ML18153D123

Monthly Operating Repts for August 1992 for Surry Power Station Units 1 & 2.W/920914 Ltr

ML18153D123
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	08/31/1992
From:	Bowling M, Negron M VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
92-594, NUDOCS 9209180330
Download: ML18153D123 (21)

Text

' , e e VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 September 14, 1992 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial No.92-594 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 August 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 210022 1 *\'j

~209180330 920831

!

PDR ADOCK 05000280 i . -.

R PDR /

'\

~--- ---------

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT REPORT NO. 92-08 Approved:

/J Ji~

-w.z=-

-Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 2of 20 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. .............................................................................. 11 Procedure or Method of Operation Changes That Did Not Require NRC Approval ........................................... 15 Tests and Experiments That Did Not Require NRC Approval ...................................................................... 17 Chemistry Report ............................................................................................................................. 18 Fuel Handling - Unit No. 1 ................................................................................................................... 19 Fuel Handling - Unit No. 2 ................................................................................................................... 19 Description of Periodic Test(s) Which Were Not Completed Within the Time Limits Specified in Technical Specifications ................................................................................................... 20

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 3 of 20 OPERATING DATA REPORT Docket No.: 50-280 Date: 09-08-92 Completed By: D. Mason Telephone: (804) 365-2459

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

2. Reporting Period: ......................................... . August 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 5855.0 172631.0

12. Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical ......... . 744.0 4211.8 112446.0

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

14. Hours Generator On-Line ......................... .. 744.0 4156.6 110396.8

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

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) ..... . 1801281.0 9525457.0 256642133.7

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ... . 587010.0 3163555.0 83678743.0

18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ....... . 556482.0 2999741.0 79373807.0

19. Unit Service Factor. ................................. . 100.0% 71.0% 63.9%

20. Unit Availability Factor.............................. . 100.0% 71.0% 66.1%

21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net).......... . 95.8% 65.6% 59.3%

22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) .......... . 94.9% 65.0% 58.3%

23. Unit Forced Outage Rate ........................... . 0.0% 4.1% 18.8%

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

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 4of 20 OPERATING DATA REPORT Docket No.: 50-281 Date: 09-08-92 Completed By: D. Mason Telephone: (804) 365-2459

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

2. Reporting Period: ......................................... . August 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 5855.0 169511.0

12. Number of Hours Reactor Was Critical ......... . 744.0 5549.8 110757.9

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

14. Hours Generator On-Line .......................... . 744.0 5541.1 109002.0

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

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) ..... . 1783296.8 13322076.4 254200758.5

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ... . 576300.0 4401885.0 82835734.0

18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) ....... . 546446.0 4183461.0 78547399.0

19. Unit Service Factor .................................. . 100.0% 94.6% 64.3%

20. Unit Availability Factor.............................. . 100.0% 94.6% 64.3%

21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) .......... . 94.0% 91.5% 59.4%

22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) .......... . 93.2% 90.7% 58.8%

23. Unit Forced Outage Rate ........................... . 0.0% 0.0% " 14.7%

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

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 5of 20 UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTION (EQUAL To OR GREATER THAN 20%)

REPORT MONTH: August 1992 Docket No.: 50-280 Unit Name: Surry Unit 1 Date: 09-08-92 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 920817 F 0 A 4 NIA EL FAN Reduced Unit power to 68% to repair an isolated phase bus duct cooling fan. Power must be reduced to limit individual phase currents to 14,500 amps upon loss of 1 of 2 fans.

920828 s 0 B 4 N/A SG COND Reduced Unit power ot 70.5%

power to maintain condenser vacuum while cleaning waterboxes.

(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)

1

- Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 6 of 20 UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTION (EQUAL To OR GREATER THAN 20%)

REPORT MONTH: August 1992 Docket No.: 50-281 Unit Name: Surry Unit 2 Date: 09-08-92 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 No entries for this reporting period.

(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 e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 7of 20 AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL Docket No.: 50-280 Unit Name: Surry Unit 1 Date: 09-08-92 Completed by: M.A. Negron Telephone: (804) 365-2795 Month: August 1992 Average Daily Power Level Average Daily Power Level Day (MWe-Net) Day (MWe-Net) 1 759 17 654 2 760 18 755 3 759 19 754 4 758 20 754 5 757 21 755 6 754 22 738 7 762 23 753 8 758 24 751 9 757 25 748 10 752 26 748 11 748 27 747 12 748 28 738 13 752 29 681 14 758 30 757 15 760 31 751 16 760 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. 92-08 Page 8of 20 AVERAGE DAILY UNIT POWER LEVEL Docket No.: 50-281 Unit Name: Surry Unit 2 Date: 09-08-92 Completed by: M.A. Negron Telephone: (804) 365-2795 Month: August 1992 Average Daily Power Level Average Daily Power Level Day (MWe- Net) Day (MWe-Net) 1 582 17 757

• 2 630 18 755 3 667 19 753 4 682 20 753 5 757 21 753 6 755 22 751 7 759 23 751 8 756 24 747 9 756 25 745 10 747 26 742 11 745 27 739 12 747 28 740 13 749 29 721 14 753 30 716 15 758 31 750 16 758 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.

I

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 9of 20

SUMMARY

OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE MONTH/YEAR: August 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 08-01-92 0000 This reporting period started with the Unit operating at 100% power, 795 MWe.

08-17-92 0651 Started ramp down to repair an Isolated Phase Bus Duct Cooling Fan; 100% power, 800 MWe.

0907 Stopped ramp; 68% power, 520 MWe.

1645 Started ramp up after repairs to fan were completed; 67.8% power 535 MWe.

1842 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 795 MWe.

08-22-92 1328 Started ramp down to swap High Pressure Heater Drain Pumps; 100% power, 800 MWe.

1443 Stopped ramp; 85% power, 670 MWe.

1706 Started ramp up; 84.4% power, 670 MWe.

1820 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 790 MWe.

08-28-92 2140 Started power reduction to maintain condenser vacuum while cleaning waterboxes; 100%

power, 790 MWe.

08-29-92 0135 Stopped power reduction; 70.5% power, 510 MWe.

0405 Started ramp up; 71 % power, 530 MWe.

1440 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 800 MWe.

08-31-92 2209 Started power reduction to maintain condenser vacuum while cleaning waterboxes; 100%

power.

2400 This reporting period ended with the Unit operating at 88% power, 670 MWe.

UNIT TWO 08-01-92 0000 This reporting period started with the Unit operating at 79% power, 61 O MWe due to waterbox hydrolasing operations.

2025 Started ramp up as condenser vacuum allowed; 79% power,610 MWe.

2213 Stopped ramp; 87% power, 670 MWe.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 10of 20 MONTH/YEAR: August 1992

[continued)

UNIT TWO [continued) 08-03-92 0308 Started ramp up; 87% power, 685 MWe.

0436 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 770 MWe.

1303 Started ramp down to maintain condenser vacuum while cleaning waterboxes; 99.5%

power, 760 MWe.

1425 Stopped ramp; 83% power, 655 MWe.

08-04-92 0845 Started power increase as vacuum allowed; 86% power, 670 MWe.

1645 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 795 MWe.

08-29-92 1858 Started ramp down to maintain vacuum; 100% power, 780 MWe.

1941 Stopped ramp; 89% power, 680 MWe.

08-30-92 0909 Started ramp up; 89.5% power, 715 MWe.

1026 Stopped ramp; 100% power, 800 MWe.

08-31-92 2400 This report period ended with the Unit operating at 100% power and 800 MWe.

-Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 11 of 20 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 EWR 88-156 Engineering Work Request 08-1 0-92 This Engineering Work Request replaced the Units 1 and 2 gaseous drains (DG) system diaphragm type valves, 1-DG-14 and 2-DG-14, with ball type valves.

This action was taken to upgrade the valves and improve their reliability.

The replacement valves meet applicable codes, standards, design and seismic requirements. The replacement valves perform the same function as the originals and do not affect the operation of the DG system. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

EWR 90-078 Engineering Work Request 08-13-92 (Safety Evaluation No.90-080)

This Engineering Work Request evaluated operating only one main control room chiller during periods with low heat loads. This mode of operation is desirable since winter heat loads are too low during normal operation to operate two chillers. The second chiller can be started to handle accident heat loads.

This evaluation concluded that operating only one chiller would result in a bulk air temperature increase of 8 °F in the warmest areas. The equipment affected by this operating change is designed to operate at temperatures that are higher than expected bulk air temperatures. In addition, it is assumed that adequate 1*

time will exist for starting a second chiller in order to ensure that heat loads will be removed and room temperatures are maintained within design assumption in the event of an accident. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 12 of 20 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992

[continued]

AC S2-92-0807 Administrative Control 08-13-92 (Safety Evaluation No. 92-173A)

Administrative control of Unit 2 steam generator "C" feedwater isolation motor operated valve, 2-FW-MOV-254C, was established in order to close the valve in the event of a reactor trip or safety injection signal. Administrative control of this valve was required while feedwater regulating valve, 2-FW-FCV-2498 was jacked open (preventing performance of its automatic safety function) to facilitate repair work.

This activity did not affect the operation of other systems or components. The subject isolation valve was controlled by a licensed operator who was capable of closing the valve (from the control room) within 30 seconds following a feedwater isolation signal. This capability ensured that the activity was bounded by the main steam line break accident analysis. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

SE-92-174 Safety Evaluation 08-13-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate the impact of a Unit 1 condensate storage system leak (3 gpm) on the auxiliary feedwater (AFW) system.

The evaluation determined that the leak does not affect the operation or performance of the AFW pumps or lube oil cooler since the leak is downstream of these components. Furthermore, it was determined that the emergency condensate storage tank and alternate sources provide sufficient capacity to make-up for losses due to leakage and still meet system design requirements.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question does not exist.

FS 90-68 UFSAR Change 08-13-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-175)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Section 8.5, "Emergency Power Station" was revised to delete the reference to an "actual" emergency diesel generator (EDG) loading value since it is subject to change and is controlled by an engineering calculation.

The change is administrative in nature. No procedures are affected and no physical modifications are involved. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 13 of 20 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992

[continued]

FS 91-24 UFSAR Change 08-13-92 (Safety Evaluation 92-176)

The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Section 14.2.9.2, "Locked Rotor Incident" is being revised to reflect the results of the reanalysis of the locked rotor event. The reanalysis was performed in response to a change in the reactor coolant pump locked rotor coefficient.

The assumptions used in the reanalysis were equivalent to or more conservative with respect to the currently docketed locked rotor event analysis. The change affects no procedures and requires no physical modifications. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

SE-92-183 Safety Evaluation 08-21-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate venting the Unit 2 pressurizer relief tank (PRT) to containment. This activity was performed to reduce the pressure in the PRT.

The evaluation determined that this activity posed no design or operational concerns. The containment atmosphere was sampled prior to the activity to ensure explosive gas concentrations were not present. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

DR S-92-0785 Deviation Report 08-25-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-184)

This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate Deviation Report S-92-0785 concerning Unit 1 operation with the condenser air ejector vent to containment trip valve 1-SV-TV-102A closed. The valve was closed to isolate leakage through containment trip valve 1-SV-TV-102 and prevent an increase in containment partial pressure.

The evaluation determined that this operating condition is acceptable since the applicable Annunciator Response and Emergency procedures require control room operators to open the subject valve (if necessary) when a condenser air ejector high activity alarm is received. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 14of 20 FACILITY CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 DR S-92-1228 Deviation Report 08-27-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-186)

This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate Deviation Report S-92-1228 concerning Unit 1 operation with the steam generator (SG) "B" atmospheric power operated relief valve (PORV) isolated. The PORV was isolated due to excessive leakage.

The evaluation determined that this operating condition is acceptable since the SG PORVs are assumed to be unavailable in the accident analyses and the subject PORV can be unisolated if needed for temperature or pressure control.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

SE-92-185 Safety Evaluation 08-27-92 This Safety Evaluation was performed to evaluate Unit 2 operation with the pressurizer relief tank primary grade water outside trip valve, 2-RC-TV-2519A, deactivated in the closed position. The valve was deactivated and closed following its failure in the intermediate position.

The evaluation determined that this operating condition is acceptable since the subject valve is normally closed and, in this position, ensures containment integrity. Furthermore, a review of applicable accident analyses identified no credible correlation with this operating condition. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

e e Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 15 of 20 PROCEDURE OR METHOD OF OPERATION CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 QLCR R92-080 Q-Llst Change Request 08-13-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-177)

This Q-List Change Request changes the classification of the Unit 1 and 2 pressurizer relief tanks (PRT) from "Safety-Related" (SR) to "Nonsafety-Related with Special Quality/Regulatory Requirements" (NSQ).

An evaluation of this change determined that the PRTs do not perform a safe shutdown function and are not required for accident mitigation. Furthermore, there is no failure mechanism associated with the PRTs that could result in a design basis accident. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

1-TOP-4018 Temporary Operating Procedure 08-21-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-182)

Temporary Operating Procedure 1-TOP-4018, "Shutdown of Auxiliary Ventilation System" was developed to install a blank flange in the suction and discharge paths the of auxiliary building ventilation exhaust fan 1-VS-F-56A.

The blank flanges were installed to facilitate repairs to the fan, damper, and duct flexible joints.

The TOP provides instructions for temporarily shutting down the auxiliary ventilation system to enable the installation/removal of the blank flanges. It also includes precautions and guidance to closely monitor charging pump temperatures during the short period of time in which the exhaust fans are secured. In addition, both trains of the auxiliary ventilation filtered exhaust system are required to be operable and in the automatic control mode during this activity. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

1-NSP-CC-003

• Engineering Surveillance Procedures 08-21-92 1-NSP-CC-004 (Safety Evaluation No.92-181)

Engineering Surveillance Procedures 1-NSP-CC-003, "Performance Test of Component Cooling Heat Exchanger 1-CC-E-1 C" and 1-NSP-CC-004, "Performance Test of Component Cooling Heat Exchanger 1-CC-E-1 D" were revised ("one-time only" change) to install a Rosemount pressure transmitter in parallel with the component cooling heat exchanger (CCHX) service water (SW) delta pressure indicator to provide performance data.

The temporary transmitters were installed using fittings and tubing used to connect the existing indicators. The reliability or integrity of the system was not impacted. Therefore, an unreviewed safety question was not created.

L

-Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 16 of 20 PROCEDURE OR METHOD OF OPERATION CHANGES THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992

[continued]

EMP-C-EPDC-181 Corrective Electrical Maintenance Procedure 08-27-92 (Safety Evaluation No.92-189)

Corrective Electrical Maintenance Procedure, EPM-C-EPDC-181, "Exide Type 2GN-23 Main Station Battery Equalizing Charge" was revised to include all Exide batteries and allow the use of a portable battery charger in the battery room.

This change requires the battery room ventilation system to be operating while performing the procedure to ensure the hydrogen concentration is maintained below the combustible level. The procedure also permits only two cells to be charged concurrently to limit the maximum potential voltage transient to 5.2 VDC, which would not affect any important relays, controls or logic circuits.

Therefore, an unreviewed safety question is not created.

-Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 17of 20 TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS THAT DID NOT REQUIRE NRC APPROVAL MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 None during this reporting period.

-Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 18 of 20 CHEMISTRY REPORT MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 Unit No. 1 Unit No. 2 Primary Coolant Analysis Max. Min. Ava. Max. Min. Avo.

Gross Radioact., u.Ci/ml 2.93E-1 1.90E-1 2.52E-1 2.19E-1 1.25E-1 1.72E-1 Susoended Solids, oom < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Gross Tritium, µCi/ml 4.00E-1 3.82E-1 3.93E-1 2.42E-1 1.58E-1 2.00E-1 1131, u.Ci/ml 6.77E-4 3.83E-4 5.47E-4 6.32E-4 2.04E-4 3.43E-4 113111133 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.09 Hvdrogen, cc/kg 40.5 25.7 30.1 39.7 25.5 31.7 Lithium, oom 2.33 2.06 2.18 2.32 1.90 2.17 Boron - 10, oom* 220.5 209.5 215.5 124.5 96.2 106.3 Oxvaen, (DO), oom < O.Q10 < 0.005 0.009 < O.Q10 < 0.005 0.009 Chloride, oom 0.009 0.005 0.007 0.004 < 0.001 0.002 oH at 25 demee Celsius 6.63 6.44 6.53 6.99 6.83 6.90 Boron - 10 = Total Boron x 0.196 Comments:

None.

• . re -Surry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 19 of 20 FUEL HANDLING UNITS 1 & 2 MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 New or Spent Number for New or Spent Fuel Shipment Date Stored or Assemblies Assembly ANSI Initial Fuel Shipping Number Received per Shipment Number Number Enrichment Cask Activity No fuel received or stored during this report period.

e aurry Monthly Operating Report No. 92-08 Page 20 of 20 DESCRIPTION OF PERIODIC TEST(S) WHICH WERE NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMITS SPECIFIED IN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MONTH/YEAR: August 1992 None During This Reporting Period.