ML20214K393
| ML20214K393 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/14/1986 |
| From: | Merschoff E, Trottier E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214K384 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900334 NUDOCS 8608210066 | |
| Download: ML20214K393 (8) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -
9 5
ORGANIZATION: TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL 0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION INSPECTION NO.: 99900334/85-02 DATES:
12/17-18/85 ON-SITE HOURS: 45 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Transamerica Delaval, Incorporated Engine and Compressor Division ATTN: Mr. C. S. Mathews, Vice President and General Manager 550 85th Avenue Oakland, California 94261 ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: Mr. B. C. Guntrum, Manager, Quality Assurance TELEPHONE NUMBER:
(415) 577-7422 NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY: With the exception of an occasional replacement part or service, no current domestic nuc. lear industry activity.
ASSIGNED INSPECTOR: [iU b9;(
I E. H. Trottier, Reactive Inspection Section (RIS)
Date OTHER INSPECTOR (S):
W. P. Haass, Program Coordination Section
< J. C. Hig clear Engineer, Brookhaven National 14 b4 f(,
APPROVED BY:
Date E.W.Merschoff,Cpf,RIS,VendorProgramBranch l
INSPECTION BASES AND SCOPE:
A.
BASES:
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B and 10 CFR Part 21 B.
SCOPE: This inspecticn was conducted to establish the Transamerica Delaval, Incorporated (TDI) contribution, if any, to the governor mal-function and subsequent overspeed event that occurred to a TDI standby diesel generator at Grand Gulf Nuclear Station on November 6,1985.
In addition, the inspectors closed out all findings and open or unresolved items from the previous TDI inspection (June 3-7,1985).
PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY: Bellefonte 1/2,50-438,439; Catawba 1/2, 50-413, 414; Comanche Peak 1/2,50-445,446; Grand Gulf 1/2, 50-416, 417; Perry 1/2, 50-440, 441; Rancho Seco, 50-312; River Bend, 50 458; San Onofre 1, 50-206; Shearon Harris, 50-400; Shoreham, 50-322; Vogtle 1/2,50-424,425.
ge2gg$ M 99900334
7 ORGANIZATION: TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC.
0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION No.-
99900334/85-02 RESULTS:
PAGE 2 of 5 A.
Violations:
No violations were identified as a result of this inspection.
B.
Nonconformances:
No nonconformances were identified as a result of this inspection.
C.
Unresolved Items:
A contributing factor to the severity of the damage sustained by the over-speeding Grand Gulf engine was found to be the time delay of the mechanical overspeed trip system. According to test witnesses and a reconstruction of the event, approximately five seconds elapsed between the time the engine reached its,overspeed setpoint (approximately 510 rpm) and engine speed began to decrease.
It is estimated that peak engine speed exceeded 600 rpm. This time delay was due to pneumatic and hydraulic c.rcuit time constants.
During this inspection, TDI representatives were questioned as to the design basis for the overspeed trip, the trip setpoint, trip time delay, and setpoint tolerance.
It was learned t. hat there was no specific design basis event on which the trip settings were based, other than prevention of catastrophic damage in an overspeed event and avoidance of trips during routine transients. The trip setpoints are either 110% or 115% (generally the latter) of the normal 450 rpm operating speed. Historically, there has been no specific tolerance on these settings, and the trip system time delay was both unspecified and unknown.
Subsequent to the Grand Gulf event, TDI issued Service Information Pemo (SIM) #347, asking owners of TDI nuclear diesel generator sets to time their over-speed trips and to contact TDI for corrective measures if the trip time exceeded 1.5 seconds. TDI has designed and tested a modified trip system that meets this 1.5 second activation time. TDI has stated that the new 1.5 second time delay is' based on engineering judgement vice engineering analysis. The inspector noted that it appeared appropriate for TDI to perform the necessary engineering analyses in this area to determine the design basis for the overspeed trip itself, the trip set-point, tolerance, and time delay. TDI acknowledged these comments, while stating that the overspeed trip is not a first line of defense. Addi tion-al DG failures (governor related) are required before the mechanical ever-speed trip comes into action.
t ORGANIZATION: TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC.
0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION NO.-
99900334/85-02 RESULTS:
PAGE 3 of 5 D.
Status of Previous Inspection Findings:
1.
Inspection 85-01 (June 3-7, 1985).
a.
Nonconforma.nce B.1 (Closed): A production routing sheet was neither stamped nor dated by a QC inspector to show acceptance of a previous operation, yet subsequent operations and the part's final inspection and acceptance were, stamped, signed and dated by a QC inspector.
This finding was correcte'd by re-inspecting the entire part (all operations). A QC inspector then initialed and stamped the subject operation as acceptable on the route sheet.
Preven' ave action was accomplished by conducting two training classes o'n specific requirements of TDI Inspection Procedure 300 and tSe In Process Inspection Manual. Training classes lasting a to'.al of one and one half hours were held on December 4th and Dec':mber 16th,1985. The classes were attended by a total of 17 IDI manufacturing personnel.
In addition, a TDI memorandum
'.'s issued to " Machine Shop Personnel" on December 3,1985. This memo stressed the importance of both proper machining operations and documentation attesting to satisfactory inspection and sign-off by QC. As an.added feature to ensure proper inspection documentation, the memo requests material movers to "... help in this area by checking routing sheets prior to the movement of parts from one machinery operation to another."
2.
Inspection 83-03 (January 17,1984) a.
Nonconformance A (Closed).
This nonconformance was reviewed during the previous inspection (85-01) and was left unresolved. The issue was the use of cable rated at 90 C in a plant where the maximum ambient temperature in the diesel building could reach 130 F.
Because of the location of the cable on the engine, the cable's temperature rating could be ex-ceeded if maximum ambient room temperature is reached during engine spesal. ion.
TDI performed an additional evaluation of this item that resulted in replacing the 90 C rated cable with a cable rated at 200 C for the affected plant.
ORGANIZATION: TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC.
0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION NO.-
99900334/85-02 RESULTS:
PAGE 4 of 5 E.
Other Findines and Comments:
1.
Review of Diesel Generator (DG) Failure at Grand, Gulf In November, 1985, a failure of one emergency DG occurred during post-maintenance testing at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. The direct cause was that the Woodward governor been drained of oil as part of maintenance and had not been properly refilled. On initial start-up, therefore, the governor did not limit engine speed. Other precautions to limit speed were not taken and engine speed increased without control until the mech'anical overspeed trip setting was reached. This trip has an inherently long time delay and did not shut down the engine quickly enough to prevent damage.
The TDI records associated with this governor failure were reviewed in detail. THe records included internal TDI memoranda, letters between TDI and the licensee (Mississippi Power and Light (MP&L))
and associated Part 21 evaluations. Discussions were also held with responsible TDI personnel regarding this issue. TDI considered two aspects of the failure for Part 21 reportability; the governor malfunction that was due to the improper oil fill, and the possible failure to provide adequate instructions for governor filling and venting in the instruction manual. TDI concluded that neither aspect was reportable as a Part 21 item. The governor /DG failure was deemed to be non-reportable since it was caused by improper post-maintenance I
l checkout and the DG had not been placed in the emergency standby mode.
Hence, it was concluded that no substantial safety hazard existed.
Regarding the adequacy of the Woodward instruction manual, TDI con-cluded that while the manual could be improved, it was clear enough l
for a knowledgeable person to properly fill and vent the governor.
Further, TDI felt it both presumptuous and technically unjustifiable te edit manuals provided by subcontractors (e.g., Woodward Governor) under separate cover, and conveyed at the time of engine sale. TDI policy is promptly to forward any and all technical information received from subcontractors.
Prior to the Grand Gulf engine failure, TDI had received one Service Bulletin from Woodward Governor and had received no technical manual revisions or updates.
(Because of their large number of customers and governor models, Woodward Governor does not maintain a direct correlation between customer and governor model purchased. Copies of the latest technical manual are enclosed with governors being returned to customers after service by Woodward.) Nea r' 311 tech-l l
ORGANIZATION: TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL, INC.
0AKLAND, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900334/85-02 RESULTS:
PAGE 5 of 5 nical manuals for Woodward Governor components purchased by TDI for nuclear power plants have been revised (usually more than once) since originally obtained by TDI. TDI is curren.tly in the process of establishing the latest revision and obtaining updated manuals from Woodward for subsequent transmittal to their nuclear customers.
2.
Part 21 Program During the inspection conducted in June 1985, the TDI Part 21 program was reviewed and comments, both positive and negative, were included in the inspection report. Below are updates of those comments based on programmatic changes made by TDI in the interim:
(These items were discussed with TDI representatives.)
The previous inspection noted that the Part 21 procedure was quite general and did not discuss specific responsibility for screening various source failure reports for escalation into the Part 21 review system. On September 11, 1985, the TDI Part 21 procedure was revised and reissued.
It now contains specifics for review of various source failure reports.
Implementing procedures for the various source failure reports did not mention Part 21 review responsibility for failures that were screened and escalated into the Part 21 program. These procedures have not been revised since June 1985, but are currently under review for revision by TDI. Also, the previous Part 21 procedure provided no detail or guidance on records supporting and documenting such review and implementation.
The current TDI Part 21 procedure now requires such documentation.
The Inspector noted that the purchasing procedure did not contain a requirement to pass on Part 21 to equipment subvendors. This proce-dure is also currently in a revision cycle.
The previous inspection noted that records for potentially reportable items (eventually determined to be non-reportable) were marginal.
Reviews conducted during the current inspection revealed that evalu-ation records have improved. However, a few areas for further improvement were identified as follows:
it was not always clear why an item was determined to be non-reportable; and it was not always I
clear if an item was still under evaluation or had been determined to be not reportable.
PERSONS CONTACTED l
l Company i b [
oatas (?-18 bae.t985 Docket / Report No.999CODf T-C Inspector [d M [f M [/ A up Page l of {
NAME(Please Print)
TITLE (Please Print)
ORGANIZATION (Please Print)
Mbb S b/ZL5 s
- 7. k k a,A Th7 b uCo-rb b lA ct p. Go k N m Th r
~
Lu./A r~tonL mkcs osau
~'
c aNhw.
Nu k d o naL/vsni e 6.sl[dIc.?
ib4 e bs l
osgat U
M d
[
U P
Lb MN er%rwh on 4
PAGE f
of t'
.T.C.dissach.41S /M ld% "
I DOCKET NO.:
77966 33 Y INSPECTOR:
SCOPE: TRMs A MGMc A D E LM AL.
REPORT NO.:
Ef-ol DOCUMENTS EXAMINED ITEM TYPE OF DOCUMENT NO.
DOCUMENT NO.
REV.
DATE TITLE / SUBJECT DAW W a)4 /nfo - M c 93-o3 A.
t.
Y%.
2.
fns sholer b&n n to en 2:
PA wa 3
FR o
~
ba u r Laq& [mmwJM A t
t%m ciec-uder M Paant c A tsra W d
M eE N bto & -
[ W Upgm
}/u.
};% gj),,( h.,1 0 %g.&
s (A
e.
(W
~
q WM LTt nDJ6 Ts1 % %)naJ T
Fh.
llnu PJ 2? & J Q h * % &fgg -11/yg,
/d 21fd }& k n-&M L 44pn/es 2
F.%
Vwm
~
r3q85 j%[ Tab 16 [
g [P w &%
9 ftJ6 0
[Nh4 WtSS ke x o ktecLu
$te# P2. M euIbuh U I b (6 TYPE OF DOCUMENT:
DWG - Drawing LTR - Letter SPC - Specification PRO - Procedure QAM - QA Manual QCD - QC Document P.O.- Purchase Order INM - Internal Memo e
J
li llll1 1!
4!
l b't w_
I 1
0
't
~
h
~
9 b_G O
%J
=
h 1
.0 g
1 t
o it f
T. T. 7.
[!
E R E k
t O
cP G o E n k
DRp n
rk u.
u G
T ca C
3B 0 O
D S
E
/
4 G.
1 4
n t
3, t
A T
h' X
i
~
E b-ST C
N E
J ir O
Co D
f R.
((
E T
~
E T
T c
2 n
N E.
4 D
1 d
k R.
V.
T.
[
E R
l 1
O f
Dg
~
p o
TRi d'o TEt *O, t
J i
ARn E t
4 G CuoMEn USJ I
C MFoM Cn t
hG T
- O R
\\
tCt Ou i
f' t
- D Wt t D cE R N~ M i
0 nEc cT t
F ePetsCos 3
o T
s O DSpqqII P
N h
C c
E E ". c _ g D. t P p ot c
- o. i S o P
i 1
en t
Y W?p J"
c
[
IDS y,
/.
DS T
I i
Ij lll 1,l l