Text

Performance Indicators,Apr 1993.
	ML20044G038
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	04/30/1993
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20044G034	List: ML20044G033; ML20044G038;
References
	NUDOCS 9306010350
	Download: ML20044G038 (99)
	v • d • e

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - --

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS APRIL 1993 l

SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS in' 188s !s888 R pyg 6

kwd of ura%a w wn, alliink...

d iawdns wisden, wnd wwndjudg anal...

dwa,Q&lian,cannn, %g censnilsnud...

d wa,wayg e y&,...d w day &jd>

,4V Llind lisa, unny lian. Rw iaunev-dinachd, wd & wwR e udnund, 9

pnwm, d w owv ow,n, ss{e wedb u6 a w 4 a s Aw u -l- w, w qu me peun, udjud u dang & ?qV Uasup.

jaans ). 6%awu

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l

l Prepared By:

Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group APRIL 1993

FORT CALHOUN STATION APRIL 1993 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT OPER ATIONS

SUMMARY

Fon Calhoun Station operated at approximately 77% power until the unit was taken off-line on April 24,1993 at 0244 hours0.00282 days 0.0678 hours 4.034392e-4 weeks 9.2842e-5 months for a scheduled one-week maintenance outage. The purpose of the outage was to improve plant reliability and thennal performance for the peak summer season.

During the outage, the plant was maintained in hot shutdown On April 24 and 25, work on 161KV Circuit 1557 (components located in the switchyani) was conducted. After work on Circuit 1587 was completed,.1.61 KV power was supplied to FCS through transformer TI A4 while Transformer TI A3 was out-of service. The oil in Transfonner TI A3 was changed and Transformer TI A3 and its fire protection deluge piping were tested. On April 29, Transformer TI A3 was retumed to service and the 161KV system was restored to its j normal lineup. ;

I During the outage, the condensers were cleaned, six containment area radiation monitors wem replaced, three safety injection tanks wem drained and refilled (to increase the boron concentra-tion), and a turbine electrohydraulic control system circuit card was replaced.

At 1019 hours0.0118 days 0.283 hours 0.00168 weeks 3.877295e-4 months on April 30 a non-licensed operator verifying tag clearance on the 345 KV syn-chronizing potentiometer mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer which caused a low voltage alann on a non-vital 4160 V. bus. Although voltage remained normal on the non-vital bus, the low voltage signal initiated load shed and anticipatory startup of one Emergency Diesel Generator associated with a vital 4160 V. bus. The "A" Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP) tripped on the load shed signal and a reactor trip signal was generated. All control rods were previously fully inserted and the plant was in a permissible condition for low Reactor Coolant System (RCS) flow. Normal electrical lineup was restored and the "A" RCP was restarted.

FCS returned to reactor critical status at 2025 hours0.0234 days 0.563 hours 0.00335 weeks 7.705125e-4 months on April 30,1993. and the turbine generator was synchronized to the grid at 0429 hours0.00497 days 0.119 hours 7.093254e-4 weeks 1.632345e-4 months on May 1,1993.

The following NRC inspection was completed during this reporting period:

IER NO. Description 93-04 Residents' Routine Inspection No LERs were submitted during this reporting period.

1 1

1 i

Soume: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs

l l

=

Unplanned Unit- Unplanned Automatic Thermal Capability Capability Scrams /7,000 Performance Falor Loss Factor Hours Critical Performance .in j Industry Upper 10%

-NPSt-Safety AFWSp.fgty ED.G$aieiy Fugt -

Performance Above System System Systm.. Reliability =

OPPD Goal and/or

-Performance -Performance Performance Indicator Industry Median Performance Below OPPD Goal and/or I Industrial industry Median Chemistry Collective '",m8 Index Radiation Safety adioactive Accident Exposure Waste Rate INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the twelve months from May 1,1992 through April 30,1993.)

Auto Scrams While Critical Safety Performance Above Older Plant 6 Quarter Actuations System / -

Moving Average M ; Performance Above OPPD Goal Safety Forced -

Performance Below OPPD Goal and/or Older System Outage Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average Failures Rate h Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average and OPPD Goal Not Available Equipment Collective Forced Radiation Outages /1,000 Exposure . j Crit. Hrs. !

NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for July

= 1991 through December 1992. All otherindicator values are for the twelve months from May 1,1992 through April 30,1993.) .

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT APRIL 1993 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATT.ENTION REPORT The Positive Trend Report highlights several Perfor- This section lists the indicators which show inadequacies mance Indicators with data representing continued per- when compared to the OPPD goal formance above the stated goal and indicators with data representing significant improvement in recent months.

sa a in u ness Recuens Rate The following indicators have been selected as exhibiting age positive trends for the reporting month: o d s bling injury /sliness frequency rate at the end of the reporting month (0.79) is above the 1993 goal of 50.50.

Locaab!e Reoortable incidents Number of Personne! Errors Reoorted in LERs h num r of system failures has declined from a total of 47 in December 1992 to a total of 26 in April 1993. fhe pe entage of personnel errors reported in LERs at the end of the reporting month (16.7%) exceeds the Diesef Generator Reliabihtv (25 Demands) *** ""* ' '

9" (Page 25) ere have been no failures in the last 25 demands for Forced Outace Ra'e (Page 8)

The forced outage rate for the twelve months from 4/1/92 through 3/30/93 (10.11%) is above the 1992 and 1993 End of Positive Trend Report Fort Calhoun goals of a maximum of 2.4%.

UnoIanned Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition)

(Page 14)

The number of NRC unplanned saf ety system actuations

' for the reporting month (1) exceeds the 1993 Fort Cal-houn goal of O.

ADVERSE TREND REPORT Number of Control Room Eouioment Deficiencies (Page 27)

A Performance indicator which has data representing The number of control room equipment deficiencies re-three (3) consecutive months of declining performance pairable on-line for the reporting month (49) exceeds the constitutes an adverse trend. The Adverse Trend Report 1993 Fort Calhoun goalof a maximum of 45.

explains the conditions under which certain indicators are showing adverse trends - Secondary System Chemistry (Page 33)

The CPI value for the reporting month (0.64) is above the The following indicators were exhibiting adverse trends 1993 goal of s0.60.

for the reporting month.

Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours (Page 36)

Gross Heat Rate The number of violations per 1,000 inspection hours for (Page 19) the 12 months from 4/1/92 through 3/31/93 is 2.18, which An adverse trend is indicated based on three consecu- exceeds the 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals of a tive months of declining performance. maximum of 1.5.

EAR Breakdown Percent of Comoteted Scheduled Maintenance Activities (Page 65) (Pages 49 through 53)

An adverse trend is indicated based on three cx)nsecu- The percent of completed scheduled maintenance activi-tive months of increases for the total number of open ties for electrical maintenance, pressure equipment, gen-EARS. eral maintenance and mechanical maintenance for the reporting month is less than the 1993 goal of 285%.

End of Adverse Trend Report. in_t_ine Chemistrv ins +ruments Outef. Service (Page 56)

The number of in-line chemistry instruments outof-ser-vice for the reporting month (18) is above the 1993 monthly goal of a maximum of 5.

End of Management Attention Rooort.

IV

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES .

This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the pre-vious month.

The format of the report has been revised to emphasize the 1993 OPPD Nuclear Organization goa!s regarding -

Safe Operations, Performance and Costs.

INPO approximate industry upper percentile values have been revised based on the INPO 1992 Year-End Report.

Safetv Svstent Failures (Page 15)

This NRC performance indicator has been added to the report.

Cents Per Ki!owatt Hour (Page 39)

This indicator has replaced the " Operations and Mainte-nance Budget

indicator.

<- EAR Breakdown (Page 65)

The graphs for this indicator have been revised to show the percentage of EARS that is overdue and the true backlog. l I

The following indicators have been deleted from the re- l port in an effort to make it a more efficient and useful j document: Planned Capability Loss Factor DieselGen- l arator Unavailability, Secerty Non-System Failures, Se-curity System Failurcs, Personnel Turnover Rate, Total instruction Hours, Total Hours of Student Training, Com-parison of Violations Among Region IV Plants Cumula-tive Violations and NCVs, Overdue and Extendd CARS, CARS issued vs. Significant CARS vs. NRC Violations vs. LERs, Amount of Work On Hold Awaiting Parts,in-ventory Accuracy, Spare Parts inventory Value, Spare Parts issued. Stockout Rate, and Expedited Purchases.

End of Performance indicator Report Improvements /

Changes Report V

Table of Contents / Summary P. AGE GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . x SAFE OPFRATIONS = -- ... . -- =...PAGE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE / DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 2 l RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE - :....................3 CONTAMINATIONS >S,000 DPM/100 CM' 4 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN LERs - . . .5 PERFORMANCE PAGE STATION NET GENERATION (10.000 Mwh) - . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . . . .7 FORCED OUTAGE RATE., . ..-....... -... . . . . . . C EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR-- -.

- . -9 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR -- .

. .10 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR . . . . . . -11 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL . . . . . . . . . .. ... .. 12 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)- .. . . . - - . . . . . . . . .. 13 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION) . . . . . . . . ... .. ..-. 14 SAFETY SYSTEM FAlLURES . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . - . . . . . . - - - .. 15 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY:

INJECTION SYSTEM - . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- .... . . . 16 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM . . . . . . . ..- 18 GROSS HEAT RATE.- . .-........-.....19 THERMAL PERFORMANCE- .. ................20 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 21 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT (Mwth) .....-. . . . . . . . . . 22 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1.000 CRITICAL HOURS - . . . . ... . .. 23 vi

PERFORMANCE (continued) PM;iE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY.. - 24 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) . 25 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY . .. 26 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES.. .

27 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

.. 28 REPEAT FAILURES . . . . . .

29 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE (pererem) . 30 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE (cuue to 31 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT -. . . 32 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY.. .. . 33 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS: . 34 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE (mrem) . _35 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS - ._36 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS.. - 37 COST EAGE

\

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . ... 33 STAFFING LEVEL.. .. .40 4 i

DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE) . . . .. N A .. .. NA .. .. NA .. .. N A .. . 42 MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER -

BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE).. ... .. s325 .. . 58 . . 68 = 1. . 43 vii

DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) EAQf CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG GREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLD (NON. OUTAGE) .. .. .. .. .. . 44 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE. . ... 45 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE .. . . . . ... .. . . . . ~ . .. . 46 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME = .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 47 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE).. . . . . . .... 48 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE) . . .. .. ... .. ... . 49 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (PRESSURE EQUIPMENT) . .. -. 50 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (GENERAL MAINTENANCE) .. . . . .. .. 51 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE) = . . - . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 52 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL) . . . . 53 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS.. . .. ... 54 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE .. ... =55 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE . .. . 56 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED (Kg) . ... . 57 DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA = . 58 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM.. . .. .. - 59 NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS., . .. . . 60 DOCUMENT REVIEW . .. - 61 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) .. . - 62 viii

l 1

l DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) PAGE TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS (EXCLUDING SCAFFOLDING) .. .. . . . 63 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS .. ;64 i

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN . .. .. . 65 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS .. 66 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN = . . . .. 67 LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN.. .. ;_68 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING .. - 69 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS . .70 OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS . . 71 MWO PLANNING STATUS . 72 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS . . .. 73 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING . .. .. . 74 ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST PAGE ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS . 75 ]

l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS - . . . .. . 77 i SAFEW ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX.. .. 84 )

REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST . -. = = 86 TABLE OF CONTENTS /

SUMMARY

TREND SYMBOLS A- ADVERSETREND l- lMPROVED PERFORMANCE D - DECLINING PERFORMANCE :

NMA - NEEDS MANAGEMENT ATTENTION I NA NOT APPLICABLE /AVAILABLE l ix !

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President 1993 Priorities -

MISSION The safe and reliable 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. ,

GOALS 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.

1993 Priorities:

Improve S ALP ratings.

Improve INPO rating.

Reduce 1993 NRC violations with no violations mom severe than level 4.

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations. !

Goal 2: 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.

1993 Priorities:

Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork.

Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

Reduce the number of human perfonnance errors.

Goal 3: COSTS Operate Fon Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a '

viable source of electricity.

l

! 1993 Priorities:

Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

l l Streamline work processes.

Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) .

X

-=

l i

l SAFE OPERATIONS l l

l Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the i 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.

l 1

1993 Disabling injury /lliness Frequency Rate 3 Year Average Disabling injury / Illness .

Frequency Rate (from 1990 thru 1992) lGOODI 1.6 - -O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.50) ]

1.4 - 1995 INPO Industry Goal

]

1.2 -

1-0.8 -

0.4 -

C 3----C 4 Q 0.2 -

0 X , m , m , , , , , , , , , , l Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 i

DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1993 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 3 year aver-age (from 1990 through 1992) disabling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for January through April 1993 was 0.79.

There were no lost time accidents, reported for the month of April. The total number of lost time accidents that have been reported during 1993 is 2. The 1993 disabling injury /

illness frequency rate goalis a maximum value of 0.50. The 1995 INPO Industry goalis l 50.50. ,

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the past twelve months is 0.77.

The industry upper ten percentile disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the twelve

months from 1/92 through 12/92 is approximately 0.14.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Richard Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 l

l 2

- - - .s-$+

5_ 1993 R:cordabl) Injury /Illn:ss Frequrney Rats 3 Year Average Recordable injury /!!! ness 4.5 - Frequency Rate (frorn 1990 thru 1992)

IGOODI

-O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.0) y l

3.5 -

l 3-2.5 -.

2- C O O O O O O O O O O O 1.5 - _x j --X '

1- .

%,.' n l l

l 0.5 -

0 , , , , _

3 , , , , , i i Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 l RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1993 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 3 year average (from 1990 through 1992) recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate ,

is also shown. ;

1 l A recordable injury / illness case is reported if any of the Nuclear Divisions' personnel are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The record-able injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

The recordable injury / illness rate for January through April 1993 was reported as 0.80.

There were no recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of April. There l have been 2 recordable injury / illness cases in 1993.

r I

l The recordable injury / illness rate for the past twelve months is 1.80.

l The 1993 goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 2.0.

l Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Richard l Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,25,26 & 27 l 3 ,

+

l l

Personnel Contamination Rate !

-e- Outage Goal (1.5) i 2- l 0" O' "

E1.8-b 1 .6 - l I COOOOOO Q. 1.4 -

3 cr 1.2- Maintenance O 1- (- Outage ->

o

{ 0.8-

8. 0.6 -

$ 0.4-k 0.2-0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 CONTAMINATIONS >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 This ine.cator shows the Personnel Contamination Rate for contaminations >5,000 dpm/

100 cm2 for the reporting month. 7 contaminations occurred during April 1993. The contaminations were: 1) An individual working in Rm 60 received a skin contamination that was believed to be due to grinding of contamination through PCs. 2) An individual received a clothing contamination while inspecting pressure gauges at penetrations in Rm 23. Source believed to be PCs. 3) An individual received a skin contamination while performing monthly fire extinguisher checks in the Aux. building. 4) An individual received a clothing contamination while replacing a solenoid valve for the washing machine in the laundry. 5) An individual received a clothing contamination while deconning Rm 69 overhead door. 6) An individual received a skin contamination while working on fire zone 18 in containment. 7) An individual received a clothing contamina-tion while working on FW-180 in containment.

There has been a total of 19 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cm a in 1993.16 of these contaminations were classified as non outage and 3 were classified as outage contami-nations.

There was a total of 273 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cmr in 1992. There was a total of 55 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cmr in 1991.

The 1993 goal for contaminations >5,000 dpm/100 cm2 is 0.4 PCR/1,000 RWP hours (non-outage) and 1.5 PCR/1,000 RWP hours (outage).

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett l

Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 4

l

l l

@ Licensee Event Reports 40 -- @ PersonnelErrors Reportedin LERs 32 33 Cumulative Licensee Event Reports 31

~

--+-- Cumulatke Personnel Errors Reported in LERs20-111 l10l15

,u.! s hb ^ ^

, , , ,0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'89 '90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93

% of Total LERs that are Attributed to Personnel Error (Year-to-Date)

--O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 12%) l 60%-

47%

50%- l 31 % -32 % 40%- ,

24 % 30 % - !

~

20%- l C O 10%-

, , , , , 0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'89 '90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN LERS The top graph shows the number of Licensee Event Reports (LERs) submitted during each month in 1993, the LERs attributed to personnel error for each month, and the cumulative totals of both. The bottom graph shows the percentage of total LERs sub-mitted that have been attributed to personnel error. The year-end totals for the four previous years are also shown for both graphs.

In April, there were no LERs reported.

The percentage of total LERs submitted year-to-date that have been attributed to per-sonnel error was 16.7% at the end of April.

The 1993 goal for this indicatoris that a maximum of 12% of the total LERs submitted will be attributed to personnel error.

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 5

J 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.

6 l

l 50-

[] Nrt Gintration (10,000 Mw hour;)

40- 35.95 36.18 36.12 34,94 5 31.88

"'1 ~~ ' "

32.51 32.14

~

S 30- ~IIl 27.2 l t 24.62 * * .. @$

N . i s.,hy WM 19.94 8 20- , $$ s p ,

.. f9 eg y};j :gg g .- -

i e4 43 37-nv yq n39 e m ; 30.27 ;n v ? yy ' '

,3 e "* V, --

10- i V:

s, , .

17 7 n x, ) 3g f ;j 3 0

hQih j p ; 3 l i

6:!N N$ $$$d d$ b[

i i i i i i , i i i i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 STATION NET GENERA'llDN During the month of April 1993 a net total of 199,385 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. The plant operated at 77% power from April 1 through 23 to conserve fuel to allow full power operation through the summer and up to the start of the refueling outage. Power was reduced to 0% from April 24 through 30 for a maintenance outage to increase systems efficiency and improve plant reliability before the peak summer season.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of September 1992 were attributable to the forced outage which began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure and the plant tripped on TM/LP. The generator was brought on-line at 2101 hours0.0243 days 0.584 hours 0.00347 weeks 7.994305e-4 months on 9/5/92.

Unplanned energy losses during August 1992 were the result of the forced outage on 8/

22/92 (described above) and the forced outage that began on 8/5/92 when a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed resulting in a controlled shutdown to Mode

2. The turbine generator was synchronized to the grid on 8/6/92.

Unplanned energy losses forthe month of July 1992 were a result of the forced outage that occurred on 7/3/92 due to the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip.

l The generator was brought on-line at 0610 hours0.00706 days 0.169 hours 0.00101 weeks 2.32105e-4 months on 7/23.

During the month of June 1992 unplanned energy losses were a result of a forced i outage that occurred on 6/1/92 due to a dropped control rod. The plant was returned to ;

100% power on 6/4/92.

The station was returned to service after the Cycle 14 Refueling Outage when the !

reactor was taken critical on 5/1/92 at 1035 hours0.012 days 0.288 hours 0.00171 weeks 3.938175e-4 months and the generator was put on-line on 5/3/92. A forced outage occurred on 5/14/92 when the turbine generator tripped on a l false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor inp.

The reactor was retumed to critical and the generator was put on-line on 5/15/92. l l

l Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 7

I

Forced Outage Rate lGOODI 20%- -O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals y 15%-

9.7 9.3 10%-

5%-

1A '

C C C C C C C C C C C O FEl ' / w/ , 0%

'89 '90 '91 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 10.11% for the twelve months from 5/1/

92 to 4/30/93. There were no forced outage hours during the month of April 1993.

Because this is a twelve month rate, assuming no additional forced outages, the FOR indicator will not improve until May 1993, when the May 1992 forced outage drops from the twelve month interval. ,

i Forced outage hours for September 1992 were due to the forced outage that began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control sys-tem. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure and the plant tripped on TM/LP. The generator was brought on-line at 2101 hours0.0243 days 0.584 hours 0.00347 weeks 7.994305e-4 months on 9/

5/92.

During the month of August 1992 forced outage hours were due to the forced outage on 8/22/92 (described above) and the forced outage on 8/5/92 when the turbine was taken off-line to replace a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A. The turbine generator was synchronized to the grid on 8/6/92.

A forced outage caused by the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip oc-curred on 7/3/92. Additionally, RC-142 opened and failed to reclose. The generator was brought on-line at 0610 hours0.00706 days 0.169 hours 0.00101 weeks 2.32105e-4 months on 7/23/92.

A forced outage occurred on 6/1/92 when the unit was shutdown due to a dropped control rod. The generator was brought on-line at 0852 on 6/2/92.

A forced outage occurred on 5/14/92 at 1557 hours0.018 days 0.433 hours 0.00257 weeks 5.924385e-4 months when the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip. The generator was brought on-line at 1150 hours0.0133 days 0.319 hours 0.0019 weeks 4.37575e-4 months on 5/15/92 following repairs.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for the Forced Outage Rate are a maximum of 2.4%.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 8

l

. I

@ Monthly EAF -4 ;

- Year-to-Date Average EAF . l GW 100% - - - - .

i - 1 I h fd Ib. h[ \

85.6 @ N ?$ bh 8 W* # M1 Ti

& &n f*'

$ 80%- -

$$ S?

- _ B e $v % a :, >

k k k a

fhk W %

k ' kh 5' f '

(;

60.8 60%-

w 7 f.f f d :

fa .

56.6 hi o

A A 9 e

jgl p W .$. :

M

6 ip &r:

'n 1" :

J h h N $ k hc i hg # p# h g k IL $i M.

y mii y 3{g'$ j

,h g , 5- %g & >;

g$ 3 k 40%- &

p M 4 4 F t af if -

@$ %8E '.i . $9 g/ p - S Q $p g1 $*

w: g f !

a y di

a w LL u 4 '

{s{t p u g

u 6 r ;

$;s 4 g is N A h R. m# # 2 3$ LEE jb 20%- sin 1 I N l1 @ @ ? d- I hj;, W @ w

'da a #2 R {$~i 5 A 1l # m

e $ ".

v g$

$$ 9 & k h k

f b

jf s.

3 ks h 9[

!} Y, Y[1 Wh 46 % % % 5 W g #[h s n %[ @ & :s j i i 8 3 0% , , , , . ., '., , , . , , ,. , ,

'90 '91 '92 May92 Jun Jul 'Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 i

i EQUlVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR ,

i This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to- j date average monthly EAF for 1993, and the EAF for the previous 3 years. l l

4 The EAF for the month of April 1993 was reported as 76.7%. Energy losses during the ;

month were due to the maintenance outage from April 24 through 30. Energy losses ;

due to the plant being operated at approximately 77% power to conserve fuel are not :

included in the EAF calculation. The year-to-date average monthly EAF was reported '

i as 94% at the end of April. !

The EAF for September 1992 was reported as 81%. This figure is the result of a forced - i outage that began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro 'i Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reach-ing design pressure during a plant transient and trip. The generator was brought on-line on 9/5/92. i The EAF for August 1992 was reported as 64.29%. This figure is a result of the 8/22/92 forced outage (described above) and a forced outage on 8/5/92'when a feeder breaker i to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed. The turbine generator was synchronized to the grid '

on 8/6/92. :

The EAF for July 1992 was reported as 34.39%. This figure is a result of the forced outage caused by the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92. The plant was brought to 90% power on 7/26/92.

Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase l Adverse Trend: None !

9 l

[

, O Monthly Unit Capability Fccior

+ Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor ,

- + - - 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor ,

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( Bo%)

Industry Upper 1o% (84.9% for a Three Year Average) . Ma enance 80%- .

W _ i _. %a y r / 5A A 5

w z-So%- Y [

,'". E. X 7 R yl ?

40% - y 2 % -- "

y g (fs l &y

}d0 c $ %g V 4 20%-

~

^ "

g^

o% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep. Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the 1993 and 1992 year-to-date UCFs, the goals, the 36 month average UCFs, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. 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 continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage.

The UCF was reported as 77.1% for the month of April 1993. Operating the plant at 77% power from April 1 through 23 is not included as an energy loss in the UCF calculation because it was a planned derate for economic considerations. Planned energy losses for the month are the result of the maintenance outage from April 24 through 30. The year-to-date unit capability factor was reported as 94%. The 36 month average UCF was reported as 75% at the end of April.

The UCF was reported as 77.5% for the month of September 1992. Unplanned energy losses for the month were a result of the forced outage that began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC con-verter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip. The generator was brought on-line at 2101 hours0.0243 days 0.584 hours 0.00347 weeks 7.994305e-4 months on 9/5/92.

The UCF was reported as 62% for the month of August 1992. Unplanned energy losses for the month were a result of the 8/22/92 forced outage (described above) and the forced outage on 8/

5/92 when a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed. The turbine generator was synchronized to the grid on 8/6/92.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 84.9%.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for Unit Capability Factor is 74.1%. The basis for this goal is 56 days for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage,20 days rampup (10 full power equivalent days),

unplanned loss of 11.5 full power equivalent days, and 10 day ramp up (5 full power equivalent days), mini outage of 7 full power equivalent days, and 10 day ramp up (5 full power equivalent days).

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 10

I

@ Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor !

i i

- Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor -

l lG00Dl

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals ( 4.5%).

9 1 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%) l Industry Upper 10% (1.68% for a Three Year Average) 60%- k 40%- C ,

g e 20%- l y g- .

g ./ +4 ,-., n

~ ~

0% ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 1 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct .Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the 1993 and 1992 year-to-date UCLFs, the goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry -!

upper ten percentile value. 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), ex- -

pressed as a percentage. <

The UCLF was reported as 0% for the month of April 1993. Energy losses as a result of the maintenance outage are not included in the UCLF calculation because it was a planned outage.

The year-to-date UCLF for 1993 is 0%. The 36 month average UCLF was reported as 11.4% at the end of April.

The UCLF was reported as 22.5% for the month of September 1992. Unplanned energy losses for the month were a result of the forced outage that began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC con-verter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system.

The UCLF was reported as 38% for the month of August 1992. Unplanned energy losses for the month were a result of the 8/22/92 forced outage (described above) and the forced outage i on 8/5/92 when a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 1.68%.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for Unplanned Capability Loss Factor is 4.5%. The bacis for this goal is an unplanned loss of 11.5 full power equivalent days and 10 day ramp up (5 full power ,

equivalent days). j i

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report l Accountability: Chase l Adverse Trend: None ,

i

- FCs R: actor scr:ms P:r 7.000 Hours Critical (YO:r-to-d;t:) r

-+- FCs Reactor scrams Per 7.000 Hours Critical (for the last 36 months)

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals .

1995 INPO Industry Goal ;

-D- Industry Upper 10% (0.58 per 7.000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical over a 36 month time period) 8-6-

4-2- , , , . . .. . . . . , ,

O U-~~U-i~b Jul

.U.U sep i U.Ua Oct Nov dB Dec Jan Feb U,

Mar Apr93 May92 Jun Aug 5-3 5 Numberof FCs Reactor scrams 9 2- 1 1 1

/

gag 0 0 0 ff R913 0 gas o sep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,

'89 '90 91 '92 May92 Jun Jul Aug Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical (as defined in INPO's 11/91 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Intemational Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Calhoun Station. This value is calculated by multiplying the total number of scrams in a specified time period by 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , then dividing that number by the total number of critical hours in the same time period. ,

The year-to-date station value is 0.0 for the month of April 1993. The value for the last 36 months is 1.002.

The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months.

The last unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on August 22,1992 as a result of the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure and the plant tripped on TM/

LP.

There was one unplanned automatic reactor scram in July 1992. This scram occurred on July 3 ,

at 2336 as a result of the loss of inverter No. 2.

There was one unplanned automatic reactor scram in May 1992. This scram occurred on May 14 at 1557 when the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip. The last unplanned automatic reactor scram prior to this occurred on July 2,1986.

The 1993 and 1992 goals for unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical have been set at zero. The 1995 INPO industry goal is one unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months Critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.58 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical for the 36 month time period from 1/90 through 12/92.

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

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 12

I 3-0 Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition) 0 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goa;s l

.O. Industry Upper 10 Percentile -

2-i 1 1

- m 1- == .;

kIh

M

- i e

k* h l 0

i , , ,0 m ,m , 'u , - i m , - , o i w i - i . , w ,% a

'90 '91 '92 May92 Jun Jul Aug . Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe5 Mar Apr93 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION) ,

I There were no unplanned safety system actuations during the month of April 1993.

There was one unplanned safety system actuation during the month of July 1992 due to i the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/2/92. i The 1993 and 1992 goals for the number of unp;anned safety system actuations are

zero.

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

i l

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

i 13 4 e , - ,. - - ~ - . . - --s.--

- 12 Month Running Tctal SSAs (NRC Definition)

O-- Critical Hours

@ safety System Actuations (NRC Definition)'

10- - 1000 900

, g e- 800 7 "

- 700 p

6- -600 y

, j j 500 g4- -400 :p I7 g g- - 300 0 gg2- 200

7

. d L , 1 a l a m

'90 '91 92 MJ J ASONDJ FMAMgJASONDJ PA A UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(NRC DEFINITION)

Th s 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 Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs in-cludes actuations when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these' safety systems are challenged.

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred on April 30,1993 when 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.

The last unplanned safety system actuation occurred on August 22,1992 due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressur-izer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip.

Two~ unplanned safety system actuations occurred in July 1992: 1) On July 3 there was an inverter failure and the subsequent reactor trip; 2) On July 23 there was an unplanned diesel generator start when an operator performing a surveillance test inad-vertently pushed the normal start button instead of the alarm acknowledge button.

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred on May 14,1992 when 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 genera-

, tors.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are 0.

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

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 14

I O Safety System Failures y - Fort Calhoun 6 Quarter Moving Average 2 ,

2 -O-- Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average 3-0E E D$

b 2- ,

,s

$ 1- ,'C 1

dMS 4# 1- m

-;5]

m %, gg m.o. m mw n q0 , , , , , , , ,

j 91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92 3 92-4 Year- Quarter 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 Data in the quarterly l

" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report. !

The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the first quarter of 1991 and the i fourth quarter of 1992: l 1

First Quarter 1991: 1) Design errors in the electrical distribution system could prevent the

~

system from supplying adequate voltage to safeguards loads. 2) Design errors in the electrical distribution system could jeopardize safety related loads under accident conditions. Breaker

]

coordination problems could cause the loss of safety related buses.

Second Quarter 1991: 1) Failure of high energy auxiliary steamlines in various equipment rooms could render equipment vital for safe shutdown inoperable. 2) All 4 channels of the pressurizer pressure low signal trip could have been nonconservatively calibrated due to an inadequate calibration procedure. 3) A steam generator blowdown was performed while the radiation monitor was inoperable. This was caused by the mode selector switch on the monifor being left in the calibrate position.

Third Quarter 1991: 1) Both EDGs could have been rendered unable to perform their design function due to radiator exhaust damper failure. The dampers had cracked pins in their cou-plings. 2) The station batteries were declared inoperable due to cracks developing in the cell casings. This was caused by inadequate design of the terminal post seals. 3) An error in an ,

operating procedure could cause improper manipualtion of nitrogen backup bottles for instru- I ment air. This could cause a loss of the containment spray system.

First Ouarter 1992: 1) Defective control switches in the 4KV switchgear could have rendered safety equip, ment inoperable. 2) All 4 channels of the SG DP trip for RPS had been calibrated nonconservatively. This occurred due to an incorrect procedure which specified a tolerance band that was too wide.

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

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 15

1993 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection Systern Unavailability g Value ,

1993 High Pressure Safety injection Systern Unavailability Value Year-to-Date

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal

- b- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.025-0.02- A A A A A A A A A A A A 0.015 -

0.01 .

C 0--C O 0.005-O.0009 n n 0

D-JL-C O O O O O-O-O

, , , ,, _, ,_ , _i , , , , ,

1992 Unavailability Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 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 April 1993 was 0.0009. There was 1.55 hours6.365741e-4 days 0.0153 hours 9.093915e-5 weeks 2.09275e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests

( and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 1993 year-to-date.

HPSI unavailability value was 0.0004 at the end of April.

There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during March and February.

There were 1.48 hours5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month of January.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are a maximum of 0.008. The '

1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.0011.

Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Adverse Trend: None 16 1 ,

@ Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1993 Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value i Year-to4 ate

--O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01)

-A-- 1995 INPO industry Goal ( 0.025)

-O- Indee.try Upper 10% (0.0039) 0.025- A A A A A A A A A A -A A 0.00 -

0.015 -

0.01 - C O O O O O O O O O O O d

0.0062 05-0%

w -

g p., rm a a O o-o O o a a i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1992 Unavailability Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for April 1993 was 0.0029. There were 3.28 hours3.240741e-4 days 0.00778 hours 4.62963e-5 weeks 1.0654e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests during the month. The 1993 year-to-date AFW unavailability value was 0.0024 at the end of April.

There were 1.73 hours8.449074e-4 days 0.0203 hours 1.207011e-4 weeks 2.77765e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests during March.

There were 0.73 hours8.449074e-4 days 0.0203 hours 1.207011e-4 weeks 2.77765e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests during February.

There were 7.23 hours2.662037e-4 days 0.00639 hours 3.80291e-5 weeks 8.7515e-6 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests during January 1993.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun year end goals for this indicator are a maximum value of 0.01. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile I value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.0039.

l Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Adverse Trend: None 17

@ MontNy Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value

' --et- Emergency AC Power Unavailability Vakte Year to-Date

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal (0.023) 0.06-

--b-- 1995 INPO Industry Goat (0.025) 0.05 -

-O- Industry Upper 10% (.005) 0.04 -

IG0.0DI 0.03 - t 0.02 -

0.01 -

1 0.001 Uy h M U C C C U C U U

, ,0 ., , , , , , , , , , , ,

1992 Unavailability Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec93 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 month.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for April 1993 is 0.0. There were no hours of unplanned or planned unavaliability for DG-1 and DG-2 during the month.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date is 0.0058.

There were no (0) hours of unplanned unavailability and 16.7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months of planned unavail-ability for a diesel maintenance outage for DG-1 in March. Ten MWOs were worked during this one day outage. There were no (0) hours of planned or unplanned unavail-ability for DG-2 in March.

There were no (0) hours of unplanned unavailability and 16.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months of planned unavail-

. ability for a diesel maintenance outage for DG-2 in February. There were no (0) hours of planned or unplanned unavailability for DG-1 during the month There were no (0) hours of planned or unplanned unavailability for DG-1 and DG-2 in January 1993.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicatoris 0.023. The 1992 goal was 0.024. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.005.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None gg

12-

@ Monthly Gross Heat Rate

--*- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate 1 lG00Dl l 0 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal !

h 1 4

3 m 11-8

?

10560 g flegl _

r G

^

PPP ^=

/ '

J< G, Li $U If$ M i hk [

l

/

//

$ & l@ H? n ,

/ r g # ks h$ $ $ !b f i

Fjh,iiiiiiiiiiii.i i 9 h h L h hhhl %

'89 '90 '91 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 GROSS HEAT RATE This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the 1993 goal and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years.

The gross heat rate for the Fort Calhoun Station was reported as 10,319 BTU /KWH for the month of April 1993. The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature.

In general, the GHR improves during the winter months and degrades during the sum-mer. This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

The year-to-date gross heat rate was reported as 10,128 BTU /KWH at the end of April.

The 1993 year-end gross heat rate goalis a maximum of 10,168 BTU /KWH.

I Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Jaworski ;

1 Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on three consecutive months of declining performance. The increase in gross heat rate for Aprilis

. predominantly due to the derated power level and the plant maintenance outage.

19

O Monthly Thermal Perforrnance

--80-- 1992 Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance

-+- 1993 Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance

4 l GOOD l O 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals 1995 INPO Industry Goal (99.5%)

--C}- Industry Upper 10% (99.8%)

~

l~}--- ICP --C C C C C C C C C D T ::= * -T M _m_. :: -- & a A 0 0 0 99%- 4 '* 4 ii M N U-^ -

@ di$ 'b h;@$ h !' d ) $ Thermal W J!.i g M e" i ;

ll

'9 Performance 98%- % kk Q -$ . i , ji ,$

^ 5

$l l value not

$ % CE M "/ le j $ ! j available due g h p to derate j l

(

97%- )' f, f;l a a M- -

g 96% , , , , , , , ,

,' , i i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average thermal performance value, the 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. -

The thermal performance value for April 1993 can not be calculated (per INPO guid-ance) because the plant was operated at less than 80% power from April 1 through 23 prior to the maintenance outage. The average monthly thermal performance value from January through March was 98.9%

The decline in thermal performance values through March was attributed to circulating water flow reductions possibly caused by condenser fouling and/or circ. water pump degradation. Inspection of CW-1B during the "B" cell outage on 4/93 showed no abnor-mal degradation of the pump impeller. Inspections during the April maintenance outage indicated considerable fouling of condenser tubes, a leaking divider plate gasket in FW-4B , and a torn backwash valve seat. The condenser was cleaned and equipment repairs made. Preliminary results show significant improvement in thermal perfor-mance.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal for this indicator is a minimum of 99.4% The 1992 goal was a minimum of 99.3% The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry ,

upper ten percentile value (for the one year period from 1/92 through 12/92) is approxi-mately 99.8%

Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek Adverse Trend: None 20-

O Fust R: liability Indicator 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/Grarn)

% - O-- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals y 1o-

&Q

~

6 FRI Not

~"

.9 h4 '

n Available for JuY '92 k-

$ 4

$5 f

i O A A

~

M Ql$kl M IAU M . . 1 M % F5!9 m b May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct . Nov Dec Jan" Feb Mar Apr93

Beginning in Jan. '93 FRI uses INPO's revised calculation method.

l FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) for April 1993 was 0.954 X 10d microcuries/ gram. This FRI value together with the shutdown chemistry data from April 23 through 30 continues to indicate a defect free core. The monthly FRI is a calculated value based on fission product activities present in the reactor coolant. Its purpose is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity.

l Only the data from April 1 through 2 at an average of 76.7% power was used for the calculation of the monthly INPO FRI value. This is in accordance with the INPO guidelines which state that data from steady-state power levels above 85% for the month should be used when possible.

l Plants that did not operate at steady-state power above 85% should collect data for the indicator at the highest steady-state power attained during the month. Power reduction commenced on April 23 for a one week outage.

The April 1993 FRI value of 0.954 X 10d microcuries/ gram is lower than the March FRl value of 1.58 X 10dmicrocuries/ gram. The lower FRI value is due to the power correction in the new FRI calculation method. Reactor power has a significant impact in reactor coolant activities. With increasing power, the production rate of fission products in the fuel increases linearly, and the release rate of fission products from the fuel to the coolant increases exponentially. Therefore, indicator results are corrected for power level (i.e., operation at less than 100% power) and are normalized to a common average linear heat generation rate.

The FRI value, using the latest INPO calculation method, is expected to be below the 1993 goal of 7.5 X 10d microcuries/ gram for the remainder of Cycle 14, without fuel failures. The current FRI trend for the Fort Calhoun Station at this time in core life together with studies of detailed shutdown chemistry data indicate a defect-free core when no Xe-133 activity increases and no iodine spiking are present. This has been confirmed with the Westinghouse Coolant Activity.

Data Evaluation Code, CADE, and with discussions with the Westinghouse technical expert on fuel failures. The last detected fuel failure was during Cycle 13.

The INPO September 1992 Report " Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility 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 above 5.0 X 104 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 10d microcuries/ gram is not an INPO industry goal. It is defined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a *Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the core is defect free or not.

Data Source: Holtkaus/Guliani Accountability: Chase /Spilker Adverse Trend: None g

O Tnermai output

-O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500-1400-1300-1200-1100 -

h000-

$ 900-E800- ,

3 700-

@ 600 -

y500-400-

=-

300-200-100-o_

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 s

DAILY THERMAL Of)TPUT The above thermal output graph displays the daily operating power levsl during April 1993, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

A power reduction to approximately 77% for fuel conservation was continued from late March through April 22. Power was then reduced to 0% for the maintenance outage, which continued through the end of the month.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Tills Adverse Trend: None 22

Equipm:nt Forced Outags Rats

--O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal 2-1.5 -

0.86 1-0.53 0.5 0.5-C C C C C C C EE 90

'91

'92. '

C C C C C Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 5QUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.0 for the months from January through April 1993.

The last equipment forced outage began on August 22,1992 (described below) and continued into September. The generator was brought on-line on 9/5/92.

The following two equipment forced outages occurred in August 1992: 1) on 8/5/92 a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed. The turbine generator was synchro-nized to the grid on 8/6/92; 2) on 8/22/92 an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip. The plant was shutdown for the remainder of the month.

There was one equipment forced outage during July due to the loss of an inverter and !

the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92.

There was one equipment forced outage during June due to a dropped control rod. The -

rod was dropped at 2305 on 5/31/92 and reactor shutdown commenced at that time.

The generator was taken off-line at 0234 on 6/1/92 and was brought back on-line at ,

0852 on 6/2/92.

There was one equipment forced outage during May. This equipment forced outage !

occurred on May 14 when the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip. 1 The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 0.20. ;

l Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) I Accountability: Chase /Jaworski i Adverse Trend: None 23

i

@ Number of Failures /20 Demands Trigger Values for 20 Demands O Number of Failures /50 Demands -V- Trigger Values for 50 Demands

@ Number of Failures /100 Demands - - Trigger Values for 100 Demands l

1 8-l GOOD l 4

t 6-4 Y Y Y 7 Y T Y Y Y Y 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4- - - -

5 g g ,

. , , ? ..

)" 3

= ;;. = = : = a$:

e s a W l 2 5 2 2 2 2 2- ; , y g g ; 7 m

7 7

^

" t 1 .. 1

+

1 1 1 1 W 1 g 1 fE 1 $ &

i - 3 - ? - :

4 9 -

q.

y p ..sl .

3 0

0 0 0 0 I O O O $

0 $ 0 <

00 3 00 d 00 h '

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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 2

than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-

. ues. The Fort Calhoun 1993 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-mum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report).

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: JaWorski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 24

4 .

l O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands IGOODI E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands y 5- O Failure Trigger Value for 25 Dernands/ Fort Calhoun Goal 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O

-l 3-2-

i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

! 1-

@ :3 4 O

O OIOZ , ,

0; O2 0

0 01 0x 0 '

O OO May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93

] 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 1992.

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 j 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 drafted for j the Fort Calhoun Station to institutionalize and formally approve / adopt the required ;

NUMARC actions. I 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. I i

i Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning i Positive Trend 4 25

~

l

C DG-1 Unr:Ilability Valua O DG-2 Unreliability Value IGOODI 1

--+- Station Unreliability Value industry Upper 10% (0.002 for a Three Year Average) 0.0025-0.002- O O O O O O O O C C C D 0.0015-0.001 -

0.0005 -

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 , 0 , ? , , , , , , , , ,

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 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-tor unreliability.

The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value for April 1993 was 0.0.

For DG-1: There were 2 start demands for the reporting month with no failures. In addition, there were 2 load-run demands with no failures.

For DG-2: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month with no failure. In addi-tion, there was 1 load-run demand with no failure.

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 LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None i 26

i I

O Optrator Work Around itzms R prirable On-Lins O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line l

--O-- Fort Calhoun Goal for Maximum Number of On-Line Deficiencies

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Maximum Number of Operator Work Arounds On-Line !

O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Requiring an Outage to Repair

@ Operator Work Around items Requiring an Outage to Repair So- {

C y.. n O 40- g~ 3 ,,

30- s G d =-

20- N '

[

'7 W 1 3 I

$: I

_m _

I Jan93 Feb Mar Apr93 O January 1993 (Da:a Not Available)

O February 1993 D March 1993 8

yo 30-

@ April 1993 LO 25-55~ o j 0 I

~

j Engineering Planning Parts (Whse/Premt)

~

Responsible Group 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 control room equipment deficien-cies that require an outage to repair, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) Items that are repairable on-line, the number of Operator Work Around items that require an outage to repair and 1993 Fort Calhoun goals. The lower graph shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies by responsible group .

There was a total of 71 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of April 1993. l 49 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 22 require a plant outage to repair. ;

There were 5 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. 3 of these OWA items are repairable on-line and 2 require an outage to repair.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun monthly goals are to have a maximum of 45 control room equip-ment deficiencies that are repairable on-line and a maximum of 5 OWAs that are repair- l able on-line.

Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Chase / Bobba l Adverse Trend: None 27 I

l

- # of Component Categories 40- -+- # of Application Categories 35- --* - Total # of Categories a 30- , ,a 5 25-y 20-g . . .

E 15- A h ,,, b_

f_ -

st 10 N91 D J92 F M A M J J A S O N D92 J93 F M A93 3 Wear Out/ Aging Q Other Devices 8 Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance /Testino 55.0% O Engineering / Design O Error 0.0 %

Percent of Total Failures During the 13.o% Past 18 Months s

[/[ \ 7.0%

19.0%

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 August 1991 through January 1993). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 12 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 11 of the 140 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 184 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 168. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

The recent increase in the failure rate can be explained by an increase in failures reported to INPO due to changes in INPO reporting guidance. Also,1992 was a refueling outage year, and refueling outage years historically have higher failure rates than non-outage years.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/ Dowdy Adverse Trend: None 28

l 4

-+- Components With More Than One Failure l GOOD l 25- -X- Components With More Than Two Failures V 21 20 20 20-l 19 -

18 18 17 15 15 15- 14 *

13 11

=

10-5 3 3 3 3 <

3 3 n - 2 2fs a n n 0

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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/

l 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).

l This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than one failure during the last eighteen months and the number of NPRDS components with more than two failures during the last eighteen months.

During the last 18 reporting months there were 15 NPRDS components with more than l 1 failure. 3 of the 15 had more than two failures. The tag numbers of the components l with more than two failures are AC-100, CH-1B and RC-142. Recommendations and

! actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component l Failure Analysis Report. The Plant Manager, Maintenance Supervisor and Station Engineering are developing actions to reduce the number of repeat failures.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None 29

i I

@ Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure j

- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Person-Rem)

--O- Fort Calhoun AnnualGoal

- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (185 Person-Rem) 300- -O- Industry Upper 10% (110 Person-Pem for a Three Year Average) 256 IGOODI V

200- C O O O O O O O O O O O A A A A A A A A A A A A 100-52 0

6 i i i

'90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE During April 1993,2.478 person-rem was recorded by TLDs wom by personnel while working at the Fort Calhoun Station. The year-to-date exposure is 8.297 person-rem.

The Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure for 1993 is a maximum of 200 person-rem.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 185 person-rem per year. The industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 110 person-rem per year. The three year average for Fort Calhoun Station from 1/90 through 12/92 was 194.5 person-rem per year.

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 30

25000- : Cumulative Dry Active Waste Ser.1 For Processing (in cubic feet) 20000-15000-10000-5000-0 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 5 Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet)

Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried l

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

-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,769.2 cubic feet) 4000- ; A ; A A A A A ; ; M gg 3000-2000-1334

(( / D D D D D D D D O-C O~ D F : 1000- C O

'91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 Year-end Total VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE The upper graph shows the volume of dry radioactive waste sent for processing. The lower graph shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for radioactive waste buried, and the year-end totals for radioactive waste buried the previous 2 years.

Cumulative amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing (cubic feet) 2,080.0 Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during April (cubic feet) 0.0 ,

Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during April (cubic feet) 29.1 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1993 (cubic feet) 111.4 Amount of solid radbactive waste in temporary storage (cubic feet) 0.0 The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste which has been buried is 1,000 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) per year. The inductry upper ten percentile value from 1/90 through 12/92 is approximately 50.12 cubic meters (1,769.2 cubic feet) per year. ;

Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP54 31

l 5%- 1 E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Lirpit l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal y 3%-

i 2%- C C C C C C C C O 1%-

0% j i i i i _ i ; i i i i i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb . Mar Apr93 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 pedormance by monitoring six key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-pended solids.100% equates to all six parameters being out of limit for the month.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was reported as 0% for the month of April 1993.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are a maximum of 2%

Hours Out of Limit.

Data Source: Glantz (Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Adverse Trend: None 32

i,

]

f S:condary Syst:m CPI

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal lG00Dl

-A-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.30) Y 1.5 - l Secondary System CPI Limit

-Cl- Industry Upper 10% (0.167) 1- l l l l l l l l l l l l

i 90 91 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 2%-

1, -

E % of Hours Chemistry is Outside OG Guidelines l G00Dl 1%- k 0% i i i i i i i a i i i. i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 i

SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY j The top graph, Secondary System Chemistry Performance index (CPI), is calculated using the following three parameters: cation conductivity in steam generator blowdown, -

sodium in steam generator blowdown, and condensate pump discharge dissolved oxygen. The bottom graph shows the percent of total hours of 13 parameters exceed-ing the Owners Group (OG) guidelines during power operation.

j The CPI was reported as 0.64 for the month of April 1993. This value is high due to

! water quality problems associated with high river levels during April. The percent of j hours outside the OG guidelines was reported as 0% for the month.

4 The 1993 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPIis a maximum value of 0.60. The INPO 1995 Industry goalis 0.30. The Fort Calhoun goal is based on site specific chem-

istry treatment, i.e. morpholine. The INPO goal does not consider the influence of j morpholine and the by-products of morpholine from thermal decomposition.

l The industry upper ten percentile value for this indicator was approximately 0.167 for ;

the twelve months from 1/92 through 12/92.

Data Source: Glantz (Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith

Adverse Trend: None 33

E % of Hours Auxiliary System (CCW) Chemistry is Outsidb Station Umits 10%-

lGOODI 8%- y 6%-

4%-

9 2%- i 0% 3 ; ; ; i ; i i ; i i j ,

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS ,

The Auxiliary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Outside Station Limits indicatortracks the monthly percent of hours that the Component Cooling Water (CCW) system is outside the station chemistry limit.

The auxiliary system chemistry percent of hours outside station limits was reported as 0% for the month of April 1993. The high value (8.8%) reported for November 1992 i was attributable to nitrites, which were lower than specifications. Prior to November 1992, the last outside of station limits condition occurred in June 1991 and was due to a l low nitrite levelin CCW coolant.

l Data Source: Glantz (Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith i Adverse Trend: None l

I 34 I

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem)

@ - Highest Exposure for the Quarter (mrem)

, E Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) 000-OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4500-4000-3500-1 3000-2500-

~

Fort Calhoun 1500 mrem /yr. Goal ;

1500-1000- l

'471 G00-O g April 1993 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During April 1993, an individual accumulated 149 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

The maximum individual exposure to date for the second quar 1er of 1993 was 149 l mrem.

The maximum individual exposure for the year was 471 mrem. t The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,500 mrem /

year. The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,500 mrem.

Date Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None i

35 !

l

9-Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours IGOODI

~

-O-- FortCalhoun Goal e :

.6- ,

a +

E O

o, 1

E 2.3 .

~

I 3

1.2

C O O O O O O' O' O O O O i

~ ~~

i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5

'90 '91 Apr92 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar 93 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per !

^

1,000 NRC inspection hou'rs. This indicator is one month behind the reporting month due to the time involved with collecting and processing the data.

4 The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 2.18 for the twelve l months from April 1,1992 through March 31,1993.

2 The following NRC inspection ended during this reporting period:

IER No. Iltla No. of Hours ;

, 93-03 Residents' Monthly inspection 696 !

There was one violation issued during this reporting period in IER 93-03 for failure to perform adequate PM testing for the NI cable temporary modification. ;

OPPD has received two (2) Level IV violations in 1993.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are a maximum of 1.5 viola- l tions per 1,000 inspection hours. ;

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None 36

O NRC Significant Events Fort Calhoun 6 Quarter Moving Average .

1. 1 1 0.

N 91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 Year - Quarter 3- O INPO Significant Events (SERs) 2.5 -

2-1.5 - 1 1 1-0.5 -

91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 Year - Quader SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Cal-houn Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis -

and Evaluation of Operational Data in the quarterly " Performance Indicators for Operat-ing Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NBQ significant events occurred between the first quarter of 1991 and the fourth quarter of 1992:

Second Quarter 1991: Safety related equipment was not adequately protected from a high energy line break.

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),

occurred between the first quarter of 1991 and the fourth quarter of 1992:

Second Quarter 1992: Personnel and accessible building areas were contaminated with transuranic, alpha-emitting radionuclides.

Third Quarter 1992: The failure of a nonessentialinverter during troubleshooting caused a turbine load rejection. This resulted in a high reactor coolant pressure auto-matic scram and the opening of the pressure relief valves and one of two pressurizer safety valves. One pressurizer safety valve subsequently reopened at a lower reactor coolant system pressure and remained partially open, resulting in a release of reactor coolant to containment via the pressurizer quench tank.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 37

1 l

i

(

7 i

COST j

Goal: To operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable

! source of electricity.

1 i

l 4

t i

J d

d t

i

38

4 .. --G- Actuals -C}- Budget A Plan 3.75-3.5 -

I 3:

l I 3.25-E j 3-2.75-2.5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

D91 D92 J93 F M A M J J A S' O N D93 D94 D95 D96 D97 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR i

The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun i Station.

1 i The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilo-

, watt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget

curve is the approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and ;

Operating Report.

1 The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991 and 1992. In addi-tion, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1994 through 1997 for reference, j The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1993 l' Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by ,

! Nt. clear Fuels.

I Data Source: ScofieldNirgillito (Manager / Source)

-)

Accountability: Scofield 4

Adverse Trend: None 39-

.l 1

i Actual Division Staffing

Authorized Division Staffing 600 -

l l

460 467 400-206 195 200- Lt p e!ss;- : > :::

, fj ptgf . .Q -

127 f

jj[4 I':i.

7: s .

. jj 122 q,g. ; -

f'-

! 'l i -

t -aae e,.w w

% --i f~

/ 9 ) N '$ ~

0 '

Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services ;

STAFFING LEVEL The authorized and actual staffing levels at the end of April 1993 are shown for the three Nuclear Divisions.

Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source)

Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 M

40

i i .

! DIVISION i

AND 4

DEPARTMENT l

PERFORMANCE i

INDICATORS ,

j These indicators may be deleted from this repon if the responsible group contacts l the Manager - Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing l SEP items require documentation to ensure that the original intent and scope of the ,

SEP item will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this report.

i

! 4

. l I

i l

i b

j i

41

i l

O January 1993 Outstanding MWOs 60 - 8 may 1993 Nstadg WOs i

O March 1993 Outstanding MWOs 50 - O w1993outSamm m ,

40-34 ,

~~"~

31 31 30- 27 26 -

25 25 19 20- :

37 . , ,

ic.

10-11 9 -

10 g h

6

, 7 ,_

p . [ 2

...z f .. """'1 . . -

0

>12 Months 0-3 Months 3-6 Months 6-9 Months 9-12 Months AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the age of corrective non-outage maintenance work orders (MWOs) remaining open at the end of the reporting month.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Bobba Adverse Trend: None 42 i

l

-]

I I

January 1993

. February 1993 l'

200 - m Marc *i 1993 2

175 -

' Aprh 1993 l 150 - l 125 - 3 107 l

100 - 91 ,

~

77 80 7 75- - 68 68

) x 58 ;

50 -

iP

%((

'// -

h

//- 31 30 25- / 20 20 22 18 19 '

i

'// //, .-

-n .

-0 d I i -,/I Total Open MWOs Open MWOs>3 Total Open Safety - Open Safety Open High' Priority months old Retated MWOs Related MWOs > 3 MWOs Months Old -

MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE)

I .

This indicator shows the total number of corrective non-outage MWOs remaining open l at the end of the reporting month, along with a breakdown by several key categories.'

The 1993 monthly goal for this indicator is to have less than 325 total corrective non-outage maintenance work orders remaining open. The 1992 goal was to have less than !

350 total corrective non-outage maintenance work orders remaining open j Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None f SEP 36 i

43 ,

l 1

i J

i 3

a Corrective Maintenance Backlog > 3 Months Old l 100% -

1 i

i

! 80% - ..

3 . .

i

.: n j 60%- :"' .

1 i ..... .s.

J g '] -

40%-

.1~' .

l 3 ;g n:ia f hj j 20%- f;. _

G.. k._

Ih

}

b'

<:, i 1 0%- k" " A ^ *~

~

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG GREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLD l (NON-OUTAGE) i This indicator shows the percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work i orders that were greater than three months old at the end of the reporting month.

I 3

The percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that were >

greater than three months old at the end of April 1993 was reported as 85.3%.

i i

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

Accountability: Chase / Bobba 1 Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 l

l f

l s: Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance ,

1 90%-

h

it 80%- b ;; !H

., ]

k.. .,u. -

%l tA jy:7 70%- Ehk bN 2 L84 iA ; ; l,

%) bli %

~

60%- hk , Ikijl 9e x y.;

7 .

$Il m 3.i 50%- $p i i

y 3 ;

M . [eef %

j ?

64 ?d!

40%- E a yN Y g4 : w b[Mh

> km yg p&g 1 j Hs pg* A4 '

m& hki pii ! Y '? ~D. >.I' 30%- B4 M

l E4 4' M i

ht $$ '

' sl x k" -

$'! j

/ !.<.l j@ ; :< ,

i a

s I:

ts gr ;$ 4' r .

5 ,

20%

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE This indicator shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outago maintenance.

The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 89.5% in April 1993.

Accountability: Chase / Bobba f

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 l

l l

45 i

4%-

5 Preventive Maintenance items Overdue ,

l GOOD l

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal f 3*4-2*/a -

1 *4 -

O O O- O O O 0.,,o .

i ;M;M; i ; ; ; ; ; i i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 'Feb Mar Apr93 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in the administration and execution of preventive maintenance (PM) programs. A small percentage of preventive mainte-nance items overdue indicates a station commitment to the preventive maintenance program and an ability to plan, schedule, and perform preventive maintenance tasks as programs require.

During April 1993,563 PM items were completed. 5 of these PM items (0.88% of the total) were not completed within the allowable grace period.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals are to have less than 0.5% per month of the preventive maintenance items overdue.

Data Source: Chase /Brady (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Bobba Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 46

O Maintenance Overtime 80%- -

12 Month Average Maintenance Overtime l GOOD l

-M-

+

70%- --O- Fort Calhoun "On-Line" Goal 60%-

50%-

I 40%-

30%-

20%- m.1 - s v o u o u,

u j 7 m m m -

^

$$. <lj ns '< -

10%- A O--- O--Od ^

O--- Q M ^ ^

n _ $ E 7 $ ;-- M j$ g 7

~

0%

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 '

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 4.07% for the month of April 1993. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 10.3% at the end of the month.

Both July and August 1992 overtime were high due to two long term (>2 weeks) forced i outages.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for the "on-line" percentage of maintenance overtime hours worked are a maximum of 10%.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Bobba Adverse Trend: None 47

E Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) 15-Q Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) ,

O Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) -

10-Y 5-2 2 2 1 (1 1 1 1 1 O k 0 Oh0 i

O h[ i Oh0 e

O k0 i

O k 0 Of0 i e O h 0 000 000 000 000 i a i. i. i i .

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 'Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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 April 1993.

Data Source: Chase /McKay (Manager / Source) ;

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Positive Trend SEP 15,41 & 44 l

1 48

- . . - . _ . - _ _ . - .- - _ _ . - - , . - . . - . - - - . _ - . . ..-. - _ - .~ ~ _ - _ - . . . . - _

l E Completed Scheduled Activities (EM) ,

{

l m Fort Calhoun Goal 100 % -

f 90%- - - -

3 l 80%-

70%- I i 60%-

50%-

l .

40%-

l 30%-

20%- :

i 4 10%-

i ,

f 0% l l December'92 January February March ' April'93 l i ,

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES I

[ (ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE)

! i 5 i i This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as i j compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning Electrical Maintenance. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, l

i and miscellaneous maintenance' activities. l i i

' The 1993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a minimum of 85%. ]

The 1992 monthly goal was a minimum of 80%. j Reoortina Month Comoteted Scheduled Activities l l December'92 70.2 %

l January 70.3 %

j February 70.7 %

j March 82.0 %

j April'93. 81.5 %

i

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

Accountability: Chase /Bobba l Adverse Trend: None SEP 33

!(

49 4

_ __ ___ _ _ - , , _ - . , ~ .__._.,,......,,,,._yy..y

E Completed Scheduled Activities (PE) ,

O Fort Calhoun Goal 100 % -

l 90%- ^

I O O O ,

80%- t 70%- 1 60%- -

f 50%- ;

! 40%- !

30%- f 20%-

i 10%- l 0%

j December'92 January February March April'93 l !

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES !

l (PRESSURE EQUIPMENT) [

l This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as l compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning Pressure j Equipment Maintenance. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a minimum of 85%. i The 1992 monthly goal was a minimum of 80%. l Reoortina Month Comoteted Scheduled Activities 1 .

I December'92 78.3 % l January 78.3 % !

February 81.0 % !

March 78.5 % !

April'93 78.4 %

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba l Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 !

.v .

1

)

50

i i

E Completed Scheduled Activities (GM) '

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 100 % -

90%- m m m 3-80%-

70%-

60%- .

50%-

December '92 January February March April'93 -

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (GENERAL MAINTENANCE) ,

This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as i compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning General Main- '

tenance. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and !

miscellaneous maintenance activities. l

-l The 1993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a minimum of 85%. l The 1992 monthly goal was a minimum of 80%. )

Reoortina Month Comoteted Scheduled Activities i December'92 49.2%

January 53.9 %

February 65.1 %

March 53.7 %

April'93 61.5 %

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

Accountability: Chase /Bobba l Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 1 l

l.

51 l

i l

l l

E Completed Scheduled Activities (MM) ,

4

^

Fort Calhoun Goal l

) 100% -

90%-

80%-

70%- ,

t 60%-

I 50%-

40%-

30%-

20%-

10%-

0%

December '92 January February March April'93 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as-compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning Mechanical Maintenance. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities.

Th31993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is 85%. The 1992 monthly goal was a minimum of 80%.

Reoortino Month Comoteted Scheduled Activities December'92 65.6 %

January 80.7 %

February 80.2 %

March 81.5 %

April'93 80.2 %

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 52 !

i 5 Comoteted Scheduled Activities (IC) e O Fort Calhoun Goat 100 % -

l 90%- ,.

80%- c :[

70%- kkhkkh

% :xm ; ," y'.

m.

60%- w 29l.

p:r:9 MEe%.

50%- F itN

;.p-7: .7 4 ,.'

40%- 7 ' Lij .

T ;;;

j 30%-

r '1

]

20%- fc.; jfd yO h-...d I 10%- kfkf$ NMi% ..

0%- bdE.$$$ $'Ade$b tsau i h,J L w.m December'92 January February March April'93 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES i i (INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL) l This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning Instrumenta-l tion & Control. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, I l and miscellaneous maintenance activities. j The 1993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a minimum of 85%.

The 1992 monthly goal was a minimum of 80%.

,' Reoortina Month Comoleted Scheduled Activities December'92 75.9 %

, January 87.5 %

February 90.7%

. March 86.9 %

April '93 80.0 %

]

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba j Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 1 4

53 l

1

3- j i

@ Numberof Missed STs Resulting in LERs 2-

-1 1-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rff, 0 0' O O I l- 1 I I I e i 1. I i i 1 4 . I

'91 '92 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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.

l There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during April 1993.

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)

Failure to Satisfy inservice Testing Requirements for Raw Water Pump.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are zero.

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

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 60 & 61 54

I 10-Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours

--h- . Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours l 8- l

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal :

7-l GOOD l S-

+ ,

O g 5-4-

4 4 a A 2- C O O O O O - O O O O O 1 1 1 an 1- /

ib . ( $l i i i i 0

'90 '91 '92 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate. This rate is based upon failures during the previous 18 months. The number of check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station for the previous three years are shown on the left.

The data for the industry check valve failure rate is three months behind the reporting month due to the time involved in collecting and processing the data. :

For January 1993, the Fort Calhoun Station reported an actual check valve failure rate of 1.18 E-6, while the industry reported an actual failure rate of 2.40 E-6. The increase in the failure rate for the month of August 1992 is due to the failure of check valve CH-288. At the end of April 1993, the Fort Calhoun Station reported a calculated check valve failure rate of 1.18 E-6.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are a maximum failure rate of 2.00 E-6. i Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source) ;

Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 55

@ Number of In:trum nts Out-of-s rvic'>

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal j 24- 23 O 20 99 IN 20_ 13 18 17 17 16 -

16-l'_ _l._:__

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the total number of in-line chemistry system instruments out-of-service at the end of the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indi-cator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of April 1993 there was a total of 18 in-line chemistry instruments out-of-service. Of these 18 instruments,13 were from the Secondary System and 5 were from PASS.

The trend for PASS instruments for this reporting period has not changed. This is due to the dissolved gas analysis being declared operable due to a diluting sample and the DOE flask (SL-19) being declared inoperable because of leaking quick disconnect fittings. The trend for Secondary instruments this reporting period has decreased by 1 due to the "A" Steam Generator specific conductivity instrument being returned to ser-vice. The entire secondary panel remains out-of-service because of failure of the Al-125 data logger; however, allinstruments at the secondary panel are operating. The Al-125 data logger is scheduled to be replaced beginning on June 14,1993. Two instru-ments are out-of-service on Al-107 because of recorder failure. One instrument is out-of-service on Al-105 because of malfunction.

The entire instrument channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, 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 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for the number of in-line chemistry system instruments that are out-of-service has been set at a maximum of 5. The 1992 goal was a maximum of

6. Six out-of-service chemistry instruments make up 10% of all the chemistry instru-ments that are counted for this indicator.

Data Source: Chase /Renaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 56

'@ Monthly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

Yearly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

--EE-- Year-to-Date Monthly Average Waste Produced (Kilograms)

-O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal

-+-- Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 Kg) i 1000- 0 0 0 ? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?

I 800- -

$ 600- {'

E 8' :

g 400- !

200-0 O-- &

---C C

C C

E C

= , T .1 , ,

W

A , ,

j May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by For. Calhoun each month, the monthly average goal and the year-to-date total for hazardous waste ,

produced. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halo- !

genated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced.

During the month of April 1993, O kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was-produced, O kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The yearly total for hazardous waste pro- '

duced is 149.5 kilograms. The year-to-date monthly average for hazardous waste -

produced is 37.4 kilograms. +

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

The 1993 and 1992 monthly average goals for hazardous waste produced are a maxi- !

mum of 100 kilograms.

Date Source: Chase /Henning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Hennmg ;

Adverse Trend: None i i

57 i

l i 100 % - E Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area

. 4k l

l --O-- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months) l GOOD l j 90%- '$

j c ^ ^

.l 1 !

I f

i l 80%-

70%- i

.i; 60%-

i i

50*'

Mar Apr93 May92 'Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb r

DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA l l

This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is decontaminated (clean) based l on the total square footage. The 1993 non-outage goalis a minimum of 88% decon- }

taminated RCA and the outage goalis a minimum of 85% decontaminated RCA. The l 1992 non-outage goal was a minimum of 88% decontaminated RCA. j i

At the end of the reporting month,89% of the total square footage of the RCA was not j contaminated. l F

Date Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) ,

i Accountability: Chase /Lovett ,

Adverse Trend: None SEP54 ;

r t

l

-i

@ Numb:r of Id:ntified PRWPs o-

--G-- Fort Calhoun Goal 15-io- C O O O O O O O O O O O 5- .

t 3

1 o ,M,o , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 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 PRWPs are identified through supervisory review of the Radiological' Occurrence Re-ports and Personnel Contamination Reports written 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 performance.

During the month of April 1993, the following 5 PRWPs were identified: 1) Individuals read, signed, and spoke to an RP tech but failed to obtain the proper dosimetry as required by the RWP and failed to sign into PRISM prior to entering the RCA. 2) An individual received a skin contamination from climbing up the I-Beams on the bioshield wallin Rm 60 to check a valve. 3) An individual alarmed the PCM and performed a self frisk and decon without RP. 4) An individual was reading a newspaper in the RCA and did not understand that OPPD policy prohibits this. 5) An individual was contaminated on the face by either coming in contact with the Gaitronics or by touching the face with the hand.

The 1993 monthly goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 10 per month. ,

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP52 I 59 :

i

E TotalNurnberof Hot Spots O Number of Additional Hot Spots identified

@ Removal Planned

- Cumulative Hot Spots Removed (Year-to-Date)

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Hot Spots Rernoved (1/rnonth) 80- g g

I 60- j y i

40-

)

4 :

20- ..

~~

0-5 0,l *?

Jan93 Feb 1J, dyec Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec93 NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS This indicator shows the total number of hot spots which have been identified to exist in the Fort Calhoun Station and have been documented through the use of a hot spot identification sheet. A hot spot is defined as a smalllocalized source of high radiation.

A hot spot occurs when the contact dose rate of an item or piece of equipment is at least 5 times the General Area dose rate and the item or piece of equipment's dose rate is equal to or greater than 100 mrem / hour in rad areas.

At the end of April 1993, there was a total of 64 hot spots identified. O hot spots were removed during the month.

Removalis planned for 16 hot spots.

There has been a total of 4 hot spots removed in 1993.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal is to remove three hot spots per quarter and achieve a net reduction of one hot spot per quarter.

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Lovett l

Adverse Trend: None so

1 O Documents Scheduled for Review

@ Documents Reviewed 700- @ Overdue Documents r

., i f 600-l

500- 1 1

400- _

} 300- !

4 t i

200 - !

i' t

100-

]

- ~

i - -

i 0

r f e- . _ _ _

i i i i i .i i i i -i i i ,

May92 Jun Mar Apr93 l Jul Aug Sep .Oct Nov -Dec Jan Feb i f

. DOCUMENT REVIEW .l i 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 !

l document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site.

j Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the j Operating Manual.- j

During April 1993 there were 208 document reviews completed while 101 document 4 reviews were scheduled. At the end of April,there were no document reviews more ,

j than 6 months overdue.

f .

l

There were 26 new documents reviewed in April.

l !

] The 1993 monthly goal for this indicator is no (0) documents more than 6 months over-due. -

!r '

T

j. Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) f Accountability: Chase /Jaworski

. LAdverse Trend: None. SEP 46 -

j 61

@ Non-System Failures JGOODI 30- V 25 -

20-15- g 10- 5 upt 6 5-9 4 ,

pgl 4,4,4, g,q 1,g ,

4 ,g ,4 ,

1 ,

, ,49 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 l GOOD l

@ System Failures

_ 4 70-60-50- AI 33 0 31 29 30- /, -

28

- 21 /f/ 26 f/ {- F 26

~

0 , , , , , , , , ,. , , ,

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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.

l During the month of April 1993, there were 29 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 25 (86%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents, and only 10 (40%) of these were environmental failures. Two of the three loggable search equip-ment failures were caused when halon was inadvertently discharged near the explosive detectors. All explosive detectors malfunctioned and had to be repaired. Two detectors are currently out of service awaiting parts. System failures continued to show a positive trend. System failures declined approximately 42% in the first quarter of 1993 com-pared to the first quarter of 1992.

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Positive Trend SEP 58 62

i

.i i

B

~

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

O Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line) . 3

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (0) 6- i i

1 5- ;

l 4- r I

3

'/

/>

7/>'>//

/ 2 2 2- - - .

/h / 1

, 1-ifff f ; $ ff l 0

, February '93 March '93 April '93 3

i TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS (EXCLUDING SCAFFOLDING) l 1

This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater I

than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number i

of temporary modifications' removable on-line that are greater than six months old. Also provided is the Fort Calhoun goal for temporary modifications.

l There are currently no temporary modifications that are greater than one fuel cycle old J requiring a refueling outage to remove. In addition, at the end of April 1993 there were 2 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be removed on-line. These were: 1) PTZ camera 51 power supply,in which DEN electri-l cal has a commitment completion date of 7/30/93 for ECN 93-113; 2) HE-2 circuit board, in which DEN electrical has a commitment completion date of 7/15/93 for ECN 93-086.

At the end of April 1993, there was a total of 29 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta-i tion.16 of the 29 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 13 are removable !

I on-line. In 1993 a total of 21 temporary modifications have been installed.

! Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

~

Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence

. Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 63 I

E Total Modifcation Packa0es Open 337 350- 0 1993 Fort Calhoun Monthly Goal (150) 300-264 250-200-172 176 173

'90

'91 t::Illinisu

'92 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excluding outstand-ina modifications which are orooosed to be cancelled).

Cateaorv Reoortina Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress - 8 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 12 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 57 Construction Backlog /In Progress 38 Design Enar. Undata Backloa/In Proaress 10 Total 125 At the end of April 1993,7 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 16 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 72 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 31 backlog modification request reviews this year.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun monthly goalis a maximum of 150 total outstanding modifica-tions.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 64

i e

EARm Requiring Engineering RXp:Inse - N:t in Cluseout O DEN E SE .

~

_ 5' :

g -

['; : - _ __. i i2 2

Feb Mar Apr

. . O . R . I"~l Feb Mar Apr l2 U.n.ITI Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar . Apr l

0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months April'93 Overdue EARS !

O Closeout B Engineering Response l 4

So-40-30-20- ,

I to-O g _ _ _ _ _' ,

Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 4

O Priority 1 & 2 O Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200-150- \ # N-r 100- -

~ """"

50- .,

m & ,m & & '

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 5 12 Overduo Responses D 60 EARS Resolved and in Closeout

@ 38 Overdue Closeouts i

S 96 EARS Requiring Response '

O 57 EARS on Schedule 39.0%

29.o% -

38.o%#% .'

2 62.o%

2.0% .

l 1

i ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering and System Engineering. The 1993 goal for this indicator is a maximum of 150 outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 9 . l EARS closed during the month 15 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 156 Data Source: Phelps/Pulverenti(Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Phelps l Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on three consecutive months of increases in the total number of open EARS. SEP 62 65

i

~

E ECNs Backlogged in DEN ;

1 350- O. ECNs Received During the Month i

@ ECNs Cornpleted During the Month 300- ,

i 250-j 200- ,

May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov .Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 i

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS This indicator shows the number of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) awaiting i completion by DEN, the number of ECNs opened during the reporting month, and the number of ECNs completed by DEN during the reporting month. .

5 At the end of April 1993, there was a total of 192 DEN backlogged open ECNs. There were 32 ECNs received by DEN, and 40 ECNs completed during the month, e

i Although the number of open ECNs is currently high, activities are in progress to reduce the backlog of open ECNs.

]

Data Source: Phelps/Pulverenti(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski

$ Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 1

66 3

O DEN - Enginnring not compl:te O System Engineering - Engineering complete, response under review 4

5 Maintenance / Construction MWO/CWO scheduled, but work not complete -

i @ Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO complete, awaiting closeout 120- 103

100- 73-80-60 - 38 40- 25 16 -20 l' 20- - 5 2 0 wn; , 0 0 p. ,

4 0 , , ,

0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months - > 6 months 2 ECN FACILITY CHANGES OPEN O DEN - Engineering not complete O System Engineering - Engineering complete, response under review I E Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO scheduled, but work not complete

9 Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO complete, awaiting closecut 4

79 80- 60 "o+.

60 60 - - J"'

~ 40- 26 28 20- ,9 11 4 2 3 4 '.us "-

0 I" " " "'

i i i 3 0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN SUBSTITUTE REPLACEMENT ITEMS OPEN t

E DEN - Engineering not complete 4

j O System Engineering - Walkdown or confirmation not cornplete ,

l 60-l 44 t 40- 27

]

20-0 kDN " "

2 9

1 10 0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN DOCUMENT CHANGES OPEN 4

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN ,

~

This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, I and Maintenance or Construction for the reporting month. The graphs provide data on

} ECN Facility Changes Open, ECN Substitute Replacement items Open, and ECN Document Changes Open.

Data Source: Phelps/Pulverenti(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski AdverseTrend: None SEP 62

' 67

,.w

@ Administrative Control Problem O Licensed operator Error

@ Other Personnel Error 6-

@ Maintenance Problem s

E Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem

@ Equipment Failures 4-3-

i 2- - -

1 1- - - -- , ::

( -

0 i i i i i i i i i i i i May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 I

LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by report date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from May 1,1992 through April 30,1993.

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 LERs submitted in April 1993.

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 68

i i .

E 60- -

Total Requalification Training Hours i

l-Simulator Training Hours .

Non-Requalification Training Hours 3 50- '

! ' s - Number of Exam Failures 4 t l 40- l l 36 36 -l 3 i- .

j 33 ' 33 '

. :i 30 30~

30- - -

25 j 8

I 20-l

f. 14 14 .

~

14 :

12 I

N10 to 10- 4

.6

/ .;g 7/ -

q q 8 *

! Z2 ,

is [: Y: 2 I:1 8' j.

0 pg ,

,' ff, i

i .

/ !f o o ( o s

f ,

?

-j l

!' Cycle 92-3 Cycle 92 - Cycle 92-5 . Cycle 92-6 . Cycle 92-7 Cycle 931 '. Cycle 93-2 '

f' .

t

Note: The Simulator was out-of-service for_ maintenance and modifications during Rotation 92-7. J l

~

i

!' LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING ,

l

i. This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each' l i crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset . ]

j. of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP ~

t verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and . ]

q Division Manager lunches. 3

~

jL Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance j

Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training. j i . .

I

! Three individuals failed the written exam during Cycle 93-2.' Allindividuals remediated I without impacting shift operations.

L j b Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source) l t Accountability: Gasper /Guliani j

^

a.

Adverse Trend: None . ~ SEP 68 j g

$ .69 i :l j

d

, , i..,,. m , , ,,m. ,.. . , . - A2.-

@ SRO Exams Administered O sRO Exams eassed E RO Exams Administered 30-O RO Exams Passed j

20-10- 5 5, F,-

7

, /, , - ,

/ .. ,

m ', /

i 9 i i i i i e i i i a e May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 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.

There were 5 Reacter Operator, and 5 Senior Reactor Operator candidate exams ad-ministered in April 1993. All five Reactor Operators, and four Senior Reactor Operator candidates passed those exams.

There were no NRC administered SRO or RO exams during April 1993.

l Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 i

70

200-g TotalOutstandingCARs .

4 O Outstanding CARS > Six Months Old 150-100- g 83 83 83 81 72 72 74 72 il 50-h 31 .

27 0- =- 1 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTF l

This indicator shows the total number of outstanding Corrective Action Reports (CARS) and the number of outstanding CARS that are greater than six months old.

At the end of April 1993 there were 66 outstanding CARS. 27 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old.

The 1993 monthly goal for this indicatoris a maximum of 30 CARS greater than 6 months old.

Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: None 71

Total Outage Maintenance Work Activities

-O- MWOs Ready to Work

-V-- Parts Hold

-+- Engineering Hold 4- Planning Hold 1000 -

900 -

800 -

700 -

600-500 -

400-300 - ,, ,

200 - p% -

100 - 0 im ;

O h Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep93 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) and Main-tenance Work Requests (MWRs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. Included are the number of activities that are ready to work (parts staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use), the number of activities that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) and planning hold (job scope not yet completed).

Approximately 2,176 Maintenance Work Orders were completed during the Cycle 14 Refueling Outage.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Johansen Adverse Trend: None SEP 31

! 72 I

Ii A A D ga1 T A RT g Q( g d c c a e ,6 eh d eh v

e o t

a o 1

9g d

t i

u f

si 0 1

0 2

0 3

0 4

0 5

0 6

0 7

0 B

O 9

0 1

0 0

r s u S f oi ei n e n o t 9o n l

i ndi

- - - - - - ~ - - -

t a u h3 al al g c T b r e f a q aiE r

e i c p Tr o d Ot O !,- ' - :': : 7 u o I'

l ti e r a V n y :

o ht jeh t

a t r E

d J e i as g h R *!$*8EgsiE J a p c %" ns .e o A :: ,' -

k' !,

N a w t i o ' , ! - 5 , '-}, .

o w o t i n w L ,

n o r hSd t Ts L e r s acci t s ht P s~=$ 3 E8 *o s k ha eh ' - '?/ ' I ' - l ' ,'-

k /i set w r e R

/i S hdo r i

l e s O B w ou l o

u e ul l

ddt e si b e

at r a et u J

E wE5 oBH3 '- '/ / / /I;/ j / jl_ 1 g a r o a C , 9 h n bC d cs T 9 e h u 3 t

e r

gi n cmv oa d e r o r

et f

S eoj HE.? ', j / / / / I; / l / ;' ' ,. ; 7 GOE O U

o p e d nh e T

(

A T M ml p ea t

o t A

a ti l

l l

y p T oEiegdE S A A c c c G n

l eop t h 1 r U ',j////I ;/l/l ? - h t t E a e nr t

3j o S ,

e u u P

g "o si e d al al R e

r ace sac j i n ac pt

(

C 23E 5_

ul C C e o o O

/ t t d p s Y ,l/, / , e ' 7 / l, l 7 d m m J

S oes E ow i

o c r C ,

C p pl C fg 1 a L o el e T u hr o0 t t vh r

c ey 0 o

r ei d h c E "kE 'Eie A5 R ,

, l y', , , )' ; ' ,'

. ' ,j?

m p

t oi o n

ti n

S S

e ei% a 1 el o

ura 5 T n n

) t i T L s o hi sa A dthoc i n t e R C3s sj HEFi n s T t

U oem ga ni E

' , -l:,',,',-)' j ,~ -

f f

o F , M Mo S

_ gp r e t o R U n n pArael m p h r e E 6jgE t h

t h

E rpt a o ',;- , ', ,',: ; , ;',- ' ;:,5 '- P h e L O i ti l js I ,

1 r r

( o ec N R 9ee n co T 9p a b .s p t

G gb 2isa$

3r d e e O

. ey c o s o f U et o t T 3O a EE.?iai g$ -

n m h A :_

swo

'. : , ' , , ' , , 5{, :, -: :: -

t e e s G ,

t hr a C E S e )k v a

y c

) E $g%!e ol$ ', 7, ', , ?.

kJ, ':7, ?: ::.- 'I E p b i el ,

P ey r

al 1 bl

_ 3 cJ 5 88 <E seE.6 ,'

7 1 e nyl u e. '?. '?5, ' - $ '- '

- 3 t li lIllllllI. lllIi1, ';

- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval O Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval

- FinalDesign Package issued l Total Modification Packages (23) (2 under re/iew to cancel or move) g 25-gf llllllllllllllllll!: llllllll;: lllllll lllllll^l*l 3 .5

.52 E

$E gE15- .-

f> @

$o oE to_

E.i En o.2 Eo z3E _ 3_ g

, ,CCCC" g, v v v v

. ---- Amomm.mAmm w w w %F hf M 4mf W W V V V V g

0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

u - e e e e g o e n - e e

$ E S 3 $ $ 3 $ $ $ $ 5 E

m PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 25 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 6/19/92) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by June 30,1993.

Additional data points will be added to this indicator as information becomes available.

Data Source: Phelps/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gambhir/Phelps Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 74

r_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

k ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS 75

)

ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS The following action plans have been developed for performance indicators cited as exhibiting adverse trends during the last three months:

Repeat Failures:

Problem: The number of NPRDS reportable components with repeat failures in the last 18 months was increasing.

Goal: To reduce the number of components with more than one failure to eight and those with more than two failures to zero by 1/94.

Action: . Existing repeat failure data was evaluated by System Engineering to determine if failures were engineering or maintenance related. A memo was prepared and distrib-uted to plant management describing failure problems and suggesting corrective ac-tions. A meeting was held to discuss the repeat failure rate and to identify action to achieve improvement. Further recommendations for reducing the number of repeat failures will be listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report.

Thermal Performance Problem: Cycle 14 Steam Cycle Performance tests continue to show performance degradation. Plant performance indicators are lower than expected.

Goal: Determine source of poor performance results and resolve problems.

Action: Remaining action items on the Thermal Performance Action Plan were com-pleted during the April maintenance outage. These included inspection and cleaning of both the "A" and "B" condensers, repairing of a backwash valve seat, cleaning of the condenser cooler, rebuilding of various valves in the condensate and steam systems, and replacement of GEM AC Power Supplies on various instrumentation.

76

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK OR. personnel errors that occur ddring maintenance or test-DERS ing activities performed on the responsible component or This indicator tracks the total number of outstanding cor- system, including failure to follow procedures.

rective non-outage Maintenance Work Orders at the Fort Errors - failures attributable to incorrect procedures that Calhoun Station versus their age in months. were followed as written, improper installation of equip-ment, and personnel errors (including failure to follow AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM procedures properly). Also included in this category are PERFORMANCE failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as-l The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- signed to any of the preceding categories.

able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the auxiliary feedwater system for the reporting period di- CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR l vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi- The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi- l' plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater cal operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per system. kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for AUXILIARY SYSTEMS CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the j HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is The cumulative hours that the Component Cooling Water the Financial and Operating Report.

l system is outside the station chemistry limit. The hours are accumulated from the first sample exceeding the limit CONTAMINATIONS >5,000 DPM/100 CM' until additional sampling shows the parameter to be back Reportable skin and clothing contaminations above within limits. background levels greater than 5000 dpm/100 cm'. This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP #15 &

CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 54.

l Compares the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate to the industry check valve f ailure rate (failures per 1 million CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG GREATER component hours). The data for the industry f ailure rate THAN 3 MONTHS OLD is three months behind the PI Report reporting month. The percentage of total outstanding corrective mainte-This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43. nance items, not requiring an outage, that are greater than three months old at the end of the period reported.

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE Co!!ective radiation exposure is the total external whole- DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT body dose received by all on-site personnel (including This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as contractors and visitors) during a time period, as mea- measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-sured by the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col- watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person- portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting rem. This indicator tracks radiological work performance month are also shown.

for SEP #54.

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for

SUMMARY

each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station demands and the last 25 load-run demands, with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) fail-ure rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED month time period. Failures are reported as component AREA (i.e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e. The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which charging pumps, main steam stop valves, control ele- includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and ment drive motors, etc.) categories, areas of the C/RP building, that is decontaminated based Failure Cause Categories are: on the total square footage. This indicator tracks perfor-Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse- mance for SEP # 54.

quence of expected wear or aging.

Manutacturing Defect a failure attributable to inad- DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREOUENCY RATE equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com- (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE) ponent or system. This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for Engineering / Design - a f allure attributable to the inad- all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, equate design of the responsible component or system. involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours Other Devices - a f ailure attributable to a failure or worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-misoperation of another component or system, including tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-associated devices. mance for SEP #25 & 26.

Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure that is a result of im-proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or 77

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (c nt'd)

DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) j The Document Review Indicator shows the number of an emergency.

J documents reviewed, the number of documents sched- B) Malf unction of equipment that is not required during uled for review, and the number of document reviews an emergency.

that are overdue for the reporting month. A document C) Intentional termination of a test because of abnormal review is considered overdue if the review is not com- conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel plate within 6 months of the assigned due date. This generator damage or repair.

indicator tracks performance for SEP #46. D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not prevented the emergency generator from being restarted EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM and brought to load within a few minutes.

PERFORMANCE E) A f ailure to start because a portion of the starting sys-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc-able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer- cessf ul start with the starting system in its normal align-gency AC power system for the reporting period divided ment.

by the number of hours in the reporting period multiplied Each emergency generator f ailure that results in the gen-by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys- erator being declared inoperable should be counted as tem. one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during corrective maintenance and the successful test that fol-EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- lows repair to verify operability should not be cx)unted as ITY .

demands or failures when the EDG has not been de-This indicator shows the number of failures that were clared operable again.

reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency dio-sei generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABluTY shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer-of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob- gency diesel generators. In general, unreliabihty is the tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when ratis of unsuccessf ul operations (starts or load-runs) to the demand f ailures are less than the trigger values. the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a

1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent combination of start unreliability and load-run start demands, including all start-only demands and all unreliabihty, start demands that are followed by load run demands, whether by automatic or manual initiation. A start only ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) demand is a demand in which the emergency generator BREAKDOWN is staned, but no attempt is made to load the generator. This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the emer- the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design En-gency generator system that prevents the generator from gineering Nuclear and System Engineering. This indica-achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as tor tracks performance for SEP #62.

a valid start f ailure. This includes any condition identified in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emer- ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) BREAK-gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would DOWN have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred. This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering

3) Number of Load-Run Demands: For a valid load-run Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design demand to be counted the load-run attempt must meet Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and one or more of the following criteria: Maintenance. The graphs provide data on ECN Facility A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real au- Changes open, ECN Substitute Replacement Parts tomatic or manualinitiation. open, and ECN Document Changes open. This indicator B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration tracks performance for SEP #62.

as stated in each test's specifications.

C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS is expected to be operated for at least one hour while The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were loaded with at least 50% of its design load. completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run f ailure by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks should be counted for any reason in which the emer- performance for SEP #62.

gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre-dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run demands.

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run ,

should not be counted as valid demands or failures when l they can be attributed to any of the following:

A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of 78 i

l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd)

EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI- GROSS HEAT RATE CAL HOURS Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical hours is the energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the inverse of the mean time between forced outages reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH).

to the number of hours the reactor is critical in a period (1000 hours0.0116 days 0.278 hours 0.00165 weeks 3.805e-4 months ) divided by the number of forced outages HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED caused by equipment failures in that period. The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated haz-ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR hazardous waste produced by FCS each month.

This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available generaton to gross maximum generation, expressed as HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM a percentage. Available generation is the energy that SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi- able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be high pressure safety injection system for the reporting produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu- period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe-ously at maximum capacity. riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres-sure safety injection system.

FORCED OUTAGE RATE This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER-the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared VICE to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are events are failures or other unplanned conditions that out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Post require removing the unit from service before the end of Accident Sampling System (PASS).

the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-ures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut- LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS down (i.e., the Unit is available but not in service). This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz-zes and exams that are administered and passed each

! FUEL REUABILITY INDICATOR month. This indicator tracks training performance for I

This indicator is defined as the steady state primary cool- SEP #68.

ant 1-101 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contri-bution and normalized to a common purification rate. UCENSED OPERATOR REQUAUFICATION TRAIN-Tramp uranium is f uel which has been deposited on re- ING actor core internals from previous defective fuel or is The total number of hours of training given to each crew present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu- during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous ing hours (which are a subset of the totaltraining hours),

operation for at least three days at a power level that the number of non-requalification training hours and the does not vary more than + or - 5% Plants should collect number of exam f ailures. This indicator tracks training data for this indicator at a power level above 85% when performance for SEP #68.

possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE the highest steady-state power level attained during the BREAKDOWN month. This indicator shows the number and root cause code for The density correction f actor is the ratio of the specific Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature follows:

(540 degrees F., Vf = 0.02146) divided by the specific 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or l degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-l changer, Vf = 0.016204), which results in a density cor- equate management or supervisory control, incorrect rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32. procedures, etc.)

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures GASEOUS RADIOACTIVE WASTE BEING DIS- errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-CHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT tors during plant activities.

This indicator displays the total number of Curies of all 3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission /commis-gaseous radioactive nuclides released from FCS. This sion committed by non-licensed personnelinvolved in indicator is included in the report when new data is avail- plant activities.

able,i.e., every 6 months. 4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause code is to capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in 79

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd) the maintenance functional organization. Activities in. NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFI-cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil. CIENCIES A control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as lance, calibration and radiation protection.

5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem any component which is operated or controlled from the

- This cause code covers a full range of programmatic Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, installa. Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control tion, and f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a passive function for the Control underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ.

Room and has been identified as deficient, l.a., does not ment, etc.).

Perform under all conditions as designed. This definition

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-ronmental-Related Failures) This code is used for spuri. also applies to the Afternate Shutdown Panels Al 179, Al-185, and Al 212.

ous f ailures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) Item

if winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time some other action is required by an operator to compen-failures. Electric components included in this category sate for the condition of the component. Some examples are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, diodes, resistors, etc. of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-tor out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re-LIQUID RADIOACTWE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED paired because rcplacement parts require a long lead TO THE ENVIRONMENT time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant This indicator displays the total number of curies from all liquid releases from FCS to the Missouri River. This pump to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions indicator is included in the report when new data is avail. are required by an Operator because of equipment de-sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-able, i.e., every 6 months.

erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

The total number of security incidents for the reporting equipment that is required to be used during Emergency month depicted in two grsphs. This indicator tracks se. Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proce-dures. 5) System indication that provides criticalinfor-curity performance for SEP #58, mation during normal or abnormal operations.

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as The number of radiological hot spots which have been contract personnel. identified and documented to exist at FCS at the end of the reporting month. A hot spot is a small localized source of radiation. A hot spot occurs when the contact MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN This indicator is a breakdown of corrective non-outage dose rate of an item is at least 5 times the General Area maintenance work orders by several categories that re. dose rate and the item's dose rate is equal to or greater main open at the end of the reporting month. This indi. than 100 mrem / hour.

cator tracks maintenance performance for SEP #36.

NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE LERS The total maximum amount of radiation received by an The number of Licensee Event Reports (LERs) attributed individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, to personnel error on the original LER submittat. A Per-and annual basis, sonne! Error is an event for which the root cause is inap-propriate action on the part of one or more specified indi-viduals (as opposed to being attributed to a department MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING or a general group), Also, the inappropriate action must OUTAGE) have occurred within approximately two years of the The to'ai number of Maintenance Work Orders that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling

Event Date" specified in the LER. This indicator trends Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts personnel performance for SEP #15.

staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use). Also included is the number of NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-( MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures SULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that resuft in (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Main- month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 &

tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that 61.

have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and have not yet been converted to MWOs.

80

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd)

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE-The year. to- date budget compared to the actual expen. NANCE ACTIVITIES ditures for Operations and Maintenance departments. The % of the number of completed maintenance activi-ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte-OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS nance activities each month. This % is shown for each This indicator displays the total number of outstanding maintenance craft. Maintenance activities include MWRs, Corrective Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella-that are older than six months and the number of modifi- neous activities. These indicators track Maintenance cation related CARS. performance for SEP #33.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The number of Modification Requests (MRs)in any state This indicator is defined as the % of preventive mainte-between the issuance of a Modification Number and the nance items in the month that were not completed by the completion of the drawing update. scheduled date plus a grace period equal to 25 % of the

1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress. This number rep- scheduled interval. This indicator tracks preventive resents modification requests that have not been plant maintenance activities for SEP #41.

approved during the reporting month.

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT -

includes: OF LIMIT A.) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed. The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry B.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear parameters divided by the total number of hours possible Projects Review Committee (NPRC). for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, C.) Modifcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Chloride, Hydrogen Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride, and Projects Committee (NPC) Suspended Solids. EPRI limits are used.

These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are (MAINTENANCE) returned to Engineering for more information, some ap- The number of identified incidents concerning mainte-proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs some approved for planning. Once planning is com- related to the use of procedures (includes the number of pleted and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and Modification Requests may be approved for acmmplish- the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

ment with a year assigned for construction or they may This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP be cancelled. All of these different phases require re- #15,41 & 44.

view.

3) Design Engineering Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION Planning has assigned a year in which construction will PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 24 MODIFICA.

be completed and design work may be in progress. TIONS)

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-Package has been issued or construction has begun but proved for completion during the Cycle 15 Refueling Out-the modification has not been accepted by the System age.

Acceptance Committee (SAC).

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress. PED RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM has received the Modification Completion Report but the The number of identified poor radiological work practices drawings have not been updated. (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not radiological work performance for SEP #52.

include modifications which are proposed for cancella-tion. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUEL- lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of ING OUTAGE) non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-This indicator shows the status of the projects which are tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, in the scope of the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-hours. This indicator tracks preventive maintenance ac-tivities for SEP #41, 81

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (cont'd)

RECORDABLEINJURY/lLLNESS CASES FRE- SIGNIFICANT EVENTS QUENCY RATE Significant events are those events identified by The number of injuries requiring more than normal first NRCstaff through detailed screening and evaluation of aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator operating experience. The screening process includes trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. the dai!y review and discussion of all reported operating reactor 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) mmponents with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine il any actual number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures 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 f ailures are any events or conditions that transient; 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, 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 mmplication; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, failure of all trains con- radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or nicalSpecifications; 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 utikties of requirements in 10 CFR 5172 and 10 CFR 50.73. The significant events and lessons learned 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, Auxiliary (and STAFFING LEVEL Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con. The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys- neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety Features instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air STATION NET GENERATION Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS during Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, the reporting month.

Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring Instrumenta- The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core Isolation figurations to the plant's systems.

Cooling System Reactor Trip System and instrumenta- 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentathn, jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the mate Heat Sink. PalD, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-INDEX cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures The Chemistry Performance Indox (CPI) is a calculation are nu; considered as temporary modifications unless the based on the mncentration of key impurities in the sec- jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the dure is cornplete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or most likely cause of deterioration of the steam genera- lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-tors. The chemistry parameters are reported only for the cations.

period of time when the plant is operated at greater than 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-30 percent power. tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for The CPI is calculated using the following equation: CPI - which MRs have been submitted will be considered as (Ka/0.8) + (Na/20) + (0,/10) / 3 where the following are temporary modifications until final resolution of the MR monthly averages of: Ka - average blowdown cation and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently conductivity, Na - average blowdown sodium concon- recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-tration, O, - average condensate pump discharge dis- rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71.

solved oxygen concentration.

I 82

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd) reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is gen-THERMAL PERFORMANCE erstod (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent- was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS age, actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pres-sure injection system, the low pressure injection system, UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR or the safety injection tanks.

The ratio of the available energy generation over a given time period to the reference energy generation (the en- UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUAllONS (NRC ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated DEFINITION) continuously at full power under reference ambient con- The number of safety system actuations which include ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per- (g&) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the centage. Low Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injec-tion Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER NRC classification of safety system actuations includes 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS actuations when major equipment is operated add when This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- the logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- lenged.

tions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of critical operation.

The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , then dividing in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC in-that number by the total number of hours criticalin the spection hours. The violations are reported in the year same time period. The inoicator is further defined as that the inspection was actually performed and not based follows: on when the inspection report is received. The hours

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici- reported for each inspection report are used as the in-pated part of a planned test. spection hours.

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE rods, liquid 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 radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-have been spurious. ior also shows the volume of k>w-levoi radioactive waste

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive 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-level solid radioac-switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- tive waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, tons) provided in the main control room, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear

4) Critical means that during the steady state condition of power plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication waste includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, factor (k,) was essentially equal to one, disposable protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other material to be disposed of at a low-level radio-UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR active waste disposal site, except resin, sludge, or The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given evaporator bottoms. Low-level refers to all radioactive period of time, to the reference energy generation (the waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel energy that could be produced if the unit were operated processing. This indicator tracks radiological work per-continuously at full power under reference ambient con- formance for SEP #54.

ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-centage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

This indicator 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 actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-cuts when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is 83

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators index is to list perior-mance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended. ,

SEP Reference Number 15 Pape increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncomp!iance incidents (Maintenance) . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Contaminations >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 4 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . .3 Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LERs . . .. . . . . . .5 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level . . . . . . . . . . ... .40 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . . . . . .. .. . ..2 Recordable Injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . .. . . . .3 SEP Reference Number 26 Evaluate and irnplement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Recordable injury /l!! ness Cases Frequency Rate . .. . . .3 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . . .. .2 Recordable Injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . .. . . . .. .3 SEP Pqference Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status . . . . . . . . . 72 Overall Project Status.. . . . . . 73 Progress of Cycle 15 Outage Modification Planning. . . . . . . 74 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (Electrical Maintenance). . . . . . . . . . .49 (Pressure Equipment) . .. . .. . . . . . . . . 50 (General Maintenance). . . .. . . . . 51 (Mechanical Maintenance) . .. . .. . . 52 (Instrumentation & Control) . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 53 SEP Reference Number 36 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Work Order (MWO) Breakdown (Corrective Non-Outage Maintenance). .. .. . 43 Corrective Maintenance Backlog Greater than 3 Months Old (Non-Outage) . . .. . 44 SEP Ref erence Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance . . . . . . .. . 45 Preventive Maintenance items Overdue . . .. . . .. .. . .. .. 46 Procedural Noncompliance incidents . . . . 48 84

SEP Reference Number 43 EaQ2 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate. . . 55 SEP Reference Number 44 Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . . . 48 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review . . . . . 61 SEP Reference Number 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program. . . . . . .. . . 59 SEP Reference Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . .30 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. . . . . . 31 Contaminations >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 4 Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area. . . . 58 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . .. . 62 SEP Reference Number 60 Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . 54 SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . 54 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications . . . . . . 63 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown. . . . 65 Engineering Change Notice Status . . . . . 66 Engineering Change Notice Breakdown . . . . .. . . 67 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training . .. . .69 License Candidate Exams. . . . .. . 70 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications . . . . .. . . 63 85

l REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews M. J. Guinn M. W. Nichols G. L. Anglehart G. E. Guliani C. W. Nor!!s W. R. Bateman K. B. Guliani Nuclear Licensing K. L. Delek E. R. Gundal & Industry Affairs T. G. Blair R.H. Guy J. T. O'Connor B. H. Blome R. M. Hawkins W. W. Orr C. N. Bloyd M. C. Hendrickson L. L. Parent J.P.Bobba R. R. Henning T. L. Patterson C. E. Boughter K. R. Henry R. T. Pearce M. A. Breuer J. B. Herman R. L. Phelps C. J. Brunnert G. J. Hill W. J. Ponec M. W. Butt K. C. Holthaus L. M. Pulverenti C. A. Carlson C. K. Huang T. M. Reisdorff J. W. Chase L. G. Huliska A. W. Richard G. R. Chatfield C. J. Hus'K R. T. Ridenour A. G. Christensen R. L. Jaworski D. G. Ried A. J. Clark R. A.Johansen G. K. Samide O. J. Clayton W. C. Jones T.J.Sandene R. P. Clemens J. D. Kecy M. J. Sandhoefner J. L. Connolley J. D. Keppler B. A. Schmidt G. M. Cook D. D. Kloock S. T. Schmitz J.E. Cook J. C. Knight F. C. Scofield M. R. Core D. M. Kobunski H. J. Sefick S. R. Crites G. J. Krause J. W. Shannon D. W. Dale J. G. Krist R. W. Short R. C. DeMeulmeester L.T.Kusek C. F. Simmons D. C. Dietz L.E. Labs E.L.Skaggs K.S. Dowdy M. P. Lazar J. L. Skiles J. A. Drahota R. C. Learch F. K. Smith T. R. Dukarski R. E. Lewis R. L. Sorenson R. G. Eurich R. C. Liebentritt J. A. Spi!ker H. J. Faulhaber D. L. Lippy D. E. Spires M. A. Ferdig B. Lisowyj K. E. Steele F. F. Franco B. R. Livingston W. Steele M. T. Frans D. L. Lovett H. F. Sterba H. K. Fraser J. H. MacKinnon G. A. Teeple J. F. W. Friedrichsen G. D. Mamoran M. A.Tesar S. K. Gambhir J. W. Marcil J. W. Ti!!s J. K. Gasper N. L. Martice D. R. Trausch W. G. Gates R. D. Martin P. R. Tumer M. O. Gautier D. J. Matthews J. M. Uhland S. W. Gebers J. M. Mattice C. F. Vanecek J. M. Glantz T. J. Mcivor J. M. Waszak J. T. Gleason K. S. McCormick G. R. Williams L. V. Goldberg R. F. Mehaffey S. J. Willrett D. J. Golden K. G. Melstad W. C. Woemer D. C. Gorence D. C. Mueller R. E. Gray R. J. Mueller 86

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 Refueling 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 101h 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 13th Refueling 02/01/92-05/03/92

Cycle 14# 05/03/92-09/18/93 (Planned Dates) 141h Refueling 09/18/93-11/13/93 l

Cycle 15 11/13/93-03/11/95 l 15th Refueling 03/11/95-05/06/95 *

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 Net Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992 l

ML20044G038

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search