ML20217F723

10CRF50.59 Rept for Period Jan 1996-Dec 1997

ML20217F723
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	12/31/1997
From:	Langenbach J GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
1920-98-20135, NUDOCS 9804280251
Download: ML20217F723 (71)

Text

e l GPU Nuclear,Inc.

( Route 441 South NUCLEAR Post Office Box 480 Middletown. PA 17057 0480 Te1717-944-7621 April 17,1998 1920-98-20135 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit I (TMI-1)

Operating License No. DPR-50 Docket No. 50-289 10 CFR 50.59 Report for 1996 and 1997 l In accordance with ihe requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, enclosed is the TMI-l 50.59 Repon for the period from January 1996 through December 1997. It contains briefdescriptions of program and procedure changes, tests, experiments, permanent and temporary modifications, and includes a summary of the findings of the respective safety evaluations for each item identified.

Sincerely,

/ 16h' ames W. Langenbac j Vice President & Director, TMl I WGH Attachment cc: Administrator, Region I - Hubert J. Miller TMI-l Senior Project Manager - Timothy G. Colburn g g i TMI Senior Resident Inspector - Wayne L. Schmidt File 98055 g b' & -

bR DO K O 289 R PDR 1

]

1920-9k-20135 s A nadunent!

Page 1 of 73 Changes completed from January 1996 through December 1997 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 I. Experiments and Tests Test / Experiment: Titanium Injection Description of Test /Experimeal: A test was designed and implemented sia installation of temporary equipment to evaluate the injection of titanium into the secondary system as a part of the Secondary Chemistry Control Program.

The purpose of the experiment was to determine if titanium, injected through a continuous feed into the final feedwater for a period of 60 to 90 days prior to shutdown, would provide conosion inhibition to steam generator (SG) materials. The focus was on tubing materials with an intent to protect tubes from intergranular stress corrosion cracking. Tube samples removed for in-service inspection will be anal >7ed to determine if the titanium fonned the desired mixed oxide on the tube OD, Safety Evaluation Summary: A safety evaluation concluded that the experiment did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahiated and did not redum the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unrevicued safety question was found to exist.

. eeee******************e *******************************eeee*****************

Ipsl: In-situ Pressure Test of OTSG Tubes (FTI-1246841 A) I Description of Test: The subject test was performed on a sample of TM1-1 OTSG tubes to satisfy a commitment to the NRC. The test was conducted in accordance with a Framatome Technologies Inc. procedure over full length, ,

partial length or localized tube sections. The test was intended to provide assurance that the structural integrity of degraded OTSG tubes is not compromised and that they are capable of withstanding tube loads that might be imposed by a postulated design basis accident with no primary-to-secondary leakage. The test will also aid in better understanding the Inter Diameter Inter-Granular Attack degradation mechanism. The test does not modify the existing tube configuration nor change the performance, operation, component function and design basis of the OTSG.

Safety Evaluation Summary: A safety evaluation concluded that the test did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

........................... e+ ................................. *********** .

11. Document and Procedure Changes Docum.gnl: Cycle !I Reload Design / Redesign pgscription of Chance: The Cycle 1I reload design u hich provided the Cycle 11 core design operating limits and plant operation with four Westinghouse lead test assemblies and with the first use of B&W advanced Mk B10 fuel assemblics was implemented. Involved in the reload design was the replacement of certain degraded or damaged fuel with fresh or previously discharged assemblics or assemblics repaired by replacing damaged fuel rods with stainless steel dummy rods. Base cycle design operating limits were identified for less than 75110 and for greater than 75 efTective full power days (EFPD) to the end of cycle. Maximum cycle length, due to the actual capacity factor exceeding the design capacity factor, was analyzed to a maximum of 690 EFPD.

Safety Evaluation Summary: A safety evaluation reviewed the Cycle 1I reload design as described above and included the acceptability of cy cle extension (including the effects of end cf cy cle power stretch maneuvers) and core operating limits for cycle extension and concluded that the core design changes did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously

I 1920-98-20135 s

A udunent1 8

Ptge 2 of 73 evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

eve ***************ee...... ** ......e***e .... ***eseeeeeeeeeee......e**e....

Documen_1: Cycle 12 Reload Design Dfscription of Changg: The Cycle 12 reload design which provided the Cycle 12 core design, operating limits, operating limits and plant operation with four Westinghouse lead test assemblics and continued use of B&W advanced Mk B10 fuel assemblies was implemented. Maximum cycle length, was analyzed to a maximum of 663 115 EFPD at a rated power level of 2568 MWt.

Sitfety Elaluation Summary: A safety evaluation reviewed the Cycle 12 reload design, as described above, concluded that the core design changes did not im olve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • e,*************************** e***********************ee*************

Document: Operational Quality Assurance Plan, Revision 10 Description of Chance: Revision 10 of the subject document involved changes which combined the Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (L&RA) and Nuclear Safety Assessment (NSA) departments into a single department and expanded the responsibilitics for the position of Director Nuclear Safety Assessment. The additional responsibilitics concern L&RA. An evaluation concluded that the change did not constitute a reduction in commitment from the program description previously accepted by the NRC.

Safety EvaluatignAmmary: A safety evaluation concluded that the administrative change to the plan did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malftmetion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

....e***ee******************esee**********************************************

Procedure: 6610-ADM-1201.02 Awareness Reporting (1-RC-96-0068)

Description of Chanic: The procedure was revised to climinate deficiency corrective action activities while maintaining opportunity to submit observations of deviation from good radiological practices (which are not deficiencies). Deficiency corrective action activitics were incorporated in procedure AP 1080, the Corrective Action Program along with all other deficiency reporting processes that existed individually within GPU Nuclear.

Safety Evahiation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the l possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not l reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was I

found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • ee.... **************** .. *********eee********ee..... *************

Procedure: AP 100lK Biennial Procedure Review (1-MD-96-0003)

Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to additional flexibility in cases for which a biennial resiew identifies changes to be made to a procedure. The change would eliminate the need to initiate an immediate PCR for trivial changes to a procedure. Instruction was provided as to when an immediate PCR is considered necessary.

1920-98-20135

• A ustawrdI Pge 3 of 73 This change allows holding trivial changes which do not affect the perfonnance of the procedure for incorporation at a later time.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

see ***ee................. e*****e......... ****** .................. ***esee.

Procedurg: AP 1002 Rules for the Protection of Employees Working on Electrical and Mechanical Apparatus (1-MD-97 0004)

Description of Chanec: The procedure was resised to provide directions for working on 4160 volt switchgear when breakers that are not fully racked in. The change allows testing of the breakers in the test position until such time as equipment is fabricated to allow breakers to be scismically secured during test activities. The operations involved in the activity are similar to load movements that occur as a part of nonnal operations. It was determined that the procedure would be invoked a maximum of ten times before the scismic "tiedowns" would be available.

Safety Evaluation Summa _n: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment impoitant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

..... .ee***** e****************************************************** ......

Procedure: AP 1038 Administrative Controls for the Fire Protection Program (1-EG-96-0024)

Description of Chanec: The procedure was revised to reduce the fr quency for the performance of visual inspection and functional testing of the plant's heat acmated detectors (HADs) on the 338' elevation of the Control Building. The change reduced the functional test Sequency from every six months to annually based upon a revision to the National Fire Alann Code and a detennination ofits applicability in this situation. Excessive testing of the simple and reliable components unnecessarily challenges safe plant operation and personnel safety due to possible CO2 actuation and necessary ventilation and fire damper trips during testing.

Safety Evaluation Summan: The safety evaluation perfonned to review the change concluded that the program revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

........ .....e**e... ********e ************ee..... ****... ***ee ****e ******

Procedure: AP-1038 Administrative Controls- Fire Protection (1-EG-97-0008) l Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to 1) identify organizational changes resulting from the l

Engineering Division reorganization, 2) provide direction to implement NMIJNFPA based perfonnance frequencies for inspection of 2" deluge and sprinkler systems and inventory checks, 3) add an administrative limiting condition of operation (LCO) on the fire brigade van to support the climination of redundant equipment storage at the station's hydrant locations,4) combine the station visual and functional fire damper tests into one procedure,5) delete special " dry pipe" system checks following conversion of the piping to a " wet pipe" system,6) delete the 18 month preventive maintenance tasks on fire service pump relief valves and 7) miscellaneous administrative changes.

I920-98-2013 $

. A nochment!

• Pcge 4 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to rniew the change concluded that the program revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defimed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

...........e********* .. ********************e******* ...e*********** ....eese r EP-006 Calculations, Resisions 3 through 5 Efocedgrg:

Description of Chances: Resisions to the procedure included: addressing the scope / applicability, documentation of computer calculations, documentation of revisions and clarification of requirements for use of standard calculation methods and alternate documentation, calculations outside OQA Plan scope, verification requirements and numerous minor changes.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the procedure change did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety pretiously evahtated and docs not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • ......................e****** ................... **ee.. ** e**ee...

Procedure: EP-007 Computer Program Control Description of Changg: In response to Quality Deficiency Repon (QDR) 971012, the subject procedure, which implements the QA program requirements for control of computer software, had an independent safety review performed. The review applied to revisions 0 through 5.

Sifety Evaluation Summa 5 The review determined that the procedure does not allow for any changes to the plant without going through the appropriate review process. The safety evaluation concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • . ***** .................e*** .. ** ........... ******* ...................

Procedure: EP-011 Methodology for Preparing the Quality Classification List Description of Chance: Procedure revisions were made to enhance the programmatic controls for the classification process and provide detailed documentation for thejustification of classification decisions. The controls imposed by the procedure assure that the appropriate Quality requirements are applied to each item.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The changes to the procedure proside programmatic controls to implement the requirements of the GPU Nuclear OQA Plan and the PDMS QA Plans for the quality classification ofitems. These classifications provide the basis for application of the applicable QA requirements which will provide reasonable assurance that the items will perform their intended safety function. The safety evahiation concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

l

1920-98 20135 s A nuhmenti e Page 5 of 73 e.............. **e ee...................................e*** ................

Procedure: ES-002 Instrument Error Calculation and Setpoint Determination Description of Chance: The procedure / standard describes the method for establishing setpoints for instrumentation channels. Setpoints are intended to initiate corrective or protective action in a time y manner.

The standard addresses the factors that influence the accuracy of the instruments initiating the setpoint function.

Resision 4 to the procedure / standard clarified the calibration for static pressure errors.

f Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an S.Asty increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

...... e**************ee.............e********ee... ********* eses......... ***

Procedure: ES-024 Overload Heater Selection for Electrical Motors Description of Chance: The procedure / standard describes the method for selection of heater elements for thermal overload relays used for overload protection for motors rated 480 volts and below. The procedure was resised to reflect the new engineering division.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an i accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • e******** e **** e************************************************

Erocedure: N 1802 Plant Chemistry Responsibilities (10S-96-0466)

Description of Chaneq: The procedure was revised to reflect consolidations in technical support functions which previously supported the chemistry program. The Engineering Division Chemistry & Materials Director will provide continued support to develop, implement changes and ensure compliance with the plant chemistry program.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defmed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ***********e e**********************

Procedure: OP 1102-1 Plant Heatup to $25'F (1-05-96-0202)

Description of Chance: The procedure revision removed the self-imposed requirement to set the high flux trip setpoint to a maximum of 62.25% of full power (FP) when operating at or below 47%. The requirement was instituted during Cycle 10 as a part of the response to slow control rod (CRD) drop times. The 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint was found to be overly conservative during a later evaluation and was determined to be unnecessary.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the deletion of the 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the pessibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety

1920-98 20135 A tiuhment1 't Pcge 6 of 73 l not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

I No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

l Procedure: OP 1102-2 Plant Startup (1-0S-96-0203) l Dsgript_i_gn of Chan.gg: The procedure resision removed the self-imposed requirement to set the high flux trip

i setpoint to a maximum of 62.25% of full power (FP) when operat ng at or below 47%. The requirement was instituted during Cycle 10 as a part of the response to slow control rod (CRD) drop times. The 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint was found to be overly conservative during a later evaluation and was determined to be unnecessary.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the deletion of the 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safet); did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l Procedure: OP 1102-10 Plant Shutdown (1-0S-96-0204) l Descrintion of Chan_ge: The procedure revision removed the self-imposed requirement to set the high flux trip l setpoint to a maximum of 62.25% of full power (FP) w hen operating at or below 47%. The requirement was instituted during Cycle 10 as a part of the response to slow control rod (CRD) drop times. The 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint was found to be overly conservative during a later evaluation and was determined to be unnecessary.

l Safety Evahiation Summam The safety evaluation performed to resiew the deletion of the 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involvu decrease l

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety l not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

............................v.........................**......................

Procedure: OP 1103-4 Soluble Poison Concentration Control (1-0S-96-0384)

Descrintion of Chanec: The procedure was revised to modify the resin load and thereby extend the lithium removal capacity of the deborating demineralizer. The activity was necessitated by the potentially adverse radiological conditions in the Auxiliary Building and a reduced ability to control RCS boron and lithium concentrations during a two year fuel cycle. Without the change, a mid-cycle change out of one of the non-lithiated demineralizers would be necessary. Boron concentration in the RCS will not be affected by the use of cation resin but could be affected by the presence of demineralized water in the demineralizer during initial operation. The cation resin will be removed from the demineralizer prior to the start of deboration activities and therefor have no affect upon them.

Safety Evaluation Summam The safety evaluation perfonned to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

.*.***....*.****.*.**e..*.*..**.*.*...*********...**.*..**.*.********.********

1920-98-20135

. A uachment1 e

Page 7 of 73 Procedure: OP 1104 2 Makeup & Purification System (1-0S-96-0293) p_gscription of Chance: The procedure was rnised to proside guidance for bypassing the letdown pre-filters (MU-F-2A/B) and allow the debris presiously deposited on the pre-filters to be collected by the makeup demineralizers.

The change reflects actions taken under STP-1 96-0016 w hich found no adverse afTect on resin performance or its waste disposal classification, the downstream filter life or the reactor coolant pumps' seal perfonnance. Benefits of the change were found to be a significant reduction in the number of makeup system filters used, dose expended in filter change outs and radwaste disposal costs.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ese ****************** e****** .e** **.. **********ese**** **

Procedurs: OP 1104-2 Makeup and Purification System (1-OS-97-0393)

Description of Chance: The procedure change, allowing the Makeup pump suction cross connect valves to remain OPEN, was made to reduce the probability of the failure of a pump previously isolated from the makeup ik and improve the defense in depth approach to mitigation of an accident. Operation with a common suction L &r has all makeup pumps lined up to a suction source at all times. MU-PIC suction piping remains full and vented at all times thus eliminating the probable failure of MU-P-lC ifit were inadvertently staned. All three pumps are protected against failure if the BWST suction valve (MU-V-14B) failed to OPEN when ES operation is required.

The impact of operation with the pump suction cross connect valves OPEN was evaluated using PRA methodology and it was determined that core damage frequency was lower with the modified configuration. The potential to over pressurize the makeup suction piping due to leakage through the recirculation line check valves or other leakage paths on the pump discharge side was evaluated. Any back flow through an idle pump will flow to the operating pump without any significant pressure increase on the pump suction.

Safety Evaluation Summan: The safety evaluation perfonned to rniew the changes concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not irwolve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ***********************************************************

Procedure: OP 1104-2 Makeup and Purification System (1-OS-96-0574) pescrintion of Chance: The procedure was revised to establish a preferred power source to IM 125 VDC distribution panel to ensure that a 125VDC system failure would not prevent the high pressure injection (HPI) components from providing the minimum required HPI flow. By maintaining the IM power source as described by the change, the loss of DC will efTect only one HPI train and the other train remains fully functional and capable to provide the required ECCS flow.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the l possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not I reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee***************e************************************

1

1920 3 8-20135 A ttadunentI Page 0 of 73 Emggs!m g: OP 1104-6 Spent Fuel Cooling System (1-0S-96-0196)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to include a section which provided steps to initiate supplemental spent fuel cooling. The purpose of this action was to provide better reliability for cooling the spent fuel with the plant in a shutdown condition.

Safety Evahiation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • .......... *** e************ .................... ******* ... ** ee....

Procedure: OP 1104-11 Nuclear Senice Closed Cooling Water System (1-OS-96-0600)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to permit repair of or change out of the relief valve on the Nuclear Scnice Closed Cooling Water surge tank: NS-V47. With the work was in progress, the tank was at atmospheric pressure instead of the nonnal operating tank pressure of 38 psig. This had no effect on the system or system's pumps operability. The procedure incorporated PRG stipulated plant conditions for performance of the maintenance during normal plant operation.

Safety Evahiation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability oc consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

see *************** **ese ***************eeeeeeeee. **************************

Procedure: OP 1104-19 Control Building Vent System (1-OS-96-0267)

Description of Chance: The procedure revision was required to include I&C shop heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment to the control building equipment list as a result of moving the shop to its new location.

The system operates in automatic under the control of the automatic temperature control system procedural direction addressing shutdown of the !&C shop portion was incorporated in the procedure. j i

Safety Evahiation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure I I

revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • e.e**********************essee***********ee*************e ******* ****

Procedure: OP 1104-23 Cycle Makeup Demineralizer (1-OS-96-0565)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to add Appendix C which provides directions for connection to the plant water systems, operation and control of the production of makeup water from the vendor trailer facility.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction ot equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

I 1920-98 20135 j A ttachment t Page 9 of 73 I

i i

• • • ese*** e**************e ee**ee****e**** *****ee.***ee**e .*****ese**. *****

Procedure: OP 1104-28T Waste Oil Transfer, Recirculation and Storage System (1-0S-97-0213)

Description of Change: The procedure was resised to incorporate a section which provided direction for the l transfer of waste oil to the Waste Oil Storage Tank (WDL-T-17) where no prior direction was available. 1 Eafety Evaluation Summ.aly: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunctinn of equipment l important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the j possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not ,

reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e.*e****e*************************ee********

Procedure: OP 1104-291 Reactor Coolant Drain Tank Transfers (1-97 0027 and 0135)

Descrintion of Chance: The procedure was revised to establish a recovery pathway for reactor coolant system  !

losses from the reactor coolant pump suction drain lines , the OTSG bottom end bell drains and the Pressurizer I surge tank line to the Reactor Coolant drain Tank. l l

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment l

important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the l possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not j

reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was l

found to exist. l

• • e********************e****************e*************e************e******e***

Procedure: OP 1104-29Q Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator (1-0S-96-0436)

Description of Chance: The procedure change made a valve position change which was necessitated by the completion of CCR 96-032. The CCR removed the miscellaneous waste evaporator (MWE) rupture disc which allowed venting the MWE feed tank to the Auxiliary Building sump. WDL-V-227 was closed by the procedure revision to prevent venting the feed tank to the vent header. Any off gassing occurring from the sump will be l filtered by the AB/ Fuel Handling Building ventilation system.

i Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment

! important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the i

i possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not l reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • v***************************

Procedure: OP 1104-29Q Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator (1-97-0085) l Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to incorporate a section providing guidance for performing chemical cleaning of the evaporator.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure  ;

resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment j impoitant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the '

possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135

. A ttactrnenti

. Page 10 of 73

.**ee see* .......e****** eses e***e . **** e**** ..........e*********e ..e***

Procedurg: OP 1104 32 Decay Heat River Water (1-05-97-0311)

Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to allow pumping the river water side of an out of senice heat exchanger to the insenice heat exchanger and back to the river. This action is taken instead of draining the out of senice heat exchanger to the building sump where it might become contaminated through mixing with contaminated water and then require handling as radwaste.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malftmetion of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

ee*******esee******** e**ee ***** e***e ***eeeee*********eee*** .......*e....

Ergggdgg: OP 1104-38 Reactor Building (1-OS-96-0180)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to improve the performance of the reactor building emergency cooling (RR) system by limiting the pressure drop across the RR strainers to 2 psig and thereby increasing the likelihood that they will remain clean. The previous higher strainer pressure drop of 9 psig was found to be more deleterious to system hydraulic performance than a constant backwash flow of 100 gallons per minute.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee********** e*****

Procedure: OP 1104-40 Plant Sump and Drainage Systems (1-96-0074 and 0567)

Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to operationally reflect a physical modification which routed drainage from tendon access gallery sump, borated water storage tank sump, heat exchanger vault sump and the spent fuel pool pit sump to the auxiliary sump instead of their prior drain destination; the miscellaneous waste storage tank, Guidance for performing activities such as recirculation and cleanup of the auxiliary sump contents were also included in the change.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not {

reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e.*********************************

Procedlirg: OP 1106-4 Auxiliary Boilers (1-OS-96-0304) j Description gf Chance: The procedure was revised to incorporate instructions to perform in-place boiler code safety valve testing and boiler leak testing.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure i revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involvc a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the

[ l 1920-98-20 33

. A ttxhment1 -

Page it of 73 possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • esee*********e.***ese****ese.......e*e...e****e..e****.....seesse*****.

Etpgp4gg: OP 1106-13 Powdex System (1-05 96-0533)

Dgscription of Changg: The procedure was resised to 1) incorporate guidance for the use of the key mode selector,

2) improve the clarity of the cycle interrupt guidance and 3) add guidance for performing a functional test of the i electro-mechanical lock-up desice associated with the vessel selector switch.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any tecimical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Procedure: OP 1106-15 Main and Auxiliary Vacuum System (1-OS-96-0252)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to permit operation of the system on two auxiliary condenser pumps and one main vacuum pump at the discretion of the Shift Foreman or Shift Supenisor after a vacuum of  ;

225" Hg is attained. During the performance of STP-96-0019, it was shown that there would be no detrimental l effect to long term operation or performance of the system on one vacuum pump.

I Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evahiation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure ,

resision did not inwolve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment I important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was ,

found to exist. l

• • • • • • • **** .e**ese***************** ...e**********ese *******************

Procedure: OP 1107-2 Emergency Electrical System (1-0S-97-0334)

Description of Channe: The procedure was revised to: 1) include a section uhich provides direction to de-energize an inverter,2) include a requirement to close MS-V-15 A or ISB prior to de-energizing Vital Bus A or B respectively,3) change the reference to the location of power supplies to nucle ir instrumentation to match the actual location and 4) add notes to sections dealing with taking HSPS out of se vice in order to clarify the indications expected by the activity.

S.afety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the procedural changes concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequeaces of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a dccrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

.. *********** .... *** ...e************ ..*******e *******e.********* e**ee.

Erggdtgg: OP 1107-2 Emergency Electrical Distribution System (1-OS-96-0573) l Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to establish a preferred power source to IM 125 VDC distribution panel to ensure that a 125VDC system failure would not prevent the high pressure injection (HPI) components from providing the minimum required HPI flow. By maintaining the IM power source as described by

1920 98 20135

. A tuhmenti e hge 12 of 73 the change, the loss of DC will effect only one llPI train and the other train remains fully functional and capable to provide the required ECCS flow.

Safety Evahiation Summ20: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ..........******ese****e .***e....*** ....,**.

hocedure: OP 1107-9 SBO Diesel Generator (1-OS-97-0254)

Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to include a new section which added an operations surveillance to conduct a load rejection test of the SBO Diesel generator. The test is perfonned at approximately 50% load and was determined to be within the capabilities of the machine (a similar test performed during initial testing of the SBO Diesel from 100% load was completed satisfactorily).

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not j

reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

hocedure: EP 1202-9A Loss of'A' DC Distribution System (1-OS-97-0374) I Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to provide a method to reenergize vital bus A following the loss of off site power concurrent with a loss of the ' A' DC distribution system. The methodology makes use of the 'B' ES power source 120 VAC distribution panel TRB to reenergize VBA which is acceptable because it is limited to a special event where a single failure has already occurred.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evahiation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l Procedure: EP 1202-33 Tornado / High Winds (1-OS-96-0155) l Description of Change: The procedure revision incorporated changes allowed to the emergency action levels (EALs) which had been approved by the NRC. The requirement for an event declaration was climinated for those events which do not qualify as an emergency.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135 A nacknent1 l

• Page 13 of 73 l

Procedure: EP 12031 Load Rejection (1-OS-96-0205)

Qgscription of Chan_gg: The procedure resision included direction to monitor turbine speed and adjust the load set as necessary to maintain turbine speed at 1800 RPM in an attempt to re-synchronize with the system. The procedure resision also removed the self-imposed requirement to set the high flux trip setpoint to a maximum of 62.25% of full power (FP) when operating at or below 47%. The requirement was instituted during Cycle 10 as a part of the response to slow control rod (CRD) drop times. The 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint was found to be overly conservative during a later eva!uation determined to be unnecessary Safglyfaidgation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not invohc a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

see. .... eeeeeeeeeeese***********esseeeeeeeee**eeeeeeeeeee********e *********

Procedure: EP 1210-1 Reactor Trip (1-OS-96-0206)

Description of Channe: The procedure revision removed the self-imposed requirement to set the high flux trip setpoint to a maximum of 62.25% of full power (FP) when operating at or below 47% The requirement was

! instituted during Cycle 10 as a part of the response to slow control rod (CRD) drop times. The 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint was found to be overly conservative during a later evaluation and was determined to be unnecessary.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the deletion of the 62.25% FP high flux trip setpoint concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malAmetion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Ergggdur_g: EP 1210-1 Plant Trip (1-0S 96-0153) i Description of Changg: The procedure revision incorporated changes allowed to the emergency action levels (EALs) which had been approved by the NRC. The requirement for an event declaration was eliminated for those events which do not qualify as an emergency.

l Safety Evaluation Summan: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedurc l revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

e ******************************eesee ***** ****** eeeeeeeeeeee***************

Procedure: EP 1210-6 Small Break LOCA Cooldown (1-OS-97-0138)

Description of Chanec: The procedure was revised to 1) transfer the makeup pump suction to " piggyback" mode prior to the borated water storage tank (BWST) low level alarm at 9.5 feet, 2) open the decay heat cross connect prior to initiating the reactor building sump recirculation mode,3) open DH-V6A/B at the BWST low level alarm and then close DH-%5 A/B and BS-V-2A/B at the BWST Lo Lo level alarm at 6.3 feet and 4) throttle high pressure injection when low pressu e injection flow is greater than 1000 gpm/ train without waiting 20 minutes.

l l

1920-98-20135 A tsahmend Pcge 14 of 73 l

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment l important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

j

• • • • • • • • • • • ece........r.***e ........ **ee.................. . ** ......ee....

Procedure: EP 1210-6 Sma.1 Break LOCA Cooldown (1-OS-97-0443)

Descrigip_n of Chance: The procec ure was revised to incorporate direction which provided revised low pressure injection throttling limits while the reactor building sump is in the recirculation mode. The change also climinated the need to open DH-V-38A/B prior to reciretdation the sump. The changes ensure that adequate LPI and BS pump net positive suction head is available when taking suc; ion from the reactor building sump as well as maintain train separation of LPI for the long term core cooling mode of operation.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • e*******ee.****** ee.e....e***********e.e************** ********e.... **

Procedure: EP 1210-7 Large Break LOCA Cooldown (1-OS-97-0139)

Description of Change: The procedure was revised to 1) transfer the makeup pump suction to " piggyback" mode prior to the borated water storage tank (BWST) low level alarm at 9.5 feet,2) open the decay heat cross connect prior to initiating the reactor building sump recirculation mode, 3) open DH-V6A/B at the BWST low level alarm and then close DH-V-5A/B and BS-V-2A/B at the BWST Lo Lo level alann at 6.3 feet and 4) throttle high pressure injection when low pressure injection flow is greater than 1000 gpm/ train without waiting 20 minutes.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

............ ee... ***............. ** **** .......* e** ... *******e........

Procedure: EP 1210-8 RCS Superheated (1-97-0009) l l

l Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to change the timing of actions to transfer suction from the )

Borated Water Storage Tank to the Low Pressure injection Pumps for the purpose of maximizing available margin I to vortex considerations.

)

S_afety Evaluation Summarn The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure  ;

revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

1930-98 20135

. A twhment t Pcge 15 or 73 ELocedurs: EP 1210-8 RCS Superheated (1-0S-97-0140)

Description of Changg: The procedure was resised to 1) transfer the makeup pump suction to " piggyback" mode prior to the borated water storage tank (BWST) low level alarm at 9.5 feet,2) open the decay heat cross connect prior to initiating the reactor building sump recirculation mode, 3) open DH-V6A/B at the BWST low level alarm and then close DH-V-5 A/B and BS-V 2A/B at the BWST Lo Lo level alarm at 6.3 feet and 4) throttle high pressure injection w hen low pressure injection flow is greater than 1000 gpm/ train without waiting 20 minutes.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eeee***ee..........eee******eseeeee*******ese*****e.......

Procedure: EP 1210-10 Abnormal Transients, Rules, Guides and Graphs (1-0S-97-0141)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to 1) transfer the makeup pump suction to " piggyback" mode prior to the borated water storage tank (BWST) low level alarm at 9.5 feet,2) open the decay heat cross connect prior to initiating the reactor building sump recirculation mode, 3) open DH V6A/B at the BWST low level alarm and then close DH-V-5 A/B and BS-V-2 A/B at the BWST Lo Lo level alarm at 6.3 feet and 4) throttle high pressure injection when low pressure injection flow is greater than 1000 gpm/ train without waiting 20 minutes.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure raision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not l

reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was I found to exist.  !

eeee **********e e*******esee *******************eeeeee*******************e...

Procedure: SP 1300-311 Insenice Testing of Makeup Pumps and Valves (1 OS-97-0406)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to coordinate with changes made to open the makeup pump cross connect valves and to incorporate the insersice testing of MU-V-18.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: The safety evaluation performed to review the procedural changes concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not I create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • ee*******.e**esees *******eeseeeeeeeee******************************* )

Procedurg: SP 1300-3H Insenice Testing of RR Pumps and Valves (1-OS-97-0261) j Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to reflect modified acceptance criteria for system valves based l on gear ratio and torque changes without changing the maximum stroke times (RR-V3 A/B/C had gear ratio changes, RR-V-1 A has its OPEN valve stroke torque increased from 90 to 100% and RR-V-12 A/B were changed out).

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not

I 1920-93 20135 A uutmenti hge 16 or 73

! reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

ee***** e***eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee***********e....e*********e ****e *****e . **

Procedure: SP 1300-6J Nuclear Senices River Water Underground Leakage Test (1-OS-97-0265)

Description of Chance: The procedure was revised to provide an adequate method for testing the integrity of the underground piping of the Nuclear Senices River Water System (NR). A test of the system is required three times per 10 year ISI cycle. A hydrostatic test at approximately the normal operating pressure of the system will be performed while the plant and the NR system are shutdown The Secondary River Water System is designated as the source for test pressure and flow. The Nuclear Senices Closed Cooling System will be monitored while NS is secured so that limits will not be exceeded.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety delimed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • e eeeeee***** e****eeseeeeeeeeeeee************************e *******

Procedure: SP 1301-3 Reactor Coolant System Chemistry and Activity (1-OS-97-0472)

Description of Change: The procedure was resised in coordination with the approval of TSCR 269 which addressed a lower reactor coolant dose equivalent lodinem limit of 0.35 Ci/gm. Primary coolant activity is I therefore controlled to a more conservative value (0.35 pCi/gm versus 1.0 Ci/gm). '

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evahiation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment l important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eese***********************************************************

Procedure: SP 1303-5.1 Reactor Building Emergency Cooling and Isolation System Logic Channel /

Component Test Description of Chance: The revised procedure provided a note in the limits and precautions addressing the l

acceptability ofleaving blocks in valves MU-V-18, IC-V-4 and IC-V-6 between engineered safeguards tests of the

'A' and 'B' sides with the permission of the Shift Supenisor. Administrative changes included involved the climination of redundant CAUTIONS and the separation of dual actions.

l Safety Evaluation Summan: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure l revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment i

important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defimed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was  ;

found to exist. l

• • • • • • • • • • • • • eeeeeeese***********eeeeeeee*********e.***************** ******

Procedure: SP 1303-11.1 Control Rod Drop Time Description of Chance: Control Rod Drop Time Surveillance Procedure (SP-1303-11.1) was resised to extend the surveillance interval for control rod drop time testing from the current 18 month frequency to a 24 month frequency.

1920 98-20135 A ttachnwnt1 Page 17 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: The tests are performed at the end of each refueling outage to assure the operability of the Control Rod Drive System for the next operating cycle. Previous test results, since plant restart in 1986, were resiewed showed large margins to the drop time criteria and it was considered that the additional six months between tests would not result in any additional Control Rod Drive System degradation. Future drop test results will be evaluated to confirm that the margin is maintained. The system is covered by both the preventive and corrective maintenance programs w hich assure system reliability.

The safety evaluation concluded that the increase in the surveillance ir.terval from 18 to 24 months did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

eese.************e e*****ee******** . **** *********************************e Plocsdgrg: SP 1303-11.58 Core Flood System Test for IST (1-OS-97-9005)

Descriotion of Chance: The new procedure was initiated to provide a method to verify that the Core Flood check valves CF-V-4 A/B and 5A/B will open sufliciently to pass the design accident flow rate assumed in the safety analysis.

Sa_fety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the new procedure concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

e.ee......e**** .....eeeeeeeee.** eeeeee ***e ....e*** *******e********** ***

P_rncedure: 1401-4.4 OTSG Manway / Inspection Cover Removal and Replacement (1-97-0107) )

I Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to reflect the use of a new hydraulic pump / wrench for removing and replacing OTSG primary manway bolting. The new wrench will be held to the same torque requirements as the old wrench and did not change the final physical state of the bolting.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • ........*** ....... ****ee.........e***ee.. **************e......

Docume_n_l: 1402-4.12 OTSG Tube Pull (1-EG-97-9002)

Descrintion of Channe: The subject procedure describes the methodology for performing OTSG tube pulls. It addresses tube removal for the purpose of obtaining pr.rtial or full length samples to assess potential tube damage mechanisms and determine the efficiency of eddy current testing. The safety function of the OTSG is not affected by the tube pull since a pulled tube is equivalent to a plugged tube following the reestablishment of the barrier I between the primary and secondary sides. Limits on secondary side openings (or use of temporary plugs within j two hours) effect outside of the Reactor Building establish containment integrity. This primary-to-secondary j integrity is maintained by installation of permanent plugs at both ends of the removed tube. '

Safety Evaluation Summarn The safety evaluation concluded that the tube pull procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an

1920-98 20135 A ucckmend Pege 18 or 73 )

l l

accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.......e**ee........ee............... e* **e ***** ............ **eseeeeeees Procedure: 1401-4.5 OTSG Eddy Current Examinatiort Support Work (1-MT-95-8675)

Dgsgfi ption of Channe: The change revised QA classifications, and titles as well as providing additional instructions for activities which were previously not described. Requirements for a daily inspection of the temporary containment integrity seal while it was installed were deleted. This was based on the recognition of the integrity of the barriers and their ability to maintain integrity such that daily inspections are not required.

Programmatic controls requiring the initiation of" breach documents" prior to disturbing a temporary seal ensures the seals are not degraded and that appropriate notification of control room personnel is made.

Eafety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation resulting from the resiew of these changes concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of i equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not I

create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee***************** eses Procedure: 1401-4.8 Install / Remove B&W Rolled Mechanical OTSG Tube Plugs and Stabilizers (1-EG-97-0034)

Description of Chance: The procedure was resised to incorporate both administrative and technical changes. The technical changes involve design changes to the Framatome plugs, plug installation tooling and installation process. The revised plug design and installation process have been reviewed to assure their applicability to TMI-1.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the procedural changes concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist. i I

e********e************eeeeeee********* *************e*************************

Procedure: 1410-Y-80 OTSG Nozzle Cold Leg Dam Installation, Removal and Testing (STP-1-97-0017) pescription of Chance: The procedure was revised to incorporate actions based on modification of the cold leg nozzle dams consoles via CCR 132501. The modification provided a redundant air path via backup regulators to the dams and increased plant safety by reducing the probability of a dam failure. It also included clarifications.

improvements and " lessons learned" during preparation of the dams for use during the 12R outage.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was i found to exist.

ee*******ee********ese***********e e***********************************ee*****

Procedure: 1440-Y22 Building Spray and Decay Heat Vault Shield Plug Removal (1-97-0099) pgscription of Chancq: The procedure was resised to bring it into compliance with the requirements of NUREG- ,

0612 by adding sections w hich address the identification of a " safe load path", minimum ratings for rigging and l

I 1920-98-20135

, A tiochmenti I

. Pcge 19 ef 73 handling equipment (including safety margins), requirements for inspection of rigging and performance of the inspection by qualified personnel.

Safety Evaluation Summttry: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probabihty or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment i important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the I possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evahtated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.  !

• • • • • • • • • • • • ee*************e. e*********e **** e******* ... ** ...............

Documtnl: FHAR Change- Thenno-Lag Cable Raceway / Fire Barrier Upgrades and Modifications (CCD 403042-002)

_Descrintion of Channe: The FHAR was revised to identify upgrades or modifications to existing Thenno-Lag cable raceway fire barriers that will restore the required fire barrier ratings. Consideration was given to the additional loads to fire barner supports and the increased de-rating efTect on protected circuits.

Safety Evaluation Summar.1: The safety evaluation concluded that the FHAR revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • ee......*********...e*****.****................e****..e****.......

Document: Plant Final Safety Anal3 sis Report Update (PFU 96-TI-009)

Descrintion of Change: New self reading dosimeters are now used in lieu of an ion chamber design. The new design units predict the accumulated value on the dosimeter of record accurately. A change was also made to process thennoluminescent dosimeters annually based on the fact that the legal dose limits are in tenus of annual dose, the likelihood of overexposure as a result of the frequency is small and the NVLAP requirements continue to be met by the system for the frequency of annual reads.

Section i1.5.2, the description of the Personnel Monitoring System, of the Final Safety Analysis Report will be resised accordingly, Safety Evahtation Summary: The safety evaluation conchided that the FSAR revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfimetion of eqmpment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • w ** e**ese*****************

Document: Plant Final Safety Analysis Report Update (PFU 96-TI-010)

Description of Chance: A new position, Radiological Health / Occupational Safety Manager, was added which 1 arr mg other things is answerable to the functions and responsibilitics deleted from the Radiological Engineering l Ma, ger position. There was no change to the accountabilitics, dutics or responsibilitics within the Radiological l Controls department. I l

Section 12.1.1.28, the description of the Radiological Engineering Manager, of the Final Safety Analysis Report j will be resised to reflect a reduction in functions and responsibilitics. i Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the FS AR revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or i

l 1920-98-20135

. A ttcchmenti Page 20 of 73 i

malftmetion of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees i Document: Plant Final Safety Analysis Repon Update (PFU 96-TI-020)

Dgscription of Chance: Substantial changes that result from typical river flow patterns are considered unlikely over the next 10 to 20 years, since none have been observed since 1967. The prior surveys encompassed periods with flooding and low flow events. The river bottom in the vicinity of TMINS has been determined to be stable and in regime.

Section 2.6.3, the description of low flow studies of the Susquehanna River, was revised to climinate the requirement for GPU Nuclear to perform yearly hydrographic studies of the York Haven Pool near TMINS.

Hydrographic surveys will not be performed yearly but will be performed on an as-determined basis.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the FS AR revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specificatien. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • eee****************eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.. ** . e***eeseesese.**ee Document: Plant Final Safety Analysis Repon Update (PFU 96-TI-048)

Description of Chance: FSAR section 3.2.2.2.1.3 was resised to describe the aspects of fuct loading operations at TMI-1. The systems were not directly affected by the description change.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the FS AR resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.. e ..e ......e ..eeeeee eeeeeeeessee seeeesseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesseee......ees.

Document: Loading for the Emergency Diesels (PFU 96-TI-051) pescription or Chance: Emergency Diesel loading values were recalculated and documented in TDR 836, Revision 6. The updated load values were from either load measurements, previously documented and evaluated load changes, vendor information, or component run-out loading values determined by Mechanical Engineering.

The results were design verified and show that dicsci loading is within the 2000 hr. rating of the dicscis. The revised loading values reflect the expected component loading under large break LOCA conditions based on component operation at run-out coaditions. Minor changes were made to loading. The loading sequence was not i

changed, nor has any large load been added to any of the load blocks. Diesel response remains within the SAR analysis.

Chapter 8, page 2-23 and Tables 8.2-8 and 8.2-9 were resised accordingly.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the FSAR revision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not pn:viously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

ese***eceeeeeeeo e*** e eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee....eeeeeeeeeeeeeese**ee.* eve eeeeeee

1920-98-20135 A nacionerni Pcge 2I of 73 Erag.gdulg: AEC Circulating Water Treatment (STP l-96-0029 and STP l-97-0014)

Rgscription of Chance: Laboratory testing performed by BETZ on the river water and the current circulation nyer water chemistry control program process. As a result an alternative "AEC" treatment was developed for implementation. The alternate treatment process provides a lower general corrosion rate w hile maintaining calcium carbonate precipitation control.

Safety Evahiation Symmary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that these special temporary procedures did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety i question was found to exist. l eeeeeeeeeee****************************************eeee********************* e hpgedure: Determination of Nitrogen Gas Consumption Rate (STP-1-96-0030)

Description of Change: The procedure was performed to detennine the gas consumption rate in cach of the nitrogen headers and monitor the system for leakage. The procedure temporarily changed the system as described in the FSA5 Sy reducing the number of nitrogen storage cylinders connected to each bank during the operation.

Sufficient . tity of nitrogen was available throughout the activity to support plant operation. The system was returned ' ,rmal configuration following completion of the activity.

Safety Evw.,ation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew the change concluded that this special temporary procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malftmetion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was fotmd to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*******eee*******?..e***********ese *********e **

Procedure: Well Water Pump Testing (STP l-96-0040)

Descriplion of Chance: The procedure was implemented to test the three wells drilled at TMl to provide a groundwater replacement for TM1 systems that were previously supplied by the pretreatment facility. The test was performed to evahtate the supply capacity of the wells. The testing resulted in the pumping of approximately 400,000 gallons of uhich contained approximately 13 ml of tritium (H3) which was disposed of by releases through the mechanical draft cooling tower to the Susquehanna River. The small volume of H3 released is within the volume allowed by design basis accidents and/or malf unctions.

Safety Evaluation Summary: A safety evaluation concluded that the well pump capacity testing activitics specified in this special temporary procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • eeeeee******************* *********************eeeeeee***********

l Procedure: AEC Circulating Water Treatment (STP l-96-0050 and STP l-96-0057) l Description of Test: Laboratory testing perfonned by BETZ on the river water and the current circulation river water chemistry control program process. As a result an alternative "AEC" treatment was developed for implementation. The alternate treatment process provides a lower general corrosion rate w hile maintaining calcium carbonate precipitation control.

1920 98-20135 A ttshment1 Page 22 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: A safety evaluation concluded that the process specified in these special temporary procedures did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • ese**esee..... ***e **** ....

• e*******...e* .........e*********e.**

bge4gte: Well Water Pumping to the Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower (STP l-96-0052 and 0059 and STP l-97-0012)

Description of Channe: The procedure was initiated to permit pumping of the three wells to the Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower (MDCT) to make use of a single monitored discharge point for the pumped water. The water is being pumped in an effort to reduce the 11 3 concentration in the wells. Flow to the MDCT is within the range of that expected during normal plant operation and does not impact efiluent temperature due to the large dilution effect prior to discharge.

I Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the contents of these special temporary l procedures concluded that the procedures did not involve an increase in the probability or conscquences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margm of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • e ***********e . ***********e ****************ese***************** e hocedurg: Feedwater lleater Vent and 4* Stage ficater Dump Affect on Dissolved Ox) gen Concentration (STP l-97-0010)

Description of Chance: The procedure was initiated to provide direction for manipulation of the feedwater heater vent valve line-up to determine if the heaters were affecting dissolved oxygen levels. It also determined if the addition of high enthalpy water to the condenser through the 4* stage heater dump line would reduce dissolved oxygen levels.

Safety Evaluation Summart The safety evahiation performed to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.....*****ese*****************************************************************

Procedure: Verify Floupath Clear at WDL-V-666 (STP l 97-0017) pescription of Chance: The procedure was initiated to provide directions for determining if a clog existed in the drain line at WDL-V-666 or at the discharge of the 'B' Reclaimed Boric Acid Tank.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review the change concluded that this special temporary procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l 1920-90-20135

. A tishment! l Page 23 of 73 l

l Procedure: Hydrogen Peroxide Flush of Waste Disposal Liquid Tanks 8,9, and 10 (STP l-97-0018) j Qpscription of Chance: The procedure was initiated to proside directions for use of a hydrogen peroxide flush to remove organic fouling in the Neutralizer Tank, the Neutralizer Feed Tank and the Neutralized Waste Storage Tank for the purpose oflowering radiation levels in the vicinity of the tanks.

S_afety Evaluatipn Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.... ******e **ee..........e*****ee... ********* ......e**** e** ............

Procedurg: Fuel Reconstitution for Hot Cell Project (STP-97-0024)

Description cf Change: The procedure was initiated to provide instructions and requirements for fuel rod transfer following reconstitution activities since the rods were not be reused in another fuel assembly but were instead were transferred into a shipping canister to support the hot cell project.

Safety Evahmtion Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfimetion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • ..e*********** .e***ee................ ********esee.. ***** ..e*********

hggtdytrg: Packaging and Solidification of Waste Phosphoric Acid (STP 1-97-0026 and 0027)

Description of Chance: The procedure was initiated to provide instruction to sequence the activities necessary to safely and adequately neutralize the phosphoric acid. It implements the Process Control Program for the Stabilization and Solidification of TMl Phosphoric Acid Waste Using Aquaset II-H Solidification Media which provides disposal specifications and criteria.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The sa7ety esatuation performed to resiew these special temporary procedures concluded that the procedures did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • .. ********************** ************ e*********************************

Procedure: Flushing of Primary Water Storage Tanks PW-T-l/2 (STP-1-97-0028)

Description of Channe: The procedure was initiated to provide direction to flush the primary water storage tanks with demineralized water to remove silica contamination remaining from cleaning activities in the tanks. The flush water was processed through a powdex vessel to the IWTS following drainage to the powdex sump.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l 1920-98 20135

. A ucstnent1 Pcge 24 af 73 l

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees ELoggdttrg: Fuel Cask Operations loi (Se 110t Cell Project (STP-1-97-0030) ptsgnption of Chance: The procedure was initiated to provide instructions and requirements for receivmg, loading and shipping a fuel cask to transfer the spent fuel rods offsite for hot cell examination. Cask operations were performed in accordance with approved cask vendor procedures and the Fuel llandling Building Crane procedure for handling heavy loads. Fuel movements were performed in accordance with the requirements of the applicable procedure: 1505-1.

Safgty Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously l cvaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No l

unreviewed safety question was found to exist. l

• • • • • • • • • • • • • eseeeeeeee *******e *******eesse...e*** .......eeeeeeee**ees ee.

Procedure: Replacement lodine Channel Sources (STP-t-97-0032)

D.escription of Chance: The procedure was initiated to allow the use of new encapsulated Bam and Csm sources for calibration of the iodine channel samplers. The old sources were loose within their plastic encapsulation and cause problems during equipment calibration. This procedure calibrated the radiation channels to the Im peak and obtained the required data to incorporate the new sources into the existing calibration procedures. The radiation monitoring instruments involved in the source " transfer" activity were RM-A-1/2/4/6/8/9/12/13/and ALC-RMI-18.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: The safety evaluation perfonned to resiew this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • ee...e****esesse.*********eese **** **esee***e**ee***e*******se*************

Procedure: OTSG Titanium Injection (STP-1-97-0039)

Description of Chance: The procedure was initiated to provide instmetions for the injection of titanium into the secondary side of the OTSGs. The purpose of the titanium addition is to determine if titanium can be added to provide corrosion inhibition to the steam generator materials with specific focus on the steam generator tubes.

Safete Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresicwed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • esse ********eeeese******************ese++ se ***eee***eeeeee***********ee*

Pr_ocedure:

. AEC Circulating Water Treatment (STP l-97-0042)

Desenption of Change: The procedure was initiated to continue the trial use of AEC circulating water chemistry control to reduce the general corrosion and increase the conductivity of the circulating water system System controls to assure no NPDES permitting issues with pli limitations were instituted and the process was monitored.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation perfonned to review this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of

(

l 1920-98-20135

, A trachment!

. Pcge 25 of 73 l safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously l cvaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeeeeee.. ***eeeeeeeeeeee*** .... *******ee*****e...........................

e Proce.dus: Circulating Water Chemical Cleaning with FERROQUEST (STP l-97-0044)

Description of Chance: The procedure was initiated to use FERROQUEST to remove a calcium carbonate scale from the hot water deck, distribution nozzles of the natural draft cooling towers, circulating water piping and probably the main and auxiliary condenser tubes caused during the evaluation of alkyl epoxy carboxylate ( AEC) when low and a complete loss of AEC feed occurred. The scale had to be removed to restore plant generating efTiciency. The cleaning activity was terminated based on the calcium concentration , the rate of pH increase and a visual inspection of the cooling tower.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e *****ee.. ********ee********* **eeee**********

Procedure: Reactor Coolant Pump Impeller Examination (STP l-97-(X)$1) ,

I Description of Chance: The procedure describes the activities necessary to inspect the four reactor coolant pump j impellers. The inspections were performed using the Lift inspection Platform (LIP) system uhich consists of a remote sideo transport and inspection device. The inspection tool was guided into the OTSG lower end bell and into the cold leg before being telescoped to the impeller to perform the inspections. Following completion of each inspection, thc equipment was removed.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evahiation performed to resiew this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously i evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No I unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

..........e** e***.ee........ ************** ..e******************************

Procedure: 12R Fuel Post-trradiation Examinations (STP l-97-0053) l Description of Chanec: The procedure was implemented to perform various inspections on irradiated fuel assemblics. The equipment used in the examinations was designed to be positioned at a suitable location and l operated remotely from a control console. Activitics covered by the procedure include fuel rod oxide thickness l measurements, rod diameter measurements, water channel measurements, visual inspections, fuel assembly length l measurements, crud sampling, shoulder gap measurements and guide tube plug gage measurements.

Safety Evahiation Summary: The safety evaluation performed to resiew this special temporary inspection procedure concluded that the procedure did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • e..****** .e*************e............. *************************** ..*****

i 1920-98-20135 i

. A uzet:wnt!  !

. Page 26 of 73 Procedure: Trouble Shooting Nuclear Sersice Surge Tank Level Decrease (STP l-97-00 8) i Description of Chance: A procedure was initiated w hich manipulated the RR-V-3 A/B/C valves to determine the leakage from the system through each of the strings.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: The safety evaluation performed to resiew this special temporary procedure concluded that the procedure resision did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee***********ee ************ .....e*****eeeeeee **********

Document: Decay Heat and reactor Building Spray Pump Flow Throttling Criteria for the Reactor Building Sump (SE-000212-032)

Description of Chance: The safety evaluationjustified changes to procedures that provide new reduced post accident throttling limits for the Building Spray (BS) and Decay Heat (DH) pumps to ensure that that the pumps I would have adequate net positive suction head (NPSH) while drawing water from the reactor building sump. Prior l credit taken for the effect of reactor building overpressure on NPSH margin was notjustified and pump flow rates I were reduced by throttling while on sump recirculation. The changes require that the DH and BS pumps bc l throttled to between 2600-2800 gpm and 1300-1400 gpm indicated respectively afler the short term cooling phase j and prior to transferring suction to the reactor building sump. l l

Safety Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that the DH and BS pump throttling criteria did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the i' margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • e..et********e..e********** eeeeee*********esessesse****************ese

• Document: Topical Report-112 Leakage Assessment Methodology for TMI-l OTSG Kinetic Expansion Exemptions Description of Chance: The leakage assessment methodology as provided by Topical Report-112 was used during the 12R outage. All OTSG tubes repaired by kinetic expansion, whereby a new tube-to-tubesheetjoint was formed, I

were affected by the inspection criteria addressed by the methodology. The methodology provides the correlation of kinetic expansion region cddy current inspection results to postulated accident induced primary-to-secondary leakage over the duration of a main steam line break (MSLB) accident. The methodology assures a conservative determination of postulated accident induced leakage in the kinetic expansion area and did not impact the OTSG free span inspection criteria.

Safett Evaluation Summary: The safety evaluation concluded that, the leakage assessment methodology implemented for the 12R outage kinetic expansion examination, did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

esseeeeeeeeee**ee*******es........e***ese**essee**********eseeee. ....e*******

L Modifications

l 1920-98-20135 A ttschmenti Pcge 27 of 73 l

l Modification: Replacement of the Thermal Sleeve on the 'B' High Pressure Injection Line (CCD-000211)

Description of Modification: The modification replaced the thermal sleeve inside the High Pressure Injection l (HPI) nozzle on the 'B' cold leg of the Reactor Coolant system. The action was necessary after routine inspection identified that cracks had developed in the thermal sleeve. Operating experience within the industry has shown that such cracking is a result of fatigue resulting from thennal cycling. All subcomponents of the nozzle were l replaced with components of the same type material and basic geometry. They were installed by qualified Framatome welders with NDE inspection perfonned throughout the welding process.

i Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l eesseeeeee<<eeseeeeeesseese *e... e*seseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese l

Modification: Turbine Gantry Crane Support (CCD-000301)

Description of Modification: The modification was performed to provide continuous support under the turbine walkway to permit the use of manual gantry cranes. Engineering analysis identified that the wheel guide, steel walkway plate and underlying support structure were insuflicient to support the weight ofloaded gantry cranes. A new support beam was installed directly below the existing wheel guide such that the gantry weight is transferred to the suppon beam through the existing support members. Additional intennediate suppons bearing against the walkway steel were connected to the support beam.

Safety Evaluation Summam An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

ee***es****ese **********sesseee*****seesseeese** . eeeeeeesseeessesse********

Modification: DH-V-4 Pressure Locking Modification (CCD-Il3202)

Description of Modification: The modification installed a pressure relieflines on DH-V-4A and 4B in response to the Generic Letter 95-07 pressure locking concern. The lines have no function during nonnal plant operation but act to provide a pressure relief path that will allow any pressure built up in the valve body to relieve to the reactor side of the valve in the event of a LOCA.

Safety Evaluation Summarv: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • esessesseese**********ese****essese*****es**esees*************sesse*********

Modification: MU-V-18 Test Circuit Modification (CCD-120021) l Description of Modification: Modification of the test circuitry of MU-V-18 to allow verification of the Engineered Safeguards test signal to the valve without requiring valve closure. The pneumatically operated gate valve isolates the normal RCS make-up flow and is required to be tested quarterly per the Technical Specifications. Presiously, to protect the high pressure injection nozzles, the valve was mechanically ' blocked' open during testing. The I modification incorporated a test switch, uhich when in the ' test' position, maintains the valve operable and

1920-93-20135

. A tsahmentI Prge 28 of 73 capable of performing its design safety function while being tested. The modification also moved ES closure at 1600 psig RCS pressure from Test Group I to Test Group 2. Both test groups are actuated by the same bistables and only effect component actuation during testing.

1 Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or

. malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involv: a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously l cvaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

1

• • • • • ..........e****************.....e**.........e****e***es******ee....

Modification: Seismic Restraints for Class 1E 4160V Breakers (CCD-120022-001)

Description of Modification: The configuration change was the result of a corrective action from LER 97-001 I which identified that Westinghouse 4160V breakers were not seismically qualified when out of their " racked-in" position. The configuration change ensures that the safety function of the Class IE 4160V electrical distribution system is not afTected during and aller an carthquake. The change, as designed by Westinghouse, involved installing a scismic restraint plate in the breaker enclosure which allows installation of a restraining bar when the breakers are stored in a position other than " racked-in" Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the configuration change, based on a review of supporting documentation and testing of a mock-up device, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or rnalfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist. l l

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee  !

Modification: Generic Letter 96-06 Modifications (CCD-120023) l Descrintion of Modification: The modification installed thermal relief valves on ten containment pipe penetrations that are susceptible to thermally induced over pressurization during a LOCA or MSLB. The valves were installed at existing Local Leak Rate Test (LLRT) connections and set to open when pressures are achieved which threaten code allowable stresses thereby eliminate the susceptibility of piping systems that penetrate containment to thencal expansion of fluid. Root isolation valves for the relief valves are locked open to assure that the reliefs are in service.

The relief valve maximum allowable setpoints were determined by the limiting valve's design pressure times 1.1 as allowed by B16.34 section 2.5.1. A piping analysis assured that the piping would not be overstressed at the relief valve setpoint. Setpoint values are at or below the values detennined. All piping section modifications made to incorporate the relief valves maintained the piping's existing Seismic Class I classification. The valve setpoints are much higher than normal operating pressures and therefore should lifl only during emergency conditions.

During normal operating conditions, the valves perform no active function and system operation is unchanged.

Safety Evaluation Summarv An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • e.....e** ............ ** .e*** . *****ee.....e*esee.**e .............

1920-98-20135

, A nachmentI l

. Page 29 of 73 Modification: Use of FTI Rolled and Ribbed Plugs in the TMI-l OTSGs (CCD-123125-002)

Description ef Modification: The modification removed from service certain tubes in the TM1-1 once through steam generators (OTSGs) using FTI rolled and ribbed plugs. The plugs were used in defective tubes to establish i an adequately leak tight boundary between the OTSG primary and secondary sides. FTl rolled plugs were I presiously used in the upper tubcsheet and the FTl ribbed plugs were used in the lower tubcsheet for those tubes

{

identified to be plugged in accordance with the established TMI-l tube plugging criteria. The adequacy of the  !

qualification program, plug design and the plug installation have been previously demonstrated Safety Evaluation Summan: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of i safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously l evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Reactor Building Emergency Cooling Water Enhancements (CCD-128216-001)

Description of Modification: The configuration change relocates the Reactor River relief valves (RR-V-11 A/B/C) l to satisfy GL 96-06 concerns for Reactor Building flooding and installs a new safety grade air supply to RR-V-6 '

from the 2-hour air system. The existing Reactor River relief valves were removed from the Reactor Building to the Intermediate Building at three locations using existing 1" threadolets. The piping in the Reactor Building was l

capped with socked wcld caps. The setpoint for the valves was reduced to 150 psig from 200 psig to accommodate i the operation of RR-V-4 A/B/C/D. Two new air bottics were added to the 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> air system to provide the added capacity to supply RR-V-6 with a safety grade air source. The air bottles were installed in th: 'B' diesel generator room and tubing was installed between the bottles and RR-V-6.

The relief valves perfonn the same function as before, even with the lower setpoint. They discharge to two 1000 gallon capacity sumps with automatic pumps and control room high level alarms. The modification also provides the Reactor River system with an added level of safety during a LOCA with a loss of the nonnal Instrument Air system: RR-V-6, the back pressure control valve will continue to control Reactor River system pressure using 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> air to adjust valve position.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Industrial Cooler Pipe Replacement (CCD-410013-001)

Description of Modification: The modification replaced 6" piping at the inlet and outlet of the industrial coolers.

In addition, the existing heat trace and insulation will not be reinstalled on the new piping since there is no benefit from the heat trace and insulation because the coolers are not heat traced and the system must be drained ifit is shutdown during cold weather. The pipe is a replacement in kind. The modification design, fabrication and testing were performed in accordance with the original B31.1-67 construction code.

i Safety Evaluation Summag: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, l

found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or I malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No a unreviewed safety question was found to exist. j i

l l

l

1920-98-20135

. A ttochent!

. Page 30 of 73

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e **********ee.. ** e* ****** ... ****** ***e ..e****** e .....

Modification: MU-V-3 Closing Thrust Modification (CCD-410024)

Description of Modification: MU-V-3 was modified to improve the closing thrust capability ofits actuator by using air pressure in addition to the existing spring force to close the valve. A letdown line break in the Auxiliary Building must be isolated to maintain the containment boundary and protect safety related equipment in the Auxiliary Building. The modification enhanced the capability of MU-V-3 to close and isolate RCS letdown. The air reservoir provides adequate capacity to close MU-V-3 against the design system AP after a failure of the Instmment Air system or a loss ofInstmment Air system integrity upstream of the safety related check valves (IA-v-2826). The OPEN function was not afTected. l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e*******************ee*****

Modification: Plant Process Computer Upgrade 1 (CCD-412619-001 and 002)

Description of Modification: The modification involved installation of cables, mounting hardware for PCs and monitors used to display computer generated data in the control room, alternate Technical Support Center and the Technical Support Center. The new PCs and monitors serve the same function as those previously existing display generators and monitors. Revision 002 added three fiber optic from the ModComp room to the Computer Console right to accommodate a future LAN connection.

Safety Evaluation Summarr An evaluation of the modifications, based on their description above, found that they did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the l

possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not i reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • ******e***************ee**************************************************

Modification: Decay River Flow Instrument DR-FE-289 A/B Upgrade for IST Including QCL Classification for DR-FE 289A/B (CCD-412671)

Description of Modification: The modification replaces the flow elements and flow indicators associated with the IST instrumentation. The instrumentation is temporarily used to obtain data to, verify the operational readiness of the DR system. Since the system testing line-up is identical to that during operation, the system is considered fully operational and capable of being run or started to respond to a DBA. The quality classification of the flow element and instmmentation valves was classified consistent with a nuclear safety related pressure boundary.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • ese*ee....,* e*******************ese********** ...e******** ** ******...

1920-98-20135

. A nachmentI e Prge 31 of 73 Modification: Nitrogen System Upgrade (CCD-412678)

Description of Modification: The modification replaced the temporary N2trailers which previously provided the primary plant with N2 with a group of permanently installed cylinders. The cylinders were arranged into two operational banks to pro ide high pressure N 2 at 20$0 psi. A liquid N 2tank provides low pressure N 2at 250 psi.

The cylinders and tank were installed outside on the south and west sides of the Pretreatment Building respectively and were connected to the existing plant N 2system connection with stainless steel tubing.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • ese********eeeeee***********e **e.e**************e...e***********

Modification: Auxiliary Building Sump Sludge Prevention (CCD-412680)

Description of Chance: The modification installed equipment and piping to remove oil and accumulated solids from the Auxiliary Building sump. These contaminants were found to contribute to high sulfur problems in the reactor coolant bleed tanks. The equipment involved includes an oil skimmer, a recirculating pump assembly and a filter housing with multiple filter elements. The components agitate the solids in the sump and filter them out.

A hose connection off of the recirculating line provided capability to use a hand-held hose to clean the sump.

New piping was installed to allow water from the Tendon Access Gallery Sump , Borated Water Storage Tank Sump, Heat Exchanger Vault Sump and Spent Fuel Pit Room Sump to be pumped to the Auxiliary Building Sump.

This would allow for oil and solids removal in the Au8xiliary Building Sump prior to the water being sent to the miscellaneous waste storage tank.

Additional hose connections were installed on the river water drain lines of the decay river and nuclear river systems' heat exchangers to allow pumping water from one cooler to another to prevent introducing dirt from the river water into the heat exchanger vault sump and the radwaste system.

Safety Evaluation Summ_a_ry: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • esee**esese e************* eeeeeeeeee**eeeeeeeeeee *eeeeee***************

Modification: Control Building First Floor Heating Ventilating and Air Conditioning Modification (CCD-412686-00l)

Description of Modification: The Control Building HVAC modification provided additional cooling to the chemistry laboratory which was previously found to be above the acceptable temperature band for comfort of the employees and that appropriate to assure sample analysis equipment and instrumentation reliability.

Safety Evaluation Summarn An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • ee...... **e ********ese*****e **e.....e************ ****************e....

1920-98-20135

. A ttxhment!

• Page 32 of 73 Modification: Cable Drive for Fuel Transfer System (CCD-412690-001)

Description of Modification: The modification replaced the pneumatic powered chain drive fuel transfer system components with an electric powered cable drive system. The electric powered cable drive climinated the recurring failures experienced wit!' the chain drive. The modification retained a Seismic Class 11 design and did not impact any refueling requirements for storage, spent fuel pool cooling or fuel shulliing operations. All new mechanical and structural components were installed and all connections with existing structure were analyzed to ensure sufficient load carrying capability and safety margin.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification electric powered cable drive fuel transfer system, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Main Generator Stator Rewind (CCD-412691)

Description of Modification: The main generator winding was replaced to improve unit reliability due to prior cooling water leaks and to maximize generator capacity to accommodate future plant thermal power uprates and efficiency improvements in the turbine steam path.

The replacement stator winding was designed using an optimized solid and hollow strand configuration in the replacement bars to maximize the capability and efficiency of the generator stator liquid cooled winding and liquid cooled series connecticas. The generator rating was increased. The rated power factor was increased due to the excitation and hydrogen cooling system calculated limitations. Finally the between-bar RTDs were replaced with dual element 100 ohm platinum RTDs.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ese****** eses *****************************

Modification: Turbine Generator Rewind Temporary Power (CCD-412691-002)

Description of Modification: The modification was used to provide temporary power to GE's power center. Tie power was provided from the l A Turbine Plant 4160 V switchgear spare cubicle. 800 amps at 480 V three phase was provided by a 100 kVA transformer located on the 355' elevation of the Turbine Building. A 6900 V cable tray was used to route the 4160 V cable which was an exception to the requirements (based in good engineering practice) stated in section 8.2.2.13 of the FSAR. The transformer and cabling were removed following completion of the generator rewind task Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or ma' function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • es******esee************************e ******

1920-98-20135 i A nachment1 Pcge 33 of 73 Modification: Moisture Separator Demineralizer Modification (CCD-412692)

Description of Modificatigtn: The modification made prosision for ard Wed a demineralizer to the outlet of the

'B' moisture separator pump. Equipment installed included a heat nchanger, demineralizer vessel, associated piping, valves and instrumentation. The 'B' moisture separator pump supplies the head for the demineralizer and Secondary Senices Closed Cooling provides cooling water to the heat exchanger. The demineralizer was installed l to remove impurities from the secondary plant.

k Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of y safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ese*******************e ****************************

Modification: Mobile Demineralizer Trailer Power Feed (CCD-412694-002)

Description of Modification: The modification provided power to the mobile demineralizer trailer located at the south end of the TMI-I Tmbine Building. Power was required for instrumentation, heat tracing, pumps, valves, etc. Components installed included a $00 KVA,13.2kv-480/277v transformer, a 600v 400A fused disconnect switch and a 480/277 feeder between them. Power was provided from distribution panel RL-2 which does not serve a nuclear safety related function.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • ese****ese**************************************************esee.

Modifipation: Mobile Dcmineralizer Trailer Senice Tie (CCD-412694-003)

Description of Modification: The purpose of the modification was to provide tie-in points for the vendor's demineralizer trailer which is used to make water to the condensate storage tanks, the million gallon tank and the reclaimed water storage tank. The following senices were required to support demineralizer operation: a 4" filtered water supply line, a 4" demineralized water discharge line and two 2" waste water reject lines.

Safety Evahtation Summam: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eeeeee***********ese*************************

Modification: Well Drilling and Trenching for the Cleanvell Supply (CCD-412694-004)

Description of Modification: The purpose of the modification is to install wells and piping to supply the pretreatment building cleanvell. Three wells were drilled and PVC piping was installed to carry the well pump discharge to the pretreatment building. The trench carrying the new PVC piping passed over vital underground senices which required that the elevation of the trench be maintained during excavation to maintain operability of those senices.

1920-98-20 t35

. A ttachmend a Page 34 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

• • e **ee **ee...... ***ee **************************ese *********************

Modification: Reactor Building Thermo-Lag Upgrade (REllS) Modification (CCD-417109)

Description of Modification: The modification was performed to satisfy 10 CFR 50 Appendix R. Section Ill.G requirements for radiant energy heat shields (REHS). Since the code precludes the use of combustibles as REHS and Thermo-Lag 330-1 was determined to be combustible, it was necessary to climinate Thermo-Lag where possible. Where climination was not possible, exposure of the Thermo-Lag to fire was prevented by wrapping it in stainless steel sheet material. As a result of the modification, the combustible loading of the Reactor Building was reduced.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment impo tant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ***************************ese********eees *****************

Modification: TMI-l Control Tower Renovations (CCD-418822)

Desc_ription of Modification: The modification provided a new and larger shop and office facilities for Instmment

& Control maintenance personnel in proximity to the control room. The Technical Support Center and the Auxiliary Operator facilitics were relocated and consolidated into an area just outside of the control room. The renovation involved modification / installation of: office and work spaces, power circuits, heating and air conditioning fans, controls and ducting, fire detection and fire senice water and plumbing to satisfy the design.

The new facilitics and the portions of the systems modified were not classified as nucicar safety related and are not part of the Engineered Safeguards Systems. All work was performed in accordance with established quality requirements and seismic classifications and it complied with all applicable regulations and the Technical Specifications.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfimetion of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • eese *************** .e************* ..... ***** e******ee.... *** ..

Modification: Recycling of Decay Heat and Building Spray Drains (CCR 95-033)

Description of Modification: The boron recycle drain modification installed a check valve and hose connections to the Spent Fuel, Decay Heat and Building Spray system vent and drain connections, as well as, equipment storage locations to facilitate the recycling of water / boric acid from the Decay Heat and Building Spray systems during system outage maintenance.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evahtated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of

1920-98-20135

, A ttcchmenti e Page 35 of 73 safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basief a technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

essee******ees ************************ e**************ve *****************e..

Modification: Removal of SD-CE-255 and Associated Controls (CCR-95-057)

DescriDtion of Modification: The modification removed the Powdex sump to IWFS composite sampler and abandoned in place its associated controller and flow totalizer. The action was taken because composite samples of l the Powdex sump are taken by the turbine building composite sampler. There is no requirement for a dedicated l Powdex sump sampler. ,

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation,

! found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of l safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously l evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee$.e***************e***************************************

l Modification: RC-V-6A/B/D Insulation (CCR-113202) l DescriDtion of Modification: Approximately fifty linear feet of fiberglass blanket insulation, evaluated for containment use, was installed on three 2" lines. The insulation was encased in stainless steeljacketing which is expected to prevent it from becoming dislodged during all scenarios with the exception of directjet impingement to the subject line. The additional insulation will not increase the hazard posed by clogging of the RB sump.

t l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification to provide insulation on three 2" lines in the

( reactor containment, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve i I

an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin p safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.  ;

.*********** ******* .e***********.. **** ...e**e.*** ******* ... ** .e******

I Modification: Fire Sprinkler Installation for Pre-fab Outage Building (CCR-122222)

DescriDtion of Modification: The modification extended the fire senice protection into a section of the Turbine Building w hich did not previously have dedicated protection. During installation, one portion of the Turbine Building sprinkler system was isolated. Alternate fire strategies were implemented during that period when normal fire senice was unavailable in accordance with procedure 1104-45 A, " Fire Protection System Impairment l

Control".

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of j safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or maifunction of equipment important to safety not previously l evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

e.** e****ese***ese**ese*** e*************ees *******ee **ee.****e************

Modification: Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator Chemical Cleaning Connections (CCR-122229)

DescriDtion of Modification: The modification installed chemical cleaning connections on the Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator. One connection was installed down stream of the feed pump and the second was installed in the reclaimed water pipe to the cleaning nozzles. Both connections have quick disconnects to facilitate hose I

1920-98-20135

. A ttachment!

+

Page 36 of 73 connection. A check valve was installed up stream of the reclaimed water connection to pres ent the non-evaporator section of the reclaimed water system from being contaminated.

Safety Evahiation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or i

malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: FW-V-92A/B Close Torque Switch Bypass (CCR-125207)

Description of Modification: The purpose of the modification was to improve the FW-V-92A/B motor operated valve capability to isolate a high energy line break without compromising valve reliability. The valve control scheme in the closing direction was changed to bypass the close torque switch until after the point of flow isolation by installation of a limit switch in parallel with the torque switch in the closing circuitry of the valves.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Relocate 2SA-P-3 to the Senice Building and Disconnect TMI-2 Compressed Air from TMI-1 Instrument Air (CCR-127283)

Description of Modification: The modification relocated 2SA-P-3 to the Senice Building and disconnected the

'IMI-2 compressed air system from the TMI-l Instrument Air system. Concurrent with this activity, numerous tanks and valves were disconnected from the compressed air system (an activity which 1.ad no effect on TMI-1).

The TM1 1 air systems are provided sufficient redundant components and sized to provide required system pressure and flow.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e***e **es.see.....e* e****************************** .. e***

Modification: IR & IT Bus Breaker Seismic Restraints (CCR-128108)

Description of Modification: The minor modification made a corrective change to add seismic restraints to specific 480 volt switchgear breakers to prevent excessive motion during a seismic event. Structural supports were attached to the back panels of the affected switchgear and installed in such a manner as to not interfere with the electrical j operation of the breaker or degrade the stmetural integrity of the switchgear.

I Safety Evaluation Summarr An evaluation of the modification to add seismic restraints to 480 volt switchgear I

breakers, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated f and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135

. A ttcotmentI Page 37 of 73

• e *********ese***************************************************************

Modification: MIC Modification - River Water (CCR-129203)

Description of Modification: The modification remosed stagnant lube water piping associated with the river water systems and installed plugs at the interfacing points to minimize the likelihood of potential microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) related failure of the piping.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee.e**ee.*********ese**ee**************e ***********

Modification: Fuel Pool Cask Pit Gate Support (CCR-131184)

Description of Modification: The modification added a structural frame to suppon the cask pit gate in the 'B' Spent Fuel Pool. The gate support was previously removed from the 'A' Spent Fuel Pool to allow access to the newly installed high density fuel racks. TI.e support was installed to permit temporaty storage of the gate during periods when the cask pit is used and/or when replacement of the gate seal is necessary.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evahiation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Fuel Transfer Canal Stairway Seismic Restraint (CCR- 132151)

Description of Modification: The configuration change provided seismic restraints to the stairway to allow "in-use position" storage on the fuel transfer Canal floor at elevation 321' during plant operation. Storage of the stairway on the transfer canal floor provides the following benefits: it eliminates two polar crane lifts at the beginning and end of an outage, polar crane maintenance does not interfere with lift schedule and allows safe access to the Transfer Canal floor early in an outage. The change did not require any anchorage to the walls or floor of the Canal but prevents the stored stairway from affecting safety-related systems. There is no system in proximity of the stored stairway during plant operation and performance of any system was unchanged by this passive change.

S.a fety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: IP Bus 27/86 Lockout (CCR-132171)

Description of Modification: The modification moves the loss of bus voltage and engineered safeguards (ES) lockout function (27/86) from tripping and blocking the manual or automatic starting of pumps IC-P-1 A, RC-P-2A-1, and RC-P-2C-1 from an auxiliary relay (27/86X) to spare contacts available on the IP Bus 27/86A & B lock out relays. The function for the loss of bus voltage and ES lockout is to prevent non Nuclear Safety related loads (non-NSR) loads loading onto the Diesel Generator during ES conditions with the loss of ofTsite power. The

\.

1920-98-20135 l

. A trachmentt Nge 38 of 73 proposed change ensures tids function is operable for all (not dependent upon) IM DC Bus power source alignments by removing the 27/86X auxiliary relay. The change restored all of the available load margin for the "A" diesel generator by correcting a design deficiency associated with the IP 480V ES Bus UV lockout load shedding scheme.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e,***************************************************

Modification: Relocation of the Hot Machine Shop and Hot Tool Room (CCR-132300)

Description of Modification: The modification relocated the Hot Tool Room to the previous location of the Hot Machine Shop and vice vt.:;a. The swapping oflocations facilitated the ready access to and use of the contaminated tooling from the Hot Tool Room since it is located near the Reactor Building personnel access hatch.

A larger work area was made available to the Hot Machine Shop.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evalwion of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not inolve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ese************eeeeeeese******* *****

Modification: NS V-4 Gear Change (CCR-132301)

Description of Modification: The modification changed the gear ratio of valve NS-V-4 to achieve greater operating stem torque margin at degraded voltage conditions as suggested by preliminary torque switch setting calculations.

The change increased the amount of stem torque for a given amount of motor torque and increased the valve stroke time while not modifying the function or the original design purpose of the valve. The method of operating the valves was not changed as a result of this modification.

Safety Evahtation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found tMt the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or

/

malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist..

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eese********************e*********************

Modification: Lithium Hydroxide Cross-Tie Connection (CCR-133912)

Description of Modification. The modification changed the Chemical Addition (CA) system piping on the 331' elevation of the Auxiliasy Building by adding: a cross-tic connection between CA-P-4 and the discharge piping from CA-P-2, two valves and a pipe support near the 1/2 inch ball valve which isolates the new connecting line.

The modification allows the higher capacity CA-P-4 to be used to inject LiOH into the RCS more quickly than was possible with CA-P-2 when a higher injection rate is appropriate.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously

1920-98-20:35 A ttxhmentt Pace 39 or 73 evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • e********************************************* . ****e ************* i Modification: RR-V-3 A, B and C Gear Change (CCR-134078)

Description of Modification: The modification changed the gear ratios of valves RR-V 3A, B and C to achieve greater operating stem torque margin at degraded voltage conditions as suggested by preliminary torque switch setting calculations. The change increased the amount of stem torque for a given amount of motor torque and increased the valve stroke time while not modifying the function or the original design purpose of the valves. The method of operating the valves was not changed as a result of this modification.

Safety Evaluation Summmy: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

....e********..**e.............*******.*******...................e******

Modification: Replacement of the Reactor Senice Structure Jib Hoist (CCR-134248)

Description of Moitication: The modification replaced the Cofling wire rope hoist presiously installed on the reactor senice structurejib crane with a one ton electric chain hoist and trolley. The replacement hoist minimizes the need for future maintenance, has added enhancements (festooned power cable and balance rect for the pendant control cable) not available on the prior hoist. The hoist provides the capability to handle materials in support of work activities related to the head while located on the senice structure. The new hoist lowers the structural loading on thejib and its attachment to the Reactor Building liner. Aluminum added to the containment by this modification was within limits established for hydrogen generation. The hoist andjib will remain in place during and afler a seismic event and will not impact safety related equipment.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specificcion. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.e****** ........ ******* e**e ******* ... ************e.e*****,e************

Modification: Isolation of Fuel Transfer Tube Weld Canopics (CCR-134266) l Description of Modification: The Penetration Pressurization (PP) and leak testing provisions of the east and west fuel transfer tubes was modified to eliminate the interconnection of the PP system to the transtr tube penetration (between a safety and non-safety grade system). The modification also eliminated the PP check valves outside the reactor building which were not in strict compliance with General Design Criteria 56. The modification acts as a high integrity leakage boundary for the reactor containment and did not compromise the leak tightness of the double o-ring seals on the fuel transfer tubes. The modified system continues to be periodically leak tested as before per the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J and meets the requirements of ASME Code Section 111.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, I found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or  !

malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

s

1920-98-20135

. A ttachmentt Pcge 40 of 73 Modification: Emergency Diesel Generator Air Compressor Filter Modification (CCR-136708)

Description of Modificatiqn: The modification installed a new pipe nipple and elbow to allow installation of a new style air filter. The new filter replaces a discontinued model and can be screwed directly to the compressor when the nipple and elbow are fitted. Although the compressor is classified NSR, the air filter is not a part of the pressure boundary and is therefore classified non-NSR.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An esahtation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

h!odification: Butterfly Valve Torque Switch Bypass Modification (CCRs 137462,137638,137639,139520)

Description of Modification: The modification installed full torque switch bypass protection on GL 96-10 motor operated Butterfly valves AH-V-1B/C, DR-V-1 A/B, NR-V-1 A/B/C, NR-V-4 A/B, RR-V-I A/B and 5.

AH-V-1B/C and NR-V-4 A/B have CLOSE safety sbnctions and the remaining valves have OPEN efety functions.

The bypass may be required to overcome high difTerential pressure / flow conditions u hile allowing the torque switch to remain at a relatively low setting. The modification was made necessary due to recent increases in certain programmatic parameters. The respective torque calculations determined the need for modification on a specific MOV. The calculation considered both design characteristics and test conditions and form the basis and confidence that the valves perform their safety function in a way that best predicts realistic equipment performance.

The modification improved the capability of the MOVs to perfonn their safety function.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety delined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Spent Fuel Pool Diver Platfonn (CCR-138384)

Wsenotion of Modification: The modification provided for a movable diving platform in support of diving operations to minimize the divers' radiation exposure and fatigue due to heat stress. The platform also makes the water entry location as close to the work location as is possible.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: AH-E-1B and IC Motor Connection Upgrade Modification (CCR-138758)

Description of Modification: The modification provided upgraded motor connections for AH-E-1B and IC Reactor Building cooling fans. The new cabic connections use a brazed connection as opposed to a connection using set screws u hich was used previously. The set screw ty pe connections have a tendency to loosen due to creep, high

1920-98 20135

. A ttxhment1

• Page 4I of 73 vibration and/or temperature cycling. Tape used to cover the otherwise bare metal at the ' spark plug' connection was also removed and replaced with shrink tubing covering. The heat shrink tubing was installed to overlap onto the exposed porcelain section of the ' spark plug' terminal to ensure satisfaction of environmental qualification requirements.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an it; crease in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evalr:4ted and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

see *****ee............. ******e .....e****** ***e.................... **** ..

Modification: BS-V-23 A/B Internals Removal (CCR-139236)

Description of Modification: The internals of BS-V-23 A/B (check valves) were removed to recover the head lost j

due to flow through the valves. The valves have no function during normal plant operation. They open to allow flow to the RB spray pumps from the BWST or RB sump during emergency operation. Removal of the valve  ;

internals provides the added ciTect of climinating the potential failure of the check valves to open.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification to remove the BS-V-23 A/B internals, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ...... **********e.....e***********ee*********

Modification: Secondary Side Nitrogen Connections (CCR-139322)

Description of Modification: The modification added a new system connection to supply nitrogen to the secondary side of the OTSGs. Previously nitrogen trucks were connected as the system supply for blanketing the OTSGs during outages. The modified system, with the additional connection, allows a hose to be run from the plant nitrogen sy stem to the OTSG blanketing supply lines: allowing the plant nitrogen tanks to act as the secondary supply at lower cost. The modification did not change the quality of the nitrogen source or the nitrogen system performance. Only the nitrogen supply source was changed during outages by cross tying to the permanent nitrogen system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously esaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • e **+ ....... *** .....e***e .........................................

Modification: Control Room BWST Level Indication Upgrade (CCR-139800)

Description of Modification: The modification replaced the control room BWST RY level indicators with indicators that meet the latest nuclear industry standards for clectrical noise and validation and verification requirements. The replacement indicators are Class IE components and provide enhanced readability and accuracy. ' Reliability of the unit read out is enhanced by utilizing a current signal versus a voltage signal to drive the indicators thus reducing the sensitivity to in-line resistance.

Safety Evaluation Summarw An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, l found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or 1

I l 1920-98-20135 i

. A ttacimenti Pcge 42 of 73 malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • eesee****ese***esee***e...e******** .....e***** ***e.*e ..e*****

Modification: Globe Valve Torque Switch Bypass Modification (CCR-139974,139975 & 140072)

Description of Modification: The torque switch modification was made to improve the capability of motor operated valves (MOVs) to isolate flow without compromising their reliability. To accomplish this, the MOV control scheme was changed to bypass the CLOSE torque switch (TS) until the point of hard seat contact. The contacts of a limit switch (LS) placed in a parallel closing circuit with the TS are closed from the initiation of the close sequence until the point of hard seat contact. Since the TS is fully bypassed, valve closure cannot be interrupted due to TS setting errors, changes in switch performance or the influence ofload sensitive behavior. The modification climinates TS failure from preventing the valve from performini; its safety function. Valve operability is enhanced by the modificatior in that both the TS and LS would have to fr.il to prevent a closure and the valve will seat without excessive contact. I Safety Evaluation Summan': An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation,  ;

found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • e*********ee**************************** *************ee***********

• Modification: RC-V-28 Gear Change (CCR-139977)

Description of Modification: The modification changed the gear ratio on RC-V-28 as suggested by torque switch setting calculations which indicated a need for increased stem torque margin at degraded voltage conditions. The higher gear ratio allows increased stem torque for 3 given amount of motor torque. The change increased the valve's stroke time but did not alter its function or original design purpose. A post modification full diagnostic test performed prior to placing the valve in senice confirmed the operability of the motor operator and its ability to deliver thrust and torque with suflicient margin to account for potential increased requirements. Operator and valve thrust and torque limits were not exceeded by the gear ratio change.

_Sjlfety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e**************ese********************** **** **e************

Modification: Installation of Leak Test Connections for DH-V-14A and 14B Check Valves (CCR-140086)

Description of Modification: A modification was made to install a " bleed ring" between the inlet flange and seat of relief valves DH-V-57A and 57B. A 3/8" connection and ball valve were mounted on the bleed ring to provide a leakage / vent path for use during periodic leak testing of the main seats on DH-V-14A and 14B. Installation of the bleed ring does not obstruct the flow through the inlet piping to the relief valves. The setpoint of the relief valves

[ remained unchanged by the modification. Protection to the lower pressure Decay Heat Removal System afTorded by the relief valves was therefore not impacted by the modification.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of

I920-9S20 t 35 A ttuhment!

Pcce 43 of 73 safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Replacement of CW-V-23 A to 23H and CW-V-24 A to 24D (CCR-140482)

Descriotion pf Modification: Originally installed gate valves, CW-V-23 A to 23H, were replaced with stainless steel ball valves to improve the performance of the Circulating Water Amertap system. The new valves proside  !

more reliable isolation provisions. While the previously installed CW-V-24 A to 24D valves were ball valves, their replacement was necessary because the valves are no longer manufactured. The advantage to replacing gate valves with ball valves in this application is that the valve is closed with a quarter turn of the handle versus the multi-turn operation of the gate valve handwheel.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of I safety; did not create the possibihty of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

......*******************************....e********************e.....*****.....

Modification: ESAS Channel #3 Bypass (CCR-140795)

Description of Modification: The modification allows operators to bypass the HPI and LPI channel #3 on a loss of VBC from the control room. The modification only affects the 'B' train of ESAS. The ability to bypass ESAS is required to throttle Reactor Building spray flow and allow ES pumps to take a suction from the Reactor Building sump on depletion of the BWST.

The modification was determined necessary following review of an event at another plant. It was found that on a concurrent loss of offsite power and a loss of ' A' train station DC power, the ' A' diesel generator fails due to a loss of excitation. The failure causes deenergization of the AC and DC power supplies to the I A, IC and IE inveners.

120 VAC vital distribution panels VB A and VBC are lost. ES actuation system train ' A' is made inoperable and both AC and DC supplies to the train are lost. Train 'B' actuates due to loss of VBA, which actuates channel #1, and VBC which de-energizes the HPl and LPI actuation bistables in bistable cabinet 'C' Block loading and 27/86 lockout occurs since 'B' train ESAS has power to the #3 channel actuation relays (powered by VBD). Because HPI and LPI channel bypass bistable de-energize, the ability to bypass the 'B' train of ES AS is lost. The modification corrects this problem.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on the description above, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

....,*e.........e***e...e******es.............e**e.****ee **e... **********.**

Modification: Re-powering the Reactor Building Spray Flow Modules (CCR-140843) ]

Description of Modification: The modification rewired the ' AUTO' and ' HAND' power to the RB Spray flow instrumentation in the non-nuclear instrumentation cabinets. The previous wiring configuration had BSI-F1I wired to ' HAND' power and BSI-F12 wired to ' AUTO' power. The modification reversed the wiring configuration. Rewiring the power to the RB Spray flow instruments ensures that one train of the RB Spray system is fully operable assuming any postulated single failure. The ability to control RB Spray is not compromised by the modification.

1

1920-98 20135 A ucchment1 Page 44 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfur:ction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • e ************e..******* .... *****ees ****e**.........eees.** .... ****.

Modification: RC-V-2 Gear Change (CCR-141422)

Description of Modification: The modification changed the gear ratio on RC-V-2 as suggested by torque switch setting calculations which indicated a need for increased stem torque margin at degraded voltage conditions. The higher gear ratio allows increased stem torque for a given amount of motor torque. The change increased the valve's stroke time but did not change its function or original design purpose. A post modification full diagnostic test perfonned prior to placing the valve in senice confinned the operability of the motor operator and its ability to deliver thrust and torque with suflicient margin to account for potential increased requirements. Operator and valve thrust and torque limits were not exceeded by the gear ratio change.

Safety Evaluation Summarv: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e *****. ******

Modification: RC-V-2 Close Torque Switch Bypass (CCR-142737) 1 Description of Modification: The modification bypassed the close torque switch on RC-V-2 as suggested by l measured data indicating that the unwedging thrust may be problematic if the bypass were not done. The close torque switch bypass allows the valve to produce less wedging force and coincidentally less unwedging force. The change allowed the valve to meet existing documented requirements with margin to account for potential future increases in design basis stem thrust requirements. A post modification diagnostic test performed before the valve was returned to senice confirmed the operability of the motor operator. Valve operation with the close bypass modification does not exceed operator and valve thrust and torque limits. The torque switch limiter plate restricts the valve torque and the motor actuator structural thrust limits are restricted by procedure.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supponing documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • e*******$ *************************************ee****$.******** e********

Modification: Station Static Inverter 15kVA CVT Replacement (CCR-142738)

Description of Modification: The modification provides instructions for the replacement of any 15kVA Constant Voltage Transfonner on any of the station static inverters. This is required since the original CVT is no longer manufactured and must be replaced with a ' transformer kit' and removal of a choke (CH4)a' nd transfonner (TI) to be replaced with a control transformer. The modification improves the reliability of the system without sacrificing functional requirements. The voltage regulation, load can)ing capacity, hannonic distortion and overload capacity are equal to or better than the original equipment.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or

1920-98 20135 A ttwhment t

, Page 45 of 73 malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or analfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • ese *********************ese***** ***** ...se.... **ee.... * .........

Modification: DH-DPT-802 Tubing Support (CCR 142755)

Description of Modification: The modification installed new tubing supports for two 0.5" diameter tubing lines connecting differential pressure transmitter (DH-DFT-802) with the ' A' 10" diameter Low Pressure Injection / Decay Heat Removal system lines going to the reactor vessel. The modification corrects inadequate support for the tubing identified during a plant walkdown by installing supports that conform to design requirements: assure that the tubing will remain functional during and after an SSE seismic event.

Safety Evahration Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on a review of supporting documentation, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist..

• • • e ****eeee******************e ***e.*e e*** e******************************

Modification: DH-V-3 Jog OPEN Modification (CCR-142895)

Description of Modification: The modification allowsjog OPEN operation of DH-V-3 when initiating the dropline to the Reactor Building sump method oflong term boron concentration control following a LOCA and thereby limit the flow rate within the design capability of the Reactor Building sump screens. As modified, the valve travels OPEN only while the push-button is pressed. This allows the valve to be left at intermediate positions. The CLOSE control function of the valve was unchanged and continues to travel to fully closed after a single operation of the CLOSE push-button. I l

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the modification, based on the description above, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • ese******es ********* e********ee********************************e.*********

Modification: Gate Valve Close Torque Switch Bypass (EDC C205690)

Description of Modification: The modification installed close torque switch bypasses on motor operated (MOV) gate valves. The bypasses are required to overcome high differential pressure / flow conditions u hile allowing the torque switch to remain at a relatively low setting. The modification was made necessary by recent increases in certain progranunatic parameters such as valve factor. The calculations form the basis and provide confidence that the valves will realistically perform their safety function. j Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the torque switch bypass modification, based on the description above, found that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evahiated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

eseee ****ese. .e****************eesee*****ee... e*************e *************

1920-98-20135

. A ttTlunent1 Pece 06 of 73 Modi 0 cation: Permanent Demineralizer System (MD-Tl/T2-232-B)

Descrintion orModification: The modification allowed more Ocxible use of plant tankage and demineralizer units for processing miscellaneous waste by: installation of either a permanent or temporary demineralizer system in the chemical cleaning building (CCB), allowed the use of two tanks, CC-T-1 and CC-T-2 in the CCB by the liquid radwaste system, cross connecting evaporator condensate dcmincralizer to permit both parallel and series 4 operation, store and process secondary condensate water in the TMI-2 Processed Water Stcrage Tanks, receive and process OTSG drain down during refueling outages and process Condenser and Turbine Building Sump water in the event of a primary to secondary leak. Pipe connections, power supplies, controls and monitoring equipment associated with the processes were made and/or relocated to make the modification.

Safety Evaluation Summary: The installation and use of the dcmineralizer system and/or the reconfigured evaporator distillate demineralizers meets the intent of Reg Guide 1.143 and the safety evaluation that the i modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was fotmd to exist.

change mods above

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • j 111. Electrical Jumpers, Lifted Leads, and Temporary Mechanical Modifications i

l Modification: Control Rod Drive Mechanism Temperature Monitoring (J 3) l Description of Modification: Six thermocouple cables were routed from the control rod drive mechanisms i (CRDM) at the reactor vessel head area to monitor CRDM temperatures during Cycle 11. The cables were routed  !

through electrical penetration 217E and connected to a thermocouple readout in the Turbine Building.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e**es*****e.******************ese***ese**se******e *******e **

Modification: Temporary Power to BS-P-0002 (J 4)

Description of Modification: Temporary control power was provided for the sodium thiosulfate recirculating pump motor while the permanent motor controller was de-energized.

Safety Evaluation Summarv: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not im olve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of r.luipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee**************************************************

Modification: Troubleshoot Stray AC Voltage on EHC-V-0018 (J 4 and 5)

Description of Modification: The fic!d cables for LO-V-0105 located in T1278 and the TB1 terminal box were swapped with the EHC.V-0018 switch while the turbine was offline to allow troubleshooting stray AC voltage.

l

I 1920-98-20135 l . A ttachmentI l

Page 47 of 73 i

k Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a resiew of supporting i documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident I or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the l margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not l previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety def'med in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e*********ee**ee* ***eeeeoe**********************.**

Modincation: Relay Sypass to Allow Continued Operation of AH-P-7C (J 5)

Description of Modincation: Relay LS-267X in the control room heating and ventilation panel was bypassed to permit continued operation of AH-P-7C while the switchgear was de-energized for breaker testing and bus cleaning.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the j margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not  !

previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • eesee************e ******* *****eee****************** ***eseee********ese*

i Modification: Power Sewage Pumping Station During IB 4160V Turbine Plant Bus Outage (3 5)

Description of Modification: Temporary power was supplied to the sewage pumping station during the IB 4160V turbine plant bus outage by running a " welding" cable from LC2 to the sewage pumping station.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defimed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • esee ****** ******e **e.se *******e.********* ee ***.e**eee.... *********

Modification: Open WDL-V-535 for Reactor Building Sump Cleaning (J 6)

Description of Modification: A temporaryjumper was installed to open WDL-V-535 while the Reactor Building sump was being cleaned.

Sa_fety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

l

• • • • • • ***e ****e...*****e..*****...ee....ee...**e.. .......***.. ********e..

Modification: Relay Bypass to Allow Continued Operation of AH-P-7D (J 5) l Description of Modification: The LS-267X relay in the control room heating and ventilation panel was bypassed to permit continued operation of AH P-7D while the switchgear was de-energized for breaker testing and bus cleaning.

l 1920-98 20135

. A ttshmentI l

. Page 48 of 73 Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

sesseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesseesseeeeeeees Modification: Power Processing Center Distribution Pancis During Ib 4160V Turbine Plant Bus Gutage (J 7 and 10)

Description of Modification: A portable diesel generator was located at the processing center and connected to power distribution panels SED-SEC-$HA and SED-SEC-5LA during the IB 4160V turbine plant bus outage.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of tle temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting l documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • e ***e eeesse *******e**ee.. **eesseeee***esee ********o*****************

Modification: East Transfer Hydraulic Pump Low Pressure Switch (J 9)

Description of Modification: The east transfer hydraulic pump pressure was observed to be cycling below the 100 psig low pressure setpoint during frame up and frame down operations. The low pressure switch wasjumpered to permit normal operation. Low pressure indicating lights and pressure indicator were observed during operations with the switch jumpered.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • e**eseesse** e*********o*****es***o**************esee*******ese****ee*******

Modification: Power Sewage Pumping Station During IB 4160V Turbine Plant Bus Outage (J 9) i i

Description of Wlodification: Temporary power was supplied to the sewage pumping station during the 1B 4160V turbine plant bus outage by connecting portable diesel generator EG-Y-6 to the sewage pumping station.  ;

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting i documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident I or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.....ee...... ee... eeeeeeeeeeeeesse***es...........e****sese*** .....ee ees.

Mgdification: IE Inverter Output Meter (J 10 and 11)

Description of Modification: A diagnostic voltage / current meter was temporarily installed on the output of the IE inverter to monitor the output voltage and current wave form.

l 1920-98-20135

, A uMunent]

l . Page 49 of 73 l

I l

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the

margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not l presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

se******ese** .......e**** . ******** e ***e .****ee....**... *ee .....e*****

Modification: Temporary Power to the Precoat Panel (J l1)

Description of Modification: A temporary cable was connected between the radwaste control parel and the precoat panel to supply power to power the precoat panel while the 'H' bus was out of senice.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the ,

margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not l previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No l unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

e++****eeeeee*******ee***** e************ .....e********** .....e*************

Modification: Pretreatment Well Pumps (J 12,13 and 14)

Description of Modification: Temporary provision was made to run the well pumps (WT-P-40A/B/C) in manual until the new dcmineralizer system is put in scrsicc.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • eesee******************************************************* e***

ModiGcation: Miscellaneous Drain Oxygen Testing (J 14)

Description of Modification: Condensate valve CO-V- 262 wasjumpered open to permit miscellaneous drains to discharge to CO-T-1 versus the hotwell for the purpose of oxygen testing.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • ese ** e********eesee*********************** ******************************

Modification: West Transfer Hydraulic Pump Low Pressure Switch (J 20) l l Description of Modification: The west transfer hydraulic pump pressure was observed to be c) cling below the 100 l psig low pressure setpoint during frame up and frame down operations. The low pressure switch wasjumpered to permit normal operation. Low pressure indicating ligbs and pressure indicator wcre observed during operations with the switch jumpered.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary jumper found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident

1920-93-20135 A nachment1 Pace 50 of 73 or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • esee***ee. ** ..e******* . ****e...... ***..... ************ eeeeee.

Modification: 1B Main Transfonner Oil Pump and Fan Power (J 20)

Description of Modification: Power for the IB Main Transfonner Bank 4 oil pumps and fans was supplied by jumpers from the transformer's auxiliary cabincts until an outage would pennit icplacement of a defective breaker.

Safety Evaluation Summaiv: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the I margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.,

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eesesseesse *******ese**********************

Modification Power to Test Run AH-E-14C Motor Fan Assembly (J 22)

Description of Modification: Temporary power was obtained for the test running of AH-E 14C by connecting a power cable from circuit LH3 to the motor power feed. ,

I Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting l documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident i or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

. **eeeeeeee***ee.. ********ee........... ***e ......e********************e...

Modification Power to Test Run AH-E-14C Motor Fan Assembly (123)

Description of Modification: A jumper was required to be installed in the control room heating and ventilation panel to permit the test operation of AH-E-14C without moving the dampers.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evahiation of the temporaryjumper found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not ,

previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defmed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • esee*******ese**ese*************************** *************************e Modification: Remove Eccentricity Display from the Digital Turbine Control System Screen (LL 1)

Description of Modification: The value displayed on screen #3 is hat of the gap between the probe and the rotor and not a measure of eccentricity. For that reason, the screen Se displaying the value was deleted to pievent operator confusion. Eccentricity will be detennined from the highest and lowest gap difTerence readings on the EWS screen #3.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not

1920-98-20135

, A naclunent!

. Page 51 of 73 presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

. e***************************************************************************

Modification: Bentley Nevada Monitoring System (LL 1 and 2)

Description of Modification: The alarm function on the Benticy Nevada vibration monitoring system was disabled to prevent the main turbine, main generator and excitor from alarming in the control room on overhead alarm I panel K-2-1. The alann feature was optional and was disconnected at the request of Operations.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident i or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • . *** .e**** ************************************************* .. ********

Modification: l A Main Transfonner Pressure Relief Device Alarm (LL 2)

Description of Modification: The l A main transformer pressure relief device alarm circuit indicated that one of the desices had not reset. The devices were found to be reset and the transformer was maintaining pressure with no N2makeup The lead from the 1 A main transformer was lifted to clear the faulty alarm and permit the proper i function of t' . arm from the 1B main transformer. '

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the ,

margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Elimination of Digital Tmbine Control System Software Problems (LL 3)

Description of Modification: The " Load Hold" and " Warming Rates" were removed from digital turbine control system display screens to prevent inadvertent use by operators. The action was taken because ofinoperative software.

Safety Evahtation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specifi':ation. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e**********eeeee************************

Modification: Circulating Water Acid Tank Low Level Alarm (LL 4)

Description of Modification: The " locked in" Low Circulating Water Level alarm was disabled by lifting a lead so that an alarm re-flash could occur to identify "Hi/Lo pH" or " Low sample flow" conditions should they occur.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not

1920-9c-20135

, A ttachmentI Page 52 cf 73

! previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Powering of Distribution Panels SED-SEC-5HA and SED-SEC-5LA (LL 5)

(

l p_g.s.griotion of Modification: The existing power leads for the two panels were lifted to avoid back feed of the IF

{

bus and pennit the re-powering the panels temporarily from a portable generator.

Safety Evaluation SummafY: An evaluation of the temporan lifted lead found, based on a review of supportmg documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Fan Operation with Auto-closure of Damper Disabled (LL 5)

Description of Modification: The trip signal leads for AH-D-84 were lifted to pennit operation of AH-E-7 during the repair of AH-TS-690.

l Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting )

documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No l unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.*******************************.se*********.***.**********.******************

Modification: Pretreatment Well Pumps (LL 6) l Description of Modification: Temporary provision was made to run the well pumps (WT-P-40A/B/C) in manual  ;

until the new demineralizer system is put in service. Pump discharge was directed to the mechanical draft cooling towers and the clearwell level switches were not necessary in the circuit.

I Safety Evaluation Summag: An evaluation of the temporary lifled lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the l margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not i previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Disable Plant Interlock Trip Signals to the Feed Pump Turbines During the Outage (LL 6 and 7)

Description of Modification: The plant interlock trip signals to the feed pump turbines were disabled to permit resetting of the feed pump turbines during the 12R outage for the purpose of valve stroking and control system testing.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

L

f

, 1920 98-20135

. A ttachmentI i . Pcge 53 of 73

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • e***********e****e**************************************e***eese Modification Power to Test Run AH-E-14C Motor Fan Assembly (LL 7 and 8)

Description of Modification: The opening of two links was required in the control room heating and ventilation l panel to reconfigure the motor control circuit and permit the test operation of All-E-14C.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,************esee....e**************** e**e****** e***.es.......

Modification: Add Reclaimed Water to Reactor Coolant Bleed Tanks While Feeding the Reactor Coolant System (LL 9)

Description of Modification: A lead was lifted to allow WDL-P-6A to continue mnning while WDL-V-20 is open.

This configuration permits the addition of reclaimed water to the 'A' bleed tank while concurrently feeding the Reactor Coolant system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safe 9 defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Return of Halon Control Panel FS-PUL-AIT-1B to Senice (LL 21)

Description of Modification: The lifted lead removed power from the 'B' detector loop to prevent def ctive components in the 'B' loop from affecting other operational loops.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary lifted lead found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No unresiewed safety question was found to exist..

• • • • ese***********************.e*****************************************e****

Modification: East Transfer Carriage Control (LL 110)

Description of Modification: A link was opened to disable the slow zone pool side 'Go' switch. It was causing air surges uhen the 'Stop' switch was activated and resulted in carriage travel.

Safety Evaluation Summm: An evaluation of the temporary lilled lead found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident i or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. No

! unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeee***************ee******ese***ee .e**************************************

1920-98-20135

, A u:chmenti

. Pagc 54 cf 73 Mpdification: Diversion of Auxiliary Boiler Sump Water w the Turbine Building Sump (TMM 2)

Description of Modificatip5 Water going to the auxiliary boiler sump was diverted to the turbine building sump while the auxiliary boiler masonry pad and sump were being rehabilitated. The temporary modification allowed the masonry work to be completed while maintaining the auxiliary boiler operational.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease ,

in the margin of safety; did not creat the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ee****eseee****ese****ee.** ee.........

Modification: River Water Supply to the Betz Trailer (TMM 2)

Description of Modification: River water was supplied through a temporary tee and isolation valve to provide make-up to the Betz trailer. The water supply was required to run the test tower (demineralizer) to evaluate cheraicals being considered for replacing sulfuric acid.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Monitoring DifTerential Pressure Between the Unit 2 Fuel Handling Building and Atmosphere (TMM 2)

Descri.ption of Modification: Faulty operation of differential pressure indicator 2 AH-DPI-5704 required the temporary use of another differential pressure indicator (2 AH-DPI-5) to monitor the differential between the Unit 2 Fuel Handling Building and atmospheric pressures until such time as the permanent indicator was repaired.

I Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create th2 possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety i not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • *****e *********=*****************************************

Modification: Chilled Water to Refrigerant Reclaimer (TMM 2)

Description of Modification: A hose was attached to CH-V-16Y, the 3 A pump discharge and a hose was attached to CH-V-16C, the 3 A pump suction to provide cooling / condensing water to the refrigerant reclaimer unit. A chilled water stream was routed to cool the unit and returned to the chilled water system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of j supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahtated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135

, A tractmenti

. hge 55 of 73 ese****e ......................................................... **e ** ...

Modification: Air Compressor EG-P-1 A Air Intake Filter Replacement (TMM 2)

Dpscription of Modification: Incidental I" pipe components were used to install a replacement air intake filter.

The longer replacement filter had to be mounted vertically on a 90 degree elbow to fit in place.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possit:ility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist..

. ***ee............ ******ee................e**e.....................e**e **.

Modification: In-leakage Detection Through Packing Glands ofidle Condensate Pumps (TMM 2)

Description of Modification: Water dams were installed on the condensate pumps after they were taken out of senice to determine if air in-leakage past the pump's packing glands could be determined a decrease in condensate dissolved oxygen concentrations. Demineralized water was used to flood the packing glands ta prevent possible contamination of the condensate system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting doct. mentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

ee******** ......e**************e... ** e******* .... **e............. *****.

Modification: Acid Addition to the Circulating Water Fiume with WT P18 Out of Senice (TMM 2)

Description of Modification: Tubing and associated fittings and valves were temporarily installed to permit acid ,

addition to the circulating water fiume during the period that WT-P-18 was out of senice.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist..

. **e ************* ***** .e*************************************************

Modification: Cross-connect the Control Output of XDC-1 to Both Industrial Coolers (TMM 2)

Description of Modification: An air supply line was temporarily installed between XDC-1 to the new industrial cooler to permit its continued operation while the nonfunctional controller was removed for maintenance.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • ee **********ese*********************************************************

i 1920-98-20135 A nochmenti Pcge % of 73 Modification: Prosision for an Adjustable and Measurable Nitrogen Supply to the Main Condenser (TMM 3)

Qescription of Modification: A temporary installation made up of a hose and rotometer from N1-V-5 to IIV-V-60 was used to proside an adjustable and measurable N2 supply to the main condenser to support actisities to reduce

, condensate system dissolved O2 concentrations.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malftmetion of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e **************** .... ****ee....... * ......e****.e.***e***

Modification: Controlled Leak:off for SR-P-1 A Upper Bearing Chamber (TMM 4)

Description of Modification: Installation of a new style "No Leakage" pump packing on SR-P-1 A, it was necessary to provide a leak-off port from the upper bearing chamber to ensure that process fluid will reach the upper bearing in the event the tube system would be out of senice.

Safety Evaluation SummaE: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease

, in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety I

not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.  !

l No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Auxiliary Building Exhaust Flow Control Damper Fixed in the 'Open' Position (TMM 4)

Description of A_tgdificatio_q

The auxiliary building exhaust flow control damper was found to have several j damper vanes broken which reduced the efTective flow. The broken vanes were temporarily wired in the 'Open' position until Engineering direction could be provided for their repair or removal.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of j supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety  ;

not previously esaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. l No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l **********e************************************ ****************************** I t

l Modification: Raw Sewage Processing While a Portion of the Equalization Tank is Out of Senice (TMM 4)

Description of Modification: An air pump and appropriate were temporarily installed from the top of the I equalizing tank at the sewage treatment plant. The pump was used to transfer raw sewage from the tank to the 'C' external aeration tank at a constant flow rate until the maintenance on the equalization tank was completed.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist..

....e************************************ e***********************************

I 1920-90-20133

, A tsahmenti

. Page 57 of 73 ,

Modificagoj! Allow Moisture Separator Drain Water Wastage to a Sump (TMM 5 and 17) pescription of Modification: To reduce the concentration of chemical contaminants in the secondary system water, wastage of water from the moisture separator drains at a rate of five gallons per minute was initiated. The wasted water was directed to either the powdex or turbine building sumps.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease l

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not prniously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist..

........ **** .....e***e ............e**** ..e*****e .........................

Modification: Telephone and Fax Sersice to the Betz Trailer (TMM 6)

Description of Modification: Temporary telephone connections for voice and facsimile communication were provided for the Betz trailer to support facility operations. I Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease l in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety l not prniously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. l No unrniewed safety question was found to exist.

j eee** *********eeeeeeeee ** ***e*********************************************

Modification: Bulk Nitrogen Supply for 12R Outage Activities (TMM 6)

Description of Modification: Accommodation was made to supply bulk N 2from the liquid high pressure banks to the secondary side N2 header for N 2blanketing of the main steam lines and the secondary side of the OTSGs during the 12R outage.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety prniously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ****ee $*********ese********

hiodification: Minimization of N 2Blanket Release from Condensate Tank IB (TMM 7)

Description of Modification: A temporary extension was installed on the vent of CO-T-1B to minimize the loss of N2 blanketing. The temporary modification maintained the venting capability of the tank while installed.

Safety Evaluation Summas: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imporunt to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety

. not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

l No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

..................................e**** ................ ******************* *

)

)

1920-98-20135

. A ncricnent1 Page 50 of 73 l

Modification: Temporary Hose from Chillers to Frcon Reliefs (TMM 7)

Description of Modification: During the installation of structural steel for modification of the control tower 355' elevation, it was necessary to provide hose connections in place of the tubing normally used between the chillers l and the freon vent valves until the tubing could be modified to accommodate the new structural steel configuration.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Acid Truck LevelIndication (TMM 7)

Description of Modification: Acid tank WT-T-23 was taken out of service after it was found to be leaking and bulk acid tanker trucks were utilized to supply acid to the plant while the tank was being replaced. Truck tank level was provided to support operators by connecting temporary tubing to the WT-T-23 level indicating equipment =

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety l not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.  !

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

• • e$$**********************************e***********$$$e*******ee**************  !

Modificati 2D: Filtered Water Supply to Ecolochem Demineralizer Unit (TMM 7)

DescriDtion of Modification: Flexib!c hose and fittings were used to make up a temporary connection between WT-V-644 at the IWT carbon filter outlets to the packaged Ecolochem demineralized water system to reduce the suspended solids of the water in the carbon filters and permit use of the reverse osmosis units.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahuated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist..

• • • • • • • • • • • • e ***************** e*****ee.. *******e e**********ee******e*****

i Modification: Manual Balancing Damper Fixed in the 'Opef Position (TMM 7) l l Description of Modification: The manual balancing damper downstream of AH-D-2 was found to have several l damper vanes broken which reduced the effective flow. The broken vancs were temporarily wired in the 'Open' l

position until Engineering direction could be provided for their repair or removal.

Safety Evaluation Sum _ mary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety I not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

1 l

1920-98-20135 A uzchmentI l

i

• Pege 59 of 73 l

............e** ..................................e***eeeeeeeeee.............. ,

1 Modification: Removal of Hose Reels from Senice (TMM 9) i l Description of Modification: Two fire senice hose reels were taken out of senice during the renovation of control l tower patio. Two 1%" hoses were made available from nearby fire senice valves to provide fire protection ,

capabilities until the hose reels were returned to service. l l

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evahtation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist,

....e***e..........................e*****e............................**....

l Modification: Iron Sampling During Alternate Amine Additions (TMM 12)

Description of Modification: Iron (Fe) transpon in the secondary coolant was assessed during the addition of alternate amines to the secondary system by connecting the normal CE-12 sample line to the Fe samplers CE-817 or 818.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involv: an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • e...................................e*********esseeeeeeeeee********esee***

Modification: Routing PWST Water to the Turbine Building Powdex Sump (TMM12 and 23)

Description of Modification: A two inch mbber hose was connected between WDL-V-684 and the inlet to the Powdex sump to allow the PWSTs to be drained to the Powdex sump.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.e ************************* ee ** *****eee***************************** e** l Modification: Verification of the Function of the New Mismatch Light Emitting Diodes (TMM 12)

Description of Modification: Mismatch incandement lights were temporarily replaced with light emitting diodes (LEDs) to determine the feasibility of replacing the incandescent lights permanently. Activities included verification that the LEDs would turn completely oft (and not dim) and that they were sufficiently bright to indicate a mismatch had occurred.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evahtated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98 20135

. A tt .chmerdI

. hge 60 of 73 I

.***e.*******.*ese****. * ** ****.******ees.***********.*******.****.. ****.*

Modification: Filtered Water Supply to Ecolochem Dcmineralizer Unit (TMM 12)

Description of Modification: Flexible hose and fittings were used to make up a temporary connection between the .

j '

IWT unit anion tanks (WT-T 13 and 14) and WT-V-819 at the packaged Ecolochem demineralized water system to reduce the contaminates in the water via the IWT unit anion beds.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of .

an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease

)'

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

..........****..................**......**...........e**e.*******e..........

Modification: Direct Ecolochem Backwash to IWFS (TMM 12)

Description of Modification: Various fittings and an isolation valve replaced CO-FT-303 to permit connection of a hose to IWFS to receive backwash effluent from the Ecolochem processing unit.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease

]

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist. )

Modification: Rinsing the Primary Water Storage Tanks (TMM 12)

Description of Modification: To allow the reuse of cendensate sent to the primary water storage tanks (PWSTs) in the future, it was necessary to flush the tanks with demineralized water. To accomplish this activity, a temporary hose was connected between the 'Million Gallon" tank and the PWSTs through DW-V-60 and WDL-V1684/685.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

...**e.....e**es .............................**.............e................

Modification: Temporary RM-A-7 Regulator (TMM 13 and 23)

Description of Modificatipn: A temporary gas metering valve was installed in place of CA-V-1030, the permanently installed gas regulating valve, while it was out of sersice due to a lack of pans to complete its repair.

The action was necessary to support a gas release by assuring adequate flow control.

Safety Evaluation SummaE: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

1 i

1920-98-20135 l

. Au%tmenti l Page 61 of 73 Modification: Feedwater System Titanium injection (TMM 13)

Description of Modification: A chemical mix tank, metering pump and hose were connected to the 'A' feedwater l string downstream of the 2"' stage feedwater heater to inject a titanium solution into the feedwater system . The i titanium injection method was tested to determine ifit would be deposited on the OTSG tube surfaces and inhibit Corrosiort.

l l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease l in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety l not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist. i l

Modification: Removal of Floor Sections to Access the 'B' Decay Heat Vault (TMM 13,41 and 57)

Description of Modification: Three to four 2'x4' concrete floor plugs at the Auxiliary Building 281 elevation were

~

temporarily removed to permit the replacement of DH-P-1B.

Eafety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease i in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Maintaining Ball Collector Valve Handles in the ' Engaged' Position (TMM 13) l Description of Modification: To prevent an inadvenent valve trip which would dump the Amertap balls, the ball collector valve handles were held (tied / wired) in the engaged position until the valve mechanism could be repaired.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.......*..* ...........*..**.*......***....***..*..*. *..o**..****.*.***..***.

Modification: Industrial Cooler Air Dampers " Fixed" in the Open Position (TMM 13)

Description of Modification: Air damper atop the Industrial Cooler AH-C-1 was inoperative due to a blown fuse (FU-102) and AH-C-1B was out of sersice. The dampers on AH-C-lwere " fixed" in the open position, while disconnected from their operating arms, to permit proper unit operation. This action allowed continued Reactor Building cooling during steady state power operation until a modification of the damper fuse circuitry was completed.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135

. A u stment1 Pcce 62 of 73 eee*** .........e**eeeeeeee**e eeeeeeeeee.....e****esessee ** ...eeeee eee.

Modification: Troubleshooting 'B' Feedwater Demand increase (TMM 13,19,24 and 25)

Description oWodification: Existing spare wire pairs were used to connect sparc DAS points to obtain data while troubleshooting the 'B' feedwater demand increase w hile placing the 'B' feedwater master in manual.

Safety Evaluation SummaD: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeeee*****e eeeeeeeeee**** ******e eeeesseseee.. **eseeeeeeeeeees e*********

Modification: Blanking Auxiliary Boiler Stack Drain (TMM 14) l l

Description of Modification: Water from the Auxiliary Boiler blowdown tank was backing up into to the boiler j stack drain which ultimately resulted in the water leaking to the floor. A ' pancake' blank was temporarily installed in the drain line at a flanged joint to prevent the back flow from the blowdown tank to the stack.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of 1 an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

J No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

]

eee e ee***e ...e****eeeeeeeeee*****ee** ..eeeeeeeee+e ......... **e .......e.

hi_odification: River Water Temperature Element (TMM 15)

Description of Modification: The permanently installed river water temperature element (SR TE-894) was damaged by a river ice flow on 1/20/96. A temporary temperature element restored river water inlet temperature indication until the permanent temperature element could be repaired.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipmcat important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • e.**e ***eseeeeeeeeeeeee. eeeeeeessee...........eeeeee **ese...e **eeeee.

Modification: Vacuum Pump Use on Condenser Hotwell Interstage Sampling Points to Obtain Dissolved Oxygen Samples (TMM 15) p_escription of Modification: A vactmm capable pump with rubber hose was installed at the main condenser hotwell interstage sampling points (SS-V-30, 31,37 and 38) to obtain accurate dissolved oxygen samples.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification fotmd, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeeeeeeeeeees oeseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

1920-98-20135

, A ttachmenti

. Poge 63 or 73 I

( 1 ModificaMen: Secondary Coolant Dissolved Oxygen Control Through Condensate Tank IB Nitrogen Blanketing (TMM 16)

Description of Modification: N 2supplied from locally positioned N generator 2 was used to blanket CO T-1B in an atternpt to reduce the dissolved oxygen concentration of the water in the hotwell. The N 2supply was connected to l the tank side of the CO-T-1B standpipe vent valve CO-V128B. A discharge line fabricated from P-tubing was connected to the tank to relieve the normal atmosphere blanket.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l

supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety dermed in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ese ***ee**e ************************** +.*************

Modification: Blanking the Flange Between WT-V-404 and WT-T-23 (TMM 16) l Description of Modification: A blank was temporarily installed at a flange between WT-V404 and the sulfuric acid tank (WT-T-23) to stop the leakage of concentrated H2 SO4 past WT-V-404 and permit repair of the WT-T-23.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malftmetion of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.  !

No unreviewed safety question was fotmd to exist. l l

Modification: Local Area Network Sersice for the Control Room CCR Console (TMM 18) pescription of Modification: An existing local area network (LAN) cable was routed from the Mod Comp Room to the control room CCR console to verify the operation of the CPU LAN connection in the control room.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previoudy evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the nurgin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

see**e ***********************************************************************

Modification: Isolation of the OSF Well from Domestic Water While Supplying the Pretreatment System Clearwell (TMM 19 and 28)

Description of Modification: The OSF well was isolated from the domestic water system while supplying the pretreatment system clearwell to prevent the introduction of the domestic water corrosion control chemical (zine onho-phosphate into the pretreatment system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of I

supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malftmetion of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98-20135

, A ttuhment1

. hge 64 of 73

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e..................... *****....... ... *****e ...*** .....e**.

Modification: Mock-up Clamped to a Secondary River Water Header (TMM 19)

Description of Modification: A light weight plywood and plastic mock up was clamped to a 30" Secondary River water system header to pennit planning, training and testing of techniques used to drain and dry the fuel transfer tube canopies during the 12R outage modification of the canopy piping.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the probability of occurrence or consequences of an accident or malfunction either i presiously analyzed or of a new or different type was not increased. No Technical Specification margin of safety l was reduced by this temporary modification. No Unresiewed Safety Question resulted from this temporary '

modification.

Modification: Installation of a Pressure Rig at Nonnally isolated Pressure Gage MU-PI-412 (TMM 19) i Description of Modification: A temporary pressure rig was installed in place of the normally isolated pressure l gage MU-PI-412 to evaluate the cause of repetitive failures of the gage during the performance of surveillances 1303-5.2 (ES Testing)and 1300-311(Inscrsice Testing).

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • ee...e*** e***ee......e4e. *****e...e**********e******************e

• Modiligition: Vapor Detector Water Stop Disc and Sensor Guard Installation (TMM 20 and 21)

Description of Modification: The sensor guard and water stop disc were installed on MSA vapor detectors to detenninc if reduced calibration drill would be observed on the detectors as a result of minimizing the detector's exposure to moisture and direct air currents. The sensor guard and water stops were installed on AH-CE-204A and 2048.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety pre'iously evaluated and does not involve a decrease l

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety l not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

i No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • e**** ...e** ......... ****e ** **********************e *****************

• Modification: Combustible Gas Monitor on IB Main Transformer (TMM 21)

Description of Modification: A combustible gas monitor was temporarily installed on the IB Main Transformer to monitor combustible gases in the transfonner oil.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supposting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease i

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defimed in the basis of any technical specification.

No unr; viewed safety question was found to exist.

............e***************************** **********************************

1920-98-20135

, A ttachmenti

+ Pcge 65 of 73 Modificatipn: Video Surveillance of the IR and IT Switchgear Rooms in the Screenhouse (TMM 22) i Descript. ion of Modification: Temporary cable was pulled and video cameras installed for the purpose of prosiding remote fire watch capabilities for the IR and IT switchgear rooms to the security central alarm station.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • ..... ****e.............e** ee*******esee.*****e **es....................

Modification: Video Obscivation of Miscellaneous Wasu Evaporator Air-Water Separator Tank Level (TMM 23)

Description of Modification: A video camera was mounted in the vicinity of the miscellaneous waste evaporator air-water separator tank for the purpose of remotely monitoring the tank level gage glass.

I Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of I supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • ese*********eeessesse***********e ...... ** se .. ******** e**** . ***ee.**

Modification: Controlled Leak-off for SR-P-1C Upper Bearing Chamber (TMM 23)

Description of Modification: Installation of a new style "No Leakage" pump packing on SR-P-lC

, it was necessary to provide a leak-off port from the upper bearing chamber to ensure that process fluid will reach the upper bearing in the event the lube system would be out of senice.

Safety Evaluation Summa _ry: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

eeeeee*********e ***** eee*** *** .... **********************************ese**

Modification: Temporary Power for MUX E Unit 9 (TMM23)

Description of Modification: A replacement power a supply (Lamda model LPD-412A-FM) was installed to supply power to MUX E Unit 9 until a new power supply was installed.

l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

ee** e**ee...................... **** ........e*** ........... **e ...........

I920-98-20135

, A ttatment1

, Page 66 of 73 o

M_dirication: Evaluating Condensate Pump Suctions as the Source of Air in-leakage (TMM 25)

Dgeription of Modification: Temporary boots were installed around the condensate pump suction expansion joint boots and were filled with water to determine if the pump suction expansion boots were the source of air in-leakage to the condensate system.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did 1.ot involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • ese ....e s e e * * * *

• o * *

• e e e * *

• e * *

• e e e e e e e e e e e e... * *...e e e e s * *

• e e......e e e.

Modification: Replace WT-V-455 with a Cap (TMM 25)

Description of Modification: WT-V-455 was damaged and could not be repaired. It was replaced with a pipe cap of the same material and adequate rating to withstand system pressure.

Eafety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evahiated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

seeeeeeeeeeee***eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees**e ..e**eseeeeeeeeeeeeeee.e**** .

Modification: Dcmineralized Water Supply for 12R Outage for Miscellaneous Activities (TMM 25)

Description of Modification: A demineralized water source was provided to support feed water heater leak checks and the generator rewind project during the 12R outage. The connection for the temporary sources was made down stream of DW-V-60, the DW-P-3 discharge valve.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahtated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

eseeesseseeesseee *****ee...e*** ..e ees ***e .....e ......e eeee.....e** ees Modification: Temporary Secunty Radio Antenna Connection (TMM 26)

Description of Modification: In order to verify the possibility of enhanced Nonh Gate radio transmissions, cable PT 276 was used to provide a temporary antenna connection.

S t_fety Egluation Summarr An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfimetion of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese>esseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee (i

I 1920-98-20135 i . A ttachmenti

. Page 67 of 73 Modification: River Water Sampling (TMM 26)

Description of Modification: A temporary continuous untreated river water sample point was established to satisfy environmental licensing requirements and at the same time climinate interference with operation of the EPA sampler.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • ..........**........................ ..............................****e..

Modificatign: Provision for Flushing and Sampling the Reclaimed Boric Acid Tank Recirculation Lines (TMM 27)

Description of Modification: Provision was made for the flushing and sampling of the RBAT recirculation lines by installing a tee and valve with goose neck tubing at the pipe to tubing connection of WDL-PI-1474.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporag mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.......****e........***..............................e.....ee.............. j Modification: Circulating Water System Supply for Analysis at the Betz Laboratory Trailer (TMM 27)

Description of Modification: A constant supply of circulating water was taken from the circulating pump i discharge and routed through hoses to the Betz laboratory trailer for analysis. The water was returned to the circulating water flume via a hose to a stop log opening.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was fotmd to exist.

l

..............e. ...................e.... e.............e.................. .e j higdification: Reactor Building Video to the Control Room (TMM 28)

D_gscription of Modification: Spare telephone cable pairs were used to provide a temporary Tideo signal from the Reactor Building to the Control Room for surveillance during the 12R outage.

l Safety Evahiation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of l an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease f

i in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

1920-98-20135 )

. A ttxtrnent1

. Prge 68 or 73 Modi 6 cation: SV-2 Stroke Travel Setting Adjustment to 40% (TMM 28)

Description of Modification: The SV-2 partial valve stroke travel setting was temporarily changed from 10% to 40% to evaluate SV-2 operation and chatter during a 10% valve stroke.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, basca on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist. l

.............................................................................. l Modi 6 cation: Provision for Flushing and Sampling the Reclaimed Boric Acid Tank Recirculation Lines I (TMM 28)

Description of Modification: Provision was made for the flushing and sampling of the RBAT recirculation lines by installing a tee and valve with goose neck tubing at the pipe to tubing connection of WDL-PI 1475. ,

1 l

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evahtation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety ,

not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification. I No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Stator Winding N: Blanket Supply (TMM 28)

Description of Mglification: A temporary source oflow pressure (<100 psi) N2 for blanketing the stator windings during rewind brazing operations was obtained via a connection to the existing TMM 6 N line. TMM 6 supplied bulk N 2to the secondary plant headers.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Video Observation of Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator Concentrator Tank Level (TMM 29 and 30)

Description of Modification: A video camera was mounted in the vicinity of the miscellaneous waste evaporator concentrator tank for the purpose of remotely monitoring the tank level.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

1920-98 20135

, A nactrnentt

, P:ge 69 of 73 Modification: Temporary Pressure Indication for the Makeup System (TMM 31)

Description of Modification: A 0 to 3000 psi gage was installed at MU-V-207 to evaluate the pressure drop across the throttled MU-V-222 at high flow rates.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specificatiori.

No umeviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • .e***ee ** . ** ...ee.........e**eesee. oso........ee*****es....ee...e ..

Modification: Setpoint Adjustment to Reduce Nuisance Alarn (TMM 32)

Description of Modification: The setpoint on K24VDC-min was temporarily changed from 23.8 to 23.5 VDC to reduce the frequency of nuisance alarms due to voltage oscillations in the monitoring circuitry of the digital turbine control system 24 VDC power supplies.

Eafety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the r ability of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reducc v margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found te c .jst.

ese**** .......e . ee.......ee...... ******ese *******e .. ***eo** ...ee.....

Modification: Operations with Condensate Tank Cross-connect Valves Closed (TMM 33)

Descrintion of Modification: Provision was made to allow removal of water from CO-T-1 A to the condenser while the condensate storage tank cross-connect valves were closed for the performance of generator 2N blanketing special temperary procedure.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evahiation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.......... ****esee***eeeeee*****eesseeee....e .......e**eeeee......se......e.

Modification: Tempmary Senice Air to Support 12R Outage Activitics (TMM 33)

Description of Modification: A temporary Senice Air supply was provided on the turbine deck to support 12R outage work. The temporary modification involved a 2" air hose and distribution manifolds on the turbine buildir g 355 clevation w hich were fed from SA-V-83.

b@i Euluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

1920-98 20135

, A urchment1

• Page 70 of 73 Modification: Priming SS-P-1 or 2 during Secondary Plant Air In-Icakage Search (TMM 34)

Rgscription of Modification: A demineralized water supply was temporarily provided to prime SS-P-1 or 2 to perform sampling from discontinued sample points CE-17 and 18 while attempting to locate secondary system air in-leakage source (s).

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Maintenance and Radeon Two-way Radio Communications (TMM 34)

Description of Modification: A remote radio transmitter / receiver was installed in the Reactor Building and a system interface unit was installed in the Turbine Building radio room to improve two-way radio communications for Maintenance and Radeon department personnel in the Reactor Building.

1 1

Safety Evaluation Sum _ mary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease

{

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

]

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Fuel Transfer Tube Weld Canopy Pressurization (TMM 36)

Description of Modification: The temporary modification allowed the pressurization of the weld canopics to leak test the newly installed piping and flange plugs u hile preventing the in-leakage of borated water.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the prooability or consequences of an acciderst or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated sud doet, not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfurcion of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined b .he basis of any technical specification. i No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l Modification: Gag WDL-V108,109,111 and 113 Closed while Operating the Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator (TMM 37 and 38)

Description of Modification: WDL-V-108,109,111 and 113 were temporarily gagged closed during operation of the miscellaneous waste evaporator to prevent the contents of the concentrated waste storage tanks from being accidentally transfeired through the valves to the evaporator.

t

! Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l

( ******************************************************************************

1920-98-20135

, A tt:chmentt Prce 71 of 73 Modification: Outage Control Center Communication System (TMM 40) i Description of Modification: The Outage Control Center (OCC) communication system was activated to permit two-way communication between the OCC and the plant. The temporary modification involved the relocation of a backup radio console to the OCC.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety j l not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.  ;

I No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • $e. ******************************************** .. e**********************

Modification: Backup Senice and Instrument Air Supplied from a Temporary Diesel Driven Compressor l (TMM 42)

Description of Modification: A temporary backup supply of senice and instrument air was provided to the plant during the 12R outage by a diesel driven compressor via a connection at SA-V-23.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evahiated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evahrated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • ese**********ese********************************************4e********

Modification: Temporary Tubing to Supply Air to Dampers (TMM 42 and 43)

Description of Modification: Temporary tubing was used to supply air to AH-E-94 A/B damper motors while the control building discharge duct was being repositioned to support the fabrication of the new I&C shop.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not presiously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

essee*******....******************.e**............**********************

Rodification: Temporary Trailer Power (TMM 43)

Description of Modification: Temporary 120 VAC electric power was supplied to a temporary trailer located south of the operations office and chemical cleaning buildings. The power source was panel 2 MPH-1 located in the chemical cleaning building. l Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of l supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease i

in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety I

not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical speciliation. j No unresiewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • • • • e *** . *** ... *********essee **************************************

l

1920 '8-20135

. A hment!

• Ptge 72 of 73 Modification: Drain the Borated Water Storage Tank to the 'B' Reactor Coolant Bleed Tank (TMM 48)

Description of Modification: A hose connection between DH-V-44 and a flange installed at WDL-V-265B was used to drain the BWST to the 'B' RCBT to permit work on a flange on piping connected to the BWST. The BWST was drained below the level of the flange involved.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modificati<m did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety presiously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malftmetion of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No imreviewed safety question was found to exist.

ese***********esee**re******* e**ee****ee... **e************************ese***

Modification: Drain the Borated Water Storage Tank to the 'B' Reactor Coolant Bleed Tank (TMM 48)

Description of Modification: A hose connection between DH-V-31 and a flange installed at WDL-V-265B was used to drain the BWST to the 'B' RCBT to permit work on a flange on piping connected to the BWST. The BWST was drained below the level of the flange involved.

Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment imponant to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

.. ******************.*e****.********.**.***********e;***e,e**+++******e... .*

Modification: Make-up Flow Transmitter Cross Tie (TMM 48)

DescriDtion of Modificati.p_q: Make-up System flow transmitters 1128 and 1129 were cross tied to provide redundant measurement of MU23-FE-3 difTerential pressure during the performance of a temporary procedure to verify the accuracy of the 'C' high pressure injection line flow instrument.

. Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a resiew of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

• • • • • • 4***********************************************************************

Modification: Temporary Removal of Tubing Between IWF-V-71 A and DW-V-43 (TMM 73) l Description of Modification: The tubing between the specified valves was removed to prevent cross-tying the anion beds with the CE-1 IWT sample point. This action prevents contamination of the secondary system with sodium hydroxide during rW. oed regeneration.

Safetv Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supponing documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.,

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e ***

1920-98-20135 l

• A tt civnentI l

• Psge 73 of 73

]

l l

hiodifisalion: Temporary Removal of Tubing Between IWF-V-71B and DW-V-43 (TMM 74)

I Description of Modification: The tubing between the specified valves was removed to prevent cross-tying the l

anion beds with the CE-1 IWT sample point. This action prevents contamination of the secondary system with l l

sodium hydroxide during anion bcd regeneration. I l

Safety Esaluation Summ;try: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease l in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any technical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

Modification: Calibration of EHC-PS-104B (TSM 1) l Description of Modification: DTCS logic points L63VTA-V and L63VTA-VH were forced to a logical "zero" to l prevent turbine trip if two or more contacts in EllC-PS-104 A/B/C close during calibration activitics. This was accomplished by disabling the vacuum trip function.

j Safety Evaluation Summary: An evaluation of the temporary mechanical modification found, based on a review of supporting documentation, that the modification did not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated and does not involve a decrease in the margin of safety; did not create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety not previously evaluated and did not reduce the margin of safety defined in the basis of any tecimical specification.

No unreviewed safety question was found to exist.

l 1

l I

l l

l