Text

Fcs,Unit 1 Performance Indicators Rept,June 1993.
	ML20046B081
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	06/30/1993
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20046B070	List: ML20046B069; ML20046B081;
References
	NUDOCS 9308030072
	Download: ML20046B081 (92)
	v • d • e

- - - - - -

] FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I O-

/

JUNE 1993 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS j

$080$00cko$00$285f PDR R g,

1 i

0%d of ac&na w wn, dLb,...

d uwdns wisdorn, wnd sowndjud ynal...

a w a, P Wns, canwu %ng cornaniknwnl...

f a w a, wag of, ?p,...d w daisy ikjd>

spMlb/ast6,wyy 6 . Jl w !

uvneo-dahd, mi L% mdl of alevnd, puwa,awowvowru4wodkwh an, ans wnd ik paik wnd sahpdun, L%lcornsjnern,!nimg%dgVknda)

L pevsan,, eljud wu dang ik dgV Miap.

jans,).o'e-l I

l

i L

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT :

FORT CALHOUN STATION l PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT j I

t Prepared By: .

Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group ;

s JUNE 1993 l

y ,.e- -

l FORT CALHOUN STATION JUNE 1993 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT 1 i

OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

j The station began the month at 100% power. On June 14,1993 moderator temperature coeffi-cient testing was conducted successfully at approximately 95% power. Subsequently, full power operation resumed until a plant trip occurred at 1322 hours0.0153 days 0.367 hours 0.00219 weeks 5.03021e-4 months on June 24. The cause of the trip was determined to be inadvenent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay when a cabinet door was opened during maintenance in the switchyard. This relay trip caused opening of the generator output )

breakers, a turbine trip and a reactor trip. Post-trip actions included troubleshooting and testing j of non-safety related electrical components and main feedwater heater relief valves. Funher l details of this event will be reported in LER 93-011. j l

The reactor was brought critical at 1412 hours0.0163 days 0.392 hours 0.00233 weeks 5.37266e-4 months on June 26. Reactor power was slowly raised and the turbine generator was synchronized to the grid at 1115 hours0.0129 days 0.31 hours 0.00184 weeks 4.242575e-4 months on June 27. Power was held at 30% for chemistry considerations. At 0606 on June 30, chemistry limits were met and a power ascension commenced. Power was raised to 70% over the next several hours, where it remained until July I for the testing of the feedwater heater relief valves mentioned above.

On June 29, the annual Emergency Plan Exercise was conducted; this exercise was integrated into the overall Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center drill.

The following NRC inspections were submitted during this reporting period:

IER No. Descriotion .

)

J 93-06 Residents' Routine Inspection 93-09 Fire Protection Inspection -;

93-10 Confirmatory Measurements Inspection 93-14 Maintenance Inspection The following LERs were submitted during this reponing period:

LER No. Description 93-007 Unplanned Emergency Diesel Start and Reactor Trip Signal l

93-008 Failure to Implement Surveillance Requirement for Stack Flow Indicator 93-009 Automatic Start of Backup Charging Pumps and Isolation of Letdown Flow ]

i Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs ;

1 i

12 Month Value Performance

= Cateaories

+ + +

.'m i

i Unit (Unplannedf:

. ~ .- i Unplanned:.

'i ntsmatici ? Thermal::

Q Performance in Industry Upper 10% and better Capability jCapability ' - lPerformance? than 1993 OPPD goal Factor 'ji.oss.FactoC [iScrema%000sHours.lCittissl} '

~ '

]

Performance Better Than 1993 OPPD Goal w _,_,_ _- ________

l 4 4 HPSI Safety I

AFW Sa fety ii EDG Safety Fpel Performance Not Meeting System ydtem l System Rel)qtjility -

1993 OPPD Goal or Performance IP oh1listice Performance Idditetof Industry Median

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---

333 Performance category has T Volume of g , finddstNA[

improved since last month's i i low-L8 Vel - report 4epsy! Collective Radioactive f' (Ssfet 2

'$nda Radiation Performance category is Waste AccidenD j 4Ratej

[+l unchanged since last (1993 months

~,

^

I only) -

m nth's report

j m- .

Performance category has h declined since last month's report INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the twelve months from July 1,1992 through June 30,1993.)

=9 t-Auto ..

Scrams: 12 Month Value Performance Categories kWhileL iCritical?

E Performance Better Than Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average

)Sofety;

.jSystem;(

b Performance Better Than 1993 OPPD Goal

[Actuationsj Performance Not Meeting 1993 OPPD Goal or Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average

- "9 8Satstyf Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average and i System)

{Forcsd(

iOutage; { 1993 OPPD Goal Not Available L Failuress ?Ratet Performance category has improved f since last month's report

_ 9 _

mt[ e j '

Collective =@ Performance category is unchanged since last month's report Oukages/$060Ab iCrit!Hrsh

(r"e s _

i i m ;"' " gg Performance category has declined since last month's report I

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 July 1,1992 through June 30,1993.)

l i

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT JUNE 1993 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT ' INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT The Positive Trend Report highlights Performance Indi-This section lists the indicators which show inadequacies I cators with data representing continued performance when compared to the OPPD goal j above the stated goal and indicators with data represent-ing significant improvement in recent months. j The following indicators have been selected as exhibiting PmW h ReW M N a positive trend for the reporting month: !

(Page 5)

The percentage of personnel errors reported in LERs at i Fuel Reliability Indientnr the end of the reporting month (27.3%) exceeds the .;

1993 goal of a maximum of 12% j (Page 10)

The FRI improved from January through May 1993 and Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours performance has been better than the goal for each (Page 17) month this year.

The number of violations per 1,000 inspection hours for '

the 12 months from 6/1/92 through 5/31/93 is 1.88, which Prooress of Cvele 15 Outaae Modification Plannino exceeds the 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals of a (Page 68) maximum of 1.5.

The goal for this indicator, i.e. to have all modification packages approved by June 30,1993, has been met.

Forced Outaae Ra's !

- (Page 22)

The forced outage rate for the twelve months from 7/1/92 +

through 6/30/93 (10.5%) is above the 1992 and 1993 I End of Positive Trend Report Fort Calhoun goals of a maximum of 2.4%.

Unolanned Automatic Reactor Scrams oer 7.000 Hours Crriacal (Page 26) ne number of unpunned automats reactor scrams per ADVERSE TREND REPORT 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical for the reporting month (1.69) ex-coeds the 1993 goal of O.

A Performance indicator which has data representing

three (3) consecutive months of declining performance Unolanned Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) constitutes an adverse trend. The Adverse Trend Report (Page 28) !

explains the conditions under which certain indicators The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations are showing adverse trends. year-to-date (2) sxceeds the 1993 Fort Calhoun goal of 0.

There were no indicators exhibiting adverse trends for Percent of Comoleted Scheduled Maintenance Activities the reporting month. (All Crafts)

(Page 49) .

The percent of completed scheduled maintenance activi- [

End of Adverse Trend Report. ties for all crafts for the reporting month (72.7%) is less j than the 1993 monthly goal of 285%

in-Line Chemistnr Instruments Out-of-Service i (Page 50) ;

The number of in-line chemistry instruments out-of-ser- i vice for the reporting month (17) is above the 1993. j monthly goal of a maximum of 5. i i

End of Management Attention Report. ,

t i

i i

i I

iv '

i

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

The " Number of Missed Surveiltance Tests ResuMino in LEBa* indicator has been moved from the Performance section to the Safe Operations section of the report.

The

Check Vahre Fai!ure Rate" indicator has been moved from the Division and Department Indicators sec-tion to the Performance section of the report.

INPO and NRC annunciator windows (Pages il and iii)

Arrows have been added to indicate changes in the indi-cator performance categories since the last report. Cat-egories have been revised.

Maintenance Work Order Breakdown (Corrective Non-Outage)

(Page 45) ,

This indicator has been revised to show IEWO break-down in manhours.

Ratio of Preventive To Tota! Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items OveMus (Page 46)

This indicator replaces the

Ration of Preventive to Total Maintenance" and Preventive Maintenance items Over-due".

Percent of Comoleted Scheduled Maintenance ActMties (A!I Crafts)

(Page 49)

The number of emergent MWOs has been added to this graph.

Ace of Outstandino Maintenance Work Orders This indicator has been deleted from the report.

Correctnre Maintenance Backloo Greater Than 3 Months Gd This indicator has been deleted from the report.

Ooen Corrective Action Reoorts and incident Reoorts (Page 65)

This indicator has rep! aced the " Outstanding CARS

indi-cator.

End of Performance indicator Report improvements /

Changes Report I

Table of Contents / Summary PAGE GOALS . .. -X SAFE OPERATONS g l

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE / DISABLING INJURY /1LLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 2 RECORDABLE INJURYriLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE . CONTAMINATONS >5.000 DPM/100 CM' _ _ _ . __ _.._.._--.4 NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN LERs 5 i

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES 6 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ,

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY:

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 REllABILITY (25 DEMANDS) .. . 12 l EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY - 13 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES-- 14 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE (peson-rem) . 15 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIA?.ON EXPOSURE (mrem) . 16 VOLATIONS PER 1.000 INSPECTON HOURS . .17 SGNIFICANT EVENTS .. 18 i

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS . .. 19 PERFORMANCE PAGE STATON NET GENERATON (10,000 Mwh) . 21 >

FORCED OUTAGE RATE - .. . . . 22 vi

)

P

j PERFORMANCE (continued) jggg EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR.. 23 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR = _

- 24 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR . .. . 25 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR l

SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL.. .. 26 t

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION) . 27 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS - (NRC DEFINITON).. _.28 GROSS HEAT RATE.. . 29 THERMAL PERFORMANCE-- .._.. . ... .. 30 i

DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT (Mwth) - .. - 31 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES '

PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS -- . 32 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS 1 REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

- .. . 33 ,

REPEAT FAILURES. . . 34 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE . . . . 35 ,

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE (wbic n.) 36 ;

PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT - . 37 ;

CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY- 38 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS.. .. .. .39 i t

i

^

COST PAGE i

-i I

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . . . 41 i

STAFFING LEVEL . . . . = . . . . . . . . . .. =.42 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE.. . .. 43 i DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS f%gg MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE)... .. . 45 vii

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

4 DfVISDN AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) EAGE, t

RATO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE

& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE . . . . . . ... . . 46 I MAINTENANCE OVERTIME . . . . . . . . _ .. . 47-PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)... . .. - - - -

. . .. .. 4s PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS) . . . . __49 ;

IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS ;

OUT-OF-SERVICE . . - .. . . . . . ~50 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED (Kg) . =51 DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA .. ..- . . . . -- 52 - ,

RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM 53 NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS... .

.. 54 .

I DOCUMENT REVIEW = . . . . . 55 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE k;CIDENTS (SECURITY)- . _ 56 TEMPORARY MODIFICATONS- =. .. 57 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATONS - _ - . 58_ ,

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE -

REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN .. . . . . . . -. .. ... 5 9 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS - - . . . - - .- 60 .

4 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN . . . . . . . . . 61 .I L

LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN - - .. . 62 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATON TRAINING.... . . . . - - 63 l LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS ... . . . ._ . -. 64 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS . . . . .65 ,

MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING OUTAGE) = - . . 66 l OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING OUTAGE) . . . . . . 67 - [<

PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING .. .. -- . . ..................68 i i

)

viii

ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST PAGE ;

ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS. ... ., . 69 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . .. . 71 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX... . . . . . .. . 78 REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST = . . . 80 3

k 3

f f

5 1

9 s

I i

IX t

l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS !

Vice President - 1993 Priorities l MISSION The safe and reliable generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the pmfessional use ,

of nuclear technology The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the . l environment. ,

GOAIS Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a i professional working environment,in the control room and throughout the OPPD nuclear organi-zation, that assures safe operation.

1993 Priorities: .

1 Improve SALP ratings. ;

Improve INPO rating. ;

Reduce 1993 NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4. !

i j

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.

1 Goal 2: PERFORMANCE To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhow Station that result in safe reliable plant operation in power production. .

.!i 1993 Priorities: ;

Impmve Quality, Pmfessionalism, and Teamwork. ;

Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

Reduce the number of human performance errors.

i 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. .[

a Streamline work processes.

i Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) 1 i

y i

.l l

I 1

l

\

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 l

l l

1 l

1 1993 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate

--X - 1992 Disabling injury / illness Frequency Rate l GOODI 1.6 -

l 1.4 - - 1995 INPO Industry Goal )

l 1.2 -

1-0.8 - .

0.6 -

D----C C 3---G

0.4 -

O.2 -

0 M , , , m , , , , , , , , , ,.

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 I DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIEc 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 June 1993 was 0.50.

There were no lost time accidents, reported for the month of June. 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 50.50.

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

The industry upper ten percentile disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the twelve months from 1/92 through 12/92 is approximately 0.14.

Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source) !

Accountability: Chase / Richard Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 2 i

5- 1993 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate 4.5 - X 1992 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate lGOODI

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

3-2.5 -

2- C O O O O O O O O O O O i -

1.5 -

s n 1-0.5 -

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

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 )

i RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE I This indicator shows the 1993 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1992 '

recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown.

A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi- !

sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid.

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

The recordable injury / illness rate for January through June 1993 was reported as 1.03.

There was 1 recordable injury / illness case, an back injury, reported for the month of ,

June. There have been 4 recordable injury / illness cases in 1993. l The recordable injury / illness rate for the past twelve months is 1.67. I i

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

1 Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

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

Personnel Contamination Rate

')

O Outage Goal (1.5) 1.6 -

--O-- Non-Outage Goat (0.4) COOO 1.4 -

$t.2-I Forced g 1- Outage )

E O 0.8-O, ,

{ 0.6-0.4 - M 1 q 02-0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 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 June 1993. The contaminations were: 1) A clothing contamination that occurred while an individual was :

touring the RCA in clean areas. 2) A clothing contamination that occurred while an individual was working at the SFP operating the hydraulic cutter controls and helping change out a camera; and 3) A clothing contamination that occurred while an individual -

was observing crane operations. ;

i a

There has been a total of 25 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cm in 1993.- 22 of these j contaminations were classified as non-outage and 3 were classified as outage contami- ;

nations.

There was a total of 273 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cma in 1992. There was a total ;

of 55 contaminations >5,000 dpm/100cm'in 1991. ,

The 1993 goal for contaminations >5,000 dpm/100 cm2 is 0.4 PCR/1,000 RWP hours

- (non-outage) and 1.5 PCR/1,000 RWP hours (outage). ,

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

Accountability: Chase /Lovett l Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 4

+

. _ _ ~. _. ._

@ Licznses Evsnt Reporta 36 40- E Personnel Errors Reported in LERs 32 M hmdaWe Nm hent Repos 31

0-

--+-- Cumulatrve Personnel Diots Reported in LERs 20-15 10 8 10-I -I i 0

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

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

-O- 1993 For1 Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 12%)

60%-

47 % 50%-

24 % 3 20% -

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

'89 '90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr 14ay 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 l 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. 4 In June there were 3 LERs reported,1 of which was attributed to personnel error. The ,

following LERs were submitted during this report period LER 93-007 - Unplanned Emergency Diesel Generator Start and Reactor Trip Signal f LER 93-008 - Failure to implement Surveillance Requirement for Stack Flow Indicator ;

LER 93-009 - Automatic Start of Backup Charging Pumps and Isolatiori of Letdown Flow ,

The percentage of total LERs submitted year-to-date that have been attributed to per-sonnel error was 27.3% at the end of June.- ;

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

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase .

Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 l 5 ;

O Safety Systern Failures ,

i g - Fort Calhoun 6 Quarter Moving Average 2

g --Q- Older Plant 6 Quarter Moving Average 3-dy 2 m" MA ~ 2 g-2 , WiM #f M- Y 9 q @ T51 90 i i e 91-4 i

92-1 i

92-2 i

92-3 i

92-4 i

y 91-1 91-2 91-3 Year - Quarter ;

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILUFIES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the quarterly

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

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

First Quarter 1991: 1) Design errors in the electrical distribution system could prevent the system from supplying adequate voltage to safeguards loads. 2) Design errors in the electrical distribution system could jeopardize safety related loads under accident conditions. Breaker coordination problems could cause the loss of safety related buses.

Second Quarter 1991: 1) Failure of high energy auxiliary steamlines in various equipment rooms could render equipment vital for safe shutdown inoperable. 2) All 4 channels of the

. pressurizer pressure low signal trip could have been nonconservatively calibrated due to an inadequate calibration procedure. 3) A steam generator blowdown was performed while the radiation monitor was inoperable. This was caused by the mode selector switch on the monitor being left in the calibrate position.

Third Quarter 1991: 1) Both EDGs could have been rendered unable to perform their design :

function due to radiator exhaust damper failure. The dampers had cracked pins in their cou- t plings. 2) The station batteries were declared inoperable due to cracks developing in the cell casings. This was caused by inadequate design of the terminal post seals. 3) An error in an operating procedure could cause improper manipualtion of nitrogen backup bottles for instru-ment air. This could cause a loss of the containment spray system. ,

First Quarter 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.

i Second Quarter 1992: Fuse and breaker coordination problems for the DC buses could cause !

a loss of the entire bus if a fault occurred on one of the loads. !

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase AdverseTrend: None 6

l 1

. - . ._ _ ~

i E 1993 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value i 1993 High Pressure Safety injection system Unavailability Vasa Ye:r- !

to-D:te j

-O- Fort calhoun Goal

- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.025- lGOODI

+ .

0.02- 4 A A A A A A A A A A A r 0.015-0.01 -

C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.005-

,9, U

, ,0 , , , , , , , ,

1992 Unavailabihty value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec93 ;

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM ,

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE i

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 June l 1993 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during June.

The 1993 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.00024 at the end of June. The value for the last 12 months is .0002.

There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during May. There were 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.

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

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

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun goals for this indicator are a maximum of 0.008. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.0011.

Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Adverse Trend: None 7

E Monthly Auxiliary Feodwater System Unavailability Value 1993 Auxiliary Feedwater Systern Unavailability Vabe Year-to-date ,

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

-G- Industry Upper 10% (0.0039) i 0.025 - A A A A A A A A A A A A i 0.02 -

0.015 -

0.01 - C O--C O O O O O O O O 0.0062 0.005 -

N -

Q O O y

--O O-O-O-O- O

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

1992 Unavailability Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 AUXlLIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM 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. t The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for June 1993 was 0.009. There were 10.03 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months of planned unavailability for surveillance tests and preventive mainte-nance for FW-6 and FW-10, and 2.02 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months of unplanned unavailability to perform surveillance tests during the month. The 1993 year-to-date AFW unavailability value ;

was 0.0031 at the end of June. The value for the last 12 months is 0.0045. i There 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 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 l I 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

l

1 1

E Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailabihty Value

- Emergency AC Power unavailability Value Year-to-Date j i

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

-e- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) 0.05-

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

0.03 -

0.02- 1 1

0.001 D- -

O O OM O O 0 4 1992 Unavailabihty Value Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM I SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month. ,

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for June 1993 is 0.0039. There were 5.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months of unplanned unavailability for DG-1 for bus 1 A1 troubleshooting during ;

the month. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date is 0.0045. The value for the last 12 months is 0.0042. i I

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

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

Tne 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 50.023. The 1992 goal was 50.024.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately 0.005.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None g l

l

O Fusi Rtliability Indicator 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (s X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) lGOODI ,

E -O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals

!* 1o- i 8- FRl Not O O O O O c 6-Availab6e 4- July 92 O O A i A i l i i i i i i i 4 4 "l ,

Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 l

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

FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR l

l The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) for June 1993 was 0.653 X 10d microcunes/ gram. This FRI value and the fission product activity data from the June trip and return to power continue to indicate a defect free core. The monthly FRIis a calculated value based on fission product activities present in the reactor coolant. Its purpose is to monitor industry progress in achieving ,

and maintaining a high level of fuel integrity. -

Only the data from June 1 through 23 at an average of 99.2% power was used for the calcula- l tion of the monthly INPO FRi value. This is in accordance with the INPO guidelines which state that data from steady-state power levels above 85% for the month should be used when pos- i sible. Steady state is defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a power level that does not vary more than 5%. The plant tripped on June 24 and returned to 100% power on July 2,1993. 4 The June 1993 FRI value of 0.653 X 10d microcuries/ gram is an increase from the May FRI 1

value of 0.398 X 0.10d microcuries/ gram. The higher FRI value is a reasonable monthly variation and is consistent with full power operation. The plant operated at 95% to 100% power ,

from May 5 through June 23. !

Fission product activity data from the month of June, including the trip and retum to power, shows no Xe-133 activity increases and no iodine spiking present. This indicates a defect free ,

core. This has been confirmed with the Westinghouse Coolant Activity Data Evaluation Code,

. CADE, and with discussions with the Westinghouse technical expert on fuel failures.1 he last

detected fuel failure was during Cycle 13. ;

The FRI value, using the latest INPO calculation method, is expected to be below the 1993 goal of 7.5 X 10d microcuries/ gram for the remainder of Cycle 14, with no fuel failures.

l The INPO September 1992 Report " Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility industry" (INPO No.92-011) states that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should '

strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value above 5.0 X 104 microcuries/ gram indicates a high probability of unit operation with one or more fuel defects. The determination of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." The .

value of 5.0 X 10d microcuries/ gram is not an INPO industry goal. It is defined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the i

core is defect free or not.

Data Source: Holthaus/Guliani :

Accountability: Chase /Spilker Positive Trend 1 10 i

4

i l

[

B Number of Failures /20 Demands - Trigger Values for 20 Demands

{

O Number of Failures /50 Demands -V- Trigger Values for 50 Demands E Number of Failures /100 Demands --

Trigger Values for 100 Demands ;

8- t l GOOD l .

+ !

6- !

7-- ? 7 7 Y Y Y Y ? Y Y Y '

4 4 4 4 4 }

4-3

= = = = = = :

2 2 2 2 2 2-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _

f i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00- 00 00 00 '- 00 i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , j Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 .

f EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY i

This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at !

the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high .j level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater l than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val- j ues. The Fort Calhoun 1993 goal is to have fewer failures than these trigger values. j 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 and all start demands that are followed by load-run demhnds, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least ,

one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run j test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, j and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a mini- j 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 j Adverse Trend: None j 11 l

l O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands lGOODI i E DG 2 Failures /25 Demands y 5- O Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O 3-2- .

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- ,

i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 i DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1992.

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

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

the unit. .

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

.i Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability. Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 12 L

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

--+-- Station Unreliability Value Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.002s - a Three Year Average) 0.002 - O O O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015-0.001 - '

I i

0.0005 -

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

- i - i - i i - i i a i a a a 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. :

L The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value for June 1993 was 0.0. j For DG-1: There were 3 start demand for the reporting month with no failures. In -:

addition, there was 1 load-run demand with no failure. ;

i For DG-2: There were 3 start demands for the reporting month with no failures. In addition, there was 1 load-run demand with no failure. l

-i Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

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

i LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs j number of valid load-run demands ;

i Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values !

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning AdverseTrend: None :

13 !

P

@ Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line -

O controi soom equipment oeficiencies sepairabie On-Line

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Maximum Number of On-Line Deficiencies O Fort Calhoun Goa! for Maximum Number of Operator Work Arounds On-Line O controi aoom equipment oeficiencies seguiring an Outage to sepair

@ Operator Work Around items Requiring an Outage to Repair 40-A Y ,

O ,,,Q,,,

g 30- tw ,u g ,C

$h- gy M <

20- g; g 3g g 10- @ $.h O & I 4 6 Mar 93 Apr May Jun93 O March 1993 $ May 1993 y O April 1993 8 June 1993 98_-

bk2 -

]' H M M1 g h 9E 3 D 4 6 3 5 engineering Planning Parts (Whse/Premt) z Responsible Group NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on-line) the number of control room eouipment defic:en-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 responsible group .

There was a total of 64 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of June 1993.

42 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 22 require a plant outage to repair.

There were 5 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. 4 of these OWA items are repairable on-line and 1 requires an outage to repair.

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

Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None 14

D Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Person-Rem)

-O- Fort Calhoun AnnualGoal

-A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (185 Person-Rem) 300- Industry Upper 10% (110 Person-Rem for a Three Year Average)

-O-lGOODI V

200- C O ,

4 A A A A A A A a a a A 100-52 i e i i 0 ;

'90 '91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE i i

During June 1993,1.045 person-rem was recorded by TLDs worn by personnel while working at the Fort Calhoun Station. The year-to-date exposure is 10.497 person-rem.

The exposure for the last 12 months is 37.82 person-rem.

The Fort Calhot n 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 percentile value (for the three year period from 1/90 through 12/92) is approximately j 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)

Acauntability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP54 I

l l

15

i O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem) l

@ Highest Expesure for the Ouarter (mrem)

E Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) 5000- !

OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Umit 4500-4000- .i l

3500-3000 -

2500 -

2000- +

Fort Calhoun 1500 mrem /yr. Goal 1500-1000-519

~

143 June 1993 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During June 1993, an individual accumulated 143 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

The maximum individual exposure to date for the second quarter of 1993 was 290 mrem. .

The maximum individual exposure for the year was 519 mrem.

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

year. The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,.300 mrem.

Date Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None l

16

r:

9- Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours GOOD

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal g

V

.66 -

s h

8 1

2.3 . %

l Ti N 12 C O O O O O O O O O O O i i i O i e i i i i i i i e i 90 91 Jun92 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May93 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS i

This indicator displays the number of NRC vic!ations 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 bours indicator was reported as 1.88 for the twelve months from June 1,1992 through May 31,1993. .l There were no NRC inspections that ended during this reporting period.

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

Level 111 Violations (0)

LevelIV 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 inspection hours.

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None 17

~-

b C. NRC Significant Events ,

I

' Fort Calhoun 6 Quarter Moving Average [

1. 1 1 0.5 2 Ik d b ^Y""'l _;

O -

91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 Year - Ouader P

3- O INPO Significant Events (SERs) 2.5 - t 2- t 1.5 - 3 3 0.5 91-1 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 Year - Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS i i

This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Cal- l houn Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis i and Evaluation of Operational Data in the quarterly " Performance Indicators for Operat- :

ing Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NBQ significant events occurred between the first quarter of 1991 and the ;

fourth quarter of 1992:

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

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

The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs),

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

Second Quarter 1992: Personnel and accessible building areas were contaminated with transuranic, alpha-emitting radionuclides. i 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 i safety valves. One pressurizer safety valve subsequently reopened at a lower reactor coolant system pressure and remained partially open, resulting in a release of reactor coolant to containment via the pressurizer quench tank.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO j Accountability: Chase l Adverse Trend: None 18

3-

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

0 V/4 0 0 0 0 0 :VJ 0 0 0 0 0 0

. . . . . . . i i i i . i

'91 92 Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.

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

During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillance was not completed nor corrective mainte-nance performed as a result of AC-10A falling into the " Alert Range" (LER 93-003 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 Advers9 Trend: None SEP 60 & 61 19

h PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the ,

highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station ^

that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion.

I.

20 1

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

l l

50 -

{ D Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) i 46 -

4 35 95 34,94 3618 3612 L: 01 e .- .

32.51 32.14 31.21 28.01 f30 '~9 27.2

! t ~

l 2 21.99

~

19.94 8

l C.20- . .

O J

I 10.27 -

3

( 10- .. .

~

4 O

i .

x T. :

0,

, l Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 i l STATION NET GENERATION i s I s

, During the month of June 1993 a net total of 280,104 MWH was generated by the Fort l l Calhoun Station. Unplanned energy losses for the month were attributable to a forced l

outage that began on June 24 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the l I

switchyard caused a turtaine and reactor trip. On June 27 the turbine generator was synchronized to the grid.

Planned energy losses for the month of April were the result of operating at 77% power to conserve fuel and a maintenance outage.

! Unplanned energy losses for the month of September 1992 were attributable to the l 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.

l

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

22/92 (described above) and the forced outage that began on 8/5/92 when a feeder l'

breaker to the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed resulting in a controlled shutdown to Mode i 2. The turbine generator was synchronized to the gnd on 8/6/92.

l

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

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

I, Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase

] Adverse Trend: None 21 J

J d

- Forced Outage Rate lGOODI ,

1

--O-- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals V i 20%-

1 15%-

9.7 9.3 -

-l ll 10%-

5%-

1A ! C O O O O O O O O O O O

, , , , 0%

'89 '90 '91 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 10.5% for the twelve months from 7/1/92 to 6/30/93. There was one forced outage during the month of June 1993. This outage, which occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip, lasted 70.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months .

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

5/92.

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

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

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

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

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 22

O Monthly EAF 1993 Year-to-Dete Average Monthly EAF

+ 1992 Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF 4

lGOODI 100 % - - """

a

(

85.6 " -

' ~

80%- -

3

~ ' '

56.6 60%- , j -

g y v M ,,

( 40%- Y .

- 4 -

g

??J ' '

20%- <

p m 4 ^ ' '

, 4 4 1 0% , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'90 '91 '92 Jul92 Aug Sep Ck:t Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 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 June 1993 were due to the forced outage that occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine trip and a ,

reactor trip. The year-to-date average monthly EAF was reported as 91% at the end of l June.

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 panet Al-41 A failed. I l

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 23 l

. . - _ = . _ - .

i O Monthly Unit Capability Factor

- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor

-+- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor

-.C)- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD .

1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 80%)

Industry Upper 10% (&4.9% for a Three Year Average) r & 5 i ; 2. -

- ~

60% - c o--U:- _

h -

d -

dNy p ?

a 4 - -

'O" 3p3 9 4 g n k g$4 d*~ ~. "

EII 1 1- ga 20%- y V f h y y g:

?

?$ ?

y '

zg 0% > > > > i i e i i i i i Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Foo Mar Apr May Jul93 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 June 1993 was reported as 82.6%. Energy losses for the month were due to Moderator Coefficient Testing and a forced outage from June 24 through June 27. The outage !

was caused by inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard. The year-to-date unit capability factor was reported as 91.1% The 36 month average UCF was reported as 78.3% at the end of June. The average monthly UCF for the last 12 months is 85%

The UCF for May 1993 was reported as 88% Energy losses for the month were due to the

! maintenance outage that began on April 24 and continued through May 1 and the subsequent j rampup.

The UCF was reported as 77.1% for the month of April 1993. Planned energy losses for the .

month were the result of the maintenance outage from April 24 through 30. l The UCF was reported as 77.5% for the month of September 1992. Unplanned energy losses ;

for the month were a result of a forced outage that began when an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior l to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip. :

The 1995 INPO lndustry 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% j l

The 1993 Fort Calhoun goal for Unit Capability Factor is 74.1% The basis for this goal is 56 l l

) days for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage,20 days rampup (10 full power equivalent days),

I unplanned loss of 11.5 full power equivalent days, and 10 day ramp up (5 full power equivalent l 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 6/30/93; assuming no forced outages and ;

the 56 day outage with 20 day rampup; the maximum possible 1993 UCF is 77.5%

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report i Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 24

\

O Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor

--M- Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor lGOODI

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

4 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%)

Industry Upper 10% (1.68% for a Three Year Average) 60%- g hb 40%- [h _

Mw 20%- 6 _

=& -n- ,

0%

- -O --

, , , ,C- , - O ,C,O- , -, O _ .D ,

Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the 1993 and 1992 year-to-date UCLFs, the goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), ex-pressed as a percentage.

The UCLF was reported as 16.6% for the month of June 1993. Unplanned energy losses for the month were the result of a forced outage that occurred as a result of the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard. The year-to-date UCLF for 1993 is 2.75%. The 36 month average UCLF was reported as 11.84% at the end of June. The average monthly UCLF for the last 12 months is 11.9%.

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 ths 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 upner 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 25 Adverse Trend: None

t 4

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

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

-O- 1993 & 1992 Fort Calhoun Goals j

--b- 1995 INPO Industry Goal

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.58 per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical over a 36 month time period) 7-6- '

5-4-

3-A N , . * * * * * . . . . ;

0-Mb Jul92 Aug i i d Sep i 0 r-O Oct Nov i T 1. U . U Dec Jan Feb. Mar S

Apr M%

May Jun93 5-4- E Numberof FCS Reactor Scrams 3

3- ,

j 2- 3 $

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~f 0 0 i i i i i i e i i i . . i . i i i

'89 '90 '91 '92 Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical (as defined in INPO's 11/91 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Intemational Nuclear .

Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Calhoun Station. This value 'l 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 lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months.

t The year-to-date station value is 1.69 for the month of June 1993. The value for the last 36 months is 1.30. The value for the last 12 months is 2.7.

An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on June 24,1993 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip.

An 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.

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

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

The 1993 and 1992 goals for unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical have .

t been set at zero. The 1995 INPO industry goal is one unplanned automatic reactor scram per.

7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.58 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical for the 36 month time period from 1/90 through 12/92.

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

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 26

3-5 Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

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

I 7

O C*

i , i i 0- MM

'90'91'92 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

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

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

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning ,

Adverse Trend: None i

27 i

l 1

- 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)

-O-- Critical Hours

@ Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) 1o- 1000

-900 j s- 800 ;

1s 700 m h 6- - 600 $ i E - 500 $

w k4- -

- 400 $c I U -300 o j 2

32-

\ -200 g 7 g i i

$ i i o R R R R R >

'9o '91 S2 JASONDJ FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ 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 Emer- ,

gency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuations when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged. ;

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred during June 1993 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip..

i 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 7 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 inadvertently pushed the normal ;

start button instead of the alarm acknowledge button.

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred on May 14,1992 when the turbine generator ,

i tripped on a falsa high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip and subsequent anticipatory start signal to both diesel generators.

There have been 1.25 unplanned safety system actuations/ quarter for the last 12 months. The -

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

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & P! ant Ucensee Event Reports (LERs) ,

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

'I

12-E Monthly Gross Heat Rate

-k- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate 0 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal V

$ 11-10560

'- 10300 l l10304 IR

'89 '90

'91 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 GROSS HEAT RATE j

I 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 10,299 BTU /KWH for

, the month of June 1993. The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature.

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

l The year-to-date gross heat rate was reported as 10,179 BTU /KWH at the end of June.

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

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 29

. _~ - . . - . -

D Monthly Thermal Performance

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

-+-- 1993 Year-to Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance lG D1

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

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

' "- =

= i;;

=

a

=

v

=

v u a -

a. ,

99 ~ -

y lj l

j 1

sk h 1

Thermal Pe-form.

p 98% ~ -

M l .

! ; value not b!l

'g3 J

1

> l i

d 3

f n g$

.N j l required or trendable 97%- gg ; l l below ; .p l w a ,

I 5 .) r 96 % i , , ', , , , , , , , 3 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 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 June 1993 was 99.71%. The average monthly thermal performance value from January through June (excluding April) was 99.2%. The average monthly value for the last 12 months is 99.3%.

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 gesket in FW-4B , and a torn backwash valve seat. The condenser was cleaned and equipment repairs made. Preliminary results show significant improvement in thermal perfor-mance.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal for this indicatoris a minimum of 99.4%. The 1992 goal I was a minimum of 99.3%. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 99.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the one year period from 1/92 through 12/92) is approxi- :

mately 99.8%.

Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek

. Adverse Trend: None .

30 1

O Thermaioutput :

--O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal 'i 1

- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500- -

1400-1300-1200-1100 - ):

1000- ,

t (900- {'

r h800- :

s g700- ]

f 600-500- ;

400- l 300- g 200- 4 100- i l

0-1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 i

DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT l t

The above thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during June 1993, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 ,

thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. ,

The plant operated at 95% power from June 12 through June 14 for Moderator Tem-perature Coefficient Testing. On June 24 inadvertentjarring of a 345 KV fault relay in l

- the switchyard caused a turbine trip and a reactor trip. j i

Data Source: ,Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase / Tills Adverse Trend: None ,

31

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

l Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours ;

1- -O- 1993 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.20) 0.86 ,

0.75- l I

0.53 0.5 0.5 - l l

ll~~0 0.25-C O O O O O O O O O i i i i

'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 0.242 for the months from January through June 1993. The value for the last 12 months is 0.52.

An equipment forced outage occurred on June 24,1993 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip. The turbine generator was synchronized to the grid on June 27.

The following two equipment forced outages occurred in August 1992: 1) on 8/5/92 a feeder breakerto the 125V DC panel Al-41 A failed. The turbine generator was synchro-nized to the grid on 8/6/92; 2) on 8/22/92 an AC/DC converter failed in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system. Pressurizer safety valve RC-142 then opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip. The plant was shutdown for the remainder of the month. The generator was brought on-line on 9/5/92.

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 indicator is a maximum of 0.20.

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

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 32

-E-- # of Component Categories 40- -+- # of Application Categories ,

35- --*-- Total # of Categories g30-25-

-y20-0

~

0 "

E "' b l~

5- w. ==

0 , i ii,, i i i i i i i , , , i i J92 F M A M J J A S O N D92 J93 F M A M J93 g WearOut/ Aging G Other Devices Q Manufacturing Defect O uaintenanceaesting .

54.0 ssn @h i

0.0%

l' Percent of TotalFailures During the 13 0% Past18 Months

/

/ 7.0% i f

6. flg f^ 0.0%

COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from October 1991 through March 1993). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 10 of the 87 compo- ,

nent categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a j higher failure rate in 12 of the 140 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary /

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

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 152 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 137. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Jaworski/ Dowdy Adverse Trend: None 33 1

Components With More Than One Failure l GOOD l 25 - X Components With More Than Two Failures V 21 20 20 20- 19 18 18 17 15 15 15- =

1,4 11 1_1 10-5 3 3 3 C 3 3 3 o

2 2 s a n -

0 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/

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

This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than 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. 2 of the 11 had more than two failures. The tag numbers of the components with more than two failures are AC-10C and RC-142. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None ,

34

1 10-

- Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Mi!! ion Component Hours

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 7-IGOODI 6-

+ :

e

,3 5-4-

Y A A A A A '

2- C O O O O O O O O O O O I I l i 1_

0

'90 '91 '92 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate. This rate is based upon failures ,

during the previous 18 months. The number of check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station for the previous three years are shown on the left.

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

For March 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 June 1993, the Fort Calhoun Station reported a calculated check valve '

failure rate of .588 E-6.

The 1993 and 1992 Fort Calhoun gcals for this indicator are a maximum failure rate of 2.~00 E-6.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Dowdy (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Jfp?A'dverse Trend: None SEP 43

.35

i 25000- -

Cumulative Dry Active Waste Sent For Processing (in cubic feet) ,

20000-15000-10000-5000- _

0 - , T',', , , , , , , , , l Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec93 i E Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet) j Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried ;

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried ,-

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

-I o- Industry Upper 10% (1,769.2 cubic feet) 4000- A a ; ; ; A ; ; ; ; A 3 j 2278

~

j tm y/jr /

20" -

o o o o o a o o o o a- o q y 1000- C O i i i a i e i e i e i i i i ,

'91 '92 Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug ' Sep Oct Nov Dec93 Year +nd Total )

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE !

The upper graph shows the volume of dry radioactive waste sent for processing. The lower _

graph shows the volume of the monthly radicactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for i radioactive waste buried, and the year-end totals for radioactive waste buried the previous 2 ,

years. ,

The Southeast Low Level Radioactive Waste Compact Commission has voted to refuse waste i shipped from Nebraska, and the 4 other states in the Central Interstate Low Level Radioactive !

waste compact, at the Bamwell, South Carolina repository beginning July 1,1993.

Cumulative amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing (cubic feet) 4,160.0 l Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during June (cubic feet) 0.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during June (cubic feet) _

203.6 478.9

, Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1993 (cubic feet)

Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage (cubic feet) 0.0 ;

The volume of solid radioactive waste buried during the last 12 months is 2,024.5 cubic feet. ;

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 goal is 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) per year. l The industry upper ten percentile value from 1/90 through 12/92 is approximately 50.12 cubic meters (1,769.2 cubic feet) per year. ;

l Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) ;

! Accountability: Chase /Lovett _

i Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 4 36 l l

i 5%-

E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit t l GOOD l

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal $ ,

3%-

^

2%- O O O O O O O O 1%-

0% I' Jut 92 i

Aug i

I Sep i -- i'i T-Oct Nov Dec

"-""T-Jan 1 ---'T ' -- 1 Feb Mar Apr 1 i May Jun93 i

1 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the pri-mary system chemistry performance by monitoring six key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-pended solids.100% equates to all six parameters being out of limit for the month.

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

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

Hours Out of Umit.

Data Source: Giantz (Source) )

Accountability: Chase / Smith Adverse Trend: None 37

i M secondary system cpi l 1

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l

-b- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.30) k l

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 r

10 ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ,

i i 4 90 St Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 2%-

E % of Hours Chemistry is Outside OG Guidelines l GOOD l 1%-

l i

0% . . .". , , , , . . , ,

Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 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 0.475 for the month of June 1993. The average monthly CPI for the last 12 months is 0.537. The percent of hours outside the OG guidelines was reported as 0% for the month.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 0.60. The INPO 1995 Industry goal is 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: Giantz (Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Adverse Trend: None 38

h l

E % of Hours Auxiliary System (CCW) Chemistry is Outside Station Umits ,

10%-

l GOOD l 8%- y ,

6%-

4%-

i 2%- 'l l

g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . .

Jul92 Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS :

t The Auxiliary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Outside Station Limits indicator tracks [

the monthly percent of hours that the Component Cooling Water (CCW) system is l outside the station chemistry limit. -

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

low nitrite levelin CCW coolant.

Data Source: Glantz (Source) l i

Accountability: Chase / Smith ,

Adverse Trend: None l l

-1 39 .

l

1 P

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

l' t

40

i J

4_ -R- Actuals -O- Budget a n-3.75-3.5 -

I I325-E 8

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: ScofieldNirgillito (Managar/ Source)

Accountability: Scofield Adverse Trend: None 41

O Actual Division Staffing E Authorized Division Staffirg 463 438- .)

400 - ,

I l

300 -

l 196 194 200 -

100 -

0- -

4 i ,

Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services STAFFING LEVEL The authorized and actual staffing levels at the end of June 1993 are shown for the ;

three Nuclear Divisions.

Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source) ,

Accountability: Ponec !

Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 ;

o I

f 42

- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) ~!

16 ,

15-l 14-13--

i 12- r 11-t 10 , , , , , , , , , , , , ;

Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jar Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE l l

The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of June 1993 i was reported as $14,468,586.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Willrett/McCormick >

Adverse Trend: None I

I 1

.I 43

l l l

DIVISION AND i DEPARTMENT !

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 4 These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con- ,

tacts the Manager- Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the original intent ,

and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this ;

report.

.)

i l

l 1

j 4

44

O Totaiuwos a uwos >3 uontns Oid l 6000 - 6000 -

5000 - 5000 -

$ 4000- 3022

~

2c 3000- 2 3000 - 2407 1938 1977 1826 1695 a 2000- @2000- Mv <$<- v.$w,$$p 1000 - M-0 , , , O i , , ,

April 93 May 93 June 93 April S3 May 93 June 93 e Safety MWOs @ Safety MWOs >3 Months Old 1000- 852 1000 -

850 600 -

~' -~

'y'/,,',;,', 800 - ~J

& ////// e 3 600 - ////// 3 600 - b 2 ////// Q ;

2 E 400- .,

360 318 pf[M g 400_ 342 318

////// ,////,' ////// 2 NN : -

h; 200 - ////// ////// ////// 200- g '

Sf' f/,{ fffff' 'C/$'C'C'I .

0

^'

0 s e i , ,- ,

April S3 May 33 June 93 April S3 May 33 June S3 High Priority MWOs 100 -

80- 76 E as -

E p 60- Q#a@n^ (*Jg42s

% 40- $$ kk 2 MS&*iff%it 0

8 b hk 0 i

, i i April 33 May 33 June 93 MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the estimated manhours for corrective non-outage MWOs remain-ing open at the end of the reporting month, along with a breakdown by several key categories.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 45

1 l Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance j 100% -

90%- -

7 Ly~gg 80% - :

7

70% - pf

60% - g ! l l 50%- 7 [$ [

40%- y [ jh h Aj;(

30% - g;l Isy

@N g* g w g*;

20%- ** 1 b?

g g Me h . ~

gn 'g pc 10% -

g

$g7l m

m Rgi g[it xm j=Y g a

. gi w

gp 2

gg Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 2% -

E Preventive Maintenance items Overdue l GOOD l

+ Fort Calhoun Goal i

1%- ;

0% i i i ! 6 1 4 i ! i i i Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 l RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE l

MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE

, The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance.

The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 91.6% in June 1993.

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

During June 1993,578 PM items were completed. 2 of these PM items (0.35% of the ,

total) were not completed within the allowable grace period.

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

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Data Source: C hase/Sch mitz/Brady(Manag e r/Sou rce s) j Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 46 1

l

O Maintenance Overtirne 80%-

l GOOD l-

--M- 12 Month Average Maintenance Overtirne t

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

50%-

40%-

30%-

20%- g x x x x y g -

a 10%- O-- O M a 0--O---d'i. 0 - O O :

et j4 .

m

"; : . b

,, p _

m Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The Maintenance Overtime indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources.

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 1.9% for the month of June 1993. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with -

respect to normal hours was reported as 9.8% at the end of the month.

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

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

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

Accountability: Chase / Bobba ;

I Adverse Trend: None l l

47 I

l r

8 Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Ma'aienance) l Q Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

O Procedural Noncernpliance irs (Maintenance) 4- ,

i 3-l 2-l 1-5 i

. = ,

0 0 0 0 0O OO OO '

O 000 000 000 000 00 000 '

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

Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Api May Jun93 -

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the number of open Maintenance incident Reports (irs) that are l 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- j pliance cause codes for each of the last twelve months. ;

There were no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the month of June 1993. -l l

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) j i

Accountability: Chase /Bobba j

-l SEP 15,41 & 44 Adverse Trend: None 6

48

.- . _ - .. - . . = __ . - . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _

Completed Scheduled Activities E (All Cra'ts)

D Numberof Emergent MWOs j

-f)- Fort Calhoun Goal (85%)

109 110

.'//

g10%- ,jI 100 2 '// i

? 90%- '//

Q c c c o 'S$

80%- 76.5 % 76.3 %

7L7% Ih')

g // - 80 $

C g 70%- $/,y 70 '

o '//

5 60% - - 60 E N 55 a)-

hh ;

2 SO%-

41.

')f N.

'/f /

50 w

< "; f,p 40 g

{ /0%-

30%- j[ '/

ff - 30 h o 20 o 20%- ,

y' . 77l /7, - 20

% !//, // "i //. ///

p 10%- '//; '[j /; '/j 10 i o '/ hf //'-

O 0%-l-0 ,

March S3 April May June 13 I

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS) i This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed maintenance activities as l compared to the number of scheduled mair.tenance activities concerning all Mainte-nance Crafts. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities. The number of emergent MWOs for the month is also shown.

The 1993 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for the percent of completed scheduled maintenance activities is a minimum of 85%

(

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Bobba Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 49 [

t n -, .- y .- -- w-

@ Number of Instruments Out-of-Service

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 24 - 23 U 18 D 18 20- 17 17 17 16 3

16- -

12- .

[ - -

0 Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 )

i IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE i

Thi- idicator shows the total number of in-line chemistry system instruments out-of-s' n . , t the end of the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indi- 4 w.~ ..ude the Secondary Systein and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of June 1993 there was a total of 17 in-line chemistry instruments out-of-service. Of these 17 instruments,15 were from the Secondary System and 2 were from PASS.

The trend for PASS instruments for this reporting period has increased by 1. In this reporting period the pH sequence has been retumed to service, however, both of the gamma spectroscopy detectors have been removed from service. The trend for Sec-ondary instruments this reporting period has increased by 2. The entire secondary panel remains out of service because of failure of the Al-125 data logger. 2 pH and a dissolved oxygen instrument 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 July 19,1993. 2 instruments are out of service on Al-107 be-cause of recorder failure.1 instrument is out of service on Al-105 because of malfunc-tion. 2 instruments are out of service on Al-104, awaiting completion of chemistry calibration.

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 .) 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-l;.1e 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 50

@ Monthly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

Yearly Waste Produced (Kilograms)

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

-O- Fort Calhoun FAanthly Average Goal

- - + - Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 Kg) 1000- ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 0 800 -

$ 600-G EP g 400-200 -

C C C C C % , ;'---C C O C Z G 4, ;, M , C Z n 0 i , , r,2 ,

n, ,. m . , , i Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by the Fort Calhoun Station each month, the monthly average goal and the year-to-date total for hazardous waste produced. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced.

During the month of June 1993, O kilograms of non-halogenatet hazardous waste was produced, O kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, an.d 0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The yearly total for hazardous waste pro-duced is 149.5 kilograms. The year-to-date monthly average for hazardous waste produced is 24.9 kilograms.

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

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

Date Source: Chase /Henning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Henning Adverse Trend: None 51

_ _ _ _ _ ____ __ _ _________ _____i

I 100 % - E Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area

+

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (noneutage months) lG00Dl 90%-

80% -

i 70% -

60%-

i I Sm'o Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is decontaminated (clean) based on the total square footage. The 1993 non-outage goalis a minimum of 88% decon-I taminated RCA and the outage goalis a minimum of 85% decontaminated RCA. The 1992 non-outage goal was a minimum of 88% decontaminated RCA. .

M

! At the end of the reporting month,89% of the total square footage of the RCA was not 4

contaminated.

l

Date Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett ;

Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 1

1 52

20-

@ Number of identified PRWPs

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal i

l 15-10- C O O O O O O O O O O O 5-3

/ 1 1 0

i i i i i i i 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, i During the month of June 1993,1 PRWP was identified. This event occurred when an individuallost his ALNOR before entering the RCA. He had his pencil dosimeter. He was in the RCA approximately 20 - 25 minutes and did not enter any HRAs.

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

Data Source: Chase / Williams (Managsr/ Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett ,

Adverse Trend: None SEP52 1 1

53 1

E TotalNumberof Hot Spots O _ Nurnber of Additional Hot Spots identified

@ Rernoval Planned

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

-O- Fort Calhoun Goalior Hot Spots Removed (1/ month) 80 40 20

-W 0 -, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan93 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec93 NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS l

This indicator shows the total number of hot spots which have been identified to exist in the Fort Calhoun Station and have been documented through the use of a hot spot .

identification sheet. A hot spot is defined as a small localized source of high radiation.

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

At the end of June 1993, there was a total of 62 hot spots identified. There were no '

new hot spots identified during the month and no hot spots were removed during the

, month.

\ -

Removalis planned for 12 hot spots. 1 There has been a total of 6 hot spots removed in 1993.

l The 1993 Fort Calhoun goalis to remove three hot spots per quarter and achieve a net ;

reduction of one hot spot per quarter. ,

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

! Accountability: Chase /Lovett ;

Adverse Trend: None M .

?

i..

O Documents scheduied for neview

@ Documents Reviewed 700- D Overdue Documents 600-500- :

400- _

300-200- n .

7 E -

100-r 9 -

, f _ _ ,

._ r ,r o rJ, ,J , , , , , m, .

L

, z, Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May . Jun93 DOCUMENT 11EVIEW 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 June 1993 there were 136 document reviews completed while 53 document reviews were scheduled. At the end of June, there were no document reviews more than 6 months overdue.

There were 76 new documents reviewed in June. l The 1993 monthly goal for this indicator is no (0) documents more than 6 months over-due.

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

Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 :

55 ,

I

E Non-System Failures lGOODI V

10-8- 6 6-0 ; i ; i ; i i i i i i i Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 l GOOD l

@ System Failures 4 _

70-60 -

Al 50 -

40- 34 30 31 M g

0 b$h,h,,,,h,h,h,h,h Ju!92 3

Aug i

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 i

LOGG ABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

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

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

During the month of June 1993, there were 40 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 33 (83%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents, and only 16 (48%) of these were environmental failures. Inclement weather during the reporting month was the major cause of the environmental failures. Security Force errors ac-counted for 50% of the nonsystem failures. Security management is currently address-ing these errors. The 1992/1993 system failure comparison showed an increase for the first time in 1993. This increase was due, as stated above, to severe weather condi-tions during June 1993.

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 56 i

.. . J

4 E Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO required for Removal) l O Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line) h

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

5- +

4-3

~ '

> > >f' > >

'//////

g g '////j; g '////// ;

0 0

v lillil i 0 ,

w tilli O'////'

i O

w Bli

,//////

i April '93 May '93 June'93 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater -

than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. 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 June 1993 there were 3 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 10/15/93 for ECN 93-113; 2) HE-2 circuit '

board, which is awaiting completion of MWO S23588, scheduled start date 7/22/93; and

3) Camera and mounting bracket removal, which is awaiting completion of MWO 924757, scheduled start date 8/12/93.

At the end of June 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 28 temporary modifications have been installed. ,

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

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

i E Total Modification Packages Open 337 350 - 0 1993 Fort Calhoun Monthly Goal (150) 300 - ,

264 i

250 -

200-173 J:listaaun

'90 '91 92 Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar - Apr - May Jun93 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS T

This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludino outstand-ina modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).

Cateoorv Reoortina Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 7 Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 52 Construction Backlog /In Progress 42 Desian Enor. Uodate Backloa/In Proaress 17 Total 119 At the end of June 1993,10 additional modification requests had been issued this year ;

and 48 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com- !

mittee (NPRC) had completed 130 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 37 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)

Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 58

l i

EARD Requiring Engineering Cicoecut - Nst in CI ceout O DEN 3 SE 1

50 - 50 - 50 - 50-40- -

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

0 , , ,0 R,R , 7 0 p h,h,o

, , , , i Mar Apr May Mar . Apr May Mar Apr May Mar Apr May 0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months May '93 Overdue EARS I O cioseout i O Engineering Responsa j

~

.l T ; ; -

Priority 1 Priority 2 Pnority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 O Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200 -

150- N # -

100- --

~ ~

50- c

- { T Z

o , , , , . . . . i , ,

Ju!92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 l C 32 Overdue Responses C 57 EARS Resolved and in Clomeout M 43 Overdue Closeouto O 96 EARS Requiring Response i

63.2 % i ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN j l

Data for this indicator for June 1993 was not available at the printing of this report.

This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer- )

ing and System Engineering. The 1993 goal for this indicator is a maximum of 150 )

outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

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

AccountWility: Jaworski/PPeips Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59 1

l

I l

E ECNs Backlogged in DEN f

3s0- O ECNs Received Durire the Month

@ ECNs Completed During the Month -l 300-2s0-i

~

200-Ju!92 Aug -Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data for this indicator for June 1993 was not available at the printing of this report. i This indicator shows the number of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) awaiting l completion by DEN, the number of ECNs opened during the reporting month, and the j 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. i i

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

the backlog of open ECNs. :

Data Source: Phelps/Pulverenti (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski l

Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 60 4

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

l l

1 1

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

@ Maintenanca/ Construction - MWO/CWO scheduled, but work not complete E Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO complete, awaiting closeout 113 120-58 g 4 1 1 l 1 0 , 3 l

0 , , ,

0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN FACILITY CHANGES OPEN O DEN - Engineering not complete

@ System Engineering - Engineering complete, response under review

@ Malntenance/ Construction - MWO/CWO scheduled, but work not complete H Maintenance / Construction - MWO/CWO complete, awaiting closeout 69 75 80-8 3 1 10 6 4 ,

i i 1 0 - 3 months 3 - 6 months > 6 months ECN SUBSTITUTE REPLACEMENT ITEMS OPEN O DEN - Engineering not complete S System Engineering - Walkdown or confirmation not comp!ste 60 -

44 40 - 33 20 - ,

I ' -- - I 0, , , ,

0 - 3 rnonths 3 - 6 rnonths > 6 rnonths ECN DOCUMENT CHANGES OPEN ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN The graphs above are for May 1993. Data for this indicator for June 1993 was not available at the printing of this report.

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 61

i D Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error i

@ Other Personnel Error f

@ Maintenance Problem !

Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem 5-B Equipment Failures 4-L s

3-2- , - ,

f 1- '-

q g

, E E -

3

~

0 i i e i i i i i i i i i Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 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 July 1,1992 through June 30,1993.

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

There were 3 LERs submitted in June 1993. >

Data Source: Short/ Lippy (Manager / Source) ,

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None !

t i

N I i

60- O Total Requalification Training Hours Simulator Training Hours i

Q Non-Requalifcation Training Hours E Numberof Exam Failures i

40- l 6

33 33 30 30 30- - -

27 25 20-14 14 14 g

~11 '

3 Z 10- 8 $

.4 ,,,,,,, '/

7 7 /,,

6 /, /,

3 3- $

r /, n '/ '/. 2 '/ //

0 i i i i i i ,

Cycle 92-4 Cycle 92-5 Cycle 92-6 Cycle 92-7,, Cycle 93-1 Cycle 93 2 Cycle 93-3

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

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

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

There were no written exam failures during Cycle 93-3. One individual failed the simu-lator exam. That individual was remediated without impacting shift operations.

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

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 63 .

D SRO Exams Administered O SRO exams eassed E RO Exams Administered 30-O RO Exams Passed 20-7 I

/

10- -

/

l NRC l Exams I r - -

r :

I I

$ I 5" $ :5

< j -

p / ; e i i i i i i i i i i i i Jut 92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 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 ?xams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

l There were no OPPD Reactor Operator or Senior Reactor Operator exams adminis-tered during June 1993.

There were 5 Reactor Operator, and 5 Senior Reactor Operator candidate NRC exams administered in June. All 5 Reactor Operators, and all 5 Senior Reactor Operator candidates passed those exams.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source) l Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64

.. _= .

@ Total Open irs . !

O TotalOpen CARS

@ Open CARS > Six Months Old @ Open irs > Six Months Old i 150- - - 150 120- : : 120 90- -

- 90 T -

60-

; - 60 O -

9 gi y

30- 3

- . ;, ; 7 _ ,

4

- 30 ,

, , , , ; v , ,- ,

)

f

/

i ',

/_

3

( ,

/

(

a < / , , i ,

i i i i i i e i i i i i ,

Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 !

50- ,

40- E Open Significant CARS O Open Significant irs 30- 25 21 l 20- ,

r 10- 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 i ime um 0 i , , , , , i i i , , i Jul92 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun93 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS

>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of open -

significant CARS and the number of open significant irs. !

At the end of June 1993 there were 68 open CARS. 26 of these CARS were greater ,

than 6 months old. Also, at the end of June there were 149 open irs. 46 of these irs ;

were greater than 6 months old.- :

The 1993 monthly goal for the number of CARS greater than 6 months old is a maxi- ,

mum of 30. ;

i Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source) & CHAMPS Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: None ,

65

Total Outage MWOs -+- Parts Hold ,

-O- MWOs Ready to Work --M- Engineering Hold

--V- Outage MWR Backlog 4 Planning Hold r

1000-900 -

800 -

700 - ;

600 -

500 -

400-300 -

200 -

100 - m 0 ,~. ,

Jun92 Jul Aug- Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep93 -

MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) and Main-tenance Work Requests (MWRs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. Included are the number of activities that are ready to work (parts -

staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use), the number of l' activities that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures and other miscellaneous i

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)

I Accountability: Chase /Johansen Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 - ;

se

A A D a1 T A RT g8@y d

v c

c a t

g e ,6 eh d d

eh uf si s 1

e o a o 1

9g i

t ei 1

0 0 2 3 0

4 0 o 6

0 7

0 8

0 9

0 0

0 r

s u S f oi n e n o t 9o n il nd t

a u h3al al g ci T e.

bi Ota r

r e c p Tr f

o d O A [88 , ' , : ,,'

_~ n y li t e

r ht o a t

u or t

V E

i

/ , :- ,,: l - -:,

d J

jeh e i a as g h R g J a p mEsOolbjy8 N a c %" n t

si o eo A , -:- , ',: ,,: -

o n w o w

r t

hSd i

n .Tsw L L

i e o s acci t s ht E r

s k t

ha eh P m%!= hN w3 k

i

/ set w r e R , : , ,: , : : , : : , ,

i S hdo r i

l e s O i

/

B w ou l o

u e ul l

ddt e si b e

at r

et u a J E djNoj8 g a r o a C

, : , -,: ,,: : , : ,: 1 9

n bC cs T e

9 h

t gi e oa h d d u r o DE 3

e r

(

n cmv o p e e

d r

et nh e f

S T *2h 45E , :, - : ,,: : , :

O U

M mlea t o t A i

%%% T A

a p ti l

l l

y p T S A cA c G n

l eop t h 1 r U 89 E E* c E 3j o

'- I', - :,

S t t e nr o h

a t , : , -,: ,,: : $

e u u g

e a c"ej si i

n ac e (

C i

d u

a l

C C al P R

sac pt p s EaB el o o O r/

S oes t t di Y , :, ',:. , - :, , ' d J c ow C r m m E o fg 1 a L i

C pl pl C u t o t vh o e e r

c h

ey r

0 0 o ei c E *cSE 2be *$

m t ti i

s e

r d h 1 . ' ,, ",: ,. - ' , : ' :, # , pl oi o S ei% a o n n ura 5 e n n

)

s i t

i T L T dthoc i t e R o h a A n n i s t T oem f o f

ga ni E F

x$E$ H]F ,. , . '.':'. , -

s MM U

S gp r e t o U o i

Mr a ae l

m p h r e E n n R E

y ph e t a ti o L i

>i 8 t

h t

h P js .' ' ,':- , . [ ,, . '

1 r r

( o ec I N e O

9ee n co R 9p a b t

p G T 3r d e s. e @a. h$88

. ey c o O ' ',; :, - ': , :

s et o f U i n o T t

m h A sEahgg's$ 3$7 swo t

e s e G , ' , ', ', ', : ' '

t hr a C E i

l e )k v y c

)

S p b a i

el NmaEa$OR{ : ',., :. ,,:.: , : ' '

E ey l a i r 1 P cJ b l

5 6 3 e ny u

l

e. mog.a$h~j 1 : ' :,.,; , : , : - ,,,',

7 t

- i ll llll l,!j i ] :i '. ; l , r: '; ', *; l , ! .; , ! : i . ,

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

- Final Design Package issued l Total Modification Packages (22) (2 under review to cancel or move) 25-R k llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll;llllli j')"

~

} 20-

[ 8

>- /

$3 15 -

2is @e -

Ee o n.1o_

A

_ 5- ^

0

,, m _m___e_ ... ..___ _

iiiiiiiiiiieiiiiieiieiiiiiiiieiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

$ $ $ E O E e e N E Em - - - - - N n < m b s n

3 "

ii5 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 24 MODIFICATIONS)

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

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

All BASELINED modification packages were PRC approved by June 23,1993.

The indicator goal was met.

All BASELINED and NEW modification packages were PRC approved by July 8,1993.

Data Source: Phelps/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gambhir/Phelps Positive Trend SEP 31 68

1 u . . _

i I

1 i

i ACTION PLANS FOR ;

ADVERSE TRENDS J

2 l

i6 69

F ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS ~

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

Enaineerina 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 comple:ed 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)

Percent of Comcleted Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts)

Problems: 1) Increasing Emergent Work A) Amount of Pre-Outage work B) Weather Related Activities C) Activities related to Shutdowns or created as a result of Shutdowns

2) Resource Constraints A) Amount of Overtime Allowed B) Not at current or approved Staff Level C) Amount of Staff available to support emergent work / pre-outage work and scheduled work is not sufficient Goal: The 1993 OPPD monthly goalis to complete a minimum of 85% of the monthly scheduled maintenance activitys.

Action: To be determined.

70

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILLARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM procedures properly). Also included in this category aro PERFORMANCE failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavaC- 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 critical hours for the reporting period multi- The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi-plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater caloperation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per system. kilowatt hour indcator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for AUXILIARY SYSTEMS CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is i The cumulative hot,rs that the Cornponent 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 DPMh00 CM2 until additional sampling shows the parameter to be back Reportable skin and clothing contaminaticns above within limits. background levels greater than 5000 dpm/100 cm'. This indicator trends personnel periormance for SEP #15 &

CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 54.

Compares the Fort Calhoun ched valve failute rate to the industry chect' valve f ailure rate (f ailures per 1 milion DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT component hours). The data for the industry f ailure rate This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as is three months behind the PI Report reporting month. measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43. watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet

, fon of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE month are also shown.

L ollective radiaton exposure is the total external whole-body dose received by all on-site personnel (including DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) contractors as f visitors) during a time period, as mea- This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for i sured by the tr,ermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col- each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person- demands and the last 25 load-run demands. I rem. This indicator tracks radological work performance l for SEP #54. DECONTAMINATED RADIATION CCNTROLLED ;

AREA !

C MPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which i SUBA LARY includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and i The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station areas of the C/RP building, that is demntaminated based l with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) f ali- on the total square footage. This indicator tracks perfor- )

ure rates than the rest Se industry for an eighteen mance for SEP # 54.

month time period. F. m nre reperted as mmponent (i.e. pumps, motors, t s ' and application (i.e. DISABUNG INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE i charging pumps, main ...> . 4 p valves, control eie- (LOST Tild ACCIDENT RATE) ment drive motors, etc.) categories. This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for !

Failure Cause Categories are: 'all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, Wear OuvAging - a failure thought to be the conse- involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours j quence of expected wear or aging. worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-Manuf acturing Defect - a failure attributable to inad- tor personnel. This indicator trads personnel perfor- i equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com- mance for SEP #25 & 26. I ponent or system.

Engineering' Design - a failure a tritutable to the inad- DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) equate design of the responsible component or system. The Document Review Indicator shows the number of Other Devices - a f ailure attributable to a failure or documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-misoperation of another component or system, including uled for review, and the number of document reviews associated devices, that are overdue for the reporting month. A document Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure that is a result of im- review is considered overdue if tM review is not com- i p;oper maintoaance or testing, lack of maintenance, or plate within 6 months of the astigned due date. This personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.

ing activities performed on the ww ible component or system, including failure to fa s y ; :!ures.

Errors - failures attributable e . rM proceoures that were followed as written,im; . . 4 sa llation of equip-ment, and personnel errors (in, , ' @ilure to follow 71 l

l l

l

i i

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd)

EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM 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 hs 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 f ailure. Exploratory tests during corrective maintenance and the successfultest that fol-EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- lows repair to verify operabilny should not be counted as ITY demands or f ailures when the EDG has not been de-This indicator shows the number of failures that were clared operable again. j reported dunng the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die-sel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Alse EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY shown are trigger values which correlate to a higi) level This indicator measures the total unreliabiltty of emer-of confidence 15at a unit's diesel generators have ob- gency diesel generators. In general, unreliability is 1%

tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) a the deraand 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 &lI unreliability.

start demands that ere 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 no attempt is made to load the generator. This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of

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

a valid start failure. This includes any condition identified in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emer- ENGINEERING CHANGE NO11CE (ECN) BPEAK- l gency generator in st e ,dby mode) that definitely would DOWN have resulted in a st rt f ailure if a demand had occurred. This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering

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

as stated in each test's specifications.

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

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

gency generator does not pick up load and run es pre-dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-demands. CAL HOURS

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run Equipment forced outages per 1C30 critical hours is the should not be counted as valid demands or failures when inverse of the mean time between forced outages they can be attributed to any of the following: caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal A) Spunous trips that would be bypassed in the event of tu the number of hours the reactor is critical in a period an emergency. (1000 hours0.0116 days 0.278 hours 0.00165 weeks 3.805e-4 months ) divided by the number of forced outages B) Malf uncton of equipment that is not required dunng caused by equipment failures in that period.

an emergency C) Intentional termination of a test because of abnonnal condions that wuuid not have resulted in major diesel generator damage or repair. i D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not pret ented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes.

72

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (C@nt'd)

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

ously at maximum capacity.

IN-UNE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER-FORCED OUTAGE RATE VICE This indsator is defined as the percentage of time that Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Post to the tima planned for electrical generation. Forced Accident Sampling System (PASS).

events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service before the end of UCENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail- This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz- ,

ures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut- zes and exams that are administered and passed each down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service). mcnth. This indcator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool- LICENSED OPERATOR REOUAUFICATION TRAIN-ant 1-131 activity, conected for the tramp uranium contri- ING bution and normalized to a common purifcation rate. The total number of hours of training given to each crew Tramp uranium is f uel which has been deposited on re- during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-actor core internals from previous defective fuel or is ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),

present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu- the number of non-requalification training houts and the facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous number of exam failures. This indcator tracks training operation for at least three days at a power level that performance for SEP #68.

does not vary more than + or - 5%. Plants should collect data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE oossible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state BREAKDOWN power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at This indcator shows the number and root cause code for the highest steady-s' ate power level attained dunng the Licensee Event Report 2. The root cause codes are as month. follows:

The density conedion factor is the ratio of the specific 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature supervisory defciencies that affect plant programs or (540 degrees F., VI - 0.02146) divided by the specific activities (i.e., poor planning, bredown or lack of ad-volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 equate management or suoervisoN Ontrol, incorrect degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- procedures, etc.)

changer, Vi = 0.016204), which results in a density cor- 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32. errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-tors during plant activities.

GASEOUS RADIOACTIVE WASTE BEING DIS- 3) Other Personriel Error - Errors of omission /commis-CHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT sion committed by non-licensed personnelinvolved in This indcator displays the total number of Curies of all plant activities.

gaseous radioactive nuclides released from FCS. This 4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause indicator is included in the report when new data is avail- code is to esp!ure the full range of problems which can able, i.e., every 6 months. be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the maintenance functionalorganization. Activities in-GROSS HEAT RATE cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio c8 total thermat lance, calibratior, and radiation protodion. l energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the 5) Design /Consiruction/tastallation/ Fabrication Problem reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by - This cause code covers a full range of programmatic ,

the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH) defciencies in the areas of design, construction, installa- )

tion, and fabrication (i.e., loss of control power ciue to l HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ- 1 The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated haz- ment, etc.). l ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and otbor 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. ronmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for spuri-ous failures of electronic piece-parts and f ailures due to meteoroogical conditions such as lightning, ice, high 73 l

l l

l

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cent'd) winds, etc. Generally, it incluoes spurious or one-time A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is I failures. Electric mmponents included in this category considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) Item

if are circuit cards, t t tifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, some other action is required by an operator to compen-diodes, resistors,i t , sate for the mndition of the component. Some examples of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-TO THE ENVIRONMENT tot out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannut be re-This indicator displays the total number of curies from all paired because replacement parts require a long lead liquid relea es from FCS to the Missouri River. This time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant ir dicator is included in the report when new data is avail- pump to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions able, i.e., every 6 months. are required by an Operator because of equipment de-sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-LOGGi.BLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require The total number of security incidents for the reporting changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant month depicted in two graphs. This indcator tracks se- equipment that is required to be used during Emergency cunty performance for SEP #58. Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proce-dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-MAINTENANCE OVERTIME mation during normal or abnormal operations. ,

The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for maintenance. This includes OPPD pc aranel as well as NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS contract personnel. The number of radiological hot spots which have been ;

ider tified and documented to exist at FCS at the end of MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN the reporting month. A hot spot is a small localized This indicator is a breakdown of the manhours associ- sou ce of radiation. A hot spot occurs when the contact ated corrective noneutage maintenance work orders by dose rate of an item is at least 5 times the General Area ,

several categories. This indicator tracks maintenance dose rate and the item's dose rate is equal to or greater performance for SEP #36. than 100 niRem/ hour.

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED IN The total maximum amount of radiation received by an LERS individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, The nurr.ber of Licensee Event Reports (LERs) attributed and annual basis, to personnel error on the original LER submittal. A Per-sonnel Error is an event for which the root cause is inap-1 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING propriate action on the part of one or more specified indi-OUTAGE) viduals (as opposed to being attributed to a department The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have or a general group). Also, the inappropriate action must been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling have ocx:urred within approximately two years of the v Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts " Event Date* specified in the LER. This indicator trends staged, planning mmplete, and all other paperwork personnel performance for SEP #15.

ready for field use). Also included is the number of MWOs that have ergineering holds (ECNs, procedures NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, SULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in '

and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Main- Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & .

have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 61.

and have not yet been mnverted to MWOs.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET NUMB 2R OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFI- The year- to- date budget compared to the actual expen-CIENCIES ditures for Operations and Maintenance departments.

A control room equipment defciency (CRD) is defined as any component wh'ch is operated or controlled from the OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS & INCIDENT Control Room, provides indicatbn or alarm to the Control REPORTS 1 Room, provides testing capabikties from the Control This indicator displays the total number of open Correc-Room, provides automate actions from or to the Control tive Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are Room, or provides a passive function for the Control older than six months and the number of open significant ,

Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not CARS. Also displayed are the number of open incident ,

perform under a!! conditions as designed. This definition Reports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six l I

i also applies to the Afternate Shutdown Fanels Al-179, months old and the number of open significant irs.

l Al-185, and Al-212. !

l 74 ;

i

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (Cont'd)

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT The number of Modifcation Requests (MRs)in any state OF LIMIT between the issuance of a Modification Number and the The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry completion of the drawing update. parameters divided by the total number of hours possible

1) Form FC-f133 BacAlogiln Progress. This number rap- for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, resents modification requests that have not been plant Chloride. Hyd.vgen. Dissolved Oxygen Fluoride, end approved during the reporting month. Suspended Solids. EPRI limits are used.

2) Moddication Requests Being Reviewed. This category includes: PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS A.) Mod feation Ruquests that are not yet reviewed. (MAINTENANCE)

B.) Mod fcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear The number of identified incidents concerning mainte-Projects Review Committee (NPRC). nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs C.) Modifcaton Requasts being reviewed by the Nuclear related to the use of procedures (includes the number of Projects Committee (NPC) closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and These Moddcation Roquests may be reviewed several the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

times before they are approved for accomplishment or This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP cancelled. Some c, these Moddication Requests are #15,41 & 44.

retumed to Engineering for more information, some ap-proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and PROGRESS OF CYCLE 15 OUTAGE MODIFICATION some approved for planning. Once planning is com- PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 24 MODIFICA-pleted and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these TIONS)

Moddcation Requests may ba approved for accomplish- This indicator shows the status of modificatons ap-ment with a year assigned for construction or they may proved for completion during the Cycle 15 Refueling Out-be cancelled. All of these different phases require re- age.

view.

3) Design Engineering Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM Planning has assigned a year in which construction will The number of identified poor radiological work practices be completed and design work may be in progress. (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction radiological work performance for SEP #52.

Fackage has been issued or construction has begun but the modification has not been accepted by the System RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

Acceptance Committee (SAC). PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog'In Progress. PED The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-has received the Moddcaton Completion Report but the lance testing and calibration p:ocedures) to the sum of drawings have not been updated. non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-The above mentioned outstanding moddcations do not tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, include moddcations which are proposed for cancella- expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-tion. hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-nance items in the month that wera not mmpleted by the '

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUEL- scheduled date plus a grace period equal to 25 % of the ING OUTAGE) scheduled interval. This indcator tracks preventive This indicator shows the status of the projects whch are maintenance activities for SEP #41.

in the scope of the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage.

RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE-PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED ' AAINTE- QUENCY RATE NANCE ACTIVITIES The number of injuries requiring more than normal first The % of the number of completed maintenance activi- aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte- trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26.

nance activities each month. This % is shown for all maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of REPEAT FAILURES emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs, The number of Nuclear Plant Reliateility Data System '

MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella- (NPRDS) mmponents with more than 1 failure and the neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per- number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures formance for SEP #33. for the last eighteen monthe.

75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (cont'd)

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES Safety system failures are any events or mnditim that ant pressure boundary, important associated features; could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of 4) Scram with mmplication; 5) Unplanned release of structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple radcactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-redundant subsystems or trains, failure of all trains con- nicalSpecifications; 7) Other.

stitutes a safety system f ailure. Failure of one of two or INPO significant events reported in this indicator are more trains is not munted as a safety system failure. SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of The definrton for the inoicator parallels NRC reporting significant events and lessons learned identified through requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The the SEE-IN screening process.

following is a list of the major safety systems, sub-systems, and components monitored for this indicator: SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE Accident Menrtoring Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- FCS during the reporting period, trol, Component Cooling Water System Containment and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys- STAFFING LEVEL tems, Control Rnom Emergency Ventilaton System. The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Producton Engi- >

Features instrumentation, Esssntial Compressed Air neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam STATION NET GENERATION Line isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during Power w! Distribution, Radiation Monitoring Instrumenta- the reporting month.

tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core isolation Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta- TEMPORARY MODIFICA110NS tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation instrumentation. The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent figurations to the plant's systems. .

Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrk.al mate Heat Sink. jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the INDEX P&lD, schematic, cannection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation 2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil- ,

based on the ccncentration of key impurities in the sec- lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro- !

ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Pmcedures most likely cause of deterioration of the steam genera- are not considered as temporary modificatons unless the tors. The chemistry parameters are reported only fc,r the jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-period of time when the plant is operated at greater than dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or 30 percent power. lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-The CPI is calculated using the following equation: CPI - cations.

(Ka/0.8) + (Na/20) + (O/10) / 3 where the following are 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica- 3 monthly averages of: Ka - average blowdown cation tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for !

conductivrty, Na - average blowdown sodium concen- whch MRs have been submitted will be considered as {

tration O, - average condensate pump discharge dis- temporary modifications untilfinal resolution of the MR solved oxygen concentraton. and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-SIGNIFICANT EVENTS rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71.

Signifcant events are those events identified by NRCstaff through detailed screening and evaluation of THERMAL PERFORMANCE operating experience. The screening process inck des The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the the daily review and discussion of all reported operating adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent-reactor events, as well as other operational data such as age.

special tests or construction activities. An event identi-fied from the screening process as a signifcant event UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual The rato of the available energy generation over a given or potential threat to the health and safety of the public time period to the reference energy generation (the en-was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated are summanzod as follows: 1) Degradation of important continuously at full power under reference amb;ent con- )

safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-transient; 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, primary cool- csntage.

76 1

l

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS (C@nt d) i UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS (NRC 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS DEFINITION)

This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- The number of safety system actuations which include tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- (2nk) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the tions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of critcal operation. Low Pressure Safety injection System, the Saf nty injec.

The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying tion Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams NRC classification of safsty system actuations includes >

in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , then dividing actuations when major equipment is ope:sted add when that number by the total number of hours cntcal in the the logic systems for the above safety systems are chal- .

same time period. The indicator is further defined as lenged.

follows:

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici- VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS pated part of a planned test. This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC in-by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e g,, by control spection hours. The violations are reported in the year rods, Iquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac- that the inspection was actually performed and not based tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- on when the inspection report is received. The hours t nat may have resutted from exceeding a setpoint or may reported for each inspection report are used as the in- :

have been spurious. spection hours.

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro- VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param- WASTE eters and conditions, rather than the manual scram This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica- ,

tons) provided in the main control room. tor also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste

4) Critical means that during the steady state condition of which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the f actor (k,) was essentially equal to one. volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been shipped off-site for processing. Low-level solid radioac- ;

UNPLANNED CAPABluTY LOSS FACTOR tive waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, The fa!b of the unplanned energy losses during a given and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear period of time, to the reference energy generation (the power plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive energy that could be produced if the unit were operated waste includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, continuously at full power under reference ambient con- disposable protective clothing, plastic containers, and ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-centage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION) l This indicator is defined as the sum of the following safety system actuations:

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ,

ECCS actuation setpoint or from a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal. l

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-tem actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is j reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is gen-erated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pres-sure it jection system, the low pressure injection system, or the safety injection tanks.

I 77 l

l

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX

- The purpose of the Safety Enhancenent Program (SEP) Performance Indicators index is to list perfor-mance indicators related to SEP ltems with parameters that can be trended.

SEP Reference Number 15 Eaga increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indcators Procedural Nonoompliance incidents (Maintenance) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 48 Contaminations >S,000 DPM/100 CM' 4 Recordable injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate .. .. .. . . . . .. . ...3-Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LERs . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .5 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 42 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented -

Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate. . . . ... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .2 Recordable injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate . .. . . . .. . . .3.

SEP Reference Number 26 Evaluate and 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 Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66 Overall Project Status... .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . 67 Progress of Cycle 15 Outage Modification Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... . 68 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts)... . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. .. 49 SEP Reference Number 38 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Work Order (MWO) Breakdown (Corrective Non-Outage Maintenance). . 45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue . . . 46 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. ... . . .. 35 78

l SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued)

SEP Reference Number 44 Page Compliance With and Use of Procedures !

Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance). . . . . . . . .. . . 48 l SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review .. .. . . . .. . . . .. . .. 55 SEP Reference Number 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program . . . . 53 SEP Reiarence Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . . .15 !

Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. .. . . .. .36 Contaminations >5,000 DPM/100 CM2 4 Decontaminated Radiation Controlled Area . . .52 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . . . . .. . .56 SEP Reference Number 60 improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . .19 SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . . .19 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications. .. . .. . . . . .. .57 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . . . . . . . . 59 Engineering Change Notice Status . . . - . . . . . . 60 Engineering Change Notice Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training . ._ .. . . 63 License Candidate Exams... .. . . . 64 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications .. ... . . .. .. .. . . . . . 57 79

)

i REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST 1 J

R. L. Andrews G. E. Guliani Nuclear Licensing G. L. Anglehart K. B. Guliani & Industry Affairs W. R. Bateman E. R. Gundal J. T. O'Connor ,

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 C. N. Bloyd R. R. Henning R. T. Pearce J.P.Bobba K. R. Henry R. L. Phelps C. E. Boughter 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 ,

G. R. Chatfield R. L. Jaworski G. K. Samide A. G. Christensen R. A.Johansen T.J.Sandene A. J. Clark W. C. Jones M. J. Sandhoefner 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. C. 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 R. C. DeMeulmeester M. P. Lazar J. L. Skiles 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 M. T. Frans J. H. MacKinr-n G. A. Teeple H. K. Fraser G. D. Mamoran M. A. Tesar J. F. W. Friedrichsen J. W. Marcil J. W. Tills S. K. Gambhir N. L. Marfice D. R. Trausch J. K. Gasper R. D. Martin P. R. Tumer 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. Wi!!iams J. T. Gleason R. F. Mehaffey S. J. Willrett L. V. Goldberg K. G. Melstad W. C. Woerner D. J. Golden D. C. Mueller D; C. Gorence R. J. Mueller R. E. Gray M. W. Nichols M. J. Guinn C. W. Norris t

80 A

FORT CALHOUN STATION l

~'

OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES l

Event Date Range Production (MWH) Cumulative (MWH) l Cycle 1 09/26 4 3-02/01/75 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 10/0136-12/73/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76- 9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/T7 -12/09/?7 ,

Cycle 4 12/09/77-10/14/78 3,026,832. 12,985,720- !

4th Refueling 10/14/78-12/24/78 Cycle 5 12/24/78-01/18!80 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 !

Cycle 6 06/11/80- 09/18!81 3,899,714 20,768,168 - !

6th Refueling 09/18/81 -12/21/81 *

Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 ',

7th Refueling 12/06/82 04/07/83 *

Cycle 8 04/07/83- 03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 ,

8th Refueling 03/03/84 - 07/12/84 ]

Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 ,

9th Refueling 09/28/85- 01/16/86

Cycle 10 01/16/86- 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,E46 10th Refueling 03/07/87 - 06/08/87

Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89

Cycle 12 01/31/89 -02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90-05/29/90

Cycle 13 05/29/90 02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 - 05/03/92

1 Cycle 14# 05/03/92 09/18/93 (Planned Dates) ,

14th Refueling 09/18/93-11/13/93

1 i

Cycle 15 11/13/93- 03/10/95 ;

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.). t First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commerclat Operation (180,000 KWH) September 26,1973 i Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 days) June 8,1987 Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Not Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Mogt Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992 Y

y y e , , . _ . ,

ML20046B081

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

= i;;

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search