes i .'st.

Nozzle loads have been evaluated and found acceptable.

The component Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed. This ,

consisted of a satisfactory review of the EDGCTS documents. It was verified that the units are mounted below the oil level in the governor.

The OG concluded that the governor assembly heat exchanger is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.37.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from its review that an adequate analysis was made on the subject component, and concurs with the OG that the governor assembly heat exchanger is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.38 ENGINE ORIVEN LUBE Oil PUMP (Part No.03-420)

5.38.1 OG Results and Conclusions There have been no reported leaks from the pressure boundary. The integrity of the pressure boundary has been demonstrated.

5.43

l*

l I

There is no history of the pump failing to maintain the required lube oil pressure and temperature. It has demonstrated adequate lube oil performance.

Contrary to the design review checklist (which calls for a review of the mechanical seal for adequacy), this pump is not furnished with a mechanical face type seal. This pump has bronze sleeve bearings, one of which also acts as a close-clearance throttle bushing. There is no history of seal degrading the pump perfomance. This pump design has been in use over 20 years. The design is considered conservative. g These pumps were seismically tested on a shaker table at Acton Laboratories as part of the purchase order requirement.

The pressure boundary parts are cast iron. The idler and drive gear are hardened carbon steel. The bushings are brass. All of the materials are suit-f able for the lube oil service.

The QR1 results were considered in the performance of the review. That is, a review of the EDGCTS document package produced acceptable results, and I inspections verified proper installation of pins and dowels.

l Based on the above, the OG concluded that the pump is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.38.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from the review of the DR/QR that an adequate analysis was

made on the lube oil pump, and concurs with the OG conclusion that it is ade-quate for its intended function at Shoreham.

i 5.39 STARTING AIR MANIFOLD - PIPING, TUBING, AND FITTINGS (Part No. 03-441A) 5.39.1 OG Results and Conclusions The air start manifold tubing for EDG 102 was analyzed and found accept- '.

able. However, this tubing for EDGs 101 and 103 was not supported in accord-ance with the stress criteria. Modifications were issued in E80CR F-46514 to install supports where required to meet these requirements.

The EDGCTS documentation was reviewed with satisfactory results. All l quality verified as-built drawings were issued. Pneumatic pressure tests and 5.44 l

l

[

visual welding inspections were performed with satisfactory results. Proper installation of flanged connections was verified.

The OG concluded that the tubing components reviewed meet the stress design criteria with the above issued modifications, and that they will perform their intended functions at Shoreham under all normal operation and earthquake 8 loadings.

5.39.2 PNL Evaluation 3 Based on its review of the DR/QR information, PNL concludes that an adequate analysis was made on the subject components. PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that, with recommended modifications, the components will serve the intended functions.

5.40 STARTING AIR MANIFOLO - VALVES, STRAINERS, AND FILTERS (Part No. 03-4418) 5.40.1 OG Results and Conclusions The check valve has a 300-lb rating, is constructed of cast steel with stainless steel trim, and is designed for air service. The materials and pressure rating are suitable for its intended use.

The strainer has a 300-1b rating and is constructed of ASTM a-216-58T GR WCB carbon steel. The mesh is constructed of 316 stainless steel. These materials and the pressure rating are suitable for the intended use.

The filter has a 300-lb rating and is constructed of a forged brass head, a drawn 304 stainless steel sump, and 304 stainless steel internals. These materials and the pressure rating are suitable for the filter's intended use.

The TOI manual was reviewed for acceptable maintenance / replacement

, procedures. The starting air system at Shoreham is designed to minimize moisture and contaminants.

Review of Shoreham experience indicated no problems with the design of the

equipment installed. However, as an added precaution, maintenance requirements 5.45

have been added to the TDI manual and are to be performed at 18-month intervals (E8DCR F-46505). In addition, the filter will be inspected on a monthly basis and replaced, if necessary.

The QRI consisted of assembling and reviewing the EDGCTS with satisfactory resul ts. No maintenance information on block / vent valve was in evidence.

k The Owners' Group concluded that starting air manifold valves, strainers, and filters are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.40.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from its review that the OG performed an adequate analysis and quality revalidation on the subject components. Noting LILCO's commitment to service these components at each outage, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that these components are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.41 FUEL OIL FILTERS (Part No. 03-455A) 5.41.1 OG Results and Conclusions The fuel oil filter design is suitable for the intended service and will allow adequate fuel flow while maintaining the desired filtration requirement of 3 to 5 microns.

Manufacturer's instructions and operating procedures are specific regard-ing the maximum differential pressure permissible across the filter. However, this review indicated there were no installed pressure gauges for detennining the differential pressure. This enhancement is recommended for implementation at an appropriate refueling outage per EEAR 84-202(a),

Operating and maintenance instructions were found to be complete in specifying cleaning / replacement procedures for filter components. Operating and maintenance instructions were not specific regarding the requirements or g methods for purging air from the standby chamber subsequent to disassembly /

reassembly. These procedures have been revised by E80CR F-46505 to incorporate the above recommendations. *

(a) A memo dated September 14, 1984, from J. Nataro (LILCO) to Design Review Committee members states that this action has been completed.

5.46

Shoreham operating experience indicates routine filter cleaning and replacement has been the most comon maintenance performed. There is no Shoreham or industry experience to indicate that the design of the fuel oil filter is unacceptable.

The EDGCTS documents were reviewed with satisfactory results.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the fuel oil filter is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

t 5.41.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the favorable operating history and LILC0's commitment to change filter elements when the differential pressure reaches 20 psid or at each outage, PNL concurs with the OG that the fuel oil filters as installed at Shoreham are acceptable for their intended function.

5.42 FUEL OIL STRAINERS (Part No. 03-455B) 5.42.1 OG Results and Conclusions Based on the engine fuel flow requirement, the strainer will allow ade-quate flow to the pump suction. Selection of a duplex type strainer is correct to allow switchover/ cleaning during diesel operation.

TDI recommends cleaning or replacing the strainer element at 5 psi pres-sure drop. This recommendation has been incorporated into the Instruction Manual via E&DCR F-46505.

A review of the EDGCTS indicates Shoreham experience with the fuel oil strainers has involved routine maintenance items only. There is no record of industry problems with the strainers.

Manufacturer's maintenance procedures were reviewed. These procedures J were complete regarding methods for cleaning the strainer. However, a need was identified for additional guidance concerning bolting torque values and procedures for disassembly, reassembly, and purging of air from the standby strainer. The required additions to the maintenance manual were covered by E80CR F-46505.

5.47

The ORI results were reviewed. This included reviewing the EDGCTS docu-mentation with satisfactory results. Proper installation of through-bolts was verified by visual inspections. No signs of leaking were noted.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the fuel oil strainer is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.42.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from the DR/QR effort review that the OG performed an ade-L '

quate analysis on the fuel oil strainers. Considering the M/S items identi-fied above and agreed to by LILCO, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the strainers are acceptable for their intended function.

5.43 LUBE DIL EXTERNAL LINES - TUBING, FITTINGS, AND COUPLINGS (Part No. 03-465A) 5.43.1 OG Results and Conclusions The lube oil rocker arm headers for EDGs 101, 102, and 103 were not supported, nor did they contain sufficient restraint in the axial direction to meet the tube stress design criteria. This modification was issued in E&DCR F-46513.

The lube oil 3/8-inch diameter tubing on EDG 101 from the external header to the camshaft outboard support bearing required additional vertical restraint to meet the stress criteria. This modification was issued in E&DCR F-46514.

The QRI results were reviewed. This involved reviewing the EDGCTS with satisfactory results. Quality as-built sketches were issued.

The OG concluded that the piping / tubing components with the above-noted modifications will meet the criteria and will perform their intended function at Shoreham under all normal and operation earthquake loadings. s 5.43.2 PNL Evaluation Rased on the detailed review of the Shoreham DR/QR report (the backup a documentation for this component was audited onsite), PNL concludes that an 5.48

adequate analysis was made on the subject components, and concurs with the OG conclusions. PNL suggests the possible addition of shields at joints as needed (see 03-380A).

5.44 TURBOCHARGER LUBE OIL - PIPE, TUBING, FITTINGS, AND FLEXIBLE COUPLING E (Part No. 03-467A) 5.44.1 OG Results and Conclusions

'J The turbo lube oil small-bore piping supply line for EDGs 101 and 103 was missing supports listed in the TDI parts manual. These suppcrts were required to meet the stress design criteria. Modifications to install these were issued in E&DCR F-46513.

The turbo lube oil small-bore piping drain line for EDGs 101 and 103 was evaluated and found acceptable. The 102 engine was missing the drain line support. Modification to install a support was issued in E&DCR F-46513D.

The QRI results were considerd in perfonning the DR/QR review. The EDGCTS documentation was reviewed with satisfactory results. Quality verified as-built drawings and sketches were issued.

The OG concluded that the small-bore piping and tubing will meet the criteria, with the above issued modifications, and will perform their intended functions at Shoreham under all normal operation and earthquake loadings.

5.44.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from its review of the DR/QR data that the OG adequately analyzed the subject components. PNL agrees with the OG conclusion that the components are now adequate for their intended function.

5.45 TURBOCHARGER BRACKET (Part No. 03-475A) 5.45.1 OG Results and Conclusions The operational history associated with the turbocharger bracket has been reviewed. The bracket was modified to correct the problems identified. The 5.49 1.

bracket modification increases the structural capability of the original turbo-charger bracket, decreases vibratory levels, and adds structural redundancy to the system.

Calculated stress levels in the steel turbocharger bracket are less than 16,000 psi under dead weight, dynamic loads, and piping loads. Thus, the bracket has adequate strength.

The QRI consisted of reviewing the EDGCTS document package with k

satisfactory results, Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the turbocharger bracket is acceptable for the intended function at Shoreham.

5.45.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from this review that the 0G adequately analyzed the turbo-charger bracket. PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the component is acceptable for its intended function.

5.46 TURB0 CHARGER AIR BUTTERFLY VALVE ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-4758) 5.46.1 OG Results and Conclusions To verify the operator size, a calculation was performed which revealed that the operator is capable of overcoming both the spring force and. the air flow to close the valve. The results of the calculation verify that the operator and roll-pin are suitably sized to close the valve.

The review of Shoreham, nuclear, and non-nuclear experience was conducted using the EDGCTS. Grease fittings have been added to the valve shaft at Shore-ham as a design improvement. The industry experience noted in the EDGCTS did not indicate any problems with the design of the valve assembly at Shoreham.

Preventive maintenance requirements were reviewed from the TDI Instruction Manual. Although Shoreham, nuclear, and non-nuclear industry experience had revealed no problems with valve components loosening, the snugness of the 4 locking devices on the valve linkages will be verified on a mor.thly basis, as an added precautionary measure. This maintenance requirement has been added to the manual via E&DCR F-46505.

5.50

The QRI included review of the EDGCTS documents with satisfactory resul ts. In addition, proper installation and alignment was verified. The butterfly to shaft attachment was visually inspected for signs of distress.

Butterfly disc material was verified. Hardness tests were performed on shaft base flange bolts.

' The OG concluded that the air butterfly valve assembly is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

f 5.46.2 PNL Evaluation From this review, and noting the commitment by LILCO to monthly confirma-tion of snugness of locking devices, PNL concurs with the OG that this valve assembly 'is acceptable for its intended function.

5.47 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - CABINET / SYSTEM (Part No. 03-500A) 5.47.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of the experiences listed in the EDGCTS indicates that no major '

problems with the electro-pneumatic control system have occurred at Shoreham.

The structural integrity of the cabinet is addressed in " Seismic Quali-fication Review, TDI Emergency Diesel Generators at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station." The review concluded that the control system components are used in the correct configuration to perfonn the required logic sequences, thereby fulfilling the criteria.

Based on the above results, the OG concluded that the control par.A assembly cabinet / system is acceptable for its intended design function at Shoreham.

5.47.2 PNL Evaluation

- Based on its review of the Shoreham DR/QR report, and noting LILC0's l

comitment to service the control panel assembly on an annual (outage) basis, PNL concludes that the OG analysis of the control panel assembly cabinet / system O was adequate. PNL concurs with the OG conclusion regarding component l

acceptability.

5.51

5.48 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - CONTROL RELAYS (Part No. 03-500J) 5.48.1 OG Results and Conclusions Quality revalidation consisted of a review of the EDGCTS documents.

Review of Shoreham experience showed some reported failures of components.

These were classified as random failures, identifiable through normal main- 4 tenance activity. No generic failure trends were observed. No non-nuclear industry problem experience was identified in the EDGCTS. .

The preventive maintenance requirements (clean and inspect relays at each '

shutdown) have been reviewed and found to be satisfactory to prevent defcctive relays due to dirty contacts. l Based on the above review, the OG considers the relays used for controlling the Shoreham EDGs are adequately designed for their intended application.

5.48.2 PNL Evaluation PNL reviewed the OG DR/QR results as well as the preventive maintenance procedures noted in E&DCR F-46505, which includes annual refurbishment. On these bases, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion regarding adequacy of the control relays.

5.49 CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY - PIPING, TUBING, AND FITTINGS (Part No. 03-500M) 5.49.1 OG Results and Conclusions The engine control panel was shaker table-tested to confirm the adequacy of the pneumatic lines in the panel. In addition, an engineering inspection of the interior of the control panel was performed to provide assurance of accept-able tubing supports. Photographs taken during the seismic tests were avail-able for comparison with the current installation. The tubing runs were found to be orderly, well supported, and consistent with testing conditions, and, therefore, were determined acceptable. x Quality revalidation consisted of a review of the EDGCTS documentation.

Only one incident of failure of tubing or fittings inside the panel was 5.52

}

eported. The failure, related to a leaking tube, is an isolated material or

~

manufacturing flaw. The EDGCTS document package was determined t be satis-factory through a review. j The OG concluded that the control panel piping, tubing, fittings, and support provisions are adequate for their intended service at Shoreham.

( 5.49.2 PNL Evaluation Based on review of the DR/QR information, PNL believes the analysis g

perfonned was adequate. PNL concurs with the OG conclusions on the adequacy of these components.

5.50 JACKET WATER AND LUBE OIL THERM 0 STATIC VALVES (Part No.03-515) 5.50.1 OG Results and Conclusions Shorehan and industry experience noted in the EDGCTS was reviewed. Two of the items under Shoreham experience consisted of valve design improvements.

Shoreham did not specifically experience the problems that had led to the improvements, but the improvements were made to preclude any future problems with the valves.

The TDI operations manual indicated the valve was constructed of a cast steel body. It was determined that the valve body was actually fabricated from a bronze material, which is marginally suitable for this application due to its susceptibility to hot tearing as a result of its material characteristics dur-ing casting. Consequently, the following action has been taken (E8DCR F-46505):

e Because the potential cracks in the valves propagate slowly, a visual inspection shall be performed every month during the required monthly start of the diesel generators, for evidence of leakage or crack l ,

propagation.

l )

e The bronze valves will be replaced with similar cast steel valves during the first 18-month outage or if leaks develop in the valves 9 prior to the outage. The steel valves are being procured under E&DCR F-46467.

5.53

Routine maintenance procedures for replacing the power-pill have been implemented by E&DCR F-46505.

Quality revalidation consisted of reviewing the EDGCTS with satisfactory resul ts. In addition, the sensing elements were verified to be correct for the jacket water and lube oil thermostatic valves.

The OG has determined that, as a result of this evaluation, the bronze thermostatic valves are suitable for their intended service until the first refueling outage at Shoreham. The reconnended cast steel replacement valves '

are acceptably designed for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.50.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the evaluation of the DR/QR efforts, PNL concludes that the OG conducted an adequate analysis on the subject valves. Noting L ILC0's commit-ment to 1) monthly leakage inspections, 2) replacement of the bronze valve with a cast steel valve at the first refueling outage, and 3) replacement of thermal power elements at 5-year intervals, PNL concludes that these valves are suitable for the expected service.

5.51 BARRING DEVICE - PNEUMATIC REGULATOR AND SHUT 0FF VALVE (Part No. 03-525B) 5.51.1 OG Results and Conclusions Both the regulator and shutoff valve are, according to the manufacturers, for use in compressed air systems and are therefore constructed of suitable materials for this service.

Because the starting air system is designed to control moisture and contaminants, the probability of valve or regulator fouling is minimized.

The TDI manual has been changed to require daily draining of the filter ,

while the barring device is in use and replacement of elastomeric parts in the pressure regulator valve during the 5-year maintenance outage (E&DCR F-46505).

A review of Shoreham and industry experience indicated an instance of bolts #

breaking on the regulator. This problem was resolved by the addition of sup-ports. There are no problems with the design of the regulator or shutoff valve.

5.54

The QRI consisted of reviewing the EDGCTS document package with satisfactory results.

The OG concluded that the pneumatic regulator and the shutoff valve of the engine barring device are acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.51.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from its review that the OG conducted an adequate analysis of these components. Noting LILCO's commitments to 1) drain the air filter I daily while the barring device is in use and 2) replace elastomeric elements at 5-year intervals, PNL concurs with the OG that the components are acceptable for their intended functions. .

5.52 BARRING DEVICE - MISC PNEUMATIC FITTINGS, HOSE, FILTERS, AND TUBING (Part No. 03-525C) 5.52.1 OG Results and Conclusions A satisfactory EDGCTS package and qualified as-built sketches for tubing were reviewed and considered in the performance of the design review.

The tubing, filters, and supports were reviewed in terms of applicable criteria, and were found acceptable. The OG concluded that the components will perform their intended function at Shoreham under all normal and earthquake loadings.

.5.52.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from the DR/QR data that an adequate review was performed on these components. Noting LILCO's commitment to replace elastomeric parts of the barring device pressure regulator at each fourth refueling outage, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion regarding the adequacy of the component.

s 5.55

l 5.53 BARRING DEVICE - MOUNTING BRACKET / SUPPORTS (Part No. 03-5250) 5.53.1 OG Results and Conclusions Calculation of retainer pin stress yielded a shear stress of less than 6000 psi for deadweight plus seismic loading. There is sufficient margin in the calculated stress to cover a substantial vibration load (from normal engine y vibration) .

The use of the flywheel cover and the generator guard screen eliminates i

the possibility 'of the barring device falling into the flywheel. The cover and guard screens aln minimize the potential of small parts entering the interior of the generator.

The OG has detemined that the barring device retaining mechanisms cannot endanger safe operation of the Shoreham EDGs.

As part of the QRI, the EDGCTS document package was reviewed and found to be acceptable.

The OG concluded that the diesel engine barring device and its mounting hardware' are acceptable for the intended function at Shoreham.

5.53.2 PNL Evaluation Based on this review, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the barring device is acceptable for its intended function.

5.54 PYROMETER CONDUIT-ASSEMBLY - THERM 0 COUPLES (Part No. 03-6300) 5.54.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of the EDGCTS revealed three cases of thermocouple mechanical failure relevant to SNPS EDGs. Two involved 6-cylinder diesel engines used in the marine industry and were reportedly due to fatigue. One case involved a %

developmental diesel engine that developed very large dynamic pressure loads due to exhaust blowdown. No action is required at SNPS resulting from these experiences. Shoreham site experience involved replacing a themocouple that .

was reading low.

5.56

Initial frequency analysis of the thermocouple revealed that resonance is not a concern.

A structural analysis was performed to determine the stresses resulting from engine vibratory loads and aerodynamic loads. These stresses were found to be within acceptable limits.

4 A fatigue analysis found a minimum factor of safety of 20.2 in the area of highest stress.

It was recommended via E&DCR F-46505 that certain inspections be included in the TDI emergency diesel generator preventive maintenance program to ensure proper performance of the themocoupl's e during normal operation.

Upon implementation of E8DCR F-46505, the OG concluded that the pyrometer conduit assembly themocouples are acceptable for their intended function at

' Shoreham.

5.54.2 PNL Evaluation From its evaluation and review of the DR/QR effort, PNL concludes that the OG perfomed an adequate analysis on the subject component. Noting LILCO's commitment to confirm thermocouple calibration at each outage and to inspect and service thermocouples at alternate outages, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion regarding thermocouple acceptability.

5.55 GENERATOR (Part No. 03-650A) 5.55.1 OG Results and Conclusions The maximum coincident demand on the diesel generators will be during a LOCA. The coincident demands on EDGs 101,102, and 103 will be 3428, 3382, and 3881 kW, respectively.(a)

Based upon calculations and site test results, the performance of the generator is acceptable with regard to the specified minimum voltage.

9 (a) Subsequent to the OG review, the maximum. load on any EDG has been specified by'LILCO to be 3300 kW.

5.57 i

Shop tests by the vendor comply with the procurement standards. Results of qualification tests were reviewed. The results of the generator onsite test and calculations indicate that this component is adequately designed to perform its intended function at Shoreham.

Wearout of the field brushes of EDGs 102 and 103 was the only pattern of recurrent problems that could be identified. This brush wear is characteristic of noncontinuous, frequent start /stop service typical of diesel generators during the testing period. Presence of dust and grit during high construction 3 activity in the region has apparently contributed to accelerated wear. The maintenance requirements as specified for future service are adequate.

The QRI included reviewing the EDGCTS document package with satisfactory resul ts.

Based on the above findings, the OG concluded that the generators are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.55.2 PNL Evaluation PNL was informed by LILCO staff during an onsite review of DR/QR compa-nents that, after the inspection and replacement of brushes in March 1984, no further replacements have been needed as a result of excessive wear. This supports the OG conclusion that brush wear was caused by the construction dust / dirt. Based upon the good service record of the generators and the satisfactory explanation of brush problems, PNL concludes that the generators are suitable for their intended service.

5.56 GENERATOR CONTROLS (Part No. 03-6508) y 5.56.1 OG Results and Conclusions The EDGCTS lists 20 incidents at Shoreham related to generator controls. ,

Five of these incidents are failures of electronic components within the exci ter. Four of these five incidents would have prevented the generator from performing its safety function. .

The industry experience listed in the EDGCTS shows 55 incidents related to generator controls. Nine are due to failures of electronic components within 5.58

I l

l the exciter; i.e., failures of diodes in the bridge rectifier assembly, voltage regulator malfunctions, and motor-driven potentiometer failures.

The assessment of the running reliability of the emergency generator shows l that a total of 3569 running hours has been accumulated on the three genera-tors. The only failure of the generator controls during operation was caused i #' by failed diodes in the bridge rectifier assembly. The present mounting arrangement does not ensure that a proper thermal connection to the heat sinks j is maintained. Although there has been only one failure of this type, a >-

maintenance procedure has been incorporated in E&DCR F-46505.

A review of the starting history shows that 1303 starts have been made with only three unsuccessful starts (i.e., the diesel started but generator controls failed to operate properly) due to the exciter. To maintain this level of reliability, a maintenance procedure has been recommended that addresses the construction of the voltage regulator printed circuit board.

This recommendation is incorporated into E&DCR F-46505.

3 Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the design of the gener-ator controls is adequate for the intended use at Shoreham.

Recommendations have been made to modify the exciter at the next refuel-2 ing outage. The modifications.will ensure that the adequacy of the equipment is maintained without the need for maintenance procedures discussed above.

These recommendations have been incorporated into EEAR 84-201.

Further reconinendations have been made to modify the exciter. These modi-

' fications are not required at the next refueling outage. They will reduce the required maintenance and improve the long-term reliability of the equipment.

5.56.2 PNL Evaluation Through an audit review of all DR/QR documentation, PNL confirmed that the failure history of the electronic components was due to poor attachment to heat

}

sinks. LILC0 has taken corrective actions consisting of:

f e addition of heat conductor material

e addition of glyptol to connections e tightening of bolts e use of heat sensitive tapes.

5.59 l

i i

I

The records were chect'id to confirm that, since these LILCO actions, there have been no failures to start or unplanned shutdowns that could be attributed

, to generator controls. In view of this, and noting LILC0's commitment to

1) check the heat sensitive tape and the glyptol for signs of relative motion after each run, 2) confinn at outages that diodes remain mounted properly and that ettachments are proper, 3) conduct major servicing and inspections at >

- alternate outages, and 4) modify the exciter per EEAR 84-201, PNL concludes that the generator controls wili serve their intended function. g 5.57 GENERATOR SHAFT AND PEDESTAL BEARING (Part No. 03-650C) 5.57.1 OG Results and Conclusions Review of Shoreham site, nuclear, and non-nuclear experience with diesel engine driven generators listed in the EDGCTS shows that no design-related problems have been encountered with the generator shaft and pedestal bearing.

The first two banding criticals were calculated to be 120 and 270 rpm, with the other criticals being above 2000 rpm. The bending modes below 450 rpm are heavily damped, and it would take a large amount of input energy to excite i them.

Static loading and engine torque were used to evaluate the stresses seen in the generator shaft. The shaft was deemed to have an adequate factor of safety for the various stresses imposed. These values were verified by dis-tortion energy fatigue failure theory calculations.

The bearing loading was reviewed, and a journal orbit analysis was per-fonned. Surface fatigue was determined to not be a limiting factor in the life of the bearing pedestal .

TDI maintenance and inspection procedures, along with the manufacturer's reconnendations, have been reviewed. These procedures are adequate.

Based upon the above review, the OG concluded that the generator shaft and pedestal bearing are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham. .

5.60

5.57.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the DR/QR information, PNL concludes that the OG performed an adequate review of the generator shaft and pedestal bearing components. Noting that LILCO has agreed to conduct monthly checks (in conjunction with exercise tests) of the generator pedestal bearing ring oilers and to annually drain,

flush, and refil'1 the bearings and check bearing insulation resistance, PNL concurs with the OG that the generator shaft and bearings are acceptable for

, their intended functions.

5.58 ENGINE SHUTDOWN TRIP SWITCHES (Part No. 03-695C) 5.58.1 OG Results and Conclusions Shoreham experience reviewed shows that the majority of repair / rework requests occurred when conditions in the diesel generator rooms were not representative of the normal operating service conditions. Conclusions as to the component's ability to perform its intended function cannot be drawn from observations made during this time frame.

Nuclear industry experience with the engine shutdown trip switches was reviewed. No action is required to be taken as a result of the reported problems with the switches at other nuclear stations.

Vendor information indicates the lube oil and turbo oil pressure trip switches, as well as the high temperature lube oil and jacket water trip switches, were designed to operate under the stated service conditions.

Vendor information also indicates the high crankcase pressure trip switches were designed to operate under the stated service conditions.

The OG concluded that the application of the engine shutdown trip switches is.in agreement with their intended purpose and design and that they are 1 acceptable for their intended functions at Shoreham.

5.58.2 PNL Evaluation Based on its review of the DR/QR information, and noting LILC0's plan to check calibration of these switches at each outage, PNL concurs with the OG con-clusion that the subject components are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.61

5.59 ENGINE SUB-BASE BOLTING (Part No. 03-715B) 5.59.1 OG Results and Conclusions Horizontal seismic loads do not exceed the combined friction capacity due to bolt tension and deadweight. Hcdever, the sub-base bolt design allows horizontal expansion via clearance in the crankcase holes and bending of the s

bol ts. Because the sub-base bolts have a relatively short length available for bending, the bend stresses may be significant. A temperature difference of 20*F between the engine base and the skid was found to be the thermal differ- g ential that produced the onset of plastic behavior in the bolts.

The actual temperature differential between the engine base and the skid may be greater than 20 F. This could produce bend stresses in excess of the bolt yield. If this occurs, the small plastic deformation will act to relax the bolt torque at the end opposite the generator, as the generator end of the engine is restrained by dowel pins.

Recent inspections of the breakaway torques and retorque of these bolts revealed no loosening of engine to sub-base bolting. The calculation of stresses for these bolts was reviewed. These calculations were found to be adequately performed and the stresses were found below allowables.

As part of the QRI, the EDGCTS documents were reviewed with satisfactory results. Dowel installation and torque values were also verified.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the diesel engine sub-base bolting is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham and that torque values, specified for these bolts are adequate.

5.59.2 PNL Evaluation Based on its review of the DR/QR information, PNL questioned the method of attachment of the engine relative to the likelihood of plastic deformation of the bolts. This was discussed with LILC0 personnel at the time of the DR/0R component audit. The PNL concern was resolved by noting and confirming during an engine walkdown that the generator end is doweled and the remaining bolts .

are in a clearance-type hole. Considering this, and noting LILC0's commitment -

5.62

to visually inspect the foundation at each outage for breaks in bond between the sole plates and grout, PNL concludes the sub-base bolting is adequate for its intended service.

5.60 LUBE OIL ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-717C)

.f 5.60.1 OG Results and Conclusions Both valves rotate simultaneously, because they are ganged together, when

, a transfer signal is received. The actuator will rotate so long as the trans-fer signal is maintained. Upon loss of the transfer signal, the valves remain in their last position.

The starting air system at Shoreham prevents moisture buildup in the auto-matic switchover logic assembly. The starting air supply system therefore meets the actuator manufacturer's requirement for clean, dry air, and the actuators do not need additional lubrication.

The TDI Maintenance Manual has been revised (via E&DCR F-46505) to incl 2 monthly testing of the lube oil actuator and switchover logic as well as test-ing after maintenance of the actuator or switchover assembly.

Tubing loads from the supply air tubing are considered insignificant and therefore do not affect the design function of this component.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the lube oil actuator assembly is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.60.2 PNL Evaluation PNL review of the DR/QR report concludes that the OG assessment was ade-quate. Noting the monthly check of lube oil actuation and switching logic, and in consideration of an onsite review of the valving arrangement conducted in conjunction with the DR/QR component audit, PNL agrees with the OG conclusion I) that the subject components are acceptable for their intended functions.

5.63

l 5.61 LUBE OIL AUTOMATIC SWITCH 0VER ASSEMBLY (Part No. 03-717L) 5.61.1 OG Results and Conclusions The logic and pneumatic designs for the lube oil switchover assembly were reviewed to verify adequacy for their intended use. This revealed that the components are used in functions for which they were intended and are in the correct configuration to accomplish the required control logic. Therefore, the logic and pneumatic designs used for the lube oil switchover assembly are acceptable. 6 The differential pressure valve has a design pressure of 150 psi across the diaphram and 1000 psi for the body, and is constructed of aluminum and stainless steel (body) and buna N (diaphram). The design pressure and mate-rials of the differential pressure valve are acceptable for its intended use.

The accumulator has a design pressure of 200 psi and is constructed of 304 stainless steel. The design pressure and materials of the accumulator are acceptable for its intended use.

The orifice has a design pressure of 125 psi and is constructed of an aluminum body. The design pressure and materials are acceptable for its intended use.

The selector valve has a design pressure of 150 psi and is constructed of zinc die casting with a stainless steel spool. The design pressure and materials are acceptable for its intended use.

The shutoff valve has a design pressure of 3000 psi at 70'F and is con-structed of plated carbon steel. The design pressure and materials are acceptable for its intended use.

The NOT logic element has a design pressure of 150 psig and is constructed of aluminum die casting with chrome plating (body), stainless steel (spring) and buna rubber (0-ring). The design pressure and materials are acceptable for 'l their intended use.

The selector switch is an oil-tight, three-position, spring-return switch. Its application is consistent with its design.

5.64

Maintenance requirements for the lube oil switchover assembly were evaluated. Preventive maintenance items have been incorporated into the manual via E&DCR F-46505.

The QRI included a review of Shoreham and industry experience that revealed no problems with the design ,0f the equipment installed at Shoreham.

f Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the lube oil switchover assembly is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

I 5.61.2 PNL Evaluation Based on data in the Shoreham DR/QR report, PNL concluded that the OG adequately analyzed these components. Considering the monthly servicing and the onsite review mentioned above (see component 03-717C), PNL concurs with the Owners' Group that the lube oil automatic switchover assembly is acceptable for the intended purpose.

5.62 FUEL OIL VALVES (Part No. 03-717N) 5.62.1 OG Results and Conclusions The check valves and pressure regulating valves are constructed of materials suitable for their intended service.

The manufacturers were reviewed for their qualifications. The Crane Valve Company is a qualified vendor on the CASE Nuclear Rating list. Fulflo Company has been manufacturing relief valves since 1935, and pretests all relief valves at its factory. Fulflo's quality assurance program is audited yearly by Duke Power Company with whom they are approved as a qualified vendor.

The QRI included a review of Shoreham and industry experience. The review indicated no problems with the design of the valves as-installed at Shoreham.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the fuel oil booster pump discharge check valves and fuel oil pressure regulating valve are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.65

5.62.2 PNL Evaluation l From its review, PNL concludes that an adequate analysis was performed on the subject components. Noting LILCO's commitment to disassemble and inspect fuel oil valves at every fourth outage, PNL concurs with the OG conclusions that they all are acceptable for their intended purposes.

6 5.63 JACKET WATER HEATERS (Part No. 03-800A) 5.63.1 OG Results and Conclusions 3 The heater capacity is considered adequate at Shoreham based on satisfactory operation during engine testing.

A review of industry experience identifies several incidents involving failure of the heating elements. Some of these failures involve the rupture of the heater sheaths. Other incidents involve failure of the heater insulation surrounding the electrical elements in the sheaths.

At Shoreham, two cases of jacket water heater failure were reported in spite of chemical treatment of the jacket water system. Also, an isolated event involving the failure of the thermowell for the jacket water tenperature sensing bulb was recorded. Maintenance procedures currently in place at Shoreham should prevent similar failures.

The maintenance recommendations have been incorporated into the TDI instruction manual via E&DCR F-46505. Preventive maintenance will be performed at 18-month intervals.

In addition, jacket water temper:'ure will be verified daily during engine standby, and the thermostat will be ca::Jrated whenever necessary.

Inc-eased surveillance of tenperature and water quality of the jacket water system, in conjunction with implementation of the preventive maintenance procedure, should ensure satisfactory conditions during engine standby. '.

In addition, modifications are recommended for the first 18-month main-tenance outage to offer maximum protection to the jacket water heaters (EEAR -

84-192).

5.66 I

The QRI results were reviewed and found to be satisfactory. This included reviewing the EDGCTS documentation package.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the jacket water heaters, as designed and installed, are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

4 5.63.2 PNL Evaluation Based on the DR/QR data provided by the OG, PNL concludes that an adequate e

review was conducted. PNL notes the planned maintenance / surveillance provides for checking temperature switch calibration and measuring heater insulation resistance at each outage and flushing the jacket water system at alternate outages. Considering these factors and the planned implementation of EEAR 84-192, which will provide for 1) moisture-resistant terminal covers,

2) nicoloy sheaths for heater elements, and 3) modifications to eliminate stagnant conditions at the upper heater, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that the jacket water heaters are suitable for their intended function.

5.64 LUBE OIL SUMP TANK HEATER (Part No. 03-800B) 5.64.1 OG Results and Conclusions The heater capacity is considered adequate at Shoreham, based on satisfactory operation during the engine testing.

It is recommended that a moisture-rc51stant terminal cover be specified for future replacement heaters. This eliminates the possibility of heater failure caused by spillage of fuel, lube oil, or water during maintenance or sudden component failure.

Industrial experience indicates several instances of heater failure due to the failure of the heating elements. The heater fails because of internal i overheating of the heating element caused by the presence of the insulating deposit layer.

' At Shoreham, the heater is interlocked with the before-and-af ter pump so that the heater circuit cannot be energized unless the pump is operating. This 5.67

design feature has a positive effect in preventing coke buildup on the heating elements and should increase the life expectancy of the heater.

Industrial experience indicates that lube oil heaters generally have a limited service life and will require periodic replacement. Typically, these heaters accumulate thousands of operating hours in one year; appropriate surveillance procedures should be implemented. 6, Preventive maintenance included in the TDI manual will be accomplished during the lube oil sump cleaning and inspection scheduled at 18-month ,

intervals (E&DCR 46404C).

Lube oil temperature will be verified daily during engine standby, and the thermostat will be recalibrated when necessary, as specified in the TDI Instruction Manual.

The lube oil sump tank heaters for the energency diesel generators are considered acceptable by the OG for their intended function at Shoreham, provided that the preventive maintenance procedure is implemented.

5.64.2 PNL Evaluation From a review of the DR/hR efforts, PNL concludes that the OG adequately analyzed the lube oil sump tank heaters. In view of the history of heater failures, the daily checks of lube oil temperature agreed to by LILC0 are important. LILCO has also connitted to 1) install moisture-resistant terminal covers (EEAR 84-196),2) check temperature switch calibration, and 3) measure

, lube oil heater insulation resistance at each outage. On these bases, PNL concurs with the OG recommendations and conclusions regarding the component.

5.65 JACKET WATER HEAT EXCHANGER (Part No.10-103) 5.65.1 GG Results and Conclusions An analysis based on the HTRI computer program indicates that the jacket water heat exchangers at Shoreham are adequately designed from a thermal standpoint. -

l i

S.68

, y

ASME Form N-1, " Manufacturer's Data Report for Nuclear Vessels" for the jacket water heat exchangers, was reviewed and found acceptable.

At Shoreham, the pipe plugs located on the entrance and exit channel were found severely corroded. It was determined that carbon steel plugs were inadvertently furnished by the manufacturer. The material was changed to Monel i l

and no further corrosion problem was encountered.

A hydrostatic test was performed to verify the integrity of the pressure r boundary; the results were satisfactory. Measures, as indicated in E&DCR F-44253, were implemented on the jacket water heat exchangers of all three diesel generators.

Tube fouling from the mussel shells is the most widely reported problem for jacket water heat exchangers cooled by salt water. At Shoreham,' service water piping associated with the heat exchangers is flushed daily to prevent fouling of the heat exchanger tubes.

The presence of mussels and other debris in the heat exchanger tubes results in reductions of service water flow rate to the jacket water heat exchanger and will eventually cause the high jacket water temperature alarm to actuate. During surveillance testing, further increases in jacket water temperature will cause high jacket water temperature shutdown of the emergency diesel generator. Instrumentation and alarms of th' 'ature protect the diesel generator and are essentially standard features for nuclear power plants.

Forces and moments applied to the heat exchanger connections from piping an' external equipment have been evaluated and found acceptable. Likewise, loadings fran the heat exchanger supports transmitted to the shell flanges have l been found acceptable.

Quality Revalidation Inspection results were reviewed and considered in

, the performance of the OG DR/QR review. This consisted of reviewing EDGCTS

\

l experience documents with satisfactory results and verifying proper installation by released as-built sketches.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the jacket water heat exchanger is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.69

5.65.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from its review that an adequate DR and QR analysis was made. Noting the M/S connitments calling for 1) daily flushing (seaside) and 2) tube and lantern ring inspections and replacement of packing rings at each refueling outage, PNL concurs with the OG that these heat exchangers are suitable for their intended service. PNL recommends that, during outage 4 inspections, particular attention be paid to the area at the ends of tne polypropylene inserts to ensure that corrosion has not occurred under the insert.

5.66 LUBE OIL HEAT EXCHANGER (Part No.10-104) 5.66.1 OG Results and Conclusions An analysis based on the HTRI computer program indicates that the lube oil heat exchangers at Shoreham are adequately designed from a themal standpoint.

The tube bundle design is also adequate to prevent flow-induced vibration.

Experience at Shoreham, based on the testing of the three diesel genera-tors, shows that the lube oil heat exchanger performs adequately in maintaining engine lube oil temperature. Also, there has been no indication of tube vibration.

The information provided in ASME Fom N-1, " Manufacturers Data Report for Nuclear Vessels" for the lube oil heat exchangers, was found acceptable.

Review of industry experience indicated that failures of lube oil heat exchangers for nuclear emergency diesel generator application were confined almost exclusively to tube failure.

At Shoreham, the lube oil heat exchanger is cooled by the jacket water j system. The lube oil heat exchanger is arranged in series with the engine

! driven jacket water pump, which runs at constant speed, so that the coolant

flow rate through the lube oil heat exchanger will always be constant and equal to the full flow rate of the jacket water system.

l 5.70 l

l L

The design of the heat exchanger and the Shoreham operating experience indicate that the lube oil heat exchanger will not be susceptible to localized erosion at the tubes and the tube / tube sheet interface.

Preventive maintenance efforts, which have been incorporated into the TDI Instruction Manual via E&DCR F-46505, ensure availability of the lube oil heat i exchanger for operation of tne emergency diesel generator.

Forces and moments applied to the heat exchanger connection from piping f

and external equipment have been evaluated and found acceptable. Likewise, forces and h.cments transmitted to the heat exchanger shell flanges from its supports have been determined to be acceptable.

As part of the QRI, the EDGCTS documentation package was reviewed with satisfactory results. The QRI also included verification of proper installa-tion by release of as-built sketches.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the lube oil heat exchanger is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.66.2 PNL Evaluation PNL notcs that LILCO has committed to perform a daily visual inspection for leakage at the neoprene packing, to conduct tube inspections and replace packing rings at each outage, and to conduct a spectrochemical analysis of the lube oil on a quarterly basis. While at Shoreham in connection with the cudit of DR/QR components, PNL also learned that the lube oil is alarmed at 190*F at the engine drain. This is adequately below the TDI design temperature of 200*F for the heat exchanger. Considering these factors, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that this component is suitable for its intended service.

5.67 FULL FLOW LUBE OIL FILTERS (Part No.10-106)

$ 5.67.1 OG Results and Conclusions Operating and maintenance procedures provided by Allen Filters are complete and contained in the TDI maintenance manual.

5.71

The TDI maintenance manual has been revised to indicate that, when the filter is replaced, it should be visually inspected to determine the nature of the material caught in the filter (E&DCR F-46505).

The filter is designed to ASME VIII and is rated for 100 psig at 250*F.

This is well above the nomal operating conditions of the lube oil system.

?

The filter cartridge has 10-micron openings. TDI recomends that the cartridge be changed at differential pressure of 15 psig. The Allen filters can operate at up to 35 psig differential pressure before requiring i replacement / cleaning.

The QRI consisted of reviewing the EDGCTS documentation package, which was determined to be satisf actory.

The OG concluded that the full flow lube oil filters are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.67.2 PNL Evaluation PNL reviewed the OG documentation of both the DR and QR conducted on the lube oil filters. PHL notes that the OG did not specifically verify that filter capacity is equal to or greater than full pump flow. However, PNL notes that the filter design temperature and pressure ratings exceed typical operating conditions anticipated at Shoreham. In addition, PNL notes the somewhat conservative TDI schedule for filter maintenance, wh,ich suggests changing the filter cartridge at 15 psig differential pressure even though it can operate up to 35 psig differential pressure before cleaning or replacement is necessary. These findings, coupled with the successful operating history noted in the EDGCTS and LILCO's comitment to inspect material caught in the filter discs at time of changeout (at outages), support PNL.'s conclusion that the full flow lube oil filters are acceptable for the service intended at Shoreham. '

5.72

5.68 AIR RECEIVER TANK (Part No.10-111) 5.68.1 OG Results and Conclusion _

The qualifying calculations and documents have been reviewed and have been found to acceptably document ASME III code compliance and design adequacy of the air receiver tanks for normal operating and seismic loads. Nozzle-shell intersection stresses due to internal pressure, seismic loads, and piping induced reactions were also within ASME III allowable stresses.

' Drain taps are provided on the tanks to eliminate water. The TDI manual and LILC0 maintenance practice include a daily check for moisture at the drain taps. The manual has been updated per E&DCR F-46505 to require that any abnormal amount of water detected at the tank drain will be brought to the attention of LILC0 maintenance for resolution.

The QRI consisted of a satisfactory review of the EDGCTS documentation.

Based on the above review, the OG concluded that the air receiver tank is acceptable for its intended design function at Shoreham.

5.68.2 PNL Evaluation PNL concludes from a review of the DR/QR information that the OG ade-l quately analyzed the structural integrity of the air receiver tank. Further, the capacity of this tank is confirmed by the 5-start tests done at refueling outages. PNL notes that LILCO has committed to drain the tanks daily and monitor the quantity of moisture and to conduct a complete check of air tank l weldments at every eighth outage. On these bases, PNL concurs with the OG conclusion that this component is suitable for its intended service.

5.69 INTAKE AIR FILTERS (Part No.10-114) 5.69.1 OG Results and Conclusions 3' The filter is an appropriate selection for the intended use at Shoreham.-

It has a " clean" pressure drop of 3 inches W.G. The design does not include a vacuum gauge option, which would give visual indication of intake pressure loss. This is not considered necessary at this time; Shoreham and industry experience has not indicated filter clogging to be a major problem and, under 5.73

normal conditions, engines are not operating except for monthly surveillance testing. Filters may also be changed while the unit is operating, should this become necessary.

The filter nozzle loads are considered acceptable because the filter and adjacent silencer are each independently anchored.

4.

The OG determined that no quality revalidation review is required for this component.

Based on the design review, the OG concluded that the intake air filters are acceptable for their intended function at Shoreham.

5.69.2 PNL Evaluation PNL believes that the OG should have verified that air intake pressure drop was within manufacturer's specifications, to confinn the quality of the component. However, in view of the favorable operating history, the OG design review cited above, and LILC0's comitment to inspect the filters every 3 to 6 months and to replace filter elements and clean the intake plenum at each refueling outage, PNL concludes that the air intake filters are adequate to serve their intended function.

5.70 OIL PRELUBE FILTER (Part No.10-117) 5.70.1 OG Results and Conclusions The maintenance procedures give adequate instruction for taking the filter offline, changing cartridges, and venting and returning the filter to service.

The filter is constructed in accordance with the ASME VIII code for pressure vessels and is rated for 150-psig service. This filter is suitable for the service conditions.

Filtration size is 20 microns (95% removal of all particles greater than s.

20 microns). This is a typical size opening for lube oil service.

Shoreham and industry experiences have not revealed any problems with the design of the filter.

5.74

End reactions on small-bore (2-inch and smaller) components (e.g., valves, filters, regulators) are considered acceptable because the relative strength of small-bore components is much greater than that of the attached small-bore piping / tubing.

For the QRI the EDGCTS documents were reviewed and found to be d satisfactory.

The OG concluded that the oil prelube filter is acceptable for its intended function at Shoreham.

5.70.2 PNL Evaluation PNL notes that the DR did not ectly assess the adequacy of the oil pre-lube filter to handle the 42-gpm 110w of the before-and-after pump. However, the EDGCTS did not indicate any pattern of excessive differential pressures or.

pressure buildup that would result from under-capacity filters. Considering

1) the favorable service, 2) the OG evaluations, and 3) the LILC0 commitment to change filter elements at each refueling outage or when the filter differential pressure reaches 10 psid (in accordance with TDI recommendation), PNL concludes

~

that the oil filters installed in the SNPS EDGs are suitable for their intended service.

1 5.75

4 -

&4 -- J ---4 --%-y- - + S- a +-ae- e&.--- e- A+ L--G a A6 APPENDIX

't SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENGINE COMPONENT SELECTION AND RESOLUTION t

l i

i 1

r

[-

i l

1.

t

3 .A . s.. .

m *,

TABLE A.1. Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Engine Component Selection and Resolution a

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER ,

REQ'D -REQ'D REV'V 00-420 Lube Ost Pressure Regulating Valve X X Unlimited !!fe Additional. valve maintenance requaremente 00-49tA Turbocharger-Air inlet Adapter; I Adapter 00-4918 Turbocharger-Air Inlet Adapter; I Mounting Hardware wf flexible Connector 00-495A Turbocharger-Air Outlet Adapter. I Adapter 00-4958 Turbocharger-Aar Outlet Adapter: X Mountang Hardware 00-520 Varning Plate X 00-700A Jacket Vater Stand Papa Pipe X X Un14mited Itfe None Fittings & Caskets 00-700B Jacket Vater Stand Pipe. Valves I X Unlimited life' Additional inspection requirements f* 00-700C Jacket Vater Stand Pipe: Supports I X Unlimited life None w

00-700D Jacket Vater Stand Pipe- Cauges X 00-700E Jacket Vater Stand Pape. Switches X X Untamated lafe None 00-700F Jacket Vater Stand Pipe- Misc. X X Unlimited life None Bolting Materials 03-305A Base & Bearang Caps. Base Assembly X X Unlimited life Revised maintenance and

inspection procedures.

03-305B Base & Bearing Caps-. Dowels X 03-305C Base & Bearang Caps, Mann Bearang X X Un14 mated life Revised maintenance and

Studs & Nuts inspection procedures 03-305D Base & Bearang Caps: Main Bearing X X Unlimited life Revised maintenance and

Cape inspection procedures.

03-305E Base & Bearing Caps: Thru Bolting I X Unlimited life Revised maintenance and *

&nspection procedures.

03-305F Base & Bearing Caps: Seals, Caskets I

& Covers

Results of the revaews on each of the generac components were subnatted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here.

TABLE A.I. ('centd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO- ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D -REV'V 03-307A Lube Oil Fattings - Internal: I I Unitatted life None Headers 03-3078 Lube Oil Fittings - -In t e rnal : . Tubing I I Unlimited life None

& Fittings 03-307C Lube Oi! Fittings - Internal: Seats I 03-307D Lube Oil Fittings - Internal: I I Unlimited life None Supports 03-310A Crankshaft & Bearings: Crankshaft & 'R I Unlimited !!fe None

Turning Gear 03-310B Crankshaft & Bearings: Bearings I I Unlimited life None Shells 03-310C Crankshaft & Bearings: . Thrust- I I Unitaited life Additional inspection Bearing Ring requirements 03-315A Cylinder Block - Laners & Vater I I Unlimited life _ Additional inspection e Manifold: Cy!!nder Block requsrements,

), 03-315B Cylinder Block - Liners & Water I

Manifold: Can Bearing-Caps and 03 Dowels I

03-315C Cyfinder Block - Liners & Water I I Unlimited life Additional inspection

Manifold: Cyttnder Liner requirements.

03-3350 Cylinder Block - Liners & Va'ter I I Unlimited life None Manifold: Jacket Water Manifold and Piping 03-315E Cylinder Diock - Liners & Water I I Unismited life None Manifold: Studs 03-315F Cylinder Block - Laners & Vater I I Unlimited lafe None Manti,old: Nuts 03-315C Cyttnder Block - Liners & Water I I Unlimited life None Manifold: Seats and Caskets 03-317A Water Discharge Manifold: Jacket I I Unlimited life None Water Discharge Manifold i 03-317B Vater Discharge Manifold: Seals and I I Unlimited life Addstional. maintenance i Caskets reautrements

+

e Results of the reviews on.each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here, e

} *'f~ Ad . @

> v. , m, TABLE A.I. (contd).

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REO'D REV'V 03-317C Vater Discharge Manifold: Supports I I Unitatted Ilie None 03-330A Flywheel I Unlimited.itte None 03-3308 Flywheel; Botting I I Unlimited, life Revased installation procedures 03-331A Guards: Flywheel Guard Assembly I 03-33tB Cuards: Rear Coil Cuard I 03-335A Front Gear Case I 03-335B Front Gear Case: Caskets & Bolting I Unlimited 14fe None Connecting Rods: Connecting Rods & Unitasted life None e 03-340A I 'I Bushang Connecting Rods: Bearsng Shells Unlimited life Procurement a 03-340B I I specification &

inspection requirements.

03-341A Pistons I I Unlimited life Additional inspection

requirements.

[a 03-3418 Pistons: Rings I I Unlimited !!!e Additional inspection 1

requirements 03-341C Pistons: Pan Assembly I I Unlimited Inte Additional inspection requirements 03-345A Tappets & Cuides: Intake Tappet I I Unlimited life None

. Assembly 03-345B Tappets & Guades: Fuel Tappet I I Unismited life None Assembly 03-345C Tappets & Guides: Fuel Pump Base I Unlimited life None Assembly 03-350A Camshaft: Camshaft Assembly I I Unlimited Info None .

t 03-3508 Camshaft: Camshaft Bearing I Unitaited life None 03-350C Camsha f t :- Supports. Bolting, & Cears I I Unlimited life Revised maintenance procedures 03-3518 Platform Ladder Front: Bracing I e Results of the reviews on each of the generic componente were schnitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here.

TABLE A.I. (contd)

PART' DESCRIPTION DR OR NO , ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REO'D REQ'D REV'V 03-355A Idler Gear Assembly: Crank to Pump I I Uniteited life Revised maintenance.

Cear procedures 03-3558 Idler Gear Assembly X X Unitaited !!!e Revised maintenance procedures 03-355C Idler Gear Assembly: Caskets & I Unlimited life None Bolting 03-359 Air Start Valve I I Unlimited Inte Revised maintenance a procedures: Gasket replacement: Revise assembly instructions; Capocrew replacement:

Additional inspection requirements 03-340A Cyttader Head Valves: Cylinders I I Unlimited life Revised maintenance

Heads procedures: Additional inspection requirements.

03-360B Cylinder Head Valves: Intake & I I Un!!aited life Additional inspection Eshaust Valves requirements

[" 03-340C Cylinder Head Valves:

Caskets Botting & I I Unlimited !!!e None 4h 03-360D Cylinder Head Valves: Springs & I I Unlimited 14fe None Retainers03-361 Indicating Cocks X 03-362A Cyttnder Head Covers. Sub Cover I I Unlimited life None Assembly 03-362B Cylinder Head Covers; Caskets & I Botting 03-345A Fuel Injection Equipment: Fuel I I Unlimited life Revised maintenance Injection Pump procedures 03-345B Fuel Insection Equipment: Fuel I Unlimited life None injection Tips Unlimited !!fe Incorporation of

03-365C Fue! Insection Equipment: Tube I Assembly additional procurement &

! in-service inspections.

03-365D Fuel Injection Equipment: Support I Unlimited life None

Results of the reviews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here.

I

, .,' .. s J i

m TABLE A.I. -(contd) 4 PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D REV'V i

03-37tA Fuel Pump Linkage: Fuel Pump Control I I Unlimited life None Shaft' 03-3788 fuel Pump Linkage: Linkage Assembly I I . Unlimited life None and Bearings 03-37tc Fuel Pump Lankage: Automatic I I Unlimited life None.

Shutdown 03-375 Intake Manifold -I I Modifications Modify bottom closure plates: Revised installation procedures 03-380A Eshaust Manifold I I Unlimited Itte Additional inspection I requirements 03-3008 Eshaust Mansfeld: Caskets & Botting I I Modifications Replaced capscrews:

} Revised installation

procedures 03-385A Cylinder Block Covers I 03-385B Cylinder Block Covers: Gaskets & I I Unlimited life Revised assembly Botts instructions 3*

bn 03-387A Crankcase Ventilator: Crankcase I Vacuum Fan l 03-3878 Crankcase Ventilator: Crankcase Oil I Separator i

j' 03-387C Crankcase Ventilator: Fittings, E Botting. Supports 03-387D Crankcase Ventilator: Crankcase & I Fluid Manometer

! 03-390A Rocker Arms & Pushrods: Intake & I I Unlimited 16te None Intermediate Rocker Shaft Assembly 03-390B Rocker Arms & Pushrods: Eshaust I I Un!! mated !!!e None l

Rocker Shaft Assembly I

03-390C Unlimited life None

Rocker Arms & Pushrods: I I Pushrods-Intake & Eshaust 03-390D Rocker' Arms & Pushrods: I Unlimited Inte None

l Pushrod-Connector e Results of the reviews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC 4 - Only a summary as noted here.

l'

. TABLE ' A.1. (contd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REO'D REQ'D REV'V 03-390E Rocker Arms & Pushrods: Bushings I Limited life Revised maintenance procedures 03-390F Rocker Arms & Pushrods: Litters I I uni 6mited !!fe Revised installation procedures 03-390C Rocker Arms & Pushrods: Bolts. Drive I I Un16mited life None a Studs 03-402A Governor Drive: Covernor & I I Unlimited life None Tachometer Drive Cear and Shaft 03-402B Covernor Drive- Couplings. Pins & I I Modifications Replace coupling Keys inserts: Modification of coupling: Revise inspection & maintenance requirements &

procedures 03-410A Overspeed Trip. Covernor I I Modifications Revised maintenance procedures 03-410B Overspeed Trip: Covernor & Accessory I I Unlimited life None Drive Assembly 3>

cn 03-410C Overspeed Trip: Coup!!ngs (Flesible I I Limited Itfe None

& Spider) 03-410D Overspeed Trip: Vent Valves I I Unlimited 16fe Revised maintenance procedures03-413 Covernor Linkage I I Untamited life Additional inspection requirements & modified maintenance procedures 03-415A Governor Assembly: Voodward Covernor I I Unlimited life Revised maintenance &

testing procedures 03-415B Covernor Assembly. Booster I Unituited life None Servosotor 03-415C Covernor Assembly: Heat Eschangers I I Unlimsted !!fe None j 03-420 Lube Oil Pumps I I Modifications Replacement of roll pin

't 03-425A Jacket Vater Pump I I Modifications Impe!!er replacement and

key removal.

03-425B Jacket Vater Pump: Cover I

~

Results of the reviews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary i s' noted here, j -f a &

b .- .- N TABLE A.1..- (contd) l PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D REV'V 03-435A Jacket Vater Fittings: Pipe & I I Unlimited life None Fittings 03-435B Jacket Water Fittings: Supports I 03-437A Turbo Vater Piping: Pipe & Fittings I I Modifications Replace missing support 03-4378 Turbo Vater Piping: Supports I I Unlimited life None 03-441A Starting Air Manifold: Piping, I I Modifications incorporation of Tubing. Fittings ,

additional supports 03-441B Starting Air Manifold: Valves. I I Unlimited life . Additional filter Strainers, Filters drains: Additional maintenance requirements 03-441C Starting Air Manifold: Supports I I Modaftcations Incorporation of additional supporte 03-442A Starting Air Distributor: I I Unlimited life Additional inspection Distributor Assembly requirements 03-4428 Start 4ng Air Distributer: Tubing. I I Modifications Modification and 3> Fattings, & Caskets addstion of supports N

03-445 Fuel Oil Booster Pump - Pump Assembly I I Unlimited life None 03-450A Fuel Ost Header: Inlector Assembines I 03-4508 Fuel Oil Header: Papang & Tubing I I Modifications Incorporation of additional supports:

Removal of tubing support 03-458D Fuel Ott Header: Supports I I Unlimited !!fe None 03-455A Fuel Oil Filters & Strainers: Filters I I Modifications Evaluate need for additional D/P gauge:

Revised operating &

maintenance procedures 03-455B Fuel Ott Filters & Strainers: I Modifications Revised maintenance Strasners procedures: Evaluate need to relas strainer size requirement 03-455C Fuel Oil F4 tiers & Strainers: I I Unismited Infe None Mountsng Hardware o

1 TABLE A.l. (contd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D R E ' V 03-4654 Lube Ost Liner - Esternal; Tubings. I I Modifications' Modification of supports Fattings. Coupling 03-4658 Lube Oil Liner - Esternal- Supports .I I Moditscations Modification of supports 03-447A . Turbocharger - Lube Oil Fitting: I I Modifications Incorporation of massing Pipang support 03-467B Turbocharger - lube 041 Fatting: I I Modifications incorporation of Suppotts additsonal support:

Modification of support 03-475A Turbocharger - Bracket I I Unlimsted life None 03-475B Turbocharger - Bracket: Air I I Unlimited !!!e Additional maintenance Butterfly Valve Assembly twfActuator) requirements 03-475C Turbocharger - Bracket: Ast Intake I I Modifications Removal of 2 pipe Piping supports: Revised installation procedures:

Replacement of bolts 03-475D Turbocharger - Bracket: Botting & I I Modificatsons Revised installataan Caskets procedures: Replacement f* of botto: Replacement of 00 components 03-475E Turbocharger - Bracket: Pipe I N/A Removed supports prior Supports to DR/OR effort 03-500A Control Panet Assembly: I I Unlimited life None Cabinet / System 03-500B Control Panet Assembly- Annunciators I Unismited lafe None 33-500C Control Pane! Assembly: Circuit I Breakers # Contact Blocks 03-500D Control Panet Assembly: Pressure I Cuages

.03-500E Control Panet Assembly: Hourmeter I 03-500F Control Pane! Assembly: Accumulator I I Unlimited 14fe None 03-500C Control Panet Assembly. Valves I I Unlimited life Additional inspection requirements 03-500H Control Panel Assembly: Pressure I I Unlimited life None Switch

Results of the reviews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here.

} y r ~ l

. s .

1 * : % m c TABLE A.I. (contd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REO'D REV'V 03-5001 Control Panet Assembly: Pyrometers I 03-500J Control Panet Assembly: Relays I I Unismited Isfe None 03-500K Control Panel Assembly: Solenosd I I Unlimited !!!e None Valve 03-500L Control Panet A s s e mb l y ': Tachometer I 03-500M Control Panet Assembly: Piping, I I Unlimited life None Tubing, Fattings 03-500N Control Panet Assembly: Terminal I Unlimited lafe None Board # Switches #Viring 03-585 Thermostatic Valve I I Modificatsons Replace valves st first outage: Incorp. valve design improvements:

Revased maint & inspec.

procedures03-520 Nameplates I 03-525A Barrsng Dewsco- Pneumatsc: Barring I

{> Device Assembly 03-525B Barring Device- Pneumatic. Regulator I I Uniteited life Additional maintenance Valve / Shut Off Valve requirements 03-525C Barring Device- Pneumatic; Misc. I I Unlimited life None rettings. Hose. Filters. Tubing 03-525D Barring Dewsco- Pneumatic: Mounting I I Unismited life Revised maintenance Bracket / Supports procedures 03-530A Platform - Front & Side: Side I Platform Assembly 03-530B Platform - Front & Side: Front I Platform Assembly 03-530C Platform - Front & Sade: Bracing I (with Attachment) 03-535A Platform Ladder Front: Platform I Assembly 03-531B Platform Ladder Front; Bracang I

.. _ _ . _ . .. . . .-- - _ . _ - _ ~ _

TABLE A.1. (centd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ *D REQ'D REV'V 03-533C Platform Ladder Front: Sub-Base I 03-540A Lube Oil Sump Tank: Tank with X X Unlimited Itte None Strainer Assembly 03-5408 Lube Oil Sump Tank: Misc. Fittings. X X Modifications Modification of supports Caskets. Pipe & Bolting Material.

Valve 03-540C Lube 04I Sump Tank: Mountsng I X Modifications Modification of mounting Hardware clamps at first refueling outage 03-550 Foundatson Bolts - Anchors, Bolts. I X Unitaited life None Masc. Hardware 03-S90 Special Tools - Asst. Engane Assembly- X Tools 03-630A Pyrometer Condust Assembty: Conduit I I Modificatsons Addstion and modification supports 03-430B Pyrometer Conduit Assembly: Conduit I X Modifications Addition and

, Fittings modificatton of supports 3m a 03-430C Pyrometer Conduit Assembly: Supports I X Modifications Addition and C3 modification of supports 03-630D Pyrometer Conduit Assembly: 'X Unlimited lafe Addition inspection Thermocouple requirements 03-430E Pyrometer Conduit Assembly: Caskets X 4

03-650A Generator I I Unlimited life None 03-6508 Cenerator; Generator Control I I Modifications Monitor diode i

temperature: Modify esciter at first outage i

l 03-650C Generator: Shaft & Bearing X Unlimited life None I

03-688A Engine & Aus, Module Varing Maternal: X X Modifications Addition and j Conduit & Fittings modification of supports 1

03-6888 Engine & Aus. Module Varing Material: I X Modifications Replacement of cables, e i Viring & Terminations 03-488C Engine & Aus. Module Viring Material: - X Unlimited life None J

Bones & Terminals

Results of the revsews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

- Only a summary is noted here, i

i j ) s

_.Y W

i) %. a c TABLE A.1. (contd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D REV'V 03-490 Engine Alarm Sensors - Temperature & I I Modifications Replace alarm sensors Level Switches 03-6954 Engine Shut Down Equipment: Tubing & I I Modtfications Addition and Fittings modificatton of supports 03-6958 Engine Shut Down Equipment: Valves, I I Unismited Isfe Additional maintenance Regulator. Ortfices requirements 03-495C Engine Shut Down Equipment: Trip I I Unlimited life None Switches 03-715A Sub Base-. Engine Generator I I Unltmited Itte None 03-7135 Sub Base: Botting I I Unitatted Itte None 03-717A Aum. Sub Base & Ost & Vater Piping- I Un!!atted life None Aum. Sub Base 03-7175 Aum. Sub Base & Oil & Vater P6 ping: I I Un!4 mated !!!e None Jacket Water - Valves 03-717C Aus. Sub Base & Ott & Vater Pipsng: I Untietted 14fe Additional testing 3> Jacket Vater Actuator requirements

>+

>* 03-717D Aum. Sub Base & 0:1 & Vater Paping: I I Modifications Incorporation of Jacket Vater - Pipe. Coupling. additional supports F4ttings, Ortfaces & Strainers 03-717F Aus, Sub Base & 0:1 & Vater Piping: I Unlimited life None Jacket Vater - Caskets & Botting 03-7t?C Aus. Sub Base & 0:1 & Vater Papang: I I Unlimited 14fe None Jacket Vater - Supports 03-717H Aus. Sub base & Oil & Vater Piping: I I Modatications Incorporation of Lube Oil - Pipe & Fittings additional supports 03-7171 Lua. Sub Base & Oil & Vater Piping: I I Unlimited Life Evaluate replacement of Lube Oil Valves valve bodies: Additional maintenance requirements 03-717J Aus. Sub Base & Oil & Vater Piping: I I Unitatted life Revised insta!!ation and Lube 041 - Caskets & Botting maintenance requtrements 03-717K Aum. Sub Base & 041 & Vater Paping: I I Modifications Modification or removal Lube Oil - Supports & Mounting of pipe supports Hardware

]

TABLE A.1. (centd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D REV*V 03-717L Aus. Sub Base 8 Oil & Vater Piping: I I Unismited life Additional maintenance Lube Oil - Switch Over Assembly requirement 03-717M Aus. Sub Base & Ost & Water Piping: I I Modifications Addition & modification Fuel Oil - Pipe and Fittsngs of supports 03-717N Auz. Sub Base & Oil.& Vater Piping - I I Unlimited Itte None Fuel 011: Valves 03-717P Aus. Sub Base & Ost & Vater P& pang - I I Unlimited life Revased maintenance Fuel 041: Caskets and Boltsng procedures 03-7170 Auz. Sub Base & Ost & Water Piping - I I Modifications Modificatlon of one

-Fuel Ost: Supports support 03-800A Misc. Equipment: Heater. Jacket I I Modifications Revise maint procedures:

Water Modify terminal covers, suction piping, flange &-

pipe config, at first outage: Revised procurement requirements

), 03-8005 Misc. Equapment: Heate*, Lube Oil .I I Unlimited life Future procurement

. Sump Tank recommendation:

Maintenance practace 73 recommendations 03-800C Masc. Equapnent: Air Starter Tank I Rettet Valves 03-800D Misc. Equapsent: Electrolytic I Conductivity cell 03-800E Masc. Equipment: Electrolytic I Conductivity Monitor 03-800F Misc. Equapsent: Reisef Valve - I Unlimited 14fe None Booster Pump 03-835A Misc. Equipment: After Cooler I Support 03-4358 Masc. Equipment: After Cooler I 03-835C Masc. Equipment: After Cooler I Botting 03-CRF Turbocharger Thrust Bearing I I Modifications Incorportalon of additional oiling 3 , f' ,a me

v ,7) % nj e TABLE A.I. '(contd)

PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION NUMBER REQ'O REQ'D REV*V 04-000 Lube Oil Full Pressure Strainer I I Unitaited life None 10-100 Misc. Components I 10-103 Jacket Water Heat Enchanger I I Modifications Replace pipe plugs:

Install flow indscator trans: Add tube protector: Rev maint.

procedures: Incorporate additional support 10 104 Lube Oil Heat Euchanger I I Modifications Incorp. of additional support: Mod. of supports: Additional inspection & maintenance requtrements10-105 Eshaust S&Iencer I 10-106 Full Flow Lube Oil Filter I I Un!!aited isfe Additional maintenance requirements10-107 Jacket Water Standby Heater Pump I I Unlimited life None 3e

,.10-108 Fuel Oil Booster Pump I Unlimated life None w

10-109 Fles Connections I I Unlimited life None 10-111 Starting Air Tank I I Unlimited life Addittonal maintenance requirements10-112 Starting Asr Compressor I Unlimited li*e Revised maintenance procedures10-113 Before & After Lube Oil Pump I I Unlimited life None 10-814 Intake Aar Falter I Unismited Info None 10-115 DC Magnetic Starter I 10-816 Aar Dryer I 10-117 Ost Prelube Filter I I Unlimited life Additional maintenance requirement F-068 Intercooler I I Unismated life Additional maintenance requirement.

F-139 Tools Turbo I

1 TABLE A.I. (contd)

I.

4 i

i l TABLE A.1. (contd) i, l PART DESCRIPTION DR OR NO ACCEPTABILITY RECOMMENDED ACTION

! NUMBER REQ'D REQ'D REV'V i

I Pyrometer Wire F-161 I 3*

w MP-Ol? Turbocharger .I I Modifications Modified lubrication

j # system; Revised maint. E q operating procedures:

9 Additional inspection requirementa e Results of the reviews on each of the generic components were submitted in separate reports to the NRC

. Only a summary is noted here.

l, it I

i i

,y ; r- a -

PNL-5336 DISTRIBUTION No. of No. of Copies Copies 0FFSITE P. Lang, NE-14 s

U.S. Department of Energy O 17 Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Energy Office of Nuclear Reactor Washington, DC 20555 Regulation r U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ONSITE Commission Washington, DC 20555 DOE Richland Operations Office ATIN: C. Berlinger (10)

M. Carrington (2) H. Ransom /M. Plahuta D. Corley D. Eisenhut Pacific Northwest laboratory A. Marinos F. Miraglia 7 Consultants M. Williams A. Henriksen 12 NRC Plant Project Managers N. Jaffray Division of Licensing B. Kirkwood U.S. Nuclear Regulatory P. Louzecky Commission N. Rivera Washington, DC 20555 L. Wechsler ATTN: B. Buckley A. Wendel S. Burwell D. Hood 5 Senior Review Panel D. Houston K. Jabbour F. Albaugh T. Kenyon S. Bush E. McKenna C. Hill M. Miller W. Richmond S. Miner L. Williams C. Stahle -

J. Stefano 22 Project Team E. Weinkam J. Alzheimer 2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory A. Currie Commission D. Dingee N;

Public Document Room R. Dodge Division of Technical W. Gintner Information and Document W. Laity (15) e7 Control J. Nesbitt y Washington, DC 20555 F. Zaloudek Technical Information (5)

Publishing Coordination (2)

Distr-1

- _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

ML20138K824

Contents

Text

Title:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

4.0 CONCLUSION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

4.0 CONCLUSION

Navigation menu

ML20138K824

Text

Title:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

4.0 CONCLUSION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

4.0 CONCLUSION

Navigation menu

Search