ML18081B138
| ML18081B138 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1979 |
| From: | Schneider F Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18081B137 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003040096 | |
| Download: ML18081B138 (3) | |
Text
-.,..._-1
- erick W. Schneider
~President Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, N.J. 07101 201/430-7373 Production December 20, 1979 Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director Off ice of Inspection and Enforcement Region 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406
Dear Mr. Grier:
NRC INSPECTION 50-272/79-29 UNIT NO. 1 SALEM GENERATING STATION We have reviewed the report of your inspection transmitted with your letter dated November 30, 1979, which was received on December 6, 1979.
The following information is provided as a response to your report:
Item A, Infraction Section 2.1.1 of Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifi-cations (ETS) for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, requires, in part, that the maximum AT across the condenser shall not exceed 16.5°F during normal operation with all.
circulating water pumps operating *. At no time will the AT across the condenser exceed 27.5°F.
Contrary to these requirements:
- 1.
The 16.5°F maximum AT across the condenser was exceeded during normal operation with all circulating water pumps operating on several occasions including January 4, 5, 23 and 25; February 5 and 6; and March 4, 1979.
- 2.
The 27.5°F instantaneous maximum AT across the con-denser was exceeded on January 18 and 25, 1979.
Item B, Deficiency Section 5.6.2 of Appendix B, ETS requires, in part, that a report shall be submitted in the event that a limiting condition for operation is exceeded.
The event shall be reported within 30 days by a written report to the Director of the Regional Inspection and Enforcement Office (with a copy to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation)
- 8003040
___ lo Boyce H. Grier, Dir. 12-2.0-79 Contrary to these requirements, on several occasions, in-cluding those of January 4, 5, 23 and 25; February 5 and 6; and March 4, 1979, the exceeding of the condenser f!r limit-ing condition for operation was not reported as required.
Reply to Items A and B We have reviewed your Inspection Report 79-29, items 79-29-01 and 79-29-02, and it appears. that these items are an extension of previously identified items of noncompliance 79-02-01 and 79-02-04.
NRC Inspection Report 79-02 ide.ntified
- various times when Salem Unit 1 exceeded the maximum AT limit of 16.5°F per Section 2.1.1 of the Environmental Technical Specifications.
This inspection report was transmitted to Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) on March 15, 1979.
PSE&G indicated in their response dated April 6, 1979 that the inst~llation of a recorder to continuously record condenser AT and average condenser outlet temperature would prevent future items of noncompliance..
A commitment was made to have this recorder in operation by the end of the 'refueling outage which. began on April 4, 1979.
NRC. Inspection Report 79-29. identified additional times
- prior to your March 15, 1979, report when Salem Unit 1 apparently exceeded the maximum AT limit of 16.5°F and 27.5°F *. It was o~r understanding at the.completion of NRC Inspection 79-02 that Salem Unit 1 would accurately measure this data when installation of the recorder is completed.
Contrary to this* understanding, NRC *Inspection 79-29 in-volved the review of data recorded after the previously identified items but prior to the refueling outage and incorporation of* the action to prevent recurrence committed to in the response to NRC Inspection 79-02.
We reiterate*
our intention to utilize the strip chart recorder, which obtains its* input from the plant computer, as the "computer printout" referenced in the Environmental Technical.Specifi-cations., Sectiqn 2.1.la and retain this printout as the
.official record for thermal monitoring.
We are of the opinion that these items had been previously identified',
adequately addressed and the operation of the new recorder will prevent future items of noncompliance.
We therefore re-quest that the two items of noncompliance (79-29-01, 79-29-02}
be closed out and reclassified as part of 79-02-01 and 79-02-04 for corrective action and followup.
Boyce H. Grier, Dir. 12-20-79 Item C, Deficiency Section 5.7.1. of Appendix B, ETS requires, in part, that records of all data from environmental monitoring, surveil-lance, and s~ecial surveillance and study activities required by the environmental technical specifications shall be made and retained for the life of the plant.
Contrary to these requirements, records of the plant thermal monitoring required by Section 2.1 of the ETS were not made and retained for the period from 0900 through 2400 hours0.0278 days <br />0.667 hours <br />0.00397 weeks <br />9.132e-4 months <br /> on January 13, 1979.
Reply to Item C
- 1.
The date of this deficiency was prior to the instal-lation of the strip chart recorder in. the Control Room.
The cause was a computer printout failure.
The printout for each day is retrieved at 2400 on that day.
It was not apparent until 2400 that a printout failure had occurred during the 'day and local readings were necessary.
- 2.
To correct the situation, the new* strip.chart recorder committed to in the response to NRC Inspection 79-02 was installed 0in the Control Room.
- 3.
To prevent future items of noncompliance, the strip chart recorder is electrically connected to the same input source as the CRT display used by the Control Room operators *. When indications are no longer re-ceived on the CRT, the operator is alerted that the strip chart recorder is.no longer printing and local readings must be taken.
- 4.
~we are in compliance now.
Sincerely, cc Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement USNRC Washington,, DC 20555