ML20137F115
| ML20137F115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | Ross M GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137F120 | List: |
| References | |
| 6710-97-2081, NUDOCS 9703280432 | |
| Download: ML20137F115 (19) | |
Text
.
t l
i 4-c j
?
i i
i ATTACHMENT I l
. TABULATION OF TMI WORKER EXPOSURES BY WORK AND JOB FUNCTION '
JANUARY 1,1996 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,1996 t
4 9703200432 970228 PDR ADOCK 05000289 PM R
~
o 6710-97-2081 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AND PERSON REMS BY WORK AND 208 FUNCVION i
(INTERNAL o EXTERNAL SRO)
GPU NUCLEAR TC! UNIT 1 REPORT PERIOD - 01/01/96 TO 12/31/96 p3Ee'I Of 4 JOB CATFGORY STATION PERSONNEL UTILITY PERSONNEL CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL JOB FUNCTION NUMBER REMS NUMBER P.fWS NUMBER REMS j.
REACTOR OPERATIONS /SURV.
MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 64
.159 2
.010 1
.089 OPERATING PERSONNEL 32
.168 0
.000 0
.000 NEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 53
.791 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 13
.040 0
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 9
.014 0
.000 1
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PFRSONNEL 15
.007 1
.000 0
.000 ROUTINE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 110 2.580 5
.006 4
.012 OPERATING PERSONNEL 97 2.721 0
.000 1
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 48 2.159 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERV!SORY PERSONNEL 80
.832 2
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 66
.272 9
.015 3
.017 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 65
.143 47
.099 6
.016 INSERVICE INSPECTION MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 19
.047 0
.000 0
.000 OPERATING PERSONNEL 21
.152 0
.000 0
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 13
.014 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 6
.006 0
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 2
.000 0
.000 0
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 2
.000 0
.000 0
.000 SPECIAL MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 92 1.311 0
.000 10
.004 OPERATING PERSONNEL 31 1.560 0
.000 0
.000 NEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 14
.092 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 17
.269 0
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 15
.014 0
.000 0
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 5
.003 2
.000 1
.000 WASTE PROCES$1NG MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 21
.073 0
.000 0
.000 1
OPERATING PERSONNEL 36 1.464 0
.000 0
.000 l
HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 22
.043 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 8
.071 0
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 6
.001 0
.000 1
.000 i
ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 9
.003 6
.036 0
.000 REFUELING OPERATING PERSONNEL 1
.000 0
.000 0
.000
6710-97-2081 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AND PERSON REMS SV WORK AND JOS FUNCTION ttachment 1 t
(II:TERNAL + EXTERNAL $40) cpu NUCLEAR TMI unit 1 PaEe 2 of 4
- REPORT PERIOD - 01/01/96 To 12/31/96 4
JOB CATEGORY STATION PERSONNEL UT!LITY PERSONNEL CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL JOS FUNCTION NUMBER REMS NUMBER REMS NUMBER REMS' TOTAL BY JOS FUNCTION
- MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 117 4.170 7
.016 13
.105 OPERATING PERSONNEL 112 6.065 0
.000 1
.000' HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 71 3.099 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 86 1.218 2
.000 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 71
.301 9
.015 3
.017 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 76 156 53
.135 6
.016
" CRAND TOTAL **
533 15.009 71
.166 23
.138 O
3 1
4 j
l i
i l
6710-97-2081 '
o NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AND PERSON REMS 8Y WORK AND JOS FUNC7!ON '
(INTERNAL o EXTERNAL SRD)
GPU WUCLEAR TMI UNIT 2 Page 3 of 4 REPORT PERIOD - 01/01/96 70 12/31/ %
JOB CATEGORY STATION PERSONNEL UTILITY PERSONNEL CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL i
JOB FUNCTION NUMBER REMS NUMBER REMS NUMBER REMS i
REACTOR OPERATIONS /SURV.
1 MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 65
.229 0
.000 2
.014 OPERATING PERSONNEL 80
.326 0
.000 0
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 28
.432 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 38
.187 1
.048 0
.000 ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 14
.005 2
.000 0
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 32
.064 2
.001 3
.019 ROUTINE MAINTENANCE i
MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 26
.442 0
.000 0
.000 OPERATING PERSONNEL 4
.018 0
.000 0
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 6
.255 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 2
.021 1
.166 0
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 1
.031 0
.000 0
.000 SPECIAL MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 9
.001 0
.000 0
.000 OPERATING PERSONNEL 14
.020 0.
.000 0
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 6
.044 0
.000 0
.000 WASTE PROCESSING MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 2
.000 0
.000 0
.000 OPERATING PERSONNEL 7
.000 0
.000 0
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 5
.000 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 1
.000 0
.000 0
.000 l
4 a
3 Q
il 3
4 d
I
-. - -.. ~
6710-97-2081 NUMBER OF PER$0NNEL AND PERSON REMS CY WORK AND JOB FUNCTION v
(!NTERNAL + EX1ERNAL $40) l GPU NUCLEAR T"! UNIT 2 REPORT PERIOD - 01/01/% TO 12/31/96 Page 4 o{4 i
1 JOB CATEGORY STATION PERSONNEL UTILITY PERSONNEL CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL j
JOS FUNCTION NUMSER REMS NUMBER REMS-NUMBER REMS r
- TOTAL BY JOS FUNCTION
- i MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL 73 672 0
.000 2
.014
+
OPERATING PERSONNEL 90 364 0
.000 0.
.000 HEALTH PHYSICS PERSONNEL 30 731 0
.000 0
.000 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL 38 208 1
.214 0
.000.
ENGINEERING PERSONNEL 14 005 2
.000 0
.000 ADMINSTRATIVE PERSONNEL 32 095,
2
.001 3
.019 5
- GRAND TOTAL **
277 2.0 75 5
.215 5
.033 i
i 6
6 t
I t
t I
i 4
l l-n m.
Y
6710-97-2081 s
L.
Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT II AIRCRAFTMOVEMENTS AT THE HARRISBURG INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (HIA)
JANUARY 1,19% THROUGH DECEMBER 31,1996 1.
Total Aircraft Movements-79,054 2.
Total number of movements of aircraft larger than 200,000 pounds is estimated to be equal to or les's than 200.
NOTE: For item 2, this data is based on a comparison of total air traffic at HIA from 1995 to 1996 that showed a slight reduction (2.85%) in air traffic volume in 1996. The data was provided to GPU Nuclear by the DOT /FAA Air Traffic Control Tower at Harrisburg International Airport.
De number of movements of aircraft larger than 200,000 pounds is not tracked and the number given in this report is consistent with the estimates of prior years. The Harrisburg International Airport Tower is not required to (and does not) record aircraft movements by weight or plane category.
a t
(.
6710-97-2081
\\
Page 1 of 2 1
ATTACHMENT III TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 6.9.1.B.3 PERIODIC LEAK REDUCTION PROGRAM TEST RESULTS The results of the TMI-l 1996 periodic Leak Reduction Program Tests which included visual inspections are summarized in Table 1. Note that since there was not a refueling outage and no maintenance had been done on the particular components, none of these inspections were perfonned. The results of the TMI-l 1996 local leakrate tests are summarized in Table 2. These tests were performed in accordance with the referenced procedures.
TABLE 1
]
1996 LEAK REDUCTION PROGRAM TEST RESULTS FOR TM1 i
.;.t;,.;,,....,,..#.,'..
- g. t.
i TSURVEI11ANCE 7 f"1DATE Oh x __
.,.1EAKING..
,! RATE!..,
lRA'IE:
3 MAINTENANCE '-
1 PROCEDURE 85
) PERFORMANCE f L COMPONENTj ;.g g 4
.gg-
) UNDERTAKEN,
- (see Nose 1) x
- 1.D.
g q
g 1303-11.16 (See Note 2) 1303-11.27 (See Note 2) 1303-11.28 (See Note 2) 1303 11.29 (See Note 2)
)
1303-11.30 (See Note 2)
I 1303-11.31 (See Note 2) 1303-11.32 (See Note 2) j 1303-11.50 (See Note 2) 4 TOTAL LEAKAGE IN 1996 l
l i
4 4
3
}
i 6710-97-2081 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENTIII (continued) i TABLE 2 1996 LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST RESULTS FOR TMI-l SURVEILLANCE 7 q DATEOF s
- LEAEINGk
, LEAK RA151 LEAK RATE!
MAINTENANCE;-
w iUNDERTAKEN 4 h $"n '.....kE
- PROCED0 M aPERFORMANCE
~ COMPONENT wt -
r"D 1
2I
!!(seiNees.1)J
? I.D ?
,e 4+ 3
[ Sh.
? S$
4 wn; s
4-1303-11.18 Various AH-VIA/BE/D 11185 (max) 11185 (max)
None (m )
68W (mM)
Personnel Hatch Equipment Hatch Note 1:
1303-11.16, " Decay Heat Removal System Leakage" 1303-11.18, "RB Local Leakrate Testing" 1303-11.27, " Makeup and Purification Leakage Check" 1303-11.28, " Liquid Waste System Leak Check"
{
1303-11.29, " Waste Gas Disposal System Leak Check" 1303-11.30, " Reactor Coolant Sampling Leakage Check" 1303-11.31, " Hydrogen Recombiner System Leak Check" 1303-11.32, "MU Pump Discharge and Letdown Leak Check" 1303-11.50, " Reactor Building Spray System Leakage Check" Note 2: Not Performed in 1996
4 6710-97 2081 y
Page 1 of 1 I
1 i
' ATTACHMENT IV 7 -
t 4
PRESSURIZER POWER OPERATED RELIEF VALVE AND PRESSURIZER SAFETY VALVE CHALLENGES IN 1996 i
L There were no pressurizer power operated relief valve or pressurizer safety valve challenges during I
19% in response to plant transients.
3 2
+
e t
.4 i
)
i I
I l
i 4
- l I
i 1
4 a
4 1
1
~
.)
6710-97-2081 1
Page 1 of 2 i
A'ITACHMENT V RESULTS OF SPECIFIC ACTIVITY ANALYSIS-PRIMARY COOLANT SYSTEM i
1 I
i i
~
Technical Specification 6.9.1.B.5 requires certain information regarding the results of specific
)
activity analyses in which the primary coolant exceeded the limits of Technical Specification 3.1.4.1.
i
~
The limits of Technical Specification 3.1.4.1 were not exceeded during 1996. Figure I contains a
)
graph of the dose equivalent iodine concentration for 19%.
j 1
ij.
1 b
e i
1 i
l l
}
i i
i i
i 4
j i
l
)
4 4
li
L l
l 1996 RCS Activity f
i 1.
1
-iw a
.w
-~
i 1
l t
I 0.1 t
t I
... - _ ~
3 r
. _. _.. ~ _.
~_
I
^
i
_m..--
.-_-.__-_-__-___{__..__-
0 01,
y
]
. ~ _ _.
-. +
- e..
m e
y
~
l f
0 001
~1/1/96 2/10S6 3/21/96 4/3tV96 6/9/96 7/1996 8/28S6 10 m96 11/16/96 12/2696 f
pate
/
l -*- DEI I T>w Ch i
I u
t fro
- G O
O#b I
tJ 9w o o i
p VJ O
e TJR
~
l l
6710-97 2081 Page 1 of 14 i
A'ITACHMENT 6 l
MAJOR CHANGES TO RAD WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS I
In 1996, GPU Nuclear completed a modification to the TMI-1 Liquid Waste Disposal System that willimprove the quality of the water processed in the system by reducing the amount of solids in the waste water. Attached for your information is the Safety Evaluation SE 412680-001 and the i
Configuration Control Document TI-CCD-412680-001.
l f
i l
l t
i
)
6710-96-2081 3
Page 2 of 14 2
I4 r.D E Nuclear 1
l Yechnical Functions Safety /Envirorrnental Determination and 50.59 Review a'
(EP-016) unit IMI 1 Page 1 of 5
SE Rev. No.
0 SE No.
412680 001 i
i Docunent/ Activity Title Auxiliary Building Sump Studge Preventton Document No. (if applicaole) 11 CCD 412680 001 Doc. Rev. No.
O Iype of Activity (modification, procedure, test, emperiment, or document): modification 1.
Does this document involve any potential non-nuclear environmental concern?
O Yes 2 No To answer tnis question, complete the Envirorpental Determination (ED) form. Any YES answer on the ED form requires j
an Environmentat impact assessment by Environmental controts, per 1000- ADM 4500.03. If in doubt, consult f
Environmental Controts or Environmental Licensing for assistance, if all answers are NO, further envirornental review is not required. In any event, continue with Question 2, below.
2.
la this activity / document listed in Section 1 or 11 of the matrices in Corporate Procedure O Yes O No i
1000 ADM 1291.017 l
l If the answer to question 2 is NO, stop here. This procedure is not applicable and no documentation is required.
1 (If this activity / document is listed in Section IV of 1000 ADM 1291 review on a case *by case basis to determine 1
applicability.) If the answer is VES, proceed to question 3.
J 3.
le this a new activity /docJnent or a substantive revision to an activity /docunent?
3 Yes O No (See Exhibit 2, paragraph 3, this procedure for examples of non substantive changes.)
If the answer to question 3 is NO, stop here and complete the approval hection below. Tnis procedure is not i
applicable and no documentation is required. If the answer is YES, proceed to answer all remaining questions.
j These answers become the Safety / Environmental Determination and 50.59 Review.
4 Does this activity /dostanent have the potential to adversely affect nuclear safety or safe S Yes O No plant operations?
l Does this activity /cocument require revision of the system / component description in the FSAR or S Yes O No otherwise require revision of the Technical Specifications or any other part of the SAR?
i 6.
Does the activity / document require revision of any procedural or operating description in the FSAR O Yes S No or otherwise require revision of the Technical Specifications or any other part of the SAR?
7.
Are tests or experiments cordJcted unich are not debcribed in the FSAR, the Technical O Ves S No Specifications or any part of the SAR7 IF AhY OF fME ANSWERS 70 QUEstl0NS 4, 5, 6, OR 7 ARE YES, PREPARE A WRitTEW SAFETY EVALUATION FORM.
4 i
(f the answers to 4, 5, 6, and 7 are NO, this precludes tne occurrence of an Unreviewed Safety Question or Technical Specifications change. Provide a written statement in the space provided below (use back of sheet if necessary) to
}
Support the determination, and List the documents you checked, i
NO, because Documents checked:
FHAR. FSAR section 11.2
{
8.
Are the design criteria as outlined in TMI 1 S0011-000 Div. I or DC SDD 000 Div. I Plant O Yes 2 No
]
Level Criteria af fected by, or do they af f ect the activity /docunent?
If YES, indicate how resolved:
APPROVALS (print name and hign)
[ff3hh Datet Engineer / Originator Steve Dunkelberger p
Section Manager T. hh Dates S h
Responsible Technical Reviewer T, M Date $ a N
- 7 Gr Other Reviewer (s)
Date:
D s
6710-96-20 3
Page 3 of lu Nuclear Technical Functions
$afety Evaluation I
(EP 016)
UNIT TMI ACTIVITY / DOCUMENT TITLE Auxiliary Buildina Surno Sludne Page 2 of 5
Prevention SE No.
412680-001 f
DOCUMENT NO. (if applicable) T1-CCD-412680-001 Rev. No.
O Rev. No.
O I
Type of Activity /Doewient evn11fication (Modification, procedure, test, experiment, or document)
This Safety Evaluation provides the basis for determining whether this activity / document involves an Unreviewed safety Question or impacts on nuclear safety.
Answer the f ollowing questions and provide reason (s) for each answer per Exhibit 7 A simple statement of conclusion in itself is not sufficient. The scope and depth of each reason should be comunensurate with the safety significance and l
conptenity of the proposed change, 1.
Will implementation of the activity /docwient adversely affect nuclear safety or safe plant O tes 2 No operations?
The following questions coniprise the 50.59 considerations and evaluation to determine if an unreviewed safety Question suists l
2.
Is the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accicent or malfunction of
,0 Ten 2 No equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Safety Analysis Report increased?
i 3.
15 the posbibility for an accident or malfunction of a cifferent type than any evaluated previously O Tes R No in the Safety Analysis Report created?
4.
Is the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification reduced?
O tes M No if any answer above is ayes" an inpact on nuclear saf ety or an Unreviewed Safety Question exists. If an adverse impact on nuclear safety exists revise or redesign. If an unreviewed safety question with no adverse impact on nuclear safety exists forward to Licensing with any additional docunentation to support a request for NRC approval prior to implementing approval.
5.
Specify whether or not any of the following are reautred, and if ayes indicate how it was resolved.
a Ves TFAAf/PFU/Other No a.
Does this activity /docwent require g
M 04 9hD"Ob an update of the FSAR?
Explain F$AR states in section 11.2.1.2 that the Tendon Access Gat terv suso, Scrated Water Storene tank sunp and the West Exchancer vault use dano into the Miscellaneous Waste storage Tank. The discharce of those sums may d
tse routed to the auxitiary tm tdina suio prior to aoina to the Miscellaneous Waste Storane Tank as a result of this modifichtton, b.
Does the activity / document require a hQ Technical Specification Amenchent?
Explain
.No Technicet $oecification is affected tv this confiauration channe. No new release oaths are created by this chance.
N5046 (07 03)
I
6710-96-2081!
- l l
Page 4 of 14l Page 3 of 5 j
j c.
Does the activity / docent require Yes TR/TFWR/Other Ng a Quality Classification List (QCL) Amencknent?
faptain Addtna velves Q,w d Ce M VES 3
7 % # [ 313 i
i t
1 a.
Other: (if none, use NA) hA I
i l
1 L
E I
i I
this form with the reasons for the answers, together with att applicable continuation sheets constitutes a written saf ety Evaluation.
h of Effertfve Panes Pane No.
Rev. Noi Pont No, sev. No.
Page No.
Rev. No.
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
[
s 0
l l
I Approvals (Print Name and Sign)
Date Engineer / Originator Steve Dunkelberger
)
if13ff[p Section Manager T, %gg.
h_,
6* Y"$
- l Responsibte technic.i Reviewer 7. hp _N W 8-M -9 <,
independent Safety Reviewer f, j g h f f'ff
)[k31, h 9 'kf [
Other Reviewer (s) 8.l y
i l
L l
45046 (09 93)
l 6710-96-2081 1
S Page 5 of 14 Safety Evaluation Continuation Sheet Page 4 of 5 No.
SE 412680-001 Rev. No.
O Document No.
TICCD-412680-001 (if applicable) 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this configuration change is to install several pieces of equipment and pipmg w hich will remosc oil and accumulated sohds from the anuhar) bmiding sump which contnbuted to high sulfur problems in the reactor coolant bleed tanks m the past. Tlus change is pan of a larger etYort to remose this type of material before it gets into the miscellaneous uaste storage tank and the miscellaneous waste esaporator.
The equipment will include an oil skimmer m the auuhary bmiding sump to collect any oil that gets into the sump. A recirculation piping assembly will be installed in the sump to agitate solids in the sump and filter them out. before the water as scut to the uuscc!!aneous waste storage tank. The recirculation pipmg assembly will be installed in a new branch line on the 4" discharge line of the existing sump pumps. A filter housmg with multiple filter elements will be installed inside the sump as part of the recirculation piping assembly Io collect solids entrained while recirculating the sump water.
A hose connection will be installed oft of the recirculation line to provide a hand-held hose capability for cleaning m the sump. Some new piping will be installed to allow several sumps to go to the auxiliary building sump prior to gomg to the miscellaneous waste storage tank (MWST)
Several hose connections will be installed on the nver water drain lines of the deca) river and nuclear rner systems' heat exchangers in the heat exchanger vault to allow pumping o'f nier water from one cooler to another after taking it out of senice. This is to pres ent introducing the dirt from the nver water into the heat exchanger vault suinp and the rad waste system.
2.0 SAFETY REVIEW 2.1 This configuration change will not adverscly impact the nuclear safety or safe plant operation. be.ause the oil skimmer and recirculation piping assembly provide a cicaning function to the sump water and create no new releasc or processmg paths The rad waste piping will be welded in areas outside the sump and threaded inside the smup. Pipmg is designed m accord;mce with B31.1 22 The river water dram connections allow returning nver water to the rn er directly from the cooler being removed from senice without sending the water through the rad waste system. This is nyer water remainmg m the heat exclumger w hen it was taken out of senice The water is returned to the river via another river water heat cxchanger usmg a small pump 23 The piping to route sumps desenbed in section 2 4 to the auuhary bmiding sump is welded and will providc for cleanup of water pnor to the watcr going to the miscellaneous waste storage tank. This water would go directly to the MWST currently.
24 This actnity reqmres revision of the system / component descnption in the FS AR SECTION t ill 2. Update sy stem desenption to state that the followmg surups ruay discharge mto the auxikary building sump in addmon to the miscellaneous waste storage tank in section iI 2.1.2. Tendon access gallery sump Ileat exclumger vault suiup and Borated I
water storage tank sump. No Technical Specifications or any other pan of the SAR reqmrcs revision.
2.5 Core bores through the 281' cles anon floor will be sealed fire barriers to maintain integnty of the rating of the floor Structural mtegnty of the concrete will be maintamed by procedural control of rebar cutting dunng the core-bore process i
N5c46 (co 93)
6710-96-2081 s
Page 6 of 14 Safety Evaluation Continuation Sheet
\\
l Page 5
of S l
No.
_SE 412680-001 i
Rev. No.
O Document No. _T1CCD-412680-001_
10 50.59 REVIEW (if applicable) j 3i This activit) does not increase the probabilit) of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfu-t equipment important to safet) previously evaluated in the Safety Analysis Report regarding the oil skimme recirculanon piping because the only change to the plant is that some cicanup is provided for the water prior to sending that water to the rad waste system. Calculation Cl101573 53214H)! evaluates the se l
pipmg imolved in this change to insure it is not degraded Installing piping to allow sending the sumps idcutified section 2.4 to the auxiliary building sump adds the abihty to cleanup that water pnor to sendmg it to th l
maximum radiological loading of the filter to allow bunal is evaluated in calculation 6612 964N)9 1
This activity does not increase the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Safety Analysis Report regarding the river water drains bl the configuration change affects one cooler at a time that is already removed from service. The water t
mservice cooler via a drain line 1" in diameter or less This does not affect operation of the mservice
. csolution is controlled by plant procedures 12 The possibilitt for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the Safet i
Report is not created regardmg the oil skmuner and recirculation piping because the only change to the plan) l i
capability is added to clean up water in the sump using a fiher and oil skimmer.
t The possibihty for an accident or malfimcuon of a dalTerent type than any evaluated previously in the Safety Repon is not created regarding the river water drains, because the only change to the plant is that river water from a isolated cooler may be pmiped into a cooler in service and returned to the river instead of draining it to the r i
water is monitored for radiation a;it is returned to the riser at RM-L-7 as it is currently during normal river wat!
l operation The configuration change will be designed. fabricated and tested in accordance with apphcable construction codes i
U The margin of safety as defined m the basis for any Tecimical Specification is not reduced regardmg the oil skimmer anf recirculation piping because the only change to the plant is that a cicanup function is added The margm of safety as defmed in the basis for any Technical Specification is not redaccd regarding the river water dr because the only change to the system is that connections are added for hoses to return nver water to an operatmg co j
send the water to the riser instead of the sump dunng maintenance.
34 CONCLUSION i
Therc is no Unreviewed Safet) Question or requirement for a Techmcal Specification change as a result of this configuration change to mstall equipment that cleans up ausiliary buildmg sump water and routes ses cral sumps to mio the auxihar) bmiding sump i
l
]
i i
i m5046 (09 03) q-esa e