ML20081M471

Monthly Operating Rept for Sept 1983

ML20081M471
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	10/07/1983
From:	Murray T, Sarsour B TOLEDO EDISON CO.
To:	Haller N NRC OFFICE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ORM)
References
K83-1353, NUDOCS 8311170266
Download: ML20081M471 (31)

Text

_ . .

. . AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL DOCKET NO. 50-346

. UNIT Davis-Besse Unit 1 DATE October 7, 1983 COMPLETED BY Bilal Sarsour TELEPHONE 419-259-5000, Extension 384 MONTH September, 1933 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe. Net) (MWe-Net)

I o 37 0 2 0 gg 0 3 0 0 39 4 . -0 20 0 5 0 0 23 6 0 0 22 7 0 3 0 8 0 0 24 9 0 25 0 10 0 26 0 1I O 0-27 12 0 3 0 13 0 0 29 14 0 0 30 15 0 3g 16 0 INSTRUCTIONS On this format. list the average daily unit power level in MWe. Net for each day in the reporting month. Compute to the nearest whole megawatt.

(9/77) 8311170266 831007 "

{DRADOCK 05000346 PDR

r OPERATING DATA REPORT

. DOCKET NO. 50-346 DATE October 7, 1983 COMPLETED BY Bilal Sarsour TELEPHONE m - m -3000 Extension 384

- OPERATING STATUS g, y,;, %. Davis-Besse Unit 1 Notes

2. Reporting Period: Septembe'r 1983

3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt): 2772

4. Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe): 925 S. Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe): 906

6. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Gross MWe): 918 '

7. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe): 874

8. If Changes Occur in Capacity Ratings (Items Number 3 Through 7) Since I.ast Report. Give Reasons: .

9. Power Level To Which Restricted,lf Any (Net MWe):

10. Reasons For Restrictions.If Any:

This Month Yr..to.Date Cumulative

!!. Hours In Reporting Period 720 6,551 45,312

12. Number Of Hours Reactor Was Critical 88.2 4,679.4 25,574.9

13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 469.5 3,833.6

14. Hours Generator On-Line 3.2 4.542.0 24,301.6

15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 1.732.5

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 6.187.0 11,540,329 56,913,090 .

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 164 9.. 3.841.150 18.947.168

' 18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 0.0 3.631.352 17.746.792

19. Unit Service Factor 0.4 69.3 53.6 l 20. Unit Availability Factor 0.4 69.3 57.5

[ 21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) 0.0 63.4 44.8 l 22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) 0.0 61.2, 43,2 l 23. Unit Forced Outage Rate 0.0 9.5 18.7

.4. Shutdowns Scheduled Over Next 6 Months (Type. Date, and Duration of Each):

~

,i

, 25. If Shut Down At End Of Report Period. Estimated Dste of Startup:

26. Units in Test Status (Prior to Commercial Operation): Forecast Achieved i

INITIAL CRITICALITY l

INIT!AL ELECTRICITY l

COMMERCI A L OPERATION ,

(4/77) l ..

t e

DOCKET NO. 50-346 ',

. UNIT S11U1 DOWNS AND POW:dl REDUCTION.} UNIT NAME Davis-Besse Unit 1 DATE October 7, 1983 COMPLET ED IlY Bilal Sarsour i REPORT MONTil ScPtember, 1983 419-259-5000. Ext. 384 TELErilONE 4

, . nw ,

l .

- E E k

- jE gg 3 *

~Sg& .Y 3 Licensee ,Eg E", Cause & Corrective r No. Date h H

J Event gy mu Action to

, fE @ j;g g Report a g Prevent Recurrence-6

j. .

8 83'07 25 S 716.8- C 4 NA NA- NA Unit outage which began on July 25, i

1983 was still in progress until 2049 hours0.0237 days <br />0.569 hours <br />0.00339 weeks <br />7.796445e-4 months <br /> on September 30, 1983.

, See Operational Summary for further details.

4 1 e l

t .

1i -

i l- 2- 3 4 F: Forced Reason: Method: Exhibit G Instructions

.. S: Schedu!cd A Equipment Failure (Explain) 1-Manual for Preparation of Data

!1 o Maintenance or Test 2 Manual Scrani. Entry Sheers for Licensee I C Refueling 3-Automatic Scram. Event ReporI(LERI File (NUREG-

. D Regulatory Restriction 4 Continuation from Previous Month Ol6l)

E-Operator Training & License Exandnation l 5 Load Reduction F-Adndnistrative  : 9-Other (Explaini 5

• i G Operational Eeror (Explain) Exfiibit I Same Source .

19/77) Il-Other (Explain) l

i. -

9

r-OPERATIONAL

SUMMARY

September, 1983 Zero power physics testing began on September 26, 1983, and the reactor was deborated.co criticality at 0745 hours0.00862 days <br />0.207 hours <br />0.00123 weeks <br />2.834725e-4 months <br /> on September 27, 1983. Physics testing was completed at 1930 hours0.0223 days <br />0.536 hours <br />0.00319 weeks <br />7.34365e-4 months <br /> on September 29, 1983.

The turbine generator was on line at 2049 hours0.0237 days <br />0.569 hours <br />0.00339 weeks <br />7.796445e-4 months <br /> on September 30, 1983, marking the completion of the unit outage which began on July 25, 1983.

The following are the more significant outage activities performed during this month:

1) Replacement of reactor coolant pump seals for reactor coolant pumps (four were replaced in August and one was replaced in September).

2) High pressure injection line stop check valve (HP49) failed to open at a design differential pressure. A new type of valve disc was installed to correct the problem. Testing verified the valve does not stick with the new disc.

3) Various 18 month and refueling surveillance tests were completed.

i i

[

4 l

l 1

e e-.-, e- v w ee-e-e---. - - - , - - y .--,----.,y --me v--,y--e ,ww-- ,, ----,----e , w -yvv--=- ~,-w. .w,, . - , - . ----v+--ye-,,------* ---.

F m

REFUELING INFORMATION DATE: September, 1983

1. Name of facility: Davis-Besse Unit 1

2. Scheduled date for next refueling shutdown: August 3,1984

3. Scheduled date for restart following refueling: October [j; 1984

4. Will refueling or resumption of operation thereafter require a technical specification change or other license amendment? If answer is yes, what in general will these be? If answer is no, has the reload fuel design and core configuration been reviewed by your Plant Safety Review Committee to determine whether any unreviewed safety questions are associated with the core reload (Ref. 10 CFR Section 50.59)?

Ans: Expect the Reload Report to require standard reload fuel design Technical Specification changes (3/4.1 Reactivity Control Systems and 3/4.2 Power Distribution Limits).

5. Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action and supporting information: July, 1984

6. Important licensing co,aiderations associated with refueling, e.g.,

new or different fuel design or supplier, unreviewed design or performance analysis methods, significant changes in fuel design, new operating procedures.

Ans: None identified to date.

7. The number of fuel assemblies (a) in the core and (b) in the spent fuel storage pool.

(a) 177 (b) 140 - Spent Fuel Assemblies

8. The present licensed spent fuel pool storage capacity and the size of

, any increase in licensed storage capacity that has been requested or is planned, in number of fuel assemblies.

Present: 735 Increase size by: 0 (zero) l 9. The projected date of the last refueling that can be discharged to l the spent fuel pool assuming the present licensed capacity.

Date: 1993 - assuming ability to unload the entire core into the spent fuel pool is maintained.

i i

i I

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST rCR NO: 78-186 SYSTEM: Cable Spreading Room COMPONENT: Conduit CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: All pipe plugs and caps were removed from conduit entering the Cable Spreading Room and were replaced by the appro-priate sirs 0.Z. Gedney conduit fire-seal. Exposed external threads on conduits were protected by Bakelike bushing. Work was completed December 3, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANGE: The 0.Z. Gedney fire-seals have a three hour fire rating, which the pipe plugs and caps did not have.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This change has been subjected to a Fire Hazard Analysis Review and was not found to adversely affect the analysis set forth in the Davis-Besse Unit 1 Fire Hazard Analysis Report. This is not an unreviewed safety question.

r COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 78-488 SYSTEM: Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG)

COMPONENT: Low frequency alarms CHANCE TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Interlocks were added to low frequency alarms S394 and S399 such that the alarm occurs only when the EDGs are called on to operate. This was completed May 28, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This modification has eliminated the nuisance alarms which occurred whenever the generators were not operating.

SAFETY FYALUATION: This work was non-nuclear safety related except for

- the installation of terminal blocks in the essential Class lE switchgear.

Installation in accordance with the vendor's instructions ensured that no adverse environments were created.

4

. .., ,____,,.. ... .. , . . . . . - . _ . , , _ . , _ _ _ _ _ . , -. , _ _ . , . , _ , ._r.._

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-005 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Fire doors CHANGE TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Work implemented by FCR 79-005 was completed September 21, 1983. This involved the replacement of fire doors 502 and 503 with lis hour fire rated doors.- A 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> fire rated rollup door was provided for Emergency Core Cooling Pump Room 115, along with 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> fire rated rollup door enclosures for three heating, ventilating, and air conditioning wall openings in Exhaust Equipment Room No. 516.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This FCR is nuclear safety related only because a core

- drill was involved. Installation in accordance with the core drilling procedure assured the integrity of the replacement doors. This is not an unreviewed safety question.

'l

.-- , ,-. -, ,- - . . - . , - _ - - . . - - , , y.- ,, - _ , , . - ,, , , -- , , - - - , , , , , , - - , . - , , , _ _ . _ , - . , , - - , - - . - -

F COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-015 SYSTEM: Fire Protect 1on COMPONENT: Fire detectors

_ CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: This FCR was implemented to install fire detection equipment in Rooms 124, 208, 209, 211, 212, 221, 225, 227, 230, 231, 232, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238,-240, 241, 242, 243, 244, and the annulus. All rooms are located on Elevation 565' of the Auxiliary Building.

Work was completed December 23, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This FCR is non-nuclear safety related except for a "Q" drill. Installation in accordance with PICA and "Q" core drill reports precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environments.

This is not an unreviewed safety question.

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-023 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Emergency Lighting CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Emergency lighting was installed in Rooms 101, 105, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 122, 125, and 126. Emergency lighting was also relocated from Room 123 to Room 124. All work was completed September 28, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: These modifications were initiated to comp.?y with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This work was non-nuclear safety related except for the installation of "Q" emergency lighting supports. Installation of the supports in accordance with PICA insured no new adverse environments were created. This did not constitute an unreviewed safety question.

s F

I I

i

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST e

FCR NO: 79-024 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Emergency Lighting CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Emergency lighting was added to the Auxiliary Building, Elevation 565', Rooms 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 208, 209, 211, 212, 225A, 227, 230, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 240, 242, 243, and 244.

Room 249. Turbine Building Elevation 567', also had emergency lighting installed in it. All work was completed November 11, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANCE: This change was completed to comply with commitments on the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with PICA and Q support details has precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environ-ments. An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

I a

, --...y y - , , . . - , a . , - - - - -<,-,-.,+----.,-,-,,+.----,n,m,--,-,-,.n., , ,.w , - ..w. , - , - , - - - - - . . -. - - - - n--- - - , -. - -.,.

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-026 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Emergency lighting CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Work implemented by FCR 79-026 was completed October 29, 1980. This involved the installation of emergency lighting in Rooms 300, 303, 304, 310, 312, 313, 314, 320, 322, 324, and 328, all of which are located in the Auxiliary Building Eleve. tion 585'.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was made to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with the "Q" lighting support details and PICA requirements precluded these portions from creating any new adverse environments. An unreviewed safety question is not involved.

1

(

I i

I I

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-027 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Emergency lighting CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Emergency lighting was installed in Rooms 223, 401, 402, 404, 405, 406, 411, 427, 428, 428A, 428B, 429, 429A, 429B, and 432, which are all located on Elevatica 603' of the Auxiliary Building.

Work was completed November 11, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was made to comply with requirements made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with the "Q" support details and PICA requirements precluded these portions from creating any new adverse environments. An unreviewed safety question is not involved.

i 9

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR No 79-028 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Emergency lighting CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: This FCR was implemented to install emergency lighting in Rooms 500, 501, 502, 515, and 516, all of which are on Elevation 623' of the Auxiliary Building. Work was completed October 29, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANCE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This work is non-nuclear safety related except for the installation of "Q" emergency lighting supports. Installation in accordance with PICA requirements insured no adverse environments were created. This is not an unreviewed safety question, i

l l

f

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-035 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Air flow annunciation CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: This FCR was implemented to provide an annunciator in the Control Room for air flow in Battery Rooms 428A and 428B, Elevation 603'. This change-assures a hydrogen buildup does not occur in these rooms. Work was completed January 13, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with Q core drill reports and PICA requirements has insured those portions have not created any new adverse environments. An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

i l

l I

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-050 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Sprinkler system CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: A sprinkler system was added to Room 328, the Component Cooling Water Pump and Heat Exchanger Room, at Elevation 585'.

Work was completed January 13, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANCE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with "Q" core drill report and PICA precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environments.

An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

, , --.n-, - - , ,--- .. ..-- . . --- ,,- - , ,, ,, , ,,,

l I

1 COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FOR NO: 79-051 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Sprinkler System CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Work on FCR 79-051 was completed April 14, 1980. This involved the addition of a sprinkler system to the Service Water Pump Room, Room 198, in the intake structure.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation in accordance with the Q core drill report and PICA requirements ensured these portions did not create any new adverse environments. There was no unreviewed safety question involved.

, , . - - - - , - - . , - , , _ , n .. . - , . -.. , -- .- - -,. .,-- - - ---, ,

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR No: 79-060 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Hose station CHANCE. TEST OR EXPERIMENT: A hose station was added in the intake structure. All work was completed January 24, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was made to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This FCR is non-nuclear safety related except for e core drill. Installation in accordance with the "Q" core drill report precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environments.

I r,-a - .-n , - . _e,----- , - - , - - - - - - - , - - , , , , . , , ,,,,,,.-.,-,..,~e,n,-m, m , - - , e--------n- - - , . - -

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-064 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Hose station CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: A hose' station was added in Room 318. Diesel Generator Room. Elevation 585'. Work was completed December 19, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: The addition of the hose station required a hole to be cut in a fire wall. This change did not adversely affect the function of i the fire wall because the wall integrity was preserved by replacement of materials after the fire line was installed to seal the opening. An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

- , - , ,w - - ye -e-,-----+ +- ** -- - - - - -

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST ,

FCR NO: 79-065 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENTl Hose Station CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Work implemented by FCR 79-065 was completed August 21, 1980. This involved the addition of a hose station in the No.

1 Main Steam Line Area, Room 610. Elevation 643',

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: The addition of the hose station has not affected public safety or plant safety and security. The FCR is nuclear safety related only because of a "Q" core drill. This did not represent an unreviewed safety item.

?

9

. - - ._ , , . . _ . . . - . . - . - _ _ - ,. ._ , , m. _ - - , .,_, __

n COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR No: 79-142 SYSTEM: N/A COMPONENT: Ladders in Refueling Canal CHANGE. TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Removable handrails were provided for two indders, one located on the north ladder which goes from Elevation 603' to 578', and t:te second one located in the south ladder between Elevation 5/8' and 559-6" in the refueling canal. Work was completed July 10, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANGE: These removable handrails, which are to be used only during refueling operations, have alleviated concerns about the safety of these ladders.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Portions of the work are nuclear safety related in that welding to the existing refueling canal stainless steel liner plate was performed. These welds were liquid penetrant tested to insure leak tightness integrity in accordance with Appendix VIII of Section VIII of the ASME Code. No unreviewed safety question exists.

. ._ = ._ _ ..

l COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQITZST FCR NO: 79-188 SYSTEM: Auxiliary Feedwater System (AFW)

COMPONENT: Flow Indication ,

CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Work implemented by this FCR was completed June 28, 1979. This involved the installation of temporary instrumentation to measure AFW flow to each steam generator and to indicate the flows in the Control Room. Safety grade AW flow indication has been installed under FCR 79-430.

REASON FOR CHANCE: This change was required by NRC Directive 0578, 2.17b (A-32).

SAFETY EVALUATION: This FCR is nuclear safety related as the flow measure-ment addition involved the clamping of ultrasonic flow detectors to the "Q" piping going to the two steam generators. Bechtel has stated that the additional weight of the transformers has no effect on the stress levels in the piping or pipe supporting systems. Hence, no unreviewed safety question is involved.

1 i

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

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST

' FCR NO: 79-241 SYSTEM: Fire Protection

COMPONENT

Sprinkler t/ stem CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: A sprinkler system was added to Room 303, No.

3 Mechanical Penetration Room on Elevation 585'. Work was completed October 30, 1980.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was made to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: This change was non-nuclear safety related except for a core drill cutout. Installation in accordance with the "Q" core drill report and PICA requirements has precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environments. An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

0

- .. . - ~ _ - -

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

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 243 SYSTEM: Fire Protection COMPONENT: Sprinkler System CHANCE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: On October 8,1980, work implemented by FCR 79-243 was completed. This involved the addition of a sprinkler system to No. 1 Mechanical Penetration Room, Room 208, Elevation 565'.

REASON FOR CHANGE: This change was completed to comply with commitments made in the Fire Hazard Analysis Report.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Installation of the sprinkler lines in accordance with PICA requirements precluded those portions from creating any new adverse environments. An unreviewed safety question was not included.

L f

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 79-331 SYSTEM: N/A COMPONENT: Control Room Console CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: On August 7,1982, work implemented by this FCR was completed. This involved the installation of ventil_ tion fans and filters to the rear of Control Room operator consoles C5706 and C5709.

REASON FOR CHANCE: This addition has provided increased ventilation to the operators control console. Additional cooling has increased the

- reliability of the operator's display and reduced the probability of equipment failure.

SAFETY EVALUATION: The safety function of this cabinet is to support and protect Class 1E equipment. Analysis of seismic calculations has determined that this FCR has not degraded the cabinet structure, therefore, this is not an unreviewed safety question.

_m

F COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 81-015 SYSTEM: Masonry block walls COMPONENT: Wall No. 3307

- CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: This modification consisted of the addition of three plate stiffeners between the flange of the floor beam above wall 3307 and the underside of the floor above. Wall 3307 is located in the Auxiliary Building Elevation 585', between the Component Cooling Water Heat Exchangers and Pump Room 328 and Elevator No.-2. Work was completed June 1, 1981.

- REASON FOR CHANGE: Block wall reanalysis, required by Nuclear Regulatory Commission I.E. Bulletin 80-11, determined that the floor beam above wall 3307 was overstressed. This modification lowered the stresses in the floor beam to within allowable limits.

SAFETY EVALUATION: In its previous condition, the floor beam did not meet the requirements of the Final Safety Analysis Report for allowable stress when subjected to a maximum possible earthquake. This overstressed condition could have caused the wall to fall and possibly affect the stability of the floor above the component cooling water heat exchanger and pump room. This modification has lowered the stress levels in the beam to within the specified limits. This is not an unreviewed safety question.

t E v r- -- ~,w e ,=w-

- --m-,v-,,-----w- n -

,-- rv,, , a---,-en.,w,---e r-, - - . - - ww. , e--,-r --- -,-

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 81-024 SYSTEM: N/A-COMPONENT: Walls 3237 and 3287 CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: This FCR braced the connections at the north end of wall 3237 and at the south end of 3287 with angles and expansion anchors. Wall 3237 separates Passage 310 from Elevator No. 3 while wall 3287 separates Passage 310 from Stairway AB-2. Both walls are located at Elevation 585'-0". This also stiffened the floor above wall 3237 at 603'-0" elevation by attaching a strut to the web of the beam. Work was completed June 1, 1982.

REASON FOR CHANGE: Nuclear Regulatory Commission IE Bulletin 80-11 required block wall reanalysis. This had shown that during compartment pressurization due to a postulated main feedwater line break, the floor beam above wall 3237 and the connections of walls 3237 and 3287 could become stressed beyond allowable limits. This is corrective action for Licensee Event Report NP-32-80-17 (80-091).

SAFETY EVALUATION: These modifications have reduced the stresses in the floor beam above wall 3237 and the stresses in the affected connections of walls 3237 and 3287 to within allowable limits set forth in Section 3.8 of the Final Safety Analysis Report. This does not constitute an unreviewed safety question.

l T

COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 81-059 SYSTEM: Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG)

COMPONENT: Vibration Dampers CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: The crankshaf t vibration dampers on the front of the diesel generators were replaced by gear type dampers. This change was completed April 27, 1982.

REASON FOR CHANGE: The diesel generator vendor, Power Systems, recommended

. that the design of the dampers be modified due to problems experienced with the original design. Also, the old dampers were no longer repairable, and complete failure could cause failure of accessory pumps.

SAFETY EVALUATION: Emergency Diesel Generators are required for safe plant shutdown in the event of the loss of offsie.e power. The replacement damper gives greater reliability and does not affect the safety function of the generators.

c ,

l 4

l

. 4 COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 81-292 SYSTEM: Containment Spray COMPONENT: Valves CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: Station air valves SA535, isolation valve to the lower containment spray header and SA536, isolation valve to the upper containment spray header, were changed to " locked closed" valves. These valves are part of the double isolation fcr station air and are used for the containment spray nozzle test. Pipe caps were installed on SAll7 and SA118, the upper and lower station air valves to containment spray hea*e vents, respectively. Work was completed December 30, 1981.

REASON FOR CHANGE: During a monthly containment integrity test SA535 was found open. This FCR was corrective action for Licensee Event Report NP-33-81-83 (81-062).

SAFETY EVALUATION: The safety function of these valves is to ensure containment isolation. The locking of valves SA535 and SA536 in the closed position and the capping of valves SAll7 and SA118 has provided added assurance against violation of containment isolation. Therefore, the changes implemented by this FCR augments the safety function of these valves. An unreviewed safety question was not involved.

I

\

I' COMPLETED FACILITY CHANGE REQUEST FCR NO: 82-128 SYSTEM: Reactor Coolant System (RCS)

COMPONENT: Pressurizer Spray Motor Isolation Valve, RC10 CHANGE, TEST OR EXPERIMENT: The open torque switch setting for motor operated valve RC10 Pressurizer Spray Motor Isolation Valve, was increased from 1.5 to 2.5. The close torque switch setting was also increased from 1.5 to 2.0. Work was completed August 30, 1982. '

REASON FOR CHANGE: This valve had experienced problems with the original

. settings. The new settings were based on a recommendation made by Torrey Pines Technology.

SAFETY EVALUATION: The safety function of valve RC10 is to provide a path for pressurizer spray for controlled shutdown and RCS pressure control.

This modification has enhanced the operation of this valve. The safety function of RC10 has not been adversely affected and, therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not involved.

i

__ __ .- , _ _ _ - - , .. _ __ _ . , . . _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ , _ _ , . , _ _ . _ . ~ _ , _ , . . . , . _ _ , _ _ _ . , .

, .g. ,. -

L g ,.

. s TOLEDO

% EDISON October 7, 1983 Log No. K83-1353 File: RR 2 (P-6-83-09)

Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Mr.- Norman Haller, Director Office of Management and Program Analysis U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Haller:

Monthly Operating Report, September 1983 Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Enclosed are ten copies of the Monthly Operating Report for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 for the month of September 1983.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Bilal Sarsour at (419) 259-5000 Extension 384.

Yours truly, Te~ r D Terry D. Murray Station Superintendent Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station TDM/BMS/ljk Enclosures cc: Mr. James G. Keppler, w/1 Regional Administrator, Region III Mr. Richard DeYoung, Director, w/2 Office of Inspection and Enforcement

! Mr. Walt Rogers, w/1

'KRC Resident Inspector gp l

l 1\

THE TOLEOO EOISON COMPANY EOISON PLAZA 300 MAOISON AVENUE TOLEOO, OHIO 43652

- - - , - .- . - - -- _-.