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)

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