ML20035E708
| ML20035E708 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1993 |
| From: | Hovey R, Zabielski V Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9304190129 | |
| Download: ML20035E708 (13) | |
Text
.
1 J. O PSEG i
(
Public Service E!ectric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 l
Hope Creek Generating Station j
l i
i April 14, 1993 I
l U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk j
Washington, DC 20555 i
Dear Sir:
i MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT HOPE CREEK GENERATION STATION UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-354 In compliance with Section 6.9, Reporting Requirements for the Hope Creek Technical Specifications, the operating statistics for March are being forwarded to you with the l
summary of changes, tests, and experiments that were f
I implemented during March 1993 pursuant to the requirements of i
l l
t l
Sincerely yours, R. J. Hovey l
General Manager -
Hope Creek Operations M :ld
%p Attachments i
C Distribution
[OY
. The Eneray People fj g 9304190129 930331 i
,s.2m me sp.,
PDR ADOCK 05000354 l
R PDR.
i i
h i
INDEX
-i i
NUMBER SECTION OF PAGES i
Average Daily Unit Power Level.
1 l
Operating Data Report.
2 Refueling Information.
1 Monthly Operating Summary.
1 l
Summary of Changes, Tests, and Experitents.
.6 i
[
i e
}
a l
i
}
n e--
AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT HoDe Creek DATE 4/14/93 COMPLETED BY V.
Zabielski i
TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 MONTH March 1993 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net)
(MWe-Net) 1.
1064 17.
1061 2.
1072 18.
1075 3.
1039 19.
1062 4.
1053 20.
1071 I
5.
1060 21.
1056 6.
2]l 22.
1 0_73 7.
1063 23.
1061 8.
1077 24.
1066
)
9.
1056 25.
1066 10.
1056 26.
1058 i
11.
1065 27.
1064 12.
1070 28.
1045 13.
1058 29.
1062 14.
1069 30.
1047 1
15.
1067 31.
1062 16.
1068
/
1 OPERATING DATA REPORT DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT Hone Creek DATE 4/14/93 COMPLETED BY V. Zabielski Y TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 OPERATING STATUS 1.
Reporting Period March 1993 Gross Hours in Report Period 744 3.
Currently Authorized Power Level (MWt) 3293 Max. Depend. Capacity (MWe-Net) 1031 Design Electrical Rating (MWe-Net) 1067 3.
Power Level to which restricted (if any) (MWe-Net)
None 4.
Reasons for restriction (if any)
This Yr To Month Date Cumulative 5.
No. of hours reactor was critical 744.0 2160.0 46,415.6 6.
Reactor reserve shutdown hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.
Hours generator on line 744.0 2160.0 45,664.9 8.
Unit reserve shutdown hours 0.0 220 0.0 9.
Gross thermal energy generated 2,438,024 7.058,941 145,272,159 (MWH)
- 10. Gross electrical energy 822,200 2,384,080 48,132,134 generated (MWH)
- 11. Net electrical energy generated 788,158 2.284,751 45,987,135 (MWH)
- 12. Reactor service factor 100.0 100.0 84,3
- 13. Reactor availability factor 100.0 100.0 84.3
- 14. Unit service factor 100.0 100.0 82.9
- 15. Unit availability factor 100.0 100.0 82.9
- 16. Unit capacity factor (using MDC) 102.7 102.6 81.0
- 17. Unit capacity factor 99,3 99.1 78.3 (Using Design MWe)
- 18. Unit forced outage rate 222 212 4.6
- 19. Shutdowns scheduled over next 6 months (type, date, & duration):
None
- 20. If shutdown at end of report period, estimated date of start-up:
N/A
l 1
OPERATING DATA REPORT UNIT SHUTDOWNS AND POWER REDUCTIONS DOCKET No.
50-354 UNIT ' Hone Creek DATE-4/14/93 COMPLETED BY V.
Zabielski TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 MONTH-March 1993 METHOD o?
SHUTTING DOWN THE j
TYPE REACTOR OR F= FORCED DURATION REASON REDUCING CORRECTIVE i
NO.
DATE S= SCHEDULED (HOURS)
(1)
POWER (2)
ACTION / COMMENTS None 1
I 4
1 B
i l
Summary
REFUELING INFORMATION DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT None Creek DATE _ 4/14/93 i
COMPLETED BY S.
Hollinasworth TELEPHONE (609) 339-1051 MONTH March 1993 l
1.
Refueling information has changed from last month:
i Yes No X 2.
Scheduled date for next refueling:
3/5/94 3.
Scheduled date for restart following refueling:
4/23/94 4.
A.
Will Technical Specification changes or other. license amendments be required?
i Yes No X
B.
Has the Safety Evaluation covering the COLR been reviewed by the Station Operating Review Committee?
Yes No X
If no, when is it scheduled?
,2/18/94 5.
Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action:
HfA 6.
Important licensing considerations associated with refueling:
l
- Fuel will be highly similar to current fuel but not identical.
Changes should be conservative and introduce no new considerations.
7.
Number of Fuel Assemblies:
A.
Incore 764 B.
In Spent Fuel Storage (prior to refueling) 1008 C.
In Spent Fuel Storage (after refueling) 1240 t
8.
Present licensed spent fuel storage capacity 4006 l
Future spent fuel storage capacity:
4006 9.
Date of last refueling that can be discharged 5/3/2006 to spent fuel pool assuming the present (EOC13) licensed capacity:
(Does allow for full-core offload)
(Assumes 244 bundle reloads every 18 months until then)
(Does Dgt allow for smaller reloads due to improved fuel) a y
9
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION MONTHLY OPERATING
SUMMARY
MARCH 1993 Hope Creek entered the month of March at approximately 100% power.
The unit operated throughout the entire month without experiencing any shutdowns or reportable power reductions.
As of March 31, the plant had been on line for 116 consecutive days.
I f
l 1
SUMMARY
OF CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS FOR THE HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION MARCH 1993 i
l 1
l l
1 i
l l
e The following items have been evaluated to determine:
i
~
1.
If the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the safety analysis repcrt may be i
increased; or 4
i 2.
If a possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the safety analysis report may be created; or 3.
If the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any i
technical specification is reduced.
The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluations showed that these items did not create a new safety hazard to the plant nor did they affect the safe shutdown of the reactor.
These items did not change the plant effluent releases and did not alter the existing environmental impact.
The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluations determined that no unreviewed safety or environmental questions are involved.
s
~
\\
DCE Description of Safety Evaluation 4EC-3020/01 Thic DCP installed a ceiling in a vestibule and corridor on the 102' elevation of the Auxiliary Building.
It also relocated an electric space heater and a thermostatic control unit.
The installation of the ceiling meets all of the design, material, and construction standards required to maintain the overall performance of the ventilation and fire protection systems.
No safety related equipment is in the vestibule or corridor.
The overhead Class 1E raceways, conduits, cables, and supports are adequate to withstand a design basis earthquake.
Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
4EC-3022/05 This DCP installed quick disconnects for temperature switches in the
'A' Emergency Diesel Generator.
The installation of the quick disconnects will improve the maintainability of the temperature switches.
The temperature switches provide an alarm and have no control function.
There is no change in control circuitry or setpoints of any instruments that are important to safety.
Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
4EX-3295/01 This DCP installed an upgraded Central Processing Unit and memory boards in the Control Room Integrated Display System.
The DCP was initially installed as a test to evaluate for increased processing speed and through put performance.
The DCP is now a permanent installation.
The design function of the Control Room Integrated Display System is not affected.
Additionally, it performs no safety functions and is classified as non-1E.
Therefore, this DCP does not involve any i
Unreviewed Safety Questions.
(
l 4HC-0204/22 These DCPs installed test jacks and keylock 4HC-0204/23 selector switches for various terminal block points used for Source Range Monitor and Intermediate Range Monitor surveillance testing.
The switches used in this DCP are of the original qualified design and the same model and configuration as the original construction.
These switches have no controlling functions and are used during channel maintenance only.
Therefore, these DCPs do not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
~
DCE Descriotion of Safety Evaluation
-l 4HM-0206 This DCP replaced light bulbs in Control Room displays with LED bulbs.
This will reduce the frequency of failed bulbs in modules that control plant equipment and the potential for unplanned equipment actuations that could result during bulb replacement.
The replacement LED bulbs are electrically and thermally superior to the previous bulbs.
They draw less current and have higher internal resistance than the original bulbs.
Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
l J
A
- - - -. - - -,,,. l
4 THE Description of Safety Evaluation 93-006 This TMR installed a check valve in the Low Volume and Oily Waste System Oil Separator Influent Line.
This check valve was installed in series with the existing check valves to ensure that the influent line does not drain back into the lift stations.
The Low Volume and Oily Waste System is not a safety related, fire protection, or radwaste system.
The addition of the check valve will not interfere with the collection or treatme.nt of oily waste water.
Therefore, this TMR does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
i
~*
Procedure I
Revision Description of Safety Evaluation NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0015(Q)
This procedure revision provided clarification for when more than one supervisor performs tagging verification i
prior to performing the work.
This procedure revision does not adversely affect the performance of work or the safety of personnel.
It provides a more efficient means of tagging verification.
Therefore, this procedure revision does not i
involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.
1 1
1 i
!