|
|
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| | number = ML18037A446 | | | number = ML18037A446 |
| | issue date = 03/12/1993 | | | issue date = 03/12/1993 |
| | title = Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Proposed Tech Spec Amend Diesel Generator Maint Insp Frequency Change Engineering Evaluation Rept. | | | title = Proposed Tech Spec Amend Diesel Generator Maint Insp Frequency Change Engineering Evaluation Rept. |
| | author name = | | | author name = |
| | author affiliation = TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY | | | author affiliation = TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
Line 17: |
Line 17: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:BROWNS IiEARF NUCLEAR PLANT PROPOSED TI".'CIINICAL SPLi CIIiICATION AMENDMENT DIESEL GENERATOR MAINTENANCE INSPECTION PRZQ UZWCF CF1ANGE ENGINLiX<RING. | | {{#Wiki_filter:BROWNS IiEARF NUCLEAR PLANT PROPOSED TI".'CIINICALSPLi CIIiICATION AMENDMENT DIESEL GENERATOR MAINTENANCEINSPECTION PRZQ UZWCF CF1ANGE ENGINLiX<RING.EVALVATIONRL<'PORT Prepar by D te |
| EVALVATION RL<'PORT Prepar by Approve D te/z 3 Da Page 1 of 6 9309080i51,930902 PDR ADOCK 05000259 t-PDR' 1~P E t 4 1$I PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT=HNGXNEHRXNG EVALUATION OF CFIANGH XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Xntroduction 2.0 Proposed Technical Specification Revision 2.1 Description 2.2.Justification Page 0 Page 2,o f 6 PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON
| | /z 3 Approve Da Page 1 of 6 9309080i51,930902 PDR ADOCK 05000259 t - PDR' |
| | |
| | 1~ |
| | P E |
| | t 4 |
| | |
| | 1$ |
| | I PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT |
| | =HNGXNEHRXNG EVALUATION OF CFIANGH XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Xntroduction 2.0 Proposed Technical Specification Revision 2.1 Description 2.2. Justification 0 Page 2,o f 6 |
| | |
| | PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Introduction Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant has eight diesel generators (DG) which are shared between three units. Four .DGs are used primarily for Units 1 and 2, and the remaining four are used primarily for Unit 3'. . The DGs are manufactured by the ElectroMotive Division of General Motors -and consist of a single EMD model 20-645-E4 engine driving an EMD A20 generator rated at 2600 kW (3250 kVA) continuous. |
| | Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Technical Specification 4.9.A.l.d currently requires each diesel generator be given an annual inspection in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturex's recommendations. As a result, each of the eight diesel generatoxs used as emergency power supplies must be xemoved from service every 12 months for a period of 4 to 7 days to perform these vendor required tasks. The average outage time for . the last seven perfoxmances of annual maintenance was'10 hours. This results in increased diesel generator unavailability during the times the diesels may be most needed. |
| | The maintenance performed on the DGs are based primarily on EMD Maintenance Xnstructions (MX) 1728 and 1742. As stated in the introduction to .MI 1742, these instructions are "intended to serve as a 'guide when establishing maintenance schedules that will meet the particular requirements of individual operations, and planned economic life of the engine and associated equipment." The MX further states "Because operating requirements for, this equipment can vary from standby, to periodic, to continuous usage, the maintenance procedures must be modified to suit individual requirements." |
| | Clearly, EMD recognized the diverse applications their engines would be used in, .and did not intend to establish any definitive maintenance requirements. |
| | The EMD MIs are divided into three sections. The first section specifies maintenance to be performed before and after each start. The second and third sections specify maintenance performed on a "calendar time" basis and "running time" basis respectively. Due to the extremely limited xun times on the BFN diesels (each diesel averages about 50 hours a year), our maintenance is based on the first two sections. The "calendar time" section gives maintena'nce to be performed every day, week, month, three months, six months, year, two years, three years, six years, and twelve years. BFN Technical Specifications. mention " 'only the annual maintenance requirements. |
| | Page 3 of 6 |
| | |
| | gL I |
| | |
| | PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATION AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Xntroducti.on (cont) |
| | II Recent nuclear industry initiatives have sought to balance high diesel generator reliability with low diesel unavailability. To achieve this, it, is necessary to evaluate all maintenance and testing performed on. the diesels with respect to its effectiveness in increasing reliability. |
| | Generic Letter 84-15, Proposed Staff Actions To Xmprove and Maintain Diesel Generator'eliability, was one document intended to aid in improving diesel reliability. This was important in that it recognized the detrimental effects of excessive diesel generator testing, especially |
| | 'ocument those which utilize cold fast. starts (one in which the diesel starts from standby conditions and accelerates to full speed within 10 seconds without the use of a preheat and prelube period), as the chief contributor to diesel engine wear in emergency power applications. As a result of this, BFN implemented a diesel reliability program and reduced the number of cold fast starts to once every 184 days and as required by the emergency load acceptance tests performed each outage. |
| | One of the industry . groups working on improving DG reliability is the EMD MKW Power Systems Ownersconsists Group (EMD of Owners Group). The EMD Owners Group representatives of 23 nuclear utilities which utilize EMD manufactured diesel generators, as well as representatives of General Motors ElectroMotive Division (EMD), the manufacturer of the diesels, and MKW Power Systems, the nuclear supplier of EMD parts and services. The group was formed to utilize. the experience of the users of this type diesel engine and act as a clearinghouse of this information. |
| | TVA and Browns Ferry are attending members of this group. |
| | Recent meetings of this group had discovered that several utilities implement different mai:ntenance schedules on their EMD diesels. The represented plants also have different Technical Specification requirements |
| | . concerning diesel generators. The Technical Specification differences result primarily from the variety of nuclear unit suppliers and plant vintage. Xn order to attempt to standardize maintenance requirements on EMD diesels at nuclear'ites, to identify the type and frequency of maintenance required to assure high diesel reliability, and to identify maintenance practices which penalize diesel generator availability while not significantly contributing to increasing'eliability, the Owners Group formed a subcommittee to thoroughly investigate current maintenance practices. The subcommittee then drafted Page 4 of 6 |
| | |
| | PROPOSED TECFINXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CIIANGE'XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Introduction (cont) |
| | I a maintenance document which was reviewed and approved by all voting utility members of the EMD Owners Group. This document has been reviewed and concurred with by EMD and MKW Power Systems. A formal letter of concurrence was drafted by EMD to be given to the Owners .Group for use in allowing each plant member to revise their diesel maintenance'rograms. |
| | 2.0 Pro osed Technical S ecification TS Revision 2.1 Descri tion The proposed |
| | 'f TS amendment, current requirement PTS 93-01, will revise the TS 4.9.A.l.d to allow the inspection to be performed once every 24 months. The wording shall be as follows: |
| | Each diesel generator shall be inspected in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturer's recommendations once every 24 months. |
| | 2.2 Justification BFN's current Technical Specifications are not specifically applicable to diesels in, nuclear service. |
| | The vast majority of EMD engine experience is based on use as locomot'ives and in marine power. These applications require large amounts of operating time, harsh operating environments, and long periods of operation between starts. The diesels used in standby power applications operate for small periods between starts, typically two,hours, and operate in relatively mild environmental conditions. As a result, these |
| | .applications do not require the same maintenance frequency to ensure required reliability. |
| | The maintenance document written by the EMD Owners Group takes the maintenance recommendations given in MX 1728 and 1742 and addresses each one specifically for nuclear service. As .a result, some differences between the Owners Group document and the EMD MX's have emerged. |
| | Nhile some requirements have been tightened, others have been relaxed. Specifically, the annual inspections given in the MX's have been changed to once each refuel cycle with the interval between inspections to be 18 to 24 Page 5 of 6 |
| | |
| | r, I~ |
| | |
| | PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 2.2 Zusti fication (cont) months. The effect of thi's change on engine reliability is not significant since these inspections are wear related engine inspections, such as mechanical inspections and adjustments, filter replacements, cleaning of strainers and internal components, functional checks of alarms and timers, and inspection of the generator. With the implementation of the new inspection interval of once every two years, engine run time will have increased from 50 hours between inspections to 100 hours. Even if engine operation is required for, extended times during these two years, it should be noted that the first maintenance required by EMD on a "running time" basis is at 500 hours of operation. Based on th'is, it is apparent that the diesel may run for an addition 400 hours (or 16 days) during this period without the need for any additional inspections. Since BFN has already reduced the most significant contributor to diesel generator wear by eliminating all unnecessary cold .fast starts, wear on the. diesels is expected to be minimum in the time periods between inspections. Xnspections performed on the. diesel generators, including recent annual, two year, three year, and six year inspections, have revealed no'significant wear on any of the diesel parts required to be inspected annually. |
| | This Technical Specification revision is also supported by the fact that several plants of "the same |
| | ~ |
| | type (BWR-4) and vintage as BFN also utilize EMD diesels and have different Technical Specification requirements concerning diesel maintenance intervals. Most notably . |
| | was the recent amendment to Toledo Edison's Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station's Technical Specification which extended the 18 month diesel generator. inspection during shutdown to a maximum inspection interval not to exceed 30 months. Davis-Besse uses the same type diesels used at BFN, EMD 20-645-E4 engines. Also, the latest proposed Standard Technical Specifications for BWRs contain no requirement to perform any inspections recommended by the diesel manufacturer. |
| | Based on the justifications given, changing the annual inspection requirement to one inspection every operating cycle should ensure the diesels are maintained at the existing levels of high reliability while improving'he availability of the diesel generators to perform their intended safety functions.'age 6 of 6 |
|
| |
|
| ==1.0 Introduction==
| |
| Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant has eight diesel generators (DG)which are shared between three units.Four.DGs are used primarily for Units 1 and 2, and the remaining four are used primarily for Unit 3'..The DGs are manufactured by the ElectroMotive Division of General Motors-and consist of a single EMD model 20-645-E4 engine driving an EMD A20 generator rated at 2600 kW (3250 kVA)continuous.
| |
| Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Technical Specification 4.9.A.l.d currently requires each diesel generator be given an annual inspection in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturex's recommendations.
| |
| As a result, each of the eight diesel generatoxs used as emergency power supplies must be xemoved from service every 12 months for a period of 4 to 7 days to perform these vendor required tasks.The average outage time for.the last seven perfoxmances of annual maintenance was'10 hours.This results in increased diesel generator unavailability during the times the diesels may be most needed.The maintenance performed on the DGs are based primarily on EMD Maintenance Xnstructions (MX)1728 and 1742.As stated in the introduction to.MI 1742, these instructions are"intended to serve as a'guide when establishing maintenance schedules that will meet the particular requirements of individual operations, and planned economic life of the engine and associated equipment." The MX further states"Because operating requirements for, this equipment can vary from standby, to periodic, to continuous usage, the maintenance procedures must be modified to suit individual requirements." Clearly, EMD recognized the diverse applications their engines would be used in,.and did not intend to establish any definitive maintenance requirements.
| |
| The EMD MIs are divided into three sections.The first section specifies maintenance to be performed before and after each start.The second and third sections specify maintenance performed on a"calendar time" basis and"running time" basis respectively.
| |
| Due to the extremely limited xun times on the BFN diesels (each diesel averages about 50 hours a year), our maintenance is based on the first two sections.The"calendar time" section gives maintena'nce to be performed every day, week, month, three months, six months, year, two years, three years, six years, and twelve years.BFN Technical Specifications.
| |
| mention"'only the annual maintenance requirements.
| |
| Page 3 of 6 gL I ,
| |
| PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATION AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Xntroducti.on (cont)II Recent nuclear industry initiatives have sought to balance high diesel generator reliability with low diesel unavailability.
| |
| To achieve this, it, is necessary to evaluate all maintenance and testing performed on.the diesels with respect to its effectiveness in increasing reliability.
| |
| Generic Letter 84-15, Proposed Staff Actions To Xmprove and Maintain Diesel Generator'eliability, was one document intended to aid in improving diesel reliability.
| |
| This'ocument was important in that it recognized the detrimental effects of excessive diesel generator testing, especially those which utilize cold fast.starts (one in which the diesel starts from standby conditions and accelerates to full speed within 10 seconds without the use of a preheat and prelube period), as the chief contributor to diesel engine wear in emergency power applications.
| |
| As a result of this, BFN implemented a diesel reliability program and reduced the number of cold fast starts to once every 184 days and as required by the emergency load acceptance tests performed each outage.One of the industry.groups working on improving DG reliability is the EMD-MKW Power Systems Owners Group (EMD Owners Group).The EMD Owners Group consists of representatives of 23 nuclear utilities which utilize EMD manufactured diesel generators, as well as representatives of General Motors ,-ElectroMotive Division (EMD), the manufacturer of the diesels, and MKW Power Systems, the nuclear supplier of EMD parts and services.The group was formed to utilize.the experience of the users of this type diesel engine and act as a clearinghouse of this information.
| |
| TVA and Browns Ferry are attending members of this group.Recent meetings of this group had discovered that several utilities implement different mai:ntenance schedules on their EMD diesels.The represented plants also have different Technical Specification
| |
| .requirements concerning diesel generators.
| |
| The Technical Specification differences result primarily from the variety of nuclear unit suppliers and plant vintage.Xn order to attempt to standardize maintenance requirements on EMD diesels at nuclear'ites, to identify the type and frequency of maintenance required to assure high diesel reliability, and to identify maintenance practices which penalize diesel generator availability while not significantly contributing to increasing'eliability, the Owners Group formed a subcommittee to thoroughly investigate current maintenance practices.
| |
| The subcommittee then drafted Page 4 of 6 PROPOSED TECFINXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CIIANGE'XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Introduction (cont)I a maintenance document which was reviewed and approved by all voting utility members of the EMD Owners Group.This document has been reviewed and concurred with by EMD and MKW Power Systems.A formal letter of concurrence was drafted by EMD to be given to the Owners.Group for use in allowing each plant member to revise their diesel maintenance'rograms.
| |
| 2.0 Pro osed Technical S ecification TS Revision 2.1 Descri tion The proposed TS amendment, PTS 93-01, will revise the current requirement
| |
| 'f TS 4.9.A.l.d to allow the inspection to be performed once every 24 months.The wording shall be as follows: Each diesel generator shall be inspected in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturer's recommendations once every 24 months.2.2 Justification BFN's current Technical Specifications are not specifically applicable to diesels in, nuclear service.The vast majority of EMD engine experience is based on use as locomot'ives and in marine power.These applications require large amounts of operating time, harsh operating environments, and long periods of operation between starts.The diesels used in standby power applications operate for small periods between starts, typically two,hours, and operate in relatively mild environmental conditions.
| |
| As a result, these.applications do not require the same maintenance frequency to ensure required reliability.
| |
| The maintenance document written by the EMD Owners Group takes the maintenance recommendations given in MX 1728 and 1742 and addresses each one specifically for nuclear service.As.a result, some differences between the Owners Group document and the EMD MX's have emerged.Nhile some requirements have been tightened, others have been relaxed.Specifically, the annual inspections given in the MX's have been changed to once each refuel cycle with the interval between inspections to be 18 to 24 Page 5 of 6 r, I~
| |
| PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 2.2 Zusti f ication (cont)months.The effect of thi's change on engine reliability is not significant since these inspections are wear related engine inspections, such as mechanical inspections and adjustments, filter replacements, cleaning of strainers and internal components, functional checks of alarms and timers, and inspection of the generator.
| |
| With the implementation of the new inspection interval of once every two years, engine run time will have increased from 50 hours between inspections to 100 hours.Even if engine operation is required for, extended times during these two years, it should be noted that the first maintenance required by EMD on a"running time" basis is at 500 hours of operation.
| |
| Based on th'is, it is apparent that the diesel may run for an addition 400 hours (or 16 days)during this period without the need for any additional inspections.
| |
| Since BFN has already reduced the most significant contributor to diesel generator wear by eliminating all unnecessary cold.fast starts, wear on the.diesels is expected to be minimum in the time periods between inspections.
| |
| Xnspections performed on the.diesel generators, including recent annual, two year, three year, and six year inspections, have revealed no'significant wear on any of the diesel parts required to be inspected annually.This Technical Specification revision~is also supported by the fact that several plants of"the same type (BWR-4)and vintage as BFN also utilize EMD diesels and have different Technical Specification requirements concerning diesel maintenance intervals.
| |
| .Most notably was the recent amendment to Toledo Edison's Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station's Technical Specification which extended the 18 month diesel generator.
| |
| inspection during shutdown to a maximum inspection interval not to exceed 30 months.Davis-Besse uses the same type diesels used at BFN, EMD 20-645-E4 engines.Also, the latest proposed Standard Technical Specifications for BWRs contain no requirement to perform any inspections recommended by the diesel manufacturer.
| |
| Based on the justifications given, changing the annual inspection requirement to one inspection every operating cycle should ensure the diesels are maintained at the existing.levels of high reliability while improving'he availability of the diesel generators to perform their intended safety functions.'age 6 of 6
| |
| ~~ | | ~~ |
| ENCLOSURE 2 EMD-PS OWNERS GROUP RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM I~~~}} | | ENCLOSURE 2 EMD-PS OWNERS GROUP RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM |
| | |
| | I~ |
| | ~ ~}} |
|
---|
Category:GENERAL EXTERNAL TECHNICAL REPORTS
MONTHYEARML18039A8821999-08-31031 August 1999 Increased MSIV Leakage Tech Spec Change Submittal - Seismic Evaluation Rept. ML18039A7761999-04-30030 April 1999 Revised Surveillance Specimen Program Evaluation for TVA Browns Ferry Unit 3. ML18038B9901997-10-31031 October 1997 Bfnp Unit 2 Completion Rept for USI A-46, for Oct 1997 ML18038B8591997-03-31031 March 1997 Completion Rept for USI A-46, for Mar 1997 ML18038B8271997-03-0707 March 1997 Rev 1 to GE-NE-523-B13-01869-032, Evaluation of Indications on Browns Ferry 3 Annulus Core Spray Piping. ML20132B7801996-11-12012 November 1996 Engineering Rept for Safety/ Relief Valves Safety Function Lift Setpoint Tolerence Relaxation Summary Rept ML18038B9291996-06-30030 June 1996 Rev 0 of Plant,Unit 3:Probabilistic Safety Assessment W/ Unit 2 Operating. ML18038B9281996-05-31031 May 1996 Rev 1 of Plant,Unit 2:Probabilistic Safety Assessment W/ Unit 3 Operating. ML20094G9781995-11-30030 November 1995 Evaluation to Determine Limiting Operating Condition in BFN III RPV Flaw Handbook ML18038B4811995-06-30030 June 1995 Brown Ferry Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Vessel Surveillance Matls Testing & Fracture Toughness Analysis. ML18038B3371995-06-23023 June 1995 SWS Operational Performance Insp (Swsopi) Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. ML18038B2431995-04-0808 April 1995 Multi-Unit Pra. W/6 Oversize Encl ML18037A4461993-03-12012 March 1993 Proposed Tech Spec Amend Diesel Generator Maint Insp Frequency Change Engineering Evaluation Rept. ML20086N8271991-12-13013 December 1991 Training Dept Initial Simulator Certification ML20072R2401991-01-16016 January 1991 Operational Readiness Review Rept,Final Phase ML20059L5771990-09-30030 September 1990 Rev 2 to Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Cable Issues Supplemental Rept Corrective Actions ML20064B4191990-09-30030 September 1990 Rev 3 to Cable Issues Supplemental Rept Corrective Actions ML20058C7101990-09-10010 September 1990 Response to Operational Readiness Review Phase Two Rept ML18033B0851989-11-30030 November 1989 Rev 3 to Electrical Cable Separations Rept, Clarifying Pages 4 & 35a of Rept ML19327B4581989-10-0606 October 1989 Rev 2 to Electrical Cable Separations Rept. ML19325C4121989-09-15015 September 1989 Seismic Assessment of Browns Ferry 2 Reactor Vessel & Internals. ML20245H3481989-08-31031 August 1989 Evaluation of Browns Ferry Nuclear Unit 2 Instrument Sense Line Issues ML20245G0651989-06-0909 June 1989 Operational Readiness Review Interim Rept,Browns Ferry Unit 2 ML20245C2901989-06-0808 June 1989 Rev 3 to Cable Issues Walkdown Rept ML20244B9211989-05-26026 May 1989 Rev 1 to Electrical Cable Separations Rept ML20245A9131989-04-13013 April 1989 Rev 2 to Test to Determine Ampacity De-Rating Effects of Cable Coatings & to Confirm Principle of Load Diversity ML20245C2751989-03-22022 March 1989 Rev 1 to Mar 1989 Evaluation of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Cable Installation Concerns, Summary Rept ML20247A5581989-03-0101 March 1989 Rev 1,Vol V to TVA Welding Project Browns Ferry Phase II Review ML20248H2351989-02-14014 February 1989 Vol 1,to Engineering Evaluations in Support of 10CFR50 App R Submittal for Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant ML20153G8081988-08-31031 August 1988 Mgt Self-Assessment (MSA) of Readiness for Restart ML20245B4181988-08-17017 August 1988 Investigation Rept,Design & Operation of Sampling Sys for Analysis of High Purity Water ML20151E7231988-06-30030 June 1988 Evaluation of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Cable Installation Concerns ML20238E5481987-12-31031 December 1987 Safe End Replacement:Util Perspective ML20238E5081987-12-31031 December 1987 Rept of Pipe Insps,Corrective Actions & Analyses,Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Unit 2,Cycle 5 Outage ML20147J3141987-11-21021 November 1987 Vol V to, Welding Project Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Phase II Review ML20237K8201987-08-26026 August 1987 TVA Employee Concerns Special Program Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Element Rept BLN-NSRS-2, Review of Nuclear Safety Review Staff Non-Startup Items at Bellefonte ML20151Z0561987-08-18018 August 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-16-BFN, Structural Steel Preweld Insps at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20237K7691987-08-0606 August 1987 Rev 3 to TVA Employee Concern Special Program Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Element Rept BFN-NSRS-1, Review of Nuclear Safety Review Staff Restart Items at Browns Ferry ML20237K7981987-07-28028 July 1987 Rev 1 to TVA Employee Concerns Special Program Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Element Rept BFN-NSRS-2, Review of Nuclear Safety Review Staff Non-Restart Items at Browns Ferry ML20237K8081987-07-23023 July 1987 Rev 0 to TVA Employee Concern Special Program Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Element Rept BLN-NSRS-1, Review of Nuclear Safety Review Staff Startup Items at Bellefonte ML20151Z0731987-07-18018 July 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-32-BFN, Adequacy of Structural Support Welds at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0381987-05-21021 May 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-06-BFN, Inspector Training & Certification at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0281987-05-11011 May 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-04-BFN, Insp Tools,Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0691987-05-0707 May 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-25-BFN, Weld Repairs Not Meeting ASME Code Requirements at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0791987-04-20020 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-35-BFN, Weld Insp Procedures at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0241987-04-17017 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-03-BFN, Welder Qualification & Continuity at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0671987-04-16016 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-24-BFN, Welder Qualification at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0501987-04-0606 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-13-BFN, Welding Equipment ML20151Z0451987-04-0606 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-07-BFN, Welder Training & Experience at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ML20151Z0151987-04-0404 April 1987 Rev 0 to Welding Project Employee Concern Evaluation Rept WP-02-BFN, Insp of Welds Through Carbo-Zinc Primer at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 1999-08-31
[Table view] Category:TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
MONTHYEARML18039A9041999-10-15015 October 1999 LER 99-010-00:on 990917,automatic Reactor Scram on Turbine Stop Valve Closure Occurred.Caused by High Water Level in Main Steam Moisture Separator 2C2.Unit 2C2 Reservoir Level Transmitter & Relays Were Replaced & Tested Satisfactorily ML18039A8981999-10-14014 October 1999 LER 99-009-00:on 990915,manual Reactor Scram Was Noted Due to EHC Leak.Caused by Failure of Stainles Steel Tubing Connection.Removed Damaged Tubing & Connection Plug ML18039A8951999-10-0808 October 1999 LER 99-008-00:on 990905,HPCI Was Inoperable Due to Failed Flow Controller.Caused by Premature Failure of Capacitor 2C3.Replaced Controller & HPCI Sys Was Run IAW Sys Operating Instructions ML18039A8751999-09-30030 September 1999 LER 99-005-00:on 990901,SR for Standby Liquid Control Sampling Was Not Met.Caused by Deficient Procedure for Chemical Addition to Standby Liquid Control.Revised Procedure.With 990930 Ltr ML20217F9671999-09-30030 September 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Units 1,2 & 3.With ML20212E6341999-09-23023 September 1999 Suppl to SE Resolving Error in Original 990802 Se,Clarifying Fact That Licensee Has Not Committed to Retain Those Specific Compensatory Measures That Were Applied to one-time Extension ML20212D3831999-09-20020 September 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Proposed Rev to Withdrawal Schedule for First & Third Surveillance Capsules for BFN-3 RPV ML20212B8561999-08-31031 August 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Aug 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.With ML18039A8821999-08-31031 August 1999 Increased MSIV Leakage Tech Spec Change Submittal - Seismic Evaluation Rept. ML18039A8391999-08-0606 August 1999 BFN Unit 2 Cycle 10 ASME Section XI NIS-1 & NIS-2 Data Repts. ML20210N1221999-08-0202 August 1999 Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Request for Relief from ASME B&PV Code,Section XI Requirements.Request 3-ISI-7, Pertains to Second 10-year Interval ISI for Plant,Unit 3 ML20210R0931999-07-31031 July 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for July 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Units 1,2 & 3.With ML18039A8201999-07-26026 July 1999 LER 99-004-00:on 990625,facility Core Spray Divisions I & II Inoperable at Same Time Due to Personnel Error.Electrical Supply Breaker to Core Spray Division II Pump 3B Returned to Normal Racked in Position ML18039A8171999-07-20020 July 1999 LER 99-007-00:on 990623,discovered That SR for Monitoring of Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration Had Not Been Met. Caused by Failure of Operators to Adequately Communicate. Required Surveillances Were Performed.With 990720 Ltr ML18039A8161999-07-19019 July 1999 LER 99-006-00:on 990618,noted That Main Steam SRV Exceeded TS Setpoint Tolerance.Caused by Pilot Vlve disc-seat Bonding.Util Replaced All 13 SRV Pilot Cartridges with Cartridges Certified to Be Witin +/-1%.With 990719 Ltr ML20209J0771999-07-16016 July 1999 Safety Evaluation Concluding That Licensee Provided Adequate Information to Resolve ampacity-related Points of Concern Raised in GL 92-08 for BFN & That No Outstanding Issues Re GL 92-08 Ampacity Issues for Browns Ferry NPP Exist ML18039A8121999-07-12012 July 1999 LER 99-005-00:on 990617,ESF Actuation & HPCI Declared Inoperable.Caused by Personnel Error.Reset HPCI & Returned Sys to Operable Status with 25 Minutes.With 990712 Ltr ML20209H4381999-06-30030 June 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Units 1,2 & 3.With ML18039A8101999-06-28028 June 1999 LER 99-004-00:on 990530,safety Features Sys Actuations Occurred Due to RPS Trip.Caused by Failure of MG Set AC Drive Motor Starter Contractor Coil.Licensee Placed 2B RPS Bus on Alternate Feed & Half Scram Was Reset ML20196F8811999-06-23023 June 1999 Safety Evaluation Accepting GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Binding of Safety-Related Power Operated Gate Valves ML18039A8071999-06-14014 June 1999 LER 99-003-00:on 990515,automatic Reactor Scram Due to Turbine Trip Was Noted.Caused by Failure of Mechanical Trip Cylinder to Latch When Hydraulically Reset.Operations Crew Stabilized Reactor Following Scram ML18039A8021999-06-14014 June 1999 LER 99-002-00:on 990501,SRs for Single CR Withdrawal During Cold SD Were Not Adequately Implemented.Caused by Procedural Inadequacy.Revised Applicable Plant Surveillances.With 990614 Ltr ML18039A8011999-06-14014 June 1999 LER 99-001-00:on 990515,automatic Reactor Scram Occurred Due to Tt.Caused by Failure of Mechanical Trip Cylinder to Latch When Hydraulically Reset.Operations Crew Stabilized Reactor Following Scram.With 990614 Ltr ML20196B8051999-05-31031 May 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for May 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Units 1,2 & 3.With ML18039A7791999-05-0606 May 1999 LER 99-003-00:on 990408,declared Plant HPCI Sys Inoperable Due to Loose Wire.Caused by Failure to Properly Tighten Screw at Some Time in Past.Loose Wire Was Tightened ML18039A7761999-04-30030 April 1999 Revised Surveillance Specimen Program Evaluation for TVA Browns Ferry Unit 3. ML20206R0731999-04-30030 April 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Apr 1999 for Bfnp.With ML18039A7561999-04-23023 April 1999 Bfnp Risk-Informed Inservice Insp (RI-ISI) Program Submittal. ML18039A7671999-04-0808 April 1999 Rev 0 to TVA-COLR-BF2C11, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 2 Cycle 11 Colr. ML18039A7461999-04-0707 April 1999 LER 99-001-00:on 990308,determined That Two Trains of Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) Were Inoperable.Caused by Trip C SGT Blower Motor Breaker.Initiated Shutdown of Plant,Reset C SGT Blower Motor Breaker & Declared Train Operable ML20205N8341999-04-0101 April 1999 Part 21 Rept Re Automatic Switch Co Nuclear Grade Series X206380 & X206832 Solenoid Valves Ordered Without Lubricants That Were Shipped with Std Lubrication to PECO & Tva.Affected Plants Were Notified ML20205F9341999-04-0101 April 1999 Safety Evaluation Authorizing Licensee 990108 Relief Request PV-38,from Requirements of ASME BPV Code Section XI IST Testing,Valve Program for Plant,Units 1,2 & 3 ML20205T5441999-03-31031 March 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Mar 1999 for Bfnp.With ML20205S0601999-03-31031 March 1999 Rept on Status of Public Petitions Under 10CFR2.206 with Status Change from Previous Update,990331 ML20205S0661999-03-31031 March 1999 Rept on Status of Public Petitions Under 10CFR2.206 with No Status Change from Previous Update,990331, Atlas Corp ML18039A7361999-03-11011 March 1999 Rev 4 to TVA-COLR-BF2C10, Bfnp,Unit 2,Cycle 10 Colr. ML20204C7891999-02-28028 February 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Feb 1999 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Units 1,2 & 3.With ML18039A6951999-02-19019 February 1999 LER 99-002-00:on 990122,LCO Was Not Entered During Calibration Testing of 3D 480 Volt Rmov Board.Caused by Personnel Error.Tva Has Briefed Operations Personnel to Preclude Recurrence of Event.With 990219 Ltr ML18039A6871999-02-12012 February 1999 LER 99-001-00:on 990114,Unit 3 HPCI Was Noted Inoperable. Caused by Oil Leak on Stop Valve.Corrective Maint Was Performed to Repair Oil Leak.With 990212 Ltr ML18039A6931999-02-0303 February 1999 Rev 3 to TVA-COLR-BF2C10, Bfnp Unit 2 Cycle 10 Colr. ML18039A6941999-02-0303 February 1999 Rev 1 to TVA-COLR-BF3C9, Bfnp Unit 3 Cycle 9 Colr. ML18039A6671998-12-31031 December 1998 LER 98-004-00:on 981202,SR Intent Was Not Adequately Implemented.Caused by Procedural Inadequacy.Revised Procedures to Provide Proper SR Implementation.With 981231 Ltr ML18039A6661998-12-31031 December 1998 Ro:On 981215,HRPCRM 2-RM-90-273C Was Declared Inoperable. Caused by Downscale Indication.Containment RM Will Be Utilized as Planned Alternate Method of Monitoring Until Hrpcrm 2-RM-90-273C Can Be Returned to Operable Status ML20199K8951998-12-31031 December 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Dec 1998 for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.With ML20199F2721998-12-31031 December 1998 ISI Summary Rept (NIS-1), for BFN Unit 3,Cycle 8 Operation ML18039A6471998-12-15015 December 1998 LER 98-007-00:on 981116,unplanned ESF Following Loss of 4kV Unit Board 3B Occurred.Caused by Temporary Energization of Lockout Relay on 4kV Unit Board 3B When Resistor on Relay Monitoring Lamp Circuit Shorted.Replaced Resistor ML18039A6371998-12-0707 December 1998 LER 98-006-00:on 981116,MSSR Valves Exceeded TS Setpoint Tolerance.Caused by Pilot Valve Disc/Seat Bonding. Installed SRV Pressure Switches During Unit 3,cycle 8 Outage.With 981207 Ltr ML20199F2791998-12-0303 December 1998 Bfnp Unit 3 Cycle 8 ASME Section XI NIS-2 Data Rept ML20198D9621998-11-30030 November 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Nov 1998 for Bfn,Units 1,2 & 3. with ML18039A6071998-11-12012 November 1998 LER 98-005-00:on 981014,mode Changes Not Allowed by TS 3.0.4 Were Made During Reactor Startup.Caused by TS LCO 3.0.4 Not Being Properly Applied.Training Info Memo Re Proper Application for TS LCO 3.0.4 Was Prepared.With 981112 Ltr 1999-09-30
[Table view] |
Text
BROWNS IiEARF NUCLEAR PLANT PROPOSED TI".'CIINICALSPLi CIIiICATION AMENDMENT DIESEL GENERATOR MAINTENANCEINSPECTION PRZQ UZWCF CF1ANGE ENGINLiX<RING.EVALVATIONRL<'PORT Prepar by D te
/z 3 Approve Da Page 1 of 6 9309080i51,930902 PDR ADOCK 05000259 t - PDR'
1~
P E
t 4
1$
I PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT
=HNGXNEHRXNG EVALUATION OF CFIANGH XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Xntroduction 2.0 Proposed Technical Specification Revision 2.1 Description 2.2. Justification 0 Page 2,o f 6
PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DIESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Introduction Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant has eight diesel generators (DG) which are shared between three units. Four .DGs are used primarily for Units 1 and 2, and the remaining four are used primarily for Unit 3'. . The DGs are manufactured by the ElectroMotive Division of General Motors -and consist of a single EMD model 20-645-E4 engine driving an EMD A20 generator rated at 2600 kW (3250 kVA) continuous.
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Technical Specification 4.9.A.l.d currently requires each diesel generator be given an annual inspection in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturex's recommendations. As a result, each of the eight diesel generatoxs used as emergency power supplies must be xemoved from service every 12 months for a period of 4 to 7 days to perform these vendor required tasks. The average outage time for . the last seven perfoxmances of annual maintenance was'10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br />. This results in increased diesel generator unavailability during the times the diesels may be most needed.
The maintenance performed on the DGs are based primarily on EMD Maintenance Xnstructions (MX) 1728 and 1742. As stated in the introduction to .MI 1742, these instructions are "intended to serve as a 'guide when establishing maintenance schedules that will meet the particular requirements of individual operations, and planned economic life of the engine and associated equipment." The MX further states "Because operating requirements for, this equipment can vary from standby, to periodic, to continuous usage, the maintenance procedures must be modified to suit individual requirements."
Clearly, EMD recognized the diverse applications their engines would be used in, .and did not intend to establish any definitive maintenance requirements.
The EMD MIs are divided into three sections. The first section specifies maintenance to be performed before and after each start. The second and third sections specify maintenance performed on a "calendar time" basis and "running time" basis respectively. Due to the extremely limited xun times on the BFN diesels (each diesel averages about 50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> a year), our maintenance is based on the first two sections. The "calendar time" section gives maintena'nce to be performed every day, week, month, three months, six months, year, two years, three years, six years, and twelve years. BFN Technical Specifications. mention " 'only the annual maintenance requirements.
Page 3 of 6
gL I
PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECXFXCATION AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Xntroducti.on (cont)
II Recent nuclear industry initiatives have sought to balance high diesel generator reliability with low diesel unavailability. To achieve this, it, is necessary to evaluate all maintenance and testing performed on. the diesels with respect to its effectiveness in increasing reliability.
Generic Letter 84-15, Proposed Staff Actions To Xmprove and Maintain Diesel Generator'eliability, was one document intended to aid in improving diesel reliability. This was important in that it recognized the detrimental effects of excessive diesel generator testing, especially
'ocument those which utilize cold fast. starts (one in which the diesel starts from standby conditions and accelerates to full speed within 10 seconds without the use of a preheat and prelube period), as the chief contributor to diesel engine wear in emergency power applications. As a result of this, BFN implemented a diesel reliability program and reduced the number of cold fast starts to once every 184 days and as required by the emergency load acceptance tests performed each outage.
One of the industry . groups working on improving DG reliability is the EMD MKW Power Systems Ownersconsists Group (EMD of Owners Group). The EMD Owners Group representatives of 23 nuclear utilities which utilize EMD manufactured diesel generators, as well as representatives of General Motors ElectroMotive Division (EMD), the manufacturer of the diesels, and MKW Power Systems, the nuclear supplier of EMD parts and services. The group was formed to utilize. the experience of the users of this type diesel engine and act as a clearinghouse of this information.
TVA and Browns Ferry are attending members of this group.
Recent meetings of this group had discovered that several utilities implement different mai:ntenance schedules on their EMD diesels. The represented plants also have different Technical Specification requirements
. concerning diesel generators. The Technical Specification differences result primarily from the variety of nuclear unit suppliers and plant vintage. Xn order to attempt to standardize maintenance requirements on EMD diesels at nuclear'ites, to identify the type and frequency of maintenance required to assure high diesel reliability, and to identify maintenance practices which penalize diesel generator availability while not significantly contributing to increasing'eliability, the Owners Group formed a subcommittee to thoroughly investigate current maintenance practices. The subcommittee then drafted Page 4 of 6
PROPOSED TECFINXCAL SPECXFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGXNEERXNG EVALUATXON OF CIIANGE'XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 1.0 Introduction (cont)
I a maintenance document which was reviewed and approved by all voting utility members of the EMD Owners Group. This document has been reviewed and concurred with by EMD and MKW Power Systems. A formal letter of concurrence was drafted by EMD to be given to the Owners .Group for use in allowing each plant member to revise their diesel maintenance'rograms.
2.0 Pro osed Technical S ecification TS Revision 2.1 Descri tion The proposed
'f TS amendment, current requirement PTS 93-01, will revise the TS 4.9.A.l.d to allow the inspection to be performed once every 24 months. The wording shall be as follows:
Each diesel generator shall be inspected in accordance with instructions based on the manufacturer's recommendations once every 24 months.
2.2 Justification BFN's current Technical Specifications are not specifically applicable to diesels in, nuclear service.
The vast majority of EMD engine experience is based on use as locomot'ives and in marine power. These applications require large amounts of operating time, harsh operating environments, and long periods of operation between starts. The diesels used in standby power applications operate for small periods between starts, typically two,hours, and operate in relatively mild environmental conditions. As a result, these
.applications do not require the same maintenance frequency to ensure required reliability.
The maintenance document written by the EMD Owners Group takes the maintenance recommendations given in MX 1728 and 1742 and addresses each one specifically for nuclear service. As .a result, some differences between the Owners Group document and the EMD MX's have emerged.
Nhile some requirements have been tightened, others have been relaxed. Specifically, the annual inspections given in the MX's have been changed to once each refuel cycle with the interval between inspections to be 18 to 24 Page 5 of 6
r, I~
PROPOSED TECHNXCAL SPECIFXCATXON AMENDMENT ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF CHANGE XN DXESEL GENERATOR MAXNTENANCE XNSPECTXON 2.2 Zusti fication (cont) months. The effect of thi's change on engine reliability is not significant since these inspections are wear related engine inspections, such as mechanical inspections and adjustments, filter replacements, cleaning of strainers and internal components, functional checks of alarms and timers, and inspection of the generator. With the implementation of the new inspection interval of once every two years, engine run time will have increased from 50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> between inspections to 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br />. Even if engine operation is required for, extended times during these two years, it should be noted that the first maintenance required by EMD on a "running time" basis is at 500 hours0.00579 days <br />0.139 hours <br />8.267196e-4 weeks <br />1.9025e-4 months <br /> of operation. Based on th'is, it is apparent that the diesel may run for an addition 400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br /> (or 16 days) during this period without the need for any additional inspections. Since BFN has already reduced the most significant contributor to diesel generator wear by eliminating all unnecessary cold .fast starts, wear on the. diesels is expected to be minimum in the time periods between inspections. Xnspections performed on the. diesel generators, including recent annual, two year, three year, and six year inspections, have revealed no'significant wear on any of the diesel parts required to be inspected annually.
This Technical Specification revision is also supported by the fact that several plants of "the same
~
type (BWR-4) and vintage as BFN also utilize EMD diesels and have different Technical Specification requirements concerning diesel maintenance intervals. Most notably .
was the recent amendment to Toledo Edison's Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station's Technical Specification which extended the 18 month diesel generator. inspection during shutdown to a maximum inspection interval not to exceed 30 months. Davis-Besse uses the same type diesels used at BFN, EMD 20-645-E4 engines. Also, the latest proposed Standard Technical Specifications for BWRs contain no requirement to perform any inspections recommended by the diesel manufacturer.
Based on the justifications given, changing the annual inspection requirement to one inspection every operating cycle should ensure the diesels are maintained at the existing levels of high reliability while improving'he availability of the diesel generators to perform their intended safety functions.'age 6 of 6
~~
ENCLOSURE 2 EMD-PS OWNERS GROUP RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
I~
~ ~