ML18101A705

Monthly Operating Rept for Apr 1995 for Salem Unit 1.W/ 950512 Ltr

ML18101A705
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	04/30/1995
From:	PHILLIPS R, SUMMERS J C Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9505180218
Download: ML18101A705 (13)

Text

L e Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038-0236 Nuclear Business Unit U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Attn.: Document Control Desk MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT SALEMNO. 1 DOCKET NO: 50-272 May 12, 1995 In compliance with Section 6.9.1.6, Reporting Requirements for the Salem Technical Specifications, the original copy of the monthly operating reports for the month of April are being sent to you. RH:vls Enclosures C Mr. Thomas T. Martin Sincerely yours, John C. Summers General Manager -Salem Operations Regional Administrator USNRC, Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19046 8-1-7.R4 r-... 9505180218 950430-........._, PDR ADOCK. 0.5000272 R PDR. The power is in yom hands. 95-2168 REV. 6/94 L tlERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER Completed by: Robert Phillips Month APRIL 1995 Day Average Daily Power Level (MWe-NET) 1 1004 2 1044 3 1050 4 1055 5 1075 6 1037 7 1030 8 1050 9 1049 10 1051 11 1051 12 1046 13 1046 14 1054 15 1054 16 1050 P. 8.1-7 Rl Day Docket No.: 50-272 Unit Name: Salem #1 Date: 05/10/95 Telephone:

339-2735 Average Daily Power Level (MWe-NET) 17 1059 18 1059 19 1059 20 1043 21 1085 22 1000 23 1066 24 1036 25 1057 26 1049 27 1113 28 986 29 1084 30 1018 31 e OPERATING DATA REPORT e Completed by: Robert Phillips Operating status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. J, t S 1 N 1 Uni Name a em o.

• Reporting Period April 1995 Licensed Thermal Power (MWt) 3411 Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe) 1170 Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe) 1115 Maximum Dependable Capacity(Gross MWe) 1149 Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe) 1106 If Changes Occur in Capacity Ratings (items Doc.ket No: 50-272 Date: 05/10/95 Telephone:

339-2735 Notes 3 through 7) since Last Report, Give

9. Power Level to Which Restricted, if any (Net MWe) N/A 10. Reasons for Restrictions, if any

12. Hours in Reporting Period 12. No. of Hrs. Rx. was Critical 13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hrs. 14. Hours Generator On-Line 15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 17. Gross Elec. Energy Generated (MWH) 18. Net Elec. Energy Gen. (MWH) 19. Unit Service Factor

• 20. Unit Availability Factor 21. Unit Capacity Factor (using MDC Net) 22. Unit Capacity Factor (using DER Net) 23. Unit Forced Outage Rate This Month 719 719 0 71-9 0 2325302.4 785640 753981 100 100 94.8 94.0 0 Year to Date 2879 2273.6 0 2246.06 0 4952850.8 2422010 2307254 78.0 78.0 72.5 71.9 22.0 cumulative 156336 103993.15 0 100002.24 0 315004753.6 105033160 99989418 64. 0 64.0 57.8 57.4 24. Shutdowns scheduled over next 6 months (type, date and duration of each) A 60 day refueling outage scheduled to start

25. If shutdown at end of Report Period, Estimated Date of Startup: N A. 8-l-7.R2 NO. DATE -----NONE 1 F: Forced S: Scheduled DURATION TYPE 1 (HOURS) REASON 2 -----2 Reason A-Equipment Failure (explain)

B-Maintenance or Test C-Refuel ing D-Requlatory Restriction UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTIONS REPORT MONTH APRIL 1995 METHOD OF SHUTTING DOWN REACTOR 3 LICENSE EVENT REPORT # Method: 1-Manual 2-Manual Scram SYSTEM CODE 4 E-Operator Training & License Examination F-Administrative 3-Automatic Scram 4-Continuation of Previous Outage 5-Load Reduction 9-0ther G-Operational Error (Explain)

H-Other (Explain) 4 DOCKET NO. UNIT NAME DATE COMPLETED BY TELEPHONE 50-272 Salem #1 5-10-95 . . Robert Phillips 609-339-2735 COMPONENT CAUSE AND CORRECTIVE ACTION CODE 5 Exhibit G -Instructions for Preparation of Data Entry Sheets for Licensee Event Report CLER) File CNUREG-0161)

TO PREVENT RECURRENCE 5 Exhibit 1 -Same Source 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05/f0/95 DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 The following items were evaluated in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations 10CFR50.59.

The Station Operations Review Committee has reviewed and concurs with these evaluations.

1. Design Change Packages (DCP) lEC-3239, Pkg. 1 "Service Water to the Station Air Compressors" Rev. 2 -The proposed changes replace piping and valves for the non-safety related portion of the service water (SW) system in the turbine building that provides cooling water to the three station air compressor (SAC) units. The valves within the piping replacement boundary will be replaced with valves of upgraded material and are compatible with the replacement piping material.

Some valves are relocated from their original location without altering original function and flow direction.

In addition to replacement valves, three new valves are being added to the system. The existing automatic isolation ST5 and ST6 air operated valves for each SAC will be replaced with Fisher Vee Ball valves with Fisher air operators.

The Technical Specification has no applicability to Service Water in the Turbine Building nor is there any applicability to the station air system. There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-035) 2. Temporary Modifications (T-Mod)94-072 "Temporary Valve Tagging of 1ST2T and 1ST14T" Rev. 1 -The purpose of this temporary modification is to relabel/retag the existing old valves 1ST2 and 1ST14 as temporary valves 1ST2T and 1ST14T to facilitate implementation of the service water piping (for station air compressors) upgrades under DCP lEC-3239.

Double valves (new permanent valves as part of the piping 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05/10/95 94-073 3. Safety Evaluations (S/E) QA/NSR Procedures

& Functions Described in Salem UFSAR DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 upgrades) will be installed directly adjacent to the existing valves under Phase 2 ofDCP lEC-3239.

This will provide a boundary for piping replacement and ensure uninterrupted service water supplies to the station air compressors.

There are no Technical Specifications associated with the Station Air or Control Air systems. This T-Mod has no impact on the bases section for the Service Water system. The Technical Specification basis for the required operability of at least two independent service water loops in Modes 1 to 4 is not affected by the proposed change. There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-035) "Installation of Temporary SW Supply and Return Headers for SA Compressors" Rev. 1 -The purpose of this temporary modification is to supply service water to the Station Air Compressors (SACs) located in Unit 1 Turbine Building to support implementation ofDCP lEC-3239 which will replace the existing SAC service water piping with permanent 6% molybdenum upgraded piping as part of the overall service water upgrade project. There are no Technical Specifications associated with the Station Air or Control Air systems. This T-Mod has no impact on the bases section for the Service Water system. The Technical Specification basis for the required operability of at least two independent service water loops in Modes 1 to 4 is not affected by the proposed change. There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-035) "Section 13, Conduct of Operations; Section 17.2 Quality Assurance During the Operation Phase" -The purpose of this evaluation is to address the reorganization of QA/NSR. The reorganization of QA affects only personnel titles with respect to applicable Technical Specifications and Section IOCFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM I 05/10/95 R.HELLER 609-339-5162 S-1-460-ESE-0850 S-C-SW-MSE-0849 DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

17.2 of the SAR. There is no reduction of QA functions described in the FSAR. The reorganization of NSR affects only personnel titles with respect to applicable Technical Specifications and Sections 13.1.1.2.1.4 and 13.4.4 of the SAR. There is no reduction of NSR functions described in the FSAR. There is no reduction in the margin of safety as described in the bases for any Technical Specifications. (SORC 95-028) "Operation of lB 480 Volt Transformer Without Fans" Rev. 0 -The modification befog evaluated is the operation of the lB 4160-480 volt transformer without the availability of the fans that provide the necessary cooling for the transformer's FA rating of 13 3 3 KV A. This transformer is rated at 1000/1333 KVA per DCP lEC-3264, Pkg. 2. Per calculation ES-8.005 "4160-480 Volt Transformer Vital Loading" the worst case transformer loading occurs during normal plant operation and is 93 2.1 KV A. This worst case loading is within the AA rating of 1000 KV A and verifies that the fans are not required to support the existing loads on this transformer.

Therefore, operation of the transformer without fans is acceptable.

There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-035) "Salem Service Water Expansion Joint Bolting Material" Rev. 0 -This evaluation addresses concerns pertaining to bolting used in the Salem Service Water discharge line. Attachment I identified six (6) concerns relating to the use of potentially inappropriate bolting in the Salem Service Water System (SWS). Four (4) of the concerns dealt with the bolting on four of the pump discharge expansion joints adjacent to the SWS pumps Nos. 13, 24 and 25. The other two (2) dealt with the small diameter chlorination injection line flanged connection bolting. The potential for stress related bolt failure in these areas exists. As outlined in Attachment 1, the concern evolves around the use of 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05/10/95 TS Bases 3.4.9.3 DATE: COI\1PLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 stainless steel bolting (ASTM Al 93 Gr. B8 -Type 304 or equivalent) instead of the specified carbon steel bolting (ASTM A913 Gr B7) and the potential exists for overstressing of the lower strength B8 material.

All of the concerns identified are for some type of pipeline flange connections and, as such, are not normally wetted by system fluid. Additionally, the above six concerns are normally wetted by system fluid. Additionally, the above six concerns are isolation to SWS Intake Structure Bays 1 and 4 only. All six concerns have been evaluated by Engineering.

There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-035) "POPS-Mass Addition of an ECCS Pump and PD Pump" Rev. 0 -The current Bases for TS 3.4.9.3 (Unit 1) and UFSAR Section 7.6.3.3 states that POPS has adequate relieving capability to protect the RCS from overpressurization when the transient is limited to either (1) the start of an idle RCP with the secondary water temperature of the steam generator less than or equal to 50°F above the RCS cold leg temperatures or (2) the start of a high head safety injection pump and its injection into a water solid RCS. Because of re-analysis associated with mass addition transients (performed as a result of Westinghouse letter dated 3/15/93 -Ref. LER 94-017), the Bases of this TS was changed on February 8, 1995, to reflect a mass addition transient associated with the injection of a high head safety injection pump only. This change reflected actual mass addition transient assumptions based on plant operating procedures and administrative controls for preventing the injection of an intermediate head safety injection pump into a water solid RCS or the injection of a high head safety injection pump in conjunction with an operating Positive Displacement (PD) pump for Unit 1. This change was also made to UFSAR Section 7.6.3.3 for the POPS Design Evaluation.

Injection of only the high 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05110195 4. Procedures DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 head SI pump into a water solid RCS would not exceed the PIT limits contained in TS 3.4.9.1 when in Mode 5 (<200°F) (Calculation S-C-RC-MDC-1413, Rev. 1). On February 13, 1995, the NRC approved ASME Code Case N-514 for use by Salem Units 1and2. This Code Case allows an additional 10% margin in the Pressure -Temperature limits contained in TS 3.4.9.1(Unit1) and 3.4.10.1(Unit2).

This 10% margin allows the operation of a High Head SI pump in conjunction with an operating positive displacement (PD) pump, or the operation of one Intermediate Head SI pump in Mode 5 without exceeding the PIT limits contained in the Technical Specifications.

Analysis of the mass addition transient due to the combined flow from the High Head SI pump and the PD pump bound the transient from the injection of an Intermediate Head SI pump. Therefore, the Unit 1 bases of TS 3.4.9.3 and UFSAR Section 7.6.3.3 for the mass addition is being revised to permit the operation of the PD pump along with the High Head SI pump or one Intermediate Head SI pump when in Mode 5. The margin of safety is not reduced. The change to the most limiting mass addition transient assumption (the injection of a High Head SI pump in conjunction with an operating PD pump into a water solid RCS) continues to ensure that the PIT limits are not exceeded when considering the additional 10% margin allowed by ASME Code Case N-514. The peak pressure from this proposed limiting mass addition transient is well below that allowed by the Code Case. The margin of safety is not reduced. (SORC 95-039) NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0012(Q) "Technical Specification Surveillance Program" Rev. 5 -The purpose of this revision is to change a commitment made in Violation Response NLR-N89176, dated 09106189, for SORC to review amendment readiness prior to 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05/10/95 DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 implementation.

This review is being replaced with a requirement to notify station management of station readiness prior to Technical Specification Amendment implementation.

There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 95-037) 5. Deficiency Reports (DR) Use-As-Is PR 950426165 "Salem Unit 1 Service Water Intake Bay Pipe Leak" Rev. 0 -The subject of this evaluation is a small through wall leak* discovered in a thirty inch carbon steel epoxy lined carbon steel Service Water pipe (spool 1-SW-98) during plant operation on Salem Unit 1. The system location is Intake Bay #3 downstream ofvalve 1SW17. UT examination has confirmed that it is localized corrosion.

The local area of wall reduction is contained in approximately a 1.5 square inch grid on the 30 inch diamter pipe. The remaining areas of the pipe wall adjacent to the defect identify a significant margin in wall thickness above the minimum required value. For this situation, the code repair within the time frame of the applicable system LCO (3.7.4) would not be possible without adequate preparation.

The normal type of code repair for this type of problem would involve isolation and direct removal of the affected area of the pipe. The single valve isolation (3 0 inch butterfly valve) is not able to provide adequate isolation.

The 30 inch class 3 moderate energy SW header with the through wall flaw has been demonstrated to be operable based on GL 90-05/GL 91-018 guidelines.

However the system is not considered to be fully qualified (note a through wall flaw does not meet the acceptance criteria o:f IBW-3600) as required by the ASl\ffi Section XI Code. It has been established that no safety concerns exist with continued operation of the system at this time even with consideration of the single failure criteria.

Appropriate corrective actions in regard to performing a

I I I 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS MONTH: APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: 50-272 SALEM 1 05/10/95 (Cont'd) DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

R. HELLER 609-339-5162 Code modification are being actively pursued with this effort and are expected to be completed promptly.

All of the conclusions of the licensing basis safety analysis remain valid, and thus the margin of safety is not reduced. (SORC 95-041)

REFUELING INFORMATION MONTH: APRIL 1995 MONTH : APRIL 1995 DOCKET NO: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

50-272 SALEM 1 05/10/95 R.HELLER 609-339-5162 Refueling information has changed from last month:

NO X Scheduled date for next refueling:

September 9, 1995 Scheduled date for restart following refueling:

November 7, 1995 a. Will Technical Specification changes or other license amendments be required?

YES _A_ NO __ _ NOT DETERMINED TO DATE b. Has the reload fuel design been reviewed by the Station Operating Review Committee?

YES NO_,X_ Ifno, when is it scheduled?

September 1995 Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action:

__ _ Important licensing considerations associated with refueling:

Number of Fuel Assemblies:

a. Incore b. In Spent Fuel Storage Present licensed spent fuel storage capacity:

Future spent fuel storage capacity:

Date oflast refueling that can be discharged to the spent fuel pool assuming the present licensed capacity:

8-l-7.R4 193 732 _1632 __ 1632 September 2008

• SALEM GENERATING STATION MONTHLY OPERATING

SUMMARY

-UNIT 1 APRIL 1995 SALEM UNIT NO. I The Unit continued to operate at 94% power throughout the entire of the period.