ML18092A765

Responds to NRC 850730 Ltr Re Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-272/85-01 & 50-311/85-04.Corrective Actions:Surveillance Procedures SP(O)4.4.6.2 & SP(O)4.4.6.2d & Operating Instruction II-1.3.5 Re RCS Coolant Revised

ML18092A765
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	08/29/1985
From:	Corbin McNeil Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
NUDOCS 8509100114
Download: ML18092A765 (3)

See also: IR 05000272/1985001

Text

• Public Service Electric and Gas Company Corbin A. McNeill, Jr. Vice President

-Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609 339-4800 Nuclear * August 29, 1985 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention:

Stewart D. Ebneter, Director Division of Reactor Safety Gentlemen:

NRC INSPECTION

AND 50-311/85-04

SALEM GENERATING

UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 Public Service Electric and Gas Company is in receipt of your letter dated July 30, 1985 which transmitted

a Notice of Violation

concerning

a failure to establish

adequate procedures.

Pursuant to the provisions

of 10 CFR 2.201, our response to the Notice of Violation

is provided in Attachment

1. Attachment

C Mr. Donald c. Fischer Licehsing

Project Manager Mr. Thomas J. Kenny Senior Resident Inspector

eso9100114 ADOCK 0 PDR Sincerely,

r. * * * ATTACHMENT

1 lOCFR PART 2.201 INFORMATION

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM GENERATING

STATION RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Your letter dated July 30, 1985 identified

a violation

of Technical

Specification

6.8 which requires that written procedures

be established

and maintained.

Contrary to this requirement, Surveillance

Procedure (SP) 4.4.6.2d, RCS Water Inventory

Balance, was inadequately

established

in that: (1) leakage occurring

outside containment (i.e., intersystem

leakage) was not classified

as either identified

or unidentified

leakage in accordance

with Regulatory

Guide 1.45; (2) no correction

was made to account for temperature

changes during the test; (3) use of inappropriate

identified

leakage values into the Reactor Coolant Drain Tank (RCDT) and; (4) either computer or manual calculations

could be used to generate the test results, allowing selection

of the more favorable

result and frequent use of the less precise manual calculation.

1. PSE&G DOES NOT DISPUTE THE VIOLATION

• 2. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM WAS A FAILURE OF OPERATIONS

DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISORY

PERSONNEL

TO RECOGNIZE

THAT THIS ACTIVITY WAS BEING CONDUCTED

IN A NON-CONSERVATIVE

MANNER. 3. IMMEDIATE

CORRECTIVE

ACTION: Surveillance

Procedures

SP(0)4.4.6.2, SP(0)4.4.6.2d, and Operating

Instruction

II-1.3.5 have been revised, where appropriate, to require the following:

-Entry into the appropriate

Technical

Specification

action statement

prior to attempting

to differentiate

between unidentified

leakage and non-Reactor

Coolant System leakage. -Reactor Coolant System (RCS) temperature (Tave) shall be the same at the beginning

and end of the test. -Reactor Coolant Drain Tank level input shall be taken during the test interval.

-The P250 computer, test 39, shall be the primary method of performing

the leak rate calculation

when the RCS is at or greater than 547°F and 2235 psig *

_,, "! .:. * * * "I: "' 4. LONG TERM CORRECTIVE

ACTIONS PSE&G continues

to stress the importance

of accountability

to all levels of employees.

Where appropriate, corrective

actions will not only include those personnel

directly involved in questionable

activities

but also the responsible

supervisory

personnel.

5. WE ARE NOW IN FULL COMPLIANCE

• ac2 3-4