ML070600521

ECR OC-06-00879-001, 10/24/2006; Drywell Floor/Trough/Drainage Inspections and Repairs

ML070600521
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	11/06/2006
From:	- No Known Affiliation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
A2152754, OC-06-00879 OC-06-00879-001
Download: ML070600521 (77)

Text

- I PAGE 0001 E c R Printout I'

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP ASSIGNED ORG: OEDM PRINT DATE/TIME: 11/06/06 07: 5 2 ASSIGNED kNDV: MARKOS REQUIRED DATE: 11/06/06 INITIATOR: TAMBURRO ECR STATUS: DISPON REQUEST ORG: OED STATUS DATE: 11/05/06 A/R NO: A21 5275 4 INIT. DATE: 10/24/0'6 PROJECT NO: A/R STATUS: ASIGND 6 '

A. IDENTIFICATION:

SYSTEM: ' COMP ID: OC 1 187 -F MISC 187 I'

INIT OPER: y QA CLASS: -Q- POTL REPT:

TECH SPEC: y REQD IN MODES: 1 2 3 PAGES ATTACHED: y NO. OF PAGES: 38 ID/DATE: JDHl 11/03/06 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION and PROPOSED DISPOSITION:

DURING 1R21, WATER WAS DISCOVERED IN THE EXCAVATED TRENCH OF THE DRYWELL ELEVATION 10'-3" FLOOR. THIS ECR WILL PROVIDE FOR INSPECTION AND REPAIR OF THE DRAINAGE PROVISIONS FOR THIS FLOOR, AS WELL AS PROTECTION OF THE DRYWELL SHELL.

IN PARTICULAR, THIS ECR ADDRESSES:

1- CLEANING, INSPECTION AND REPAIR, AS NEEDED, OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM TROUGH (CONCRETE !REV 1 AREA UNDER REACTOR VESSEL) !REV 1 INCLUDING THE ENTRANCE TO THE PIPE THAT DIRECTS THE DRAINS TO THE SUMP.

2- CLEANING AND INSPECTION OF THE DRYWELL SUMP.

3 - CLEANING AND PREPARATION OF THE INTERFACE OF THE DRYWELL FLOOR AND DRYWELL SHELL, AND INSTALLATION OF A CAULKING MATERIAL INTENDED TO PREVENT WATER INFILTRATION 4 - ADDITIONAL EXCAVATION OF THE TRENCH AT BAY 5, TO ALLOW FOR FURTHER UT EXAMINATION OF THE DRYWELL SHELL, FOLLOWED BY PARTIAL GROUTING OF THAT TRENCH TO OPTIMIZE ONGOING PROTECTION OF THE DRYWELL SHELL.

NOTE: THIS ECR WAS CREATED AS A REPLACEMENT FOR ECR 06-00875, IN ORDER TO HAVE THE ECR UNDER THE APPROPRIATE A/R.

-r , PAGE 0002 E C R Printout '

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCPI

//

B. EVALUATION:

50.59 REVIEW REQD: ORIG 50.59 REVIEW AFFECTED: 50.59 SE REQD:

REPORTABLE:

STATION PROC/PROGRAM REVIEW COMPLT: - '

N DATE/TIME: CAUSE: RE FINAL SSV OPERABILITY:

NAME: COMP: ___ SYSTEM: -

ssv DATE/TIME: PLANT: - I I

SCHED CODE/WINDW: 1R21 187 CEGO 10/21/06 ADVANCED WORK AUTH: y FINAL DISP: RP INTERIM DISP:  :.

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

I REVISION REV 1 1 INCLUDES MINOR REVISION PROVZDED BY PORC I I REVIEW OF REV 0 dF THIS ECR. PORC MEETING NO 06-18.

THESE CHANGES ARE MINOR EDITORIAL CHANGES TO MAINTAIN , .

CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING STRUCTURAL MONINTORING COMMITMENTS. REFERENCE TO A FREQUENCY OF 2 YEARS INSTEAD OF 4 YEARS. I THIS REVISION REVISES:

PAGE 1 OF THE ECR TO CLARIFY THAT CLEANING WAS NEEDED OF THE TROUGH.

PAGE 4 OF ATTACHMENT 1 IS REVISED TO CHANGE THE RESULTS OF THE GROUT TESTING PAGE 9 OF ATTACHMEW 1 IS REVISED TO REFERENCE IR 00546049.

ATTACHMENT 10D IS REVISED TO CHANGE FREQUENCY OF CAULK PM FROM 4 YEARS TO 2 YEARS.

OTHER MINOR EDITORIAL CHANGES AND ENHANCEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE DISPOSITION.

I h D OF REV 1 AWA FOR DRYWELL FLOOR REPAIRS:

THE FOLLOWING ADVANCED WORK AUTHORIZATIONS ARE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CC-AA-103. THE WORK DESCRIBED BELOW DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN-SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THE SCOPE AND SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS ARE AS DESCRIBED IN EACH SECTION BELOW.

iWA #1 - SUB-PILE ROOM (CONCRETE AREA UNDER REACTOR VESSEL) TROUGH CLEANING, INSPECTION AND PARIAL REPAIR:

THE TROUGH IS THE DRAINAGE TRENCH AT THE SUB-PILE

L 1 * ' PAGE 0003 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP APPROVED'DISPOSITION:

/

ROOM PERIMETER. THE TROUGH MUST BE THOROUGHLY CLEANED AND INSPECTED, TO DETERMINE IF REPAIRS ARE REQUIRED. ALL STANDING WATER SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE TRENCH. ALL LOOSE MATERIAL (DEBRIS, LOOSE AGGREGATE, ETC.) MUST BE REMOVED. IN PARTICULAR, ALL LOOSE OR EASILY LOOSENED MATERIAL IN THE TROUGH, AROUND THE PIPES THAT CONNECT TO THE SUMP SHOULD BE REMOVED. DAMAGE TO ANY'AREAS OF THE TROUGH SHOULD BE QUANTIFIED. WHERE DEPRESSIONS IN THE TROUGH %LOOR ARE VISUALLY NOTICED, PLACE A 24" LONG STRAIGHT EDGE IN THE TROUGH AND MEASURE THE DEPTH OF THE DEPRESSION. NOTIFY ENGINEERING OF THE DEPTH, EXTENT, AND LOCATION OF ANY POCKETS OR DEPRESSIONS GREATER THAN 1/4" DEEP. AT THE DRAIN PIPES FROM THE TROUGH TO THE I

SUMP, PROVIDE ENGINEERING WITH MEASUREMENTS OF DEPTH, WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF ANY CONCRETE DAMAGE. AT THE FOUR PIPES THAT PASS WATER FROM OUTSIDE OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM, NOTE AND INFORM ENGINEERING OF THE BOTTOM ELEVATION OF THE PIPE RELATIVE TO THE BOTTOM SURFACE OF THE TROUGH (E.G. PIPE BOTTOM IS 3/8" LOWER THAN BOTTOM OF TROUGH).

GROUT REPAIRS CAN BE PERFORMED TO THE AREA AROUND THE PIPES TO THE SUMP AND THE PIPES FROM OUTSIDE THE SUB-PILE ROOM TO INSIDE, AS NEEDED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATION OCIS 551-81-6 (AS A STRUCTURAL REPAIR).

"MASTERFLOW 713 PLUS" OR "MASTERFLOW 9 2 8 " SHALL BE USED FOR THE REPAIRS (SAFETY RELATED MATERIAL), AND IT SHALL BE MIXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS RATHER THAN THOSE IN THE SPECIFICATION.

TEST CUBE SAMPLES DO NOT NEED TO BE TAKEN AS DIRECTED IN THE SPECIFICATION, SINCE THIS APPLICATION DOES NOT RELY ON THE STRENGTH OF THE CURED GROUT.

BASED ON A PRELIMINARY INSPECTION BY S A M MARKOS, THE AREAS WHERE A GROUT REPAIR IS DEFINITELY REQUIRED AROUND THE DRAIN PIPE ARE: BOTH PIPES TO THE SUMP, AT THE POINT WHERE THEY EXIT THE TROUGH, AND THE INBOARD SIDE OF THE PIPE THROUGH THE PEDESTAL WALL, AT AZIMUTH 270.

THESE THREE PIPES REQUIRE REMOVAL OF ALL LOOSE MATERIAL AROUND THE PIPE, DOWN TO CLEAN, SOLIDLY SECURED AGGREGATE. THE AREA MUST 3E PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATION GROUTING PROCEDURE PRIOR TO GROUTING.

CARE MUST BE TAKEN NOT TO CREATE ANY BLOCKAGES TO FLOW THAT WOULD CREATE STANDING WATER IN THIS AREA. OTHER REPAIRS TO THE TRENCH WILL BE SPECIFIED BY ENGINEERING FOLLOWING REVIEW OF THE DATA PROVIDED.

THE ABOVE SCOPE OF WORK DOES NOT ALTER THE DESIGN OR FUNCTION OF ANY PLANT SSC. CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS. ANY GROUT REPAIRS SERVE TO RESTORE THE AFFECTED SSC TO ITS INTENDED DESIGN CONDITION.

COORDINATION WITH THE OCC IS IMPERATIVE TO MAINTAIN THE TROUGH AREA DRY DURING THE REPAIR AND CURING PROCESSES.

PAGE 0004 E C R Printout '

1 1 I

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP APPROVED DISPOSITION:

AWA #1 PREPARED BY: P. KESTER I '

REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS SCOPE IS PROVIDED TO GEORGE SEVCIK '

(OWP) BY HOWIE RAY (SMDE DESIGNEE FOR S. ,HUTCHINS)

(SMDE) ON 10/24/06, 12:OO.

AWA #2 - DRYWELL SUMP CLEANING AND INSPECTION:

________________----------------------------- I!.

THE DRYWELL SUMP COULD BE A SOURCE OF WATER INFILTRA-TION INTO THE CONCRETE. THE SUMP INTERIOR SHOULD BE DRAINED AND CLEANED S0,THATTHE STAINLESS STEEL LINER CAN BE INSPECTED FOR FLAWS OR DAMAGE.' TEMPORARY DAMMING I I '

SHOULD BE PLACED'TO PREVENT WATER FROM ENTERING THE SUMP UNTIL THE INSPECTION IS COMPLETE. THE SUMP SHOULD BE CLEANED SUFFICIENTLY SUCH THAT A VT-1 INSPECTION OF THE INTERIOR SURFACES OF THE SUMP LINER CAN BE PERFORMED.

THE RESULTS OF THE INSPECTION SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO ENGINEERING. IF ANY FLAWS ARE FOUND, REPAIRS WILL BE SPECIFIED ACCORDINGLY.

THE ABOVE SCOPE OF WORK DOES NOT ALTER THE DESIGN OR FUNCTION OF ANY PLANT SSC. CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS.

AWA #2 PREPARED BY: P. KESTER REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS SCOPE IS PROVIDED TO GEORGE SEVCIK (OWP) BY HOWIE RAY (SMDE DESIGNEE FOR S . HUTCHINS)

(SMDE) ON 10/24/06, 12:OO.

AWA # 3 - DRYWELL FLOOR-TO-SHELLINTERFACE CLEANING, PREP FOR CAULKING:

A BEAD OF CAULK WILL BE APPLIED TO THE DRYWELL SHELL WHERE IT MEETS THE CONCRETE STEPPED CURBING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE CONCRETE DRYWELL FLOOR SLAB AT ELEVATION 10'-3". THE SCOPE OF THIS AWA IS THE CLEANING AND PREPARATION OF THE CONCRETE AND STEEL SURFACES FOR CAULKING, BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF THE CAULKING. ALL DEBRIS AND LOOSE CONCRETE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE INTERFACE. HAND TOOLS (DENTIST PICK, SMALL WIRE BRUSH, CHIPPING HAMMER, ETC.) AND A VACUUM SHOULD BE USED. THE CONCRETE SURFACE IS REPORTED TO BE SUFFICIENTLY ROUGH FOR ADHESION OF THE CAULK, AND THEREFORE MAY NOT REQUIRE ROUGHENING. THIS SHOULD BE ASSURED BY INSPECTION. A BAND OF AT LEAST 1" WIDTH OF CONCRETE ADJACENT TO THE DRYWELL SHELL SHOULD BE ASSURED TO HAVE A ROUGHNESS EQUIVALENT TO 60 GRIT SANDPAPER, OR ROUGHER. THE STEEL SURFACE SHOULD ALSO BE PREPARED FOR A BAND OF AT LEAST 1" ADJACENT TO THE CONCRETE. ANY LOOSE OR POORLY ADHERED MATERIAL SHOULD BE REMOVED USING HAND

PAGE 0005 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR'TYPE: DCP APPROVED'DI

/ SPOSITION:

TOOLS SUCH AS A STIFF BRUSH, A PUTTY KNIFE OR SCOTCH-BRITE TO SSPC-SP 2 STANDARD. WELL ADHERED COAT,INGSDO NOT NEED TO BE REMOVED.

THE ABOVE SCOPE OF WORK DOES NOT ALTER THE DESIGN OR FUNCTION OF ANY PLANT SSC. CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS.

I

• I D AWA # 3 ,$REPARED BY: P. KESTER REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS SCOPE IS PROVIDED TO GEORGE SEVCIK (OWP) BY ,HOWIE RAY (SMDE DESIGNEE FOR S. HUTCHINS)

(SMDE) ON 10/24/06, 12:OO.

AWA # 4 - EXCAVATE ADDITIONAL CONCRETE FROM'THE BAY #5 TRENCH MORE OF THE DRYWELL SHELL MUST BE EXPOSED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE BAY #5 TRENCH TO FACILITATE ADDITIONAL DRYWELL SHELL UT MEASUREMENTS. THE BAY #5 TRENCH IS IN I THE DRYWELL ELEV 10'-3" FLOOR SLAB, IN THE BAY #5 REGION, ADJACENT TO THE DRYWELL SHELL.

CONCRETE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE BAY #5 TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED AS REQUIRED TO EXPOSE AN ADDITIONAL 3 -1/2",' ( + / - ) BAND OF THE DRYWELL SHELL. THE BAND SHALL BE ACROSS THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF THE TRENCH.

EXTREME CARE SHALL BE EXERCISED TO AVOID DAMAGE (NICKS, CUTS, SCRAPES) TO THE DRYWELL SHELL.

ALSO NOTE THAT A VERTICAL'STEEL PLATE STIFFENER (APPROX 1" THICK) IS EMBEDDED IN THE CONCRETE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE BAY # 5 TRENCH. THE STIFFENER PLATE IS PARALLEL TO THE DRYWELL SHELL AND APPROXIMATELY 7" FROM THE SHELL. A PORTION OF THE TOP EDGE OF THIS PLATE IS EXPOSED IN THE EXISTING TRENCH EXCAVATION. EXTREME CARE SHALL BE EXERCISED TO AVOID DAMAGE (NICKS, CUTS, SCRAPES) TO THIS STIFFENER PLATE.

ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE WITH HAND TOOLS. 1 ALL MATERIAL REMOVED SHALL BE QUARANTINED FOR FURTHER

- INSPECTION/TESTING AS REQUIRED.

DOCUMENT THE FINAL CONFIGURATION OF THE TRENCH (DEPTH AND WIDTH) AFTER THE EXCAVATION. FORWARD THIS INFORMATION TO THE PROJECT ENGINEERING TEAM (ATTENTION:

HOWIE RAY).

DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHS SHALL BE TAKEN OF THE NEWLY EXPOSED DRYWELL SHELL IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXCAVATION IS COMPLETE. DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHS SHALL ALSO BE TAKEN OF

I ' ,' PAGE 0006 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: -OC 06-00879 001 I

ECR TYPE: DCP I

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

THE SURFACE OF THE EXCAVATED CONCRETE THAT WAS ADJACENT TO THE DRYWELL SHELL. ALL DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHS FILES SHALL BE TRANSMITTED TO THE PROJECT ENGINEERING TEAM (ATTENTION: HOWIE RAY). I I

THE SCOPE OF THIS AWA DOES NOT ALTER OR IMPACT THE FUNCTION OF ANY PLANT SSC'S.

• AWA PREPARED BY: DP KNEPPER - PEDM ,',

AWA REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO I

AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS SCOPE IS PROVIDED TO JIM HEARNS (OWP) BY HOWIE RAY CSMDE DESIGNEE F O R S. HUTCHINS) I (SMDE) ON 10/24/d6, 18:OO.

AWA #5 - CAULK DRYWELL SHELL-TO-CONCRETEFLOOR JOINT:

AT THE OUTBOARD PERIMETER OF THE ELEV. 10'-3" DRYWELL FLOOR, THE CONCRETE SLAB MEETS THE DRYWELL SHELL. THIS . . I INTERFACE HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR CAULKING UNDER AWA # 3 .

THE CAULK WILL BE APPLIED TO THAT JOINT UNDER THIS AWA.

THE CAULK SHALL LAP ONTO THE CONCRETE AND STEEL SURFACES BY 1/4" TO 3/4" ON EACH SURFACE.

THE CAULK IS TO FOLLOW THE CONCRETE-TO-STEELINTERFACE, FOLLOWING THE CHANGES IN CURB ELEVATION (INCLUDING THE SIDES AND TOPS OF THE CURBS), AND THE DIPS INTO THE TWO TRENCHES. THE BAY 5 TRENCH SHOULD NOT BE CAULKED UNTIL ALL NDE WORK IS COMPLETED, BUT PRIOR TO RECOATING THE STEEL. TECHNICAL EVALUATION A2152754-5 IS BEING DEVELOPED TO DOCUMENT THE TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THIS AWA, AND PROVIDES A DETAILED SKETCH OF THE CAULK CONFIGURATION ALONG WITH MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS. THE CAULKING MATERIAL SHALL BE THIOKOL 2235M BY POLYSPEC. THE INSTALLATION OF THE CAULKING MATERIAL IS ACCEPTABLE PROVIDED THAT CAULKING MATERIAL IS QUALIFIED TO BE USED INSIDE THE DRYWELL AS AUGMENTED QUALIFY, QA CLASS "A" OR BETTER. THE SURFACE PREPARATION SHALL BE AS DESCRIBED IN AWA #3 OF THIS ECR, AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE IAW THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS (EXCEPT THAT PRIMER, BACKER ROD AND BOND  !

BREAKER TAPE ARE NOT REQUIRED). QV VERIFICATION IS REQUIRED FOR PREPARATION (PER AWA #3 OF THIS ECR) AND INSTALLATION (MIXING, POT LIFE, APPLICATION). DBA QUALIFICATION OF THE CAULK IS BEING FINALIZED.

WORK SCOPE:

1- PERFORM UT OF DRYWELL SHELL IN THE BAY 5 TRENCH AFTER ADDITIONAL EXCAVATION DESCRIBED IN AWA #4 HAS BEEN COMPLETED. UT SCOPE IS SIMILAR TO THAT DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3.2.6 OF SPECIFICATION IS-328227-004REV. 13, BUT FOR THE NEWLY EXPOSED STEEL AREA IN THE TRENCH (REF. AWA

PAGE 0007 E C R Printout

((

ECR 'TYPE: DCP APPROVE? DI SPOS ITION :

1. 4).

2 - CLEAN/PREP STEEL AND CONCRETE SURFACES FOR CAULKING I AS DESCRIBED IN AWA # 3 3 - INSTALL CAULKING AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. FINISHED CAULK SHOULD FORM A CONTINUOUS BARRIER AROUND THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE CONCRETE FLOOR, WHERE IT MEETS THE STEEL DRYWELL SHELL.

4- NDE SHALL PERFORM A PSI (PRE-SERVICEINSPECTION - /

' VT3) OF,. THE FINAL CAULK CONFIGURATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASME SECTION XI REPAIR/REPLACEMENT PROGRAM.

5 - RECOAT THE DRYWELL SHELL SURFACE IN BOTH THE BAY 5 8 AND BAY 17 TRENCHES AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3.2.2.4.3 OF i

SPECIFICATION IS-328227-004REV. 13.

THIS AWA DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN-SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

AWA #5 PREPARED BY: P. KESTER REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS SCOPE IS PROVIDED TO JOHN BURT 'I (VENTURE) BY F.H. RAY (SMDE DESIGNEE FOR S. HUTCHINS)

(SMDE) ON 10/25/06, 13:30.

NOTE REVISION OF THE ABOVE AWA #5: THE MAXIMUM LAP LENGTH OF THE CAULK ONTO THE CONCRETE AND STEEL HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM 1" TO 3/4" TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF MATERIAL'ADDED TO THE DRYWELL.

AS REVIEWER OF THE ORIGINAL AWA, I HAVE REVIEWED AND AGREE WITH THE REVISED LAP LENGTH - DAN FIORELLO CHANGE APPROVED ON 10/26/06 AT 07:OO BY HOWIE RAY.

JOHN BURT WAS NOTIFIED BY DAVE KNEPPER, AND A MARKED-UP SKETCH REFLECTING THE CHANGE WAS PROVIDED TO HIM.

~EVISION2 TO THE AWA #5:

iWA # 5 AND ITS REVISION PROVIDE INSTRUCTIONS TO CAULK SURFACES BETWEEN THE DRYWELL VESSEL PLATE AND THE CONCRETE IN THE TWO TRENCHES. AWA #5 USED MASTERFLOW 928 GROUT MATERIAL. TO APPLY THE CAULK THE SURFACES MUST BE DRY. HOWEVER THE SURFACE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH IN BAY 5 AND THE SEAM BETWEEN THE C 0 N C R E T E . W STEEL ARE MOIST EVEN AFTER APPLYING MASTERFLOW 928. THEREFORE, THE CAULK CANNOT BE APPLIED. IF THIS CONDITION CONTINUES TO EXIST, PREPARE I THE IC, SURFACES A1\m ALLOWED LAYEK J . / A IIULLL r u v u AND INSTALL MBXTMr,M A y - a + - - - - -

INCH THE OFMINIMUM GROUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWA #l. THE GROUTING MATERIAL SHALL BE "747 RAPID-SETTING GROUT" MANUFACTURED BY BASF AND MIXING SHALL BE PLASTIC TO ACHIEVE A FINAL SETTING TIME OF 80 MINUTES. THE LAYER OF GROUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE

PAGE 0008 E C R Printout '

ECR NUMBER: -OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE:

I DCP APPROVE^ DISPOSITION:

I TRENCH AT MOIST SURFACES OVER EXISTING MASTERFLOW 928 HAVE BEEN PLACED WHERE CONCRETE MEETS THE DRYWELL VESSEL. THE PURPOSE OF THE ADDITIONAL LAYER OF 7 4 7 RAPID-SETTING GROUT IS TO COVER THE MOIST AREAS I '

TO ALLOW PROPER APPLICATION OF THE CAULK. WAIT A MINIMUM OF 80 MINUTES FOR THE GROUT TO SET,BEFORE APPLYING ANY CAULK. THIS GROUT DOES NOT PERFQRM ANY SAFETY RELATED FUNCTION. THE REQUIRED STRENGTH IS MINImL AND IS PLACED TO FORM A SUITABLE SURFACE FOR CAULK. THE MATERIAL WILL BE CONFIRMED TO BE SET BEFORE APPLICATION OF THE CAULK. THEREFORE, I THE MATERIAL MAY BE COMMERCIAL GRADE.

. I I .

I THIS AWA AND ITS'REVISIONS DO NOT AFFECT ANY IN SERVICE EQUIPMENT. CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS.

iWA #5, REVISION 2 PREPARED BY: NIOGI, SUJIT (PIMS INPUT BY DJF)

I REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO THIS AWA REVISION 2 IS APPROVED BY F. H. RAY FOR S . HUTCHINS (SMDE) I THIS AWA #5, REVISION 2 IS PROVIDED .TODAVE RYAN AT 18:45 11/02/06 BY F.H. RAY END OF AWA #5, REVISION 2 AWA #5 REVISION 3 BASED ON THE LATE DELIVERY OF THE 7 4 7 GROUT, IT IS PERMISSABLE TO USE THE BASF MASTERFLOW 928 GROUT. PER THE MANUFACTURE PRODUCT DATA SHEET, MASTERFLOW 928 WILL REACH A FINAL SET IN 4 HOURS. THE CONSISTANCY OF THE 928 SHOULD BE MIXED TO PLASTIC CONSISTANCY. PER TELEPHONE WITH THE TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE OF POLYSPEC THE MANUFACTURER OF THIOKOL 2235M THE CAULK CAN BE APPLIED AFTER THE GROUT REACHES THE FINAL SET. REVISION 3 TO AWA # 5 AUTHORIZES THE USE OF MASTERFLOW 928. THE MINIMUM THINKNESS OF THE APPLICATION NEEDS TO BE CONSISTANT WITH THE EARLIER GUIDANCE FOR MASTERFLOW 928.

AWA # 5 REVISION 3 PREPARED BY J. HALLENBECK REVIEWED BY:NIOGI, SUJIT THIS AWA REVISION 3 IS APPROVED BY:MAKAR, JOHN

HIS AWA #5 REVISION 3 IS PROVIDED TO DAVE RYAN AT

12:05 NOV 3, 2006

PAGE 0009 E c R Printout

. I ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP APPROVED'DI/ SPOs ITION:

END OF AWA # 5 REVISION 3 AWA'#6 - USE OF BACKER ROD BEHIND CAULK JOINT:

---

==============----------------------

0' SCOPE OF AUTHORIZED WORK: I BASED Old THE SIZE OF THE GAP BETWEEN THE DRYWELL CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB AND THE STEEL DRYWELL SHELL, IT IS DESIRED TO INSTALL BACKER ROD IN SOME AREAS TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUlyT OF CAULK NEEDED. THE BACKER ROD IS A POLYETHYLENE MATERIAL (204-07780)THAT WILL BE COVERED BY THE CAULK, AND THEREFORE WILL NOT BE EXPOSED.

THE INSTALLER ESTIMATES THAT 10' OF PERIMETER WILL REQUIRE ITS USE. THIS AMOUNT OF ROD WEIGHS ON THE ORDER OF A FEW OUNCES. RELATIVE TO THE MATERIAL WEIGHTS IN THE SUCTION STRAINER CLOGGING CALCULATION, THE WEIGHT IS INSIGNIFICANT COMPARED TO THE CALCULATION WEIGHTS OF 150 POUNDS FOR DUST, DIRT AND CONCRETE, AND 25 POUNDS FOR MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL DEBRIS. IN ADDITION, THE BACKER ROD WILL EITHER FLOAT , OR MELT AND FLOWN DOWN THROUGH THE GAP BETWEEN THE CONCRETE AND THE STEEL SHELL IF EXPOSED TO EXTREME TEMPERATURE. THEREFORE, THE BACKER ROD WILL NOT GET TO THE SUCTION STRAINERS TO CONTRIBUTE THEIR ,CLOGGING.

PRIMARILY, THOUGH, THE BACKER ROD WILL BE WEDGED INTO THE GAP BETWEEN THE SHELL AND THE CONCRETE, AND IS THEREFORE VERY UNLIKELY TO BE DISLODGED BY ANY DBA IN THE DRYWELL.

MARK CARLSON AND TIM TRETTEL WERE CONSULTED FOR FIRE PROTECTION CONCERNS, AND THEY INDICATED THAT BASED ON THE AMOUNT AND THE LOCATION, USE OF THE BACKER ROD IS ACCEPTABLE WITH REGARD TO FIRE LOADING ADDED TO THE DRYWELL. THEREFORE AUTHORIZATION IS GIVEN TO UTILIZE BACKER ROD IN THIS APPLICATION.

PREPARED BY: P. KESTER CHANGES TO THE ABOVE AWA WERE MADE BY THE REVIEWER BASED ON THE PREPARER INPUT.

AS STATED IN CC-AA-103, T H I S WORK IS BEING PERFORMED AT RISK AND DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN SERVICE EQUIPMENT:

THIS AUTHORIZATION IS GIVING TO TOM BADDERS, VENTURE PLANNING.

INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED BY S. MARKOS THIS AWA HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE OC SDEM S . HUTCHINS, ON 10/26/06 8 20:27

PAGE 0010 E cR Printout '

I' I

ECR TYPE: DCP I .

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

END OF AWA # 6

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I 11 AWA #7 - REPAIR OF VOID IN THE TROUGH ADJACENT TO SUMP 1-8: 1 I' SCOPE OF WORK:

~ A L KDOWN BY WILLIAMS COATING INC. REVEALED T~TAT II, APPROXIMATELY 4 INCH WIDE VOID EXIST IN THE TROUGH 1, ADJACENT TO THE SUMP 1-8. ALSO IT APPEARS THAT A FOREIGN GLASS OBJECT IS LODGED I I

I' IN TO THE VOID. THE,OBJECT SHALL BE 'REMOVEDAS MUCH AS POSSIBLE BY,BREAKINGIT IN*TO SMALL PIECES AND I I'

VACUUM CLEANING *HE BROKEN GLASS PIECES. ALL, PIECES II

' SHALL BE RETAINED FOR LATER EVALUATION. AFTER REMOVING THE BROKEN GLASS PIECES THE VOID SPACE SHALL B E \ '

FILLED WITH GROUT WITH "MASTERFLOW 713 PLUS" OR IIMASTERFLOW 928". THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR APPLICATION IN THE DRYWELL PER AWA #1.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

ALL THE STEPS FOR CLEANING, SURFACE PREPARATION, MIXING AND PLACEMENT OF GROUT SHALL BE AS DELINEATED IN AWA #1 AND MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE FOLLOWED. IF I THE VOID IS MORE THAN 2" WIDE, 33% BY WEIGHT OF CLEAN, DAMP 3/8" PEA GRAVEL MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM C33 MAY BE ADDED TO THE MIXTURE. SEVENTEEN POUNDS OF PEA GRAVEL SHALL BE ADDED TO EVERY 50 POUNDS OF GROUT.

GROUT AND PEA GRAVEL SHALL BE AT ROOM TEMPERATURE (APPROXIMATELY 70 DEGREES F). THE GROUT MIXTURE SHALL BE COMPACTED WITH A STEEL ROD OR SIMILAR DEVICE TO ELIMINATE VOIDS AND CONSOLIDATE THE GROUT MIXTURE AS IT BEING PLACED IN THE VOID.

THE AWA DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS. ANY GROUT REPAIRS SERVE TO RESTORE THE AFFECTED SSC TO ITS INTENDED DESIGN CONDITION.

iWA #7 PREPARED BY S. NIOGI.

REVIEWED BY: P. TAMBURRO AND DAN FIORELLO THIS AWA IS APPROVED BY F.H. RAY FOR S , HUTCHINS (SMDE)

THIS AWA IS PROVIDED TO G. SEVCIK AND B. MAZE AT 1930 ON 10/28/06 BY F . H . RAY.

ENSURE ALL DEBRIS REMOVED FROM THE VOID IN THE CONCRETE TROUGH IS RETAINED FOR LATER EVALUATION.

• • +**++***+********REVISION 1 TO AWA # ? * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• e NOTE REVISION OF THE AWA #7: IF THE WIDTH OF THE VOID

~

PAGE 0011 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR'TYPE: DCP I'

APPROVE,D DISPOSITION :

IS 2 INCHES OR SMALLER PEA GRAVEL IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE ADDED TO THE GROUT MIXTURE.

I'

~EVISION1 TO AWA # 7 IS PREPARED BY SUJIT NIOGI (I REVISION 1 TO AWA #7 WAS REVIEWED BY DAN FIORELLO I

AWA 7, REVISION 1 AUTHORIZATION: I  ;

THIS AWA IS APPROVED BY F.H. RAY FOR S. HUTCHINS (SMDE) i',

AND I RROVIDED TO D. RYAN AND J. BURT AT 1100 I

' ON 10/30/06 BY F.H. RAY. I' I

.................................................... /

(I iWA #8 SgALING TRENCH IN BAY 5 , I SCOPE OF WORK AWA # 5 PROVIDES INSTRUCTIONS TO CAULK SURFACES BETWEEN THE DRYWELL VESSEL PLATE AND THE CONCRETE IN THE TWO TRENCHES. TO APPLY THE CAULK THE SURFACES MUST BE DRY.

HOWEVER THE SURFACE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH IN BAY 5 AND THE SEAM BETWEEN THE CONCRETE AND STEEL ARE MOIST. THEREFORE THE CAULK CANNOT BE APPLIED.

IF THIS CONDITION CONTINUES TO EXIST, PREPARE THE SURFACES AND INSTALL THE MINIMUM ALLOWED LAYER (1 INCH)

OF GROUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWA #l. THE LAYER OF GROUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH AT MOIST SURFACES WHERE EXISTING CONCRETE MEETS THE DRYWELL VESSEL. THE PURPOSE OF THE LAYER OF GROUT IS TO COVER THE MOIST AREAS TO ALLOW PROPER APPLICATION OF THE CAULK. WAIT A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS FOR THE GROUT TO CURE.

iPPLY THE CAULK ON DRY SURFACES BETWEEN THE GROUT AND THE STEEL VESSEL AND OVER LAP THE AREAS WHERE OTHER CAULKING HAS ENDED.

THE AWA DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN SERVICE EQUIPMENT CLEANING AND INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS. ANY GROUT REPAIRS SERVE TO RESTORE THE AFFECTED SSC TO ITS INTENDED CONFIGURATION.

AWA #8 PREPARED BY P,. TAMBURRO REVIEWED BY: DAN FIORELLO THIS AWA IS APPROVED BY F.H. RAY FOR S . HUTCHINS

( SMDE THIS AWA IS PROVIDED TO DAVE RYAN AT 1600 10/30/06 BY F.H. RAY.

PAGE 0012 E C R Printout .

. I I

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP APPROVED' DISPOSITION:

END OF AWA 8 '

AWA #9 - LEAK TEST OF TROUGH INSIDE THE PEDESTAL, I EL.10'-9" UNDER VESSEL I SCOPE OF WORK THE TROUGH IS APPROXIMATELY 8 " DEEP AND LOCATED INSIDE THE REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL AT EL.10'-9".

THERE ARE FOUR 4 " DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVES AT 90 DEGREES I APART THROUGH THE 4 FEET REACTOR PEDESTAL WALL FOR DRAINING WATER FROM 'DRYWELL FLOOR &L.' 10 I - 3 " TO THE I t .

TROUGH. THE INVERT ELEVATION OF THE 411 DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVE IS 10'-3". THE TROUGH IS CONNECTED TO THE SUMP 1-8 BY TWO 2" DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVES. THE INVERT ELEVATION OF THE 2" DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVE IS 10'-1 1/48'.

THIS AWA #9 PROVIDES THE INSTRUCTIONS TO PLUG THESE SIX SLEEVES (FOUR 4" DIAMETER AND TWO 2" DIAMETER).

. . 4 THE SLEEVES CAN BE PLUGGED USING TAPERED SILICONE RUBBER PLUGS, MCMASTER-CARR CATALOG PART NO.

9277K75 FOR 4 " DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVES (FOUR REQUIRED)

AND MCMASTER-CARR CATALOG PART NO. 9277K79 FOR 2

DIAMETER PIPE SLEEVES (TWO REQUIRED). THESE PLUGS SHALL BE INSERTED FROM INSIDE THE PEDESTAL IN TO THE PIPE SLEEVES. AFTER THE PLUGS ARE INSERTED IN TO THE SLEEVES THE SURFACE AROUND THE PLUGS BETWEEN THE PIPE SLEEVE AND THE PLUG SHALL BE COVERED WITH DUCT TAPE OR EQUAL AS APPROVED BY THE CHEMISTRY AND OPERATION DEPARTMENT. THE SURFACES MUST BE DRY BEFORE THE TAPE IS APPLIED. ALTERNATE TYPE PLUGS AS APPROVED BY ENGINEERING MAY BE UTILIZED IF REQUIRED.

BEFORE FILLING THE TROUGH WITH WATER, USING A THIN STEEL NARROW RULER OR THIS NARROW FLAT BAR (OR EQUIVALENT)

TO VERIFY THAT NO ADDITIONAL VOIDS EXIST IN THE TROUGH THAT COULD ADD TO THIS LEAKAGE PATH.

IF SIGNFICANT VOIDS ARE DISCOVERED, REPAIR USING GROUT.

REPAIR STEPS FOR CLEANING, SURFACE PREPARATION, MIXING AND PLACEMENT OF GROUT SHALL BE AS DELINEATED IN AWA #1 AND MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE FOLLOWED.

IF REPAIR BY GROUT IS PERFORMED, ALLOW 24 HRS FOR CURING PRIOR TO PLUGGING THE DRAIN HOLES OR PERFOMING THIS PMT TEST OF THE SUBJECT TROUGH.

WATER IN BAYS 5 ANTI 17 TRENCHES SHOULD BE VACUUMED OUT.

FILL THE TROUGH WITH WATER AT LEAST 7 " DEEP AND MONITOR THE HEIGHT OF THE WATER FOR TWO HOURS AND CAREFULLY RECORD THE DEPTH. REFILL THE TROUGH WITH WATER TO 7" HEIGHT IF ANY WATER IS LOST DURING THE FIRST TWO HOURS. AFTER THE TROUGH IS REFILLED, MEASURE THE HEIGHT OF WATER EVERY ONE HOUR FOR NEXT FOUR HOURS.

PAGE 0013 E C R Printout I .

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR'TYPE: DCP I

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

THE HEIGHT OF WATER SHALL BE MEASURED AT 90 DEGREE I DISTANCES APART USING THE EXACT LOCATIONS EACH TIME. I : I ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA - THE LEVEL AFTER 4 HOURS SHALL N,OT I \

I HAVE DROPPED MORE THAN 1/4 INCH WITH A MEASURING , I ACCURACY OF 1/16 INCH I 'I

' I THE AWA DOES NOT AFFECT ANY IN 1.

SERVICE.EQUIPMENT. CLEANING AND

' INSPECTION ARE ROUTINE TASKS. ALL PLUGS 'I AND THE TAPE SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER TPE LEAK TEST AND THE AFFECTED AREA OF,,THE SSC SHALL:BE RESTORED I I I

TO ITS INTENDED CONFIGURATION.

I I

THIS AUTHORIZATION IS GIVEN TO TOM BADDER OF SENTIJRE PLANNING.

AWA #9 PREPARED BY NIOGI, SUJIT REVIEWED BY: P I TAMBURRO 'I THIS AWA IS APPROVED BY SP HUTCHINS (SMDE)

THIS AWA IS PROVIDED TO DAVE RYAN AT 1600 11/01/06 BY. I F.H. RAY I

REVISION 1 TO AWA 9 NOTE THAT REVISION 1 TO AWA 9 CHANGED THE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA TO A DROP IN WATER LEVEL OF 1/4 INCH WITH A MEASURING ACCURACY OF 1/16 INCH. THE PURPOSE OF THE TEST IS CHECK FOR ANY GROSS LEAKAGE FROM THE TROUGH THROUGH CRACKS AND VOIDS. THERE WILL BE SOME LOSS OF WATER THROUGH EVAPORATION. ALSO SINCE CONCRETE IS PERMEABLE, THERE WILL BE SOME LOSS OF WATER THROUGH SEEPAGE INTO THE SOUND CONCRETE.

REVISION 1 TO AWA 9 PREPARED BY: DAN FIORELLO

~EVISWION1 TO AWA 9 REVIEWED BY PETE TAMBURRO THIS AWA REVISION HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO DAVE RYAN AND JOHN BURT AT 15:OO ON 11/2/2006 BY F.H. RAY.

~EVISION1 TO AWA 9 APPROVED BY: F.H. RAY FOR s. HUTCHINS AS SMDE.

END OF AWA #9

&ISON z TO AWA #9 FOR BETTER ALARA PRACTICE: WATER LEVEL IN THE TROUGH AT 7 " WILL BE MARKED ON THE REACTOR PEDESTAL WALL AT ONE LOCATION. A CAMERA WILL BE FIXED ON THE MARK TO

PAGE 0014 E C R Printout '

I I

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP APPROVED DISPOSITION:

FACILITATE MONITORING OF THE TROUGH WATER LEVEL WITH RESPECT TO THE LEVEL MARK ON THE PEDESTAL WALL. FINAL I FIELD VERIFICATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED FOR,,WATERLEVEL AND DEPTH. RESULTS OF THE FIELD TEST WILL BE DOCUMENTED * 'I IN THE W.O. CREM FOR ACCEPTANCE. I

+HIS REVISION OF THIS AWA DOES NOT AFFECT ANY,TN SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THIS AWA IS GIVEN TO TOM BADDER OF VENTURE.

,/:

PREPARED BY S. MARKOS REVIEWED BY: JOHN A. CAMIRE I' I L

APPROVED BY SMDE : S HUTCHINS

.,( I .A 1, 8

' I I

,I I I I I

OF AWA #9, REV. 2 1.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION:

DURING 11R, TWO TRENCHES WERE CUT FROM THE CONCRETE FLOOR WHERE IT MEETS THE DRYWELL SHELL TO EVALUATE SHELL THICKNESS AND TO REMOVE PLUG SAMPLES IN BAYS 5 AND 17. AFTER EVALUATION AND REPAIR, THE SHELL WAS SPRAY COATED IN THE TRENCH AREAS, FILLED UP WITH DOW I CORNING 3-6548 SILICONE RTV FOAM AND SEALED AT THE TOP BY POURING A PROTECTIVE SEALING LAYER OF PROMATEC LOW DENSITY SILICONE ELASTOMER. IT WAS EVIDENT AFTER A 12R INSPECTION OF THE AREA, THAT WATER WAS SEEPING INTO THE TRENCHES. PROBABLE SOURCES OF WATER MAY BE (A):

VARIOUS COMPONENT (E.G. VALVE) LEAKAGES, (B): SPILLS FROM DRAIN TANKS, AND (C): EXCESS WATER FROM OUTAGE ACTIVITIES (E.G. CRD CHANGES). IN APRIL 1994, THE TRENCH AREAS WERE VISUALLY INSPECTED AGAIN (WITHOUT I REMOVING THE FOAM COVER) WHEN A t, WALKDOWN WAS CONDUCTED DURING A FORCED OUTAGE. THE I

AREAS WERE FOUm,DRY. DURING THE 1995 STRUCTURAL MONITORING INSPECTIONS NO SIGNS OF CORROSION I OF THE INNER SURFACE OF EXPOSED STEEL SHELL IN THE TRENCHES WAS FOUND. THE PRESENCE OF WATER IN THE TRENCHES WAS OBSERVED IN 16R REFUELING OUTAGE IN 1997.

IN THE 17R REFUELING OUTAGE, NO SIGN OF WATER WAS OBSERVED IN THE TRENCHES. IN THE 18R REFUELING OUTAGE DRYWELL INSPECTION THERE IS NO MENTION OF WATER PRESENCE IN THE TRENCHES.

DURING 1R21, AFTER THE REMOVAL OF THE FOAM COVER, I WATER WAS DISCOVERED IN THE TRENCH IN BAY 5.

THIS WATER WAS VACUUMED OUT, BUT THE TRENCH SOON I REFILLED INDICATING THAT WATER WAS CONTAINED IN OR AROUND THE SLAB. THE FLOOR SLAB IS POURED AGAINST THE

PAGE 0015 E cR Printout .

\ I ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP APPROVED DISPOSITION:

BOTTOM OF THE 'DRYWELL SHELL. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES SHOWED THAT THE WATER IS NEUTRAL TO WEAK BASIC. WHEN THE PLANT IS AT POWER THE DRYWELL IS INERTED WITH NITROGEN. LACK OF OXYGEN AND NEUTRAL TO ' I I

WEAK BASIC WATER DO NOT FORM AN AGGRESSIVE ENVIRONMENT THAT COULD LEAD TO CORROSION OF THE DRYWELL STEEL SHELL. THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED WITH VISUAL IVSPECTION OF THE INNER SURFACE OF THE DRYWELL EXPOSED SHELL IN I' THE AREA OF THE TRENCHES. THE ABOVE OBSERVATION INDICATES THAT (A): PROMATEC LDSE IS NO LONGER ACTING A S A SEAL TO PREVENT INTRUSION OF SURFACE WATER, AND (B): DOW CORNING RTV FOAM IS RETAINIIdG THE WATER

. I REACHING THE TRENCHES; I I THE POTENTIAL SOURCES OF THE WATER ARE DIRECT LEAKAGE INTO THE FLOOR-TO-SHELLGAP DUE TO STANDING WATER ON THE FLOOR OR WATER RUNNING DOWN THE INTERIOR OF THE DRYWELL SHELL. IN ADDITION THE WATER COULD ALSO BE TRAVELING THROUGH CRACKS OR CONSTRUCTION JOINTS IN THE I CONCRETE SLAB, COMING FROM THE TROUGH AROUND THE INNER FACE OF THE REACTOR PEDESTAL, OR FROM THE 1-8 SUMP IF HOLES EXIST IN THE SUMP LINER.

INSPECTION OF THE SUMP LINER SHOWS THAT IT IS IN GOOD CONDITION WITH NO HOLES. THEREFORE THE SUMP IS NO LONGER'CONSIDERED AS A POSSIBLE SOURCE FOR THE WATER.

AFTER REMOVING DEBRIS FROM TROUGH AROUND THE INNER FACE OF THE REACTOR PEDESTAL (PER AWA #1) A VOID WAS FOUND IN CONCRETE IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TROUGH (IR 00550437).

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THIS VOID ALLOWS WATER TO BYPASS THE TROUGH ROUTING ARRANGEMENT TO THE 1-SUMP AND ALLOWS WATER TO ENTER THE CONCRETE FLOOR AND MIGRATE THROUGH CRACKS OR CONSTRUCTION JOINTS TO THE TRENCH IN BAY 5.

AS A RESULT AWA # 7 WAS ISSUED TO THE FIELD TO REPAIR THIS VOID AND ELIMINATE THIS LEAKAGE SOURCE INTO THE CONCRETE FLOOR.

1.2-SCOPE:

THIS ECR THEREFORE ADDRESSES SEVERAL TOPICS:

1.2.1-THE GAP BETWEEN THE DRYWELL SHELL AND THE CONCRETE FLOOR SHALL BE CAULKED AT THE INTERFACE.

i .2.2 -THE GAP BETWEEN THE DRYWELL SHELL AND THE TRENCH SIDES SHALL BE CAULKED AT THE INTERFACE.

i.2.3-THE EXISTING TRENCH IN BAY 5 IS EXCAVATED FURTHER TO DETERMINE THE CONDITION OF THE DRYWELL SHELL IN THAT AREA. ACTIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR FINISHING THE TRENCH SURFACES AFTER THE UT INSPECTIONS ARE COMPLETED.

PAGE 0016 ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 E C R Printout ECR 'TYPE: DCP I 'I APPROVED

/ DISPOSITION:

1.2.4- INSTRUCTIONS FOR CLEANING AND INSPECTION OF THE I DRYWELL SUMP WERE PROVIDED UNDER AWA #2 TO . I I

DETERMINE IF ANY REPAIRS ARE REQUIRED. THE I RESULTS WILL BE FORWARDED TO ENGINEERING FOR ,

EVALUATION UNDER THE STRUCTURAL MONITORING PROGRAM. 1' 1.2.5-THE TROUGH INSIDE OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM (THE AREA INSIDE OF THE PEDESTAL AT ELEVATION 10'-3) AND I '

THE PIPES THAT CONNECT IT TO THE AREAItOUTSIDE OF \

THE PEDESTAL AND THE,,SUMP WERE 1NSP.ECTED UNDER I I

AWA #I. THE RESULTS I ~ I C A T E DTHAT CONCRETE REPAIRS ARE NEEDED AROUND THE PIPES CONNECTING THE TROUGH TO THE SUMP, THE AREA OUTSIDE OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM, AND THE VOID IN THE TROUGH.

THEREFORE THESE REPAIRS ARE ADDRESSED IN THIS ECR .

1.2.6-THE TROUGH INSPECTION ALSO IDENTIFIED LOW POINTS IN THE TROUGH. ACCEPTANCE OF THESE LOW POINTS WITHOUT ACTION Is JUSTIFIED IN THIS ECR.

1.2.7-INSPECTIONS IN THE SUB-PILE ROOM REVEALED THAT THE RAISED FLOOR SLAB IS DEGRADED, WITH EXPOSED AGGREGATE. THIS CONDITION IS ADDRESSED IN THIS ECR, INCLUDING JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED OPERATION UNTIL REPAIRS ARE DETERMINED AND IMPLEMENTED DURING A FUTURE REFUELING OUTAGE, IF DESIRED (SEE ATTACHED DESIGN ATTRIBUTES AND IR 546049)

I 1.3 ECR TYPE AND CLASSIFICATION:

BASED ON "NO" ANSWERS TO SOME OF THE SCREENING QUESTIONS OF CC-AA-103ATTACHMENTS F AND G, THIS ECR IS CLASSIFIED AS A DESIGN CHANGE PACKAGE. SAFETY RELATED SSC'S ARE AFFECTED.

i .4 TECHNICAL TASK RIGOR/RISK ASSESSMENT:

A TECHNICAL TASK RIGOR/RISK ASSESSMENT WAS PERFORMED PER HU-AA-1212. THE INITIAL BRIEF FOR THIS TASK WAS CONDUCTED ON 10/18/06. FOR THE TASK OF DETERMINING THE SOURCE AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE WATER (ADDRESSED IN A2152754 E06, NOT IN SCOPE OF THIS ECR), A RISK RANK OF 2 WAS DETERMINED. AN EVALUATION TEAM OF MULTIPLE SME'S WAS ASSEMBLED, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY REVIEW WAS REQUIRED. THE SCOPE OF THIS ECR IS TO IMPLEMENT THE RESOLUTIONS OF THAT TECHNICAL TASK. FOR THE SCOPE OF THIS ECR, A RISK RANK OF 3 WAS DETERMINED. THEREFORE THIS ECR REQUIRES AN ON-SITE INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY REVIEW.

i.0 SOLUTION / TECHNICAL EVALUATION:

E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR'TYPE: DCP 4 ,

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

/

2.1 DESIGN CHANGE ATTRIBUTES: 11 I

I t DESIGN CHANGE ATTRIBUTES AND INPUTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED PER'ATTACHMENT IA OF CC-AA-102,AND ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE I' PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT 1 OF CC-MA-102-1001. THIS REVIEW IS PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT 1 OF THIS ECR. I 4

I*

2.2 CONFIGURATION ACTIVITIES IMPACT REVIEW:

' CONFIGURATION CONTROL ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN REVIEWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ATTACHMENT 7 OF CC-AA-102 AND ADDITIONAL GUTDANCE PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT I' 7A OF CC-MA-102-1001,8 REVIEW IS D'OCUMENTED IN I' ATTACHMENTS 1 ANDl'2 OF THIS ECR.

a 4

2.3 PROGRAM IMPACT REVIEW PROGRAM ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN REVIEWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ATTACHMENT 8 OF CC-AA-102AND ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT 8A OF CC-MA-102-1001. THIS REVIEW IS DOCUMENTED IN ATTACHMENTS 1 I1 AND 2 OF THIS ECR.

2.4 SOLUTION

THE REPAIRS SPECIFIED UNDER THIS ECR ARE INTENDED TO CONTROL WATER FLOW IN THE BOTTOM OF THE DRYWELL. I' .

ALTHOUGH DETERMINED TO BE ACCEPTABLE IN A2152754 E06*,

IT IS ,DESIRABLE TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF WATER IN THE PORES AND SMALL SPACES IN AND AROUND THE DRYWELL CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB AT ELEVATION 10'-3". TO DO THIS, THE SUMP HAS BEEN INSPECTED AS DIRECTED IN AWA #2 TO MINIMIZE ITS POTENTIAL AS A SOURCE OF LEAKAGE INTO THE SLAB. VT-1 INSPECTION OF THE SUMP SHOWS THAT THE STAINLESS STEEL LINER IS IN GOOD CONDITIONS AND HAS NO HOLES. THEREFORE THIS SOURCE OF THE LEAKAGE IS ELIMINATED AS A LEAKAGE SOURCE, (A2152754-13).

HE TROUGH AREA HAS ALSO BEEN INSPECTED, AND WILL BE REPAIRED AS REQUIRED TO DIRECT FLOW TO THE SUMP (BY REPAIRING THE CONCRETE AROUND THE PIPES). AFTER REMOVING DEBRIS FROM TROUGH AROUND THE INNER FACE OF THE REACTOR PEDESTAL (PER AWA #1) A VOID WAS FOUND IN THE CONCRETE IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TROUGH (IR 00550437).

THIS VOID MAY ALLOW WATER TO BYPASS THE TROUGH I ROUTING ARRANGEMENT TO THE 1-8 AND ALLOWS WATER TO ENTER THE'CONCRETE FLOOR, WHICH ALLOWS WATER TO MIGRATE THOUGH CRACKS AND CONSTRUCTION JOINTS IN THE FLOOR TO THE TRENCH IN BAY 5. AS A RESULT AWA # 7 WAS ISSUED TO REPAIR THIS VOID AND ELIMINATE THIS LEAKAGE SOURCE INTO THE CONCRETE FLOOR. THE REPAIR OF THE TROUGH SHOULD ELIMINATE THE LEAKAGE SOURCE, WHICH CONTINUES TO FILL THE BAY 5 TRENCH.

ENGINEERING & FIELD PERSONNEL ALSO PERFORMED ADDITIONAL I

I , I PAGE 0018 E C R Printout '

ECR NUMBER: 00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCPI APPROVED'DISPOSITION:

INSPECTIONS OF THE FULL PERIMETER SURFACE OF THE TROUGH I TO ENSURE NO OTHER VOIDS EXIST. ONLY MINOR SUPERFICIAL I DEFECTS WERE IDENTIFIED AND DETERMINED NOT TO NEED I REPAIRS. I

• I I I IN ADDITION, THE PERIMETER OF THE SLAB WILL BE CAULKED TO THE STEEL VESSEL TO PREVENT WATER FROM ENTERING THE I '

GAP THE AT THIS FLOW PRI~Y~ARY INTERFACE. THESE PATH INTO THEREPAIRS SHOULD ELIMINATE SLAB AREA. I THE TRENCH AT BAY 5 WILL BE EXCAVATED SEVERAL INCHES I DEEPER TO ALLOW FOR FURTHER UT INSPECTION OF THE DRYWELL SHELL. THEN THE NEW CONCRETE' EDGES AGAINST THE I STEEL SHELL WILL'BE GROUTED, CAULKED AND THE STEEL SHELL EXPOSED AREA WILL BE COATED. THE DEGRADATION OF THE RAISED SLAB IN THE SUB-PILE ROOM, AND THE LOW POINTS IN THE TROUGH DO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT THE CONTROL OF WATER IN THIS AREA. THEREFORE NO REPAIRS ARE REQUIRED FOR THESE CONDITIONS AT THIS TIME.

THIS CONCLUSION WAS DOCUMENTED AS PART OF THE STRUCTURE I MONITORING PROGRAM ER-OC-450 (REF. R2091380-01 & 02)-

2.5 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

THE DESIGN SOLUTIONS ARE EXPLAINED HERE, AND SUPPORTED BY THE ATTACHED DESIGN ATTRIBUTES.

WATER HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE TRENCHES OF THE 10'-3" DRYWELL FLOOR SLAB DURING SEVERAL PAST INSPECTIONS. AS JUSTIFIED IN IR 546049-02* (SEE NOTE AT END OF DAR).

I THE PRESENCE OF THIS WATER IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE STEEL DRYWELL SHELL. HOWEVER, CAULK WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE CONCRETE AND THE DRYWELL SHELL TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF WATER ENTERING THE GAP BETWEEN THE CONCRETE SLAB AND THE SHELL. THE CAULK WILL FOLLOW THE CONTOUR OF THE EDGE OF THE CONCRETE ALONG THE STEEL SHELL, GOING UP AND DOWN THE CHANGES IN CURB ELEVATION AND INTO THE DEPRESSIONS OF THE TRENCHES. THE CAULK DOES NOT INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF MATERIAL POTENTIALLY FOULING THE SUCTION STRAINERS BECAUSE A GREATER AMOUNT OF MATERIAL (SILICONE FOAM AND ELASTOMER) WAS REMOVED FROM THE TRENCHES AND IS NOT BEING REPLACED, REFER TO TECHNICAL EVALUATION A2152754-05 FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT ON THE SUCTION STRAINERS

HE TRENCH IN BAY 5 WAS EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 311 DEEPER TO EXPOSE THE DRYWELL SHELL FOR ACCESS FOR UT I MEASUREMENTS. THE MINOR AMOUNT OF CONCRETE REMOVED HAS NO IMPACT ON THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE SLAB SINCE THE SLAB IS PRINCIPALLY A FILL LAYER TO PROVIDE A LEVEL FLOOR (EXCEPT FOR BEARING DIRECTLY UNDER THE PEDESTAL).

' I PAGE 0019 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE:

I DCP APPROVE? DISPOSITION:

THE CONCRETE REMOVED IS A PORTION OF THE REMAINING THIN WEDGE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH, BETWEEN THE (RELATIVELY) FLAT BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH AND THE SLOPED SHELL SURFACE. NO REINFORCING OR STRUCTURAL STEEL IS AFFECTED. THE STEEL SHELL REMAINS INTACT AS THE CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY. UT EXAMINATIONS WERB PERFORMED ON THE NEWI+Y EXPOSED DRYWELL VESSEL, WHICH DEMONSTRATED I

I THAT THE VESSEL THICKNESS WAS ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED FROM NOMINAL THICKNESS.

THE NEW EDGE OF THE CONCRETE WILL BE CAULKED TO THE STEEL SHELL,'TO MAINTAIN THE CONTIN~ITYOF THE CAULK BARRIER. THE STEEL WILL BE COATED WITH GREASE AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3.2.2.4.3 OF SPECIFICATION IS-328227-004REV. 13, TO PREVENT CORROSION OF ANY AREAS THAT ARE NOT COATED WITH THE NORMAL ZINC BASED COATING. REMOVAL OF THE SILICONE FOAM AND ELASTOMER FROM THE TRENCHES HAS NO IMPACT ON THE FLOOR SLAB OR THE STEEL SHELL. WATER WAS FOUND IN THE TRENCHES UNDER THE SILICONE MATERIAL, SO THEY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE AS A WATER SEAL IN THIS APPLICATION. ANY WATER COLLECTING IN THE TRENCHES WILL NOT AFFECT THE STEEL DUE TO THE GREASE APPLIED, AND THE CONCRETE IS NOT DET,RIMENTALLYIMPACTED BY CONTACT WITH THE WATER.

, I I

IN THE TROUGH AREA, THE CONCRETE WAS FOUND TO BE DEGRADED AROUND SEVERAL PIPES. THE TWO PIPES TO THE SUMP WERE FOUND TO HAVE VOIDS AND LOOSE MATERIAL UNDER THEM ON THE TROUGH SIDE, AS WAS THE AZIMUTH 270 PIPE FROM OUTSIDE OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM TO THE TROUGH. THESE THREE AREAS WILL BE RESTORED TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION USING SAFETY RELATED MASTERFLOW 928 GROUT, WHICH IS AS STRONG OR STRONGER THAN THE ORIGINAL CONCRETE.

IN ADDITION, AFTER REMOVING DEBRIS FROM TROUGH AROUND THE INNER FACE OF THE REACTORtPEDESTAL (PER AWA #1) A VOID WAS FOUND IN CONCRETE IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TROUGH (IR 00550437). MOST LIKELY THIS VOID ALLOWS WATER TO BYPASS THE TROUGH GOING TO THE 1-8 SUMP AND ALLOWS WATER TO ENTER THE CONCRETE FLOOR, WHICH ALLOWS I WATER TO MIGRATE THOUGH FLOOR TO THE TRENCH IN BAY 5.

AS A RESULT AWA # 7 WAS ISSUED TO THE FIELD TO REPAIR THIS VOID AND ELIMINATE THIS LEAKAGE SOURCE INTO THE CONCRETE FLOOR. THE REPAIR OF THE TROUGH SHOULD ELIMINATE THE PRIMARY LEAKAGE SOURCE, WHICH CONTINUES TO FILL THE BAY 5 TRENCH.

THE DEPTH OF THE TROUGH WAS MEASURED RELATIVE TO STANDING WATER IN THE TROUGH TO DETERMINE IF THE FLOOR OF THE TROUGH WAS SLOPED TO THE SUMP AREA. IT WAS

PAGE 0020 E C R Printout '

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCPI I

APPROVED DISPOSITION:

FOUND THAT, GENERALLY, THE LOW POINT OF THE TROUGH IS AT THE SUMP ( 0 DEGREES) AND THE HIGH POINT IS OPPOSITE THE SUMP (180 DEGREES). THE TROUGH IS RELATIVELY FLAT FROM 270 DEGREES TO 0 DEGREES, HAVING ONLiY A 1/8" DIFFERENCE IN WATER DEPTH. THE FLOOR AND WALLS OF THE I TROUGH WERE FOUND TO BE IN GOOD CONDITION, HAVING NO SIGNIFICANT CRACKS OR PATHS OF LEAKAGE INTO TYE SLAB INTERIOR. BASED ON THIS INFORMATION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS LITTLE BENEFIT TO RESURFACING THE TROUGH FLOOR TO PROVIDE A CONTINUOUS PITCH TO THE SUMP. ANY STANDING WATER IN THE TROUGH DOES NOT AFFECT THE I, I

CONCRETE. ALSO, RAI,SINGTHE FLOOR.OF'THE TROUGH IN THE I

270 DEGREE REGION,COULD CAUSE WATEg TO COLLECT OUTSIDE I I OF THE PEDESTAL fN THAT AREA, OR EVEN FLOW OUT OF THE TROUGH TO THE OUTER AREA THROUGH THE PIPE THA'T CONNECTS THE TWO AREAS. THEREFORE, BASED ON THERE BEING NO TANGIBLE BENEFIT AND POTENTIAL NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES, NO REPAIRS ARE SPECIFIED FOR THE TROUGH FLOOR OR WALLS.

.- 11 THE RAISED SLAB IN THE CENTER OF THE SUB-PILE ROOM HAS I EXPOSED AND LOOSE AGGREGATE, AND SPALLING ALONG THE EDGE IN A FEW PLACES. THIS SLAB IS PITCHED DOWNWARD FROM THE CENTER POINT IN ORDER TO SHED WATER INTO THE TROUGH. THERE IS NO STRUCTURAL FUNCTION OF THE RAISED PORTION OF THE SLAB OTHER THAN TO PROVIDE A WORKING SURFACE FOR UNDER VESSEL WORK. THE DISLODGED AND LOOSE AGGREGATE AND DEBRIS HAS BEEN REMOVED, SO THERE IS NO CURRENT CONCERN WITH THE CONDITION AND IT SHOULD NOT BE A SOURCE FOR WATER TO ENTER THE CONCRETE SLAB AT I ELEVATION 10'-3". RESURFACING OF THIS SURFACE SHOULD I BE CONSIDERED TO PREVENT ADDITIONAL DETERIORATON AND I CREATION OF DEBRIS. THEREFORE THE DEGRADED CONDITION I OF THE SLAB IS ACCEPTABLE AT THIS TIME, AND NO REPAIRS ARE SPECIFIED. (REFERENCE IR 546049-10)

I 3.0 10CFR50.59 REVIEW:  ; I (4

THIS ECR IS DETERMINED TO BE A DCP-TYPE PER CC-AA-103.

AS SUCH, A 50.59 REVIEW IS REQUIRED. 50.59 SCREENING OC-2006-S-0379HAS BEEN PERFORMED PER LS-AA-104FOR THIS CONFIGURATION CHANGE. THE 50.59 SCREENING CONCLUDES THAT A 50.59 REVIEW IS NOT REQUIRED AND THAT PRIOR NRC APPROVAL IS NOT REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THIS CONFIGURATION CHANGE.

4.0 PLANNING, INSTALLATION AND TESTING INSTRUCTIONS:

4.1 PLANT MODE ( S ) APPLICABILITY:

THIS DESIGN CHANGE PACKAGE REQUIRES INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS IN THE DRYWELL. THEREFORE THIS MODIFICATION MUST BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED DURING THE 1R21 OUTAGE.

I ' PAGE 0021 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR ' TYPE : DCP APPROVE@ / DIS POSITION:

4.2 INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS:

4.2 .'l GENERAL 4.2.1.1 WORK WILL BE IN A POSTED HIGH RAD AREA. AN ALARA PLAN MUST BE DEVELOPED FOR THE REQUIRED WORK ACTIVITIFS.

I 4.2.1.2 THE MIXING AND PLACEMENT OF GROUT SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 2400-SMM-3150.16 AND THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTTONS. A QV QUALIFIED INSPECTOR MUST WITNESS THE MIXXNG I AND PLACEMENT OF THE GROUT.

4.2.1.3 THE MIXING OF THE CAULKING MATERIALS AND

. PLACEMENT MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND THIS ECR, AND BE WITNESSED BY QV QUALIFIED INSPECTOR-4.2.2 REPAIRS IN SUB-PILE ROOM (AREA INSIDE OF THE PEDESTAL) 4.2.2.1 LOOSE DEBRIS AND EASILY DISLODGED AGGREGATE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE TROUGH AND THE RAISED FLOOR SLAB. IN .

4.2.2.2 GROUT REPAIR IS REQUIRED AT THE TWO PIPES FROM THE TROUGH TO THE SUMP, AND AT THE AZIMUTH 270 PIPE THROUGH THE PEDESTAL WALL TO THE TROUGH, AS DESCRIBED IN AWA #1. IN ADDITION THE VOID SHALL BE REPAIRED PER AWA #7.

4.2.2.3 ENSURE THAT LOOSE MATERIAL IS REMOVED AND CLEAN AGGREGATE IS EXPOSED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE REPAIR GROUT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROCEDURE 2400-SMM-3150.16.

4.2.2.4 THE DRYWELL SUMP LINER SHOULD BE CLEANED AND INSPECTED AS DESCRIBED IN AWA #2, WITH ANY UNSATISFACTORY RESULTS BEING REPORTED TO ENGINEERING FOR CONSIDERATION OF REPAIRS AND BEING TRACKED UNDER A2152754 -13. 1 .

4.2.3 CAULKING THE ELEVATION IO I - 3 81 SLAB PERIMETER 4.2.3.1 THE STEEL AND CONCRETE SURFACES SHOULD BE PREPARED AS DESCRIBED IN AWA #3. LOOSE COATINGS, DIRT, DEBRIS AND CONTAMINANTS MUST BE REMOVED PRIOR TO CAULKING. SURFACE CONDITIONS SHOULD MEET MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS FOR CAULK PLACEMENT.

4.2.3.2 CAULK SHALL BE APPLIED TO THE FULL PERIMETER

PAGE 0022 E C R Printout '

I ' I ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP APPROVED' DISPOSITION:

OF THE SLAB, AT ITS INTERFACE WITH THE STEEL SHELL, AS DESCRIBED IN AWA # 5 AND MODIFIED BY AWA #6 FOR USE OF BACKER ROD.

I 4.2.3.3 NOTE THE QV INSPECTIONS REQUIRED BY THE AWA,, I AND THE REVISION TO AWA # 5 REDUCING THE MAXIMUM LAP OF THE CAULK ONTO THE STEEL AND CONCRETE TO 3 / 4 y #

I 4.2.4 TRENCH EXCAVATION AND RESTORATION 4.2.4.1 THE TRENCH IN BAY 5 SHALL BEI FURTHER EXCAVATED AS DESCRTBED, IN AWA #4.,

I I

. a 1 ,

4.2.4.2 AFTER C~MPLETIONOF UT EXAMINATIONS, CAULK CAN BE APPLIED AT THE INTERFACE WITH THE STEEL SHELL AND THE CONCRETE PER SECTION 4.2.3. REMOVE ALL STANDING WATER FROM THE TRENCH AND ALLOW THE SURFACES TO DRY SUFFICIENTLY TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION OF THE GROUT.

CONDITIONS MAY NOT ALLOW FOR A COMPLETE DEWATERING OF THE TRENCH AND DRYING OF ALL SURFACES. IN THIS CASE I APPLY A MINIMUM APPLICATION OF GROUT TO THESE SURFACES AND ALLOW 8 HOURS FOR IT TO DRY. ONCE DRY APPLY THE CAULK.

I 4.2.4.3, RECOAT THE DRYWELL SHELL SURFACE IN BOTH THE BAY 5 l!.ND BAY 17 TRENCHES AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3.2.2.4.3 OF SPECIFICATION 18-328227-004 REV. 13.

4.2.4.4 DO NOT REINSTALL THE SILICONE FOAM OR ELASTOMER TOPPING IN THE TWO TRENCHES.

4.3 ACCEPTANCE TESTING:

4.3.1 GROUT REPAIRS - LEAK TEST WILL BE PERFORMED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE REPAIRS AS DETAILED IN AWA # 9 .

THE LEAK TEST IS USED AS A POST MAINTENANCE VERIFICATION.

4.3.2 CAULKING - AN IS1 PRE-SERVICE INSPECTION (PSI)

WILL BE PERFORMED ON THE CAULK. SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THIS VISUAL EXAMINATION PROVIDES SATISFACTORY ACCEPTANCE TESTING FOR THIS INSTALLATION.

i .3.3 TRENCH EXCAVATION/RESTORATION - ACCEPTANCE TESTING FOR THIS PORTION OF THE WORK IS A VISUAL VERIFICATION BY THE WORK GROUP THAT ALL STEEL SHELL SURFACE AREA IN THE TRENCHES IS COATED, EITHER WITH THE ORIGINAL ZINC BASED COATING OR THE GREASE SPECIFIED IN THIS ECR.

4.4 MATERIALS :

- - -04825

-3.04 - MASTERFLOW 928 GROUT (PC1) 204-07780 BACKER ROD

' PAGE 0023 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP APPROVED DISPOSITION:

I POLYSPEC THIOKOL 2235M CAULK

5.0 REFERENCES

s.

=========== I1 I'

l.-A2152754 E05, TECHNICAL BASIS FOR CAULK DEBRIS GENERATION 2.-A2152754 E06, EVALUATION OF WATER IN BOTTOM OF DRYWELL (THIS WAS TRANSFERRED TO IR 546049-02) I "

3.-50.59 SCREENING OC-2006-S-0379 4.-CALCULATION C-1302-241-E610-081

5. A2152754 EO9, EVALUATION OF UT DATF (THIS WAS I TRANSFERRED TO IR 54,6049-07) I 1.-DESIGN ATTRIBUTE REVIEW, 9 PAGES 2.-IMPACT REVIEWS (ATTACHMENT IO'S OF CC-AA-102),7 PAGES 3.-EP-O11QUALITY CLASSIFICATION FORM, 3 PAGES I 4.-MARKUP TO DWG BR 4070, 1 PAGE 5.-KOREA ATOMIC ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE RADIATION TEST REPORT (CAULK), 17 PAGES 6.-COPY OF C-1302-241-E3610-081,

- . ~

REV 2A MINOR REVISION, 1 PAGE.

IND. D,ESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS:

STRUCTURAL TECHNICAL REVIEW WAS PERFORMED BY DAN FIORELLO I PERFORMED A REVIEW OF THE WORD DOCUMENT CONTAINING THE PROBLEM RESOLUTION, I REVIEWED THE AWAS AND THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF THE DESIGN CHANGE AND AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHANGES. I ALSO REVIEWED THE DESIGN ATTRIBUTES IN ATTACHMENT 1. MY COMMENTS WERE MINOR AND WERE INCOPORATED INTO THE DOCUMENT

. INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY PETE TAMBURRO I HAVE REVIEWED THE ATTACHED ECR IN ACCORDANCE WITH CC-AA-103ATTACHMENT D.

THE ECR DESIGN INPUTS ARE CORRECT.

ALL ASSUMPTIONS ARE REASONABLE. THE APPROPRAITE QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED.

ALL DESIGN INTERFACE REQURIEMEN+S ARE MET. THE INSTALLED CAULK HAS BEEN QUALIFIED. ADEQUATE MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION FEATURES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. RADIATION EXPOSURE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. ALL RECORD RETENTION AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.

THEREFORE I RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ECR.

ALL COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE THIRD REVIEWER HAS BEEN SATISFACTORY RESOLVED AS DOCUMENTED IN EMAIL DATED 10/28.

PAGE 0 0 2 4

.E c R Printout .

I I' ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP IND. DESZGN REVIEW COMMENTS:

SIGNED FOR ELDRIDGE, SHARON DUE TO PIMS INACCESSIBILITY.

~ W A1 THROUGH 9 INCLUDING REVISIONS WHICH'WERE '

I 0

REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT AND CORRECT THE IDENTIFIED I DISCREPANCIES HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AGAINST THE FINAL DISPOSITION AND ALL REVIEWER COMMENTS REMAIN VALID.

THIS PACKAGE ALSO RECIEVED A FINAL INDEPENDENT ., ' I THIRD PARTY REVIEW BY MPR ASSOCIATES AND WAS FOUND ACCEPTABLE WITHOUT REVISION.

MANAGERS COMMENTS . I

'0 I THIS DCP IS APPROVED'FOR USE. THIS 'M~DIFICATIONWILL 1 I

4 IMPROVED THE HEALTH OF THE DRYWELL AND CONCRETE TO ENSURE THAT THE PHYSICAL PLANT IS KEPT HEALTHY THROUGH LIFE EXTENSION.

THE SUBJECT ECR REVISION HAS BEEN INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED I IAW PROCEDURE CC-AA-103AND FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE. I THIS DESIGN REVIEW ONLY COVERS THE REVISION 1 CHANGES.

REVISION 1 MANAGER COMMENTS:

THE PERSONNEL WHO PERFORMED THIS DISPOSITION WERE I I

QUALIFIED AND THE CHANGES HAVE RECEIVED A RIGOROUS CHALLENGE THROUGH THE PROJECT TEAM ALONG WITH IN HOUSE ININDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY REVIEWER (ITPR) ( S I ELDRIDGE)

AND AN OVERALL ITPR PERFORMED BY MPR (J. NESTELL)

AS PART TO THE DRYWELL WATER ISSUE EVALUATIONS COVERED UNDER IR 546049.

I MADE NUMEROUS EDITORIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES WITHIN THE DISPOSITION TO IMPROVE THE WORDING AND ADDRESS SEVERAL QUESTIONS DISCUSSED AT PORC PORC MEETING 06-18.

HE HU-AA-1212PRE-JOB BRIEF AND RISK SCREENING WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE OVERALL TASK OF EVALUATING THE EFFECTS OF WATER FOUND IN THE DRYWELL PER IR 0546049, WHICH WAS GIVEN A RISK RANK OF 2. THESE REVIEWS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND COMMENTS RESOLVED.

I

E C R Printout '

PAGE 0025 '

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP C. DOCUMENT CHANGES:

DOC CHANGES REQUIRED: y .DOC SCREEN STATUS: 8 I I

AFFECTED DOCUMENTS:

F T y p e Document ID Sheet As-Built ,Incorp Dwg Inc 'Inc Resp I T y p e Cat Due Date .qate

, Rev Orgn OC DWG GU 4070 BR 3B-153-34-1000 N/A 1 1.02 6.01 I

D F I OED OED 1

. I I I D. APPROVALS:

Name U s e r ID Date INTERFACING GROUPS:

CAQ: - ISSUE NBR:

RESP ENGINEER: TAMBURRO, PETE PXTO 11/05/06 IND REVIEWER: NIOGI, S U J I SNNl 11/05/106 MANAGER : RAY, F . H . FHRl 11/06/06 E. ECR WORK COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: y AUTO CLOSE: N c _ PRKl FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR:

C2013725 01. 2 COMPLT 20061024 DESC: 187 MOBILIZE WORK AREA C2013725 02 1 COMPLT 20061025 DESC: 187 DOP TEST HEPA UNIT I

C2013725 03 1 COMPLT 2 00 61024 DESC: 187 CLEAN TROUGH C2013725 04 1 HOLD 20061024 DESC: 187 MATERIALS / PARTS WORK ORDER

PAGE 0 0 2 6 E C R Printout I

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR'TYPE: DCP I

E . ECR WORk COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: y AUTO CLOSE :

' - N PRKl FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR:

C2013725 05 1 INPROG 2 0 0 6 10 2 4 I DESC: ,.'187 PERFORM CLEANLINESS INSPECTION C2013725 06 1 COMPLT 20061030 I

DESC: ,1871 QUANTIFY EXTENT OF REPAIRS C2013725 07 1 COMPLT 20061101 DESC: 187 REPAIR PER AWA #1 C2013725 08 1 READY 20061030 I DESC: 187 ENGINEERING INSPECTION C2013325 09 1 READY 20061025 DESC: 187 ENGINEERING ECR/MOD ACCEPTANCE C2013725 .a1 COMPLT 20061102 DESC: 187 GROUT REPAIR PER AWA # 7 (22013725 - 1 11 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 MOBILIZE CHECK FOR VOIDS C2013725 21 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 INSTALL PLUGS C2013725 13 1 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 FILL TROUGH AND VERIFY NO LEAK C2013725 14 1 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 "TROUGH LEAK TEST"

I PAGE 0027 E C R Printout '

1 I

ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: DCP E. ECR WORK COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: y AUTO CLOSE: -N PRKl I,

'11 FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR: I C2013725 15 1 COMPLT 20061103 , I ,

I.

DESC: 187 GROUT REPAIR (CONTINGENT)

I, I I

- -2 _

C 0 1-3-7 2 5 16 I, , G' COMPLT

• 2'0061104 B B

DESC: 187 t ! I I DEMOBILIZ~ ' I I t

I C2013726 01 1 COMPLT 20061029 ,

DESC: 187 REMOVE CONCRETE IN BkY # 5 C2013726 02 1 READY 20061025 DESC: 187 ENGINEERING ECR/AWA ACCEPTANCE C 2 0 1 3 7 2 6 03 1 ,COMPLT 20061104 I, I

DESC: BAY 5 & 17 COAT PREP AREAS WITH VERSILUBE C2013726 04 1 COMPLT 20061104 DESC: 187 VACUUM WATER FROM BAY #5 C2013726 05 1 COMPLT 20061102 DESC: 187 GROUT REPAIR BAY #5 TRENCH C2013726 06 1 COMPLT 20061101 DESC: 187 REMOVE WATER FROM BAY 17 C2013726 07 1 COMPLT 2 0 0 6 1104 DESC: 187 PROVIDE ENGINEERING SUPPORT C2013729 01 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 CLEAN OUT PERIMETER CREVICE

PAGE 0028 E C R Printout ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP

. //

E. ECR WORk COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: y AUTO,'CLOSE : - N PRKl FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR:

I C2013729 02 1 COMPLT 20061029 I ' DESC: ,,'187 CAULK PERIMETER CREVICE C2013729 03 1 READY 20061027 DESC: 0187 ENGINEERING INSPECTION C2013729 04 1,READY 20061027 DESC: 187 ENGINEERING ECR/MOD ACCEPTANCE C2013729 05 1 COMPLT 2 00611 04 DESC: 187 CONDITIONAL RELEASE OF MATERIAL C2013729 06 1 COMPLT 2 0061104 DESC: 187 VERIFY MATERIALS HAVE BEEN 4 ,

I C2013729 07 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 CLEAN GREASE FROM GALVANIZE C2013729 08 1 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 COMPLETE CAULKING C2013732 01 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 CLEAN OUT DRYWELL SUMP C2013732 02 1 COMPLT 20061028 DESC: 187 PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR DRYWELL SU C2013732 03 1 ; COMPLT 20061030 DESC: 187 ENGINEERING INSPECTION

PAGE 0 0 2 9 E C R Printout .

I' ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR TYPE: I DCP E. ECR WORK COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: 1 AUTO CLOSE: -N PRKl 0 .

I ( :

I/

FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR:

' I C2013732 04 1 COMPLT 20061029 I

1.

+,

DESC: 187 DWlO ROV REMOTE VT EXAMS DRYWELL SUMP I

I' I C2013732 05 11 , 1' COMPLT *' 2'0061029 I1 DESC: 187 I t I , REMOVE COVERS FROM DW SUMP I I

C2013732 06 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: SUB PILE ROOM C6-1568 INSTALL GRATING C2013732 07 1 COMPLT 20061030 DESC: GRATING C6-1568 REMOVE GRATING C2013732 DESC: 187 08, 1 SCHED PERFORM PMT 20061103 I C2013732 09 1 COMPLT 20061031 DESC: 187 REINSTALL COVERS FROM DW SUMP C2013732 10 1 COMPLT 20061030 DESC: 187 TO BE CLOSED NO WORK PERFORMED C2013732 11 1 COMPLT 20061030 DESC: 187 OPS SUPPORT TO EMPTY SUMP C2013732 DESC: 187 12 1 COMPLT TO BE CLOSED OUT 20061030 C2013732 13 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 POWERWASH DRYWELL SUMP

PAGE 0 0 3 0 E C R Printout 11 ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR 'TYPE: DCP E, ECR WOR'k COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: y AUTO CLOSE: -N PRKl I I

FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR:

C2013732 *. 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 HYDROLAZE DRYWELL SUMP I

I' C2013732 15 ,, " COMPLT .n20061029 I I DESC: 1187 I I MECHANICALLY CLEAN 1 - 8 SUMP C2013732 18 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 REMOVE TENT (CONTINGENT)

C2013732 17 1 COMPLT 20061029 DESC: 187 ERECT TENT (CONTINGENT)

C2013732 19 - 1 COMPLT 20061031 DESC: 187 PERMITS PERMITS C2013732 20 1 COMPLT 20061030 DESC: 187 PERFORM WELD REPAIR AWA XXX C2013732 21~ 2 COMPLT 20061103 DESC: 187 DEMOBILIZE C2013732 22. 1 COMPLT 20061031 DESC: 187 PERFORM STATIC TEST C2013727 01 1 COMPLT 20061026 DESC: 187 DWlO PREP DW SHELL FOR UT INSPECTION A2152754 05 COMPLT 11/04/06 DESC: TECHNICAL BASIS FOR AWA FOR ECR 06-00879

PAGE 0 0 3 1 E C R Printout .

I ECR NUMBER: OC 06-00879 001 ECR I TYPE: DCP

/

E . ECR WORK COMPLETION NOTIFICATION:

WORK REQUIRED: 2 AUT0,CLOSE: - N PRKl I FILM ID: BLIP NBR: BOX NBR: I 1

A2152754 06 RETURN 11/04/06 ' .I.

I' DESC: 'EVALUATE IMPACT OF WATER IN BAY 5 & 17 TRENCHES A2152754 12 , COMPLT '11 / 0 5 /O 6 DESC: ENSURE DRYWELL CAULK PASSES dUALIFICATION TESTING 8 1 I

a A2152754 13 COMPLT 11/03/06 DESC: ENSURE DRYWELL SUMP LINER PASSES V T - 1 INSPECTION F. COMPONENT CHANGE REQUESTS: . .

CCR Revw Prop User Affected Component List Rev Flag Stat ID Date OC 1 1-87 M MISC NROl\MBOOl-INT 000 - Y -F JDAO 10 /27 / 0 6

, I PAGE 0032

, I E C R Printout COMPONENT CHANGE REQUEST I I1 MECHANICAL MISCELLANEOUS 4 0

OMP ID : o'c 1 187 M MISC NROI\MBOOI-INT ECR/NCR ID: E 06-00879 001

CR REV : 0 0 0

,AST UPD : 10/31/06 PXTO REV1EWED  : y,,

~ROPOSDCRL STATUS: F CCR STATUS: APPVD REVIEWED BY : PXTO REVIEW DATE  : 10/31/06

Mp DESCRIPT,,:

I DRYWELL INTERIOR MOISTURE BARRIER 3 ' CONCRETE FLOOR ELEV 10-3 WHERE DW FLOOR MEETS DW SHELL

MP DESCRIPT :  ! I I 0

LANUFACTURER 1 : - ,'

• " I '

[FGR STYLE OM NUMBER IODEL NUMBER :

- - COMPUTER ADDRESS:

THIOKOL 2235M IFG TYPE ERIAL NUMBER: I 10CATION  : LOC: DW 10 IAA LOC :

iBL FOOTNOTES:

______________ CODES AND CLASSIFICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

• A SEIS CAT -- z SSEL/SQUG --

e--

9

!A CLASS N M EQPT ENV QUAL E INTERFACE  : REG.GDE. 1.23 : N REG-GDE. 1.26 -- W EG.GDE. 1.97' : -- N REG-GDE. 1.143 : N EG.GDE. 1.155 : N ATWS N IRE79-18 EB SSD

- - - NN e--

10CFR73.55 IEB 80-11

-- N N

N FIRE PROTECTION SWP/RWP EMER HT SNK

-- N M

CM SET POINT CLASS: X IS1 CLASS --

0 - v SME SEC XI ISI: Y ASME SEC XI IST: N ASME REPR/REPL  : N RES BND INSTR  : -- N MRULE/EPIX -- N A4 SCOPE - -

- - TECH 9 SA CLASS RAM ITE PIPE CD e--

0

- N LR

- IVOR REQ :

SPEC 9

THER RR --- Y TMI-2 PDMS --- BORON --

ASIC REFERENCE DOCUMENT:

- BR 4070 EFS/OTHER COMMITMENTS  :

THE AMOUNT OF POTENTIAL DRYWELLDEBRIS THAT COULD ENTER THE ECCS SUCTION STRAINERS IS EVALUATED IN CALCULATION C-1302-241-E610-081.

1 I.

. PAGE 00'33 E C R Printout I1 COMPONENT CHANGE REQUEST I MECHANICAL MISCELLANEOUS I

3MP ID : OC 1 187..M MISC NROl\MBOOl-INT ECR/NCR ID: E 06-00879 0 0 1 . .

ZR REV : 000 I

I INE NUMBER : VALVE SIZE :

3MP SUB - T Y P E :

I LOW RATING I ZSIGN TEMP II PEED RATING I LWR P R E S RT

'IIVER SPEED

%SIGN P R E S S ILUME

[MENSIONS IRSEPOWER SPACITY

$TED SPEED WTOFF HEAD JBE PRESS SHELL PRESS:

h 3LIEF P R E S S I 3MP CORRECT 4CKPRES S COR :

SNCH TEST PR:

3RVICE FLUID:

J SERVICE DATE: 10/27/06 PO NO:

3NDOR CODE

'EC NBR ITEM NBR:

$SIGN CODE .  :

)NSTR CODE ISTALL CODE  :

8 ,

1 .

PAGE 0034 E C R Printout COMPONENT CHANGE REQUEST 11 MECHANICAL MISCELLANEOUS

OMP ID : dc 1 187

//

M MISC NROI\MBOOI-INT ECR/NCR ID: E 06-00879 001

CR REV : 0 0 0

,AST UPD : 10/31/06 PXTO REV1EWED 9 -

'ROPOSD CRL STATUS: F CCR STATUS: APPVD REVIEWED BY :* Y PXTO REVIEW DATE : 10/31/06

.___________________------------COMMENTS ======================== ID == DATE =

NOTE: THIS IS THE CAULK JOINT AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PRKl 10/27/06 ORYWELL CO~CRETEFLOOR AT ELEVATION 10'311, WHERE IT MEETS PRKl 10/27/06

'THE STEEL DRYWELL SHELL. PRKl 10/27/06 LAX DESIGN S T, R O ~ ETIME I ,

POSITION OPEN: P+ID COORD: ACT'TYPE : NORMAL :

CLOSED: APP. J TYPE C  : G.L. 89-10 : SAFE :

VALVE CAT : SIZE: 0.00 0.00 FAIL :

PENETRATION/COMMODITY EN SIZE :

EN CONFIG:

OMMODITY SIZE OMMODITY MATERIAL:

IPING: MAX MVMT AXIAL LATERAL LECTRICAL MAX: PIPE TEMP: LOADING: -~~

NEW CABLE (% FILL)

AD EQUIV FT OF CONC. REQD A/BA RATIO: (ACTUAL)

ATER PSIG(MAX FLD HT. - MIN PEN. ELEV X 0.43)

PENETRATION SEAL A SIDE B SIDE ETAIL: I

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ~

• • END - OF - CCR

• I '

PAGE 0035 E C R Printout COMPONENT CHANGE REQUEST e MECHANICAL MISCELLANEOUS

//

OMP ID dc 1 187 M MISC NROI\MBOOI-INT ECR/NCR ID: E 0'6-00879 001 CR REV : 0 0 0 AST UPD :' 10/31/06 PXTO REVIEWED 0 -

ROPOSD CRL STATUS: CCR STATUS: APPVD REVIEWED BY :

• Y PXTO REVIEW DATE : 10/31/06

• *' END,."OFECR - ALL ASSOCIATED CCR"S PRINTED I '

I '

ECR 06-00879 rev. 0 Attachment 1 ,page 1 of 9 ECR 06-00879 Rev. 0 I Attachment 1 - Design Attribute Review I

DESIGN ATTRIBUTES (Numbers correspond to CC-AA-102 rev 13, Att. 1 list items) 4.1.4.1 IDENTXFY BASIC SSC FUNCTIONS: I 11 I(

The Containment is an enclosure for the reactor vessel, the Reactor Coolant Recirculation System, and other branch connections of the Reactor Coolant System. I Per UFSAR section 6.2.1, the design criteria for the Containhent are as follows: .

a. To withstand the peak transient pressure (coincident with an edrthquake) which could occur due to the postulated break of any pipe inside the drywell.

b. To channel the flaws fkom postulated pipe breaks to the torus. I I

c. To withstand the force caused b> the impingement of the fluid from I a break,in the largest IOC~Ipipe or connection, without containment failure.

d. To limit primary containment leakage rate dmbg and following a postulated break in the primary system to substantially less than that which would result in offsite doses approaching the limiting values in 10CFRl 00.

e. To include provisions for leak rate tests.

I1 The concrete floor slab at the base of the drywell provides a foundation for the RPV support pedestal, as well as a level support surface for personnel and equipment. The slab internal to the pedestal has an additional 6slab on top, and is therefore at a higher elevation than the slab outboard of the pedestal, with the exception of the 6 wide trough just inboard of the pedestal. Drains external to the pedestal can reach the trough (and sump) via four pipes in the base of the pedestal that connect the inboard and outboard areas. The higher slab inside of the pedestal is sloped downward from the center to shed water to the trough.

4.1.4.2 IDENTIFY SAFETY CLASSIFICATION OF CONFIGURATION CHANGE:

The structural support fbnction of the concrete slab is safety related, in that it provides structural integrity for the reactor vessel and its supporting equipment. The steel drywell containment vessel is also safety related, providing the containment integrity. The concrete slab is not required to be impregnable to water? as justified in tech eval A21 52754 E06*. Therefore any coatings and caulks are not safety related, and ody provide the desired effect of minimizing water infiltration into the concretelsteel shell interface. This ECR is classified as safety related, however, because the added materials come into contact with the safety related steel and concrete, and could potentially have an adverse effect on them. Accordingly, the caulking material is Augmented, A Qualifty.

i.1.4.3 IDENTIFY SEISMIC CLASSIFICATION OF SSC :

The steel drywell vessel and the concrete floor slab are Seismic Category I structures.

Any added coatings or caulks do not affect these seismic capabilities. Therefore there are no seismic qualification requirements for added coatings or caulks. The concretehteel shell interface is not considered a seismic gap.

. I ECR 06-00879 rev. 0

. Attachment 1, page 2 of 9 1

i.l.5 IDENTIFY PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS:

Coatings and caulk shall not degrade or alter the strength and integrity of the steel cohtainment vessel and the concrete floor slab. Cementitious grout has a cured ,

compressive strength as high, or typically higher than concrete, so it will behave in the same manner as the concrete to which it is applied. This prevents the need for consideration of any new failure effects for the grout. The caulk shall be qualified to remain adhered under all potential drywell conditions identified in procedure ES-027, with the exception ofjet impingement.

i 4.1.6 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR SURVEILANCE AND ACCEPTANCE TFSTING:

The design allows for future inspections of the installed caulk as required under the ASME Section XI program.

4.1 :7 SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, STANDARDS, OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS:

Specification IS-328227-004 Rev 13, Function Requirements for Drywell Containment Vessel Thickness Examinations.

OC Station Procedure No. 2400-SMM-3150.16, Mixing and Placement of Grouts.

GE NEDO-32686, Rev 0, Utility Resolution Guidance for ECCS Suction Strainer B1ockage.

EP-057, Component Record List Control.

EP-011,Methodology for Assigning and Maintaining the Quality Classification of Components.

ES-027, Environmental Parameters - Oyster Creek NGS.

.I 4.1.8 PWR SUMP PROGRAM IMPACTS FOR BRAIDWOOD, BYRON AND TMI:

Not applicable.

4.1.9 CALCULATIONS OR DESIGN ANALYSES AFFECTED:

The effect of the missing curb will not have a significant effect on the Design Basis Accident analysis of the Containment Shell For the following reasons:

The finite element models used in the GE analysis of the containment shell has fixed boundary conditions at the base where it is supported by the concrete foundation. With the sand bed removed, this interface is modeled at the base of the sand bed region (El 8 3 1 7B) The concrete floor inside the drywell at El 10-3 extends up to an elevation of 12 -3. The concrete floor and curbs above the bottom of the sand pocket region were not considered to provide &y support to the Drywell shell.

The thermal analysis considered that the temperatures of the shell behind the curb were lower than that of the shell exposed to the drywell atmosphere. There are two portions of the curb that have been removed, each being approximately 16 inches wide.

Cutting this small portion of the curb will expose a portion of the shell to higher temperatures. This will have a negligible affect on the shell thermal distribution and the

ECR 06-00879 rev. 0 Attachment 1,page 3 of 9 thermal analysis stresses. A review of the GE stress report indicated that in the sandbed region the highest stress (primary & secondary) is due to load Case VI (Post -Accident condition) - Gravity, Flooded Seismic) which is a primary stress check and does not included the DBA accident temperature load. The load condition that includes the DBA accident temperature is Load Case V-1. This load case has a maximum primary plus secondary stress in the sandbed region, which is approximately 73 percent of the allowable stress. The Load Case V-1 includes the pressure, gravity, unflooded seismic, seismic relative support displacement and temperatufe gradient during DBA loads. The '

load case would conservatively determine combined stresses because the pressure and thermal stress will not maximize simulataneously. The,local change in the shell temperature where the curb has been removed will increase the thermal stress in a localized area but this increase is judged not to be significant. The stresses ar&secondary and localized. The event is a one time loading that has no affect on metal fatigue. Any localized change in the thermal stress can be accommodated by the existing margin to the I I

allowable stress. ' 8

. I I

I As documented in Technical Evaluations A2 152754-05, the amount of potential drywell debris that could enter the ECCS suction strainers is evaluated in calculation C-1302-241-E61 0-081. The grout behaves as the concrete already present in the drywell, and therefore does not contribute to the potential debris. No additional debris will be created by its presence, since it provides the same surface area available for abrasion or spalling I during the DBA as the concrete, and has equal or better strength than the concrete.

The caulk can become dislodged by a water jet, and therefore must be addressed as potential additional debris. However, the amount of caulk added is less than the amount I of silicone foam and elastomer removed from either one of the two trenches, and the silicone material was removed from both trenches. Therefore there is no net increase in mass that could clog the suction strainers. The calculation does not specifically address the silicone foam in the trenches, but rather genm'cally includes dust, dirt, concrete and debris in typical amounts for nuclear plants. The amounts are not based on the drywell inventory specific to Oyster Creek (except for insulation), but are numbers utilized by the industry as typical. Since the caulk being added is typically installed in nuclear plants, it can reasonably be considered to be captured in the generic debris amounts utilized in the calculation. Thus, fi-om a practical perspective, there is no net increase in the mass of material in the drywell. And fiom a configuration control perspective, the caulk being installed is represented in the existing mass values used in the calculation. Therefore it is not necessary to revise the numerical values of the calculation, and the calculation remains accurate to the same degree as when it was originally created. However, text is added to alert calculation users of this issue, and that the mass values are considered to include the caulk installed by this ECR.

There are additional facts that reduce the threat of suction strainer clogging fiom the caulk. The caulk is at the lowest level of the drywell, installed in a comer joint. The position of the recirc pumps and piping are such that a break would impinge on the caulk in a direction that would push it into the corner rather than in a direction that would tear it fiom the comer. If it were to be dislodged, its position is below the downcomers such that it would have to travel upward in the drywell to reach the torus. In most line breaks,

ECR 06-00879 revJ Attachment 1, page 4 of 9 flow in the drywell is downward to the downcomers, making it unlikely that the caulk strip would be washed upward. The cured caulk has a density roughly 1.5 times that of water, making it likely that it will remain at the bottom of the drywell and not reach the torus.

In some areas, backer rod will need to be installed in the gap between the concrete slab and the steel shell, to reduce the amount of caulk needed. The backer rod is a negligible contribution to debris. The installer estimates that 10' of perimeter will require its use.

This amount of rod weighs on the order of a few ounces, which is insignificant compard to the calculation weights of 150 pounds for dust, dirt and concrete, and 25 pounds for miscellaneous additional debris. In addition, the backs rod will float, and therefore will not get to the suction strainers to contribute to their cloggink. However, it is very unlikely that the backer rod will dislodge at all. It is a high fiction, compresdible material that will be wedged into the gap between the steel shell and the concrete. Any water jet or other DBA will not penetrate into this gap with any significant force, so the I rod is expected to remain in its installed location under all conditions. Therefor? use of ,

the'backer rod is acceptable, and no calculation changes are required to reflect its use.

4.1.10REDUNDANCY, DIVERSITY AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS:

I Not applicable to this modification.

4.1.11 FAILURE EFFECTS REQUIREMENTS :

I As discussed above, the grout is no different than the concrete floor slab already present,

$0 its presence does not add any new potential failure effects. It is used to restore the contour to the trough in the sub-pile room. The grout will be placed in accordance with Procedure 2400-SMM-3150.16with adequate controls to ensure that the grout will not experience bonding failure to the existing concrete. However, if it became delaminated from the concrete substrate, it would result in localized ponding in the trough, and could potentially reach the sump. Localized ponding in the trough is not a concern, since it would not damage the remaining concrete and would allow-a negligible volume of water to remain in the drywell. Any grout that reached the sump would remain on the bottom of the sump, and would not affect the operation of the sump pump.

Procedure ES-027for the DBLOCA defines the environmental parameters inside the drywell. The caulking matm'als will survive the DBLOCA environmental parameters with exception of the impingement zone of influence caused by the recirculation piping in close proximity to the caulked joints. Failure of the caulk bond could result in water infiltrating the crevice between the concrete drywell floor and the steel drywell vessel.

This is acceptable, as determined in A2152754 E06*. The caulk could become dislodged and travel through the. downcomers to the torus. This has been addressed in the debris analysis as discussed above. The caulk is sufficiently flexible to accommodate any movement of the drywell vessel relative to its concrete floor slab, and will not restrict this movement. The caulk remains flexible and will remain adhered under the expected range of relative motion, having an elongation capability of greater than 400% (reference Rev. 1

a ,

ECR 06-00879 rev. 0 Attachment 1,page 5 of 9 A21 52754-05). The caulk material used has also been successfully tested to the radiation dose associated with plant life service plus accident conditions (see ECR attachments).

4.1.12 USE ATTACHMENT z TO IDENTIFY FIRE PROTECTION AND APPE~IX R SAFE SHUTDOWN REQUIREMENTS:

All screening questions of CC-AA-102 Att. 2 are answered no. Therefore a formal fire protection review is not required. In particular, question 1 is answered no based on the following reasons: The grout material is essentially concrete, and is not flammable.

The MSDS for the caulk indicates that the material has an NFPA flammability rating of zero, and that it is not a fire hazard. Review by the fire protection program manager I indicates that there is no impact to the fire protection and Appendix R safe shutdown.

requirements and that the amount of polyethylene backer rod material is insighificant, the material is not exposed, there is no fire source in the area, and the environment is inerted. I I

4.1.1 3 MATERIAL AND MATERIAL SUIT4BILITY REQUIREMENTS:

l%e cementitious bout used is compatible with the wet environment of the d3ywell .

and the concrete floor slab to which it is bonded, and is not adversely affected by the radiation levels present. The caulk material is designed fo; this type of application and has been qualified to perform satisfactorily under drywell design basis accident conditions. Furthermore?the caulking material is compatible with the DW steel shell structure and concrete structure and will not result in h a r m l l chemical reactions to any I of these structures. The backer rod is also compatible with the drywell environment, and will not react with the steel, concrete, or drywell atmosphere.

4.1.14 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS: I The installed materials are rated for the drywell normal and accident conditions provided in procedure ES-027. The materials are essentially inert once cured, and will have no effect on the drywell environment. They are not flammable and do not generate any flammable gases, with the exception of the small amount of backer rod added, which has been accepted in the fire protection review. This modification does not affect the temperature, pressure or humidity of the drywell environment.

4.1.15 EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION:

These modifications do not install any equipment requiring environmental qualification?and do not affect the EQ of any existing equipment.

h.1.16 OPERATING EXPERIENCE:

These repairs are based, in part, on the past findings documented in the structural monitoring program, as discussed in the ECR introduction. The caulk applied to the drywell floor joint is the same material used successfUlly in this application at Peach Bottom, Turkey Point, St. Lucie, Oconee, Catawba, McGuire, and Wolsong, per the coatings consultant on site for the outage (Jon Cavallo, VP of Corrosion Control Consultants and Labs, Inc.).

4.1.17 EPIX DATABASE IMPACTS:

None.

. I I S I

ECR 06-00879 rev$ f %\ob Attachment 1, page 6 of 9 ,Ab

,I 4.1.18 PRA IMPACTS:

Although the Level 2 PRA took some credit for the curb probabilistically, the minor daunt of concrete removed fiom the trench in Bay 5 is not significant enough to markedly change LERF or the co&sions of the SAh4A analysis, (Ref. IR 55002i). The failure probabilities for the OC h due to core material impingement are not significantly different than those for other Mark I containments where the concrete curb does not exist. Therefore there are no impacts to the PRA analysis.

4.1.19 SYSTEM OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS;:

The ECCS suction strainers must not become clogged to the point that they affect the I

operability of the ECCS systems. The amount of installed material that could become I (

dislodged and reach the suction strainers has been analyzed and found to be within the available margin for continued operability of ECCS systems. Also, materials installed will not affect the operation of the drywell sump pumps.

I t I IC 4.1.20 HUMAN FACTORS REQUIREMENTS:

Not applicable to this ECR.

4.1.21 USE ATTACHMENT 9 TO IDENTIFY PROCEDURE CHANGES:

The requirement to inspect the caulk will be added to procedure ER-OC-330-1006 for the Containment IS1 program inspections IAW ASME Section XI program and is tracked under A2 152754-11.Based on review of attachment 9 and the impact review performed, there are no other procedure impacts.

4 .

4.1.22 TRAINING REQUIREMENTS:

, , $Nonerequired.

4.1.23 SYSTEM INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS:

This activity will leave the two trenches that were previously filed with a foam material empty. This empty space may slightly delay the measurement of unidentified leak rate which is measured by the 1-8sump. The open trenches may collect unidentified leakage and temporarily prevent the leakage from reaching 1-8sump. However this delay is conservatively estimated to be no more than a 30 minutes. The total empty volume of the both trench is estimated to be approximately 50 gallons. Tech. Spec. 3.3.D.1 requires that reactor coolant shall be limited to a 2 gpm increase in a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period. Assuming a 2 gpm leak were to instantaneously develop and leak into both trenches at the same time, it would take about 30 minutes for the trenches to fill and overflow at which point the leakage would enter the 1-8sump.

The installed matenals,are primarily structural and cosmetic repairs, and do not interface with any other plant systems.

ECR 06-00879 rev. 0 Attachment 1, page 7 of 9 II' 4.1.24 LAYOUT AND ARRANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS:

There are no special requirements for these modifications.

h.l.25 USE ATTACHMENT 5 TO DETERMINE RADIATION PROTECTION /

ALARA APPLIcABILI?"y: 1 Based on the responses to the attachment 5 questions, an ALARA review is r'equired II for this scope of work. (I 4.1.26 WALKDOWNS: 1 Several walkdowns and inspections were performed by ehgineering, planning and the work group to determine the best course of action and the preferred design solktion. The walkdowns established the existing field conditions, and the installability of @e intended design solutions. 8 I

1 I

II i 4.1 2 7 ACCESS.,FOR'MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, ISI, OR IST:

The design allows for fbture inspections of the installed caulk as required under the ASME Section XI program, and for fiture inspections of &e trenches to determine if they contain water. The installed caulk and grout does not impede access to any plant equipment.

I 4.1.28 HANDLING,

~

STORAGE,CLEANING, SHIPPING AND TRANSPORTING REQUIREMENTS:

Cleaning requirements in preparation for application of the caulking material are specified in AWA #3 of this ECR.

4.1.29 EMERGENCY PLAN IMPACT: .

None for this modification.

i.1.30 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS:

The MSDS for all materials should be obtained by the work group, and reviewed to determine the applicable hazards and precautions.

h.1.31 USE ATTACHMENT 6 TO DETERMINE IMPACT ON NUCLEAR FUEL, CORE COMPONENTS, CORE DESIGN, REACTIVITY MANAGEMENT; CRITICALITY CONTROL AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS, AND TRANSIENT AND ACCIDENT ANALYSES:

There are no impacts. The materials used are qualified for the drywell environment.

Potential creation of debris under DBA conditions has been evaluated and determined to be bounded by the existing conditions and analyses.

4.1.32 LOAD PATH REQUIREMENTS:

There are no special handling requirements for the materials used for these modifications.

s.1.33 MECHANICAL SYSTEM DESIGN LIMITS:

I '

ECR 06-00879 rev. 0

. ' Attachment 1,page 8 of 9 None applicable. 'I I 4.1.34 IDENTIFY CHEMISTRY REQUIREMENTS:

/Chemistry has approved the materials applied by this ECR for use in the drywell:

Leachable contaminants are within the limits of this environment.

, 4.1.35 ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS: I Not applicable. I I

4.1.36 INSTRUMENT AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS:

Not applicable.

4.1.37 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS:

Not applicable. I I I C I u h.l:38 JDENTIFY C I h L / STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS:

The repairs do not perform a structural function, but,only serve to direct water to the drywell sump. The materials utilized are compatible with, and do not affect the structural integrity of the existing structural elements.

4.1.39 IDENTIFY SEISMIC / DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS: I Similar to the above item, the installed materials do not have a seismic hnction or requirements, and do not impact the seismic capabilities of existing SSC's.

4.1.40 PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS: ,

Personnel shall be qualified for installation of the materials specified.

t '

4.1.4 1 SPECIAL PROCEDURES OR SPECIAL INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS:

The applicable portions of Specification IS-328227-004 rev. 13 are referred to in the work instructions of AWA #5. Unless directed otherwise within this ECR, all materials shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. Grout is to be insta3Ied in'accordance with Specification IS-551-81-6 as directed in AWA #l.

4.1.42 IDENTIFY / OBTAIN INTERFACING DEPARTMENT REVIEWS:

Interface reviews have been performed by the work group (Dave Ryan), the Venture planner (John Burt), Operations (Robin Brown), the structural monitorhg program owner (Sugit Niogi), the system manager (Sylvain Schwartz), the fire protection program manager (Mark Carlson) and the IS1 program manager (Greg Harttrafi). The completed reviews are attached to this ECR. All identified impacts have been addressed, or have a tracking mechanism to ensure their completion.

4.1.43 USE ATTACHMENT 11 TO DETERMINE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON LICENSE RENEWAL:

This ECR directs a VT inspection of the drywell 1-8 sump pit liner and tracked under A2 152754-13, which will satisfy the structural monitoring requirement for license renewal and tracked under A21 52754-13. All of the questions of attachment 11 are

ECR 06-00879 rev.# Fq!&

Attachment 1, page 9 o f 9

/I answered no. The SSCs involved are not affected, and the materials installed do not perform any of the roles or functions addressed by the screeningquestions.

4.k.44 NEIL REQUIREMENTS:

None. .

document. A2152754 E06 has been transferred to IR 00546049 A02. The conclusion this Tech Eva1 does not change disposition or repairs made by this ECR. Rev. 1

5-CC-AA-I 02

-> ECR 06-00879, Iikv.0 Revision 13 [ .

A?TACHMENT $J .,

Page 61 of 77

. PAGE( OF V tl I ATTACHMENT lOA Operations Department (including Radwaste) Configuration Change Review Checklist Page 1 of I Configuration Change Document No.: @M 06 00 87 9 h.0 This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmentalapprovals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each department is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. As long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format.1 This review covers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial theetings, walkdowns, detailed design development, and identification of impacts on other station programs and areas of I

responsibility.

Review Reauirements @l,, InitiallDate

1. The impact on the station equipment, changes in equipment responses, and changes in operator response for different scenarios have been discussed. As the representative of the c

Operations Department, Ifully understand the impaqt,, including training needs, upon my department and concur that my concerns have b.een adequately addressed.

I *

• II d@& ,/O-27-%

2. I have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements are complete, or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-AA-102 attachments listed below:

0 Attachment 7 - Configuration Activities (List Tracking &/Q-t746 I NO. /I/u,+ 1

- Programs (Tracking No. h I

0 Attachment 8 No. &,Jn4 1

~3 Attachment 9 - Procedures and Training (Tracking 1

/O 06 m/b27106 I

3. Acceptance $riteria for Post Maintenance Testing and any special tests required to adequately demonstrate system operability following implementation of a Configuration Change have been specified.

Jd 10-27-k!

4. A U R A for operation has been considered in th lh.3 70-276

5. Appropriate component labeling is used in the design package, including drawings. -#Y/o-z7-i%

6. The Configuration Change does not interfere with operation of existing nearby equipment. 1!%-+5?d

7. There are no operating procedure changes required by this Configuration Change that introduce new susceptibility to water hammer or hydraulic transients that might result in impacting plant operation.

8. The design can be implemented within constraints of plant operatiodmode. This includes an operation assessment of all affected systems and interfacing structures, systems and components during the mode(s) in which the design change is being implemented.

9. The configuration change has been reviewed and will not introduce a new single point of vulnerability and there are no existing SPVs (unless approved by Site Engineering Director)

10. Impact of this configuration change on Operator Aids has been reviewed and appropriate actions have been or will be taken (refer to OP-AA-115-101 and the Operator Aid Log)pGde

11. The configuration change has been reviewed and impacts on margin are understoo&The 10-27-lV design summary adequately addresses known margin impacts. (refer to ER-AA-2007)

12. Changes impacting the Clearance and Tagging Program have been identified and are being & /0-27-06 tracked.

My department has reviewed the Configuration Change Document (or appropriate contents) and understands the impact regarding my departments operations, procedures, and programs. All Configuration Change support been identified.

Date: 0 f -2?7%

OpGatZns Department Representative Return the completed form to the Configuration Change Preparer I

• I cc-AA-102 ECR 06-00879,REV. 8 Revision 13 I Page 62 of 77 I '

ATTACHMENT IOB *'

Plant Engineering Configuration Change Review Checklist Page 1 of 1

/

Configuration Change Document No.: 06 -008 79 Rk-This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartment approvals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each department is expected to ans'wer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. As long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format. This review mvers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial meetings, walkdowns, I

detailed design development, and identification of impacts on other station programs and areas of responsibility.

Review Reauirements 1, InitiallDate

1. My department has participated as required, and concurred with the proposed Configuration Change; and fully understands the Configuration Change implications for my department. Included in this review is verification that restoration activities will not result in hydraulic transients that could result in water hammer or affect the continued operation of the unit I 4/cr/z7/pc

2. I have confir;med the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements are complete,' or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-AA-102 attachments listed # ,o/z7/Q below 4 0 EC& 06-,0087' Attachment 7 - Configuration Activities (Tracking No. A- Z/r27C4 )

Attachment 8 - Programs (Tracking No. )

1. A 4 7/1&

4/yiJe4 Attachment 9 - Procedures and Training (Tracking No. )

--#I+ $!A

3. Acceptance criteria for DCP Testing and any special tests required to adequately demonstrate system operability following Configuration Change implementation have been specified.

4. Parameters for performance monitoring and trending are adequately instrumented. . .

NA-'

5. Ifapplicable, changes to system descriptions in UFSAR and DBDs have been reviewed and are CoTect.

! &/04

6. Existing Surveillance Procedures are adequate for monitoring system performance or revision are being tracked to assure timely completion. (Action Tracking No. )

8. New components are classified per MA-AA-716-210 in the PCM web-based tool, appropriate revisions in the PCM web-based tool for existing components have been made, or additions and #A-changes are being tracked to assure timely completion. (Action Tracking No. )

9. Design conditions, inputs, and assumptions used in processes, designs or analyses subject to Nuclear Fuels Dept. design authority, if affected, have been discussed with NF and addressed if req'd. &

10.The configuration change has been reviewed and will not introduce a new single point of

8 ,

I ECR 06-00879,REV. 0 ATTACHMENT 2 cc-AA-102 PAGE 3 0 7 ~ Revision 11 I

. Page 57 of 63 ATACHMENT IOC Engineering Programs Configuration Change Review Checklist .

//

Page I of 1 CONFIGURATION CHANGE DOCUMENT NO.:

This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmentalapprovals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each department is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. As long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format. This review covers activities performed during the design phase of a ConfigurationChange, including initial meetings, walkdowns, detailed design development, and identification of impacts on other station programs and areas of responsibility.

8 '

Review Requirements InitiallDate

1. My department has participated as required, and concurred with the proposed Configuration Change; and fully understands the Configuration Change implicationsfor my department, /rlk /0/27&

2. I have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements are complete, or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-AA-102 attachments listed below: fl& lo)&7hb AttachmegIA- Configuration Activities (Action Tracking flk fohh 1

Attachment 8 Programs (Action Tracking No. Nh' ) * /aJL7IQL Attachme t 9 - Procedures and Training (Action Tracking fiw /0)27b6 No. e?b )

3. DkP Testing has been specified to adequately demonstrate program compliance for components. These tests have been reviewed to assure that there is no likelihood of initiating a water hammer event. N14C /djZ7/0L

4. Changes to system descriptions in UFSAR and component DBDs have been reviewed and /uAc t?0b7hb are correct.

5. Existing Surveillance Procedures are adequate for monitoring system performance r W /Jbbb revisions are being tracked to assure timely completion. (Action Tracking No. Mh 1

6. The configuration change has been reviewed and impacts on margin are understood. The W d 7 kb design summary adequately addresses known margin impacts. (refer to ER-AA-2007)

My department has reviewed the ConfigurationChange Document (or appropriate contents) and understands the impact regarding my department's operations, procedures, and programs. All Configuration Change support t have been identified.

Engineering Programs Representative h7l474.A Date Return the completed foim to the Configuration Change Preparer or Sign Electronically in PlMS or PassPort

ECR 06-00879, REV. 0 ATTACHMENT% cc-AA-102 ,

PAGE@F 7 Revision 11 I I(

Page 57 of 63 ATTACHMENT 1OC Engineering Programs Configuration Change ReviewChecklist Page 1 of 1 CONFIGURATION CHANGE DOCUMENT NO.: e I?. 06 - O 979 , &c,u.D This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmental approvals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each department is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. As long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format. This review covers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial meetings, I walkdowns, detailed design development, and identification of impacts on other station progtams and areas of responsibility.

Review Reouirements InitiallUate 4

1. My department has garticipated as required, and concurred with the proposed Configuration Change; and fully understands the Configuration Change implications for my department. I f&Jd/2,/&

2. I have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements are complete, or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-AA-102 attachments listed below: J A y ,b)%&,

Attachment 7 - Configuration Activities (Action Tracking No. Y / A 1 a/&< 7;/6 4

. Attachment 8 - Programs (Action Tracking No. rJ /A-Attachment 9 - Procedures and Training (Action Tracking f.

No. f J iff

3. DCP Testing has been specified to adequately demonstrate program compliance for components. These tests have been reviewed to assure that there is no likelihood of initiating a water hammer event. Id / A

4. Changes to system descriptions in UFSAR and component QBQs have been reviewed and /A ark correct.

5. Existing Surveillance Procedures are adequate for monitoring system performance or , iJ /A revisions are being tracked to assure timely completion. (Action Tracking No. bJ ( A 1

6. The configuration change has been reviewed and impacts on margin are understood. The L- f design summary adequately addresses known margin impacts. (refer to ER-AA-2007)

My department has reviewed the Configuration Change Document (or appropriate contents) and understands the ocedures, and programs. All Configuration Change support Date Return the completed form to the Configuration Change Preparer or Sign Electronically in PlMS or Passport

ECR 06-00879,REV.0 cc-AA-102 .

. ATTACHMENTV , . # I Revision 13 I .?

PAGESOF 7 Page63of77 '

ATTACHMENT IOC . I Engineering Ptog rams Configuration Change Review Checklist

/ Page 1 of 1 CONFIGURATION CHANGE DOCUMENT NO.: h e 06 -00879 PW.0 _,

This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmental approyak of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each depa'rtment is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. *'long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format. This review covers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial meetings, walkdowns, detailed design development, and identificationof impacts, on other station p y rt a m s and areas of I O responsibilHy. '.

Review Reauiremenb InitialFate I'

1. My department has participated'as required, and concurred with the proposed Configuratipn Change; and fully understands the Configuration Ch'ange implications for my departmentr

2. 1 have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements am complete, or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-M-102 attachments listed below:

Attachment 7 - Configuration Activities (Tracking No. )

Attachment 8 - Programs (Tracking No.AV52754 Et1 0 Attachment 9 - Procedures and Training (Tracking No. )

3. DCP Testing has been specified to adequately demonstrate program compliance for components. These tests have been reviewed to assure that there is no likelihood of initiating a water hammer event.

4. Changes to system descriptions in UFSAR and component DBDs have been reviewed and are correct.

5. Existing Surveillance Procedures are adequate for monitoring system performance or revisions are being tracked to assure timely completion. (Action Tracking No. )

L

6. The configuration change has been reviewed and impacts on margin are understood, The design summary adequately addresses known margin impacts. (refer to ER-AA-2007)

L My department has reviewed the Configuration Change Dowment (or appropriate contents) and understands the impact regarding my department's operations, procedures, and programs. All Configuration Change support department have been identified.

E n g p r i n g P r b b m s Representative Return the completed form to the Configuration Change Preparer or Sign Electronically in PlMS or PassPort

ECR 06-bo379, REV.o cc-AA-I02 ATI'ACHMENT 2/ Revision 13 I ,

PAGE 6 OF 7 Page 64 of 77 ATTACHMENT 10D ' I Maintenance Department Configuration Change Review Checklist

/ Page 1of 1 I Configuration Change Document No.: 6@ ob-obB3 # ! f ld This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmental approvals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that *eachdepartment is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. Ap long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirement to use this particular format. This I

review covers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial meetings, walkdowns, detailed design development, and identification of impacts on other station programs and arZas of responsibility. ',

Review Reauiremene 1 InitiallDate

1. My department has participated as required and concuked with the proposed 'Configuration Change; and fully understands the Configuration Change implications for my department.

2. I have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training J requirements are complete, or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordanp with CC-AA-102 attachments listed below:

-4

4. Demolition and removal boundaries have been clearly specified.

M

5. Equipment layout allows maintenance space for newly installed components and does not interfere with maintenance of existing equipment. -q

6. Items not in inventory, long lead time items, and required spare parts have C.

been identified. (Tracking Number: )

7. Acceptance criteria for maintenance testing has been specified as required. --

ble contents) and understandsthe Configuration Change support

ATTACHMENT 10F

, Configuration

- Change Review Checklist for Use by Other Departments Page 1 of 1 Department dz- z/# &i?&

CONFIGURATION CHANGE DOCUMENT NO.:& -0 879 l I

This Attachment is a sample of a format that can be used to obtain InterDepartmentalapprovals of a Configuration Change. The content of the Attachment is the required level of questions that each department is expected to answer and provide concurrence before Engineering issues the Configuration Change. As long as the content of the Attachment is being addressed, there is no requirementto use this particular format. This review covers activities performed during the design phase of a Configuration Change, including initial meetings, walkdowns, detailed design development,.and identification of impacts on other station programs and areas of I I

responsibility.

I , Review Resuirements' i InitiallDhte

1. My department has participated in the ConfigurationChange process (sCope meetings, walkdowns, impact review, etc.) as required, and concurred with the proposed Configuration Change; and fully understands the ConfigurationChange implications for my department.

2. I have confirmed the identified Programs, Procedures and Training requirements are complete, I or initiated tracking for completion, for my department in accordance with CC-AA-102 attachments listed below:

0 Attachment 8 - Programs (Action Tracking No. ) A ,

0 Attachment 9 - Procedures and Training (Action Tracking No. )

3. Other Considerations required to be completed in support of the Configuration Change: A/A

4. The configuration change has been reviewed and impacts on margin are understood. The /A/

design summary adequately addresses known margin impacts. (refer to ER-AA-2007) I My department has reviewed the Configuration Change document (or applicable contents) and understands the impact regarding my department's operations, procedures, and programs, All Configuration Change support actiyities required of my department have been identified.

1 U e c t e d Plant Department Representative (See EC Milestone for Dept Review signature authentication)

Return the completed form to the Configuration Change Preparer or Sign Electronically in PlMS or PassPort

ECR 06-00879, REV 0, ATTACHMENT 3, PAGE 1 OF 3 Procedure EP-011 Rev. 11 AmerGen, Exhibit 2A An ElebnlBmrh CMrgy COrnFany QUALITY CLASSIFICATION EVALUATION FORM (Typical) EP-Oil I ECR NO: 06-00879 REV: 0 , PAGE L O F -

1. Component Information ' NEW COMPONENT REVISION CI INITIAL CLASSIFICATION Faciliv. a U n i t 1 Category: M Type: MlSC CRL Component No.: NROl\MB001-INT.

I I

Host System No.: -187 Host ComponenVDescription: DRMELL System Classification: ElQ CIA* , I7N Host Component Classification: lXlQ O A ON 1, 811. Evaluation

1. What are the safety functions of the host system and the host component? If both the host system and host I component do not perform a safety function, mark this question and question 2 as "NIA" and continue to question 3.

0 ,

, I I

Host Svstem:

Host System:

The Containment is an enclosure for the reactor vessel, the Reactor Coolant Recirculation System, and other branch connections of the Reactor Coolant System.

per uFsAR section 6.2.1, the design criteria for the Containment are as follows:

a. TO withstand the peak transient pressure (coincident with an earthquake) which could occur due to the postulated break of any pipe inside the drywell. I

b. To channel the flows from postulated pipe breaks to the torus.

C. To withstand the force caused by the impingement of the fluid from a break in the largest local pipe or connection, without containment failure.

d. To limit primary containment leakage rate during and following a postulated break in the primary system to substantially less than that which would result in offsite doses approaching the limiting values in 10CFR100. ,

e. To include provisions for leak rate tests.

Host Component:

The concrete floor slab at the base of the drywell providesa foundation for the RPV support pedestal, as well as a level support surface for personneland equipment

2. Does the item play a role In accomplishing the host system or host component's safety function? If "NO", go to Question

3. If"YES" mark questions 3 and 4 as "WA" and go to section 111. In either case, explain your answer.

NO

3. Does the item serve as an isolation device betweena safety related and non-safety related interfacewith regard to fluid systems, electrical circuits, primary containment or effluent control? If "YES, explain your answer. If "NO", mark this question "NO" and go to Question4.

NO

4. Are there any credible faiture mechanismdmodes of the item that would prevent its host system or host component from performing its safety function? Explain.

The amount of potentialdwell debris that could enter the ECCS suction strainers is evaluatedin calculation C-l302-241-E610-081.

111. Component Classification If the answer to question 2,3 or 4 is YES,classify the item as Safety Related (a).

Ifthe item is not Q, is it required to meet any of the commitments or requirements of Exhibit 3 in EP-0117 If YES, identify those commitmentdrequirementson Exhibit 28 and classify the item as Augmented Quality (A); otherwise, classify the item as "Not Safety Related" (N).

Q (Safety Related) A (Augmented Quality) N (Not Safety Related)

IV. Revisions 17 UPGRADES- Operability Review/CAP Initiated -

DOWNGRADES 10CFR50.59 Previous Report number: (Required for EDMS) CAP No. SE No.:

MAINT. RULE COORD. NOTIFIED OF CLASSIFICATION REVISION: PREPARER'S INITIALS: SM DATE: 10/27/06 (EP-O11/S6) E2-1

ECR 06-00879, R E V 0 , ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE 3 OF 3 ECR 06-00879, REV 0,ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE 2 OF 3 QC Evaluation (Typical)

ECR NO: 06-00879 RevNo.: 0 Date: 10/27/06 Quality Class: A 1 EQ (10 CFR 50.49):

Facility: E Unit: 1 system : 187 Category: M Type: - Cmp Nbr: NROl\MB001-INT Functions: (include Safetv Function for Safetv Related items)

NONE. INSTALLED TO MINIMIZE WATER INTRUSION INTO CONCRETE FLOOR.

ALL ITEMS ARE TO BE EVALUATED REGULATORY COMMITMENTS [Blank indicates N. X indicates Y) SSEUSQUG:Check One Box Only 0 R.G. 1.23 (Meteorological Monitoring) 0 10 CFR 50.62 (ATWS) 0 1. (Host Component SQUG Eval- Active SSEL.)

R.G. 1.26 (Quality Group Classification) 0 10 CFR 73.55 (Security) (Note l),., 0 2. (Rule Of Box SQUG Eva1- Active SSEL) 0 R.G. 1.143 (Radwaste ManagementSystems) R.G. 1.97: Check one Box only 0 3.(EssentialRelay - Active SSEL) 0 R.G. 1.155 (Station Blackout) 0 R.G. 1.97 CAT 1 required to be classifiedQ .- 0 4. (Operator Action Relay - Active SSEL) 0 IEB 79-18 (Plant Paging) 0 R.G. 1.97 CAT 2 0 5. (Host Component SQUG Eval- InactiveSSEL.)

0 IEB 80-11 (Block Walls) 0 R.G. 1.97 CAT 3 0 6.(Rule Of Box SQUG Eva1- InactiveSSEL) 0 7. (SQUG Qualified ComponentNot On SSEL)

Seismic Cateaow: Check one Box only 0 W - (Seismic Class 1-Operable During & After SSE) 0 Y - (R.G. 1.29 Anti Fall-down) M-RULEEPIWPSA 0 -

X (Seismic Class 1- Operable After SSE)

~

Z (No Seismic Class applies) 1 M-RULE (R / Y / N) 0 A4 SCOPE (Y / N)

OTHER CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS(Blank indicates N, X indicates Y) 0 PSACLASS(Y/N) - ORAM (0/ S / B / N) 1E Interface Emer Ht Sink 0 Press Boundary Inst. License Renewal ASME REQUIREMENTS(Blank indicates N. X indicates Y*) 10 CFR 50 APP. WBTP APP. A (FHARl

- IS1 CLASS(A/C/N/M/1/2/3) IxI SECXI IS1 0 FSSD(N/1/2) 0 FlREPROTC(/N) 0 SEC XI IST 0 ASME REPAIWREPLACE 0 RefsDtherCommitments:

Comments: MUST MEET ENVIRONETAL CONDITIONS OF DBLOCA FOR SUCTION STRAINERS CLOGING. -

References:

C-1302-241-E610-081, Rev. 0 -

Reason for Revision:

ECR 06-00879, REV 0 , ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE 3 OF 3 Note 1:"Y" Rewires the following Soecial Text Entrv in PIMS: "***SECURITYREQUIRED PRIOR TO WORK ON THIS COMPONENT***"

Exhibit 2C - EP-011 QC Evaluation (Typical)

Multiple Component Sheet For ECR#

CMP NBR CATG TYPE FUNCTION (Include Safety Function for "Q" components) 5 0

EL. 0'- I I - 114" ECR 06-008791 -ECR 06-00873 ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE I OF I BY:D.ABBRJJSCATO DATE: I 1105106

7 m,.x.1997 1 88pM NORTON SCP WOODSTOCK ( E1513375261

- NO.827 P.4/16

' r

.+ C Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute P. 0.BOX 7. DAEDUK-~ANJI. TAEJdN. 3 O 5 a . KOREA CERTIFICATE OF RADIATION PROCESSING SMLE I

i '*, .-

DOSIMElza I DOSE MwsuRE TIME 466hr 1994. 6..- 26. 1 4 : 6 6 - 7. 7. 06:s 1 mssrI!!E:54~

Head, Radiation Processins P r o i e i

00.27.1997 1 :09PN MORTON SCP WOODSTOCK ( E15 13375261 No.827 P . W l.6 I,

9 ,

..I I

I.:

0

MORTON SCP WOODSTOCK c e15 13375261 NO.827 P.Wl.6 c* XT, 27.1997 1 :09PM 0

c.

_..**... OCT. E.1997 1

B9PM MORTON SCP WOODSTOCK ( 815 I 33'!5261 NO.827 P.746 1- - "

LP" II POLYSULFIDE POLYMER 5/69 TD-569N i I

RADIATION RESISTAhkE OF LP@LIQUID

• e 1

POLYSULFIDE POLYMER BASED COMPOUNDS ,

II I

INTRODUCTION I Several independent test laboratory studies hav,e been conducted on the radiation resistance bf Lp@

liquid polysulfide based compounds. In one study, an LP liquid polysulfide based compound withstood gamma radiation doses up to Si6 x lo7 roentgens, for a period of seven days, with little degradation to physical properties. In a second study, specially formulated LP liquid polysulfide based compounds immersed in JP-4 jet fuel withstood as much as 1.7 x IO8 roentgens, with only a small loss in physical properties. BoTh srudies showed that commercially available LP liquid polysulfide polyrher base aircraft sealants formulated io meet Federal Specifications MIL-S-7502C and MI L-S-8802C had I

the best resistance to radiation.

DISCUSSION O f RADIATION RESISTANCE DATA FROM OTHER REPORTS One report which contains radiation data is entitled, "Research on Elastomeric and Compliant Materials for Aerospace Sealants", Technical Documentary Report No. ASD-TDR-62-709. In this study, eight different polymer based sealants, which were all proprietary sealants, were evaluated and compared. Of those sealants tested, rhe LP liquid polysulfide based sealants gave the best resistance to gamma radiation, In testing The LP liquid polysulfide based sealant compounds for radiation resistance, three different curing agents were used, The best radiation and heat resistance results obtained were on those LP polysulfide polymer compounds which used either the chromate* or MnO, cure as compared t o the PW1 cum. The best results obtained in this study were on an LP liquid polysulfide polymer based compound that withstood gamma radiation doses of 6.4 x lo6 roentgens at temperatures of 190°F for 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br />. After 7 00 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> a t 25OoF, this compound was stili serviceable although some degradation was evident.

A second repoR that contains considerable radialion data on various sealant systems is entltled, 'The Effects of Reactor Radiation on Elastomers and Sealants4 II", by L. L. Morgan. This is Document No.

NARF-60-37T, and Is also lined as ASTIA No, 256,689. In rhis study, a number of proprietary compounds, as well as compounds prepared by Thiokol, were evaluated againn a number of combined environments. The maximum gamma dosage which LP'liquid polysulfide based sealants withrtood, when exposed in alr a t 9@F, was 7.7 x lo8 roenrgens. After this rnaximqm Karnrna radiation exposure, the samples stilf exhibited tensile propercies of 400 psi and elongation values of 265%.

/CHEMICAL DIVISION 930 Lower Ferry Poad P.O. Box 1296 OTrenton, N. J. 08607 0 (609) 396-4001 0 Reglotarad trademark of TClclrd Carporolfan.

The InformalIan in thle b ~ l l a t l fI$~ drrfvod ham Ihs bast waltabie IOU~CBB snd 18 b ~ ~ l f i v aIoa DB accLnaIe. Clovwor no euarente8 k.elpreassd of Impllad rosardtng tho

~ C E U of~ lhcie ~ C d81q

~ 01 tho VDO of thlr DroUuEI. nor aro any aleternant8 In I N a bulletln tnlanded Io lnfrlnge on on; pBIanL

4 y",'

0cT.S.

~, 1997 1: 18pM NORTON SCP WOODSTOCK(E15)3375261 N0.027 P.Wl6 in another rea, cured tensile specimen samples of seyeral LP liquid polysulfide polymer based sealant compounds were Immersed in JP-4 fuel for seven days. Next, the samples recdived a gamma dose of L.

1.7 x IOB roentgens, after which they were leh immersed in the'JP-4 fuel for thiny more days, After complerion of the exposure tests, the samples still exhibited a tensile'strength of 350 psi and an elohgation of 125%. The LP liquid polysulfide polymer based cornDounds used in these exposure tests were based on a chromate and MnO, cure system.

Refer to Table I for typicat LP liquid polysulfide polymer based formulations and the Fhysical and heat resistant properties of the cured compounds. Then, refer to Tables I1 and 111 for a summary of results on five cure systems and their correlation between radiation and beat resistance. All data in rhe following Tables was compiled from tests conducted by Convalr, a division of General Dynamics, Fort Worth, Texas, Convair conducted all the hadlalion studies on the test sample?, which were prepared '

and supplied by Thiokol Chemical Corporation. Among the sealants formulated by Thiokol, It was established thar cure systems ex hibiting the best heat resistance also exhibited the best radiation resistance. Exposure to higher temperatures during irradiation indicated that heat alone can cause I

degradation. 0 ,

. I I I

0 t

TABLEI 'E PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COMPOUNDS BASED ON THIOKOL'S LP-32 POLYMER

/

/

Compound (pbwl A B C 0 i!

I LP-32 Polymer 100 100 100 ' loo Titenox RA-50 EH-330 0

t -

50 I 1.2 25% Maleic Anhydride in Cyclohexanone 2 Ourer 10694 i SRF 43 3P M90 0 Sutfur I -

I Srearic Acid Cumene Hydroperoxide 5096 TeOl in Diburyl Phthalate c 50% PbOa VI TP-680 43% Ammonium Chronwre Soluxion in Hz 0 -*'

Cabosil M-6 20 Sodium Stearate MnOz ."D" Grade Original Physical Propetth Tensile, psl 390 310 43s 800 300% Modulus, psi 240 780 130 810 ElorigarTon, % 500 530 ,-:-

910 590 Hardness, Shore A 50 33 46 61 Physical Fropenies After One Week a t 1!S0F.

Tensile, psi 550 360 520 910 3gp% Modulus. p i 300 150 165 610 Elongation. 96 540 ' 630 830 490 Hardness. Shore A 53 50 40 62 PhysicalProperties After One Week a t 212'F.

Tenslls, psi 710 420 870 950 780 300% Moddur, psi 380 140 290 680 290 Elongation. 38 440 350 740 460 710 Hardness, Shore P 57 49 57 64 48 Physical Properties After One Week a t 250'F.

.L Tensile, psi 540 380 800 710 1 430 Y-300% Modulbs, psi 120 460 510 160 Elongatlon, 96 190 BSO 460 420 750 Hardness. Shore A 64 48 58 67 43 Y. if 3

. ~ 1Y . IrJI

- 0 ~. Z 1: l l p M NORTON SCP WOODSTOCK(E15)~EZ61 , NO. 827 P. 18/16

- 3 % 0 1 II

• . b

'?.

/

TABLE II I

I PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF EXPERIMENTAL SEALANTS, BASED 1 .

ON THIOKOL'S LP-32 POLYMER, AFTER IRRADIATION IN AIR AT 90°F.'

^ I

\

Neutron %IOu ' Elongarion, 96 0 480 Si26 y

c .4 460

\

, 490 a 300 210 7 250 166 0 700 1.5 7.3 420 720 I 10.1 a 260 200 7

0 170 820

- 200 670

'(

1,3 580 560 7.1 420 320 7 400 260 "

..- C' I 0 ,o 1230 570 1.3 1140 440 1 10,l 7 650 210 7 160 0 5% "

1.3 480' 450 8.4 7 280 2511

i 17.4 250 210 Gamma irradiation in Roentgens. but originallv expressed as ergslgrrr. (Cl Neutron lrradiation In n / c d where E>0.33 MEV I h T?

1 :1 1PM SCP WOODSTOCK ( E15 13375261 .NO.627 t.* - OCT. zi!. 1 9 4 MORTON P.1146 P

V

' I

'9. .

. I I

/ TABLE 111 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF EXPERlMENfAL SEALANTS BASED ON THIOKOL'S LP-32 POLYMER, AFTER IRRAD1ATION AND IMMERSION IN JET FUEL

• I LIST OF BRAND NAME COMPOUNDING I N G R E D l E N V Material Trade Name Chemical Composition Manufacturer TP@-680 Polymeric Thio kol/ChemicaI Division 0 Cabosil M-5 Fumed sifica Cabot Corporation D u r a 10694 Phenolic resin Hooker Chemical Corp.

Catalyst, tertiary amine Thiokol Chem. Corp.

MnO? "D" grade Manganese dioxide, special Manganese Chemical -

grade MnO, Corporation Titanox RA-50 Tiraniurn dioxide Titanium Pigments Corporation

1:11PH MORTON SCP WOODSTOCK C C15l3375261 NO.827 P.lW16 DlVlSlON HEADOUARTE RS

/

P. 0. Box 1286 Trenton, New Jersey 08607 (609) 3964001 SALES OFFICES 4

Suite 521 One Oxford Valiey I'

Langhorne, Pennsylvania 19047 1 (215) 752-5355 6272 Oakton Street . .

Morron Grove, Illinois 60053 (312) 583-2900 1

Q 2631 Michelle Drive Tustin, Callforqia 92680 (714) 832-3560 c IN CANADA:

Thiokol Canada Limited 75 Homer Avenue Toronto, Ontario, Canada M8Z 4x5 (416) 259-1141 IN ENGLAND:

Thiokol Chemicals Llmited Station Tower, Statton Square Coventry CVl2GH, England Telephde: 2-1213 CH EM1CAL DIVISION A DIVISION OF THIOKOL CORPORATION TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08607

Y I

e.:

'Engineering Paper NO. , 893 t

TIE EFECT OF NUCLEAR I1ADYITION ON SXLABT$,

I c

I I1

, ,, I 'i I I I) . .' 'by I' * .

Raymond A. Siebert Process Engineer Materials Research 6 PrPcess;,Epgineeriag

.c Douglas Afrcraft Company, Inc, c

Tbis p a p e t t o be presented at the Society o f Aircraft Haterials and Process Engineers, Sppcsbnn on S e a l a t s a d S c a l i n g Aircraft, Missiles, and E l e c t r i c a l Components, October 28, 1959, i n the fnstitutc of Aeronautical Sciences, 7660 W. 3everly Blvd., Los Angcles, Califomfa i;

, NO.827 P.14116 In a d d i t f o n t o the obvious rhmnaf end mtchantcal effects,'of an atomic e x p l o s h n , additional, effects nay r e s u l t from exposure t o high intensitp nuclear radiation. An aircraft o r missile which might survive the hear I and shock wave of an atomic detonation could ionceivably become disabled b e c a u s e of r a d i a t i o n e f f e c t s o n components of aa essential system such as hydraulic controls o r power plant. Recently, Douglas Aircraft Company had t h e opportunity t o investigate the effects of nuclear fadfation from an atomic explosion o n various process materials used in the construction of a i r c r a f t and missiles. 'Ilncluded in the test materials we= vaiibus -.I sealants which were selected because o f their general usage in the air-frame and iss silt industry,

• 4 1, Raterial A i s a polysulfide based H2L-S-8502 typk j e t fuel resistant integral fuel tank sealant which employs a chromate based accelerator. I I

2. Hatpriai B is a black, polysulfide based MIL-S-7502 type '

c I lntegral fuel tank s e a l a n t vhich uril5zes a lead perox'ide based accelerator.

3. Material C is a polysulfide based Ma-S-8516 type electrical ,

p.qttlng compound which u t i l i z e s a l e a d pemxide based accelerator.

4

- I 0 4. H a t e r i a l D is a room temperature curing s i l k o n e based sealant.

5. H a t e r i a l E is a heat curing s i l i c o n e based sealantvh%chis puttp-like i n consistency before cure. I b .

Specimen Prepara tiou Test spechens were prepared f r o m 118 inch thick sheets of cured sealanc vhich had been milled to r ~ o v e a entrapped a i r immediately after a d d l t i o n of the accelerator. After the sbeets had cured 7 days at 77 bell s p e c h e a s uere cut using the d i e described in A S M D-412-SlT 8s

• 2%., d a b -

D i e D. The resulting s p e c b e a s measured 4 inches in l a g t h with a .maxburu width of 5/8 of an h c h and a throat w i d t h o f 1/8 o f an inch. Since Haterial E, the heat: turfng silicone, vas t o o viscous f o z air-free mailling, 112 by 4 inch rectangular s p e c b e - v e t e c u t fm a 118 inch thick sheet vhich had been pressed from a portion of the uncured cOmp0-d.

Each specimen was then weighed t o the oeasest milligram and enclosed in ;B piece of 1100 a l d m (2s) tubing with an imide diameter of 3f4 of an inch and a lengrh o f 5 %aches. The a d s of the tubes were t r j m p t d closed and the sealants allowed to cure an additional 37 d 8 p a t 7 7

• 203, The specimens of were then divide'd into 5 groups,vith each graup SonsrLsting 3 specimens of each sealant, Each group, vith the exceptton of the 4 control group, was encased in a 6 inch aluminum sphere having a wall thickness o f 1-112 inches in o r d e r to protect the spechens from thermal and mechanical damage. These spercs vere shipped to the test site vhere they were placed a t varying distances from ground zero- The control specbens were maintained a t 77

• 2 9 . for the duration of the t e s t ,

~ ~ 0~~.2T.1997 1:lZpM MORTON SCP WOODSTOCK(E1513375261 N0.027 P.lW16

---* I

• i

• I h

z .

C "

Eighteen days after the detonetiop, The t e s t spedmens vere removed from the almninum tubes and checked f o r induced radioactivity. Only .the poly-

// - -

s u l f i d e specimens Msterlals A, B snd C uhtck had been exposed a t Positfons 1 and 2 exhiblted any measurable induced radioactivtty, as shown in che Table of Results. A l l specimens including the controls were reveighed and p e r cent changes in veight calculated. There were no significant trends apparent in the welght changes except, perhaps, i n Haterial E which will be discussed later.

cur; o f 62 d i ~ y s , were t e s t e d for n properties a t 77 29. using a e 2-1 clamps and operating at a

• minute. All specimens of )laterial Rex Durometer, Node1 A.

, there was no consist&& pattern Fn or elongation of the exposed specheas ttd specbeas of fuel tank sealants, ght Sncrease in ultimate tensile opostional t o the amouat of radiation nly consistent changes vere observed eclmens o Haterial E, vhere a increasing proximity to ground zero was noted.

The changes tn weight and hardness exhibited bp the wposed specimens of ..

0 Katcrlal E Yere possibly caused by Jncreased temperatures as the specimens 5'~2 -

0; ',

1 1 vere s 5 l x a t i d c l o s e r t o ground zero. However, if the temperature at Position 1 was sufficient t o c u r e Haterial E t o a hardness o f 45-50, which normally requires 5 to 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> a t 250OP., the specimens of .Haterial?

Crc A, B a08 C a t t h i s position should have exhibited detectable signs o f du 83 heat exposure, such as increased tensile strength ox reduced e l o n g a t i o n .

Since there appeared t o be no other evdeace of beat effects, the chmges exhibited by Haterfal E vere probably a result of bombardment by thermal 8 pc3 neutrons whose energy effects may have been sufficient to p o l p c r t z e the relatively 10u molecular weight s i l i c o n e compdnd.

Generally, the sealants tested did not experience sufficient damage t o impair t h e i r serviceability at the levels of radiatlon i n v d v e d S.a t h i s test. Since an aircraft: or missile exposed t o hCgher l e v e l s of zadiatioa from an atomic explosion would probably be destroyed o r disabled by t h e hear o s ahock vave, any effects on sealsnt materials at these levels vould appear t o be o f secondary i n t e r e s t . U

' I L

PULYSPEC PAGE 81 QD f 1 ' .

NSF Xafernationd .

Ann Arbor, MI Sacr;mtnto, CA I

Washinglon, D.C.

NOV 20, 1997 Bru~se16, Belgium

. . . I I

I '

I Send To 32300*IM' P l a n t 32301 MORTON INTERNATIONAG, IUCd M O ~ T O N INTERNATIONAL,

' mc. I .

100 NORTH RWERSIDE P U Z A :

CRICAM, IL 60606-1598 . 812 4 ELDER FERRY ROAD '

I '

I4095 POINT, MS 39581 Attn: MR. MARK NOWAK Attnz M I L HAL MC LAUGIlLXts I

I

• a I 4 ,

I 8 .

Tbank'you f o r having youz product t e s t e d by NSF: '

The enclosed report details the rersulte a f the feaf'ing performed on yovz p X & V C r . y?W program representative wi11 be contactlng you i n the near future i f there are any remaining Yaaues concrrnihg the s t a t u e of t h i s product.

.. I P l a a a e do nat h e s i t a t e toicontact VB Ifyou have any immediate questions pertaining t o your product.

• . I .

0 a

I .

,!F9711 2 0 5 4 05 Report for Job 955316 Page 1 o f 6 Thi8 report s h a l l not be reproduced, s x c r p t ir\ i t a e n t i r e t y , vithouf thm w r i t t e n approval of NSF. This report not represent USF Csxtifios@Zen 9 Y aurhbulaatien +e Y O Q tho WSF Mark. h u t h e r i t a t i o n Co uoo tho NE?? Hark i o L h to product8 appearing b the Companyrs O f f i c i a l NSP L i J t l n g Boek ez N S F p e Internet Product C c x t i f i s a t i o n Direi P.O. Box 130140 Ann Atbor. Michigan 481 13.0140 USA 313-749-8010 1-800-NSF-MARK Fax 3 13-769-0109 E-Mail: info@nsf.org Web:http://www.nsf.b%

POLYSPEC PAGE 82:

I .

Tracking ID: 'IA01875 Re ion:.-04 caqlectioa Date: IO-APR-19:96 OO:OO:OO,OO

// .

Description:

T h i o k o l 2235-M Lab Number: 560502730 Sampled: XPR;10, 1996 Re c e i v e d: 3996

~ l ' a3s ~ u n citon : JASM/G'SK Tracking ID: I A 0 1 8 7 5 .

L i s t e d . el; F e t e s t : A I Normalization Ambunt (Field): 7 . 7 5 11 Normalization Voluma (Field) : 1 Normalization Factor - @2: 0 T e s t i g g Standara: 61 P ar wt b r - . Result un t er c.d I

I' q e s c x i p t i o n : Th5okol 2235-M, 'sample exposed at ~ O and C p~ 5 '

Lab Number: S61003055 sampled:. M R IO,, i996 Redeived: APR 16, 1996 P m e r I -

Additives sample preparation: informattan ,

b a t e exposure completed 10-30-96 '

. Sampler 11-OCT-ISS6 0 0 :DO

. Conirol: 11-OCT-1996 OOk 0 0 surface area expoaed (All . in2 10-30-96 Final volume of solution (91) liters 10 96 Length of axpowre .(T1) hour# 10-3 0- 96 0 Arsenic, ug/L 11 96 Cadmilurn , ug/L 21-0 8- 96 Lead . .. . ug/L , 11-08-96 CI P H e r c u r y mg/G 10-17-96 D e s c r i p t i o n : T h i p k o l 2235-M, Sample exposed at 30C.and pH 0 Lab Number: S61003056 Sampled: ~ P R5 0 , 1996 Received: APR 16; 1996 d

8 1 .

Pweter  : C&#?

Y f!

Additives sample preparation: i n f o m a t i o n Date exposure completed . 10-'30-96

. Sampler 1%-OCT-1996 0 0 : O O c p n k o l : 11-OCT-1996 O O b 00 S u r f r a c urea txpoatd (Al) 126 128 . in2 10-30-9 6 a Rinal volume of s o l u t i o n (91) 7.30 7.60 liter. 10-30-96 Zength of.sxpooura (Tl) 24.00 24 - 0 0 hourn 10-30-96 Phena 1hca 0.032 ND (0.001) mg/L 10-15-9 6 2-Mercaptoethanol , ND ( 5 0 ) ND (50) ug/L 11-0 5-9 6 Phthalates, i n Water, Scan, 6 compounda, 625 B i a (2-Ethylhcxyl) P h t h a l a t e ND (1) ND (1) ug/L 11-18-96

'Dukyl Benzyl Phthalate 3 ND (1) US/L 11-18-96

. ND Indicates Not Derqcted.

F9711205405 R e p o r t fox Job 955316 . Page 2 Q r . 6

~ 10/25/2886 11: 49 2813976512 POLYSPEC PAGE 83 I

S61003056 Continued I P w e r , S ample a1 qn4ta -.J&=xL P h t h d l a t e s , i n Water, Scan, 6 colnpsunbs, 625 Continued Di-n-Butyl P h t h a l a t e <I 1 uu/L 11-18 9 6 -

Diethyl Phthalate 5 <l ug/L 11-18 9 6 -

Dimethyl P h t h a l a t e ND(10) ND (10) ug/L 8 11-1B 9 6 -

,' Di-n-Qctyl Phthalate ND (1) ND (1) ug/L I 11-18-96 Note:.

Also found approximately:

8.2 ug/L AS 1 Benzensmetganal 3 . 3 ug/L ASt 1-Phenyl ethanoae I 3.9 ug/L AS: 2-Phcnyly2ipropanol

. 0.61 US/& AS: B i a (2-ch1ok:oethoxy)merhane I

• I' E x t e r n a l 10 linaaj Phthalatee, i n Water, Scan, 6 compounda, 623

. I 2 0 , ug/L LP: Oxygen contiaining, m>103 7 ug/L LP: TetramethyL urea I 6 ug/L LP: Mix of oxygen containing, HW 8 9 and oxathiolane and ethyl hesanol I 6 I ug/k LP: ' N l t ~ o g e n . c q n t a i n l n g MOQ>114 9 ' ug(L ZIP: (PropenyloAy) benzene

• 200 ug/L LP: Mix of Diodathiocane and aurragat;e etandard d5-nltrabenzene 10 ug/L LP: Trimethyl gentanediol 3 ug/L LP.r (Propenyl) phenol 3 ug/L LP: Oxygen contiaining, W=>.l44

,7 uq/L 'LP: Tetramethyl t h i o u r e a 3 ug/L LP: Nitrogen, dxygen containing, &>a57

. 20 ug/L Le: Oxygen aengaining, MW->142 10 ug/L Yip: Oxygen csncaining, MW>159 46 ug/L Lgr Oxygen contieining, EpQ>173 900 ug/L LP: Mix.of nitdogen containing, MW=>199 and surrogate standard dt3- fluorobqphsnyl 20 ug/L LP: Aromatic v$ygan containing, MV?=>162 3.00 ug/L LPt Aromatic OXygen containing, MW=3164, 81 30 uq/L LPt Aromatic njitrogen, oxygen containing, MW3178 ..

0 1QQ ug/L ZIP: Aromatic oqygen containing, MW~>l.64, #2 4, ug/L LIP: Mix of oxyden containing, MoJ=>lBO and d i t e r t butyl rnethbxy phenol ug/L LP3 Oxygen cent~ainina, MW=>202 ug/L LB: Nitrogen cdntaining, M e 1 7 6 uq/L LP: Mix of n i t d o g e n .containing, MW>198 and oxygen containing, 0 W=>20 4 8w 8Ll-o,

~

U& LP: M%,t w o oqygen cantaining, MWm>lB6 and MW>16s and aromatic oxygen c o n t a i n i g g , MW=>206

. 0 4% 'ug/L LPi Aromacle o*ygen containing, m->204, fl *

$5$

ug/L LP: Aromatic olygen containing, MW=>204, #2 ug/L LPI N i t r d g e n cqnt&ining, MW>ZOO 1W ug/L LB: Nitrogen c d n t a i n h g , m>OL2, #l 1.0 ug/L LP: Nitrogen cqntaining hydrocarbonl Nw?192 3 ug/L LP; Aromatic alygen containing, Mp9->236 4 ug/L LP: Aromatic q y g e n conta.ining, m=>204, 113 30 ug/L LP: Aromatic! o@gen containing, MD1->192 50 ug/L LP: Aromatic ox&gan containing, MW=>194

. . 6  : ug/L LP: Nittogen cdntalning, Mw)212, 92 6 . ug/L LP: (Methyl phenyl ethyl) phenol 8 ug/L LP! Nltrogen caxttaining, MPp>246 7 ug/L LP: Unknown hydrocarbon, MW>209

• 6 ug/L LP: Mix 9f nitrogen cantaining, MW>230 and axygen containing, W->226 ID l a d k 4 t c ~Not Detected.

b F9711205405 Report for Job 955316 Page 3 of 6 I.

I f h i e report s h a l l not be reproduced, except in i t 8 entirety, without the W r i t t e n approval of NSF, T h i s &rt not reprosent NSF Ccrt!ficatien o r authcrixation to U B Q the NS? Mark. Authorisation CO uae the N6F Mark ..3 Ilm E O products appearing I n the Company'e 0 0 f i c S a l NSF Lisrinp Book or N S F ' s I n t e r n e t Produat C e x t i f i c a t i o n Diroc

., h8/25/2086 11: 49 2613976512 POLYSPEC PAGE 04 S61003056 Continued I 11 ssmolp con- Units T!t%t-Phthalates, in W a t e r , Scan, 6 ccmpounde, 625 Continued 3 ug/L LP: Nitrogen c d n t a i n l n g , @a44 80 ag/L LP: Nitrogen c d n t a l n i n g , Mw=>257 8 ug/k LP: Oxygen contatning, m->166 100 ug/L LP:.Nltrogen cwltaining hydrocarbon, MW>270 11 40 ug/L LPx Nitrogen c q n t a i n i n g , MW>286 '

' I1 10 ug/L LPs Nitrogen c u b t a i n l n g , MW260 10 u g / t LP: Nitregen c trining, MW=s2P9 30 2

100 ug/L LP: Unknown by ocarbon, MW=>300 ug/L LP: Unknown hydrocarban, ?49=>312 4' 20 ug/L LP: Mix of nitrlogen containing, WC-328 and oxygen contaiqbng, MHm>310 . ' .

2 ug/L LPr Oxygen contkiking, MW->390

. 200 uq/L. LP: N A t X O g e n COptalning hydrocarbon, MW=>3316 ug/L LPt .Unknown hyd ocarbon, MW>344, .

10.

E I'

. I 3 u g / ~ 1.2: Unknown

. hyd, ocarban, m>2Sf A0 ug/L LP: N+txo$en 'cahtalnlng hydrocarbon, MW->379 - 0 I'

Volatilesr Onregulate4 VoC'o.

Comment N .A. 10-18-96 ,

Sample: Aslo had 520 ugi/L carbon d i s u l f i d e .

• Dichlorodifluo~ametbane Chloromethane ND(0.5) '

ND ( 0 . 5 )

ND ( 0 - 5 )

ND ( 0 . 5 )

10-18 9 6 10-18796 Bromomethane ND(0.5) Nb ( 0 . 5 f 10 96 Chloroathane ND ( 0 . 5 ) ND(b.51 10 96

~ricblozofluoro~thane , NP ( 0 . 5 ) ND(0.S). 10-18-96 I Trichlarotrifluoroe~han~ NPiO.5) ND(O.5) 1O-l8-Q6 '

Methylene Chloride ND(0.2) ND ( 0 . 2 ) 10 96 trane-1,Z-Dichlorosthylena ND(0.S) ND (0.5) 307 18-96 1,1-Dichloroithane ND(0.5) ND ( 0 .SI 10-10-96 2 ,2-Dichl oropropane

• ND(0.S) MD (0.5) 10-18-96 cis-1, O-~icbL~roethylens ND ( 0 . 5 1 ND ( 0 .SI lO-l8$96 Chloro o m 1.2 . AD(0.5) 10-18-96 Bromochloromethane ND ( 0 . 5 ) ND (0.5) 10-18-9 6

'I 0 1 , l - D i c h l oropropene . ND(0.5)' ND(0.5,) 10-18-9 6 Carbon Tetrachloride ND (0.5) ND (0 e5.1 . 10-18-96 L, 1,P-Dfichloropropane ND (0.51 ND ( 0 . 5 ) 10-18-96 Bromodichloromethane ND ( 0 - 5 ) ND ( 0 . 5 ) 10-18-96

'8 8

d A D&ram*methana 2-ChloroethyLvinyl Ether cis-l,3-bichloropropene trana-l,3-Dichloropropens 1,1,2-Trich2oroet*hane ND(0.5)

ND(0.5)

ND ( 0 . 5 )

ND(0.5)

ND10.5)

ND ( 0 . 5 )

dD ( 0 . 5 )

ND(0.5)

NP ( 0 . 5 )

Nt,( 0 . 6 1 I O 96 10-18-96 io-la-94 10-18-96 10-1s-96 4 1,3-Pichloroprapana Na(0.5) 8 w4 2

TeCrachloroethylcnc Chlorodibromomethane '

rja(0.5)

ND(Qi5)

ND (0.5)

ND(O.5)

ND(0.5) 10-18-96 10-18-96 10-18-96 ch 1osoben z e m ND(O.5) ND (0 . J ) 10- 18-96 1,1,1,5-Tetrachloroethane NP(U.5) ND ( 0 . 5 ) io-18-36 Bromof 0 9 ND(0.5) ND (0.5) 10-18-96 I,1,2,2-Tetrachloroathane ND(0.5) ND ( 0 . 5 ) lO-18-9L 1,2,3-Trichloropropane

• 0.5 ND ( 0 . 5 ) 10-18-96 lI3-Pichlorobenzen+ .ND(0.8) ND(0.5) 10-18-9 6 1, +Dichlorobenzene ND ( 0 . 5 ) ND(O.5) 10-18-96 2,2-Dichlorobenzene ND(0.5) ~~(0.5) 10 96 Methyl-terC-Butyl E t h e r ND(0.5,) ND(0*5) IO-I~-D~

Methyl Isobutyl Petone ND (51 ND (51 10-la-96 Methyl E t h y l .Ketone ND ( 5 ) ND(5) ' 10-3.8-9 6 ND i n d i c a t e s N o t Detected.

E9711205465 Report fox Yob 9S5316 Patre 4 o f 6 This repart ehalS not be reproducedi' e%ce t in Ate entirety, without t h e written approval of WSP. Thin report not represent NSF t b r t l f b a t i c n er autHcxfzafton f o uao tho NSP Mark. Authorizattlaa to uae the NSF Mark i r 1I to products appearing An the Cempany'a O f f i c i a l NBF Listing Book or NSF,'n Xntetntt Produot Certification Dirr

. I

t 50.59 REVIEW COVERSHEET FORM LS-AA-104-1001 Revision 2 Page 1 of 1 Station/Unit(s): Ovster Creek Unit 1 t' I

Activity/Document Number: ECR 06-00879 Revision Number: 1 Tide: Drywell FIoor/Trouf&Drahage Inspection and Repairs NOTE: For 50.59 Evaluations, information on this form will provide the basis for preparing the biennial,summaryreport submitted to the NRC in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59(d)(2).

s I' II' Description of Activity: I (Provide a brief, concise description of what the proposed activity involves.)

ECR 06-00879specifies repairs to the lower drywell elevation. The joint at the perimeter of the concrete floor slab is caulked tc the steel shell of the drywell. Degraded concrete around the pipes to and from $e drain trough is repaifed wit$ grout. T h e existing trench into the concrete slab, in bay 5, is being excavated slightly deeper. The worn concretq'surface of the raised slab in the sub-pile room is accepted as-is. The non-uniform slope of the sub-pile room drain trough is also accepted as-is.

1 I

Reason for Activity: . I I' 11

@iscuss why the proposed activ& is being performed.) * ' . I Water was found in one of the 2 trenches in the drywell concrete floor slab. Extensive study (ref. Passport IR 00546049-02an 07)was performed to evaluate thepotential causes and effects. ECR 06-00879was created to implement repairs to limit the I amount of water that would bypass the intended drainage path and enter the floor slab crevices.

Effect of Activity:

@iscuss how the activity impacts plant operations, design bases, or safety analyses described in the UFSAR.)

The specified repairs do not impact plant operations or operability. There is no deviation fiom any d e s c n i d system function, method of operation, design basis or safety analysis descnied in the UFSAR. The repairs will help to ensure that the drywell drainage paths function as originally intended and designed I

Summary of Conclusion for the Activity's 50.59 Review:

(Providejustification for the conclusion, including sufficient detail to recognize and understand the essential hguments leading to the conclusion. Provide more than a simple statement that a 50.59 Screening, 50.59 Evaluation, or a License Amendment Request, as applicable, is not required.)

A 50.59 screening was prepared, and all five questions are answered "no". The repairs do not invalidate any stated or implied conditions of the UFSAR regarding plant SSC condition, operation or reason for acceptance, but rather serve to restore the intended design function of the drywell drahage system. Based on the assessment and screening responses, a 50.59 evaluation is not required, and the activity can proceed without prior NRC approval.

Attachments:

Attach all 50.59 Review forms completed, as appropriate.

(NOTE:if both a Screening and Evaluation are completed, no ScreeningNo. is required.)

w Forms Attached: (Check all that apply.)

Applicability Review 50.59 Screening 50.59 Evaluation 50.59 Screening No.

50.59 Evaluation No.

OC-2006-S-0379 Rev.

Rev.

1

50.59 SCREEMNG FORM LS-AA-104-1003 Revision 1 Page 1 of3 50.59 Screening No. OC-2006-S-0379 Rev.No. 1 I Activity/Document Number: ECR 06-00879 Revision Number:-l

//

I. 50.59 Screening Questions (Check correct response and provide separate written response providing the basis for the answer to each question)(See Section 5 of the Resource Manual (RM) for additional guidance):

I

1. Does the proposed Activity involve a change to an SSC that adversely affects an UFSAR -YJ5S I A N 0 described design function? (See Section 5.2.2.1 of the RM)

2. Does the proposed Activity involve a change to a procedure that adversely affects how UFSAR -YES X N O described SSC design hnctions are performed or controlled? (See Section 5.2.2.2 of the RM)

.I,

3. Does the proposed Activity involve an adverse change to an element of a UFSAR described

-YES X N O evaluation methodology, or use of an alternative evaluation methodology, that is used &

I establishing the design bases or used in the safety analytjes? (See Section 5.2.2.3 of the RM)

I

4. Does the proposed Activky hvolve a test or experiment not descnied in the UFSAR, where an ' -YES X N O SSC is utilized or controlled in a manner that is outside the reference bounds of the design for that SSC or is inconsistent with analyses or descriptions in the UFSAR? (See Section 5.2.2.4 of the RM)

5. Does the proposed Activity require a change in the Technical Specificationsor Operating -YES A N 0 License? (See Section 5.2.2.5 of the RM) I

n. List the documents (e.g., UFSAR, Technical Specifications, other licensing basis, technical, commitments, etc.) reviewed, including sections numbers where relevant information was found (if not identified in the response to each question). ,

See below.

m. Select the appropriate conditions:

NO, then complete the 50.59 Screening and implement the Activity per the applicable governing procedure.

If question 1,2,3, or 4 is answered YES and question 5 is answered NO,then a 50.59 Evaluation shall be performed, If questions 1,2,3, and 4 are answered NO and question 5 is answered YES, then a License Amendment is required prior to implementation of the Activity.

If question 5 is answered YES for any portion of an Activity, then a License Amendment is required prior to implementation of that portion of the Activity. In addition, if question 1,2,3, or 4 is answered YES for the remaining portions of the Activity, then a 50.59 Evaluation shall be performed for the remaining portions of the Activity.

&v I V. Screening Signoffs:

50.59 Screener:

(Print name)

Sign: /5%75- (Signature)

Date:--

50.59 Reviewer: 5 3 5 \T h o L\ Date:\' I gl O b (Print name) (S ignatur

50.59 SCREEMNG FORM LS-AA-104-100 Revision Page 2 of 50.59 Screening NO. OC-2006-S-0379 Rev. No. 1 I Activity/Document Number: ECR 06-00879 Revision Number: 1

/

/

Expanded Responses:

1. Does the proposed Activity involve a change to an SSC that adversely affects an UFSAR descnibed design function?

I No. The UFSAR contains extensive discussion on the concrete outside of, and beneath, the steel drywell dell, including the gap between the two. That is because that concrete provides important shielding and support functions, and the gap is essential to these functions. However, there is very little mention of the concrete floor slab inside of the drywell.

Section 3.8.3.1.1,Fill Slab, states that the concrete provides a wbrkini surface and transfenLtheloads of the drywell internal structures to the shell through direct bearing. Design functions of the fill slab are not mpacted by the repairs performed under ECR 06-00879. The caulk installation serves to prevent water from entering any gaps between the slab and shell, and has no impact on the load transfer or support functions. Inspection of the caulk will be performed,every two years under the structural monitoring program to ensure that it does not degrade.

The drywell sumps purpose is to collect all leakage in the drywell so that it can be monitored and quantified,,as well as appropriately discharged. The trough and its supply and discharge paths direct the drains to the sump. The concrete repairs specified serve to restore the full capability of these fbnctions by preventing any unintended diversion of the water fiom these pathways. The conditions of the raised floor slab section and the trough slope were determined to have no impact on the drainage hnction or the structural function of the concrete. This activity will leave the two trenches empty. This empty space may slightly delay the measurement of unidentified leak rate, which is measured by the 1-8 sump. The open trenches may collect unidentified leakage and temporarily prevent the leakage from reaching 1-8sump.

This delay has been evaluated in the ECR attachment 1 and is concluded to be minor. Tech. Spec. 3.3.D.1requires that ,

reactor coolant shall be limited to a 2 gpm increase in a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period, Assuming a 2 gpm leak were to instantaneously develop and leak into both trenches at the same time, it would take about 30 minutes for the trenches to fill and overflow at which point the leakage would enter the 1-8sump. In addition the Tech Spec. requires that reactor coolant shall be limited to 5 gpm. Increases over 5 gpm over a short time frame are bounded by the tech spec requirement for the 2 gpm increase over a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period. Assuming a 5 gpm leak were to instantaneously develop and leak into both trenches at the same time, it would take about 12 minutes for the trenches to fd and overflow at which point the leakage would enter the 1-8sump.

The torus suction strainers serve the h c t i o n of preventing debris fiom damaging the ECCS pumps. The UFSAR section 6.3.2.2.3 descnies the design analysis which ensures that excessive debris is not created such that the suction strainers could become too clogged by debris to allow sufficient flow to the pumps. That analysis was reviewed. The

, result of the materials (that could generate clogging debris) added and removed from the drywell by the subject ECR is a net reduction in these materials. Therefore there is no adverse effect on the analysis.

The 1986 removal of concrete from the floor and curb, that formed the trenches in Bay 5 and 17, does not affect any safety related design functions. A review of the Design Basis Accidents documented in chapter 15 of the UFSAR shows that the floor and curb are not credited for mitigation of design accidents. In addition it does not adversely affect the design inputs, assumptions or conclusions of the GE Design Bases Analysis of the Drywell Vessel (reference GE Report An ASME Section Vm Evaluation of Oyster Creek Drywell for Without Sand Case Part I Stress Analysis -Index 9.3 dated Feb 1991). The effects of the missing curb will not have a significant effect on the Design Basis Accident Analysis of the Containment Shell as discussed in attachment 1 section 4.1.9 of the ECR.

The curb feature (which is unique to Oyster Creek) has been credited in some Severe Accident Mitigation Events.

However the overall benefit of the curb is marginal. The PRA implications of the curb removal were not specifically addressed at the time the PRA was developed, which was after 1986.IR 550022 has been issued to address this omission. An initial review has been completed and the results demonstrate a less than significant impact on LERF and no impact on CDF.

The minor amount of concrete removed from the existing trench in bay 5 is in an area where it also has no impact on these functions.

Therefore the scope of ECR 06-00879 does not adversely affect any design function that is descnied, implied or referred to in the UFSAR.

50.59 SCREENING FORM LS-AA-104-100 Revision Page 3 of 50.59 Screening No. -0C-2006-S-0379 Rev. No. 1 I I

ActivityDocument Number: ECR 06-00879 Revision Number: 1

/

2. Does the proposed Activity involve a change to a procedure that adversely affects how UFSAR described SSC design functions are performed or controlled? 4 I I 0;

No. All of the changes made by the subject ECR are passive in nature, and do not affect the performance control of any plant operations or evolutjons. The repairs do not impact operdtion of the drywell sump, drywell structures or equipment or ECCS systems. No plant processes or procedures are affqcted by the changes. Therefore the scope of ' ,'

ECR 06-00879 does not adversely affect the performance or control of any UFSAR descnied . .besign fbnction.

3. Does the proposed Activity involve an adverse change to an eIement of a UFSAR described evaluation methodoldgy, or use of an alternative evaluation pethodology, that is usdd in establishing the design bases or used,in the safety analyses?

. I I

' 4 I No. The design antilysis for suction strainer clogging described in the UFSAR was reviewed with regard to the materials added by the subject ECR. The net change in debris generating materials was evaluated using the existing methodolorn ofthe design analysis to establish its acceptability. There are no other evaluation methodologies involved with this activity. Therefore the evaluation methodology used within ECR 06-00879 does not deviate fiom those descriied in the UFSAR I

I

4. Does the proposed Activity involve a test or experiment not descnied in the UFSAR, where an SSC is utilized or controlled in a manner that is outside the reference bounds of the design for that SSC or is inconsistent with analyses of descriptions in the UFSAR?

No. The purpose of the repairs is to direct drywell drains to the sump, as described in the UFSAR. The caulk and grbut serve to restore this function. The addition of the materials has been evaluated in accordance with existing analyses and' processes, and was found to be acceptable. The scope of ECR 06-00879 does not affect the use or cohtrol of any plant SSC. Therefore this activity does not involve any test or experiment that is not bounded by the UFSAR.

5. Does the proposed Activity require a change in the Technical Specifications or Operating License?

No. The repairs in ECR 06-00879 are passive in nature and do not affect the operational parameters or operability of any plant SSC. As discussed under question 1, the potential for water retention by the concrete and trenches not reaching the sump is minima1 and the changes implemented per this ECR would not require a technical specification change.

However this issue is being further addressed by Licensing under IR 00546049 assignment 09. Therefore none of the required actions or limits for operation of the Technical Specificationor Operating License are impacted by the rep&.

Therefore no changes are required to the Technical Specificationsor Operating License.

Documents Reviewed:

WSm. Overview of entire document, plus detailed review of sections 1.2, 1.9,3.8.2,3.8.3,5.2.5,6.2,6.3,9.3,11.2.

Tech Spec: Overview of entire document, plus detailed review of sections 3.4,3.5,4.4,4.5,5.2.

Operating License DPR-16: Entire Document

References:

1. IR 546049, Water Observed Coming Into The Trench In Bay 5 Of Drywell