ML20212A115
| ML20212A115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/1997 |
| From: | Jamila Perry COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| JSPLTR:-97-0172, JSPLTR:-97-172, NUDOCS 9710230160 | |
| Download: ML20212A115 (17) | |
Text
0
( Anmtunnuralth Idimn 04intjian)~
!)rrwk11 Grnorattr$ NAdoft 6%00 Ntitt i Dresden Road l
Matrh,11. 60 450 irisi%9u rno October 2,1997 JSPLTR: #97 0172 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington,D.C. 20555
Subject:
1997 Third Quarter 10 CFR 50.59 Report Dresden Nuciear Power Stelion Docket Nos.50-010,50 237, and 50-249 Enclosed is the third quarter Report of completed Changes, Tests, and Experiments per 10 CFR 50.59 for Dresden Nuclear Power Station. Th9se evaluations correspond to the conditions identified in 10 CFR 50.59(a)(2) for determining whether e proposed change, test, or experiment shall be determined to involve an unreviewed safety question.
If there are any questions regarding this report, please contact Mr. Frank Spangenberg, Dresden Station Regulatory Assurance Manager, at (815) 942-2920, extension 3800.
Sincerely, M
t
- 7. Stephen Perry
/{lf7 Site Vice President I
Dresden Station JSP/RWC:as Enclosure cc:
A, Bill Beach, Regional Administrator, Region lli W. J. Kropp, Branch Chief, DRP, Region 111
.[ 2 0 L,' ~ J. F. Stang, Project Manager, NRR Senior Resident inspector, Dresden Office of Nuclear Facility Safety IDNS
~
9710230160 971002 PDR ADOCK 05000010 hk,\\hkhh i,
_a
10 CFR 60.59 Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluation Number 1997 02-089 Type of Safety Evaluation:
F.xempt Change Evaluaten Reference Numbot E12 3 97 209
Title:
Drywell Floor Drain Sump Pump Discharge Line Relof VaNo Desenption: The proposed Change is to install a relef valve in the drywell floor drain surnp pump dischargo hne (3 20013*-LX) and to extend the safety-related boundary of kne 3 20013"-LX from drywell penetration X 117 up to and including releef valve 3 20991001 and associated piping Result:
This evaluation determined that an unrevowed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Numbet 1997-02-090 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Numbot E12 3 97 210
Title:
Drywell Equipment Dren Sump Pump Discharge Line Relef Valve Desenpton The proposed change is to install a relef valve in the drywell equipment drain sump discharge line (3 2005 3"-LX) and to extend the safety related boundary of line 3 2005 3" LX from drywell penetraton X 118 up to and hcluding relef valve 3 20991002 and associat+d piping Result:
This evaluation determined that an unrevewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-02-094 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaten Reference Numbec E12 3 97 213
Title:
RBCCW Drywell Return Line Relef Vanes Deccripton: The proposed change is to install two relef valves in the drywell on the RBCCW System return hne One relef vane will be installed upstream of RBCCW containment isolaten valve 3-3706 and one relef valve will be installed downstream of RBCCW containment isolaton valve 3 3706.
Result-This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety queston did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 02 095 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaton Reference Number E12 3-97 216 Title' Reactor Shutdown Coohng Sucten Header Rehef VaNo -
Descriptor.: The proposed change is to install one rehef valve on pipe hne 3-1001 A 16" B inside of the drywell between penetration X 111 A and motor operated valve 3-1001 1 A.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluaton Number 1997-02-096 Type of Safety Evaluston:
Exempt Change Evaluatiori 6eference Number: E12-0-97 205
Title:
Add Restraining Strap on Circuit Breakers
==
Description:==
Add a restraining strap with protective sleeve on the intemal upper and lower asxiliary switches on the Golden Gate Switchboard Co. (GGS) / Pacific Breaker Systems (PBS)
AMHG and G26 4ky 1200A circuit breakers with the Merlin-Gerin (MG) FG-2 gas interrupter and rnechanism assembly.
Result:
This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety queston did not exist.
- of 16 m_
__m-__
l e
l 10 CFR 50.59 Charter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Summary Rep _ ort Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-02-098 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Eiempt Change Evaluation Reference Number: E12-0-97 203
Title:
Control Rm. Train B Refng Coad Unit Desenption: The modificaten wl1 convert the existing 3-pass heat exchanger on the Contf 01 Room Train B Refrgeraton Condsasing Unit (RCU)into a 6-pass heat exchanger configuration and correct the misaignment of the existing inlet head. In doing this, the existing inlet nozzles / heat exchanger head (west head) will be rotated (one bott hole in the counterclockwise direct on.
as vened looking east at the west end of the heat exchanger), the existing outlet nozzle (east head) will have a blind flange installed, and the existing inlet and outlet cooling water piping (SW/CCSW) will be modifed. In addition, to the heat exchanger and piping modificatons, the modification will in= tall valves (4 total) for a luw point drain on the supply piping, a high point vent on the retum piping, and a test connecton on both the supply and return piping. The modificaton will also install a set of break flanged on the retum piping The drain, vent and test connecten valves and break flanges will be used for the RCU's maintenance and testing activites The exempt change will not affect the restncien onfices (2 9400-126 & 127) currentry installed in the coAng water supply line,2/3 392513" DX, to the Train B RCU.
These or6ces were installed under a previous modifcaton, P12 2-93-239 (ECN 12 00691M) tc control the flow through the RCU, to increase tne overall effectiveness of the CCSW System, and to maintain the CCSW System pressure greater than the Low Pressure Coolant injecten System. That mod 6 cation (in calculation ATD 0253) cons 6dered a pressure drop of 10 psid (23 ft of water) The 6-pass confguraton willinduce a maximum pressure drop of 3.5 psid (3 ft. of water) This modif cation will be performed whm there are no core alterations, no handling of irradiated fuel in the secondary conto ament, and no operational pe'ential for draining the reactor vessel (Ref Tech. Spec, section 3/4 8DL Result.
This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist-Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-02 102 Type of Safet/ Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaten Reference Number: E12 S97 215
Title:
PCV wod Desenpton. This Exempt Piar t Change (EPC) replaces the pressure control valves (PCVs) in the steam piping leading to the Booster Jets and Dilution Steam Onfce, the bypass valve around the PCVs and the outlet shutoff valve downstream of the PCVs. The existing two PCVs in a parallel.Jnfquration, per train, will be replaced with one larger PCV, Four pressure regulators in the instrument air tubing connecting to the air actuators of PCV 3-5425-A1, B1.-
A2,and -B2 are removed since the new PCVs come with integral regulators. The instrument ar supplied to the PCVs positoners and actuator is modifed to isolate nec sssary supply air '
and control signal air previously supplied to valves PCV 34424-A1 and PCV 3 5424-B1.
Result:
This evaluaten determinod that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluston Number: 1997-02 112 Type of Safety Evaluaten:
Evaluaton Reference Number E12-197 207
Title:
Drywell Demineralized Water Supply Line Relef Valve Descr tion: The proposed change is to install a relef valve in the drywell on the demineralized water e
supply line, The relef valve will be installed between domineralized water makeup system containment isolaten valves 3-4327 500,3-4327-502 and 3-1916-500.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unrevswed safety question did not exist.
2 of 16 B
-.,. = -._-
_i.
i,...i
e 10 CFR 60.59 Quarter: 199743 Safety Evaluation Summary, Report Safety Evaluation Number; 1997 02 113 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluston Reference Number: E12 3-97 211
Title:
RR Sample Lire Cont. Bypass Check Valve Desenpton: The proposed change is to install a bypass hne around reactor recirculation sample line inboard containment isolaton vatve A03 22044. Installed in the bypass hne will be a spring check valve and a manual valve A test tap will be installed upstream of the inboard isolaton valve A03 22044.
Result' This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 02 114 1ype of S.fety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaten Reference Number: E12 3 97 212 Title.
RWCU Cont. Bypass Check Valve -
Desenpton: The proposed change is to instal s bypass hne around reactor water cleanup system supply hne inboard containment isolation valves 3-1201 1 and 31201 1A Installed in the t ypass hne will be a spnng check valve and a manualisolation vatve. A test tap will also be installed upstream of the inboard isolation valvet Result.
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety questen did not exist Safet1 Evaluston Number: 1997 02 130 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Exempt Change Evaluaten Reference Number: E12 3 97 201
Title:
Gland Seal Drain Pump Motor / Exhaust Fan Motor / Level Switches and Push Button Statens Descripton: This evaluall(n addresses a permanent change to the facility (as desenbod in the UFSAR).
The change la the upgrade of the HPCI Gland Seal and Exhauster Subsystem from non-safety related to safety related. As a result of the upgrade, the equipment within the subsystem may require environmental qualificaton. This change reflects the fact that the HPCI Gland Seal and Exhauster Subsystem is a required suoport system for the safe operaten of the HPCI system A description of the change is given in the attached Justification for Cont,nued Operation (JCO). The JCO addresses the lack of complete documentaten regarding the abihty of the HPCI Gland Seal and Exhauster electrical components, located in the HPCI toom, to perform their safety-related functions under the environmental conditions resulting from the postulated accident The change in environrnental conditons is the higher temperatuieS resulting from operation of the HPCI equipment dunng postulated accident conditions with loss of room coolers. The HPCI System components of interest are presently classified as nr+ safety related. Such classification indicates that no credit is taken for operaten 0.nis equipment dunng postulated accederus Therefore, this equipment was not included in the Staton's EQ Program. The components of interes' are the gland Seal Leak Off (GSLO) Pump Motor, the Gland Seat f.xhaust Fan (GSEF) Motor, the level switches that control the operaten uf the pump, the level switches that alarm on high level in the condenser, and the push-button stations that allow for manual operation of the pump and fan. At pru.ent, there is no EQ documentation to demonstrate that the components of interest would be able to perform their ! Mended functions under this higher temperature.. However, the JCO does provide sufficient reasoning to constitute ' reasonable assurance" that the components of interest would be able to perform their functions under this higher temperature.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety questson did not exist.
3 of 16
. _ =
i..
____m__.---.-
10 CFR 50.59 Quarter: 19E03 I
Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluaten Number: 1997-02 135 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Temporay Alteration Evaluston Reference Number: Il-17 97 Titie' RWCU Retum Line Pressure Top De6cnption. The proposed activity is to inject sealant into the packing area of the valve, to stop a leak that has developed through the packing A 1/16" NPT hole will be dnlied and tapped into the valve yoke. A threaded hippiv/ adapter will be used to inject sealant and wdl be sealed / closed after the injection is finished.
Result:
This evaluaten determined that an unreviewed safety questen did not exist.
l
. Safety Evaluation Number, 1997 02 133 Type of Safety Evaluation-Miscellaneous Evaluston Reference Number; 3A & 3B FWRVs
Title:
. 3A FWRV isolaton on 4/27/96 Descnptiorr The purpose of this safety r* valuation is to detymine whether en unreviewed safety queston existed when the 3A FWRV was isolated on April 27,1996 (Commitment in LER 96-004 00)
Because of the purpose of this safety evaluaton, the questions are answered based on the UFSAR, including pending changes as of that date, Nevertheless, subsequent UFSAR revisions pertinent to this event were also reviewed. In additen, this safety evaluation was onganally propared and c; proved on C/21/96. Based on comrnents from Offsite Review, this safety evaluaton has been revised Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 02 144 Type of Safety Evaluation:
FSAR Change Evaluston Reference Number; DFL 97-066 T6tle-.
Core Spray UFSAR Change Desenption: This change is being initiated to revise section 6 3 2.1.3.3 of the UFSAR to remove the eusting instrumentaten descript,on in paragraph 1 of this section and provide wording that axista. sly desenbos the functionality of the Core Spray leak detection DPT, Result:
This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety question did not entst Safety Evaluation Number. 1997-02 152 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
FSAR Change Evaluation Reference Numoei DFL 97 065
Title:
DFL 97-065 r
Desenption: This safety evaluation does not involve a physical plant change, but revises secten 9 2.5 3 2 i
et the UFSAR to eliminate incorrect information concerning the elevation of the CC$W suction piping within the Cribhouse. The conclusion of this UFSAR paragraph, that a dam failure will result in a water level below the suction level of the pipe, is not being changed by el nination of the elevation values.
Result:
Th.s evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety Question dd not enist.
i o
[
4 of 16
=_
=
==
i - $W P yi'typ-'
qyww vv'g*--ywsy-wng p,
T ms%Mrrv--_yn-yr---,p g,v+m -ig mygamm.
,gp may y'-vy. r eurw vp
+yw%q--++-s u---p-t-N' M7Str*'TP'h'w*-t W"C'-TW Y'"e*-F M T e-P
?*
e sr vm.
10 CFR 50.59 Quarten 199b03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluaton Number, 1997 02 153 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
FSAR Changs Evaluaten Reference Number: DFL 97467
Title:
DFL 97 067 Descripton-The changes associated with this UFSAR change are the result of an independent review of the core spray system versus the UFSAR. These changes are minor technical enhancements which have been added to improve the context of the UFSAR. Gecten 6 2 5 3 2 was changed to add a further description of the Core spray initistson logic to the ACAD/ CAM system descripton. Secten 6 3.3 2 2 is being revised to add the current HPCl flow contributons to the histoncal analysis secten of the ECCS Secten 6 3 3 4.1 further identifes what part of the core spray subsystem opens when the reactor low pressure permissive clears. Secten 6 3 4.1 is being revised to further define the core spray realignment and operation if an initiation signalis recetved dunng a loop test. All of these changes reflect the current operation of the system and do not alter the existing design of the
- system, Result This evaluation deterr@ed that an unreviewed safety queston did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 02 155 Type of Safety Evaastion:
FSAR Change Evaluaten Reference Number: DFL 96422 and DFL 96103
Title:
OFL 96 022, DFL 96103 Desenption: Sectons 5 4 6 2 and 7=3 4 were changed under DFL D6-022 to remove the nominal high reactor pressure signal level of 1070 psig from the UFSAR text W to reference that the accepted and operating high reactor pressure signallevel was defineo in the Technical Specificatens (TS), which are also consviered as part of the UFSAR. These changes were further Changed under DFL 96103 to identify the signal as a ' sustained high reactor pressure signal. A similar change was rnade to Section 7.3 2 2.11 and Note 26 of Table 6 2 6 (Page 4 of 4) to reflect that the sustained I th pressure level signal is identifed in the TS under DFL 96103. Add $onally, the minimum cooling water volume for the isolation condenser was removed from Table 51 1 Sheet 3 of 3. This safety evaluation is being performed to address the Off-Site Revow concems addressed in OSR Reports 12-96130 and 12 97140.
Result.
This evaluaten determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist-Safety Evaluaten Number: 1997 02 156 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaten Reference Number: E12 0 96-215 Title-Chemical injecten Ball and Check Vanes Descnpton: The proposed modification replaces the current Chemicallnjection System consisting of single (1) line feed to the Service Water (SW) system and a temporary hose to Bay 13 in the 2/3 Cnb House servicing the Containmera Cooling Service Water (CCSW) System and Diesel dnven Fire Pump (DFP) The upgraded Chemicalinjection System will provide seven permanent 1/2" diameter Chlonnated Polyvinyl Chionde (CPVC) lines for delivenng chemdals to the prevously identifed service / Cooling water systems, The system will be expanded to include a separate feed to the Desel Generator Cooling Water (DOCW) System.
Replacement of a 2" hose providing water from the SW System to the chemical feed trailer with a permanent 2" Carbon Steel pipe is also 6ncluded in the proposed design.
Result-This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
- 5 of 16
10 CFR 60.59 Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluaton Number. 1997-02 157 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Miscellaneous Evaluation Paterence Numbet DOS 950014780
Title:
Panel 2223-2 Desenpten: The Offges Filter Building Air Partculate Samphng System, Panel 2223-2 (M 179)is currently out of servce, Restoration of the samphng system is scheduled for the end of 1997, Result.
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety queston did not exist.
L Safety Evaluaton Number; 1997-02 168
. Type of Safety Evaluston:
Macellaneous Evaluston Reference Numbet Panel 2(3F1798 03
Title:
Off Gas Filter Bldg Sample System Sampling Rach Descripien The Off Oas Filter Buliding Sample System Samphng Rack. Panel 2(3F1798-03 (M-179 & M.
421)is currently isolated and not in use (Unit 3 tagged out of servee, Unit 2 not tagged) and have been for a long period of time This evaluation documents the out of-service status of these units until the final management decision can be made.
Result This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist.
Safety Evaluaten Numbet 1997 02 169 Type of Safety Evaluaten Macellaneous Evaluation Reference Number: Off Gas Sys Process Viv Stem S
Title:
Off Oas System Process Valve Stern Seahng Air Desenpton: The Off Gas System Process Vatve Stem Sealing Air Provded by Instrument Air Compressor 2(3F4716B to the subject process valves (reference M 37, Sheets 4 and 7)is currently tagged with cauten tags. These mechanical valves are located in the off gas system and the air is partly in use dunng the restoration of the system. This has not been identified as a high pnonty concem but repair of this portion of the off gas system has been recommended by the original equipment manufacturer. This evaluation documents the temporary out of-service status of these units until the final management decisions are made.
Result' This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist.
Safety Evaluaten Numbet 1997 02 160 Type of Safety Evaluaton FSAR Change Evaluaten Reference Number: DFL 96-023
Title:
Interim Radweste Storage Facihty Descripton The Interim Radwaste Storage Facility (IRSF) was installed under Modificaton M12-0 84 075 and was added to the existing Unit 1 Chemical Cleaning Building to provide storage of radweste on site beginning in 1993. The existing Figure 114 3 of the UFSAR is being revsed to reflect the latest layout of the facshty.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist-6 of 16 I
10 0FR 50.69 Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluation Number; 1997 03 165 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Exempt Change Evaluston Reference Number: E12 3-96-227 Titie:
Replace Unit 3 Two Stage Reciprocating Alt Compressor
. Descripten: The Exempt Plant Change (EPC) provides directen for the replacement of the existing Unit 3,
- 3B" two stage reciprocating instrument air compressor, This work willinclude the removal of the instrument air compressor, including its foundston, intercooler, aftercooler, separator, air receiver, prefdter, and afterfitter; and the installation of a new Atlas Copco ZR3-65 compressor, air receiver tank and a profilter/aierfilter skid. A new flow rneter will be installed downstream of the aflerfiltere outlet. The existing air dryer outlet check valve (EPN 3 4799-1769) wdl be replaced with a new check valve which will not be bored it also provides for associated electncal and rnochanical piping modificatons. The new Atlas Copco compressor is a two stage, oil free, rotary screw type compressor and includes the required aftercooler,-
separator and inlet fdters built into the component skid. The existing equipment configuration will be rearranged to accommodate the new compressor and associated equipment.
Result.
This evaluaton determined that an unrevewed safety question did not entst -
Safety Evaluatnn Number, 1997 03 167 Type of Safety Evaluaten FSAR Chaage Evaluation Reference Number: DFL 97 013 Title.
Main Steam Flow Restrictor Differential Pressure Measurements Desenpton The proposed change is to delets the requirement to penodically repeat and compare the main steam flow restrictor differential pressure measurements. This requirement is being deleted because it has been determined that based on the matenal of the restrictors and Industry exponence, that these measurements are not required. This change will have no effect on the main steam line flow restnctors performance.
Result:
This evaluston determined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist, Safety Evaluaten Number: 1997-03-168 Type of Safety Evaluatoir
- Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Number: P12 3%284
Title:
LPCI Drywell Spray isolaten Valve Descripton: T0is exempt change wdlincrease the thrust of the existing SMB O actuator on the LPCI drywell spray isolaton valve (31501 288). This is accomplished by increasing the actuater g
geanng ratio. The Overall Actuator Ratio (OAR) willincrease from 54 00 to 78 81 by instCing a larger motor pinion and worm shaft gear sub-assembly. The 9 eat change was selected using Limitorque Corporation Gate and Globe Valve Selechon Procedure dated 5 2179.
. This Safety Evaluaten was performed in 1995, but is being added to the data base for traceability, Result:
This evaluation determined that an unroviewed safety queston dd not exist 8 of 16
l l
)
10 CFR 50.59 Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Sum _ mary Rep _ ort Safety Evaluation Number. 1997-0316g Type of Safety Evaluaton-Exempt Change Fvalustson Reference Number. P12 3 93-253 Title.
Core Spray Test Vane Moe Description This Exempt Plant Change will modify the flow Control characteristics of the existing motor operated core spray full flow test valve, MO 3-1402-4A, by ir, stalling an anti-cavitation
- drag' trim. This new antscavitation inm is desgned to control cavitation in high velocity flow apphcatons by dividing the fluid flow into multiple flow paths The existing valve, as a result of hgh flow passing through it, is experoncing $gnificant cavitation The cavitation is causing excessive vibration which could lead to internal physical damage to the valve and downstream piping Based on the design Confguration of the antscavitation trim, the modification consists of modifying the intemal valve seat This will cause a reduction 6n the intemal orifice diameter of the valve in addition, a new stem, plug, bonnet, and yolte will be installed The design review meeting had identifed that a fiow rate of 4500 gpm through the extsting piping configuration would produce a flow velocity of approximately 29 fVs which is hgher than standard industry desgn practice of 12 to 15 fVs. Wh6te the anti-cavitation will ehminate the noise and vibration associated with cavitaten, it will not eliminate the rioise and vibration associated with this high fluid velocity, To correct this problem, the existing 8" kne should be replaced by a 10" hne. Cost estimates were developed and vanous options were consdered it was decded thet optons to completely remove all system induced noise and vibration were hot cost effective.
This safety evaluaton was performed in 1995, Lut is being added to the data base for traceabihty Result This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety queston did not exist Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-03-170 Type of Safety Evaluaton Exempt Change Evaluston Reference Number; P12 3 93-254 Title Core Spray Test Valve Mod
==
Description:==
This Exempt Plant Change will modify the flow control charactenstics of the existing motor operated core spray full flow test valve, MO-3-1402-40, by instalhng an anti-cavitaten
- drag" inm. This new anti-cavitation inm is desgned to control cavi'ation in high velocity flow apphcations by divding the flud flow into multiple flow paths The existing vane, as a result of high flow passing through it, is expenencing significant cavitation The cavitation is causing excessive vibration which could lead to internal physical damage to the valve and downstream piping Based on the desgn confguration of the anti-cavitaten inm, the modification consists of modifyng the internat valve seat, This will cause a reduction in the intemal onfice diameter of the valve in addition, a new stem, plug, bonnet, and yoite will be installed The desgn review meeting had identifed that a flow rate of 4500 gpm through the existing piping confguraton would produce a flow velocity of approximately 29 fUs which is higher than standard industry desgn practice of 12 to 15 fUs While the antscavitation will eliminate the noise and vibration associated with cavitation, it will not ehminate the noise and vibration associated with this hgh fluid velocity. To correct this problem, the existing 8" kne should be replaced by a 10" kne. Cost estimato were developed and vanous options were consdered it was decded that optons to completely remove all system induced noise and vibration were not cost effective, This safety evaluation was performed in 1995. but is being added to the data base for traceabihty.
Result.
This evaluation determined that an unrevewed safety question did not exist 9 of 16 l
10 CFR 50.59 Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-03-172 Type of Safety Evaluabon:
FSAR Change Evaluation Reference Number; DFL 97 074
Title:
UFSAR Change for Circ Water Samplirt Descripton: Change the UFSAR from stating that circulating water is monitored, sampled, and how it is sampled Now UFSAR refers to the Offsite Dose Calculaten Manual (ODCM) for monitoring and samphng requirements.
Result.
This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety questan did not exist.
Safety Evaluat6on Number; 1997 03 173 Type of Safety Evaluation-FSAR Change Evaluation Reference Number: OFL 96-026
Title:
Rod Block Monitor
- Desenpton= Techncal change of UFSAR secten 7.61.5 3 2, Paragraph 7.6 24, and Figure 7.617. Item (C) of 7.6-24 is not correct. A
- Channel reading below reference APRM downscale tnp" will NOT gNo a rod block, however, a RBM downscale will The UFSAR will be changed to reflect this.
Result.
This evalushon determined that an unreviewed safety questen did not exist.
Safety Evaluaton Number: 1997 03 174 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Modification Evaluation Reference Number; M12 2-95-003
Title:
Replace U2 24/48 VDC Batteries & Chargers Desenpton The subject modification will replace the aging Unit 2 24/48 VDC batteries and battery chargers with commercial grade equipment. The modifcaten will also re power Analog Trip System (ATS) panel 2202 73A from 125 VDC Bus 2A-1. The existing power feed to the lower inp unit on panel 2202 73A is from 24 VOC Bus 2A. In order to supply 24 VDC for the ATS loads a safety related DC to DC converter will be installed in panel 2202 73A and will be powered frorn 125 VDC Bus 2A 1 The DC to DC converter will supply a regulated 24 VDC output for ATS panelloads.
Result.
A new Technical Specifcaten, revision, or other License Amendment is required.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-03-178 Type of Safety Fvaluation:
Modifcation Evaluaten Reference Number: M12197 001 A
Title:
AEER New Ventilaton System Desenpton The activty' associated with this evaluation is for the installation af Design Change Partial Modifcation M12 0-97-001A. This modifcation has been initiated to add additonal cooling capability to the Auxiliary Ehetncal Equipment Room (AEER) and Auxihary Computer Room (ACR) ventilation system by instalhng a new A/C unit. This unit will provide the normal required cooling for the nCR as weit as the AEER but will not be taken credit for in the event of a design bases accident Upon completon of the installaton, the operation of the new A/C system will be placed on hold until the AEER Icensing issue and separation.'f the ACR has been resolved.
This evaluation addresses the installation of the modification only and will not address the operation of the design change. This will be performed at a later date. Completion of instattation (i e., final wiring bnd ducting requirernents) and operational acceptance will te required to complete the modifcation.
Result-This evaluaten determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
10 of 16
. _ = -
s
[
Quarter: 1997-03 Safety Evaluation Sum _maty Report Safety Esaluation Number-1997-03-179 Type of Safety Evaluation:
FSAR Change Evciustion Refe~k.e Number: DFL 97-079
Title:
Revise 2/3 Fuel Pool Chemistry Desenption Remnve specific chemistry values for spent fuel pool wat r from the UFSAR (page 9.135).
Replace values with statement hat chemistry is controlled in accordance with Dresden i
J Chemistry Procedures.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed cafety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03-180 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluatson Reference Number: E12 3-95-224
Title:
MOV 3-205-24
==
Description:==
The thrust outpd of the existing SMB-000-5 actuator will be increased by increasing the actuator Over Ak gear Ratio (OAR) from 68.0 to 82 0. The new OAR was selected using Limiturque Corporation Gate and Globe Valve Selection Procedure dated 5-2179. The gear change will be installed per DEP 0040 09 f.nd DMP 0040-16.
Thermal Over'and OCs) Heater The existing TOL is being replaced with a TOL that will allow more current pnor to tripping.
Motor Pinion Key Replacement Due to e concern with high torque motors bending and ureaking weak motor-pirQn keys, a i
new naspinion key, made of stronger AISI 4140 matenal, will be used vhen reinstalling tae notor.
Testing and Acceptance Criteria The testing and acceptance criteria indicated in the original Exempt Change Approval letter are revised oue to new EWCS ruquirements.
Pressure Locking issue A new 21/2" Anchor /Darhng double disk gate valve was used to replace the leaking head spray conta:nment isolation valve during the last refueling outage. This double disk gate a-valve was procured with a 1/4' ho!e dnlied in one of the disks. The disks were installed such that the reactor side had the disk with the hole in it. This was done to eiiminate the potential for pressure locking This addendum includes a revised 10 CFR 50 59 which addresses the pressure locking concem. The disk downstream of the reactor will pros!Je for Containment isolation within the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix J.
MOV Stroke 7 me The new guar ratio will increase the MOV strcke tee from approximately 39 seconds to approximately ?61 seconds. The 3-205-24 MOV is a Group 11 pnmary containment isolation valve. The existing stroke time requirements as Ce'.ned in the DATR Table 3/418.2 is 45 seconds. An analysis was performed to show that a gu;lotine pipe break would not result in a release that would uncover the core or result in offsite releases in excess of 10 CFR 100 limits with a closure time of 60 seconds. This was evaluated and documented in the Apnl 13, 1995 letter CHRON No. 0307985 which is attached to the Exempt Plant Change Approval Addendum letter, Result.
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safet/ quest % dxi not exist.
11 of 16
o 4
9 i
Quarter: 1997-03 I
Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03-181 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Modification Evaluation Reference Number
- M12-3-88-067
Title:
Hydrogen Add. tion System for Unit 3
==
Description:==
This modification installs a hydrogen addtion system (HAS) for Dresden Unit 3. The HAS is designed to mitigate the intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) conditions in the reactor coolant piping and pressure vessel intemals due to dissolved oxygen concentration in the reactor coolant. This will be accomplished by injecting gaseous hydrogen into the condensate / feodwater to shift the stoichiometnc oxygen concentration below 20 ppb, This coupled with high quality water chemistry will reduce the electruchemical corrosion potential (ECP) An oxygen injection system is also being added to the Unit 3 Off-Gas system to combine with the residual hydrogen carried over from the steam. Oxygen will be injected downstream of the booster steam air ejector (SJAE) at a rate equal to one-half of the hydrogen injection rate.
Result:
A revision to an existing Technical Specification is required.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03 182 Type of Safety Evaluadon:
Tumporay Alsaraton Evaluation Reference Nu nber: 11-23-97
Title:
Unit 2/3 Turbine Pipeway East and West Sde Desenption' In response to NRC IE Notice 92-52,"Bamers and Seals between Mild and Harsh Environment
- Comed identified the subject deors as a boundary between harsh and mild environments following design basis accidents (DBA) at Dresden Station. The doors have to withstand a preasure of 16.5 psia or 1.0 psi (16 5-14.7 = 1.8) due to a postulated Main Steam Line Break (MSLB)inside the rooms. If the door is blown open, some equipment outside the room may expenence harsh environments. Installation of angle bars will ensures that the door will withstand the pressure following a DBA.
Result-This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question dio not exist.
i Safety Evaluation Number-1997-03-184 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Procedure Evaluation Reference Nur9ber: SPI 97-08-009
Title:
Unit 1 Fuel Cleaning Pnor to Phase il Fuel Charactenzation Desenption: This Special Procedure will perform cleaning and debns removal on Unit 1 spent fuel stored in the Unit 1 Fuel Storage Pool pnor to Phase il Fuelinspection. No fuel will be moved or grappled by this Special Piccedure The following activites will be included:
- 1. Removal of debris from appro.ima'aly 1C0 fuel assembles, as identifed by Seimens.
- 2. Additionai top plate vacuuming of, Jronmately 26 fuel assemblies, as recommended by
- Seimens.
- 3. Velocity flushing of approximately 40 channeled fuel assemblies.
5 Velocity flushing will reduce the clouding efact on the pool water visibility resulting from any disturbances of the fuel assembly with the extensive corrosion products on the fuel rods and channel surfaces presently found.
Result.
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
12 of 16
t..
l
.10 CFR 50.59 Quarter: 19@03 Safety Evaluation Summary Report S ! sty Evaluation Number: 1997-03 189 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Tempctay Alteration Evaluation Reference Number 111 13-97
Title:
3A Reactor Recire Pu p Temperature Monitonng System
^
Desenption: Reprogram W Reacto. Recite Temperature Recorder, TR 3-026219A. to bypass the alarm function for the 3A Recire Pump Outer Seal Cooler RBCCW Outlet, TE 3-0262-13A, and allow 3A Recire Pp Temp Hi Annunciator 403-4 E 5 to monitor and alarm for the working temperatere indications on the 3A motor.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03 190 1ype of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Number. E12 2-95-230
Title:
Add Two Test Valves Desenption: The proposed modification invoNes 6dding two 1/2dnch globe valves (test vanes) in series and piping with a threaded pipe cap to the vane 21501 19A. The added test vanes will be utilizeo to check the suling capability of the isolation outboard face of the valve 21501 19A by provding a vent through the bonnet and also a means to pressunze the bonnet area to test the packing This will allow testing of the above mentioned valve to meet the requirements of 1C CFR 50 Appendix J Result:
This evaluation determined that en unreviewed safety question dd not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number. 1997-03-191 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Changa -
Evaluat:on Reference Number: E12-2-95-231
Title:
Add Two Test Valves
%senption-The proposed modsfication invoNes aoding two 1/2-inch globe vanes (test vanes) in series and piping with a threaded pipe cap to the valve 2-1501 198. The added test valves will be utilized to check the sealing capability of the isolation outboard face of the vane 21501 19B by providing a vent through the bonnet and also a means to preasunze the bonnet area to t
test the packing. This will allow testing of the atove mentioned valve to rPeed the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix J.
1 Result.
This evaluation deteiinined that an unreviewed safety question dd not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-03-194 Type of Safety Evaluation:
FSAR Change Evaluation Reference Number: DFL 97-081
Title:
UFSAR Change, Section 13.6 Secunty Desenption: UFSAR 13 6 revised to reflect change in Secunty Plan due to change in organization, titles
- and structure.
Result.
This evaluation determined that sa unreviewed safety qtW*on d4 not exist.
13 of 16
,10 CFR 50.59 -
Quarter: 1997-03 l
Safety Evaluation Suminary_ Report i
Safety Evaluation Number; 1997-03-197 Type of Safety Evaluaton:
Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Number: E121-97-201
Title:
Unit 14kV Buses 11 and 12 Descripton-The modification adds a second LOR locknut relay to Unit 14kV bus 11 Compartn.ents 1101 and 1107.
Result:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03-198 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Temporay Afteration Evaluation Reference Numbec 111-36-96
Title:
Faciktate Breaker Work in Cubicle 14 at Bus 33-1 Desenption: Jumper contact 1 1T from auxikary contact at Cubicle 14 at Bus 33-1, This contact is in the 2/3 DG output to Bus 231 permissive circuit. The jumper will simulate that Bkr 152-3333 is open and thus allow the 20 DG to close onto Bus 231 when required The reason for the change is EMD needs to hft this contact to facihtate breaker work in Cubicle 14 at Bus 33-1.
Result:
This evr*iation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number 1997-03 199 Type of Safety Evaluation:
FSAR Change Evaluation Reference Number DFL 96-116 Title.
P12-2 p3-275 & P12-3-93-232
==
Description:==
Since Dresden no longer regenerates condensate deminerahzer resin with acid and caustic, it was determined to utihze the space for more economict.) reasons Therefore, it was decirted to remove the acid and caustic equipment associated with condensate demanera.cer resin regeneration for Units 2 and 3.
Result!
This evaluation determined that an un eviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Numbet 1997-03-200 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exeiapt Change Evaluation Reference Number E12-2-97 210
Title:
Drywell Equipment Drain Sump Pump Discharge Line Rehef Valve Desenpton: The proposed change is to install a rehef valve (RV 2-2099-1002)in the drywell equipment drain sump discharge hne (2 2005-3*-LX)insde Pnmary Containment. The relief vatve provides over pressure protection against post accident thermally induced pressunzation (NRC GL 96-06) for the safety related piping at containment penetration X 118. Therefore, the safety-releted boundary of line 2 2005-3*-LX at containment penetration X 118 is extended from tht, drywell, cetratinn to include the new rehef valve RV 2-2099-1002 and the flow path leading to t' + rdiefi alve In order to prevent inadvertent rehef valve opening the set pressure is set 50, f ier (set pressure is 200 psid) than the Drywell Equiptront Drain System design pressure of 150 psig. The design pressure of the piping at containment penetration X 118 is also increased to 230 psig.
Resuit:
This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
14 of 16
.10 CFR 50.59 -
Quarter: 1997-03 l
Safety Evaluation Summary Report Safety Evaluation Number 1997-03-201 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluaton Reference Number: E12-2 97-209 Title.
Drywell Fooi Drain Surnp Pump Discharge Line Relef Valve Descripton-The preposed change is to install a rehef valve (RV 2 2099-1001) in the drywell floor drain sump discharge Trie (2-20013"-LX)inside Pnmary Containment. The rehef valve provides over pressure protection against post accident thermal!y induced pressurt2ation (NRC GL 96-
- 06) for the safety related piping at containment penetration X 117. Therefore. the safety-related boundary of kne 2-20013*-LX at containment penetration X-117 is extended from the drywell penetration to include the new relief valse RV 2-2099-1001 and the flow path leading to the relef valve. In order to prevent snadvertent relief valve opening, the set pressure is set 50 ps g higher (set pressure is 200 psid) than the Drywell Floor Drain System design pressure of 150 psg The design pressure of the piping at containment penetration X 117 is also increased to 230 psig Result.
This evaluaton determined that an unreviewed safety que stion did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997 03 202 Type of Safety Evaluation-Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Number: E12 2-97-214
Title:
RBCCW Dryweli Retum Line Rehef Valves Desenpton: The proposed change is to install two rehef valves in the drywell on the RBCCW System to provide over pressure protecton against post accident thermally induced pressunzation (NRC GL 96-06) for the s. ety related piping at penetrations X 123 and X-124 One relef vatve (RV 2-3799-277) will be installed on the containment penetration piping I
between RBCCW return penetration X 124 and its inboard containment isolation valve 2-3706. Rehef valve RV 2 3799-277 provides ever pressure for the safety related piping at penetration X 124 The other relef valve (RV 2-3799-276) will be installed upstream of the RBCCW inboard containment isolation valve 2-3706 at penetration X-124 and at provides over pressure for the safety related penetation piping at penetrauon X 123 and the non-Safety related closed piping loop inside drywell. The safety related boundary at the inboard isolaton valve 2 3706 & extended from the valve 2 3706 to include the rehef valve RV 2 3799-276 in order to prevent inadvertent rehef valve opening, the set pressure is set 50 psg higher (set pressure is 200 psid) than the RBCCW design pressure of 150 psig. The design pressure of the safety related RBCCW piping at containment penetrations X-123 and X-124 and the non-safety related RBCCW piping inside drywell will be increased to 230 psg Result:
This evaluation detemuned that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
Safety Evaluation Number: 1997-03-203 Type of Safety Evaluation:
Exempt Change Evaluation Reference Number: E12146-200 Title-Unit 1 125VDC and 480VAC Distnbution Systems Desenption. Determination of remaining electncalloads not required for SAFSTOR of Unit 1. These loads have been recommended for permanent de-energization as part of the resolution of Dresden Unit 1 Electncal Systems Review, Revision 0 discrepancy resolution errort (Reference Attachment to Duke Engineering Lener B/P 591 13561. Dated June 10,1997). This EPC also makes several"for record
- changes to design drawings to incorporate as built condtons as identifed dunng the discrepancy resolution effort.
Result This evaluation determined that an unreviewed safwry quest on did not exist.
15 of 16
{
i l
o
.10 CFR 50.59 Quarter: 1997-03
' Safety Evaluation Summary Report End of Repoit c
i 16 of 16
__