ML20105A790

Monthly Operating Rept for Aug 1992 for HCGS Unit 1

ML20105A790
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	08/31/1992
From:	Hagan J, Zabielski V Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9209170250
Download: ML20105A790 (13)

Text

- ' ' . ,

g.

y ; ;. ; .

pgggi

/ P0blic Service Electric and Gas Company P 0, Box 236 Hancocks Bndge, New Jersey 08038

' Hope Crook Generating' Station September 11', 1992 S.-LNuclear Regulatory Commission

~ '

~~U.

' Document Control Desk- ,

Washino*;n, DC -20555

Dear Sir:

,4

-MONTHLY' OPERATING REPORT HOPE 1 CREEK GENERATION STATION-UNIT 1 1 DOCKET NOe 50-354

.In compliance with Section 6.9, Reporting Requirements for

~ = -

the Hope: Creek. Technical: Specifications, the operating' ,

u

-statisticsfor_ August are being' forwarded to'you along-with l

the summary of changes', tests, and experiments for August 1992 '

" ^

persuant to- the- requirements of 10CFR50.59 (b) .

~ Sinceyely-yours,- '

f -

. . l-- H.igan _-

Ge eral Manager -

Ho M ek-Operations-Y ^

RAR':ld

'cAttachments

- C. Distribution-l

[

/

L -

/

--;Tho Enerav People

-;PDR-9209170250 920831

R

ADOCK 05000354 ' {hQQQf.- "*" '"

PDR w w v.--6 -, -+ .a [gog e y- -

+-p

r INDEX NUMBER SECTION OF PAGES Average: Daily Unit Power Level. . . . . . . . . . . 1 Operating Data Report-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Refueling Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Monthly Operating Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Summary of Changes, Teste, and Experiments. . . . . 6 l

l' l

[ ~.

l~

~ ~

a) [(Y ~ , [7

. ? - . I

. AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL DOCKET NO. 50-354 UNIT Hope Creek DATE 9/11/92 COMPLETED BY V. Zabielski TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506

-MONTH Aucust 1992

. DAY. AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net)- (MWe-Net)

1. . 1038 17, 1035 2, 1012 38. 1033

.3. 1042 19. 1047

4. 1034 20. 1040

5. 1212 21. 1046

6. 1041 22, 1040

7. 1041 23, 1018

8. 1035 24. .1922 9-. 1019 25, 1031

10 '. 1026 26. 1024

'11. 1025 2 7. - 1027 l'3 . - 1QS7- 28. 1024 E13 . 1042 29. 1039 i: 14. 10_42- 30. 1034 l

H 15 . - 1042 31. 1034 l --

l. 16; 1212 i-l l1 l

l

l OPERATING DATA REPORT DOCKET NO. 50-354 UNIT Hope Creek DATE 9/11/92 COMPLETED BY V. Zabielski 1/C TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 OPERATING STATUS

1. Reporting Period Auaust 1992 Gross Hours in Report Period 744

2. Currently Authorized Power Level (MWt) 3293 Max. Depend. Capacity 1021 Design Electrical Ratin(MWe-Net) g (MWe-Net) 1067

3. Power Level to which restricted (if any) (MWe-Net) None

4. Reasons for restriction (if any)

This Yr To Month Dats Cumulative

5. No. of hours reactor was critical 744.0 5537us 42,698.8

6. Reactor reserve shutdown hours 0.0 gig 0.0

7. Hours generator on line 744.0 5475.4 42.050.0

8. Unit reserve shutdown hours Ema 0.0 212

9. Gross' thermal energy generated 2.443,707 17,650,961 133.648,104 (MWH)

'10. Gross electrical energy 804,080 5.864,090 44,216.584 generated (MWH) 11.-Net electrical energy generated 768,896 5.605.288 42.256.837

-12. Reactor service factor 100.0 94.6 85.5-

- 13 . Reactor availability factor 100.0 94.6 -85.5

14. Unit service factor 100.0 93.5 84.2

15. Unit'avdilability factor 100.0 93.5 84.2 l

'16. Unit capacity factor (using MDC) 100 2 92.9 82.0 L -17.. Unit capacity factor 96.9 89.7 79.3 E

(Using Design MWe)

18. Unit forced outage rate 0.0 21 1 Aza

19. Shutdowns scheduled over next 6 months (type, date, & duration):

Refueling-outage, 9/12/92, 60 days-ll -20. If shutdown at'end of report period, estimated date of start-up:

l N/A

OPERATING DATA REPORT UNIT SHUTDOWNS AND POWER REDUCTIONS DOCKET NO. E0-354 UNIT Hope Creek DATE 9/11/92 COMPLETED BY V. Zabielski TELEPHONE f609) 339-3506 MONTH Auaust 1992 METHOD OF SHUTTING -- .

DOWN .'H E TYPE REAC.OR OR F= FORCED DURATION REASON REDUCING CORRECTIVE NO. DATE SsSCHEDULED (HOURS) (1) POWER (2) ACTION / COMMENTS None I

Summary

REFUELING INFORMATION DOCKET NO.10-354 UNIT }igne Cr eek DATE 9/11/12 COMPLETED BY L_liplllDgsworth__

TELEPHONE (609) 339-1051 MONTH Auaust 1992

1. Refueling information has changed from last month:

Yes X No

2. Scheduled date for next refueling: 9/12/92

3. Schedu;ad date for restart following refueling: 11/11/92

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 X No If no, when is it scheduled?

5. Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action: HlA

6. Important licensing .:onsiderations associated with refueling:

V - Same fresh fuel as current cycle: no new considerations

7. Number of Fuel Assemblios:

A. Incors 764 B. In Spent Fuel Storsgn (t-ior to refueling) 760 C. In Spent Fuel Storage (after refueling) 1008

8. Present licensed spent fuel storage capacity: 1995 inture spent fool storage capacitv 4006

9. Date of last refueling that can b6 .scharged 11/4, 2010 to spent fuel pool assuming the prodent (EOC16) licensed capacity:

(does not allow for full-core oft; ~

!! OPE CRFEF CEllERATI!1G STATIOli MO!1TilLY OPERATI!1G

SUMMARY

August 1992 11 ope Creek entered the month of August at approximately 100%

puwer. The unit operated for the entire month without experiencing any shutdowns or reportable power reductione. As of August 31, the plant had been on line for 78 consecutivo days.

3

.___.___.__--__m______a---_.__._.____.-____.__.___._____.-__-__m_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -m.___-_.. _m____.______.___.________ _ _ _ _ . _ _._____-m._

4

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES. TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS FOR THE HOPE CREEK GEllERATIN3 STATIOli AUGUST 1992 i

1

_ _ . - - - _ - - - _m-- _ _ _ _ - - - - - - _ - _ - _ _ - _ -_ -_. _ . - -

The'following items have been evaluated to determines

1. If the probability of occurrence or 'he consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the safety analysis report may be increased; or

2. If a possibility for an accident or malfunction-of a different l 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 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 i determined that no unroviewed safety or envlronmental qtestions are involved.

1

EdE Descrintion of Safety Evaluation 4EC-3254/01 This DCP added two ventilation fans to each i Filtration, Recirculation, and Ventilation System Ventilation System unit heater control panel. It also changed some internal wires, removed relays, and removed Temporary Modifications that bypassed the disconnect switches.

This DCP does not change the function of the Filtration, Recirculation, and Ventilation System Ventilation System. This DCP provices additional cooling for the components in the Ventilation )

System heater control panels. It does not citer '

the operation of the system in meeting its accident mitigation function. Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.

4EC-3329/01 This DCP allows the replacement of the Service Water Strainer elements with either the existing atrainer element or an alternative strainer element design. The new design will provide increased structural stability with respect to the element over-the convoluted perforated element design.

The saQ:ty functions, control, and operation of the Serviet Water system remain unchanged. The replacement strainer element provides Service Water system protection similar to the original strainer element. The Service Water Pumps have instrumentation that sense shaft vibration and temperature. These instruments give an early indication of potential wear. Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.

4HX-0331/01 This DCP replaces mechanical snubbers with hydraulic snubbers which do not require seal maintenance and have a 40 year. plant-life. After the next outage, it is planned that these snubbers be removed and subjected to functional tests and >

evaluations. This test and experiment DCP will help to determine if 1130 mechanical snubbera will be replaced with hydraulic snubbers.

The hydraulic anubbers have the same design load, nuclear qualifications, and thermal and seismic piping-application as the mechanical snubbers and will perform the same functions. Therefore, this DCP does not involve any Unroviewed Safety Questions.

l ,

, IM8 Descrintion of Safety EvaluatiRD 92-020 This THR installed Control Air tubing between a pressure control valve in the Gaseous Radwante system and its associated instrumentation. This TMR will allow operators to restore system pressure within design parameters until equipment problems can be resolved.

The SAR bounds gross equipment failure due to hydrogen detonations or seismic events of greater magnitude than design. This THR does not affect the seismic or explosion resistance of the system; therefore, it does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.

. . . . . _.J

Procedure Revision Descriotion of Safety Evaluation HC.SA-AP.ZZ-0052(Q) This procedure revision provides guidance Rev 7 for the station departments involved in ensuring that water chemistry parameters are maintained in accordance with the t appropriate vendor and industry guidelines. .

Cracking problems in BWR austenitic stainless steel piping systems are a result of concurrent aggrcbsive water environment, material susceptibility, and stress conditions. Establishing and maintaining appropriate water chemistry conditions improves plant availability and minimizes personnel radiation exposure. This procedure revision considers the most recent knowledge of how water chemistry parameters affect fuel performance, radiation field buildup, and pipe cracking.

Therefore, this procedure does not involve an Unreviewed Safety Question.

HC.SA-AP.ZZ-0133(Q)

This new administrative procedure addresses Rev 0 a subset of proposed temporary modifications that may be implemented to bypass Control Room overhaad annunciator input signals that have alarmed and cannot be immediately corrected by maintenance.

The presence of the alarm represents a nuisance distraction to Control Room operators, may mask other contributions to the alarm window, and provides no useful to the operator.

The type of temporary modifications addressed in this procedure are limited to bypassing Control Room alarms and associated indications that have already actuated, been recognized by the Control Room operator, and thus have performed their intended design function. No changes are permitted to circuits or components with active control functions. Therefore, this procedure does not involve an Unroviewed Safety Question.

.UFSAR Section DescriDtion of Safety Evaluation 1.8.1.52.2 This UPSAR Change addresses the requirements 7.3.1.1.9.4 of the Filtration, Recirculation and Ventilation System Vent High Eff1ciency Particulate Air Filter Pressure Drop Alarm and Recorder instrumentation. The purpose of this UFSAR change is to correct discrepancies j within the UFSAR, which-does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions. .,

. . _ . _ .- . _ . . _ ._ _. _ -_ _ _ . _ . _ - - - _.