NUREG-1216, Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 16 to License NPF-35
| ML20215K732 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215K729 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1216 NUDOCS 8610280281 | |
| Download: ML20215K732 (7) | |
Text
[%
UNITED STATES y*
'j ( ).$ I. t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 v e
....+
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR PEACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.16 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 DUKE POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
I.
INTRODUCTION By letter dated August 6,1986, Duke Power Company, et al., (the licensee) proposed that License Condition 2.C.(20) of Catawba Unit 1 Facility Operating License NPF-35, Attachment 1 to NPF-35, and Attachment 1 to Catawba Unit 2 Facility Operating License NPF-52 be amended to incorporate the recommendations and conclusions contained in the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) on Operability / Reliability of Emergency Diesel Generators Manufactured by Trans-america Delaval, Inc.," transmitted to the licensee by letter dated July 2,1986.
In August 1986, the essential portions of that SER were published as NUREG-1216.
Thus, NUREG-1216 documents the staff's evaluation of the TDI Diesel Generator Owners Group Program.
NUREG-1216 states that:
"The staff concludes that implementation of the Owners Group recommedations plus additional actions as identified herein will establish the adequacy of the TDI diesel generators for nuclear standby service as required by General Design Criterion 17 of Appendix A to 10 CFR 50. The staff further concludes that these actions will ensure that the design and manufacturing quality of the TDI engines is within the range nonnally assumed for diesel engines designed and manufactured in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
Con-tinued reliability and operability of the TDI engines for the life of the facilities will be ensured by implementation of the maintenance / surveillance program described herein."
This amendment to NPF-35 approves for Catawba Unit I the main changes requested by the licensee in its letter of August 6,1986. The amendment to NPF-52 re-quested for Catawba Unit 2 is still under staff review and is outside the scope of this arrendment.
II.
EVALUATION 1.
License Condition for Catawba Unit 1 In NPF-35 as issued on January 17, 1985, License Condition 2.C.(20) regarding the TDI Diesel Generators stated that:
" Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, Duke Power Company shall i pplement the TDI Owners' Group recomendations."
Furthermore, Attachment I to NPF-35 as issued on January 17, 1985, stated that:
h U h CK 05000413 81 861021 P
.o
" Prior to February 5,1985, Duke Power Company (DPC) shall have implemented, to the satisfaction of the staff, the TDI diesel generator maintenance and surveillance program coarnitted to in DPC letters dated July 16, October 9, and December 5, 1984, which is in accordance with the staff's SER transmitted to DPC by letter dated August 14, 1984."
The amendment to the above License Condition in NPF-35 would be accomplished by making it similar to License Condition 2.C.(11) of Catawba Unit 2 Facility Operating License NPF-52 issued on May 15, 1985, because the same issue is applicable to both Units.
Thus, the proposed License Condition 2.C.(20) to be incorporated in NPF-35 would then read:
" Duke Power Company shall impleaent the TDI diesel requirements as specified in Attachment 1 into its maintenance and surveillance program. Attachment 1 is hereby incorporated into this license."
The amendment to NPF-35 Attachment I would be accomplished by using the applicable sample license conditions as stated in Appendix B of NUREG-1216. Attachment I would then read:
" Duke Power Company shall comply with the following requirements related to the TDI diesel engines for Catawba Unit 1.
1.
Changes to the maintenance and surveillance program for the TDI diesel engines, as identified in the licensee's submittals of August I and September 11, 1986, shall be subject to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.
The frequency of the major engine overhauls referred to in the license conditions below shall be consistent with Section IV.1, " Overhaul Frequency," in Revision 2 of Appendix II of the Design Review / Duality Revalidation Report which was transmitted by letter dated May 1, 1986, from J. B. George, Owners Group, to H. R. Denton, NRC.
2.
Connecting rod assemblies shall be subjected to the following in-spections at each major engine overhaul:
(a) The surfaces of the rack teeth should be inspected for signs of fretting.
If fretting has occurred, it should be subject to an engineering evaluation for appropriate corrective action.
(b) All connecting rod bolts should be lubricated in accordance with the engine manufacturer's instructions and torqued to the specifications of the manufacturer. The lengths of the two pairs of bolts above the crankpin should be measured ultrasonically before and after tensioning.
(c) The lengths of the two pairs of bolts above the crankpin should be remeasured ultrasonically before detensioning and disassenbly of the bolts.
If bolt tension is less than 937 of the value at in-stallation, the cause should be determined, appropriate corrective action should be taken, and the interval between checks of bolt tension should be reevaluated.
.' (d) All connecting rod bolts should be visuolly inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling), and the two pairs of connecting rod bolts above the crankpin should be inspected by magnetic particle testing to verify the continued absence of cracking. All washers used with the bolts should be examined visually for signs of galling cr cracking, and replaced if damaged.
(e) A visual inspection should be performed of all external surfaces of the link rod box to verify the absence of any signs of service-induced stress.
(f) All of the bolt holes in the link rod box should be inspected for thread damage (e.g., galling) or other signs of abnormalities.
In addition, the bolt holes subject to the highest stresses (e.g., the pair imediately above the crankpin) should be examined with an appropriate nondestructive method to verify the continued absence of cracking. Any indications should be recorded for engineering evaluation and appropriate corrective action.
3.
(a) Cylinder blocks shall be inspected for " ligament" crar.ks,
" stud-to-stud" cracks and " stud-to-end" cracks as defined in a report by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (FaAA) entitled
" Design Review of TDI R-4 and RV-4 Series Emergency Diesel Generator Cylinder Blocks" (FaAA report no. FaAA-84-9-11.1) and dated December 1984.
(Note that the FaAA report specifies additional inspections to be performed for blocks with "known" or " assumed" ligament cracks.) The inspection intervals (i.e.,
frequency) shall not exceed the intervals calculated using the cumulative damage index model in the subject FaAA report. In addition, inspection methods shall be consistent with or equivalent to those identified in the subject FaAA rerort.
(b)
In addition to inspections specified in the aforementioned FaAA report, blocks with "known" or " assumed" ligament cracks (as defined in the FaAA report) should be inspected at each refueling outage to detennine whether or not cracks have initiated on the top surface, which was exposed because of the removal of~two or more cylinder heads. This process should be repeated over several refueling outages until the entire block has been inspected.
Liquid penetrant testing or a similarly sensitive nondestructive testing technique should be used to detect cracking, and eday current testing should be used as appropriate to determine the depth of any cracks discovered.
(c)
If inspection reveals cracks in the cylinder blocks between stud holes of adjacent cylinders (" stud-to-stud" cracks) or " stud-to-end cracks, this condition shall be reported promptly to the NRC staff and the affected engine shall be considered inoperable.
The engine shall not be restored to " operable status" until the proposed disposition and/or corrective actions have been approved by the NRC staff.
. 4.
The following air-roll test shall be performed as specified below, except when the plant is already in an Action Statement of Technical Specification 3/4.8.1, " Electric Power Systems, A.C. Sources":
The engines shall be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open before each planned start, unless that start occurs within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of a shutdown. The engines shall also be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open after 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, but no more than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, after engine shutdown and then rolled over once again approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after each shutdown. (If an engine is removed from service for any reason other than the rolling-over procedure before expiration of the 8-hour or 24-hour periods noted above, that engine need not be rolled over while it is out of service. The licensee shall air-roll the engine over with the stopcocks open at the time it is returned to service.) The origin of any water detected in the cylinder must be determined, and any cylinder head that leaks because of a crack shall be replaced.
The above-air roll test may be discontinued following the first re-fueling outage subject to the following conditions:
(a) All cylinder heads are Group III heads (i.e., cast after September, 1980).
(b) Quality revalidation inspections, as identified in the Design Review / Quality Revalidation report, have been completed for all cylinder heads.
(c) Group III heads continue to demonstrate leak-free perfomance.
This should be confirmed with TDI before deleting air-roll tests are discontinued.
5.
Periodic inspections of the turbochargers shall include the following:
(a) The turbocharger thrust bearings should be visually inspected l
for excessive wear after 40 nonprelubed starts since the previous visual inspection.
(b) Turbocharger rotor axial clearance should be measured at each refueling outage to verify compliance with TDI/Elliott specifications.
In addition, thrust bearing rieasurements should be compared with measurements taken previously to determine a need for further inspection or corrective action.
(c) Spectrographic and ferrographic engine oil analysis shall be performed quarterly to provide early evidence of bearing degradation.
l Particular attention should be paid to copper level and particulate size, which could signify thrust bearing degradation.
l
,O
- (d) The nozzle ring components and inlet guide vanes should be visually inspected at each refueling outage for missing parts or parts show-ing distress on a one-turbocharger-per-refueling-outage basis.
In addition, these inspections should be performed for all turbochargers at each turbocharger overhaul (i.e., at approxinetely 5-year intervals).
If any missing parts or distress is noted, the entire ring assenbly should be replaced and the subject turbocharger should be reinspected at the next refueling outage".
2.
Justification for the Proposed Changes __
As discussed in NUREG-1216, the staff has concluded that resolution of the TDI diesel generator issue involves implementation of an acceptable Phase I program as identified in Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216, an acceptable Phase II program as identified in Section 2.2 of NUREG-1216,'and implementation of an acceptable maintenance and surveillance program as identified in Section 2.3 of NUREG-1216.
The licensee's implementation of each of these phases is discussed below.
(a) Resolution of Phase I Phase I relates to the resolution of known generic problem areas intended by the Owners Group to serve as a basis for the licensing of plants during the period before completion of Phase II of the Owners Group program. By letters dated August 1, and September 11, 1986, the licensee responded, among other things, to the items in Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216. The licensee's submittals documented past actions and provided the necessary concitments for all items required by Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216. The staff has reviewed these submittals and finds that the licensee has met Section 2.1 of NUREG-1216 requirements for an acceptable Phase I program.
i (b) Resolution of Phase II Phase II relates to design review / quality revalidation of a large set of important engine components to ensure that their design and manufacture, including specifications, quality control and quality assurance, and operational surveillance and maintenance, are adequate.
By letter dated November 4,1985, the licensee documented the Design Review and Quality Revalidation (DR/QR)
Review for Catawba Unit 1.
The licensee transmitted the results of Quality Revalidation (QR) Inspections to the NRC staff by letters dated June 29, 1984 (diesel 1A), and July 6, 1984 (diesel 18).
As documented in these reports and the August 1,1986, submittal, the licensee has completed Phase II of the Nners Group recommendations for Unit 1.
By letter dated May 19, 1986, the licensee informed the staff of its actions related to three design modifications proposed by the Owners Group. The staff has reviewed these actions and finds that they provide acceptable alternatives for implementing the Owners Group recommendations.
Furthermore, the staff finds that the licensee has met Section 2.2 of NUREG-1216 requiren>ents for an acceptable Phase II program.
(c) Resoluti,o,n_ of Maintenance and_ Surveillance Program This program relates to expanded engine tests and inspections as needed to sup-port Phases I and II.
The licensee has implemented the maintenance and
,e 6-surveillance recormendations developed by the Owners Group in Appendix II, Re-vision 2, of the DR/QR report for Catawba.
Furthermore, the staff proposed the sample license conditions in NUREG-1216 to ensure adequate inspection of cer-tain components. By letter dated August 6, 1986, the licensee proposed a license arrendirent for Catawba Unit'l to incorporate the staff's proposed sample license conditions as they are applicable to Catawba Unit 1.
The staff has reviewed the ifcensee's submittals and finds that the licensee has met Section 2.3 of NUREG-1216 requirements for an acceptable maintenance and surveillance orogram.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The anendment involves a change in use of facility corrponents located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requi ren,en ts.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no signi-ficant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant in-crease in individual or cumulative occupational exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendnent involves no significant hazards consideration, and there have been no public coments on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical ex-clusion set forth in 10 CFR Section 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessrrent need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
IV.
CONCLUSION The Comission trade a proposed determination that the amendirent involves no t
significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (51 FR 30561) on August 27, 1986, and consulted with the state of South Carolina.
No public coments were received, and the state of South Carolina did not have any comments.
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in corrpliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Kahtan Jabbour, PWRf4/DPWR-A Dated:
October 21, 1986 l
l l
l
October 21, 1986 AMENDMENT NO.16 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF CATAWBA NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 11STRIBUTION_: w/ enclosures:
f 3acket File ]
_ NRC PDR Local PDR NSIC PRC System PWR#4 R/F B. J. Youngblood K. Jabbour M. Duncan OGC/Bethesda R. Diggs, ADM T. Barnhart (4)
E. L. Jordan L. J. Harmon B. Grimes J. Partlow ACRS (10)
OPA N. Thompson E. Butcher l
l l
f
_