ML20203K196
| ML20203K196 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1986 |
| From: | Corbin McNeil Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| NLR-N86073, NUDOCS 8608060294 | |
| Download: ML20203K196 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.
- e I
~
Pubhc Service Electric and Gas Company Ctrbin A. McNeill, Jr.
Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236. Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609 339-4800 Wce President -
Nuclear July 3, 1986 N LR-N 8607 3 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention:
Dr. Thomas E.
- Murley, Region.11 Administrator Gentlemen:
INITIAL START-UP TEST PROGRAM CHANGES HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-354 In accordance with license condition 2.c.ll of Operating License NPF-50 and the provisions of 10 CPR 50.59, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) is submitting 39 copies of the changes made to the Hope Creek Initial Start-up Test Program.
This program is described in Chapter 14 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). contains a description, justification, and safety evaluation for each change. contains the marked up FSAR pages incorporating these changes.
Per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, paragraph (a)(2), none of these changes involve an unreviewed safety question.
The safety evaluations in Attachment 1 provide the basis for this conclusion.
If you have any questions in regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, Attachments qV,
8608060294 860703 ef' PDR ADOCK 05000354
\\
i\\
P PDR
. - _-._._..=. -.. _ -
.. ~. _
s W
Dr. Thomas E. Murley, 7-3-86 Regional Administrator t
4 C
Mr. D.
H. Wagner
}
Licensing Project Manager 4
i Mr.
R. W.
Borchardt Senior Resident Inspector
?
Mr. J.
M. Taylor Director - Inspection and Enforcement l
i
{
s i
1 J
i i
e, i
sf 4
i l,
I i.
t l
l I
l i
4 I
e ATTACHMENT 1 Description of Change FSAR Figure 14.2-5, " Test Schedule and Conditions", lists the start-up tests that will be performed along with the conditions under which they will be run.
This change to Test #26,
" Shutdown outside Control Room Complex (CRC)", will allow the cold shutdown demonstration part of the test to be performed during a convenient shutdown from test conditions 1, 2, 3, 4,
5, or 6.
Reason for Change This change brings FSAR Figure 14.2-5 into agreement with FSAR Section 14.2.12.3.26.c.
This states that the verification of satisfactory operation of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) shutdown mode from outside the CRC does not have to follow immediately af ter the hot stand-by demonstration.
Instead, it may be conducted during a convenient shutdown from any test condition.
This is consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.6.8.2, Position C.4.
10 CFR 50.50 Safety Evaluation Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59, paragraph (a)(2), the following three questions are responded to in order to determine if an unreviewed safety question is involved in this change.
1.
Does the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR increase?
No.
This change does not affect any accident evaluations contained in the FSAR.
This change is i
administrative in that it simply reflects what is already contained in anc'.her section of the FSAR.
2.
Is the probability for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously evaluated in the FSAR created?
No.
This change does not alter the subject test, so no accident or malfunction of a different type can be postulated.
3.
Is the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification reduced?
No.
This change does not alter the test in any way.
There is no change in a margin of safety that forms the basis for a Technical Specification.
Since the response to these questions is no, the change does not j
involve any unreviewed safety question.
Description of Change The Full Core Margin Shutdown Test (Test #4) and the Intermediate Range Monitor (IRM) Performance Test (Test #8) are presently listed as being performed under Open Vessel conditions.
However, they will be performed during Heat Up test conditions.
Likewise, a portion of the Source Range Monitor (SRM) Performance Test (Test #6) will be conducted during Heat Up as oppossed to Open Vessel conditions.
Reason for Change These changes are being made to reflect PSE&G's compliance with a commitment made to the NRC in a PSE&G letter dated April 10, 1986.
In this submittal, PSE&G committed to achieving initial criticality only when the vessel head is on and bolts f ully tensioned.
The above mentioned tests, or portions thereof, as is the case with the SRM Performance Test, must be conducted with the reactor critical.
Therefore, these tests will be run during Heat Up, not Open Vessel conditions.
10 CFR 50.59 Safety Evaluation Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59, paragraph (a)( 2), the following three questions are responded to in order to determine if an unreviewed safety question is involved in this change.
1.
Does the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipmer.t important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR increase?
No.
This change does not alter test requirements or methodology.
Therefore, no increase in the probability of an accident or safety equipment manlf unction will occur.
2.
Is the probability for an accident or malf unction of a different type than any previously evaluated in the FSAR created?
No.
This change does not alter the test requirements or methodology.
There fore, no accident or malf unction l
of a different type can be postulated.
l 3.
Is the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification reduced?
No.
This change does not alter the test requirements or methodology.
Therefore, no safety margin as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification is reduced.
Since the response to these questions is no, the change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
?,.. Jf_n P,; [ l...
"'i, l ~ -Q l Y T 4 [ ' - J[}
f__'
~ L ATTACHMENT 2 t
e 4
TEST
(
OPEN HEAT c
w e ptant (24 MM W cooh l
NO.
TEST NAME (22)
VESSEL UP 4
5 6
N#" % W4 h W WN 6 (2) Perform Test 5, tkning of 4 (22) The test number correlates to 1
Chemicaland Rad.octemical X
X X
X X
selected control rods, m FSAR Section 14.2.12.3.x 2
Radiation Measure..wnt X
X X
conencti n wnh expected where x is the indscated test 3
Fuel Loading 4
F ull Core Shutdown Margin
[X ss rarns nunter c)( ^ 2 (3? Dynamic System Test Case to (23) May be performed any time test 6
Control Rod Drive X
X XCl XQ)
XQ) be completed between test condetw rs pennit 6
SRM Perfcrmance X
. E' conditsons 1 and 3 j
8 IRM Performance
/
)(.
X tw Mculath pump trps (24) RCIC testing, if not previously 9
LPRM Calibration X
X X
X p,,79,,,,,q 10 APRM Cahbration X
X X
X X
X 11 Process computer X
X XGI X
X (5) Between 80 erv' 90 percent h d TA'
<*4 s *-h d'a~**"'
12 RCIC X
XC81 thermal power. and rwar 100 13 HPCI X
X percent core flow
,. y p [,,fg g gt,
14 Selected Process Temp X *l X
i X
14 Water Level Ref Leg Temp X
X X
(6) Max FW Runout Capability and 15 System Empansion a X
X*
X X
X have already been completed.
Recirc Pump Runback rnust If 4t C'*d '* ;#
- id d 's E # *'
I 17 Core Performance X
X X
X X
X g-18 Steam Production X
(7) Reactor power between 80 and 90 percent 20 Pressure Regulator X
X X
X X
X 21 Feed Sys - Setpoint Changes X
X X
X X
X X
(g3 oeactor power between 45 and 21 Feed Sys - Loss FW Heating 65 percent and 75 and 90 percent Xt51 21 Feedwater Pump Trip Xtel (9) Deleted 21 Mau FW Runout Capability.
X(D 22 Turbine Valve Surveillance X tal XUO3 (10) At manimum power that wid not 23 MSiv Functional Test
- X XU11 23 MSIV Full isolation X
(11). Perform between test conditions
- 24 Relief Vafves X. X W)
X(M)
X QOl 1 and 3 2S Turbine Trip and Lead Rejection X
26 Shutdown Outside CRC Hy' XMM X
g 27 Recerculation Flow Control XH 41 XU81 28 Recirc - One Pump Trip (13) Deleted
~
X X
28 RPT Trip - Two Pumps X(191 28 Recire System Performance (14) Between test conditions 2 and 3 X
X X
X 28 Recerc SYS. CAVITATIm (15) Turbine tnp, withir. bypass valve cacaci ty X
30 Loss of Offsite Pwr X
31 P:pe Vibration X
X X
X X
X (16) Deleted 29 Recirc Flow Ca:ibration X
X (17) Lead rejecten 32 RWCU XGM 33' RHR X mi XQu (18) Between test conditions 5 and 6 34 Drywell and Steam Tunnel Cooling X
X X
X X
35 Gaseous Radwaste (19) >50% powar and >95 are flow X
X X
38 SACS Performance X
X (20) Check SRV operabihty dunng 40 Conf;rmatory in Plant Test X
X major scram tests GENERATING S TION g
,7 FINAL $AFsTV ANALY$lt REPORT TEST SCHEDULE AND CONDITIONS F H2URE 1a 2 5 Amememem 15 05T8 O
o e
o