ML20101T007

From kanterella
Revision as of 10:10, 28 April 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Monthly Operating Rept for June 1992 for Hope Creek Generating Station Unit 1
ML20101T007
Person / Time
Site: Hope Creek PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 06/30/1992
From: Hagan J, Hollingsworth, Zabielski V
Public Service Enterprise Group
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9207200194
Download: ML20101T007 (10)


Text

~

^

O PSIEG Pubhc Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Hope Creek Generating Station Ju?.y 15, 1992 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 -

Dear Sir:

MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT HOPE CREEK GENERATION STATION UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-354 In compliance with Section 6.9, Reporting Requirements for the Hope Creeir Technical Specifications, the operating statistics for= June are being forwarded to you along with the summary of changes, tests, and experiments for June 1992 persuant to the requirements of 10CFR50.59(b).

Sincerely yours, r = -_

J J Ha'an en ral Eanager -

Hope re k Operations

.; RAR:Id

_ k Attachments C Distribution

// \

The Eneray People 8 l

9207200194 920630 ' O C '}_ O 1 i f

" "i2m12ea PDR ADOCK 05000354 R PDR

j.

.- i>'

.c  ; (, ,

4 INDEX NUMBER SECTIOli OF PAGES Average Daily Unit Power Level. . . . . . . . .. . 1 Operating. Data: Report . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Refueling Information:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Monthly Operating Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Summary of Changes, Tests, and Experiments. . .. . . 3

(+

4 I

  • AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL l

DOCKET No. 50-354 UNIT Eque Creek -

DATE 7/15/92 COMPLETED BY V. Zabielski Al TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506 MO!!TH June 1992 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) (MWe-Net)

1. 790 17. 1041
2. 1036 18. 1042

'3. 1041 19. 1037

4. 1049 20. 1(L431
5. 1qiq 21. 1015
6. 1040 22. 1911
7. 1014 23. 1049
8. 1925 24. 1031
9. 1038 25. 1048 10- 1041 26. 1039
11. 1058 27. 1036 12, 1037 'e 8 . 1034
13. 115- 29. 1036
14. 427 30. 1C37
15. 979 31. ELA
16. 1044

)

4

4 < 1

')

No:

CC j

+ <

u 4

a: "'

OPERATING ~ DATA 1 REPORT ~ -!

=DOCKETENO.' 50-354

_s;~ UNIT . Hope Creek DATE; 12l/,15/92

~

V.~Zabielski 'N

. COMPLETED BY W -

LTELEPHONE-- (609) 339-3506 F .

OPERATING-STATUSL (1. LReportinglPeriodiJune- 1992-Gross Hours in Report Period 11Q I';

, - 12 . L - Currently Authorized Power- Level -(MWt) 2 3293

-Max. Depend.cCapacity-(MWe-Net) 1031 Design Electrical Rating 1(MWe-Net). 1067 3 '. ~ Power Level to which; restricted lifiany) .(MWe-Net)

E None f 4 6. ; Reasons:for restrictioni(if'any). ._

This Yr To- .

= Month Date- Cumulative 5.: No. of hours l reactor:wasicritical 720.0 4049.5 41.210.8 4

4 6.3 Reactor ~ reserve' shutdown hours- 222 0;0 0.0

7. LHoursigeneratorlon?lin'e < 701.1- 2237.4 40.562.0 (8. $ Unit-Lreserve shutdownihours 22 0~ 0.0 0.0

. 291 [ Gross therral' energy -generate'd  : 2.231.387: 12.768.348- .128.765.49.1 l(MWH)' '

,10.Niross' electrical l energy =

~736.650 4.258.530 42.611*.024- *

[s. generated!(MWH).

I llE Net electricalDenergy. generated 704.077 .4.070.028 40.721.577

-12'. ReactorfserviceJfactor. <100.0. 9 2 .' 7 - 85.0 13.-Reactorlavailability factor 100.0 92.7 85.0

~

14 '. Unit servicesfactor' 97.4 91._3 83.7 15;LUnitravailability factor 97.4 91.3 83.7

~

16.
Uniticapacity' factor (using MDC) -

94.8 90.4 81.5

!17'., Unit ~ capacity factor 91.6 87.3 2322 s

, .(UsingEDesign'MWe) s18. Unitiforced outage rate 2.6 3.2 5.0 19s ShutdownsEscheduled-over--next 6 months (type, date, & duration):

Refueling outage,-9/12/92, 60 days l20. If shutdown at end of report period, estimated date of start-up:

N/A 9

r -

= , g 4 - -, ,. 7 - , , , _ _ - _ , , _ , , , _ _ _ , , , _ _ _ , _ _ _ -

, , f ,

n ,

'  ?

, 4 <: 3 i,% I s

' .1 ~

w ", , .

&% -" #, ~

Jf ,

r .-

d w z OPERATING DATA. REPORTS -

[ T

-UNITcSHUTDOWNSiAND POWER: REDUCTIONS A.

Q> ,

~

4'

, DOCKET--NO.- .50-354 _

c ,

-UNIT HoDe-Creek P  : 'c

'DATE 7/15/92 COMPLETED-BYDy. Zabielski: Y, TELEPHONE (609) 339-3506-( -H 6 7h0 NTH June =- ,1992 METHOD t OF -- =t SHUTTING

^

DOWN_THE-E TYPE 4 qREACTOR OR' - - -

e- -

.. F= FORCED' DURATION REASON REDUCING ' CORRECTIVE O NO. DATEj S= SCHEDULED.f(HOURS) (1)- POWER 1(2) ACTION / COMMENTS

,  ; 5 -- E6/1 iF 0- ' A -- 4' PoNer ascension-1-

fallowing-May;:

forced outage' LER 354/92-006

c. 6 16/13 '
FJ ~~1819 -A- 9 ' Unit was.taken off-line'to-repair.EHC1 leak.- The--Reactor.

s -

was not shtt down,

~

but was kept at  :

, 'approximately 3% ,

power for the duration of the-

' outage.  ;

O.

4 5

.6 Y _

..}'TS.u'mmary7 r

7 4 'E_.

i ,

s-REFUELING INFORMATION DOCKET NO. 50-354 UNIT Hope Creek DATE 7/15/92 COMPLETED BY S. Hollinasworth TELEPHONE- (609) 339-1051

+

. MONTH June M

1. Refueling information has changed from last month:

Yes X No

2. Scheduled date-for next refueling: 9/12/92
3. Scheduled date for restart following refueling: 11/11/92
4. A. Will Technical Specification changes or other license amendments be required?

Yes No X B. Has the reload fuel design been reviewed by the Ctation Operating Review Committee?

Yes No X If no, when is it scheduled?- not scheduled (on or prior to 10/28/92)

5. Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action: ELA
6. Important licensing considerations associated with refueling:

- Same fresh fuel as current cycle: no new considerations

7. Number of Fuel Assemblies:

A. Incore 764 B. In Spent Fuel Storage (prior to refueling) 760

-0. In Spent Fuel Storage (after refueling) 1008

8. Present licensed spent fuel storage capacity: 4006 Future. spent fuel storage capacity: 4006
9. Date of last refueling that can be discharged 11/4, 2010 to spent fuel pool assuming the present (EOC16)

-licensed capacity:

(does not allcu for full-core offload)

HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION MONTHLY OPERATING

SUMMARY

June 1992 On June 1, power ascension was-underway following a forced outage on May 26 due to the failure of the Drywell to Suppression Chamber Decay Test to meet its acceptance criteria. The unit reached approximately 100% power on June 1. On June 13, the unit was taken off line to repair an Electro-Hydrualic Control leak. The Reactor remained at approximately 3% power during this evolution, was brought back on line on June 14, and restored to 100% power on June 15. On June ~30, the plant had been on line for 16 consecutive days.

9

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS FOR THE HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION JUNE 1992 h

e

)

h The following item has been evaluated to deternine:

1. -If-the probability of occurrence or'the consequences of an accident or-malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated-in the safety analysis report may be increased; or:

2.- If a possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type thanLany evaluated prevj Asly in the safety analysis report may be created;,or

3. If the margin of safety as defined in the basis-for any technical specification is reduced.

The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluation showed.that this item did not create a new safety hazard to the plant nor did it affect the safe shutdown of the reactor. This item did not change the plant effluent releases and did not alter 1the existing environmental

-impact . :The 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluation = determined that no unreviewed safety orienvironmental. questions Are-involved.

DCE Description of Safety Evaluation

  1. y

-g:

.7-

. SQU1 Descrintion of Safety Evaluation 92-016 This TMR installed electrical jumpers across the Feedwater Heater's High High Level Trip Switches.

u These switches cause spurious high level trip signals during low power levels-due to inleakage in the reference leg. -The jumpers are only required

.until the level sianals stabilize-and were removed later in the month!

The Feedwater system is not safety related and is not requirca to be operable following a LOCA, other than for containmcnt isolation. Failure of the Feedwater system does not compromise any safety related system or components. This TMR has no impact on the containment isolation function of the Feedwater system. Therefore, this TMR does not involve any Unreviewed Safety Questions.

L t

l-I