ML18152A098
| ML18152A098 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1989 |
| From: | Stewart W, Warren L VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 89-516, NUDOCS 8907200397 | |
| Download: ML18152A098 (32) | |
Text
--- ~! ___ _
... **~
~,,,
)
(
I
\\
'~:
e e
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 July 14, 1989 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 Gentlemen:
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 MONTHL V OPERATING REPORT Serial No.
NO/RPC:vlh Docket Nos.
License Nos.89-516 50-280 50-281 DPR-32 DPR-37 Enclosed is the Monthly Operating Report for Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 for the month of June 1989.
Very truly yours,
\\JL~~
W. L. Stewart Senior Vice President - Power Enclosure cc:
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, N. W.
Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. W. E. Holland NRC Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station 8907200397 890630 PDR ADOCK 05000280 R
' *s-*
l POW 34-04 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT REPORT 89-06 APPROVED:
1--- --
e e
DOCKET NO.
50-280 DATE 07 /06/89 COMPLETED BY L. A. Warren TELEPHONE 804-357-3184 x355 OPERATING STATUS
- 1. Unit Name:
Surry Unit l Notes
- 2. Reportfog Period:
June 01, 1989 thru June 30, 1989
- 3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt):
2441
- 4. Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe):
--,8,....4=7,,..,.5 ____ _
- s. Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe):
788
- 6.
Maximum Dependable Capacity (Gross MWe):
820
- 7. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe):
781
- 8. If Changes Occur in Capacity Ratings (Items Number 3 Through 7) Since Last Report, Give Reasons:
- 9. Power Level To Which Restricted, If Any (Net MWe):
10, Reasons For Restrictions, If Any:
This Mooth
- 11. Hours In Reporting Period 720.o
- 12. Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical 0
- 13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours 0
- 14. Hours Generator On-Line 0
- 15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0
- 16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 0
- 17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 0
- 18. Net Electrical Energy-Generated (MWH) 0
- 19. Unit Service Factor 0
20, Unit Available Factor 0
- 21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) 0
- 22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) 0 23, Uriit Forced Rate 100%
Yr. -to-Date 4343.0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
100%
- 24. Shutdowns Scheduled Over Next 6 Months (Type, Date, and Duration of Each):
Forced Maintenance Outage on 09/14/88, scheduled on line date of 25, If Shut Down At End Of Report Period Estimated Date of Startup:
- 26. Units In Test Status (Prior to Commercial Operation):
INITIAL CRITICALITY INITIAL ELECTRICITY COMMERCIAL OPERATION Forecast Cumulative 144839.0 88478.6 3774. 5 86605.4 3736.2 201171267.0 65203673.0 61840403.0
~9. 8%
62.4%
- 55. 2%
54.2%
22.3%
July 7, 1989.
Achieved
\\ **
DOCKET NO.
50-281 DATE 07/06/89 COMPLETED BY L. A. Warren TELEPHONE 804-357-3184 x355 OPERATING STATUS 1, Unit Name:
Surry Unit 2 Notes
- 2. Reportfog Period:
June 01. 1898 thru June 30, 1989
- 3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt):
2441 4, Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe): --s-4-1-.s-----
- 5. Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe):
788
- 6.
Maximum Dependable Capacity (Gross MWe):
820
- 7. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe):
781
- 8. If Changes Occur in Capacity Ratings (Items Number 3 Through 7) Since Last Report, Give Reasons:
9, Power Level To Which Restricted, If Any (Net MWe):
10, Reasons For Restrictions, If Any:
This Mooth
- 11. Hours In Reporting Period 720.0
- 12.
Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical 0
- 13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours 0
14, Hours Generator On-Line 0
- 15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0
- 16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 0
- 17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 0
- 18. Net Electrical Energy-Generated (MWH) 0
- 19. Unit Service Factor 0
- 20. Unit Available Factor 0
- 21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) 0
- 22.
Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) 0
- 23. Unit Forced Rate 0
Yr.-to-Date 4343.0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
- 24.
Shutdowns Scheduled Over Next 6 Months {Type, Date, and Duration of Each):
Cumulative 141719.0 89694.3 328.1 88293.0 0
206740436.1 67136244.0 63647378.0 62.3%
- 62. J%
57.6%
57%
15%
Refueling Outage on 09/10/88, scheduled on line date of August 11, 1989.
- 25. If Shut Down At End Of Report Period Estimated Date of Startups
- 26.
Units In Test Status (Prior to Commercial Operation):
Forecast INITIAL CRITICALITY INITIAL ELECTRICITY COMMERCIAL OPERATION Achieved
HO.
DATE
- a.,.....
89-06 06/01 /89 F
1 2
F: Forced S:
Scheduled (9/77)
UNIT SHUTDOWNS AND POWER REDUC'IIONS
""""""' HO 50-280
~
UNIT NAME ~~S~u~c~cv--~1,~owl.1--~-~
DAD _0_7_./_0_6/._8_9,_ __,~
C04PLEm> BY L, A, Warren
- REPOR:r HON'l'll JUNE 1989 TELEPll>NE 804-357-3184 x355 C
DI 0
0...
N 0
C C
... u 0
'O 0..
II 0
z;
- , Ill:
- , :c
.. z; 0 -
Ill:
- I rll
~
0 0
720.0 F
1 Reason:
A - Equipment Failure (Explain)
- B - Maintenance or Test C - Refueling D - Regulatory Restriction LICENSEE EVEH'.t REPOR'.I
- E - Operator Training & License Examination F - Administrative G - Operational Error (Explain)
H - Other (Explain) 3 e,
C...
I C *
.. 'O CAUSE 6, CORRECIIVE AC'J:ION 'IO 0
'O 0
- a.
0
- u E U PREVENT RECURREN'l 0 u Unit shutdown due to Emergency Diesel Generator operability concerns.
Method:
1 - Manual 2 - Manual Scram.
3 - Automatic Scram.
4 - Other (Explain) 5 Exhibit G - Inatructions for Preparation of Data Entry Sheets for Licensee Event Report (LER) File (NUREG 0161)
Exhibit l - Same Source e
NO.
DA:rE Q.
89-06 06/01/89 s
II 1
F: Forced 2
S:
Scheduled (9/77)
UNI'I SHU'IDOWNS AND POWER RED\\JC'UONS DOCKE:r No. __
s_o_-2_a_1 _____ _
UNI'I NAME _.. S.... u~rry~~l~Jn~i,..t--..2 ____ _
0_.7/._0_6_/8_9 ________ ~
a>>IPLE'IEDBY_~L~,~A'"61.,~w.arr...,,.~e~o.,_ __ __
REPOR:r HONnl __ J._U.... N....._.E... 1.... 9.... 8.... 9 __
'IELEPHONE _8.::;.;0:..;4_,-.;..;35_7_-~3 ;::.,:l 8"'"41..11x....,3'""5~5-C Cl 0
0 -
N 0
C LICENSEE e,,
C C
... u II on I
0
'ti..
- a II C
II CAUSE & CORREC'.IIVE AC'J:ION 'IO
- I 0
EVEN'I
.. 'ti 0
'ti 0
.c.. a:
0 Q.
0
.. ::c
- I
- u e o
- I
.c REPOR:r #
PREVENt RECUlUlEHt C -
a:
l m
~
0 D
0 C
720.0 C
1,3
.Unit shutdown for refueling outage, automatic Reason; A - Equipment Failure (Explain)
B - Maintenance or 'test C - Refueling D - Regulatory Restriction E - Operator Training & License Examination F - Administrative G - Operational Error (Explain)
H - Other (Explain) 3 reactor trip.
Method:
1 - Manual 2 - Manual Scram.
3 - Automatic Scram.
4 - Other (Explain) 4 5
Exhibit G - Instructions for Preparation of Data Entry Sheets for Licensee Event Report (LER) rue (N\\JREG 0161)
Exhibit 1 - Same Source e
~. :
e AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL MONTH *June 1989 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) 1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
10 0
11 0
12 0
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
INSTRUCTIONS DAY 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 DOCKET NO.
50-280
-,:e----------
UN IT Surry Unit I DATE 07/06/89 COMPLETED BY L.A. Warren TELEPHONE 804-357-3184 x355 AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
On this format, list the average daily unit power level in MWe-Net for each day in the reporting month.
Compute to the nearest whole megawatt.
(9/77)
e AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL MONTH. June 1989 DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) 1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
10 0
11 0
12 0
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
INSTRUCTIONS DAY 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 DOCKET NO.
so..:201
,,;a.=.-=-=------
UN IT Surry Unit 2 DATE 07 /06/89 COMPLETED BY L. A. Warren TELEPHONE 804-357-3184 x355 AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
On this format, list the average daily unit power level in MWe-Net for each day in the reporting month.
Compvte to the nearest whole megawatt.
(9/77)
SUMMARY
OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 Listed below in chronological sequence by unit is a summary of operating experiences for this month which required load reductions or resulted in significant non-load related incidents.
UNIT ONE 06/01/89 0000 06/05/89 1412 06/15/89 0818 06/22/89 1520 06/29/89 0650 06/30/89 2400 UNIT TWO 06/01/89 0000 06/30/89 2400 This reporting period begins with the unit at CSD.
Four hour report to NRC for ESF Actuation during performance of ST-239 due to erroneous SF /FF mismatch in coincidence with S / G lo-lo level.
Four hour report to NRG for ESF Actuation of auxiliary ventilation system during performance of ST-262.
Four hour report to NRG for ESF Actuation during performance of ST-260 on AOD-VS-105A & B.
Made a mode change from CSD to !SD RCS> 200°F.
This reporting period ends with the unit at ISD with startup in progress to HSD.
This reporting period begins with the unit at CSD.
This reporting period ends with the unit at CSD.
\\
e F AGILITY CHANGES REQUIRING NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 NONE DURING THIS PERIOD
e e
FACIIJTY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 DC 85-32 VITAL BUS EXPANSION UNIT I This modification replaced the station batteries and the battery racks with larger capacity batteries installed in seismically designed racks and related inter-cell cabling. Also, the battery chargers, static inverters and regulating transformers were replaced with two uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) per 125V DC bus. Each UPS consists of a rectifier/charger, inverter, static switch, manual bypass switch and regulating line conditioner in one complete unit.
SUMMARY
OF SAFETY ANALYSIS The station batteries and UPS were. designed, fabricated and installed to meet or exceed the requirements of the original design basis documents. The larger capacity batteries enhance the 125V DC bus system and the power supplies upgrade the 125V DC and 120V AC vital bus systems.
DC 87-20 REMOVAL OF CONTROL ROOM CHLORINE MONITORS UNITS I & 2 After the existing chlorination system had been removed and thestored chlorine gas had been removed from the site, the chlorine monitoring system.for the control room was removed from service. Removing the system from service required the removal of the sensors, analyzers and associated conduit and
- supports, determina.tion of cables, and replacing an annunciator window.
SUMMARY
OF SAFETY ANALYSIS The control room chlorine monitors provided an alarm and control of the control room isolation dampers in the event of a chlorine gas release creating a hazardous environment in the control room. The sewage treatment plant was the only source of chlorine gas which could cause control room habitability concerns, and the chlorine gas storage at the sewage treatment plant was eliminated. There are other sources of chlorine gas including chlorine gas produced by accidental chemical reactions between existing materials on site, but these sources are insignificant and not considered hazardous to control room safety in accordance with Reg. Guide 1.78. The probability of a chlorine gas release adversely affecting control room habitability is essentially eliminated after removal of the chlorine gas storage from the site. The chlorine monitors are no longer required when the chlorine gas source is eliminated. The chlorine monitors can be removed and the associated modifications can be completed without increasing the probability of occurrence or consequences of a malfunction involving any other existing safety system previously evaluated in the FSAR.
This change was made following NRG approval of T.S.
amendment 124, which deleted the requirements for the chlorine monitors.
The modification did not change the function of any other safety system.
e FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 DC 88-31 ADDITION OF DIESEL GENERATOR SEQUENCING UNIT 1 This modification adds an emergency diesel generator (EDG) load sequencing scheme which will be initiated by a loss of offsite power condition. This will ensure that the maximum EDG load capabilities will not be exceeded under the worst case load applications and therefore, resolve NRC concerns described in IE Information Notice 85-91.
SUMMARY
OF SAFETY ANALYSIS The load sequencing of specific loads onto the EDG will ensure that the maximum load capabilities will not be exceeded and will ensure the availability of the systems necessary to mitigate the consequences of a design basis event.
With the limiting equipment delays, the results of the applicable accident analyses will still meet their acceptance criteria. There will be no increase in the calculated dose consequences since the assumptions for the dose calculations will not be impacted. The operation of safety-related equipment or systems, or the availability of safety-related power sources, are not adversely affected.
DC 89-03 CONTROL ROOM BOTTLED AIR AUTOMATIC DISCHARGE UNITS 1 & 2 This modification added an automatic actuation to the control room bottled air system. The automatic release signal will be generated from the control room isolation signal to ensure that whenever the normal source of pressurized air for the control room is cut-off, the bottled air system will automatically make up the required air.
SUMMARY
OF SAFETY ANALYSIS The addition of automatic actuation of the bottled air system will assure that pressurized air is supplied to the control room coincident with control room isolation. This will occur immediately without the need for operator intervention as presently designed. The modification does not adversely affect safety-related equipment and systems or the operation of equipment and systems.
\\.
~
e FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 SCAFFOLDING REQUEST 06/02/89 The request erected temporary scaffolding located in the # 2 emergency diesel generator room to work lighting.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability /function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 06/02/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the Unit 1 containment, elevation 316 11 to work l-CC-176 and l-CC-177.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
TM-Sl-89-122 TEMPORARY MODIFICATION for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 06/05/89 This temporary modification was to wire shut the exhaust damper for 1-VS-F-lB.
This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question in that the containment air recirculation system is not required to function during design basis events.
TM-Sl-89-123 TEMPORARY MODIFICATION 06/05/89 This temporary modification was to wire open the exhaust damper for 1-VS-F-lB.
This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question in that the containment air recirculation system is not required to function during design basis events.
l/2-EWR-89-013 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/05/89 This request documented the Gamma Metrics cable replacement. T.his replacement was a "one for one" replacement. of the same type from Gamma Metrics.
This evaluation does not represent an unreviewed safety question in that the EWR only provides a "one for one 11 replacement of the Gamma Metrics cable. The cable will be changed according to accepted station procedures.
e FACILIT..., CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 TM-Sl-89-129 TEMPORARY MODIFICATION 06/07/89 This temporary modification was to wire shut the exhaust damper for 1-VS-F-l B.
This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question in that the containment air recirculation system is not required to function during design basis events.
l-EWR-88-072 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/08/89 This request documented the replacement of a low head safety injection pump motor which had failed with a similar qualified motor.
The motor replacement with a dissimilar motor with acceptable characteristics resulted in a facility change with no negative impact.
l-EWR-87-276 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/10/89 This request allows access to. the recirculation spray pumps and containment drain sump pump sumps without disassembly of the screens.
The performance of this request does not represent an unreviewed *safety question as the modification of the screens does not affect screen integrity.
l/2-EWR-88-494 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/11/89 This request was to update vibration program for ISI program to meet new relief request P-1 which is based on ANSI/ ASME-OM-6 Draft II.
This request documented new reference value and acceptance criteria of pump vibration program to meet relief request based on ANSI/ ASME OM-6 Draft II and did not affect plant operations.
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST 06/12/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the Unit 1 containment 'B' loop room to work l-SI-130.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are_ not affected.
for effect on Conclusion is analyses and
FACILIT~HANGEs THAT DID NOT REQUIRIRc APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR _...:.J_:.U_N_E_l_9_8_9 _
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST 06/12/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the radiological control area (RCA) near Unit 2 refueling water storage tank to work lagging removal and heat tracing repair on 1 l/2"-CS-107-152.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 06/13/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the mechanical equipment room #3 to work 1-VS-P-ZA.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 2-EWR-88-346 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/14/89 l/2-ES-80-30 This request was to add temporary radiation shielding to the accumulator discharge lines; the shielding will not render the lines inoperable.
The placement bf temporary shielding on operable safety injection accumulator discharge lines does not result in an unreviewed safety question because it does not increase the probability or consequence of any accident or create any new modes of failure.
ENGINEERING STUDY 06/15/89 This engineering study was to delete the valve pit baffle in the outside recirculation spray pump and the low head safety injection pump valve pits for Surry Units 1 and 2 from the UFSAR.
Detection of postulated suction piping leakage can also be accomplished by the operator through the observation of other system parameters which are also indicated in the control room. The potential increase in time that it would take the operator to identify and isolate a large leak in the piping in the valve pit, if the baffle is not installed, is considered insignificant.
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST 06/16/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the # 1 EDG room to work changing out lighting fixtures.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability /function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
for effect on Conclusion is analyses and
I-~--~-- - - -
e e
F ACIIJTY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL JC0-89-3-002 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989
-~-----
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST 06/16/89 This request erected temporary scaffolding located in the RCA alongside 1-CS-TK-l to work heat tracing.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
l JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED OPERATION (JCO)
FOR APPENDIX 'R' COMPENSATORY ACTIONS for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 06/17/89 JCO to establish continuous firewatches and roving firewatch patrols until Appendix 'R' concerns are corrected.
Continuous firewatches and roving firewatches are compensatory measures based on informal guidance from the NRG until compliance is restored for Appendix 'R' concerns. Therefore, there is no unreviewed safety question.
AC Sl-89-0617 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL 06/17/89 Sl-89-1396 JC0-89-3-003 Valves l-CC-415 and l-CC-422 will be closed under Administrative Control. Operations personnel will be available to establish component cooling flow to the spent fuel pit coolers, if required.
The maximum allowable temperature during this test will be 120°, which is well below the limits assumed in the UFSAR. The heat exchangers remain operable and available, if required.
DEVIATION REPORT/
JUSTIFICATION FOR INTERIM OPERATION PRIOR TO REPLACEMENT OF WESTINGHOUSE TYPE F A/FB BREAKERS 06/17/89 An analysis was prepared to justify the unit start-up prior to replacement of the subject breakers. As noted in the justification, the breakers to which the concern applies is limited to those rated 150 AMP frame, or less, installed in molded case circuit (MCC) "breaker only" cubicles.
Only one train is affected by the postulated fault and the fault would be cleared by the upstream breaker. In addition, the likelihood of such a fault is very remote.
l/2-EWR-89-Q89 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/20/89 This request documented the addition of a required splice box and modification to the electrical termination detail at each outside recirculation spray pump motor (4) to assure reliable operation.
The performance of this EWR does not represent an unreviewed safety question in that it only provides a splice box and enhancement of the termination details at each outside recirculation spray pump motor for
)
more reliable operation.
[-~--~----- ~
\\.**
e e
FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL l/2-EWR-89-330 l/2-EWR-89-161 l/2-EWR-89-396 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/20/89 This request was to increase start setpoints of the fire protection pumps and air compressor to comply with technical specifications.
The setpoints will ensure compliance with technical specifications and reduce the allowable system pressure drop required for pump/compressor starts.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/20/89 This request was to install a 12 inch butterfly valve on a mounting flange and pipe on top of a new manhole cover in each unit's discharge tunnel manhole pit.
A missile shield with an access hole for valve operation is installed on top of each manhole pit.
This request will not result in an unreviewed safety question and will not have an adverse effect upon the plant's systems, equipment or safety analysis.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/20/89 This request was for the addition of vents and drains on the component cooling side. of the charging pump component cooling water pump intermediate seal coolers..
This modification will not affect any accident or malfunctions previously evaluated, nor does it create any new accidents or malfunction possibilities when administratively controlled via station operating procedures.
l/2-EWR-89-207.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/20/89 This request is to remove the controls and associated cables for the combustion turbine generator from the control room.
The panel will be left in place with the face blank for future use.
The review resulted in revision of the UFSAR to remove reference to control room* operation of the combustion turbine generator with no effect on plant safety or operations.
UFSAR 11.3.5 CHANGE REQUEST TO UFSAR 06/20/89 This change request is to delete the requirements for collection and analysis. of fowl for gamma emitters in the Surry environmental survey program.
The collection and analysis of miik, shellfish, silt, soil, water, crops, and fish gives verification of radioactivity control. Due to their migratory nature, fowl do not give a representative indication of activity build up.
e e
FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 UFSAR 11.3.5.1 CHANGE REQUEST TO UFSAR 06/20/89 The requirement to collect air samples in Richmond, VA is being deleted from UFSAR 11.3.5.1 The collection of air samples in Richmond has no effect on safety. T.S.
4.9, table 4.9-3 requires a control sample to be taken at a location 15-30 km.
UFSAR 11.3.5.5 CHANGE REQUEST TO UFSAR 11.3.5.5 06/20/89 This change request is for the requirements to analyze well water and surface water samples from gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium to gamma emitting isotopes and tritium.
Gamma multi-channel analysis provides better radiological environmental monitoring and isotopic quantification than gross alpha and beta counting.
TM-S2-89-057 TEMPORARY MODIFICATION 06/20/89 This temporary modification was to wire open the exhaust damper for 2-VS-F-lB.
This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question in that the containment air recirculation system is not required to function during design basis events.
TM-Sl-89-139 TEMPORARY MODIFICATION 06/21/89 The gate has been removed from 2-SW-306. The valve will be re-installed without the gate to allow service water flow to 'C' control room chiller and the lOB charging pump service water pumps.
The discharge valve (2-SW-306) will be re-installed without the gate to ensure service water flow to 'C' control room chiller and the lOB charging pump service water pumps. Since service water flow will be maintained and technical specification action statements will be entered if required, an unreviewed safety question is not created.
JC0-89':-1-007 JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED OPERATION EMERGENCY'SERVICE WATER (ESW) PUMPS 06/22/89 JCO - ESW pumps will provide various restrictions and operator actions will be performed prior to completion of various modifications.
An unreviewed safety question does not exist since the JCO provides the necessary restrictions and requires operator actions in the event of a loss of off-site power to ensure adequate service water inventory can be maintained in the intake canal.
e e
FACILlTY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 I-EWR-89-238 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/22/89 l/2-ES-80-30 JC0-89-3-008 This request documented the use of the replacement of 20 1/4 11 diameter impeller on the emergency service water pumps, replace.ct the fuel injectors on pump diesel drivers to provide brake horse power margin and performed an in-place verification test to verify adequacy of the replacement components at design conditions.
This modification does not create an unreviewed safety question. The
- pump impellers and diesel fuel injectors will be replaced with components manufactured to the same standards.
Component service conditions, functions, environment and reliability are unchanged.
ENGINEERING STUDY JCO - SAFETY ANALYSIS/IOCFRS0.59 REVIEW ORS & LHSI VALVE PIT LEVEL DETECTORS 06/22/89 This engineering study provided documentation to allow operation with the outside recirculation spray pump and the low head safety injection pump valve pit level detectors temporarily inoperable.
The function of the level detectors can also be accomplished by the operator through the observation of other system parameters which are indicated in the control* room. The potential increase in time that it would take the operator to identify and isolate a large leak in the piping in the valve pit is considered acceptable on an interim basis if the level detectors are not installed.
l-EWR-89-232 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/22/89 This request was to install a new larger capacity limitorque operator on the pressure operated relief valve block valves to ensure sufficient thrust capability to overcome maximum pressure differential across the valves. The request included modifications for machining and installing new valve yokes capable of supporting the new operators during normal and accident operating conditions.
A review determined that no unreviewed safety question exists since the valves function has not changed, only their capability to open and close against valve differential pressure which was increased and therefore, increased the margin of safety against valve failure due to maximum differential pressure across valve.
l/2-EWR-89-390 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/22/89 This request documented that the maximum allowable
- stroke time for valves 1&2-CH-LCV-115B, D and 2115B, D will be increased from 10 seconds to 12 seconds.
An unreviewed safety question was not created because the UFSAR accident analysis results remain bounding for the stroke times associated with 1&2-CH-LCV-1115B, D and 2115B, D.
e e
FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL l/2-EWR-88-474 l /2-EWR-88-456 l/2-EWR-89-023 l/2-EWR-89-351 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/23/89 This request documents that each of the three emergency service water pumps, 46 11 diameter inlet screens is removed. A duplex strainer is added to each* pump's diesel cooling water inlet line.
The l II diameter, 90° gear oil cooler line is rerouted to connect downstream of the duplex strainer.
The request does not result in an unreviewed safety question and will not have an adverse effect upon the plants systems, equipment or safety analysis since the pump flow capability is not affected and the diesel engine will be properly cooled.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/23/89 This request is to reset the governor control to provide for optimal operation of the emergency diesel generator (EDG) when required to operate isolated from the system grid as required during a loss of offsite power (LOOP).
The proposed emergency diesel generator governor setpoint changes do not impact the UFSAR or technical specification since the change to the component does not affect the EDGs capability or their availability.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/23/89 This request is to document reanalysis using the Retran Code for heatup and cooldown of the reactor to prevent nonductile pressurization and overstressing of the reactor vessel and pressure differential between the two transmitters.
The review consisted of an analysis of the heatup and cooldown of the reactor coolant system and the cold overpressurization of the reactor to prevent non-ductile pressurization or overstressing of the reactor vessel. Based on our review, the revision to the heatup and cooldown and the cold overpressurization setpoint does not constitute and unreviewed safety question.
ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/24/89 This request will install an air operated sump pump to pump out the containment sump area around the recirculation spray pumps to the area of the sump where the normal sump pumps can pump the water to the liquid waste system.
The sump pump is utilized prior to quarterly testing of the inside recirculation spray pumps to preclude pumping sump water into the recirculation spray heat exchangers.
This function will enhance the overall system operation. Piping and equipment installation has been seismically analyzed and will not affect the surrounding safety related equipment.
e e
FACIIJTY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 l-EWR-88-467 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/24/89 This request was generated to ensure the capability of the emergency service water pumps to provice make up water to the intake canal for 30 day loss of off-site power accident.
The changes reviewed enhance the plant capability to mitigate the effects of an accident.
The procedural changes decrease the probability of equipment malfunction. Failure of the added equipment results in the same failure modes previously evaluated.
SCAFFOLDING REQUEST This request erected temporary scaffolding located in containment 'C' loop room to work job # 89-08.
Installation of this temporary scaffolding was reviewed accident analyses and equipment operability/function.
that assumptions, bases and probabilities of accident equipment malfunctions are not affected.
06/25/89 the Unit 2 for effect on Conclusion is analyses and 2-EWR-89-288 ENGINEERING WORK REQUEST 06/26/89 The request allowed reversing positions of 2-CC-805 and 806 in order to allow maintenance to be performed on the check valve.
An unreviewed safety question does not exist since the function and integrity of the makeup line was not affected.
AC-Sl-89-0626 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL 06/26/89 Sl-89-1032 JC0-89-3-009 Placed administrative control of outside air to Unit 1 containment during cold rod drops to maintain conditions of containment integrity.
Administrative control will ensure that containment integrity can be established immediately.
Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.
STATION DEVIATION 06/26/89 JCO-CS RWST LEVEL BISTABLES (WIDE RANGE)
Procedural instructions require a test technician to provide channel status to the control room versus continuous indication on the main board.
An unreviewed safety question is not created because the main board operator shall be kept informed of channel status whenever period tests or calibration procedures are performed.
e e
FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL Sl-89-1453 JC0-89-3-004 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 DEVIATION REPORT JCO - ENGINEERING EVALUATION DEVIATION REPORT Sl-89-1453, REGULATORY GUIDE 1.97 INSTRUMENTATION 06/19/89 Indication of the system pressure on the discharge of the recirculation spray pumps and status of the pump motors are available and are adequate for the control room operator to evaluate system operability and will be added to R.G. 1.97 variable D-23. Valve Position for MOV-SW-104A, B, C, and D (upstream of RSHX) MOV-SW-lOSA,B,C, and D (downstream of RSHX) is available from status lights in the control room and from the ERF computer system. These MOVs are qualified and on the EQML.
The status of MOV-SW-103A,B,C and D is also available on Control Room status lights and from the ERF computer system. These valve indications will be added to R.G. 1.97 variable D-31.
Existing plant instrumentation is available to monitor the safety functions required by R.G. 1.97. Therefore, continued operation does not create an unreviewed safety question.
JC0-89-1-005 JCO - JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUED OPERATION 06/20/89 STARTUP OF UNIT ONE PRIOR TO LEAK TESTING UNIT TWO CIRCULATING AND SERVICE WATER ISOLATION VALVES JCO to allow startup of Unit 1 prior to determining total station circulating water/service water isolation valve leakage.
An unreviewed safety question does not exist since total station service water valve leakage will not exceed the design assumptions in PES CALC ME-0166.
' I J
e PROCEDURE OR METHOD OF OPERATION CHANGES REQUIRING NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR __
J_U_N_E_I_9_89 ___
NONE DURING THIS PERIOD
Sl-89-1104 Sl-89-1212 JC0-89-3-006 l-OP-7.4.3 e
e PROCEDURE OR METHOD OF OPERATION CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 DEVIATION REPORT 06/15/89 Documentation allowing the 11as acceptable 11 stroke time of 10.16 seconds as recorded in l-PT-l 8.3A.
An unreviewed safety question is not created because the stroke time of 10.16 was analyzed as acceptable.
In addition, actual positional movement of the operator was under 10 seconds as documented by actual position indicating equipment.
As a result, an UFSAR change is not deemed necessary.
OPERATIONAL QUAIJTY ASSURANCE PROGRAM TOPICAL REPORT 06/20/89 Documentation of the safety analysis/10 CFR 50.59 Review performed on the Quality assurance Topical Report Change Package.
These changes are administrative and editorial in nature and do not alter the conditions or assumptions of any accident analysis discussed in the UFSAR or basis of the Technical Specifications.
Also, some changes are organization changes and serve only to enhance administrative controls at the power stations and improve the effectiveness of the quality assurance program.
Therefore, it has been determined that the changes to the Quality Assurance Program
- Topical Report do not pose an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59.
DEVIATION REPORT/
06/2I/89 ROSEMOUNT 10CFR21 NOTIFICATION LETTER, MAY 10, 1989 Operations is monitoring the various channels (redundant) to identify channels showing a large difference between channels. If symptoms, as identified by Rosemount are identified, a full range test will be performed and transmitters which do not have proper response will be replaced.
Existing plant instrumentation is available to monitor the safety functions.
The failure of a single Rosemount transmitter would not have an adverse effect on the operability of the unit, since redundancy has been established in protective systems.
OPERATING PROCEDURE 06/22/89 This procedure is to ensure that a zero fouling factor is maintained for the recirculation spray heat exchangers tubes by providing a method for verification that the heat exchangers are dry during power operation.
This procedure will ensure that the recirculation spray heat exchangers will remain operable. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.
,}
e I
I TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS REQUIRING NRG APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 NONE DURING THIS PERIOD
- I J.
e e
TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRG APPROVAL l/2-ST-228 l/2-ST-269 l/2-ST-225 l-ST-227 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 SPECIAL TEST 11/27 /88 This test ran through a test crank of an emergency service water pump diesel chosen for the test and started the same pump to determine starting and running currents. This test rendered the pump inoperable for short periods of time during this test.
An unreviewed safety question is not created by this special test since the tested emergency service water pump will be under direct administrative control and could be started in the event the other operable pump failed to start.
SPECIAL TEST 06/06/89 This test provided simultaneous measurements of the absolute pressure in the main control room and selected adjacent areas.
The pressure measurement was made using absolute pressure gauges (barometers) calibrated in inches of water gauge (in. WG). The instruments were capable of measuring the pressure in 0.01 in. WG increments.
The test was performed with the systems operating as described in the URSAR and Technical Specification.
The test did not result in an unreviewed safety question or require a change to the Technical Specifications.
SPECIAL TEST 06/17/89 This test was performed to document that the emergency diesel generators were subjected to an instantaneous load reject in order to evaluate engine governor transient response.
The emergency diesel generator is designed to accept a load reject.
Operability will be maintained in accordance with technical specifications limits. The probability of reviewed accidents is not increased.
SPECIAL TEST 06/17/89 This test was performed to document that an emergency diesel generator (EDG) could be subjected to initial and subsequent electrical load blocks to assess EDG capabilities based on voltage and frequency response.
The tests were performed for cold and hot diesel conditions.
The test of the EDG #3 response to applied loads had no impact on the UFSAR or technical specification since the test was designed to stay within diesel limits and resulted in no permanent changes to plant configuration.
- J TESTS AN.PERIMENTS THAT DID NOT RE.RE NRC APPROVAL 1-ST-245 l/2-ST-218 1-ST-244 1-ST-254 l/2-ST-243 MONTH/YEAR JUNE 1989 SPECIAL TEST 06/17/89 This test documented that the air supply lines to air operated safe shutdown valves. were slowly bled down to atmospheric pressure. Valves were observed to ensure travel to their safe shutdown positions.
The valves were operated per design. The technical specification limiting condition of operation were met prior to commencement of this test.
SPECIAL TEST 06/20/89 This test placed the Surry control room lighting in its emergency configuration and data was taken to assess the adequacy of lighting relative to NUREG-0700 guidelines.
Reducing the control room lighting to its design emergency level for this test did not result in an increase in the probability of occurrence or consequences of any accident or malfunction of safety related equipment evaluated in the UFSAR.
SPECIAL TEST 06/20/89 This special test was developed to verify that when the identified breaker was opened, the valves shown to be connected to that breaker will not cycle.
The -performance of this test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question since it did not increase the probability of an accident or malfunction as described in the UFSAR, or did it reduce the margin of safety as described in the technical specification basis. Each group of valves has a contingency plan.
SPECIAL TEST 06/20/89 This test documented that the normal air supply to RC-PCV-1455C, and 1456 were bled down. The' check valve was tested to hold bottled air pressure. PCVs were cycled to test design basis operability.
The components were operated per design.
The technical specification limiting conditions of operation were met prior to commencement of the test.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test w~s required to verify that the component cooling inlet and discharge water boxes remain full when the non-safety related vacuum priming system is isolated.
This ensures full heat transfer capability for design basis events.
The consequences or probability of an accident are not increased since the. units can be kept in cold shutdown for all design basis conditions during the test.
TESTS AND E'ERIMENTS THAT DID NOT REQul: NRG APPROVAL l-ST-246 l/2-ST-248 l/2-ST-251 l/2-ST-252 MONTH/YEAR SPECIAL TEST JUNE 1989 06/21/89 This test documented that the total valve leakage was determined by closing the header valves and draining a portion of the system. Once the draining was completed, residual water was collected over a given period of time to determine total valve leakage.
This test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question, or a change to technical specifications. This conclusion was based on a review of technical specifications, UFSAR and test procedure performance requirements.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test documents that the test equipment was temporarily installed in the seal housing to monitor both stationary seal temperature and seal pressure during batching operations and adjust the flow of l-CH-P-2C by repositioning HCV-1105 to the correct position to give 75 gpm.
This test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question, or require a change in the technical specification since the special test only installed temporary test instrumentation for monitoring pump seal parameters on l-CH-P-2C.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test measured the leakage through each of the condenser inlet and outlet motor operated valves.
This test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question, or a change in technical specifications.
This conclusion was based on the review of applicable technical specifications, applicable UFSAR sections and test procedure performance requirements.
All equipment affected by this test was operated in its normal manner.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test documented that the total inlet/outlet leakage through each component cooling exchanger was obtained by introducing a measured flow rate of water into the exchanger until a level is established and stabilized by adjusting the flow rate.
This test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question or a change in technical specifications.
This conclusion was based on the review of applicable technical specifications, UFSAR sections and test procedure performance requirements.
TESTS AND IPERIMENTS THAT DID NOT REQ!E NRG APPROVAL l/2-ST-256 l/2-ST-258 l/2-ST-262 MONTH/YEAR SPECIAL TEST JUNE 1989 06/21/89 This test documented that the pump bay water level was varied and held for pump data measurement down to the minimum submergence level (5 feet). A modified stop log seal plate with valved openings was used to allow pump bay level to be adjustable.
This test did not constitute an unreviewed safety question, or change to technical specification. This conclusion was based on a review of technical specifications, UFSAR and test procedure performance requirements.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test documented the bleed down of the normal instrument air supply to LC-TV-109A, B and CC-TV-209A, B.
The check valve was tested to hold accumulator air pressure. The trip valves were cycled closed and held to test design basis operability.
All components were operated per design. Technical specification limiting condition of operations were met prior to commencement of this test and during the test. Therefore, no unreviewed safety question was created.
SPECIAL TEST 06/21/89 This test documented slow instrument air bleed down fail-safe testing of auxiliary ventilation systems. The temporary test connection assemblies were used for air bleed down. Devices were installed at various locations on the instrument supply lines to the auxiliary vent system to simulate loss of instrument air; this simulated loss of instrument air and allowed for verification of stroking of the dampers and seating of the system isolation check valves.
This test verified that the emergency ventilation dampers in the auxiliary vent system stoke to a fail safe position and checkvalves seat properly under loss of instrument air conditions. The system's design basis was unchanged by this test. Since this test verified that system's design basis, no unreviewed safety question was created.
..,/'
- ,I PRIMARY COOLANT ANALYSIS MAX.
Gross Radioact., llCi/ml 3.39E-3 Suspended Solids, ppm 0.0 Gross Tritium, l,ICi/ml NIA 131 Iodine
, l,ICi/ml NIA 1131 / 1133 NIA Oi Hydroaen, cc/kst 24.7 Lithium, ppm 1.61 Boron-10, ppm*
407.5
{ZJ Oxygen, (DO), oom 1.000 Chloride, ppm 0.015 1>H@ 25 degree Celsius 5.76
- Boron-10
AVG.
MAX.
l~
3.52E-4 l.35E-_3 2.55E-2 0.0 0.0 0.0 NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA UJ UJ 17.8 22.2 NIA 0.64 1.19 0.22 390.2 401.1 428.8
<0.005 0.065
<0.005 0.003 0.009 0.020 5.34 5.50 5.30
(* (1) (2) (3) - see numbers listed above/comments listed below)
UNIT NO. 2 MIN.
AVG.
l.23E-3 7.30E-3 0.0 0.0 NIA NIA NIA NIA J
NIA NIA NIA NIA 0.16 0.19 419.5 423.8
<0.005
<0.005 0.010 0.014 5.03 5.15 UNIT ONE:
Hydrazine additions:
06/22/89 at 0900, added one gallon of hydrazine.
Lithium additions:
06/22/89 at 1455, added 1560 grams of LiOH; 06/23/89 at 0500 added 900 grams of LiOH. Total LiOH added:
2460 grams.
NOTE:
(1)
Reactor not critical, hydrogen specification not applicable.
(2)
Unit at cold shutdown, dissolved oxygen specification not applicable.
- uNIT TWO:
No Chemical additions made in June.
NOTE:
(3) Unit 2 letdown isolated from beginning of June until 06/ 18/89 at 1737.
' =-----
... t e
e
~
UNIT 1&2 FUEL HANDLING DATE JUNE 1989 NEW OR DATE NUMBER OF NEW OR SPENT SPENT FUEL SHIPPED OR ASSEMBLIES ASSEMBLY ANSI INITIAL FUEL SHIPPINC SHIPMENT II RECEIVED PER SHIPMENT II 6
ENRICHMENT CASK ACTIVITI LEVEL NONE DU1 1ING THIS P ~RIOD
~---------------
e e
DESCRIPTION OF PERIODIC TEST WHICH WERE NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMITS SPECIFIED IN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MONTH/YEAR ___ J_U_N_E_I_9_89 ___ _
NONE DURING THIS PERIOD