Text

May 1993 Monthly Operating Rept.
	ML20045F045
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	05/31/1993
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20045F039	List: ML20045F038; ML20045F045;
References
	NUDOCS 9307060350
	Download: ML20045F045 (98)
	v • d • e

i i

l OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT i FORT CALHOUN STATION :

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT k

i

.i

'I i

Prepared By: l 4

Production Engineering Division -

System Engineering. l Test and Performance Group 4

MAY 1993 !

-l l

1 i

I 9307060350 930608 [5% I PDR ADOCK 05000285 ' I!':$ .l R PDR y. !

I FORT CALHOUN STATION MAY 1993 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT -;

OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

Following a one week planned maintenance outage that began on April 24,1993, Fort Calhoun Station returned to service at 0429 hours0.00497 days 0.119 hours 7.093254e-4 weeks 1.632345e-4 months on May 1,1993. Unit power level was maintained at 46 ,

percent to allow for condenser FW-1B tube cleaning and subsequent valve repair on Condenser FW-1 A. Power escalation commenced on May 6, after work on the condensers was completed.

On May 11, Fort Calhoun Station reached the 100% power level where it operated throughout the remainder of the month.

Due to the inability to generate quality demineralized water from either of the water plant trains because of depleted resin, it was necessary to continue utilizing temporary demineralizers on trailers. These trailers will continue to supply the demineralized water system until performance is improved by cleaning the resin. 1 On May 17, the water plant was shutdown to perform repairs to the water plant waste system ,

piping. The most significant repair involved a leak fmm a pipe joint in the acid tank berm drain line to the neutralization basin. The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission were notified that an underground release of concentrated acid and caustic had occurred.

On May 24, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was notified of an inadvertent actuation of Engineered Safety Features equipment. An apparent spike on Pressurizer Level Controller LC- ;

101X caused the two backup charging pumps to automatically start. Troubleshooting was performed on the controller, but the cause of the malfunction could not be determined.

There were no NRC inspections completed during this reporting period.

The following LERs were submitted during this reponing period:

LER NO. Descriotion 93-005 Seismic Design of Safety Injection and Refueling Water Tank (SIRWT) Filter Piping e

93-006 Failure to Maintain Continuous Fire Watch for Impaued Halon System Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs -

t

t i

=

i

. . . . fUnplanned4 Unit (Unplanned FAutomatic? 'iThermal Capability fCapability; l Scrams /7,'0001 Factor JPerformance!

Loss Factorji ;; Hours' Critical) <

3 Performance .in Industry Upper 10%

I HPSI Safety AFg Sa k ty EDG Safety Fuel I Performance BetterThan System $'ystbm l System Gol)dtillit;y 2 1993 OPPD Goal and/or

! Performance Po ' rr$arice Performance Irgjihat'or Industry Median

! ~ ~ ~ ' " ' - ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ -

g 49=, <

Performance Worse Than I

I ,. . . .

m 1993 OPPD Goal and/or Collective 'N ?INddstShl] Industry Median 09M dex. iP T YRadiation bY *b (Safetyi !

Exposure iRadioactive"s ?

Accidenti

- &Wssts& ' { Rate ?

= -

INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the twelve months from June 1,1992 through May 31,1993.)

4

l

~

4: Auto' L; Scrams

-While l l Critical!

l L

i JS_afetylj N' h 5 Performance Better Than Older Plant 6

.!Systemi Quarter Moving Average i

fActuations!

[ Performance Better Than 1993 OPPD Goal s' . . , . . . . .

~ ~

Performance Worse Than 1993 OPPD Goal nSafety! IForced( -

' j$ystem:$ '{Outsgel and/or Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average

/Fa!!ures? ; 1Ratej

] Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average and

~

1993 OPPD Goal Not Available

!Equipmenh

' JForcsd ! ~ Collective IOutsgss/15000l! Radiation

EcritTHrsh ' Exposure

/

NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for July E 1991 through December 1992. All other indicator values are for the twelve months from June 1,1992 through May 31,1993.)

' FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT MAY 1993 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT- INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED -

MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT The Positive Trend Report highlights Performance indi-cators with data representing continued performance . This section lists the indicators which show inadequacies !

above the stated goal and indicators with data represent- when compared to the OPPD goal.

]

ing significant improvement in recent months. ]

Disab!ino iniurv/lilness Frecuenev Rate The following indicator has been selected as exhibiting a ag 2 positive trend for the reporting month; ,

the reporting month (0.6) is above the 1993 goal of [

Reoeat Failures 50.50. l e nu r of components with more than one f ailure Conta.*a%ns MOD DM 00 W l has declined steadily from a totalof 21 in February 1993 (Page 4) to a total of 11 in May 1993. The personnel contam,ination rate for the reporting month ;

exceeds the non-outage goal of 0.4. ?

End of Positive Trend Report Number of Personnel Errors Reoorted in LERs j (Page 5)

The percentage of personnel errors reported in LERs at ;

the end of the reporting month (25%) exceeds the 1993 ;

goal of a maximum of 12%

Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours (Page 17) l The number of violations per 1,000 inspection hoers for ;

the 12 months from 5/1/92 through 4/30/93 is 2.17, which exceeds the 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals of a

i. maximum of 1.5.

ADVERSE TREND REPORT po,c,g oy,,o, no,, l (Page 21) .

A Performance Indicator which has data represent,ng i The forced outage rate for the twelve months from 5/1/92 !

three (3) consecutive months of declining performance through 4/30/93 (9.89%) is above the 1992 and 1993 i

constitutes an adverse trend. The Adverse Trend Report Fort Calhoun goals of a maximum of 2.4%

explains the conditions under which certain indicators !

are showing adverse trends. Unnianned Safety System Actuations (NRC Definhion) l (Page 14)

The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations l The following indicator was exhibiting an adverse trend - year-to date (1) exceeds the 1993 Fort Calhoun goal of for the reporting month: .[

o, y F

in-Line Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service !

Percent of Comoteted Scheduled Maintenance Acthrities (Page 53) ;

(Alf Maintenance Crat+si The number of in.line chemistry instruments out-of-ser- ;

(Page 50) vice for the reporting month (14) is above the 1993 j An adverse trend is indicated based on three consecu- monthly goal of a maximum of S. j tive months of declining performance. -

Enoineerino Assistance Reevest (E AR) Breakdown

-[

(Page 62) :

End of Adverse Trend Report. The number of totalopen EARS atthe end of the report- 5 ing month (155) exceeds the Fort Calhoun goal of a i maximum 150.

End of Management Attenton Report. !

t l

[

iv

.}

o

. , , =_ _ --. , . . - - -. _ _ _ _____ - - s

. PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the pre-trious month.

The following performance indicators have been moved from the " Performance" section of the report to the " Safe Operations

section: Safety System Failures, HPSI, AFW and EACP Safety System Performance, Fuel Reli-ability Indicator, Emergency Diesel Generator Unit Reli-ability Emergency Diesel Generator Reliability (25 De-mands) Emergency Diesel Generator Unreliability, Num-bor :,i Control Room Equipment Deficiencies, Collective Radiation Exposure, Maximum Individual Radiation Ex-posure, Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours and Sig-nificant Events.

INPO and NRC annunciator windows (Pages ii and iii)

The terms *above goal..

and "below goal..

have been replaced with the terms "better than goal.* and " worse tion coal.

respectively. In addition,the OPPD goal has been sr>ecified as the 1222 goal.

Disablina Iniurv/lilness Frecuency Rate (Page 2)

The graph has been revised to show the 1992 frequency rate values, rather than 3 year average monthly values, as a comparison to 1993 performance.

Recordable Iniurv/111 ness Cases Frecuencv Rate (Page 2) ,

The graph has been revised to show the 1992 cases fre-quency rate values, rather than 3 year average monthly values, as a comparison to 1993 performance. 3 Soare Parts inventerv Value (Page 41) .

'Ihis indicator was added to the

Cost

section of the re-port. 1

.i Percent of Comoleted Scheduled Maintenance Activities ,

(All Maintenance Cra+ts)

(Page 50) :

1 l

V y

Table of Contents / Summary >

PAGE GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . X SAFE OPERATONS PAGE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE / DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 2 ,

RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE . .3 ,

CONTAMINATIONS >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 4 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN LERs _ .. .5 -

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES .6 ,

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY: .

f INJECTON SYSTEM - . . . . . . . . .7 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM -- - . -. 8 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM - ;.9 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 10 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR .;

UNIT RELIABILITY - 11 ,

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR ,

RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) .. 12 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY _ _- ,, 13 i NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM ,

I EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES . . -14 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE (persomrem) . 15 !

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATON EXPOSURE (mrem) ... . . 16 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS - . . . . 17 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS 18 PERFORMANCE PAGE STATION NET GENERATION (10,000 Mwh) 20 FORCED OUTAGE RATE - . 21 j vi

PERFORMANCE (continued) PAGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR . 22 ;

UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR : 23 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR - -24 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL .. 25 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS -(INPO DEFINITON) ., 26 t

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS -(NRC DEFINITON): 27 GROSS HEAT RATE... 28 THERMAL PERFORMANCE - 29 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT (Mwth) . . . . - .. . 30 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS . 31 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

.. . 32 REPEAT FAILURES 33 :

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOUD RADIOACTIVE WASTE (cubic to 34 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY

PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT - 35 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY '

SYSTEM CHEMISTRY . . . . - 36 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT ,

OF HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS 37 -

l COST PAGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . .. .. .. .... 3 9 r

STAFFING LEVEL- 40 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE _ 41 DIVISON AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE) 42 vil ,

i DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) PAGE MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE) = . . . - .. . 44 CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG '

GREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLD (NON-OUTAGE) .. -- 45 '{

RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE. . . _ . . ._. . 46 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE '

ITEMS OVERDUE . -- =47 ,

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME - . . ... 48 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE).- . _ _.. 49 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED +

MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS)- . . . - - . - 50 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE '

EVENT REPORTS .. 51 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE . . .. .. 52 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE . . - . . . 53 ;

HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED (Kg) - 54 DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA- . . . . . . - 55 RADIOLOGICAL WORK '

PRACTICES PROGRAM - - - . . 56 NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS- 57 f

DOCUMENT REVIEW .. .. . ... =58 4 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE I INCIDENTS (SECURITY) .. . . . . 59 ,

TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS (EXCLUDING SCAFFOLDING)- . . . . . 60 j OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS . =. . - 61 .

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE

' REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN . -

.- 62 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS - -= 63 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN -- .. . 64 .f LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN - 65 ,

I viii i

o .-

DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) PAGE LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATON TRAINING . . . . . 66 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS . - 67 r

OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS ... . -- 68 MWO PLANNING STATUS : .-.... . 69 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS - . .70 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 CUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING --

71 ,

ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS SEP INDEX 8 DISTRIBUTION LIST PAGE ACTON PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS 72 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITONS . 75 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX .- 82 REPORT DISTRIBUTON LIST . . . . . 84 l

t l

I l

4 l

ix

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GO ALS 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 i 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 SALP ratings.

Improve INPO rating.

Reduce 1993 NRC violations with no violations more severe than les - 1.

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 performance errors.

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

1993 Priorities:

Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

Streamline work processes.

i Goals Source: Scofield (Manager)

X

l i

SAFE OPERATIONS Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional work-ing environment in the control room and throughout the OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation.

i e

f 1

1993 Disab!!ng injury / Illness Frequency Rate X 1992 Disabling injury /fliness Frequency Rate lGOODI 1.6 -

o a un &al( OM h 1.4 - - 1995 INPO Industry Goal 1.2 -

1-0.8 - I 0.6 -

C u a C C C C C C 0.2 -

0 X , m , m , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1993 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1992 dis-abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for January through May 1993 was 0.60.

There were no lost time accidents, reported for the month of May. 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 s0.50.

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 2 -

a .

5- 1993 Recordable injury /ltness Frequency Rate 4.5 -

X 1992 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate IGOODI

-O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.0) 3.5 -

3- ,

2.5 -

2- C O O O O O O O O-- --C O O r +,

1.5 -

1- -

0.5 -

0 i i , , , , , , , , , i Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1993 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1992 recordable injuryAllness cases frequency rate is also shown.

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

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

The recordable injury / illness rate for January through May 1993 was reported as 1.06.

There was 1 recordable injury / illness case, an eye injury that occurred while washing out condenser tubes, reported for the month of May. There have been 3 recordable injury / illness cases in 1993. ,

The recordable injury / illness rate for the past twelve months is 1.67.

The 1993 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.0.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Richard

Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,25,26 & 27 3

Personnel Contamination Rate

?

-e- Outage Goal (1.5) ,

I

-O- Non-Outage Goal (0.4) 1.6 - 1 C000000000000000000000000000000 l g 1.4- j 5

r1.2- ,

Q.

3ll 1- ,

cc :

0.8 - :I 0.6 -

a !

y 0.4- j o

~

0- 0.2 -

0 .

1 4 7 10 13 16 19- 22 25 28 31 CONTAMINATIONS >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 ,

This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Rate for contaminations >5,000 dpm/

100 cm2 for the reporting month. 3 contaminations occurred during May 1993. The contaminations were: 1) PCM-140 was contaminated. 2) An individual was walking-- ;

from the dressout area to the count room PCMs and the PCM alarmed.~ A piece of duct tape on a shoe was the source of contamination; and 3) An individual was on top of -

WD-138 washing out the incide of the tank. A PCM alarmed upon exit. A particle was -

found on the individual's clothir,g.' The source of contamination was believed to be the ' ,

PCs, not penetration of contam: nation through the PCs.

There has been a total of 22 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cm rin 1993. _19 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/100cm2in 1991. 1 I

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). j Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Chase /Lovett j Adverse Trend: None SEP 16 & 54 j 4 1 l

l j

l

. . i B Licensee Event Reports i

40- O Personnel Errors Reportedin LERs 33 Cumulative Licensee Event Reports 31 3 .

-+- Cumulative Personnel Errors Reported in LERs j

I:::[,

20-

i ; 15

i : 8 10-f , ,

,0 . .

^

i

'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) s

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

60%- i N 50%- ,

31 % 32 % 40%-

24 % 30 % -

~

20%- /

10%- C O O O O O O O O O O O !

'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 May there were 2 LERs reported, one of which was attributed to personnel error. The following LERs were submitted during this report period:

LER 93-005 - Seismic Design of Safety injection & Refueling Water Tank Filter Piping LER 93-006 - Failure to Maintain Continuous Fire Watch for impaired Halon System The percentage of total LERs submitted year-to-date that have been attributed to per-sonnel error was 25% at the end of May. '

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

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 5

i

Safety S trstem Failures y - Fort Calhoun 6 Quarter Moving Average To -C}- Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average 5 3 3 h 2 Q '^?g 2 2:-

I-IC2 $b[ [b @ Ub$ g ,

@ D ,

Eo , , , , , , , ,

) 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 quarteriy

Performance indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report.

The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the first quarter of 1991 and the -

fourth quarter of 1992:

i 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 .he 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 .

3 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 monitor being left in the calibrate position. ;

Third Quarter 1991: 1) Both EDGs could have been rendered unable to perform their design j function due to radiator exhaust damper failure. The dampers had cracked pins in their cou-pfings. 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 seats. 3) An error in an operating procedure could cause improper manipualtion of nitrogen backup bottles for instru-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 equipment 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 l a loss of the entire bus if a fault occurred on one of the loads. ;

a Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Accountability: Chase ;

Adverse Trend: None !

6 !

i I

a

.f

a .

D 1993 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value 1993 High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value Year-to-Date

-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal

-&-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.025 - l GOOD l

+

0.02- a a a a a a a a a a a a 0.015 -

0.01 -

C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.005-0 R N W ,

O O O

D i , ,,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 May 1993 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during May. -

The 1993 year-to-date HPSI unavailability Value was 0.00029 at the end of May.

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 April.

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

1 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 goalis 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 7

i

E Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailabirity Value 1993 Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailabihty Value Year-to-date

~ -O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01) 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025)

-D- Industry Upper 10% (0.0039) 0.025- A A A a a A A a a A A A 0.02-0.015-0.01 - C O----O l 0.0062 i 0.005- g - ,

g g g g g g g g g ;

l l l l l l l l l l' l l l l 1992 Unavailability Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM j SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE .!

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

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

i

?

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for May 1993 was 0.00029. There i were 0.43 hours4.976852e-4 days 0.0119 hours 7.109788e-5 weeks 1.63615e-5 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests during the month. The l 1993 year-to-date AFW unavailability value was 0.00194 at the end of May.

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 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 -

value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.0039. _

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

e., . , . .,

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

[

O Monthly Emergency Ac Power unavailability value !

-at-- Emergency Ac Power unavailability Value Year-to-Date l

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

-A-- 1995 INPo industry Goal (0.025) l 0.05- >

-O - Industry upper 10% (.005) !

0.04- I IGO,ODI !

0.03- p 0.02-0.001 U- U U C O O O U

. s e 1992 unavailabilrty Value Jan93 Feb sep Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Oct Nov Dec93

-l 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. l The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for May 1993 is 0.0. There were ;

} no hours of unplanned or planned unavailability for DG-1 and DG-2 during the month. l The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date is 0.0046. ,

There were no hours of unplanned or planned unavailability for DG-1 and DG-2 during l April.

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- q

, ability for DG-2 in March. ;

1 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 j of planned or unplanned unavailability for DG-1 during the month l There were no (0) hours of planned or unplanned unavailability for DG-1 and DG-2 in i January 1993.

l The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is s0.023. The 1992 goal was 50.024.

The 1995 INPO industry goalis 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 9 eg

A . 4 u = - - a

($. - x- .. . - - - .

h D Fuel Reliability indicator

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

--O.- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals E 10-2 k FRINot f 36- Available for ; 3 ; 3

! 4- g July S2

$, Y

s

~

2 0 , i 3 ; ; ; ; E ; E , M ,iimiii; j e Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr - May93 ,

Beginning in Jan.13 FRI uses INPO's revised calculation method. ;

FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR !

The Fuel Reliability indicator (FRI) for May 1993 was 0.398 X 10d microcuries/ gram. This FRI r value continues to indicate a defect free core. The monthly FRI is a calculated value based on l fission product activities present in the reactor coolant. Its purpose is to monitor industry j progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity.

J Only the data from May 15 through 31 at 100% power was used for the calculation of the f 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. j Steady state is defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a power level that i does not vary more than 15%. Power ascension commenced May 1 after a one week mainte- !

nance outage.

The May 1993 FRI value of 0.398 X 104 microcuries/ gram is lower than the April FRI value of

l 0.954 X 0.10d microcuries/ gram. The lower FRI value is due to continued RCS cleanup for the power increase this month and the results of limited fission product activity generation with the plant shutdown (April 23 through 30) and at lower power levels (early May). {

i The FRI value, using the latest INPO calculation method, is expected to be below the 1993 goal l of 7.5 X 10d microcuries/ gram for the remainder of Cycle 14, without fuel failures. The current j FRI trend for the Fort Calhoun Station at this time in core life together with studies of detailed t 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 -i 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" j (INPO No.92-011) states that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should i strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value above 5.0 X 10d 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 104 microcuries/ gram is not an INPO industry goal. It is defined as a " Fuel l Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the ,

core is defect free or not. 1 Data Source: Holthaus/Guliani ;

Accountability: Chase /Spijker l Adverse Trend: None ;

10 l

8 Number of Failures /20 Demands Trigger Values for 20 Demands i O Number of Failures /50 Demands --V- Trigger Values for 50 Demands [

@ Number of Failures /100 Demands - - Trigaer Values for 100 Demands ,

8-l G00Dl [

6-

+ '

Y Y Y Y Y T T 7 T T Y Y ,

4 4 4 4 4 4 ;

4- - w ,

3 N $ '

2 2 2 2 j

2- -

g ? -

l

, j 7 1

l e -

1 1

) 1 S

g _

1 l, 1 1 ,

1 4 3 $ $

s 1

3 t 3 ; n , .

5

0 0 1 i

0 .

i O I i

O f i 0

i 0

i 04 (

i 0

i 00 %

i 00 i

00 h i

00 $

i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY t 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 i the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high ;

level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater !

than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-ues. The Fort Calhoun 1993 goal is to have fewer failures than these trigger values.

The demands counted for this indicatorinclude 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 l 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 l l

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 i Adverse Trend: None i 11 ;

i

)

O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands l lGOODI '

E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands y 5- O Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal )

4- C C O O O O O O O O O O

-i t

3- ;

1 l,

2-

'I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1-A 0 0h 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 ,

4 i i i e i i i i i e i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 :

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel l 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 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 .

the Fort Calhoun Station to institutionalize and formally approve / adopt the required i NUMARC actions. ,

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

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

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning j Adverse Trend: None 12 ,

L

O DG-1 Unreliability Value O DG-2 Unreliability Value lGOODI

--+- Station Unreliability Value Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025- a Three Year Average) 0.002- C C C C C C C C C C C C O.0015 -

0.001 -

0.0005-0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 i - e v i a ' a 4 a i 4 i e i 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 May 1993 was 0.0.

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

For DG-2: There were 2 start demands for the reporting month with no failures. In ,

addition, 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 unsuccessful load-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 13 t

8 Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line O control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line

-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 controi Room Equipment Deficiencies Requiring an Outage to Repair E Operator Work Around items Requiring an Outage to Repair 4

E w m O 30- -

w y ;;p 0 , , ,

5 ,

Feb93 Mar Apr May93 O February 1993 8 April 1993

. O March 1993 @ May 1993 Ei30-Q 25- ,,

5fhI $$kh

!'2:

o 0 n s rcxfm , $$

e, M mb, f Engineering Planning Responsible Group Parts (Whse/Premt)

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 the 1993 Fort Calhoun goals. The lower graph shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies by responsibic group .

I There was a total of 59 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of May 1993. 34 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 25 require a plant outage to repair.

There were 4 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. 3 of these OWA items are repairable on-line and 1 requires 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-able on-line.

Data Source: Chasefi' ills (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None 14

J e

@ Monthly Personnel Rafation Exposure Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Person-Rem)

-O- Fort Calhoun AnnualGoal 1995 INPO Industry Goal (185 Person-Rem) 276 IGOODI V

200- C w w w w w w w v v v O A A A A A A A A A A A A l

100-52

~~~

i i i i 0

'90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE During May 1993,1.155 person-rem was recorded by TLDs worn by personnel while working at the Fort Calhoun Station. The year-to-date exposure is 9.452 person-rem.

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

The 1995 INPO industry goalis 185 person-rem per year. The industry upper ten 1 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 i5

f i

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem) ,

i

@ - Highest Exposure for the Quarter (mrem) .

E Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) f 1 OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4500- i 4000- !

3500-3000-2500-l 2000-Fort Calhoun 1500 mrem /yr. Goal ,

1500-1000- <

490 116 p7 ,

O i May 1993 ;

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE l

During May 1993, an individual accumulated 116 mrem, which was the highest indi- i vidual exposure forthe month. l l

The maximum individual exposure to date for the second quarter of 1993 was 265 l mrem. This exposure was received by a contractor involved in deconning activities. 1 The maximum individual exposure for the year was 490 mrem. This exposure was received by an in-house Radiation Protection technician and is attributed to normal duties.

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. .

l 4

Date Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett i

Adverse Trend: None 16

Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours

$ -O- Fort Calhoun Goal k

8

'5 s. '

8.

E 8

ct a ;3-B

^ x 12 5O C O O O O O O O O O O O

,-- , , 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'90 '91 May92 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr93 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per 1,000 NRC inspection hours. This indicatoris one month behind the reporting month due to the time involved with collecting and processing the data.

The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 2.17 for the twelve months from May 1,1992 through April 30,1993.

The following NRC inspection ended during this reporting period:

IER No. Til!g No. of Hours 93-04 Residents' Monthly inspection 464 There was one non-cited violation issued during this reporting period in IER v3-04 for failure to follow the requirements specified in a radiation protection procedure.

To date, OPPD has received a total of 3 violations in 1993:

Level 111 Violations (0)

Level IV Violations (2)

Non-Cited Violations (NCV) (1)

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

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountabi!n/: Short Adverse Trend: None 17

.O NRC Significent Evants

. - Fort Calhoun 6 Ouarter Moving Average ~

1 1- 1 0.5 -

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

2-1.5 - 3 $

1-0,5 -

91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 Year - Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicatorillustrates 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 NRC 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 Quarwr 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 INPQ significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs),

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

1 Second Quarter 1992: Personnel and accessible building areas were contaminated I 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 coolan; 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 Treno: None

l. 18

t PERFORMANCE :

i r

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

i r

s I

19 i

50- '

a Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) r 40-35.95 gg4 36.18 s6.12 g

3 31.88 P

h 6 32.51 32.14 a

31.21 y30- ! 27.2 M W'"

l

$ @ Egg [

{

21.99 g f - 5 f @y 14 ;

19.94 ; ;

o 20- t k .M g c

p[f y r

k2

g l n, l SC Ms :

n ;

32 g o,27 j #

. r . p pq I ! ;

- I 2ME y p 0

(! ,

{$ O , ,

!, l i , , , ,

tg i

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 l STATION NET GENERATION ,

l During the month of May 1993 a net total of 312,114 MWH was generated by the Fort :

Calhoun Station. At 0429 on May 1 the plant was returned to service following a main- ;

tenance outage that began in April. Plant power was maintained at about 41% for a ;

week to allow repairs on condenser tubes / valves, before being returned to 100% power.

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 en:trgy losses during August 1992 were the result of the forced outage on 8/

22/92 (dese:: bed 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. Tiie turbine generator was synchronized to the grid on 8/6/92.

Unplanned energy losses for the 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.

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 outage that occurred on 6/1/92 due to a dropped control rod. The plant was returned to 100% power on 6/4/92.

Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 20

_. . ~ . . . .. . .

l l

Forced Outage Rate

{

I

_ -O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals !

l 20%- ,

i i

I 15%- ;

89.3- 10%- - .

]

5%-

1A F/A[-.

l,I, . , 0%

C ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

O i

'89 '90 '91 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar _ Apr May93 FORCED OUTAGE RATE .

The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 9.89% for the twelve months from 6/1/92 !

to 5/31/93. There were no forced outage hours during the month of May 1993. j 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- i tem. Pressurizer safety valve RC .142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure l 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.

I 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 j was brought on-line at 0610 hours0.00706 days 0.169 hours 0.00101 weeks 2.32105e-4 months on 7/23/92. j 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.

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

i Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms Accountability: Chase

. Adverse Trend: None 1 21 .

?

O Monthly EAF 4 Dj Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF 100% - - - -

85.6 .

J ,

80%- -

c 60.8 - 0 56.6 % 60%- y ..

y-1 s 40%, - - ,

e 20%-

6 6 i i 0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'90 '91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF for 1993, and the EAF for the previous 3 years.

Energy losses during May 1993 were due to the maintenance of main condenser tubes that began on April 24 and continued through May 7. The year-to-date average monthly EAF was reported as 92.7% at the end of May.

The September 1992 energy loss results from an outage that began on 8/22/92 when an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control System and the subsequent early lift of RC-142.

Decreased EAF in August results from two forced outages: one is described above and one occurred on 8/5/92 when a feeder breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed.

July energy losses result from a forced outage caused by the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92.

Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None i

i 22

O Monthly Unit Capability Factor

-N- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor

-+-- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor 4

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD 1995 INPO Industry Goat ( 80%)

Industry Upper 1o% (84.9% for a Three Year Average)

MM 100 % - ._ .

)?: X # N9* ~

g:: T : 2 o- 4 M4 -

4 s-+-?

4 o%- # %

7*

Q

l' ;

20%-

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

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 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 for May 1993 was repor1ed as 88%. Energy losses for the month wete due to the maintenance outage that began on April 24 and continued through May 1 and the subsequent rampup. The year-to-date unit capability factor was reported as 92.7%. The 36 month average UCF was reported as 76.7% at the end of May.

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 were the result of the maintenance outage from April 24 through 30.

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 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 i days). Based on the station operating record through 5/31/93; assuming no forced outages and the 56 day outage with 20 day rampup; the maximum possible 1993 UCF is 78.9%.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 23

O Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor lGOODI

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

1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%)

Industry Upper 10% (1.68% for a Three Year Average) 60%- (p B$

40%- W MM q

& g M 20%- % == _

0%

~ '

O C O i >

e i e i i - i - i - i - i - i Jun92 Je' Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec' Jan Feb- Mar Apr May93 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR l

This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the 1993 and 1

- 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 0.0% for the month of May 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 0.0%. The 36 month average UCLF was reported as 11.4%

at the end of May.

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 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 basis for this goal is an unplanned loss of 11.5 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 24 4

i

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

--+- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Cntical(for the last 36 months)

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals i

--b-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal i

-D- Industry Upper 10% (0.58 per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical over a 36 month time period) !

7- ~f 6-5- !

4- ,

3- ;

2- i

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

1- ^ '

0 , U , d , d , d , C , d , d , d , h- l Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 5- .,

4_ E Numberof FCS ReactorScrams !

- 3-

'A 2- 1 g !

1-0 0 0 h O pig m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I

, , , , s , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'89 '90 '91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL j 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 May 1993. The value for the last 36 .

months is 0.97. ;

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

The 1993 and 1992 goals for unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical have i 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 i 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 Ucensee Event Reports (LERs)

. Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 25 l

3-B Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

O 1993 & 1992 For1 Calhoun Goals O Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-1 1

- - 1- y a

0 .1-i i i i 0 m ,m ,m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m , m ,

'90 '91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

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

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

The 1993 and 1992 goals for the number of unplanned safety system actuations are zero.

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

I Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning l Adverse Trend: None i

i 1

26

l 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)

-- C)-- Critical Hours G Safety System Actuations (N AC Definition) 10- 1000

-90o 7 g s- -soo

% 700 m j s- - soo j

.4- b oy g - soo o m g2- - ,; -200

, k(

'90 '91 '92 o

d fi J J A SON DJ FMAMJ J A SON DJ FMAM

! R R 1991 1992 1993 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the 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.

There were no unplanned safety system actuations during May 1993.

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.

An 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. Pressurizer 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 i 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 Ucensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 27

12'-

E Monthly Gross Heat Rate ,

-A- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate O_ 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal V

g x

11-8 ;

3

10560

/' 10304 10300

. l.LIM 111I

'89 '90 '91 Jun92 Jul~ Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 GROSS HEAT RATE 1

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 10,267 BTU /KWH for the month of May 1993. The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In l general, the GHR improves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. 1 This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water tempera-ture of 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

The year-to-date gross heat rate was reported as 10,157 BTU /KWH at the end of May. !

i 1

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

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 28

1 O Monthly Thermal Performance

.)

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

--+-- 1993 Year-to-Date Average MonthlyThermal Performanc 4 !

I GOOD l

--O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals a 1995 INPO Industry Goal (99.5%)

f

-O Industry Upper 10% (99.8%) ,

100% -

E_ - O _O O -- O~ O -O- O-g

-O g

O-g O-g ag t g ;

99%- ;" ^f ' pt: y g g lg

[A A $-s _.

h k ks 3 h [$ hk [ Thermal

~

jf ;f!fff gfh va ue not k IN #

ih NA ~(^

iN h g@ available j 97%- # q W W m v WH gp g$ due to r;

j%

!!E

$w SM k jy s

45 e Y M [M h 23 g

7

=

derate W

96% , , , , , , , , , , , _,

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 I

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 the month of May 1993 was 99.7%. The average i monthly thermal performance value from January through May (excluding April) was !

99.1 %.

The thermal performance value for April 1993 could 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 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 tom 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 l Accountability: Jaworski/Popek ,

Adverse Trend: None 29

f Y' O ThermalOutput j

--O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

. Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500- .;

1400- ,

1300- - ,

1200- -

1100- .

E1000-

!900- ,

R800-3

,700-E e

600- ;

I (E500-400-300- l 200- i 100-0- 1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 :

DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT ,

The above thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during May [

1993, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 :

1 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

i A maintenance outage, which began in April, was completed cn May 1 at 0429 hours0.00497 days 0.119 hours 7.093254e-4 weeks 1.632345e-4 months .

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) i b

Accountability: Chase / Tills [

i AdverseTrend: None i

30 1

__ 1

Equipment Forced Outage Rate j

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

0.86 1-0.53 0.5 0.5 -

. '; j i C O

/ !. n .: o ,

'90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep . Oct Nov Dec93 EQUIPMENT 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 May 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 remairicer of the month.

There was one equipment forced outage during July 1992 due to the loss of an inverter ,

and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92.

There was one equipment forced outage during June 1992 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.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicatoris a maximum of 0.20.

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

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 31

-G- # of Component Categories 40- -+- # of Application Categories 35- -*- Total # of Categories l m 30- ~

25-

~A k2 0 0-~

A J =

z n . x-

~NC 3 -- -

10-5- - - - l D91 J92 F M A M J J A S O N D92 J93 F M A M93 E Wear Out/ Aging G Other Devices

@ Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / resting s3.o% 0 Engineering / Design O Error I 1.0% i Percent of Total Failures During the

@ ]

12.0 /,, Past 18 Months ;

W t -

t 7.0 %

6M 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) i failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from September 1991 through February 1993). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 10 of the 87 ;

component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station t reported a higher failure rate in 13 of the 140 application categories (main steam stop valves, I 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 l this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 184 failure reports that were submitted to j INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was j known for 168. The pie chart reflects known failure causes. l l

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 32

1

Components With More Than One Failure l GOOD l 25- X Components With More Than Two Failures V i l

21 1 20 20 20-19 -

18 18 17 15 15 15- =

14 11 11 10- ,

5 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3

^

m 2 2ps n

a ^ ^ ^

o Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/

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

This indicator shows the number of NPRDS cornponents 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 11 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure. 3 of the 11 had more than two failures. The tag numbers of the components with more than two failures are AC-10C, CH-1B and RC-142. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component 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 Positive Trend ,

33 )

l l

i

i I

25000- : Cumulative Dry Active Waste Sent For Processing (in cubic iect) 20000-15000- .[

10000-5000- j

' ~

0

'4 - 1 I I i i I i i I l 3-Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Ncv Dec93 ,

E Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet) .

Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried

-O- Fort Calhoun Goat For Waste Buried f

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

-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,769.2 cubic feet)

{

4000- A A A A ; ; A A A A ; 3 ;

~

2278 1334 N/g 2000- C C C C C C C C C C C C gi 7 1000- c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 .

./~ M ,. . ., o , , ; , , , , , , , , ,

'91 '92 Jan93 Feb ~ Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep . Oct Nov Dec93 l Year-end Total ,

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE f 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 j 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) 4,160.0 i Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during May (cubic feet) 2,080.0 l Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during May (cubic feet) 163.9 ;

Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1993 (cubic feet) 275.3 i Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage (cubic feet) 0.0 :

i 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 goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884~ !

cubic feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value from 1/90 through 12/92 is l approximately 50.12 cubic meters (1,769.2 cubic feet) per year.

i h

Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Chase /Lovett -

Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 34 ,

5%-

G Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal h 3%-

2%- C O-- O O O O O O O O 3

1 '* ~

hi n, h n .,

i yt!

os id , ,

E , , , , , , ,

Jun92 Jul Aug -Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent et Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the pri-mary system chemistry performance 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 1.72% for the month of May 1993. The increase since last month is due to startup chemistry changes after the maintenance outage.

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

Hours Out of Limit.

Data Source: Glantz (Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith AdverseTrend: None 35

O Secondary System CPI

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l

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

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.167) 1- l l l l l l l l l l l l an -

0 46 c.5 - '~'"

- - 9-

, -p#hw A

~

e: -

>R4h _ _ -

1 Stsl i o

_ -9'"~~ 9N.U -

%-l 1 i i , , , , , , , , , , , ,

W W Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 2%-

Q % of Hours Chemistry is Outside OG Guidelines l GOOD l 1%- k i

0% "

i a i i i a i i i i i i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY 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.

The CPI was reported as 0.56 forthe month of May 1993. The percent of hours out-side the OG guidelines was reported as 0.59% for the month. The increase since last month is due to startup chemistry changes after the maintenance outage.

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 goalis based on site specific chem-istry treatment, i.e. morpholine. The INPO goal does not consider the influence of morpholine and the by-products of morpholine from thermal decomposition.

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 36

3.- .

_l l

x 1 a E % of Hours Auxiliary System (CCW) Chemistry is Outside Station Limits j t

i 10%-

i l GOOD l -l 8%- y i

6%-

4%- ,

i l

2%- j ll

'l 0% ; , j j ; ; ; ; 3 ; ; . j f Jun92 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 i AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUTSIDE I

. STATION LIMITS i

The Auxiliary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Outside Station Limits indicator tracks l the monthly percent of hours that the Component Cooling Water (CCW) system is ;

outside the station chemistry limit. j The auxiliary system chemistry percent of hours outside station limits was reported as - j '

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

l l;

Data Source: Glantz (Source) '!

1 Accountability: Chase / Smith i

AdverseTrend: None j

'l' i

i i

37 1

l

i t

COST l i

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

P

~i i

f

4- -m- Actuals -C}- Budget .'.

. Plan i

3.75-3.5 -

I 3:

I 3.25-E 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 The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.

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.

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.

The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1993 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels.

Data Source: Scofield/Virgillito (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield Adverse Trend: None 39

.- . . . . . - - .- . ~ . ~.

I Actual Division Staffing !

@ Authorized Division Staffing ;

i 465 468 ,

fRL4&6M5 :

%,nf,%:g'x e 400- M Ow]p#1 D ij i

5 Q:wp q.

C '- $$4 -

??:.. p.y.:

4. gg-dIkMdh; ,

w gy I

200 - khhffk. i

a: ' .. a.

l h ll4l2 $: ff r

[N- N,. c 121 122 u.. w,. .:

n ed a Nll$$h,h "

b :

" ' ~l' O i e i :

Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services !

STAFFING LEVEL :

The authorized and actual staffing levels at the end of May 1993 are shown for the three ;

Nuclear Divisions.

Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source) :

Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24

{

i

. I J !

i P

r j l

?

t g 3:

40 :

i h

.. - - -. ... - -I

t l

- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 16-(- l 15- ,

n 14- j i

13-f i 12- ,

i l

11 -

i i

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

Jun93 . Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 ,

i SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of May 1993 was reported as $14,091,277. j I

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Willrett/McCormick i

' Adverse Trend: None f

6

.i l

41 i

i i

i DIVISION :

AND l DEPARTMENT l PERFORMANCE l INDICATORS l These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group contacts' )

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

1 l

i 42 i

O February 1993 Outstanding MWOs ;

i i

- @ March 1993 Outstanding MWOs 60 -

O April 1993 Outstanding MWOs ;

O May 1993 Outstanding MWOs 50-40- 'I 34 31 31 7 30-N ,

25 25 20 E !

20- D .

37 15 -

- $4 13 f* !

11 I 10-9 10 9 !

6 7

6

{

2 -

2 N !

O i i e i i -

0-3 Months 3-6 Months 6-9 Months 9-12 Months >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) -f r

Accountability: Chase / Bobba !

Adverse Trend: None ,

1 i

i l

l 43

'1

a t

February 1993 - _

i t

O March 1993 ;

200 - @ April 1993 ;

i 175- ' May 1993 150 - .

t 125-100 - gi i

~~~"

T1 80

75- 68 70 68 '

y -

58 55 I 50- [I l 25- 20 220 19 22 18 '19 18 h$ YI kk> // Wa '// a // .7 7 8 8 i

& // #. /6 ft %/ Wh f/ ,, o n/in _

r Total Open MWOs Open MWOs>3 Total Open Safety Open Safety Open High Priority i months old Related MWOs Related MWOs > 3 MWOs !

Months Old -i MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of corrective non-outage MWOs remaining open i 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- f outage maintenance work orders ' remaining open. The 1992 goal was to have less than -

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

Accountability: Chase /Bobba :j

~ Adverse Trend: Non? 'SEP 36 f

-l y

l w a

~- Corrective Maintenance Backlog > 3 Months Old )

100 % -

__1 i

E T T _

j 80%- hY hb $$

T M[hih

%i $9 q WO j$ # 9 5l f f]

1 60%-

g g

$?$

y s

K klj 9 lA 2

& ^: #a ; O. Lk %'. ' ,

2 s c-: . s. . . ?

. . _ . *: W& .1 kJ Fj

-~

kN inIf g 4%

T E % W "" 't M i u[g?

40%- Ivi 1 1;;- :< , c f i .a 31 j(@R ,

l 7 FA . . . ;, d{$5 'j

@i % M] [ j'A >_ j ih ;{

a !J ? 65 E ; g M el 20%- E[ f@ .

$ !Q ${ *!

,j h l_ llj i r

?" i g pg h ; j L" 'l (;: l a a 3

a e a de E na E)* w s

e is

j e

d

):

/0 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 !

l CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE B ACKLOG GREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLD !

(NON-OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that were greater than three months old at the end of the reporting month. l The percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that were greater than three months old at the end of May 1993 was reported as 78.6%.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

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

45 !

)

i i

O Ratioof Preventive toTotalMaintenance ;

t .

100 % -

Vid '

90%- . T

.~

y.. :

$n i a "

80%- . ,.

g3 g g .-

l w9 , w ll';:

w : .

' '? Wig ;; :. -l 70%- 'L- k$9

~ .

i e

i$

e Et e

i

..j .pj

' J;g , b6

. ;h f [:-L iJ i

60%- p ~f ;} t j pf g- -

h^e

-:t :- !

ff :- E 4 ' '

T - '

7:11 c ! pc' gE;' ?~~

50%- lf$ ".. -

g,

{ll g.<

g% e. , . , ;{ ..

,.s.

((i [

(:fh: : .l.! ((.' '

I $ hh l Y N 40%- l4 Q f@ N i % i

lI g'y y%;

g:p y.

ja M

g:3 g;;;

g l:;

.l

., , 71

.j j d.d.::? . F: !al . .

j ,

sf' ,l'j';.', is 30%- g N g :'.j. .x g -

4 q g!

h g$4

@g: l d$ 16 A; Nw 2

[M

6,1 d #7 2 $3 ;a '

tig

K4 inf il

.l 20%

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb- Mar Apr May93 ,

- RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE l This indicator shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance.

I The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 95.7% in Mey 1993. ;

i i

-i Accountability: Chase / Bobba ~! e a

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Adverse Trend: None - . .! ~

SEP 41 -

l

.i

.I

'}

a 46 i e

I t

2%-

B Preventive Maintenance items Overdue. I l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal Y 1%- p (p -c c c c c c c 0%-- r-N i e i i e i i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 ,

i PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in the administration and execution t 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 May 1993,630 PM items were completed. 3 of these PM items (0.48% of the_ ;

total) were not completed within the allowable grace period. l l

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 l t

Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 i

9 47

O Maintenance Overtime 80%-

12 Month Average Maintenance Overtime IGOODl t

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

50%- ,

40%-

30%-

20%- ;Z . & v u u a u m m g m ,

!M R 10%- O---O- -

Q--Q .O O-- 04 A O - O e gs M - W @ ~: -

- b*

ya g g g g l gg .

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 i

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME l The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte- l nance activities with the allotted resources. ;

t The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 4.5% for - l the month of May 1993. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 10.0% at the end of the month.-

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

l

~

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

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

Accountability: Chase /Bobba .;

AdverseTrend: None :

i h

48 I

f

.l I

8 _ Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) ,

15- >

Q Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) j O Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance)

.i a

10- j i

r f

5- i 2 2 l 1 . 1 1 1 % 1 1 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 000 000 '000 000' 0 i i i i a i a a i . i i Jun92 Jul 'Aug Sep Oct - Nov' Dec Jan Feb Mar . ~ Apr May33 I PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) I i

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. 'i There were' no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the : l month of May 1993. l Data Source: Chase /McKay (Manager / Source) l

. Accountability: Chase /Bobba l Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 4

t i

i 49 i

l Completed Scheduled Activities (All Craf's)

O Fort Calhoun Goal ( 85%) l l

100 % - j i

90%- 1 C O O O O l 80% - 77.5 % 76.5% 76.3% I 7*~

j 60%-

s%["(( [. f..: m.~ )

y

, %; . , s%

QQ 'w hl;k ^

g:

1

% : ::.4

$ y }

50%- lgglf,@g;tm

{

3 p.. 2: f ; i.I?:i fgr 1 Jp~;;;jgyl.

%gp2f l a ga . . . , .gw%g i i yh 's ' - : : >

.e 2,7M:0.Q: l 40% - & q (, ,' . .; , Jq (

%gj$

4 ; -

e i W 30% -- g :.

,j_

,4 ;

y g{Qg.

g%%

y 3 E; 3 "; ;M Nt%f 20%- s'$

2;

., a s a 1: y

&skt ti m}%

Mk; Mik i>

gggg)g'

o. . :

10% - y' ;g*f$jt)!gg p g.j y g74 g

? 18GO21 as4isid as ..; A,j363 9g January '93 February March April May '93 PERCENT OF COMPLE'lFD SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS)

This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning all Mainte-nance Crafts. 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%.

Data Source: Chass/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on three consecutive months of declining performance.

SEP 33 50

3-

@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs 2-1-

0 WJ

~ ~

0 0 0 0 0 0 :fA 0 0 0 0 0 i i i i i i : i i i i i a i

'91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 .

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS ;

This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STc) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years. .

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

i.

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

The 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 i

51

. . l l

10- j g_

Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Cornponent Hours j

- - Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours

--O-Fort Calhoun Goal 7-l GOOD l 6-g 't e

g 5-t 4- ,

4 a 'A A A 2- C O O O O O O O O O O O l 1 1 1 ;

i i i i 0

'90 '91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 .

No. of Check Valve Failures i

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. l For February 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 2.4 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 May 1993, the Fort Calhoun Station reported a calculated check valve !

-failure rate of 1.18 E-6. 7 The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are a maximum failure rate of - -l 2.00 E-6. j j

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 52 .

j

'j

__. .____-_:_:_ ._ __l

1 O Number of Instruments Out-of-Service

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal 24- 23 20 - $7 17 [ 16 .

16- 14 i -

12- :

8-

l O

~

3 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 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 May 1993 there was a total of 14 in-line chemistry instruments out-of- .

service. Of these 14 instruments,13 were from the Secondary System and 1 was from PASS.

The trend for PASS instruments for this reporting period has changed. This is due to all sequences being placed in service with the exception of pH, which failed the semi-annual functional test. The trend for Secondary instruments this reporting period has not changed. The entire secondary panel remains out-of-service because of failure of the Al-125 data logger. Two pH instruments at the secondary panel are out-of-service due to failure of weekly functional tests and awaiting repair. The Al-125 data logger is scheduled to be replaced beginning on June 14,1993. Two instruments 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, and 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 53 i

1 i

@ Monthly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

Yearly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

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

-O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal

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

1000- 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 l

I 800- i

$ 600-E 8" e p 400- ?

j 200- !

S $ $ n 0 , , , , , . . - . L .". , ,

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 HAZARDOUS. WASTE PRODUCED ,

This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous _ waste produced by the Fort Calhoun l Station each month, the monthly average goal and the year-to-date total for hazardous l waste produced. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, i halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced.

During the month of May 1993, O kilograms of non-halogenated hazardou's waste was ;

produced, O kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced.fThe yearly total for hazardous waste pro- ,

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

produced is 29.9 kilograms.

{

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

. The 1993 and 1992 monthly average goals for hazardous waste produced are a maxi- l mum of 100 kilograms. !

l Date Source: Chase /Henning (Manager / Source)

. Accountability: Chase /Henning Adverse Trend: None

' 54 -

100% -

Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area

+

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months) lG00Dl 90%- j c c n-o -

-U-U-U W ;

u W

y

, y4 9 :

a

m

4 ;

g?

%g ~

??) % tri i : K 80%- '

d$ b d kg.N '

s d I

$ e $5i s ; 3! /.& ll ';s, I ij Adj

$s s .

5' @@k f km g@j h

A

[ h

$3!!

h$ ; I

j

^

R $3 $$ ss jg s' E j{

s 4

70%- pj $g'gf! ff -y f _

1:E h $$$ MF , c k h ;' 33 m t, M

g M_ . . . ::

ty I

sx ri

,F

$$ : hi ',

g :

If 60%-

'*< e r~ :

.'. % o. 'l g es

[ h e gg M 4, lj g

J

~* ' '

50 %

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May?3 DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is decomaminated (clean) based 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 1992 non-outage goal was a minimum of 88% decontaminated RCA.

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

Date Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 55 l l

1 l

4 4

~

@ Numberof Identified PRWPs O Fort Calhoun Goal 15 --

)

i 10- C O O O O O O O O O O O l l

5 5-3

/. 1 1 0 i i e i i i 6 i i i i i 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.

4 During the month of May 1993, no PRWPs were identified.

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

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) .

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP52 56

- j l

D Total Number of Hot Spots O Number of Additional Hot Spots identified l

@ Removal Planned

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

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Hot Spots Removed (1/ month)

I ,

8o- ; i 8

60 - h t l

2 s

9 i

?

40- h; f 4 0 i h [

20-- i W E

-^

. . . ---O O

7 ,"> * ," f * ," # , , , , , , ,

Jan93 Feb 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 i 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 a 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 May 1993, there was a total of 62 hot spots identified. The following hot !

spots were removed during the month: 1) A hot spot was removed from the Spent .

Regen Tank in Rm 23; and 2) A hot spot disappeared without plant assistance from the ,

1 leakage cooler return line to the SIRWT in Corridor 4.

i Removalis planned for 16 hot spots.

There has been a total of 6 hot spots removed in 1993.

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

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

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None 57

.I

Documents Scheduled for Review 800-

@ Documents Reviewed 700- .- Overdue Documents 600 - 7 h

2 500- j g

h 400- 2

~h s

300- @

3

200- - Il 100-i 9

l 1

w

~lp m 1

3 h -

d /s V -

, & V

$_~ crh

~

0 II .r %h~fd .

.,-L .

. i i i

~$

L ,r i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual.

During May 1993 there were 97 document reviews completed while 29 document re-views were scheduled. At the end of May, there were no document reviews more than 6 months overdue.

There were 23 new documents reviewed in May.

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

Data Source: Chase /Kei. ster (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 58

O Non-Systern Failures l GOOD l

+

10- 9 8- 1J 6 6- 5 yg 7 4 4

~

d 2 2 ) 2 9 d Tn 2 5 2-q q ff_4 jfy a g 1 -

0 i , , , , , , , , , , 3 Jun92 Ju! Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 l GOOD l

@ Systern Failures 4

70-60 -

50- 47

; 38 40- 34 30-28 g 21 y 25 25 0

Jun93 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 l LOGG AB LE/REPORTAB LE 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 conceming system failures which occurred during the reporting month.

During the month of May 1993, there were 26 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 25 (96%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents, and only 8 (32%) of these were environmental failures. There were 10 search equipment failures during the reporting month,6 of which were explosive detector malfunctions. Signifi-cantly, there was only 1 non-system failure incident reported during the month. Security Performance Indicators continue to show a decline during 1993.

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 59

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

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

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (0) 6-5-

4-t 3-l 2 2 2 2- ,,,,,, -----,

1- y i

- SS : 0 0 ,/.../ 0

.O'/../

O m , , m ,

March '93 April'93 May '93 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS (EXCLUDING SCAFFOLDING)

This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. Also provided is the Fort Calhoun goal for temporary modifications.

There are currently no temporary modifications that are greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage to remove. In addition, at the end of May 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-cal has a commitment completion date of 7/30/93 for ECN 93-113; and 2) HE-2 circuit board,in wNch DEN electrical has a commitment completion date of 7/15/93 for ECN 93-086.

~

At the end of May 1993, there was a total of 31 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta-tion.16 of the 31 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 15 are removable on-line. In 1993 a total of 25 temporary modifications have been installed.

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

Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 60 -

it rig , g igini gi - . .

. . . _ . . . . ._ . _ _ . _ , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ u-___. __ -_,-A

O Total Modification Packages Open 350 - 0 1993 Fort Calhoun Monthly Goal ( 150) 337 300-264 m-250 -

200 -

176 173 160

- 150 -

$[ y lijMt g 146 145 n O O O 127 M [' 2'

' SS @% M 's .

127 . .. 115 125 126 k 'b $ f ^

i i i 1 100 ; i , , , , , i 4 , , ,

'90 '91 '92 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Aar Apr May93 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludino outstand-ino modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).

Categorv Reoortino Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 8 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 8 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 58 ~

Construction Backlog /In Progress 38 Desion Encr. Uodate Backlog /in Progress 14 Total 126 At the end of May 1993,10 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 21 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 96 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 34 backlog modification request reviews this year.

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

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 61

EARS Requirin3 Engineering CI:secut- Nst in Clococut DEN 5 SE 50 - 50- 50- 50 -

40- -

40- 40- 40-30- - 30- 30- 30- - - -

20- 20- 20- 20-1 1 I b l -

o i 3 Mar Apr May Mar Apr May Mar Apr ._ May Mar Apr May 3

0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months 6-12 months May '93 Overdue EARS O Closeout O Engineering Response 5:

xD6w l~ 'l , ,

s s . < > >

Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 : Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 O Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200-150-N -~ ~

100- -

- ~"~

50- _

~~~

p 7 0 4 4 e i 4 e a a i e i i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 O - 57 EARS Resolved and in Closeout 32 Overdue Responses G 43 Overdue Closeouts 96 EARS Requiring Response 96 EARS on Schedule

'TE$dQig$

36 86' .er::x 6s.2s

/

"%5f"AN _

2 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.'

'*otal EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 15 EARS closed during the month 15 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 153 Data Source: Phelps/Pulverenti(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Phelps Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 62 a

l

~

B ECNs Backbgged in DEN 350- ECNs Received During the Month

@ ECNs Completed During the Month 300-250 -

200 -

I : x g n m s; 3

150-q p

g j , g

j Tr ' L & h ~

p

> a ; ,~. y 3y p w 4 100-

@y f 11 .s'< e y

y

[

3 s

Ej c

g o

? s e A : E 3 ,

y c{'

50 - il 7 m 7 _ _

k ~f 0

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS This indicator shows the number of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) awaiting completion by DEN, the number of ECNs opened during the reporting month, and the number of ECNs completed by DEN during the reporting month.

At the end of May 1993, there was a total of 163 DEN backlogged open ECNs. There were 47 ECNs received by DEN, and 67 ECNs completed during the month.

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 i

63 l

O DEN - Engineering not complete G System Engineering - Engineering complete, response under review -

@ Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO scheduled. but work not complete O Maintenance /Censtruction - MWO/CWO complete, awaiting closeout 113 120-100-80- 58 60 - 30 40- 25 16 19 ' "?

2- l l 4 1 1 l @1 0 , k 3 E![fi 0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN FACILITY CHANGES OPEN O DEN - Engineering not cornplete G System Engineering - Engineering complete, response under review

@ Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO scheduled, but work not complete O uaintenance/ Construction - uWO/CWO compiete. awaiting cioseout 80 - 53 60 - rp : " :'.

8 3 1 10 6 4 , ,,

0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN SUBSTITUTE REPLACEMENT ITEMS OPEN O DEN - Engineering not complete Q System Engineering - Walkdown or confirmation not complete 60 -

44 40 - 33 20- 9 8 1 I l 1 0 , , ,

0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN DOCUMENT CHANGES OPEN 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, 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 Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 64 1

O Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error Q Other Personnel Error 9 Maintenance Problem O Design /Constructiorvinstallation/ Fabrication Problem 5-

@ Equipment Failures 4-3-

2- - -

l ,

1- ,. --

r;. , =

, - =

1 ? 2 2

h ,

-,l l 2 :

0 4 6 4 i 6 4 6 i i i i Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 l

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 June 1,1992 through May 31,1993.

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 2 LERs submitted in May 1993.

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 65

60- 0 Total Requalification Traini.tl Hours O Simulator Training Hours O Non-Requalification Training Hours O Number of Exam Failures 40-36 36 33 33 30 30 30- - -

25 20-14 14 14 12 N10 10 10- -

8

'/ '/. 7 7 6 's '/. - -

Z 2 5

7"" W '/

g -

3 .

'/. /, 2

/

3 h] h U[ 0 % 0 0 /- f 0

'/

/Q (';M 0 , , , , , , ,

Cycle 92-3 Cycle 92-4 Cycle 92-5 Cycle 92-6 Cycle 92-7 Cycle 931 Cycle 93-2

Note: The Simulator was outef-service for maintenance and modifications during Rotation 92-7.

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP verification & va'idation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

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

Three individuals failed the written exam during Cycle 93-2. All individuals remediated without impacting shift operations.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 66

@ SRO Exams Administered O sRO exams passed E RO Exams Administered 30-O RO Exams Passed 20-7 10- ,

/

i ,. --

O , ,

l

}

g , ,

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 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 Reactor Operator, and 5 Senior Reactor Operator candidate exams ad-ministered in May 1993. 3 of the 5 Reactor Operators, and 4 of the 5 Senior Reactor Operator candidates passed those exams.

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

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 67 i l

O Total Outstanding CARS O Outstanding CARS > Six Months Old 100 -

91 w

S3 -- 83

- 3" 81 l .

76 $h

~i >

74 75- +

72 g n g}>

1 72 72 y 68 7 -l 7 ,'

66 9 P T-2*

h 61 lg

' ;f n$;

4 .3; w .M[4

}

7 3 ? ,

Q w

&) >

e

~s s W ,

50 - <

@~;

g (j g 3 ... t1 n y ;

-~

4%

' .' f" y 1,8' s:. [

b 37 _ 36 36 E4 4 34 .

ElA h[ 31 A9 h 3'

I l k ., 28 M -

29 $ ;{ f 27 N 3

l' 25 27 j l

l -28 st -

'n-25- ,

v Q{ gg g_23 ;

v e y n

b, hc N,y "

. . ?

$h L

< 0 '

C :ht ..

I O Wd ad {

h$

M lyp $s h: gs.

l

>- 4.s# . ;

i i i I 6 4 4 4 4 i i !

Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS 1

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 May 1993 there were 61 outstanding CARS. 28 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old.

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

Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: None 68

Total Outage Maintenance Work Activities

-O- MWOs Ready to Work

-V- Parts Hold

-+- Engineenng Hold

-M- Planning Hold

-G- Planning Complete j

~

900 _

800 -

700-400-300 - ,, p.

200 - TM 1@-

[/ c e gi ;

O m Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep93 e e 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),

planning hold (job scope not yet completed) and planning complete.

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 69

o>

N o.

> O 0) o c") --4 z c.

I -i s- % CcmP l ete

< 8 o

c.3 e co a- e a eW--

c N O b m o M m D o

o 0 o o' o o o o o o o o o c to d o

- m 3' e

e .a CD o _~,. gwca-o 3

=-

o O.

i i i i i i i i i i c> c - n> oa u O$--

MNM Si

Steam Generator Services --- - - 'J i S $ R EMR 5 yh b ~ i o 3; y y-c NOO we-( g 3, , 3 c Ba!ance of Plant ECT - = 4 - - - .I 1 w W m E g@R E e m o - o c5-- -e cr - c,) m c_ Erosion Corrosion c e, m e -+ m . ,a a c a c. - c ss, s s , , , s , sss ,s , , , , S 3 EOz h h ~ i $ E, $ 8 "g S! , e a m E (n, Snubber Testing - -- = ~------~~r m s s s s s s s s s , s s s s s s s s s ., s s s ,i OO o I i E =s 5 -- - 3. -- E > -

# # > l o q i m ) @e

= rm g

R c g

Containment ILRT

w - a a=*'* = = =

s s sss s ss s s_ s ss s sss s s s s s si R RR O m i I 3 _ k (n o $0 oem o" [ o c3 oE h o ISIExams khh a o u u a m o c < 3- F o ?qo 8 6 -4 ~ I g,o- m e g m J_ 6g = ' w ~ a System Pressure Tests + ei R a a s s s s ?"". .s s' .s x .O e 'I 3 _3 M - o 5' bo D' oc m - t 9o o co g h *3 3 m Relief Valve Testing - c ,n.xss . I1 5mg l ,c o g o0 3- - s ss sss-o g o 5 l c s .g g 3 oae i a a n m m Check Valves - - 9 9 @ '< oy -+ o c3 - o

m. m C s si 1

o ' o eoo g - y O,q O O 3 g i g m V, c) c- Q m 'O RCP Maintenance

Ji l w

a. e - m O ' N'\\"' N 'I 1 85 83 a c -

$ 9 $ Motor Operated Valves (MOVs) - ' * - 1' gg g e O g _ ..x m 'sxx m ssss sxx ms 9 o7 gm<

m i Y RV Surveillance Capsule - "'

co .o m '< a- , m -a m i m c3 o a e-. cr " ' g c

Boric Acid inspection m-* = e m mwr~e < 3 e, x_ F. , s -s . , . ,_s,,,,,s ,,.,,,,.si .

'? . . e a - I m v. O Baseline Schedule for PRC Approvdi O Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval ) l l - Final Design Package issued ! Total Modification F ackages (22) (2 under review to cancel or move) : i- , g_ R , e . i lllll M-- +h lll !!!!': lllll llllllll':0%j)D ll t y 35 ; e o 20-ar 8 -8 - n. i $E C Ee 15- ; ti & ! m< r o- O - i _o cc ~ n.10_ N 8 Eoh" e $E; 5- w E o. , g vvvv , ^ 0^2 ! dbe d oc: c: o r : 6 0 000 d O^~ 0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, l u - e e e n e e e n - e e i $ 5 3 6 3 3 E E S $ 5 E l 5 ! I PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING I

(FROZEN SCOPE OF 24 MODIFICATIONS) ;

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the ' ^ jJe 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 j the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group. . i The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by June 30,1993. l Additional data points will be added to this indicator as information be :omes available. l 'l Data Source: Phelps/Ronne (Manager / Source) , Accountability: Gambhir/Phelps l AdverseTrend: None SEP 31 ( i 71 ! .~ a e i ACTION PLANS FOR : ADVERSE TRENDS l i 72 . . l I ) ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS The following action plans have been developed for performance indicators cited as , exhibiting adverse trends c'uring the last three months: l Enaineerino Assistance Reauest Breakdown Problem: The total number of open EARS is increasing past the established goal for 1993. Goal: The total number of open EARS shall be less than 150 for 1993 and decreasing towards a lower goal for 1994. : Action: Two components of the open EARS must be more effectively controlled: 1) Completed EARS must be closed. This represents two thirds of the overdue backlog and one third of the total backlog. A completed EAR either turns into a configuration change request, document update, or closes. A 30 day goal has been established to close completed EARS. (Action: MTF/RLJ)

2) Discretion must be used in authorizing new EARS. Many EARS can be resolved with phone calls or review of DBD material. Other EARS are requests to explore potential configuration changes that may have little overall benefit. The SE supervisors should screen these requests more carefully. (Action: MTF)

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. 73 ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS 1 Thermal Performance (continued) l i Goal: Determine source of poor performance results and resolve problems. Action: Remaining action items on the Thermal Performance Action Plan were com- l 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. l i i 1 t i J f i 74 l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l l AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK OR- personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- l DERS ing activities performed on the responsible component or l This indicator tracks the total number of outstanding cor- system, including failure to follow procedures. ! Errors - faltures attributable to incarrect procedures that l rective non-outage Maintenance Work Orders at the Fort Calhoun Station versus their age in months, were followed as written, improper installation of equip-ment, and personnel errors (including failure to follow AUXlLIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM procedures properly). Also included in this category are FERFORMANCE failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as-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 vided by the entical hours for the reporting period multi- The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi-pl;ed by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater caloperation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per system. kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month roihng average for . AUXILIARY SYSTEMS CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the 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. system is outside the station chemistry limit. The hours are accumulated from the first sample exceeding the limit CONTAMINATIONS >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 , until additional sampling shows the parameter to be back Reportable skin and clothing contaminations above l within limits. background levels greater inan 5000 dpm/100 cm2. This , indicator trends personnel performance for SEP #15 & CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 54. 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 failure 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.

COLLEC11VE RADIATION EXPOSURE Collective radiation exposure is the total extornal 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 goat for the reporting rem. This indcator tracks radiological work performance month are also shown. , for SEP #54. - DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) i 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 vatves, 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 perfur-Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse- mance for SEP # 54.

quence of expected wear or aging.

Manuf actunng Defect - a f aiture attributable to inad- DISABLING INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY 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 EngineeringOesign - a failure attributable to the inad- all utihty personnel permanently assigned to the station, equate design of the responsible component or system. involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours ,

01her Devices - a failure attributable to a failure or worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-misoperation of another component or system, including for personnel This indicator tracks personne! perfor-

)

associated devices. mance for SEP #25 & 26.

Maintenance' Testing - a !ailure that is a result of im- i proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or 75 1

f PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd)

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

documents reviewed, the number of documents sched- B) Malfunction of equipment that is rot required during l uled for review, and the number of document reviews an emergency.

that are overdue for the reporting month. A document C) Intentionaltermination of a test because of abnormal e

review is considered overdue if the review is not com- conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel !

plete 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. l~

PERFORMANCE E) A failure 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- cessful 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 failure 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 R corrective maintenance and the successful test that fol-EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- lows repair to verify operability should not be counted as ITY demands or failures when the EDG has not been de-4 This indicator shows the number of failures that were clared operable again. ;

reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die-sel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELJABILITY ,

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, unreliability is the j tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when ratio of unsuccessful 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 unreliability.

start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. A start-only ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) ,

demand is a demand in which the emergency generator BREAKDOWN is started, but ro attempt is made to load the generator. This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of l

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 for tracks performance for SEP #62. ,

a valid start failure. This includes any condition identified i in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emer- ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) BREAK- i 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 i

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 manualinrtiation. 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. j C) Other specialtests 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 l

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks {

should be counted for any reason in which tha amer- performance for SEP #62.

gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre- ,

dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run l demands.

5) Exceptions: Unsucx:essful attempts to start or load-run 3 should not be counted as valid demands or failures when :

5 they can be attributed to any of the following:

A) Spurous trips that would be bypassed in the event of i 76 I i

f r

i

. 4 . ,

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 AVAILABluTY FACTOR hazardous waste produced by FCS each month.

This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available generation 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 crrtical 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 r This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that IN-UNE 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 Semndary 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- UCENSE 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 REUABiUTY INDICATOR month. This indicator tracks training performance for This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool- SEP #68.

ant 1-131 activity, mrrected for the tramp uranium contri-bu1on 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 surf ace of fuel elements from the manu- during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train- ,

factunng process. Steady state is defined as continuous ing hours (which are a subset of the total training 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 exarn failures. This indicator trad(s 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 normal letdown temperature (120 supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-changer,Vi= 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 /mmmission 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 personnel involved in ,

indicator is included in the report when new data is avail- plant activities. l 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 77

. l 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 ,

lance, calibration and radiation protection. A control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as

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

- This cause mde covers a full range of programmatic Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, instalia. Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control tion, and iabrication (i.e., loss of control power due to Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Contro!

underrated f use, equipment not qualified for the environ. Room, or provides a passive function for the Control '

ment, etc.). Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi. perform under all conditions as designed. This definition ronmental-Related Failures)- This code is used for spuri. also applies to the Attornate Shutdown Panels Al-179, ous failures of electronic piece-parts and f ailures due to Al-185, and Al-212.

meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high A plant compc,nent which is deficient or inoperable is winds, etc. Genera!!y, it includes spurious or one-time considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) ltem" if i failures. Electric components included in this category some other action is required by an operator to compen-are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, sate for the condition of the component. Some examples 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-LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED tor out ir the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re-TO THE ENVIRONMENT paired because replacement parts require a long lead This indicator displays the total number of curies from all time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant 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- >

able, i.e., every 6 months. sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-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 graphs. This indcator tracks se. Operating Procedures or AbnormalOperating Proce-curity performance for SEP #58. dures. 5) System indication that provides criticalinfor-mation c'e ng normal or abnormal operations.

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared to norme.1 hours1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months for NUMBEM OF HOT SPOTS maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as The rEnber of radiological hot spots which have been contract personnel. iderf.,fied and documented to exist at FCS at the end of the reporting month. A hot spot is a small localized MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN source of radiation. A hot spot occurs when the contact 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 mRom/ 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, quarterty, to personnel error on the original LER submittal. A Per-and annual basis. sonnel Error is an event for which the root cause is inap-propriate action on the part of one or more specified indi-MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING viduals (as opposed to being attributed to a department OUTAGE) or a general group). Also, the inappropriate action must The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have have ocx:urred within approximately two years of the 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 mmplete, and all other paperwork ready for field use), Also included is the number of NUMBER OF MISSED St% EILLANCE TESTS RE-MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures SULTING IN LICENSEE E*irENT REPORTS and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, The number of Surveillance Tests (STs)inat result 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 mnverted to MWOs.

78 -

i

m .. _ .. _ _ . . . . _ _ _ .

.. . t i

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFIN!TtONS (Cont'd) ;

i OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE- !

The year to- date budget compared to the actual expen- NANCE ACTIVITIES 'i ditures for Operations and Maintenance departments- - The % of the number of completed maintenance activi- !

ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte- i OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS nance activities each month. This % is shown for each !

This indicator displays the total number of outstandin9 maintenance craft. Maintenance activities include MWRs, 1 Corrective Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other misce!!a- !'

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 prevedive mainte-between the issuance of a Moddication Number and the nance items in the month that were not comp'eted by the f completion of the drawing update. scheduled date plus a grace period equal to 25 % of the l

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. l approved during the reporting month. . i

2) Moddication Requests Being Reviewed. This category PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT -l includes: OF UMIT l 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.) Moddication Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Chloride. Hydrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride, and .j Projects Committee (NPC) Suspended Solids. EPRi limits are used.

These Moddication Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE 18 ,CIDENTS

, cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are (MAINTENANCE) retumed 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 i Modifcation Requests may be approved for accomplish- 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 drfferent phases require re- #15,41 & 44 '

view. t

3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION 'l Planning has assigned a year in which cx>nstruction will PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 24 MODIRCA- ,

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

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction This indicator shows the status of modifications ap- i 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 Moddication 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 modifcations do not radiological work performance for SEP #52. !

include moddications which are proposed for cancella-tion. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE i The ra:io of preventive maintenance (including surveil- !

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUEL- lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of ,

ING OUTAGE) nonautage corrective maintenance and preventive main- !

This indcator 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.

l l

1 79 i l

-- ~ n- , . , -

, ~

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (c@nt'd) {

RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE- SIGNIRCANT 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 irdudes trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. the daily 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 Reliabihty Data System fled from the screening process as a significant event (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual number of NPRDS compor,ents with more than 2 f allures or potential threat to the health and safety of the public for the last eighteen months. was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a Safety system failures are any events or conditions that transient; 3) Degradation of fuel integrity, primary mol-could prevent the fulfiliment of the safety functions of ant pressure boundary, important associated features; structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple 4) Scram with complication; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, f ailure of all trains con- radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or nical Specifications; 7) Other, more trains is not counted as a safety system failure. INPO significant events reported in this indicator are The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The signif cant events ar.d lessons teamed identified through following is a list of the major safety systems, sub- the SEE-IN screening process.

systems, and components monitored for this indcator:

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

and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys-tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, STAFFING LEVEL Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Features instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Systems Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24 Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line isolation Valves Onsite Emergency AC & DC STATION NET GENERAllON Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring instrumenta- The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS during tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core isolation the reporting month.

Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation, TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- figurations to the plant's systems, mate Heat Sink. 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating INDEX systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the The Chemistry Performance index (CPI)is a calculation P&lD, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

based on the concentration of key impurities in the see- 2) Jumpers and blocks which are insta!!ed for Surveil-ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-most likely cause of detenoration of the steam genera- cedures Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures tors. The chemistry parameters are reported only for the are not considered as temporary modifcations unless the period of time when the plant is operated at greater than jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-30 percent power. dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or The CPI is calculated using the following equation: CPI - lab ins'ruments are not considered as temporary modifi-(Ka/0.8) + (Na/20) + (0/10) / 3 where the following are cations.

monthly averages of: Ka - average blowdown cation 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-conductivity, Na = average blowdown sodium concen- tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for tration O, - average condensate pump discharge dis- which MRs have been submitted will be considered as solved oxygen concentration. temporary modifications untilfinal resolution of the MR 80

1 u 1 I

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (c@nt'd) '

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently tem actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo- guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-rary modifcations for SEP #62 & 71. curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is gen-THERMAL PERFORMANCE erated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system The rato of the design gross heat rate (mrrected) 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 generaton (the en- UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS (NRC ergy that could be produced if the umt were operated DEFINITION) continuously at full power under reference ambient con- The number of safety system actuations which include ditions) over the same time penod, expressed as a per- (2D!Y.) 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 classifcation of safety system actuations includes 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS actuations when major equipment is operated gad 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 entical 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 :n NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC in-that number by the total number of hours ctdical in the spection hours. The violations are reported in the year same time period. The indicator is further defined as that the inspection was actually performed and not based iolbws: 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 f rom exceeding a setpoint or may radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-have been spurious. tor also shows the volume of low level radioactive waste

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused which is in temporary storage, the amount of 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- volurne 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) Cntical means that during the steady-state condition of power plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplcation 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 CAPABIUTY LOSS FACTOR active waste disposa! site, except resin, sludge, or The ra*io of the unplanned energy losses during a given evaporator bottoms. Low-levet 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 pered, expressed as a per-centage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

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

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Coofing System (ECCS) actuations that resuf! from reaching an ECCS actuation setpoint or f rom a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal.

81

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

SEP Reference Number 15 EaQ2 increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance)... .. . . . . . .. . 49 Contaminations >5,000 DPM/100 CM8 4 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . . . .. ... . .3 Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LERs . . . . .. . ..5 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies l Staffing Level . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . 40 j l

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 28 Evaluate and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate. . .. . . . . . . .2 Recordable injury / Illness 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 Reference Numbar 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status .. . . . . . . ... .. .. . .. . 69 Overall Project Status.. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 70 Progress of Cycle 15 Outage Modification Planning. . . . . . . 71 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts). ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 SEP Reference Number 36 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Work Order (MWO) Breakdown (Corrective Non-Outage Maintenance). .. . ,. 44 Corrective Maintenance Backlog Greater than 3 Months Old (Non-Outage) . .. . . 45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance ... . .. .. . .. . . . . - . . . .. .46 Preventive Maintenance items Overdue ... .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 47 Procedural Noncompliance incidents -- . . . . . . . . . . . 49 SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate.. . ... . .. .. .. . . . . . . .. . . .. 52 82

. o .

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued)

SEP Reference Number 44 EaQ2 Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance).. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . 49 SEP Reference Number 46 i Design a Procedures Controland Administrative Program Document Review ..... . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ._ . . 58 SEP Reference Numbar 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 SEP Reference Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 15 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste.... . ... .. .. . . .. ....... .. 34 Contaminations >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 4 Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area.. . .. ... .. .- ... . . . . .. . .55 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) .. .. .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. 59 SEP Reference Number 60 improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . 51 [

SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . . . . 51 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers Terroorary Modifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . . . . ., . . . . . . ... . . 62 Engineering Change Notice Status _ ... .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Engineering Change Notice Breakdown ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training ..... . . . . . . . . . .. . 66 License Candidate Exams. .. . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 67 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 60 83

l

. s.

REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R.L Andrews G. E. Guliani - Nuclear Licensing ' 'i G. L. Anglehart K. B. Guliani & Industry Affairs ;

W. R. Bateman E.R.Gundal J. T. O'Connor ' 1 K. L. Belek R. H. Guy W. W. Orr T, G. Blair R. M. Hawkins L L. Parent B. H. Biome M. C. Hendrickson T. L. Patterson p C. N. Bloyd R. R. Henning R. T. Pearce

.J.P.Bobba K. R. Henry R. L. Phelps C.E.Bougha J. B. Herman W.J.Ponec M. A. Breuer G. J. Hill L. M. Pulverenti C. J. Brunnert . K. C. Holthaus T. M. Reisdorff -

M. W. Butt C.K. Huang A. W. Richard C. A.Carlson L G. Huliska R. T. Ridenour J. W. Chase C. J. Husk D. G. Ried l G. R. Chatfield R. L Jaworski G. K. Samide l

A. G. Christensen R. A.Johansen T.J.Sandene A. J. Clark W. C. Jones M. J. Sandhoefner l O. J. Clayton J. D. Kecy B. A. Schmidt R. P. Clemens J. D. Keppler S. T. Schmitz J. L Connolley D. D. Kloock F. C. Scofield G. M Cook J. O. Knight H. J. Sefick J.E. Cook D. M. Kobunski J. W. Shannon -

M. R. Core G. J. Krause R. W. Short S. R. Crites L T. Kusek C. F. Simmons

. D. W. Dale. L E. Labs E.L Skaggs l R. C. DeMeulmeester M. P. Lazar J. L. Skiles l D. C. Dietz R. C. Learch . F. K. Smith -

K.S. Dowdy R. E. Lewis R. L Sorenson J. A. Drahota R. C. Liebentritt J. A. Spilker T. R. Dukarski D. L Lippy D. E. Spires R. G. Eurich B. Lisowyj K. E. Steele H. J. Faulhaber B. R. Livingston W. Steele M. A. Ferdig D. L Lovett H. F. Sterba i' M. T. Frans J. H. MacKinnon G. A. Teeple H. K. Fraser G. D. Mamoran M. A. Tesar J. F. W. Friedrichsen J. W. Marcil J. W. Tills .

S. K. Garnbhir N. L. Marfice D. R. Trausch J. K. Gasper R. D. Martin P. R. Turner W. G. Gates D. J. Matthews J. M. Uhland M. O. Gautier J. M. Mattice C. F. Vanecek S. W. Gebers T. J. Mcivor J. M. Waszak J. M. Glantz K. S. McCormick G. R. Williams J. T. Gleason R. F. Mehaffey S. J. Willrett L V. Goldberg K. G. Meistad W. C. Woemer D. J. Golden D. C. Mueller D. C. Gorence R. J. Mueller R. E. Gray M. W. Nichols M. J. Guinn C. W. Norris 84-

p

-"+ 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 41h 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 71h 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 91h Refueling 09/28/85 - 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86 - 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87- 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90 - 05/29/90 Cycie 13 05/29/90 - 02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 - 05C3/92 Cycle 14# 05/03/92 -09/18/93 (Psanned Dates) 14th Refueling 09/18/93-11/13/93 Cycle 15 11/13/93- 03/11/95 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

-

ML20045F045

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search