ML20247D407
| ML20247D407 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247D401 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905250407 | |
| Download: ML20247D407 (3) | |
Text
. - - _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _
r
' ?pa. azg"o a
UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
WASMNGTON, D. C. 20056 3\\....}g SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.25 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-57 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATICN DOCKET NO. 50-354
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated February 2,1989, Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-57 for the Hope Creek Generating Station (HCGS).
The proposed amendment would revise, by addition of a footnote, Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2h to increase the 18 month plus 25%
surveillance interval for the A and D Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs),
overdue on August 19 and 27, 1989 respectively, until October 15, 1989.
2.0 EVALUATION HCGS has four Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG) and the PSE&G surveillance requirements of these EDGs is that the units should be subjected to 18 month inspection and verification of the EDG capabilities j
in accordance with established procedures. The Surveillance Requirement shall be performed within an 18 month interval with a maximum allowable extension not to exceed 25% of the surveillance interval.
The proposed change to HCGS Technical Specifications (TS) is to permit a one-time extension of the 18 month plus 25% surveillance interval required by TS 4.8.1.1.2h, by approximately two months until not later than October 15, 1989. This amendment will be accomplished by adding a footnote to T.S. 4.8.1.1.2h extending the surveillance interval to October 15, 1989.
PSE&G's original plan to conduct an 18 month plus 25% EDG surveillance is on a staggered basis (half at refueling outages and half during mid-cycle outages). Based on this program the A and D EDGs are scheduled for their 18 month overhaul inspection during the coming Cycle 2 (mid-cycle) outage from February 18 through March 10, 1989 or based on the 25% extension the overhaul becomes overdue on August 19 and 27, 1989 respectively.
I However, due to a PSE&G decision, no future mid-cycle outages are planned during the 18 month fuel cycles. The next refueling outage is scheduled 8905250407 890515 PDR ADOCK 05000354 P
4
, for September 23, through November 6,1989. The same overhaul inspection must again be performed on EDG A and D so that the 18 month surveillance interval for all four EDGs will coincide with future refueling outages.
EDGs A and D were overhauled on September 22 and 30, 1987 respectively during Cycle 1 mid-cycle outage with approximate accumulated operational hours of 97 hours0.00112 days <br />0.0269 hours <br />1.603836e-4 weeks <br />3.69085e-5 months <br /> for EDG A and 102 hours0.00118 days <br />0.0283 hours <br />1.686508e-4 weeks <br />3.8811e-5 months <br /> for EDG D.
The results of the overhauls were satisfactory and no abnormal conditions were present. Since the overhaul and through December 8, 1988, EDG A has accumulated 19 operational hours and EDG D has accumulated 32 operational hours.
It is expected that an additional 18 operational hours per each EDG will be accumulated through late August 1989 and another additional 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> until October 15, 1989. PSE&G's requested extension of the EDG surveillance represents only an additional 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of operation on each unit based on 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per month usage. This amount of runtime during the period is small and the wear failure has a very low probability. The delaying of the overhaul would not affect the perfomance and reliability of the EDG.
Since each inspection / overhaul refurbishment of the EDGs established the engines within the manufacturer's specifications or restored them to these specifications, the EDGs are essentially "as good as new" after the overhaul. The reinitialization of the 18 month interval to zero will have a minimal impact on their reliability or operability.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with j
the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves j
no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 11841) on March 22, 1989 and consulted with the State of New Jersey.
No public coments were received and the State of New Jersey did not have any comments.
fu
.+-
~.-
4 ;..The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above.
that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that'the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of this einendment will not be inimical.to the comon defense and security nor to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
C. Y. Shiraki, S. N. Saba Dated: May 15, 1989-
[
.