ML20072L428

FCS Performance Indicators Jul 1994

ML20072L428
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	07/31/1994
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20072L423	List: LIC-94-0170, Forwards FCS Performace Indicators Jul 1994 Rept ML20072L428
References
NUDOCS 9408310281
Download: ML20072L428 (96)

Text

_

3 FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS r~

E

-r I

Liguiii 1

~

l

.Q

~

?' %

,/

~,

,s 9

JULY 1994 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS

&R"3M;s8h ?,$88@p R

i

o kwd of warx%a w wn, alhinh,...

il iawak wisden, wnd wnndjud anad...

g d w a, yShaa, cam 4'ng, cornandsnwnl...

il w a, way,9 y!>...d w dobng, ikjob e

qu lk jiul 6, wey 6.

Jl w iavns-dinckd, mi ik wdL aj wdwnd, pwm., il w owv wn, u{e wea wh na iu 4 aus 4?x LkL corns lmn, !q ik qu knd e

9 peuwn,, neljud On, dg ik 9V kny.

Jaans).6%awu

i OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT Prepared By:

Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group JULY 1994

FORT CAL,HOUN STATION JULY 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of July, Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100% power level, i

Normal plant maintenance, surveillance, and equipment rotation activities occurred during the month, in addition to scheduled on-line modification activities.

Work continued on the installation of the new Spent Fuel Pool racks, including numerous fuel movements within the Spent Fuel Pool. The last of the old racks was removed from the pool during the month of July.

During the July 4 nightshift, FCS was notified of the inadvenent actuation of one emergency no-tification siren caused by thunderstorm activity. The appropriate notifications were made to lo-cal and state officials, and to the NRC resident inspector. On July 5, thunderstorms caused inad-vertent actuation of two additional emergency sirens. Again, appropriate notifications were made and repairs completed.

Modification work is underway outside the protected area on the 161kV electrical system. An additional line is being routed from Omaha in support of a major constmetion project (Cargill) north of the Fort Calhoun Station. Installation of the poles for the new 161 kV line continued throughout July. On h!y 79,1994, a contract worker was injured when a pole for the 161 kV line rolled off the back of the truck onto his leg. The accident took place on OPPD owner-con-trolled property, outside the switchyard. A helicopter ambulance was summoned and local me-dia personnel arrived. Although the incident was outside the switchyard and the protected area, OPPD provided a 4-hour notification to the NRC Operations Center due to the potential for a press release and media interest in a personnel injury accident at the Fort Calhoun Station.

The Fuel Reliability Indicator has been exhibiting a slowly increasing trend that may be indica-tive of a fuel pin leak.

The following NRC inspection was completed during this reporting period:

IER No.

Descriotion 94-09 Maintenance Reliability Initiative Team Inspection There were no Licensee Event Reports (LERs) submitted during this reponing period.

Soutre: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs i

=

Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories 7

Q Performance in Industry

+

(Unplanned

~ w Upper 10% and better Unit Ueplanned Automatic pp m than 1994 OPPD goal Capability C3Nbillh Scrams /7W Factor LosisFactor EHaufs nC TI Performance Better Than E

1994 OPPD Goal

' s s ll l

l l

I Nl$fs@tegli p

ep

.JFuel Performance Not Meeting ty igk l $y5 tem l 3

l (Reliabilith i

1994 OPPD Goal hNNE I I

Per%$1liddQe rferN5 rice j

g i

Olndidatord Perfortsence,

lI I

1 i

i l

,, am

' El p'

Apdl May June 3

M 34 94 94 Collective NOMg

~ inssjy dddmdskrh

'gQfy Radiation Low-Level.

Sadatyp Exposure RadioactNsj[

Accident MN Yea To-Date Nestel : _._q

{ Rate)_g l

Best Possible

. M.t Performance 1994 Year-End x

Performance INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the months of January through July 1994)

l

- lguga y gg..

4 Whlie':-

&^-

Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories l

3 Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend

gg$

[Sissificaht)

/Sklet

.]-l. Events 7-

~ FActuations i

L Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal

[

w j#

Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or Industry Average Trend

m. Safety ^ qif

~

Forced (System Outage

^ OFailures a

Rate

$il May June 4

$4 4

[ m; iiiiiii Eduid,,~t July 1994 Year-To-Date g

Collective Value Best Possible outid$gj j siti Radiation Performance 1994 Year-End MJgj[000 ll Exposure Performance l

lE NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for October 1990 through September 1993. Predictor blocks cannot be generated for these performance indicators because they are based on NRC biannual reports.

a All otherindicator values are for the months of January through July 1994.)

j

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT JULY 1994 -

SUMMARY

l POSITIVE TREND REPORT l

in-Line Chemistrv Instruments Out-of-Service l

A performance indicator with data representing three consecutive months of improving performance or three (Page 51) consecutive months of performance that is superior to Hazardous Waste Produced i

the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NODOP 37).

(Page 52) j The following performance indicators exhibited positive Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area trends for the reporting month:

(Page 53)

Recordable Iniurv/11l ness Cases Frecuenev Rate (Page 4)

End of Positive Trend Report.

Auxiliary Feedwater System Safety System Performance l

(Page 9)

~

i ADVERSE TREND REPORT l

Emeraency AC Power System Safety System Perfor-i manca A Performance Indicator with data representing 3 con-(Page 10) secutive months of declining performance; or four or more consecutive months of performance that is trending Emeraency Diesel Generator Unit Reliability towards declining as determined by the Manager - Sta-(Page 11) tion Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per NOD-OP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator ex-Diesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands) hibits an adverse trend by this definition may specify in (Page 12) written form (to be published in this report) why the trend is not adverse.

Emeroency Diesel Generator Unreliability (Page 13)

The following performance indicator exhibited an ad-Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resultino in Lic-ensee Event Rooorts Fuel Reliability indicator (Page 20)

(Page 14)

An adverse trend is indicated based on the FRI value for Forced Outaae Rate the reporting month (6.12 X 10') exceeding the 1994 (Page 23)

Fort Calhoun monthly goal of less than 5.0 X 104, and the potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rods in the core.

Unit Cacability Fac+or (Page 25)

End of Adverse Trend Report.

l Uno!anned Canability Loss Factor (Page 26)

Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Lima (Page 38)

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED l

MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT Secondary System Chemistry (Page 39)

A performance indicator with data for the reporting period Cents Per Kilowa't Hour that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is (Page 41) defined as "Needing increased Management Attention

• per NOD 4P-37.

Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance ftoms Overdue The following performance indicators are cited as need.

(Page 46) ing increased management attention for the reporting month:

Percentaos of Total MWOs Comoleted Per Month identi-fied As Rework Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO (Page 47)

(Page 2)

Maintenance Overtime The year-to<iate value for this indicator has exceeded (Page 48) the Fort Calhoun goal of s0.50 since May 1994.

iv

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT JULY 1994 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES OMM This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the pre-

)

Number of Control Room Eouloment Deficiencies vious month.

(Page 15)

The total number of control room equipment deficiencies at the end of the reporting month (47) exceeds the 1994 Collective Radiation Exoosure 1

Fort Calhoun monthly goalof $45.

(Page 16)

July 1994 dose readings are derived from ALNOR re-Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours suits. January through June 1994 dose was determined (Page 18) from actual TLD readings.

The number of violations per 1,000 inspection hours has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of s1.4 since March Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Umit 1994 (Page 38)

This indicator has been revised to track the following key Unolanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7.000 Hours chemistry parameters: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlo-Critical rides, fluoride, hydrogen and suspended solids.

(Page 27)

The number of unplanned automatic scrarns per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994.

End of Performance indicator Report improvements /

Changes Report Unolanned Safety System Actuations - flNPO Definition)

(Page 28)

The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua-tions has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994.

Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(NRC Definition)

(Page 29)

The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994.

Thermal Performance (Page 31)

The year-to-date a'verage monthly thermal performance value has been below the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 299.5% since January 1994.

Document Review (Page 55)

The number of document reviews more than 6 months overdue at the end of the reporting month (3) exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal of 0.

Tomocrary Modifications (Page 57)

The number of temporary modifications >1 cycle old has exceeded the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since April 1994. The number of temporary modtfications >6 months old has exceeded the goal of 0 since January 1994.

End of Management Attention Report.

V

Table of Contents / Summary eAan

.. X GOALS...

SAFE OPERATIONS PAGE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO..

... 2 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE.

3 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES

..4 FREQUENCY RATE...

CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATONS

.5 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA..

PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs..

...6 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES..

.. 7 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE:

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM.

... 8

..9 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM..

EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM :

..10 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR

.11 UNIT RELIABILITY.

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR

.12 RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS).

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR

.13 UNRELIABILITY...

FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 14 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES...

.15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE..

16 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE.........

.17 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS...

....-............18 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS.

..19 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS...

... 20 PERFORMANCE EAQE

. 22 STATION NET GENERATION.

. 23 FORCED OUTAGE RATE....

vi

---.m___

PERFORMANCE (continued)

P. AGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR..

.. 24 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR.,

...... 25 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR.

. 26 i

1 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR j

SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL..

... 27 1

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM

. 28 l

ACTUATONS -(INPO DEFINITON)..

1 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS - (NRC DEFINITON)..

..... 29 GROSS HEAT RATE..

. 30 t

THERMAL PERFORMANCE..

... 31 l

1 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT....

. 32 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS.

. 33 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

. 34 REPEAT FAILURES..

. 35 l

I CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE..

. 36 l

1 l

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID

(

RADIOACTIVE WASTE -

37 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT.

. 38 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY..

.39 Cost PAGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR..

. 41 STAFFING LEVEL..

. 42 I

SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE..

... 43 DIVISDN AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE 1

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE).....

. 45 vii

DIVISON AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued)

EACiE RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE

& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE.

. 46 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK..

. 47 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME.

. 48 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)...

. 49 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS).

. 50 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT.OF-SERVICE.

. 51 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED.

. 52 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA.

. 53 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM.

. 54 DOCUMENT REVIEW..

. 55 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY).

.. 56 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS..

.57 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATONS.

. 58 ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN.

. 59 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS.

. 60 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN.

. 61 LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN..

. 62 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUAllFICATON TRAINING.

. 63 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS.

. 64 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS.

. 65 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE)..

. 66 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE).

. 67 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATON PLANNING....

. 68 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATON PLANNING.

.. 69 viii

ACTON PLANS. DEFINITONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST M

ACTON PLANS..

. 70 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITONS..

. 73 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX..

. 80 REPORT DISTRIBUTON LIST.

. 82

" dig OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1994 Priorities MISSION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment.

GOAIS Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional working environment, in the control room and throughout the OPPD nuclear organi-zation, that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader.

1994 Priorities:

Improve SALP ratings.

Improve INPO rating.

Reduce NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4.

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.

finalli PERFORMANCE To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production.

1994 Priorities:

Improve Quality, Pmfessionalism, and Teamwork.

Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

Reduce the number of human perfomtance errors.

Identify programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.

Goal 3: COSTS Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity.

1994 Priorities:

Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

Streamline work processes to improve cost effectiveness.

Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) x

SAFE OPERATIONS Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional work-ing environment in the control room and throughout the OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader.

1

Year to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Rate

-O-Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.50) 1.8 -

-O-Industry Upper 10%

V 1.6 -

-b--

1995 lNPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 1.4 -

1.2 -

1-0.8 -

0.6 -

0 0

0 0

0 0

C O

l 0.4 -

0.2 -

C C

C C

C C

C C

O O

O O

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 i

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO I

As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Asso-clation of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants': "The purpose of this indicator is monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the i

station."

The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year-to-date was 0.72 at the end of July 1994. The value for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 was 0.78.

L There were no restricted-time or lost time accidents in July. There has been 1 re-stricted-time accident and 2 lost-time accidents in 1994.

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

(number of restricted-time + lost time accidents + fatalities) X 200.000 (number of station person hours worked)

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis s0.50. The 1995 INPO Industry goalis 50.50.

The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 1/93 through 12/93) is 0.12.

I Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None 2

-@ - 1994 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate l GOOD l X

1993 Disabling Injury / Illness Frequency Rate V

0 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.5) 1.2 -

1 --

0.8 -

b"

^

^

^

^

^

C "y"

"N "Y

0.2 -

0

=

i i

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1994 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1993 dis-abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year-to-date was 0.48 at the end of July 1994.

There were no lost-time accidents reported for the month. There have been 2 lost time accidents in 1994.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 was 0.52.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner i

Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 i

I 3

.... 1994 Recordable Injury /lliness Frequency Rate IGCODI X

1993 Recordable Injury / Illness Frequency Rate V

2.5 -

O 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 1.5) 2.25-2-

1.75 -

O 1.5 -

n

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

v v

v v

v v

v v

v 1.25 -

'^

1-0.75-0.5 -

0.25-i i

i i

i i

i i

0 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May aan Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1994 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1993 recordable injyry/ illness cases frequency rate is also shown.

A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid.

The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

The recordable injury / illness rate year-to-date was 1.20 at the end of July 1994. There were no recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of July. There have been 5 recordable injury / illness cases in 1994.

The recordable injury / illness rate for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 was 1.04.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Conner Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 l

4 l

-O-Contamination Events lGOODj

-O-Fort Calhoun Year End Goal ( 54) 70-65-60 -

55-O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

m j 50-t$45-o 40-35-k30-h25-U 20-15-10-g_

0 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS /

MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

There were 6 contamination events in July 1994. There has been a total of 38 contami-nation events in 1994.

The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 54 contamination events.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 l

5 I

l Preventable (18 Month Totals)

-O - Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)

O Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40-35-30-25-20-

=

~

15-10-3 5-UI Il o.' b $

0 7

m m

s c

_3 o

s m

x n

o m

o l

f&

A R

QfI

$ E$

f a

PREVENTABLEPERSONNEL ERROR LERs This indicator depicts 18 month totals for numbers of " Preventable" and " Personnel Error" LERs.

l The graph shows the 18 month totals for preventable LERs, the 18 month totals for Personnel Err'or LERs and the Personnel Error totals for each month. The LERs are trended based on the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date.

In June 1994, there were no events that were subsequently reported as an LER. No LERs were categorized as Preventable and a Personnel Error.

1 The total LERs for the year 1994 (through June 30,1994)is 6. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1994 is 2. The total Preventable LERs for the year is 2.

The 1994 goals for this indicator are that the year-end values for the 18 month totals be no more than 12 Preventable and 5 Personnel Error LERs. (Note: Because this indica-tor is based on an 18 month period, the 1994 year-end totals willinclude LERs occur-ring in 1994 and the last 6 months of 1993.)

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 6

i I

l

{

g operation O

Shutdown

~

- PWR Average Trend b

E 7

u> 2 -

2:-

$q$

u) l~

T 3

ll ll e

0

(

j 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 i

Year-Ouarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational l

Data in the biannual" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power l

Reactors" report.

I The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993:

}

First Quarter 1992: 1) Defective control switches in the 4KV switchgear could have l

rendered safety equipment inoperable; 2) All 4 channels of the SG DP trip for RPS had l

been calibratdd nonconservatively. This occurred due to an incorrect procedure which l

specified a tolerance band that was too wide.

l Second Quarter 1992: Fuse and breaker coordination problems for the DC buses could cause a loss of the entire bus if a fault occurred on one of the loads.

First Quarter 1993: The SG low pressure scram signal block reset values, for all 4 channels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating conditions.

Second Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water source of the safety injection system was not seismically qualified. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 7

1994 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System g

Unavailability Value 1994 Year to-Date High Pressure Safety injection

• System Unavailability Value l GOOD l O

1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004) y

-b-1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-O-Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.03 -

0.025 -

0.02 -

A A

A A

A A

A A

A 0.015 -

0.01 -

0.005 -

h,h O

9 i-[

U U

O,O, 0

i i

i i

i i

i 1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report-ing month.

The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of July 1994 was 0.0002. There was a total of 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability for surveil-lance tests and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 1994 year-l to4 ate HPSI unavailability value was 0.004 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.003.

There have been 56.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and no hours of unplanned un-availability for the HPSI system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.004.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the Industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.001.

Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Adverse Trend: None 8

E Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1994 Year to-Date Auxiliary Feedwater System

• UnavailabilityValue

-O-1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01) l GOODI 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025)

-D-Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) 0.025 -

A A

A A

A A

A A

A A

A A

0.02 -

0.015 -

0.01 - 0 0

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

l 0

til B

C 8

E--E 0

i i

i i

l i

i l

1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE j

i This indicator,shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by i

INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

l The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for July 1994 was 0.0 During the month, there were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability. The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.003, and the value for the last 12 months was 0.003 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 14.58 hours6.712963e-4 days <br />0.0161 hours <br />9.589947e-5 weeks <br />2.2069e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 17.26 hours3.009259e-4 days <br />0.00722 hours <br />4.298942e-5 weeks <br />9.893e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 0.002.

Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Positive Trend 9

3 Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value l GOOD]

O Fort Calhoun Goal t

+ 1995 MO Nustry Goal (0.025) 0.07-

-D-Industry Upper 10% (0.004) 0.06-0.05 -

0.04 -

0.03 -

0.02 -

O O

O O

O O

O O

% -gg 0.01 -

-R i -n E -C O

O O

O O

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting i

month.

i The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for July 1994 was 0.006. Dur;ng i

the month, there were 9.74 hours8.564815e-4 days <br />0.0206 hours <br />1.223545e-4 weeks <br />2.8157e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability for testing, and no hours of unplanned unavailability. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.'019 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.011 at the end of the month. The large unavailability value for February is due to maintenance outages on both diesel generators.

There has been a total of 177.91 hours0.00105 days <br />0.0253 hours <br />1.50463e-4 weeks <br />3.46255e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 11.25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.025.

l The 1994 DG unavailability has increased over 1993 DG unavailability due to changes I

in operational definitions of out-of-service equipment.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.004.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 10

Number of Failures /20 Demands

--R-Trigger Values for 20 Demands O

Number of Failures /50 Demands

--V-Trigger Values for 50 Demands 5

Number of Failures /100 Demands Trigger Values for 100 Demands 8-l GOOD l

+

6-Y Y

Y V

V V

V V

V V

V V

4-2 2

2-1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

e j

E d

5 s

l E

I 0 0 ;q 00f 00 q 00 00 i 00$ 00g 0 0 ;j 00g 00 ]

00 3 OO P I

I I

I i

i i

4 I

i l

l Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-ues. The Fort Calhoun 1994 goalis to have fewer failures than these trigger values.

The demands counted for this indicator include the respective number of starts and the respective number of load-runs for both Diesel Generators combined. The number of start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a mini-4 mum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Detinition Section of this report).

4 Data Scurce: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 11 i

O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands IGOODl E

DG-2 Failures /25 Demands 5-

--Er--

Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal 4-C C

C C

C C

C C

C C

C O

3-2-

1-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1

I I

I i

i I

I I

i i

i Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Juf94 DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1994.

It must be emphasized that, in accordance with NUMARC criteria, certain actions will take place in the event that any one emergency diesel generator experiences 4 or more failures within the last 25 demands on the unit. These actions are described in the Definitions Section of this report. A System Engineering instruction has been approved for the Fort Calhoun Station to institutionalize and formally approve / adopt the required NUMARC actions.

Diesel Generator DG 1 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands on the unit.

Diesel Generator DG-2 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands on the unit.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 12

O DG-1 Unreliability Value DG-2 Unreliability Value lGOODI Station Unreliability Value 0.003-industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025 -

a Three Year Average) 0.002 -

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

0.0015 -

0.001 -

i 0.0005-0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 i -

i - i i

i v

i - i i

i

- a v

i Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling genera-j tor unreliability.

j The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value at the end of July 1994 was 0.0. The 1994 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1: There were 2 start demands for the reporting month without a failure.

In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure.

I For DG-2: There were 2 start demands for the reporting month without a failure.

In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure.

I Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows.

value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands j

LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs l

number of valid load-run demands l

Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 13

5 Fuel Reliability Indicator a

1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10 4 Microcuries/ Gram) lGOODI l

0 Y

h10-O Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for July 1994 was 6.12 X 10-4 microcuries/

gram. The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintain-ing a high level of fuelintegrity. The July FRI value, which is slightly greater than the zero defect threshold value, discussed below, indicates a potential fuel defect in the core. The plant operated at full power during the entire month. The July FRI was calcu-lated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, July 1 through 31.

The July FRI value of 6.12 X 10-* microcuries/ gram is comparable to the June value of 4.6 X 10 4 microcuries/ gram. The 6.12 X 10 4 microcuries/ gram FRI value for July ex-ceeds the 1994 operational goal. The FRI value will not decrease until the leaking fuel l

pin or pins are removed from the core.

l Fission product activity data from July full power operation showed a Xenon-133 activity increase but no lodine spiking. The Westinghouse technical expert has determined that there is a potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rod (s)in the Cycle 15 core. This prediction is based on a change in the Xe-133 to 1-131 ratio. A more definitive disposition will be possible wher) a significant power change is made and specific chemistry data (i.e.

Cesium, lodine and Xenon) can be collected. The presence or lack of Xenon and lodine spikes during the power change would confirm or disprove the fuel failure as-sumption. The last detected fuel failure was during Cycle 13.

The INPO September 1992 Report " Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility l

Industry" (INPO No.92-011) states that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value larger than 5.0 X 10 d microcuries/ gram indicates a high probability of unit operation with one or more fuel defects. The determination of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." The value of 5.0 X 10-* microcuries/ gram is de-fined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the core is defect free or not. The 1994 Fort Calhoun Station FRI performance indicator goal will be to maintain a monthly FRI below 5.0 X 10 4 microcu-ries / gram.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Weber l

Accountability: Chase /Spilker l

Adverse Trond: An Adverse Trend is indicated based on not meeting the 1994 goal.

14 i

O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line lGOODI O

Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V

80 -

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70-60-h 4

I

)

30-t

~

l'

?,

/

20-f 10-

5; I

I j

/;

.I;

[

/,'.

f 5

0 I

i 6

6 6

6 I

i i

i i

1 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 8

Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line O

Total Number of Operator Work Around items 10-

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal for Total Operator Work Around items 8-6-

C O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

4-r a a

a a

a n

n n

i i

i l

i l

I i

i l

i i

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on-line), the number of outstanding control room equip-ment deficiencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) Items repairable on-line, the number of outstanding OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals.

There was a total of 47 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of July 1994.16 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 31 require a plant outage to repair.

There were 22 deficiencies added and 18 deficiencies closed during the month.

There were 2 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. The OWAs were on equipment tags CH-208, C/R Panel CB-1/2/3 and MOV-D1, C/R Panel CB-10/11. Both OWAs require an outage to repair.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 45 deficiencies and 5 OWAs.

Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None 15

O Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack)

--e--

Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack)

-O-Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person-Rem) b40-C O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

Cc 30-6 20-

}

,=,:

2 m

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rorack IGOODl

-e-Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack V

-O-Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rem)

E$$:

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

sl:

l E

~

e i

i i

i Q-Jan94 Feb M ar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure, excluding the spent fuel rarack, is less than 44 person-Rem.

The exposure for July 1994 was 1.872 person-Rem.

l The year-to-date exposure was 10.421 person-Rem at the end of July.

The Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure to complete the Spent Fuel Rerack is less than 23 person-Rem.

The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure for July was 1.438 person-Rem.

The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure year-to-date was 4.308 person-Rem at the end of July.

l The collective radiation exposure at the end of July (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 14.730 person-Rem. The collec-tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 156.79 person-Rem at the end of the month.

The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-rem per year. The industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 110.5 person-rem per year. The yearly average for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 8/91 through 7/94 was 148.3 person-rem per year.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 16

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem) 0 Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) 5000 -

OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit e

4000 -

t 3000 -

b o~

E 2000 -

Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000 -

296 343 0

~

July 1994 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During July 1994, an individual accumulated 296 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

The maximum individual expocure for the year was 343 mrem at the end of July.

The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,500 mrem /

year. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem.

Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None 17

i 4-Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours l GOOD l

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal k

3.03 8

p3-

.6 1

82-i l

3 1.4 O- - - C O

O O

~~ I~0 Q

O O

.5 51-

?

l i

t i

S2

'93 Jut 93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 i

VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS l

This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per 1,000 NRC inspection hours. This indicator is one month behind the reporting month due to the time in-volved with collecting and processing the data.

The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 1.63 for the twelve months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994.

The following inspections ended during this reporting period:

IER No.

litlft No. of Hours 94-16 Resident Monthly inspection 464 To date, OPPD has received 8 violations for inspections conducted in 1994:

Level 111 Violations (1)

Level IV Violations (5)

Level V Violations (0)

Non-Cited Violations (NCV)

(2)

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 inspec-tion hours.

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager, Source)

Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None 18 l

l

O NRC Significant Events l GOOD)

Y Industry Average Trond 2-1 Mg i

I I

I I

I I

I 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93 2 93-3 Year - Quarter

@ INPO Significant Events (SERs) l GOOD l V

2 2-Y b

ffb

/

i i

i I

I I

I i

l 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 Year - Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual " Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NEG significant events occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993:

Third Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressurizer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), oc-curred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the fourth quarter of 1993:

i Second Quarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Ct.ange-out.

Third Quarter 1992: 1) RC-142 LOCA; and 2) Premature Lift of RC-io2.

First Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrument ation Safety Channel D.

]

Second Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip Fourth Ouarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 19 l

I

=

3-

@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs 2-I

~

j_

Q 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

'92 93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.

There were no. missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during July 1994.

During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillance was not completed nor corrective mainte-nance performed as a result of AC-10A falling into the " Alert Range" (LER 93-003 Fail-ure to Satisfy inservice Testing Requirements for Raw Water Pump).

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend SEP 60 & 61 20 l

i

PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion.

l

~

21 l

l i

=

E Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) 40-35.66 35.12 34.6 34.9 34.85 33.91 33.56

-p3y m

Cycle 15 27.8

'-)

30-25.03 Refueling

~

2 Outage 8

o. 20 -

3 10 -

1. N$

.]{ !N 0-Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 STATION NET GENERATION During the month of July 1994 a net total of 348,529 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 15 was 2,730,559 MWH at the end of the month.

Energy losses'for the month of February 1994 were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January 1994 were attributable to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Energy losses for the month of December 1993 were a result of a forced outage that began on December 6 and ended on December 7. The outage was caused t.y an EHC test failure. Energy losses for September, October and November 1993 were attribut-able to the shutdown for the Cycle 15 refueling outage, which began on September 25 and ended on November 26.

Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 22 l

Forced Outage Rate l GOOD l 12%-

- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%)

y 10%-

8%-

6%-

Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 4%-

C C

C C

C C

C C

C C

C 2%-

1.38 7

0%

i i

i i

'91

'92

'93 Aug93 Sep Oct ' Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was repor1ed as 1.05% for the twelve months from Au-gust 1,1993 to July 31,1994. The 1994 year-to-date FOR was 0.96% at the end of July.

A forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. The generator was off-line for 48.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />.

A forced outage occurred on December 6,1993 when the plant tripped during weekly testing of the turbine EHC system. The generator was off-line for 27.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4%.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goal was a maximum value of 2.4%.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 23 r

I 1

O Monthty EAF Year to-Date Average Monthly EAF

-R-Industry Median Value (76.7%)

100 % -

7 Wh 8

(g tm

,i

?

g 85.6

$q Y

.m,

f

~<

.L.

3 E

ni E

76.2 80% -

W m--

S E

E E

E E

S-9 f<

W NJ 7

Mk J

y A

y

^

E

+

L Cycle 15 hy

?

g 60%-

Refueling R

g j

3

?y f;

Outage

~~

W

n..,

g)y

~

n 6

3,,

y

,n

+7.:;.;

4..3 4

40%-

/

k A

y*

^

'WO y

A MG M

+

3 M

N s

I st 6

4:3 4.m hk h

~

4

[

..y s

g e

g 3

/

• );

%?

H gs; g

20%-

~4s ac

+

e n

.m;..

<a r.W u.

5 kkk

$,?

g e

y

~

e

m~

.m

.m i

/

g fg p

0%

~

1 1

i i

'91

'92

'93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average. monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous 3 years.

The EAF for July 1994 was reported as 96.75%. The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 96.37% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates for condenser tube repair and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

i The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was y

75.32% The industry median EAF value for the three year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was 76.7%

Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 24

O Monthly Unit Capability Factor

--96--

Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor

-+-- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor 4

O Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 80%)

Industry Upper 10% (86.7% for a Three Year Average) 100 % -

g-n n

o Y

1. 3 S

b b

b b

80%-

G m

p z

a x

x 60%-

A

4

?a R

sa

~ ~ "

m l

w Cycle 15 A

N A

9 h[

O 40%-

43 iN Refueling g

m.

i 20%- g g

Outage f,

g 0%

,~,

i i

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the year-to-date UCFs, the 36 month average UCFs, and the UCF goals. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continu-l ously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage.

The UCF for July 1994 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date UCF was 97.23%, the l

UCF for the last 12 months was 79.75%, and the 36 month average UCF was reported I

as 76.06% at1he end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to l

repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Energy losses for the month December 1993 were due to rampup from the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and a plant trip that occurred on December 6 during testing of the EHC system.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 86.7%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 96.03%.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 25

O Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 50%-

-et-Year to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor O

Fort Calhoun Goal 40%-

1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%)

t Industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average) 30%-

Cycle 15 Refueling 20%-

Outage gA M

10%-

O T

A f c

o o

a O

l3l 0%

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF and the goal. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of July 1994 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to-date UCLF was 2.77%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 3.65%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.15% at the end of the month.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Unplanned energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of December 1993 were the result of a plant trip that occurred during EHC testing.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 1.48%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%.

i Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 26

- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical Year to-date

-+- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for the last 36 months

-O-1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 1995 INPO Industry Goal 6-

-O-Industry Upper 10% (0.51 per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical over a 36 month time period) 5-4-

3-2-

?

0 0

^

0 0

4k;h.

':H:- r-t,

, t __, (,:, $., d, 0 i A

A A

1-3 u

n s

0 --$,-:__

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 E Number of FCS Reactor Scrams 4-3 2

3-Cyc!c 15 Refueling 2-3 Outage 1

1 0 0 0

0 0

0 0

mum 0

0 0

0 0

~

i i i

i i

i i

i i

i e

i i

i i

i i

'90 '91 '92 '93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tional Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Cal-houn Station. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months.

The year-to-date station value was 1.38 at the end of July 1994. The value for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 was 1.93. The value for the last 36 months was 1.99.

)

An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11,1994 when supervi-sory relay 869/CPHSS failed. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on December 6,1993 during EHC testing.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.51 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical for the 36 month time period from 1/91 through 12/93.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 27

3-5 Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

O Fort Calhoun Goal O

Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-1 1_

l h

y Cycle 15 s

1 Refueling l

d Outage 8

i i

,0 O

O O

O O

O b

O O

O O

O i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i

'91 '92 '93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of July 1994.

There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection Actuation Signal, Containment isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation Signal and Steam Generator Isolation Signal. The Steam Generator Isolation Signal automatically closed both main steam isolation valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip.

An INPO unplanned safety system actuation occurred during the month of July 1992. It was due to the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 28

12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)

--+-- Critical Hours

]

Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) 10-1000

- 900 0~

-800 Cycle Is W

Refueling

- 700 6-

• 9*

- 600 5

- 500 E N 4-

- 400 300 2-

- 200 o$

b O

O b

'91 '92 '93 ASONDJ FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJJ 1992 1993 1994 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emer-gency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuations when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged.

There was 1 NRC unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concur-rent turbine and reactor trip.

There were 3 NRC unplanned safety system actuations in 1993: 1) In December 1993 the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing; 2) In June 1993 the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip; and 3) in April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer, causing a low voltage alarm on bus 1 A1, a loadshed on bus 1 A1 and an auto start of an EDG.

There were 4 unplanned safety system actuations in 1992: 1) In August, due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system, pressurizer safety valve RC-142 opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip; 2) On July 3 there was an inverter failure and the subsequent reactor trip; 3) On July 23 there was an unplanned diesel generator start when an operator performing a surveillance test inadvertently pushed the normal start button instead of the alarm acknowledge button; and 4) In May the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip and subsequent anticipatory start signal to both diesel generators.

There have been 2 unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29

E Monthly Gross Heat Rate

-M-Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate

-O-1994 &1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-i 10300 Cycle 15 i

10223 10.25-Refueling 10177 I

Outage I

$m

' 10-9 75 I

i i

i i

i i

i i

i I

i i

i i

i

'91

'92

'93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 GROSS HEAT RATE This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years.

The gross hest rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,390 for the month of July 1994.

The 1994 year-todate GHR was 10,172 at the end of the month.

The GHR was not calculated for the months of October and November 1993 because of

)

the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage.

The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR im-proves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is s10,190.

l Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 30

O Monthly Thermal Performance

--W---

Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance

--G--

1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goats l GOOD l

--+- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)

a industry Upper 10% (99.9%)

100 '* ~

n a

A a

a a

a A

a a

0 0

0 0

0.

f g_0 M

e Cycle 15

^

7 3

Refueling N

m Mi Outage 1

jg; 99%-

f f

?$

h W

l$

y tR

,~

v g

g@

y 98 %

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value.

The thermal performance value for July 1994 was 99.46%. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.32% at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 was 99.43 %.

l j

Thermal Performance improved in May as a result of the backwash valve adjustments on "A" Condenser and improvements in Heater 2A level control.

The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control problems on heaters 3A and 58, and to spring runoff resulting in screen carry-over and condenser fouling. Improvements made during the month of March were: warm water recirc. was taken off-line; some recovery in condenser performance was achieved due l

to backwashing at regular intervals; and the level control problems for heater 3A were corrected.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 99.5%. The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal was a minimum of 99.4%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the one year period from 1/93 through 12/93) is approximately 99.9%.

Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek Adverse Trend: None 3,

O Thermai output

-O-Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 1499.5-1499-1498.5-1498-1497.5-1497-1496.5-

[

1496-1495.5-1495{

)

1494.5-1494-1493.5-1493-1492.5-1492-1491.5-1491-1490.5-1490 1

3 5

7 9

11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during July 1994, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chasefrills Adverse Trend: None 32 i

~ Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours O

1994 Fort Calhoun Year End Goal (0.2) 0.75-l GOOD l V

0.5 0.5 -

0.25-C O

O O

O O

0 0

0 0

0 0

i i

i i

0

'91

'92

'93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipmer.it forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.20 for the months from January through July 1994. The value for the 12 months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994 is 0.14.

An equipment forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 when the plant experi-enced an unplanned automatic reactor trip as a result of the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit.

An equipment forced outage occurred in August 1992 and continued through Septem-ber. It was due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control System.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.20.

Data Source: Monthly O,oerations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 33

~

_ _ _ # of Component Categories 40-35-

-+-- # of Application Categories 30-

-de-Total # of Categories 5 25-en

( 20-e-

-~.

5-

"YC N 0

F93 M A

M J

J A

S O

N D93 J94 F

M A

M J

J94 E Wear Out/ Aging Q Other Devices 2.4%

@ Manufactunng Defect O Maintenance / Action 9.6%

0 Engineering / Design

@ Error / Operating Action 43.4%

4.8%

N Percent of Total Failures During the Past 18 Months

,r'

,o' O

s' f

k:

33.7 %

IIllI 6.0%

COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from October 1992 through March 1994). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 87 compo-nent categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary /

emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18 months.

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 99 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 83. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trend: None 34

--+-- Cornponents With More Than One Failure Components With More Than Two Failures V

5-l 20-15-14 12 12 12 12 10 10-v 9

4 8

l 7

l 5-4, 4

2 2

2,

,2,<Q,

,1,

,1, n

n n

m n

AugG3 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/

AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track repetitive component failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).

This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than 1 failure during the eighteen month CFAR period and the number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures during the eighteen month CFAR period.

During the last 18 reporting months there were 8 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure.1 of the 8 had more than 2 failures. The tag number of the component with more than 2 failures is AC-100. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 35

i Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Cornponent Hours l GOOD l Calculated Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Y

Million Component Hours 3-

-O--

Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 ~

L h

2-C O

O O

O

$1.5-I l

1-0.5 -

0

'91

'92 '93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun NPRDS check valve failure rate, the l

Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate average. The failure rates are based on submitted NPRDS failure reports for an 18 month time interval. They do not include failure reports outside of the 18 month time interval. The interval starts 22 l

months prior to the current month and ends 4 months prior to the current month. For example, the July 1994 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) covers the 18 month interval from October 1,1992 through March 31,1994. This delay is due to the time involved in collecting and processing failure report data.

The actual nu~mber of NPRDS reportable check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station are shown above on the graph at the left side of the page.

For July 1994, the CFAR provided the following failure rates:

Fort Calhoun Station 1.17 E-6 Industry (excluding FCS) 1.67 E-6 The recent increase in the FCS failure rate is due to 2 reportable failures of RC-374, Pressurizer RC-4 Spray Line Check Valve; one failure occurred in October and another in November 1993.

L The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is s;1.75 E-6.

i l

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 l

36

l 0

Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet)

Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried l GOOD l

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) 750 -

y

-tr-1995 INPO Industry Goal (3,884 cubic feet)

-O-Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet)

C C

C C

C O

y 450-tf

\\

$300-1 l

150-a l

(c:. -

h d

0 i

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%.

Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during June (cubic feet) 0.0 Volurne of Solid Radwaste Buried during June (cubic feet) 206.0 Cumulative volurne of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) 543.6 Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage after July 1,1994 (cubic feet) 0.0 The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste which has been buried is 500 cubic feet. The goal was exceeded in June because OPPD's 18 month goal (established in 1993) allowed the opportunity to further reduce the amount of solid radioactive waste. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) i per year. The industry upper ten percentile value from 1/91 through 12/93 is approxi-I mately 29.59 cubic meters (1,045.12 cubic feet) per year.

Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: Although the 1994 goal was exceeded, this indicator is not exhibiting an adverse trend because Fort Calhoun did not exceed the 18 month goal of 1,500 ft.3 that was established in 1993. The 18 month total for l

Fort Calhoun was 1,401.4 ft. at the end of June 1994.

SEP54 37

__mm_-_

--_-__..___.____m_-

m__-.u

E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit lGOODI

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal V

3%-

2%-

C C

C C

C C

C C

C C

1%-

0%

i i

i i

i i

i i

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the pri-mary system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-pended solids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was 0.0% for the month of July 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 2% hours out of limit.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith l

Positive Trend 38

E Secondary System CPI 2-l GOOD l

-O-Fort Calhoun Goal 4

1.9 -

1.8 -

1.7 -

1.6 -

1.5 -

C C

C C

C C

C C

C C

C 1.4 -

1.3 -

1 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performanes index (CPI) are:

1) The plant is at greater than 30% power; and 2) the power is ch'inging at less than 5%

per day.

The CPI for July 1994 was 1.07. The year-to-date average monthly CPI value was 1.21 at the end of the month.

The CPI for December 1993 was 1.92. This relatively higher number was due primarily to iron transport following the plant start-up.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 1.5.

The CPI calculation is different from that reported in 1993 in that it reflects the recent INPO revision to the calculation. This revision addresses the penalties for the beneficial effect of alternative chemistry, i.e., morpholine, such as used at Fort Calhoun Station, and focuses more on specific impurities.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 39

l COST l

Goal: To operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost efTectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity.

l l

l l

l l

40

4~

-E-Actuals

-O-Budget A

Plan 3.75-3.5 -

I h3 3.25-E 3-2.75-2.5 D91 D92 D93 J94 F M

A M

J J

A S

O N D94 D95 D96 D97 D98 I

Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR l

The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The indicator is one month behind the reporting month due to the time required for collecting and processing the data.

The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1993 and 1994 revised budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report.

The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991,1992 and 1993. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1995 through 1998 for refer-ence. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1994 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels.

l The unit price is averaging lower than budget due to expenses being below budget while generation exceeds the budget.

Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield Positive Trend y

@ Nuclear Services Division Staffing O Production Engineering Division Staffing

@ Nuclear Operations Division Staffing O Total Nuclear Staffing 7

7 8

7 8

9 0

7 7

7 8

4 2

1 6

5 5

4 800 -

5 9

3 p

si 700 -

5 5 ;,

5 g 5

3 600 -

3 f 4

ffl 5

4 4

4 4

2 6

j n

5 5 W 4

200 - -I fI

[

6

@3 500 -

4 4

E$

g

~

h h

2 D

??

2 2

2+

f h

ff y

9 5

8 f

300 -

N 9

0 0

O 5

is 6

h 13 1

1 2

1 3

1

((

1 _8 x*

f 1-g 1-g 1_

T g

$b.

4 5-4

f 7

4 6

j!

6 5

~

d

! d i d

$ 1 d i i l i l I

I I

I i

l Jan90 Jan91 Jan92 Jan93 Jan94 Apr94 Jul94 ACTUAL STAFFING LEVEL (UPDATED QUARTERLY)

STAFFING LEVEL The actual staffing levels for the three Nuclear Divisions are shown on the graph above.

The authorized staffing levels for 1994 are:

1994 Authorized Staffing 453 Nuclear Operations Division 191 Production Engineering Division 117 Nuclear Services Division Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source)

Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 42

Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 17-Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 16-15-E

_m_

~~g14-O v>

8 13-

"lii 12-11 -

10 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of July 1994 was reported as $15,954,030.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Adverse Trend: None 43

DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con-tacts the Manager - Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the original intent and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the Indicator from this report.

I 44 i

O Corrective Maintenance Non-Corrective / Plant Improvernents O

Preventive Maintenance O

Fort Calhoun Goal 800-

)

752 723 700-25-5 626 581 600 -

W

~

F 500-h h

k V

G 400-h

~

I 300-G^

O O

O N:

'N

/Y h'

77

/

200-U' II b

d'

$[:

'/,

//.

D

'/,

//.

']

fM rm I/A II' b

iY 0

I I

I I

I i

i i

i i

i l

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog 400-O Totaiuwos g Mwos which exceed Maintenance Cornpietion Goais 350-300 -

250-200-129 150-145 100-k7,2 [d 50 ~

4 da s da r-ys s

0 i

l i

i i

Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Aging MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS This indicator shows the backlog of nor:-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1994 goal for this indicator has been changed to 400 non-outage corrective MWOs. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as:

Goal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 dcy3 Priority 3 Operations Concern 14 dcyc Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant improvements N/A Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 45 J

l

O Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100% -

90%-

80% --

'~

70%-

/

60%-

50% ~

y 40%-

g".,

30%-

20%-

E

^

~'

?g 10%-

if 0%

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 2*/. -

O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue GOOD

-O--

Fort Calhoun Goal V

1%-

Data Unavailable C

,,Q

~

Q Q

Re e 0%

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph-shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance.

The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 59.6% for the month of July 1994. The trend of this ratio reflects the revised definition of corrective maintenance which was implemented in March.

The lower graph shows the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue.

During July,528 PM items were completed. 2 of these PM items (0.38% of the total) were not completed within the allowable grace period or administratively closed.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue is a maximum of 0.5%.

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Data Source: Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources)

Positive Trend SEP 41 46

l E

Rework As.;'9nified By Planning or Craft

-O-Fort Calhoun Gt al 5.2%

5%-

4.56 %

t

$ 4%-

o h3%-

O O

O O

O 2.51 %

To 2.43 %

l 2.06%

'o 2% -

g 1.58 %

o 1.06 %

1%-

0%

c Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK This graph indicates the percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%.

Data Source: Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Positive Trend l

l 47

80%-

E Maintenance Overtirne

+

M Mh Average Maidenance Omtirm l GOOD l 70%-

k

-O-Fort Calhoun "On-Line" Goal 60%-

50%-

Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 40%-

7a 30% -

N3

x 20%-

h

q x

X i-Ng o

o o

o u

^

^

E

^

~C 2.

10%-

O y

32-V

?!H m

h

$0 lN NY h

0%

i i

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources.

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 9.0% for the month of July 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 13.5% at the end of the month.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%.

1 Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Positive Trend 48

~

0 Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

@ Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

E Procedural Nonconpliance irs (Maintenance) i l

?-

11 1

1 1

000 0 0

0 000 000 000 000 00 00 000 000 000 i

l i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the number of open Maintenance incident Reports (irs) that are related to the use of procedures, the number of closed irs that are related to the use of procedures, and the number of open and closed irs that received procedural noncom-pliance cause codes for each of the last twelve months.

There were no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the month of July 1994.

There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reported in September 1993.

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 49

l B

Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts)

D Numberof Emergent MWOs Completed O

Fort Calhoun Goal m

110

100Y.-

100 e 5 90 % -

89 l

M S 80%-

^

^

O 8

'//

80

'f/,-

o

@ 70%-

70 I

O ff; 7

W:

'z E:

6 60%-

'//-

//

'// -

60 $

N

'//.

///

'//,

y 50%-

'//;

f[f

'((:

50 g hh.

/

'//,

///

o a~i 40%-

/f; pp

'/j;

% Completed ((f.

- 40 E' 3

/.

/-

/

Scheduled

///

l g 30Y.~

((:

y; Activities Not jjf 30 [

20%-

((:

<[I h:

Available pj(

- 20 E o

//.

///

'//.

///

d

{ 10%-

((;

((

h:

(([

10 2 h

0%-

~

-0 0

April *94 May June July '94 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS)

This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning all Maintenance Crafts. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, cali-brations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities. The number of emergent MWOs completed for the month is also shown.

The percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities for the months of July and August 1994 will not be available due to the software and data collection method changes involved with the implementation of the Integrated Plant Schedule. There were 51 emergent MWOs completed during the month of July.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 80%.

]

i 1

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 50

E

% of Hours the in-Une Chemistry Instruments are Inoperable 12-

-O-1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 10%)

11-10-C O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

9 -.

8-y 7-6-

5-4-

0 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of July 1994 the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 3.90%.

It should be noted the total number of in-line chemistry instruments considered within this performance indicator has been increased to 51. This is the result of including the new Waterplant panel, Al-160 (5 instruments), and the chemical lagoon pH sensor, PHE-15198, as well as the deletion of 2 PASS detectors.

The entire instrument channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, or 3) the alarm function associated with the instrument is inoperative. If any of the functions listed above are not operational, then the instrument is not performing its intended function.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 10% in-line i

chemistry instruments inoperable. 5 out-of service chemistry instruments make up 10%

of all the chemistry instruments that are counted for this indicator.

Data Source: Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend i

51

Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)

Monthly Average Waste Produced During the Last 12 Months (Kilograms)

-O-Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal l

. Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max, of 1,000 Kg) 1000 -

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

f 800 -

y 600-G 8'g 400-200 -

--C C

C C

C C

O---

---C C

C 0

~ " ',

l Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 l

HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by the Fort Calhoun l

Station each month, the monthly average goal and the monthly average total for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced.

During the month of July 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,0.0 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0.0 kilo-grams of other hazardous waste was produced. The total for hazardous waste pro-duced during the last 12 months is 310.9 kilograms. The monthly average for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months is 25.9 kilograms.

Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for this indicator is a maximum of 100 kilograms.

Data Source: Chase / Smith (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 52

l 1

5 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area j

25% -

[ GOOD l l

--O--

Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months)

--O-Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months) 20%-

15% -

O O

O O

O

^

^

^

^

^

^

lllllll 10%-

0%

i i

j i

j i

i i

i i

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is contaminated based on the total square footage. The 1994 monthly non-outage goalis a maximum of 10% contami-nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 13% contaminated RCA.

At the end of July 1994, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.6%.

Data Source: Chase /Gundal (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Positive Trend SEP 54 53

Number of identified PRWPs Year-To-Date IGOODI

-O-1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<25) y 30-.

25-C O

O O

O O

O O

O O

O O

$g20-uJ 8p 15-5 Ee g10-O 5-0 i

i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radio-logical Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month.

The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological l

performance.

l During the month of July 1994, there was 1 PRWP identified. The PRWP occurred when an individual dropped several ml of sample on the floor in Al-100 when removing the sample bomb.

There have been S PRWPs in 1994.

The 1994 year-end goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 25.

)

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP52 54 l

Documents Scheduled for Review G Documents Reviewed 250 -

Overdue Documents x

200-150-5 E

[f

~

100-I f

f

~

}

L p

i s

Z 4

F4 ft

~i j

_7 f

50 -

0

~',

M,

~'

i Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan,. Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual.

During July 1994 there were 110 document reviews scheduled, while 119 document reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 3 document reviews more than 6 months overdue.

There were 29 new documents initiated in July.

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 55

l 5 Non System Failures 30 -

25 -

V 20 -

15-12 10 10-7 7

4 4

5-1

~J 3

3 2

2 2

usem Ph$

=--

0 i

y Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94

@ System Failures l GOOD l 90-80-y 70 -

60 -

~

38 38 40-30 31 32 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

I Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 LOGG ABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

The Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate graphs. The top graph depicts the total number of loggable/ reportable non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authorization, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors. The bottom graph shows the total number of loggable/

reportable incidents concerning system failures which occurred during the reporting month.

During the month of July 1994, there were 23 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 19 (71%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. System failures increased by 3 during the reporting month. Non-system failures increased by 2.

7 of the system failures were environmental. These failures were due to severe weather during the reporting month.

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 56

5 Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO required for Removal)

Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on line) 8-Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old &

Temporary Modifications >6 months old 7_

6-5

$[j'[

[

4 4

4-

'////

/////

///,'

////,,

/////

3

'////

////

'h hh

//>'X hh h hl

/////

////,

'////

'////

2-

'////

////,

'////

'///,

1 h[

1 1

1 hhl 1-

'////

////,

'////

//, '//

o I

I i

v i

April '94 May '94 June '94 July '94 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are 0.

There is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: Epoxy repairs to ST-4B, which is awaiting completion of MWO 931325, scheduled start date 1995 Refueling Outage. This temporary modifi-cation was previously included in the on-line removable >6 months old classification, but was re-classified as an outage modification to save engineering resources from com-pleting 1 ECN to allow the epoxy repair to remain in place and a second ECN to remove it during the 1995 refueling outage. In addition, at the end of July 1994 there were 4 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be removed on-line. These were: 1) Local indication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11 B, in which Operations is reviewing a draft FLC. After review, Licensing is to issue an FLC, and the NRC is to approve; 2) LP-30 transformer,in which ECN 93-183 is approved for accomplishment prior to 8/31/94; 3) Door 1011-7 lockset replacement,in which ECN 93-408 is approved for accomplishment 1995 on-line; and 4) CL-106 blank flange installation, in which ECN 94-298 is approved for accomplishment 1994 on line.

At the end of July 1994, there was a total of 23 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta-tion.15 of the 23 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 8 are removable on-i line. In 1994 a total of 30 temporary modifications have been installed.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 57

.3 at.

O

.'tal Modification Packages Open 264 2 50 -

-O-Fort Calhoun Year End Goal n

200 -

150 - c o

e o

127 4

7 100- I o

r a

y a

w, y

.l, h

}&

V h

h h

kh fy f.

&n

$1 a

w Q

q r

2 50 -

M M

2$

y N

g n

7

iit hi m

u g

M gg g;;

y n&

g

\\g a

4p g

e.c g

b.g g$

$;g D

N n

n

(

ifi h

y N

f (

_e n

i

!il b

B M

t$

4!

g I

i i

6 I

I I

I I

i i

l i

i I

'91

'92

'93 AugG3 sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstand-ina modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).

Cateaorv Reoorting Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 1

Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 1

Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 27 onstruction Backlog /In Progress 15 Design Engr. Uodate Backlog /In Proaress 11 Total 55 l

At the end of July 1994,12 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 39 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 104 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 51 backlog modification request reviews this year.

l The 1994 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 80 outstanding modifications.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 58

.- =

EARS R: quiring Engineering Closecut - Not in Clos:out O DEN B sE 50-40-40-40-j 40-30-30-30-30-20- -

20-

~-

20-10-10-10-10-

.^

"' 7 j

0 --

,o

,0

,0 -_L1 r-T-

May Jun Jul May Jun Jul May Jun Jul May Jun Jul

)

0-3 months 3-6 months 612 months

>12 months

)

July '94 Overdue EARS C Cbsoout (SE)

O Engineering Rosponse b

s8:

?8:

i i

i O

Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Prkarity 5 Priority 6 O

Priority 1 & 2 O

Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200-150 -

100-50-p

{

I I

i i

i i

i I

I i

i 1

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 O 67 Overdue Responses

@ 57 EARS Resolved and in Closoout C 46 Overdue Closoouts O 100 EARS Requiring Rosponso G S2 EARS on Schedule 4 * * *

~

a(s-/s

llllllllllllll11 Os.sv.

/

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer-ing and System Engineering. The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 4

1 EARS closed during the month 6

Total EARS open as of the end of the month 165 Data Source: Skiles/Pulverenti (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59

g in DEN - 203 g 0-3 Months - 307 6.6 31.6 O in System Engineering - 143 37.1 % 7.8%f O 3-6 Months - 97 5%

O in Procurement /Constr. - 125 15.1 %

O 36 Months - 238

@ in Closecut - 171 ECH STATUS OVERALL BACKLOG E ECNs Backlogged O ECNs Received During the Month O ECNs Completed During the Month ELLLLLh @251%

E 0-3 Months -119

==

I I

i i

i i

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 (Year-to Date monthly average of ECNs received was 50.5)

ECN STATUS DEN 250-200-0 4.5 3 0 3 Months - 35

~

150-62.9% 12.6 %

O 3-6 Months - 18 100--

8 O >6 Months - 90 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS SE 250-200-3 0-3 Months - 41 10 2.8 l 52,8 %

O 3 6 Months - 18

~

~

~

O >6 Months - 66 I

I I

I I

I Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94

_ECN STATUS; PROC /CONSTR 200-D E 0 3 Months - 112 18.1 %

0 3-6 Months - 28

~

16.4 5.5 a 4 O >6 Months - 31 I

I I

i i

i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - CLOSEOUT ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverso Trend: None SEP 62 60

E FC Type = 213 3 Prionty 1 &2 - 107 33.2

@ SRIType = 247 l

@ Priority 3 & 4 - 326 38.5 0 oC Type = 182

[

'j O Priority 5 & 6 = 209 TOTAL OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (642 TOTAL)

TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (642 TOTAL)

O DEN - Engineering Not Complete y System Engineering Response, Confirmation Not Complete

@ Maintenarce/ Construction /Procurernent Work Not Complete 3 DEN - Closeout or Drafting Not Complete 213 210 205 200_

399 5 Priority 1 or 2 50 4

100 -

95 '

8 Priority 3 or 4 58.7 50-49

\\

O Priority 5 or 6 0

i i

i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Facility Change ECNs Open 271 246 250 244 241 247 250 -

200 -

73 M

7.1%

150 -

64 I

$59.5%j O Priority 5 or 6

)

100 -

30 50-so

'v' j

0-i i

i i

i j

Feb94 - Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open l

250-2_34 3.8"

['] Priordy 1 or 2 2m 200 -

188 1st 182

- 9.7a/.

Priority 3 or 4

~

7 O Priority 5 or 6 100-.

50-0--

7 i

i q

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Document Change ECNs Open ENGINEEFilNG CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61

O Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error

@ Other Personnel Error

@ Maintenance Problem 3-M Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem

@ Equipment Failures 2-1-

g t

r E

I f

L t

I

[

0 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i e

i Jul93 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from July 1,1993 through June 30,1994. To be consis-tent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.

The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For detailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section of this report.

There were no events in June 1994 that resulted in an LER.

l Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62

O Total Requalification Training Hours O Simulator Training Hours

@ NorrRequalification Training Hours 50-E Number of Exam Failures y

40-37 34 32 2

1 E

30-20-18 37

~

14 14 Io *

• 7.

10-8 5

7'/

- 7 6

3.

5 4

'[

3 5

5

/

g 3

2

(

O M

O i

O Cycle 93-5 Cycle 93-6

• Cycle 93 7 Cycle 94-1 Cycle 94-2 Cycle 94-3 Cycle 94-4 *

• Note 1: The Simulator was out-of-service during Cycle 93-6 and Cycle 94-4.

• Note 2: Includes 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of General Employee Training.

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of bours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP l

verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training.

There was 1 written exam failure, and no simulator exam failures for Cycle 94-4. The individual who f ailed the written exam was remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift schedule.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 63

=

@ SRO Exams Administered O SRO Exams Passed E RO Exams Administered 20-O RO Exams Passed 15-10-7 5-o Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera-tor (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis-tered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

The NRC Generic Fundamentals (GFES) examination was administered to the Hot License class on June 8,1994. All 8 individuals (4 ROs,2 ISROs and 2 Certifications) passed. No other Hot License examinations were given in July Hot License training will re-convene on August 29,1994.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

)

l Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64

O TotalOpon CARS

@ Total Open irs G Opon CARS > Six Months Old S Open irs > Six Months Old 360-360 320--

cycle 15

[

[

[

320 Refueling 280-outage 280 240 -

2 2

2 2

2 2

2

-240

(

200-

-200 160-E 160 120-l 120 l

}

{

72 3

_2

}

2 2

l 80 -

80 t,Jl.

1 g

e::

E:

40-40 4, 9, 4, 4 f

+::

a

,0 0

i i

Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 E Open Significant CARS 0 Open Signmcant irs g

3 E

80 -

s4 60 -

51 37 7

40-27 I

24 20 -

2 2

4 5

5 4

6 6

8 7

8 8

0 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator 'shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS

>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of open significant CARS and the number of open significant irs.

At the end of July 1994 there were 66 open CARS.16 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 8 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month.

Also, at the end of July there were 352 open irs.162 of these irs were greater than 6 months old. There were 81 Open Significant irs at the end of the month.

The 1994 monthly goal for the number of CARS greater than 6 months old is less than 30.

Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source) & CHAMPS Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: Although the number of irs has been increasing, an adverse trend is not indicated because the increase is a result of a revision to Standing Order R-4 that lowers the threshold for writing irs and requires completion of all corrective actions prior to closing irs.

65

I Engineering Hold

-+- Planning Complete

-O-Planning Hold

-H-Ready

-V-Part Hold Total 650 -

600 -

550 -

500 -

.h

'N

- 350 -

l-U 300 -

g 250-h 200 -

150 -

J 100 -

50-0 i

Dec93Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb Mar 95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates:

Parts Holds (part hold removed when parts are staged and ready for use)

Engineering Holds (Engineering hold removed when appropriate engineering paper-work or support is received for the package)

Planning Holds (Planning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process)

Planning Complete (status given when only items keeping the job from being ready to work are parts or engineering support)

Ready (status when all planning, supporting documentation, and parts are ready to go)

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 66

>>O

'O 'D -l a4 Complete Q. o gu O.

3-e 3'

$o6

?c5

[>

to ca s

m o

n m

e agm 5

6*F

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

I en o a

3 O-g$g

? *O I H

E S

M

=

o-O All Projects l

l a q --

E

@ER y

sh%%hMhv1 a-u m

-mm og$

3 N$

z$T a y

5-E r-Steam Generator Services I

o to m r-thw ww w sw1 s

• o*

Om9 Q <x

?.

m@

3 7

c 5y gQn O

Balance of Plant ECT a

8

? **a hi

~

in e

• gs n8=

El h

$@9 6 *-

(n Erosion / Corrosion I

E O

'1

-4 SSSMh%%%%M1 c

Q.

a-m o e

~

g 63v H

m g) >

E

' E8 E

Snubber Testing I

a @a @

m z

o

=r sssh%%%swa

=

a y

a mR O

E o o ISI Exams E

6 hoe 3

$55 E

m E

h Om M

Ey 0 O

E o3 m

System Pressure Tests I

5' s

a a E m,g, 2.

O m

A%%%%%ww o

3-

• n I E c

3 5

-9 C

M 8

m

• S Relief Valve Testing l

9 9 3

E 5

g "U

A%%%h\\%%i e

a.

3 x o D

O M

O g

$*o O

Check Valves I

A oo o-C N h w % % Nsssss3 3

09 d

WO m

Motor Operated Valves (MOVs)

I CD m

m Ox K% % % %% %1 o

m O. G.

M 5

4m E

= cn Boric Acid Inspection I

e hhh%%hNS3 n

t

m 1995 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS Baseline Schedule for FRC Approval Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval 20 --

Final Design Package issued W

l Total Modification Packages (17) (3 added after 1/14/94) r 15-EY l

s'

: : : :::::'::'::'::':::::::::' ll: :::

oE

-3 *>

.RS 10-d{1 a-e 8

b 5-o.

o o

0 5

5 5

5 E

~

8 S

S S

5 E

E 3

PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 13 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. The data is represented with respect to the baseline j

schedule (established 1/14/94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering group.

In July 1994 no modifications were deleted and none were added.

j The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by October 15,1994. 3 modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included in this performance indicator. The 3 modifications are scheduled and will not impact the 1995 outage.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager /Sourco)

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 68

1994 ON LINE MODIFICATIONS Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval & Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued (7 FD DCPs issued prior to 1/14/94)

Total Modification Packages (17) (2 are Close Out Only) (1 Added after 1/14/94) 20-k

?

]h15-g.B ll ll

'l l

'l

'lll:

l' l

l'

• e k'*~

..f Ea

..J.f~~~~~~~~~~

B$

m h

5-

Ee 8

b E

o i,ii,,,iiiii,,,,iiiii,,,ii,,,iiiii

,,,iiii,,i h

h h

I 3

0 R

s s

s 5

s s

a a

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during 1994. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/

94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.

In July 1994 no modifications were deleted and 1 was added.

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by August 15,1994.1 modification was added after 1/14/94 and is not included in this performance indicator. The modification is scheduled and will not im-pact 1994 on-line construction.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None gg

ACTION PLANS 9

70

ACTION PLANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing increased Management Attention for 3 consecutive months, in accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-OP-37, the following performance indicators would require action plans based on 3 consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing Increased Management Attention":

. Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Critical Hours

. Unplanned Safety System Actuations (INPO and NRC)

The Plant Manager and Station Engineering Manager have reviewed the daily and ongoing actions being taken to return these performance indicators to meeting the goals. This review indicates appropriate action is being taken and no explicit action plan is required.

The action plan for Fuel Reliability Indicator (page 14) follows:

1) The prediction that there is a potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rods in the core is based on a change in the Xe 133 to 1131 ratio. A more definitive disposition will be possible when a significant power change is made and specific chemistry da.a can be collected.

2) A specification will be prepared for Ultrasonic Testing,if required, during the next refueling outage.

The action plan for Violations Per 1,000 Inspection Hours (page 18) follows:

1) The number of inspections (and thus exposure to potential violations) currently scheduled for the remainder of the year is much less than the first half of 1994 (SALP period ended 7/31/94). Only the SWOPl and Resident inspections are currently scheduled.

l

2) Pursuit of Resident inspector concerns / problems / issues will be thorough to preclude them from becoming violations.

3) Preparation for scheduled inspections (e.g. SWOPI) will be thorough and comprehensive.

J

/

/

(Action Plans are continued on the next page) 71

~.

d ACTION PLANS (continued)

The action plan for Thermal Performance (page 31) follows:

Actions to improvo Thermal Performance are:

1) Pursuing adjustments and repairs (in progress) on condenser backwash valves to enhance condenser performance.

4

2) Investigate the possibility of FW flow nozzle fouling.

3) Investigate the effects of adding Ethanolamine (late summer) to 4

secondary chemistry to clean system and possibly reduce S/G blowdown.

i i

l E

I 72

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR PERFORMANCE The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-cal operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per j

able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the kilowatt Sour indicator represents the budget and actual

{

auxiliary feedwater system for the reporting period di-cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi-the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is

system, the Financial and Operating Report.

CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS Compares the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate to 21,000 D SINTEGRATIONS/ MINUTE PER PROBE the industry check valve f ailure rate (f ailures per 1 millon AREA component hours). The data for the industry failure rate The personnel contamination events in the clean con-is three mor ths behind the Pi Report reporting month.

trolled area. This indicator tracks personnel performance This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43.

for SEP #15 & 54.

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA Collective radiaten exposure is the total external whole-The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which body dose received by all on-site personnel (including includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and contractors and visitors)during a time period, as mea-areas of the C/RP building, that is contaminated based sured by the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col-on the total square footage. This in6cator tracks perfor-lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person-mance for SEP # 54.

rom. This indicator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54.

DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-

SUMMARY

watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) f ail-month are also shown.

ure rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen month time period. Failu%s are reported as component DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

(i.e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e.

This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for charging pumps, men steam stop valves, control ele-each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start ment drive motors, etc.Dategories.

demands and the last 25 load-run demands.

Failure Cause Categories are:

Wear Out/ Aging - a f ailure thought to be the conse-DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE quence of expected wear or aging.

(LOSTTIME ACCIDENT RATE)

Manuf acturing Def ect - a f ailure attributable to inad-This indicato? is defined as the number of accidents for equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com-all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, ponent or system.

involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours Engineering / Design - a f ailure attnbutable to the inad-worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-equate design of the resporsible component or system.

tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor.

Other Devices - a f ailure anributable to a failure or mance for SEP #25 & 26.

misoperation of another component or system, including associated devices.

DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL)

Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure thM is a result of im-The Document Review Indicator shows the number of proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, er documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test-uled for review, and the number of document reviews ing activities performed on the responsible component or that are overdue 'or the reporting month. A document system, including failure to follow procedures.

review is considered ovordue if the re w is not com-1 Errors - f ailures attributable to incorrect procedures that plete within 6 months of the assigned we date. Thk were followed as written, improper installat' n of equip-indicator tracks performance for SEP #4C o

ment, and personnel errors (including f ailure to follow procedures propeny). Also included in this category are EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM f ailures for which the causa is unknown or cannot be as-PERFORMANCE signed to any of the preceding categories.

The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer-gency AC power system for the reporting period divided by the number of hours in the reporting period muttiplied j

by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys-tem.

73

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS i

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL-EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABIUTY ITY This indicator measures the total unreliability of emot -

This indicator shows the number of failures that were gency diesel generators. In general, unreliability is the reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die-ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to sel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level combination of start unreliability and load-run of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob-unreliability.

tained a reliabiltty of greater than or equal to 95% when the demand f ailures are less than the trigger values.

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR)

1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent BREAKDOWN start demands, including all start only demands and all This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of start demands that are followed by load-run demands, the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design En-whether by automatic or manualinitiation. A start-only gineering Nuclear and System Engineering. This indica-demand is a demand in which the emergency generator tor tracks performance for SEP #62.

is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the emer-ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS gency generator system that prevents the generator from The number of ECNs that were opened ECNs that were achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as completed, and open backley ECNs awaaing completion a valid start failure. This includes any condition identified by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks in the course of maintenance inspedions (with the emer-performance for SEP #62.

gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred.

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN

3) Number of Load Run Demands: For a valid load-run This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering demand to be counted the load-run sttempt must meet Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design une or more of the following crite Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real au-Maintenance. The graphs provide data on ECN Facility tomatic or manualinitiation.

Changes open, ECN Substitute Replacement Parts

8) A load.run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration open, and ECN Document Changes open. This indicator as stated in each test's specifications.

tracks performance for SEP #62.

C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator is expected to be operated for at least one hour while EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-loaded with at least 50% of its design load.

CAL HOURS

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical hours is the l

should be counted for any reason in which the emer-inverse of the mean time between forced outages j

gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre-caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal dicted. I-ailures are counted during any valid load-run to the numbst of hours the reactor is critical in a period

(

demands.

(1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />) divided by the number of forced outages

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run caused by equipment failures in that period, should not be counted as valid demands or failures when

• ay can be attnbuted to any of the following:

EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR surious trips that would be bypassed in the event of This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available 6

i s e ergency.

generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as ty Matfunction of equipment that is not required during a percentage. Available generation is the energy that an emergency.

can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum l

C) Intentional termination of a test because of abnormal power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi-l conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be l

generator damage or repair.

produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu-l D) Malfunctions or operathg errors which would have not ously at maximum capacity, prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brnught to load within a few minutes.

FORCED OUTAGE RATE E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting sys-This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc-the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared cessfu! start with the starting system in its normal align-to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced m ent.

events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen-require removing the unit from service before the end of orator being declared inoperable should be counted as the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during ures and events initiatad while the unit is in reserve shut-corrective maintenance and the successful test that fol-down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service).

lows repair to venfy operability should not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG has not been de-clared operable again.

1 1

74 l

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indcator is defined as the steady-state primary cool-This indicator shows the number of SFtO and/or RO quiz-ant I-131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contri-zes and exams that are administered and passed each i

buton and rormalized to a common purifcation rate.

month. This indicator tracks training performance for j

Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re-SEP #68.

actor core internals f rom previous defective fuel or is present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu-LICENSED OPERATOR REQUAllRCATION TRAIN-facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous ING operation for at least three days at a power level that The total number of hours of training given to each crew does not vary more than + or - 5%. Plants should collect during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-data for this indcator at a power level above 85%, when ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),

possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state the number of non-requalification training hours and the power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at number of exam f ailures. This indcator tracks training the highest steady state power level attained during the performance for SEP #68.

month.

The density correction f actor is the rat,0 of the specific LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature BREAKDOWN (540 degrees F., Vf - 0.02146) divided by the specific This indicator shows the number and root cause code for volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex-follows:

changer, Vf - 0.016204), which results in a density cor-

1) Administrative Control Problem Management and rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32, supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-GROSS HEAT RATE equate management or supervisory control, incorrect Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio cf total thermal procedures, etc.)

energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code capturas reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by errors of omisson/ commission by licensed reactor opera-the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH).

tors during plant activities.

3) Other Personnel Error Errors of omission /commis-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED sion committed by non-licensed personnel involved in Tha total amount (in Kilograma) of non-halogenated haz-plant activities.

ardow waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other

4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause hazardoas waste produced by FCS each month.

code is to capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM the maintenance functional organizaton. Activities in-SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ciudad in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-lance, calibration and radiation protection.

able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the

5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem high pressure safety injection system for the reporting

- This cause code covers a full range of programmatic period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe-deficiencies in the areas of design, construdion, installa-riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres-tion, and f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to sure safety injection e Stem.

underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ-mont, etc.).

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-This indcator is defined as the number of accidents per ronmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for spuri-200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per-ous failures of electronic piece-parts and f ailures due to manently assigned to the station that result in any of the meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high foilowing 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex-winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one time cluding the day of tne accident); 2) one or more days failures. Electric mmponents included in this category away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors,

3) f atalities. Contractor personnel are not included for dodes, resistors, etc.

this indicator.

LOGGA BLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

IH-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SEH-The total number of security incidents for the reporting VICE month depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks so-Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are curity performanca for SEP #58.

out-of service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared to rmal hours for maintenance. This ireludes OPPD pernonnel a5 well as contract personnel.

75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFI-This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Mainte-CIENCIES nance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the A control room equipment deficiency (CRD)is defined as reporting month. Maintenance classifications are de.

any component which is operated or controlled from the fined as:

Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control Corrective - Repair and restoratioa of equipment or com.

Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Control ponents that have failed or are mnifunctioning and are Room, or provides a passive function for the Control not performing their intended function.

Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not perform under all conditions as designed. This definition Preventive - Actions taken to mairitain a piece of equip.

also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panels Al-179, ment within design operating cx)rxlitions, prevent equip.

Al-185, and Al-212.

ment failure, and extend its irfe and are performed prior A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is to equipment f ailure.

considered an

• Operator Work Around (OWA) item" if some other action is required by an operator to compen-Non-Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance ac.

sate for the condition of the component. Some examples tivities performed to implement station improvements or of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does to repair non-plant equipment.

not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-tor out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re-Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as:

paired because replacement parts require a long lead time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant Emergency - Conditions which significantly degrade sta.

purnp to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions tion safety or availabikty, are required by an Operator because of equipment de-sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-Immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies whch signifi-erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require cantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unit shut.

changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant down or power reduction.

equipment that is required to be used during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proce-Operations Concern - Equipment deficiencies which dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-hinder station operation.

mation during normal or abnormal operations.

Essential-Routine corrective maintenance on essential NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS Rt>

station systems and equipment.

SULTING IN UCENSEh EVENT REPORTS The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Non-Essential-Routine corrective maintenance on non.

Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting essential station systems and equipment.

month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 &

61.

Plant Improvement - Non-corrective maintenance and plant improvements.

OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS & INCIDENT

~

REPORTS This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP This indicate,r displays the total number of open Correc-

1. 36.

tive Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are older than six months and the number of open significant MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION CXPOSURE CARS. Also displayed are the number of open incident The total maximum amount of radiation received by an Reports ; irs), the number of irs that are greater than six individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, months old and the number of open significant irs.

and annual basis.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING The number of Modification Requests (MRs)in any state OUTAGE) between the issuance of a Modification Number and the The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have cornpletion of the drawing update.

been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Ref ueling

1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress. This number rep-Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modification requests that have not been plant staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork 4 proved during the reporting month, ready for field use). Also included is the number of

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures includes:

and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, A ) Modification Requests that are not yet review sd.

(parts staged, not yet inspected, part2 not yet arrived)

B.) Modrfcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Main.

Projects Review Committee (NPRC).

tonance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nucler.c have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage Projects Committee (NPC) and have nol yet been converted to MWOs.

These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or 76

.=

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with returned to Engineering for more information, some ap-the original design of the plant would not be considered proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and preventable).

some approved for planning. Once planning is com-For purposes of LER event classification, a

• Personnel plated and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these Error" LER is defined as follows: An event for which the Modification Requests may be approved for accomplish-root cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or rnent with a year assigned for construction or they may more indrviduals (as opposed to being attributed to a de-be cancelled. All of these different phases require re-partment or a general group). Also, the inappropriate view.

action must have occurred within approximately two

3) Design Engineering Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear years of the

• Event Date" specified in the LER.

Planning has assigned a year in which construction will Additionally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error" be completed and design work may be in progress.

should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator

4) Construchon Backlog /In Progress. The Construction trends personnel performance for SEP ftem #15.

Package has been issued or construction has begun but the modification has not been accepted by the System PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT Acceptance Committee (SAC).

OF UMT

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress. PED The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry has received the Modificaton Completion Report but the parameters divided by the total number of hours possible drawings have not been updated.

for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, The above mentioned e atanding modifications do not Chloride, Hydrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride and include modif catons wWch are proposed for cancella-Suspended Solids. EPRIlimits are used.

tion.

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the status of the projects which are The number of identified incidents concerning mainte-in the scope of the Refueling Outage.

nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the use of procedures (includes the number of PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

The percentage of total MWOs completed per month This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by

1. 15,41 & 44.

maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any main-i tenance work repeated to correct a deficiency which has PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION re ocx:urred within 60 days following similar work activi-PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-ties. Any additional work required to correct deficiencies T10NS) discovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to on.

This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-sure the component / system pcsses subsequent Post proved for completion during the Refueling Outage.

Maintenance Tests. This definition can be found in S. O.

M 101.

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLAN.

NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIRCATIONS)

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE-This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-NANCE ACTIVITIES proved for completion during 1994.

The % of the number of cornpleted maintenance actrvi-ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte-RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM nance activities each month. This % is shown for all The number of identified poor radiological work practices maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs, radiological work performance for SEP #52.

MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella-neous actrvities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per-RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

formance for SEP #33.

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil.

PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of noneutage corrective maintenance and preventive main.

LER event classification, a preventable LER is defined tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, as: An event for which the root cause is personnel error expressed as a percentago, is calculated based on man-(i.e., inappropriate action by one or rnore individuals),

hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-inadequate administrative controls, a design /construc-nance items in the month that were not completed or ad-tioWinstallation/f abrication problem (involving work com-minstratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace pleted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main-period equal to 25 % of the scheduled interval. This indi-tenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper cator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP upkeeptopair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of

1. 41.

the event must have occurred within approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER (e.g., an 77

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE-SIGNIFICANT EVENTS QUENCY RATE Significant events are those events identified by NRC The number of injuries requiring more than normal first staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operat-aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ing experience. The screening process includes the trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26.

daily review and discussion of all reported operating re-actor events, as well as other operational data such as REPEAT FAILURES special tests or construction activities. An event identi-The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System fied from the screening process as a significant event (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures or potential threat to the health and safety of the public for the last eighteen months.

was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a Safety system failures are any events or conditions that transient; 3) Degradation of fuel integrity, primary cool-could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of ant pressure boundary, important associated features; structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple

4) Scram with complication; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, f ailure of all trains con-radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or nical Specificadons; 7) Other.

more trains is not counted as a safety system failure.

INPO significant events reported in this indicator are The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The significant events and lessons loamed identified through following is a list of the major safety systems, sub-the SEE-IN screening process.

systems, and components monitored for this indicator:

Accident Monitoring Instrumentation, Auxihary (and SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE Emergency) Feedwater System Combustible Gas Con-The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment FCS during the reportmg period.

and Containment isolaton, Containment Coolant Sys-tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, STAFFING LEVEL Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Features instrumentation. Essential Compressed Air for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Detection or Supp.ression Systems, Isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line isolation Valves Onsite Emergency AC & DC STATION NET GENERATION Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring Instrumenta-The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core Isolation the reporting month.

Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation instrumentation.

TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removat Systems, Safety Valves, Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-Fuel Systems, Starxiby Liquid Control System and Ulti-figurations to the plant's systems.

mate Heat Sink.

1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating INDEX systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the The Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) is a calculation P&lD schematic, mnnection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

based on the concentration of key impurities in the sec-

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil-ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-most hkely cause of deterioration of the steam genera-cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures tors. Cnteria for calculating the cpl are: 1) The plant is are not considered as temporary modifications unless the at greater than 30 percent power; and 2) The power is jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-changing less than 5% per day. The CPI is calculated dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or using the following wquation: CPI- (sodium /0.90) +

lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-(Chloride /1.70) + (Sulfate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper /

cations.

0.30)/5 Where: Sodium, sulf ate and chloride are the

3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for and copper are monthly time weighted average which MRs havs been submitted will be considered as feedwater concentrat ons in ppb. The denominator for temporary modifications until final resolution of the MR sach of the 5 f actors is the INPO median value. If the and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently monthly average for a specMc parameter is less than the recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-INPO median value, the median value is used in the cah rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71.

culation.

76

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS THERMAL PERFORMANCE reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signalis gener-The ratio of the design gross heat rat )(corrected) to the ated (ECCS onty), and major equipment in the system is adjusted actual gross heat rate, expa,ssed as a percent-actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation age.

was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pres-UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR sure injecton system, the low pressure injecton system.

The ratio of the available energy generation over a given or the safety injection tanks.

time period to the reference energy generation (the en-ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS(NRC continuously at full power under reference ambient con-DEFINmON) ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-The number of safety system actuations which include contage.

(sk) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS classification of safety system actuations includes actua-This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au-tions when mayr equipment is operatedEd when the tomate scrams (reactor protection system logic actua-logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-tions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critical operation.

lenged.

The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS in a specific time perod by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividing This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited that number by the total number of hours critical in the in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-same time period. The indicator is further defined as tion hours. The violatons are reported in the year that the follows:

inspection was actually performed and not based on when

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antci-the inspection report is received. The hours repo'ted for pated part of a planned test.

each inspection report are used as the inspection hours.

2) Scram means the automato shutdown of the reactor by a rapid inserton of negative reactivity (e.g., by control VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE rods, lequid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac-WASTE tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig-This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may radoactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-have been spurious.

tor also shows the volume of low level radioactive waste

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused which is in temporary storage, the amount of radcactive actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro-oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param-volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been eters and conditions, rather than the manual scram shipped off-site for processing. Low 4evel solid radioactive switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but-waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and tons) provided in the main control room.

evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power

4) Cntical means that during the steady-state condition of plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive waste the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplcation includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, dispos-factor (k,,,) was essentially equal to one.

able protactrve clothing, plastic containers, and any other material to be disposed of at a lowdevel radioactive waste UNPLANNED CAPABluTY LOSS FACTOR disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms.

The rato of the unplanned energy losses during a given Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent penod of time, to the reference energy generation (the fuel or e by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica-energy that could be produced if the unit were operated for tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54.

continuously at full power under reference anhient con-ditions) over the same time perod, expressed as 9 per-centage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

This indcator is defined as the sum of the following safety system actuations:

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS actuation setpoint or from a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal.

2)The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-tem actuatons that result from a loss of power to a safe-guards bus. An ur, planned safety system actuation oc-curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is 79

SAFETY ENHANCTENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators Index is to list perfor-l mance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended.

I SEP Reference Number 15 Eggg Increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance).

. 49

)

Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 21,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area.,.

...5 Recordable Injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate..

..4 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs...........

.6 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies t

Staffing Level

. 42 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented Disabling injury / illness Frequency Rate.

..3 Recordable injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate.

.4 SEP Reference Number 26 Evaluate and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate.

.3 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate.

.4 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate.

.3 Recordable Injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate.

...4 SEP Reference Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training I

MWO Planning Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outag9).

. 66 Overall Project Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage).

. 67 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning...

..... 68 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts).

... 50 l

SEP Reference Number 36 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage).

. 45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and Implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue..

.46 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents..

. 49 i

SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate.

.36

(

80

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued)

SEP Reference Number 44 Pace Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance).

. 49 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Controland Administrative Program Document Review.

. 55 1

SEP Reference Number 52 I

Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program.

. 54 SEP Reference NumtmL54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure.

.16 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste.

.37 Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area.

.5 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area.

. 53 I

SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security).

. 56 SEP Reference Number 60 Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports.

. 20 SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tertc Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports.

. 20 SEP Ref erence Number 62 i

Estabhsh Interim System Engineers Temporary Modrfications.

. 57 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.

. 59 Engineering Change Notice Status.

. 60 Engineering Change Notices Open.

. 61 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training.

. 63 License Candidate Exams.

. 64 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Tomporary Modifications.

.57 81

w REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST M. P. Lazar R. L. Andrews B. R. Livingston G. L. Anglehart D. L Lovett K. L Belek J. H. MacKinnon B. H. Biome J. W. Marcil C. E. Boughter N. L. Marfice C. J. Brunnert R. D. Martin G. R. Cavanaugh T. J. Mcivor J. W. Chase K. G. Melstad A. G. Christensen K. A. Miller O. J. Clayton P. A. Mruz R. P. Clemens Nuclear Licensing R. G. Conner

& Industry Affairs J. L. Connolley J. T. O'Connor G. M. Cook W. W. Orr S. R. Crites T. L Patterson D. C. Dietz R. T. Pearce M. L Ellis H. J. Faulhaber R. L. Phelps W. J. Ponec M. T. Frans C. R. Rice D. P. Galle A. W. Richard S. K. Gambhir D. G. Ried J. K. Gasper G. K. Samide W. G. Gates M. J. Sarxfhoefner S. W. Gebers F. C. Scofield L. V. Goldberg H. J. Sefick D. J. Golden J. W. Shannon R.H. Guy R. W. Short A. L. Hale C. F. Simrnons J. B. Herman T. L. Herman E. L Skaggs J. L. Skiles K. C. Holthaus F. K. Smith L. P. Hopkins R. L. Sorenson C. K. Huang K. E. Steele T. W. Jamieson M. A. Tesar R. L Jaworski J. J. Tesarek R. A.Johansen J. W. Tills J. W. Johnson J. M. Waszak W. C. Jones G. R. Williams J. D. Keppler S. J. Willrett D. D. Kloock L.T.Kusek 82 e

FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES Event Date Range

- Production (MWH)

Cumulative (MWH)

Cycle 1 09/26/73 -02/01/75 3,299,639 3,299,639

~*

1st RefuelinD 02/01/75 -05/09/75 Cycle 2 05/09/75 -10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/76-12/13/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76 - 9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77 10/14/78 3,026,832 12,985,720 4th Refueling 10/14/78 12/24/78 Cycle 5 12/24/78 01/18/80 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 - 12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/06/82 04/07/83 Cycle 8 04/07/83 03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84 - 07/12/84 Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85 - 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86-03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87 - 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90 - 05/29/90 Cycle 13 05/29/90 - 02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 i

13th Refueling 02/01/92- 05/03/92 Cycle 14 05/03/92-09/25/93 4,981,485 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93 - 11/26/93 Cycle 15 11/26/93- 03/11/95 15th Refueling 03/11/95- 04/29/95 (Planned Dates)

FORT CALHOUN STATION CURRENT PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS " RECORDS" First Sustained Reaction August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.)

First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial Operation (180,000 KWH)

September 26,1973 Achieved Full Power (100%)

May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 days)

June 8,1987 Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Not Generation (364,468,800 KWH)

October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13)

May 29,1990 Feb,1,1992 9

..,m

-- w