ML18152A443

Monthly Operating Repts for Dec 1992 for Sps,Units 1 & 2.W/ 930111 Ltr

ML18152A443
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/31/1992
From:	Bowling M, Mason D VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
93-009, 93-9, NUDOCS 9301210094
Download: ML18152A443 (22)

Text

.

e e VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 January 11, 1993 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial No.93-009 Attention: Document Control Desk NO/RPC:vlh Washington, D. C. 20555 Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 DPR-37 Gentlemen:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 MONTHL V OPERATING REPORT Enclosed is the Monthly Operating Report for Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 for the month of December 1992.

Very truly yours, M. L. Bowling, Manager Nuclear Licensing & Programs Enclosure cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, N. W.

Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. M. W. Branch NRC Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station

' ) r\ ,.. 0 -:  !1 r-*9ao1210094 921231 --~,.

' PDR ADOCK 05000280 R PDR

I, e

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT REPORT NO. 92-12 Approved:

e Surry Monthly Operating Report

- No. 92-12 Page 2of 21 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Operating Data Report - Unit No. 1 ......................................................................................................... 3 Operating Data Report - Unit No. 2 ......................................................................................................... 4 Unit Shutdowns and Power Reductions - Unit No. 1.................................................................................... 5 Unit Shutdowns and Power Reductions - Unit No. 2 .................................................................................... 6 Average Daily Unit Power Level - Unit No. 1.............................................................................................. 7 Average Daily Unit Power Level - Unit No. 2 .............................................................................................. 8 Summary of Operating Experience - Unit No. 1 ...................,. ..................................................................... 9 Summary of Operating Experience - Unit No. 2 ......................................................................................... 9 Facility Changes That Did Not Require NRC Approval. .............................................................................. 1O Procedure or Method of Operation Changes That Did Not Require NRC Approval ........................................... 17 Tests and Experiments That Did Not Require NRC Approval ...................................................................... 18 Chemistry Report ............................................................................................................................. 19 Fuel Handling - Unit No. 1 ................................................................................................................... 20 Fuel Handling - Unit No. 2 ....................... , ........................................................................................... 20 Description of Periodic Test(s) Which Were Not Completed Within the Time Limits Specified in Technical Specifications ................................................................................................... 21

Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 3 of 21 OPERATING DATA REPORT Docket No.: 50-280 Date: 01-08-92 Completed By: D. Mason Telephone: (804) 365-2459

1. Unit Name: .................................................. . Surry Unit 1

2. Reporting Period: ......................................... . December 1992

3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt): ..................... .. 2441

4. Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe): ...................... . 847.5

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 Month YID Cumulative

11. Hours In Reporting Period ........................ .. 744.0 8784.0 175560.0

12. Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical ......... . 744.0 7140.8 115375.0

13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours .............. . 0.0 0.0 3774.5

14. Hours Generator On-Line .......................... . 744.0 7035.2 113275.4

15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours .................... . 0.0 0.0 3736.2

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) ..... . 1804738.7 16502602.4 263619279.1

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) .. .. 610375.0 5503065.0 86018253.0

18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ...... .. 580659.0 5223794.0 81597860.0

19. Unit Service Factor ................................. .. 100.0% 80.1% 64.5%

20. Unit Availability Factor .............................. . 100.0% 80.1% 66.7%

21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) .......... . 99.9% 76.1% 60.0%

22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) .......... . 99.0% 75.5% 59.0%

23. Unit Forced Outage Rate .......................... .. 0.0% 3.2% 18.4%

24. Shutdowns Schedule Over Next 6 Months (Type, Date, and Duration of Each):

25. If Shut Down at End of Report Period Estimated Date of Start-up:

26. Unit In Test Status (Prior to Commercial Operation):

FORECAST ACHIEVED INITIAL CRITICALITY INITIAL ELECTRICITY COMMERCIAL OPERATION

OPERATING DATA REPORT

• Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 4of 21 Docket No.: 50-281 Date: 01-08-92 Completed By: D. Mason Telephone: (804) 365-2459

1. Unit Name: .................................................. . Surry Unit 2

2. Reporting Period: ......................................... . December 1992

3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt): ...................... . 2441

4. Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe): ...................... . 847.5

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 Month YTD Cumulative

11. Hours In Reporting Period .......................... 744.0 8784.0 172440.0

12. Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical .......... 744.0 8478.8 113686.9

13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours ............... 0.0 0.0 328.1

14. Hours Generator On-Line ........................... 744.0 8470.1 111931.0

15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours..................... 0.0 0.0 0.0

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) ...... 1805266.0 20452391.7 261331073.8

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) .... 602575.0 6762055.0 85195904.0

18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ........ 573019.0 6426475.0 80790413.0

19. Unit Service Factor ................................... 100.0% 96.4% 64.9%

20. Unit Availability Factor ............................... 100.0% 96.4% 64.9%

21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net)........... 98.6% 93.7% 60.1%

22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) ........... 97.7% 92.8% 59.5%

23. Unit Forced Outage Rate ............................ 0.0% 0.0% 14.4%

24. Shutdowns Schedule Over Next 6 Months (Type, Date, and Duration of Each):

Refueling, March 6, 1993 -- 64 days.

25. If Shut Down at End of Report Period Estimated Date of Start-up:

26. Unit In Test Status (Prior to Commercial Operation):

FORECAST ACHIEVED INITIAL CRITICALITY INITIAL ELECTRICITY COMMERCIAL OPERATION

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 5 of 21 UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTION (EQUAL To OR GREATER THAN 20%)

REPORT MONTH: December 1992 Docket No.: 50-280 Unit Name: Surry Unit 1 Date: 01-08-92 Completed by: Anthony Xenakis Telephone: (804) 365-2145 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Method Duration of LER System Component Cause & Corrective Action to Date Type Hours Reason .. Shutting No. Code Code Prevent Recurrence Down Rx 921222 s 0 B 4 NIA EL FAN Unit power was reduced from 100% to 65% to perform maintenance on "C" Isolated Phase Bus Duct Cooling Fan.

(1) (2) (3)

F: Forced REASON: METHOD:

S: Scheduled A - Equipment Failure (Explain) 1 - Manual B Maintenance or Test 2 - Manual Scram.

C Refueling 3 - Automatic Scram.

D Regulatory Restriction 4 - Other (Explain)

E Operator Training & Licensing Examination F Administrative G Operational Error (Explain)

(4) (5)

Exhibit G - Instructions for Preparation of Data Entry Sheets Exhibit 1 - Same Source.

for Licensee Event Report (LER) File (NUREG 0161)

e UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTION (EQUAL To OR GREATER THAN 20%)

- Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 6 of 21 REPORT MONTH: December 1992 Docket No.: 50-281 Unit Name: Surry Unit 2 Date: 01-08-92 Completed by: Anthony Xenakis Telephone: (804) 365-2145 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Method Duration of LER System Component Cause & Corrective Action to Date Type Hours Reason Shutting No. Code Code Prevent Recurrence Down Rx 921225 F 0 A 4 N/A SJ JX Unit power was reduced from 100% to 75% when both DC power supplies on the "Network 90" Feedwater Control System failed. The failure was caused by the loss of the cabinet cooling fans and resulted in a loss of both low pressure heater drain pumps and the running high pressure heater drain pump. The unit was stabilized at 90% power and subsequently reduced to 75% power in order to return the Condensate Polishing system to service.

(1) (2) (3)

F: Forced REASON: METHOD:

S: Scheduled A - Equipment Failure (Explain) 1 - Manual B Maintenance or Test 2 - Manual Scram.

C Refueling 3 - Automatic Scram.

D Regulatory Restriction 4 - Other (Explain)

E Operator Training & Licensing Examination F Administrative G Operational Error (Explain)

(4) (5)

Exhibit G - Instructions for Preparation of Data Entry Sheets Exhibit 1 - Same Source.

for Licensee Event Report (LER) File (NUREG 0161)

Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page ?of 21 AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL Docket No.: 50-280 Unit Name: Surry Unit 1 Date: 01-08-92 Completed by: M.A. Negron Telephone: (804) 365-2795 Month: December 1992 Average Daily Power Level Average Daily Power Level Day (MWe- Net) Day (MWe- Net) 1 785 17 786 2 785 18 786 3 786 19 786 4 786 20 786 5 786 21 785 6 785 22 692 7 786 23 745 8 778 24 785 9 787 25 783 10 787 26 785 11 784 27 785 12 787 28 785 13 787 29 785 14 787 30 780 15 788 31 768 16 788 INSTRUCTIONS 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.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 8 of 21 AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL Docket No.: 50-281 Unit Name: Surry Unit 2 Date: 01-08-92 Completed by: M.A. Negron Telephone: (804) 365-2795 Month: December 1992 Average Daily Power Level Average Daily Power Level Day (MWe-Net) Day (MWe- Net) 1 773 17 776 2 774 18 776 3 775 19 776 4 775 20 776 5 775 21 778 6 776 22 778 7 775 23 776 8 775 24 776 9 772 25 611 10 774 26 771 11 776 27 778 12 777 28 778 13 776 29 778 14 776 30 777 15 775 31 777 16 771 INSTRUCTIONS 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.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 9 of 21

SUMMARY

OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 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 12-01-92 0000 This reporting period began with the Unit operating at 100% power, 825 MWe.

12-22-92 0935 Started ramp down to perform 1-0SP-TM-001 and maintenance on the "C" Isolated Phase Bus Duct Cooling Fan; 100% power, 825 MWe.

2000 Stopped ramp; 65% power, 520 MWe.

12-23-92 0149 Started ramp up; 66% power, 535 MWe.

0530 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 825 MWe.

12-30-92 2209 Started power reduction to maintain condenser vacuum while cleaning water boxes; 100%

power, 825 MWe.

2223 Stopped power reduction; 93% power, 780 MWe.

12-31-92 0439 Started ramp up; 91 % power, 760 MWe.

0621 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 825 MWe.

2400 This reporting period ended with the Unit operating at 100% power, 825 MWe.

UNIT TWO 12-01-92 0000 This reporting period began with the Unit operating at 100% power, 810 MWe.

12-25-92 0352 The Unit experienced a secondary transient while operating at 100% power, 815 MWe, resulting in a loss of both Low Pressure Heater Drain Pumps and the running High Pressure Heater Drain Pump. Power was reduced to 90%, 700 MWe. The transient was caused by the failure of both DC power supplies to the "Network 90" Feedwater Control System. This failure resulted from the loss of the cabinet cooling fans.

0601 Started power reduction to place the Condensate Polishing system in service; 90% power, 675MWe.

0652 Stopped power reduction; 75% power, 600 MWe.

2230 Started ramp up; 80% power, 630 MWe.

12-26-92 0232 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 815 MWe.

12-31-92 2400 This reporting period ended with the Unit operating at 100% power, 820 MWe.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 10 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 DCP 84-27 Design Change Package 12-03-92 This Design Change Package installed new positive displacement type pumps on the Units 1 and 2 condenser leak detection systems.

The modification enhanced the operating capability of the condenser leak detection system. It did not affect the design or operation of safety-related systems or components. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

EWA 91-080 Engineering Work Request 12-03-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-025)

This Engineering Work Request installed an orifice plate in the Unit 1 charging pump 1-CH-P-1A thrust bearing oil inlet port to ensure proper flow to the thrust bearing and the inner bearing.

The modification ensures the subject pump's bearings are properly lubricated and does not alter the safety-related function of the pump. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

EWA 89-770 Engineering Work Request 12-04-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-222)

This Engineering Work Request (EWA) changed the condensate pump recirculation controller's setpoint to 3600 gpm for single pump operation and

.s,4500 gpm when two or more pumps are running. This change was made due to the high vibration, cavitation, and erosion experienced at higher flow rates.

This change ensures adequate pump cooling is provided at the lower flow rates and reduces the potential for recirculation line failures. The condensate recirculation controls are nonsafety-related and do not impact safety-related equipment. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

SE 92-245 Safety Evaluation 12-08-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed, as a result of a review of Information Notice 91-40, to evaluate the potential for unmonitored, uncontrolled radiation releases to the environment from the chilled water system.

The evaluation concluded that a chiller heat exchanger tube leak to the service water system would be required for a release to the discharge canal to occur.

In the event of such a leak, minimal service water system flow would dilute contamination levels to well below the maximum release levels. Periodic sampling is performed to monitor system contamination levels to ensure a release can be adequately diluted. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 11 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 SE 92-246 Safety Evaluation 12-08-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed, as a result of a review of Information Notice 91-40, to evaluate the potential for unmonitored, uncontrolled radiation releases to the environment from the auxiliary steam system drains (from the auxiliary building).

The evaluation concluded that contamination from a leaking pipe or spill to the floor drains would be required for a release to the discharge canal to occur. In the event of such a leak or spill, minimal circulating/service water system flow would dilute contamination levels to well below the maximum release levels. Periodic sampling is performed to monitor system contamination levels to ensure a release can be adequately diluted. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

SE 92-247 Safety Evaluation 12-08-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed, as a result of a review of Information Notice 91-40, to evaluate the potential for unmonitored, uncontrolled radiation releases to the environment from the component cooling (CC) system.

The evaluation concluded that a CC system heat exchanger tube leak to the service water system would be required for a release to the discharge canal to occur. In the event of such a leak, minimal service water system flow would dilute contamination levels to well below the maximum release levels. Periodic sampling is performed to monitor system contamination levels to ensure a release can be adequately diluted. System gases are also monitored at the CC system surge tank and are vented to the process vent system. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

SE 92-248 Safety Evaluation 12-08-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed, as a result of a review of Information Notice 91-40, to evaluate the potential for unmonitored, uncontrolled radiation releases to the environment from the containment subsurface drain system.

The evaluation concluded that existing contamination levels (undiluted) are less than that permitted by 1o CFR 20 for release to the environment. These low contamination levels are further diluted by the circulating and service water systems prior to release. The system is also sampled daily to ensure compliance with Technical Specifications. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 12 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 TM S1-92-40 Temporary Modification 12-1 0-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-249)

This Temporary Modification (TM) lifted electrical leads on the Agastat timer for the Unit 1 "C" isophase bus duct cooling fan low air flow alarm circuit to facilitate repairs to the circuit.

This TM enabled the inoperable alarm circuit to be restored to service. Safety-related systems, structures and turbine/generator protective functions were not affected. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

TM S1-92-41 Temporary Modification 12-11-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-250)

This Temporary Modification (TM) installed a temporary Unit 1 condensate pump discharge dissolved oxygen sample system. This system is being used while maintenance is being performed on the permanent on-line system.

This TM does not affect safety-related systems or structures and remains bounded by the steam generator tube rupture accident analysis. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

FS 92-41 UFSAR Change 12-15-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-252)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Section 14.3.3, "Rupture of a Control Rod Drive Mechanism Housing (Control Rod Assembly Ejection)" is being changed to reflect a revised rod cluster control assembly (RCCA) ejection analysis. The new analysis was performed to provide margin to offset trends of higher peaking factors due to fuel assembly and operational changes.

The new analysis requires operation within the bounds of the existing Technical Specifications and indicates that the applicable analysis limits will continue to be met for both Units. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

EWR 91-089 Engineering Work Request 12-16-92 (Safety Evaluation No.91-206)

This Engineering Work Request installed transparent covers on the emergency diesel generator's (EOG) governor limit switch housings to allow observation of match markings on the speed control gears.

The modification will help to ensure the EDGs function as designed and operate within the desired speed and frequency ranges. The change does not affect accidents evaluated in the UFSAR. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 13 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 EWR 91-111 Engineering Work Request 12-16-92 (Safety Evaluation No.91-196)

This Engineering Work Request (EWR) removed the electric motor driver from the diesel powered emergency service water pump 1-SW-P-1 A. The EWR also modified the shaft coupling from the diesel motor to the pump and replaced the piping from the oil cooler to the pump casing.

The electric motor driver is not safety-related and performs no function during an accident. The diesel engine drive train for the pump remains fully operable and the safety function of the pump is not compromised. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

DCP 90-013 Design Change Package 12-17-92 This Design Change Package replaced the motor operators of Unit 1 charging (CH), safety injection (SI), and feedwater (FW) system motor operated valves (MOV), 1-CH-MOV-1287A, 1-CH-MOV-1287B, 1-SI-MOV-1869B, 1-SI-MOV-1842, 1-FW-MOV-160A, and 1-FW-MOV-160B with larger similarly designed motor operators to ensure the affected valves will perform their intended function under postulated system conditions.

The modification was performed at cold shutdown. The replacement motor operators are seismically and environmentally qualified and do not change the valve function or impact the system design basis. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

DR S-92-1936 Deviation Report 12-17-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-253)

This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate Deviation Report S-92-1936 concerning the need to bypass the individual rod position indication (IRPI) dropped rod turbine runback signal while repairing Unit 2 control rod bank "C" PIA converter power supplies.

The power range nuclear instrumentation dropped rod runback and rod stop signals remained operable during this activity and the control rods were fully capable of being tripped manually or by the reactor protection system.

Furthermore, a separate evaluation (Safety Evaluation 92-059) concluded that blocking the IRPI turbine runback signal does not alter the actual or predicted consequences or affect the probability of occurrence of the dropped rod event.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 14of 21 MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 EWR 90-320 Engineering Work Request 12-17-92 This Engineering Work Request (EWR) replaced ventilation system pump 1-VS-P-1 C and motor due to operational problems with the pump and the inability to obtain replacement parts.

The replacement motor is identical and the pump has operating characteristics similar to the original. The modification does not affect the seismic qualification of the ventilation system and does not compromise the pump's safety function. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

SE 92-254 Safety Evaluation 12-17-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate a revised analytical basis which allows the disabling of the turbine runback and control rod withdrawal block protection upon indication of one or more dropped rods for the remainder of the Unit 2, cycle 11 .

It was concluded that implementation of this revised methodology would not alter the actual or predicted consequences or affect the probability of occurrence of the dropped rod event. Plant changes, implemented based on the revised methodology, will be evaluated individually to ensure changes to related hardware and procedures are properly addressed. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

FS 88-56 UFSAR Change 12-22-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-258)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Chapters 5, "Containment System," and 6, "Engineered Safeguards," are being revised to incorporate various minor editorial modifications and clarifications and to reflect previously analyzed and evaluated system and setpoint changes The subject changes are administrative in nature and will improve the quality and consistency of the UFSAR. No unanalyzed hardware or software changes are included. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

FS 90-51 UFSAR Change 12-22-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-256)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Section 14.3.1, "Steam-Generator Tube Rupture," is being changed to reflect current emergency operating procedures to revise the description of the air ejector divert to containment and to discuss the steam generator tube uncovery issue.

These changes are administrative in nature and reflect previously approved analyses, procedures, and design configurations. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 15 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 FS 92-10 UFSAR Change 12-22-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-257)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Sections 11.3.2, "Shielding Design and Evaluation," 11.3.6, "Control Areas," and 14.5, "Loss-of-Coolant Accident," are being revised to reflect revised control room and off-site loss of coolant accident dose analyses.

These changes are administrative in nature and do not involve physical or procedural changes. In addition, the subject analyses have been reviewed and approved by the NRC. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

TM S2-92-28 Temporary Modification 1 2-22-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-259)

This Temporary Modification (TM) installed electrical jumpers to maintain electrical circuit continuity during the replacement of failed Unit 2 reactor protection system train "A" relay, FC-474.

This TM was used to maintain the safety injection (SI) system "A" train function during this activity. Double verification of the jumper installation/removal and post maintenance testing were performed. The SI "B" train logic was not affected. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

EWR 85-430 Engineering Work Request 12-23-92 This Engineering Work Request (EWR) installed sample lines and sinks for the refueling water storage tank (RWST) and the caustic addition tank (CAT) in each Unit's safeguards area to provide a more representative sample and safer sampling point.

The sample lines and sink were seismically installed and utilized existing sample line connections. Implementation of the modification did not impact the containment spray or safety injection systems. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

EWR 90-100 Engineering Work Request 1 2-23-92 (Safety Evaluation No.90-171)

This Engineering Work Request upgraded the vital battery room ventilation system in order to maintain the average temperature at a level that is appropriate for best battery performance.

The modification enhanced the operating capability of the nonsafety-related battery room ventilation system and did not adversely affect the licensing basis of the plant. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 16 of 21 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 TM S2-92-29 Temporary Modification 12-23-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-260)

This Temporary Modification (TM) installed electrical jumpers to maintain electrical circuit continuity during the replacement of failed Unit 2 reactor protection system train "A" test switch, FC-474-TA.

This TM was used to maintain the safety injection (SI) "A" train function during this activity. Double verification of the jumper installation/removal and post maintenance testing were performed. The SI "B" train logic was not affected.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

QA Topical Report Quality Assurance Topical Report 12-29-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-265)

The QA Topical Report Table 17.2.0, "Conformance of the Company's Operational Quality Assurance Program to NRC Regulatory Guides and ANSI Standards," is being revised to reflect current administrative processes.

This is only an administrative change that will not reduce the margins of safety or adversely impact the probability or consequences of an accident. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

TM S2-92-30 Temporary Modification 12-29-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-264)

This Temporary Modification (TM) installed a temporary hydrogen gas dryer in parallel with the existing dryer in order to remove excessive moisture from the Unit 2 main generator.

This TM does not affect safety-related systems or structures and is not applicable to previously evaluated design basis accidents. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 17 of 21 PROCEDURE OR METHOD OF OPERATION CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 2-0P-30.8 Operating Procedure 12-22-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-255)

Unit 2 Operating Procedure 2-0P-30.8, "Condensate Polishing - Chemical Waste Discharge" was revised to provide instructions for bypassing the waste neutralization sump discharge filters (when out of service) to release radioactively contaminated liquids from the waste neutralization sump to the discharge canal.

A release form from the Health Physics department is required prior to performing this activity which ensures the liquids are properly sampled and controlled. This activity does not affect the total assumed radioactive release from the station and does not permit regulatory limits to be exceeded.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

SE 92-262 Safety Evaluation 12-29-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate operation of the Unit 1 main turbine in the manual operating mode while maintenance is being performed on the automatic operating mode circuitry.

It was concluded that the main turbine is capable (by design) of operating in the manual operation mode without adversely affecting plant operations or posing a significant safety hazard. Furthermore, manual mode operation does not impact turbine overspeed or reactor protection circuitry. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 18 of 21 TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 ST-303 Speclal Test - Containment Instrument Air Quality 12-15-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-125)

This special test was performed to evaluate the solid particulate matter in the containment instrument air system. The results of the test indicate that there is minimal solid particulate matter in the system.

Two temporary quick disconnects were added to the containment instrument air system to facilitate this testing. These temporary modifications were independently evaluated (Safety Evaluation 92-217) and previously reported as TM S1 37 and TM S2-92-25. The quantity of air required for this testing was small and well within the capacity of the containment instrument air compressor. In the event of a transient, the control room would have notified an operator (stationed at the test point) to close an isolation valve, terminating air flow to the test devices. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 19 of 21 CHEMISTRY REPORT MONTH/YEAR: December 1992 Unit No. 1 Unit No. 2 Primarv Coolant Analvsis Max. Min. Ava. Max. Min. Ava.

Gross Radioact., uCi/ml 4.02E-1 2.63E-1 3.26E-1 2.33E-1 1.33E-1 1.86E-1 Suspended Solids, oom < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Gross Tritium, uCi/ml 3.SOE-1 3.29E-1 3.52E-1 2.72E-1 1.45E-1 2.24E-1 1131, µCi/ml 8.66E-4 5.41E-4 6.80E-4 5.66E-4 2.56E-4 3.97E-4 113111133 0.14 0.07 0.09 0.14 0.07 0.10 Hvdroaen, cc/ka 38.9 27.8 33.0 36.4 29.1 33.6 Lithium, oom 2.30 2.07 2.21 1.73 1.24 1.48 Boron - 10, oom* 172.1 158.8 165.9 39.8 20.6 30.2 Oxvaen, (DO), oom < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Chloride, oom #< 0.050 0.003 0.006 #< 0.050 < 0.001 0.003 oH at 25 dearee Celsius 6.92 6.62 6.77 7.57 7.29 7.43

• Boron - 1O= Total Boron x 0.196 Comments:

1. - Calorimetric method used. Ion Chromatograph out-of-service for repairs.

FUEL HANDLING

• Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 20 of 21 UNITS 1 & 2 MONTH/VEAR: December 1992 New or Spent Number of New or Spent Fuel Shipment Date Stored or Assemblies Assembly ANSI Initial Fuel Shipping Number Received eer Shiement Number Number Enrichment Cask Activi!Y Unit2 (Total Batch 14 12-15-92 12 5W1 LMOX3S 4.0 Shipment)

Shipment 1 15.16 Ci 4W2 LMOX3H 4.0 3W5 LMOX3A 4.0 3W8 LMOX3D 4.0 3W9 LMOX3E 4.0 4W9 LMOX3Q 4.0 4W3 LMOX3J 4.0 4W4 LMOX3K 4.0 4W6 LMOX3M 4.0 4W8 LMOX3P 4.0 5W3 LMOX3U 4.0 5WO LMOX3R 4.0

l Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-12 Page 21 of 21 DESCRIPTION OF PERIODIC TEST(S) WHICH WERE NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMITS SPECIFIED IN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MONTH/VEAR: December 1992 None During This Reporting Period.