ML20083G652

Response to Util Answer to NRC Supplemental Response to Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy 831027 Motion for Admission & to Resubmit Proposed Contention 2 Re Diesel Generator Reliability.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20083G652
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	12/22/1983
From:	Hiatt S OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8401060358
Download: ML20083G652 (4)

Text

,

Deceaber 22, 1983 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA yet;gg. _

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMNISSION m:,e Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boa,rd 2 1 ~5 pig;g; In the Matter of

)

)

!; 5, CLEVELAND ELECTRIC-ILLUMINATING

)

Docket Nos.Ej0 %p5Yci COMPANY, Et Al.

)

50-4W!CM

)

(Operating Li. cense)

(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,

)

Units 1 and 2)

.)

)

OCP2 RESPONSE 'IO A?PLICANTS' ANSEER 'IO 1E STAFF SUPPLEMEtEAL RES,PQMSE' RE PROPOSED DIESEL NIM'IOR hELIAhILITY CCNIENIION- -

3pplicants, pursuant to Cleve' land Elbet' rid 'blhinin'atino 'C'o.

(Perry Nuclear Pcwer Plant, Units 1 and 2), LBP-82-89,16 IE 1355, 1357 (1982), filed a response to the "NRC Staff Supplemental Resconse (Based Upon~ New Information in Board Notification BN-83--160) to CCRE Motion for Admission to Pesubmit Its Proposed Contention 2" dated October 27, 1983.

'Ihis filing consisted of an attack on the Staff for favoring the admission of the contention and an affidavit pur-porting to deacnstrate that none of the deficiencies described in EN-83-160 are applicable to the Transanerica Delaval diesel generators at Perry, i

As for the former, OCRE believes that it is inproper for Applicants l

t I

to complain when the Staff fulfills its responsibili+ des of keeping the

.1/

i l

Board and par' des inforned and representing the public interesE l

i As f6r the l'atter, the averments therein, although sworn, are of ths nest cursory nature and are unverified and unaccompanicd by any 8401060358 831222 PDR ADOCK 05000440 l

G PDR 1/ Aeolicantsi of course, do not complain when the Staff assists them

(

E this proceeding-e.g., by filing nctions for sumary discosition and

~~

~

siding with Applicants in procedural matters.

It is this nere typical behavior which has led the Comission to re-examine the Staff's role in.

adjudicatory proceedings. See Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, l

1983.

Ible of the Staff in adjudicatory LicensingHearings,48FR50550,Nov.2,D5CQ

)

9 -

- j factual basis.

Furthernore, the affidavit incceletely addresses all the known problems with Transamerica Delaval diesel generators, e.g, those described in BN-83-160A, even though the affiants refer to that Board Notification. Specifically, BN-83-160A also discussed connecting i

rod bearing failures in the Shoreham diesel generators. Of the 24 bearings in the 3 Shoreham diesels, 4 were found to be cracked.

Failure Analysis Associates (. enclosure 3 to the Board hbtification) 1 determined that:

The factors which contributed to or caused the bearing cracking have been identified.

They are unsupported, overhung bearing ends, excessive crankpin journal yawing, and the presence of voids or nores in the size range of 0.5 mn to 0.7 mn in the aluminu:n alloy bearings.

Scanning electron microscopy of the fracture surface of one of the cracked bearings identified these voids as the apparent crack initiation sites. Mechanical testing of ten specimens frcm the cracked beanngs denonstrated that this bearing material did not neet the TDI material specifications apparently in effect at the time Shoreham's DG's were designed and fabricated. TDI allegedly lwered these specification requirements subsequent to the delivery of the SNPS DG's and the test results meet this reduced specification. The specification requirements did not (not do they nm). include a porosity requirenent.

The replacement connecting rod bearings being installed with the new 12 inch journal crankshafts are represented to be qualified to the lower specificiations, and are therefore equivalent in material to the earlier bearings.

-Id., p. 1.

Although the new Shoreham crankshaft design will elirinate the first 2 factors contributing to bearing cracking, the third factor is still present.

It is not knwn whether the Perry crankshaft design will eliminate the first 2 factors, and this cannot be determined without discovery. The generic quality implications of adopting a lower material specification for the bearings needs further examination also.

1 Similarly, the assertions of the affiants should not be accepted without verification by an adversary party through discovery

..o.

e or cross-examination. Of course, OCPS does not possess these rights with regard to diesel generator reliability and will not unless the j

contention is admitted. OCRE feels tha.t the erinciole of LSP-82-89

)

(supra) has been abused. What has ensued is a nini-litigation, without OCRE's effective participation. Applicants' filing is in f

2/

jf effect an attempt at sumary dispositio.E of an unadmitted contention, E

and OCRE, having no discovery rights, has no opportunity to refute l

't their unverified assertions. Applicants' filing distorts the reply brief principle far beyond the original purpose of allcuing intervenors i

to reply to Staff and Applicant responses to proposed new contentions, in accordance with Houston Lichtina and Power (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station), AIAB-565,10 NBC 521 (1979). OCRE respectfully requests that Applicants' December 16 filing not be considered by the Licensing Board in deciding whether to admit the contention, Respectfully submitted, QR Susan L. Hiatt e

OCRE Iepresentative 8275 Munson Rd.

Mentor, OH 44060 (216) 255-3158 s

y Such a standard is obviously far beyond that for the admission of late-filed contentions. All that need be shown is that the l

contention has specificity and basis and that the 5 factors of 10 GR 2.714(a).(1) have been met affirmatively.

OCRE believes that these requirements have been met, and that the contention should be admitted.

=

p;?

~,.

n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

'84 JNi-5 M0 :51 This is to certi'fy that copies of the foregoing were served by 7.

deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid, this

[

1983 to thoseB'gi.:the; f;_

s p a,)

day of D.*x,-1 s e 1

ERAnc

=_

service list below.

i

=

4

=

f.e, I M b %

5 Susan L.

Hiatt b

t E.,

a g -..

SERVICE LIST _

l

=

i m

I Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Terry Lodce, Esc.

2 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 618 N. Michigan'St.

.[

. U iS. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Suite 105 5]

Washington,'D.C.

20555 Toledo, OH 43624 5

h Dr. Jerry R..Kline

.2 l

Atomic Safety.& Licen. sing Board.

f U.S Nuclear.Reculatory Commission i

e Washington, D.C.

20555 i

9 i

Mr..Glenn O.

Bright Atomic Safety & Licensing Board j

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l

L Washington, D.C.

20555

==

Colleen P. Woodhead, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director

'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j

Washington,.D.C.

20555

.?

Jay.Silberg, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW

~

Washington, D.C.

20036 M

Docketing & Service Branch i

. Office of'the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 l

Licensing Appeal Board Panel Atomic Safety.&

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l

Washington, D.C.

20555 L_