ML20082U938
| ML20082U938 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1991 |
| From: | Hollingsworth, Zabielski V Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9109230039 | |
| Download: ML20082U938 (12) | |
Text
- - 6 *i. >.-
g pggg Pubhc Service Electnc and Gas Company' P,0; Box 236 Hancocks Brdge, New Jersey 08038
- Hope Creek Generating Station September 13, 1991 L
U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington,,DC 20555
' ~
Dear Sir:
h~-
~ 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' August are being forwarded to you with the Lsummary of-changes, tests, and-experiments-for August 1991 j.
pursuant to the requirements of 10CFR50.59(b).
L Sincerely yours,_
.l' \\
m LHagan, & JJ W L
J.-J.
l-General Manager -
l-
-Hope Creek Operations Rild Attachments
..i.
_.- (
C Distribution l
l l
i I
I 9109230039 910S91 l
PDR ADOCK050003(34 p
PD l
'R
. The Energy People
')
n
,nn-u-,_-e- -.,, - - -.
,.,,m
.,_.,,n.
INDEX NUMBER JECTIQH OF PAGES Average Daily Unit Power Level.
1 Operating Data Report 2-Refueling Information.
1 Monthly Operating Summary.
1 Summary of Changes, Tests, and Experiments.
5 n
e AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT HcDe Creek DATE 9/13/91 COMPLETED BY V.
Zabielski TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 MONTH Auaust 1991 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net)
(MWe-Net) 1.
1Q11 17.
1Q12 2.
1Q11 18.
10__Q2 3.
Egl 19.
1Q11 4.
1Q21 20.
JJ;LQ2 5.
1Q11 21.
1Q51 6.
- 1Q12, 22.
1Q1Q 7.
1911 23.
1Q12 8.
1Qli 24.
122 9.
121 25.
1Q11 10.
1Q21 26.
1030 11.
211 27.
1921 12.
1QH1 28.
1Ql1 13.
1Q2A 29.
1192 34.
1911 30.
LQ21 15, 1Q21 31.
1Q11 16.
1921 Due to various errors in recording the meter readings, the exact average daily power levels for ceveral days may be approximate.
The average for the month is correct.
l l
'b
^
_ OPERATING DATA REPORT DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT HoDe Creek DATE 9/13/91 COMPLETED BY V.-Zabielski TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 OPERATING STATUS 1.
-Reporting Feriod Auaust-1991 Gross Hours in Report Period 211 2.
Currently Authorized-Power Level (MWt)-
-1111 Max. Depend. Capacity-(MWe-Net) 1031 DeLign Electrical Rating-(MWe-Net) 1Qil 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 4450.8 34.232.3 6.
< Reactor reserve shutdown hours A&Q LA
'21Q 7.'
Hours: generator on line 744.0 1152.5 33.645.6 i
- 8. ' Unit reserve shutdown hours-R&Q.
920 222 9.
Gross thermal energy generated 2.437.047 14.013.022 106.555.430
_(MWH) 10.' Gross ~ electrical energy 794.080 4.604.961 35.226.63.1 generated (MWH)'
'11. Net electrical energy generated 759.653 4.398.281 33.654.965 (MWH)
- 12. Reactor service factor 19222 76.3 83.1 13.~ Reactor availability factor 100.0 76.3 83.1 114.-Unit service factor 100.0 74.6 81.7-
- 15. Unit availability factor 100.0 74.6 81.7
- 16. Unit capacityLfactor-(using MDC) 99.0 73.2 222) 17.-Unit capacityTfactor 95.7 70.7 7.616 (Using Design MWe)
- 18. Unit forced outage rate AzQ 5_,_1
-111
- 39. Shutdowns scheduled over next 6 months (type, date, & duration):
None
- 20. If ahutdown at end of report-period, estimated date of start-up:
N/A o
s/?
.~
. _.... _... _ -.. ~.... -..
m.
______>-__1.
Ji (.
a,_.
' OPERATING-DATA REPORT UNIT' SHUTDOWNS AND POWER REDUCTIONS-DOCKET N0.
50-354
- i UNIT Hooe creek DATE 9/13/9:
COMPLETED BY L Zab:.elski
~
TELEPHONE 1Q39) 339-3506
~ )
. 1 MONTH August 1991 i
METHOD OF SHUTTING DOWN THE TYPE--
REACTOR OR' F= FORCED DURATION REASON REDUCING CORRECTIVE _
- 1 NO, DATE S= SCHEDULED (HOURS)
(1)-
POWER (2)
ACTION / COMMENTS NONE
- l
- i I
-Summary:
'J i
.d.__,__
.C.,
e
., ~.,,.
.y
~, __.
l REFUELING INFORMATION DOCKET NO.
50-354 UNIT H2ng_ Creek DATE 9/13/9:
COMPLETED BY S.
Hollnngsworth TELEPHONE 1609) 339-1051 MONTH Auaust 1991 1.
Refueling information has changed from last month:
Yes X
No 2.
Scheduled date for next refueling:
9/5/92 3.
Scheduled date for restart following refueling:
11/4/92 4.
A.
Will Technical Specification changes or other license amendments be required?
Yes No X
B,.
Has the reload fuel design been reviewed by the Station Operating Review Committee?
Yes No X
If no, when is it scheduled?
not scheduled (on or prior to 7/24/92) 5.
Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action:
HIA 6.
Important licensing considerations associated with refuelittg:
- Same fresh fuel as current cycle:
no new considerations 7.
Number of Fuel Assemblies:
A.
Incore 764 P.
In Spent Fuel Storage (prior to refueling) 712 C'
Ir. Spent Fuel Storage (after refueling) 1008 8.
- Aesent licensed spent fuel storage capacity
4006 Future spent fuel storage capacity:
Appf 9.
Date of last refueling that can be discharged 11/4, 2007 to spent fuel pool assuming the present (EOC16) licensed capacity:
l
Ll
-s -
s_,_
l HOPE CREEK-GENERATING STATION t
MONTHLY OPERATING
SUMMARY
August-1991 Hope. Creek entered the month of August at approximately 100% power and operated for-the-entire-month without experiencing any-shutdowns ~or-reportable power reductions.
On-August 31, the plant completed its 111th day of continuous power operation.
1 o
9-p I
i e
i.
l l-1 i
l 's m,
ce.
-,-l' r
i:.
'TheIfollowing-items have been evaluated to-determine:
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 report may be
- =
p increased; or-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-technical specification is red'2ced.
The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluations showed that these items did not i.
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 l
-environmental impact.- The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluations determined that-no unreviewed safety or environmental questions are involved.
i:
1 i
l
-l i
l
DCE Descrintion of Safety Evalgation 4EX-3133-Thic test and experiment DCP installed thermocouples insido and outside of-the Filtration, Rocirculation, and Ventilation System Heater Control Panels.
The temperature at the thermocouples was continuously monitored.
No Unroviewed Safoty Questions were involved because this test does not require any configuration or wiring chrnges.
Additionally, the system will be operated as designed and described in the UFSAR.
The increased fire load inside the panels is insignificant.
Also, rodundant panols will be available during the course of this tost.
4HX-3132 This test and experimont DCP inctalled a 1000 foot drain line to run from the Alternato Blocide-Test Trailer to the stilling Well Manhole on the Cooling Tower Blowdown Line.
The lino drains directly into the flow from the Cooling Tower, not into the Stilling Well.
No Unroviewed Safety Questions wore involved because the waste stream from the Alternato Biocido Test Trailer contains only chemically neutralized oxidizing blocidos at a Jovel less than detectablo with the Total Residual Chlorine analyzers installed on the drainlino.
The concentrated chemicals are in small quantities and are stored in the test trailer; therefore, any spills would be contained within the trailor.
Neither chlorino nor bromino are being used in conjunction with this test.
I f;
i L
l
~
IME Dgscription of Safety Evaluation 91-041 This TMR installed a jumper across a slot sensor to the High Motor Temperature Trip Module of the
'B' Turbine Building Chiller.
The jumper will permit the chiller to operate with a defectivo thermistor until a replacement part can be installed.
No Unreviewed Safety Questions were involved because the Turbine Building Chiller is a non-Q component.
Additionally, this jumper will remove only one of the two motor temperature sensors from the
'B' Turbine Building Chiller trip circuitry.
If a high motor temperature occurs, the chiller will trip as designed.
Procedure Revision Descriotion of Safety Evaluation NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0052(Q)
This administrative procedure describes the Rev.
O methods used to minimize the effects of chemical impurities in plant systems, to support long term reliability of plant equipment, to minimize plant radiation fields, and to identify adverse water quality conditions and correct them as soon as practical.
No Unreviewed Safety Questions were involved because this procedure is designed to ensure operations within a pre-approved safety envelcpe.
This procedure is designed to provide additional administrative guidance to ensure compliance with the UFSAR.
It is also based on vendor and industry chemical guidelines that are designcd to mitigate the cracking of stainless steel piping.
it requiren action when Additionally [stry conditions are present.
adverse chem NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0071(Q)
This administrative procedure describes a Rev.
O zero defect fuel performance program that will prevent or mitigate the impact of failed fuel on plant operations.
The procedure was developed to catisfy the recommendations of INPO SOER 90-02,
" Nuclear Fuel Defects."
No Unreviewed Safety Questions were involved because the existing UFSAR ensures operations within a pre-approved safety envelope.
This procedure is designed to provide additional administrative guidance to ensure compliance with the UFSAR.
Existing Technical Specification limits on fuel failure, and required activities upon reaching those limits, are not changed by this procedure.
This procedure is more conservative than the existing limits.
k 1
UFSAR Sect 3GD Descriotion of Safety Evaluation 9.3.1.2 The UFSAR is being modified to state that "The emergency instrument air compressor and corresponding air dryer package, which are connected to the non-Class 1E bus system (diesel backed) and maintained in automatic operation mode, will start operating only if the instrument air pressure drops below 85 psig.". The need for this UFSAR change was identified during the Instrument Air Configuration Baseline Document review.
No Unreviewed Safety Questions were involved because this change is limited to an update of the UFSAR.
No change to the plant is involved.
The design for the Compressed Air System conforms to the General Design Criteria and Regulatory Guide 1.75 guidance concerning separation between Class 1E and non-Class 1E circuits.
Therefore, the existing design of the Instrument Air system is correct.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _