ML20059M490
| ML20059M490 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1990 |
| From: | OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059M489 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9010040273 | |
| Download: ML20059M490 (120) | |
Text
, , - . , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , - - - - - - ~ - . - -
FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AUGUST, 1990 Prepared by:
Production Engineering Division System Engineering fOdlhh>$$l,.- ,
OMA ' PUBLIC POWER-DISTRICT !
FORT CALH0'IN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l
.i
.i i
i I
PREPARED BY:
]
PRODUCTION ENGINEERING DIVISION.
SYSTEM ENGINEERING AUGUST, 1990
l .
J Pwwal of sudtwrun w m ab6ds...
1 Y$ W$/Y Y Y ...
a w w ep>,,z , -en, _a,,rw,a. . .
d w w u>ay of ep...d w dotirzg % pS to , . b
- w.aw as4 m m, a w - -4 a-a q
u>s etns curud h & curtd EaN^{nrhwrz,'
m , & a d~rs % 9^tt!+ur.
9 - 9. o c _
w . . . . . . .
l l
TABLE Of CONTENTS en Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
. Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . . . 1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4 Adverse Trend Report. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 5 1
Indicators Needing Increased Management . . . . . . 6 Attention ,
{
IndextoSafetyEnhancementProgram(SEP)
- Indicators . . ...,.............
_ 8 .!
]
'I Index-to Performance Indicator Graphs . . . . . . . 10 '
i Performance Indicator Graphs. . . . . .
. .. . . . . . - 15 !
Significant Items of Interest . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 93 .
Basis for Establishing 1989 Performance Indicator Goals . . . . . . . ... . ... ...:. . . 107-Operating Cycles and Refueling Outage Datest. . . .
109 :
Production and Operation Records. . . . . . . . . 110 Data Source . . . . . . . . -, . . . . . ... . . . . 111 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .'115 '
.i
.- i I
i DIST,RI,BUTION i ..
V. W. Anderson D. C. Gorence- R. J. Mueller R. L. Andrews R. E. Gray. W.-L. Neal W. R. Bateman M. J. Guinn J. B. Newhouse K. L. Belek E. R. Gundal -M. W. Nichols S. M. Bera A. L. Gurtis C. W. Norris A. D. Bilau R. H. Guy J. T. O'Connor l B. H. Blome R. M. Hawkins W. W. Orr C. N. Bloyd M. C. Hendrickson L. L.-Parent i J. P. Bobba .R. R. Henning- T. L..Patterson ;
C. E. Boughter K. R. Henry R. L. Phelps ;
M. A. Breuer J. B. Herman. T. M. Reisdorff.
C. J. Brunnert G. J. Hill B. A. Reneaud. ;
M. W. Butt K. C. Holthaus A. W. Richard. !
C.-A. Carlson L. G. Huliska -T. J. Sandene l J. W. Chase R. L. Jaworski C. A. Sayre G. R. Chatfield R. A. Johansen B. A. Schmidt A. G. Christensen J. W. Johnson S. T.tSchmitz
- 0. J. Clayton W. C. Jones F. C. Scofield R. P. Clemens J. D. Kecy L. G. Sealock- 3 R. G. Conner J. D. Keppler H.,J. Sefick
)
J. L. Connolley D. D. Kloock P. Sepcenko !
G. M. Cook J. C. Knight J. W. Shannon ;
M. R. Core D. M.'Kobunski R; W. Short o S. R. Crites G. J. Krause C. F. Simmons .
D. W. Dale L. J. Kripal E. L.-:Skaggs R. C. DeMeulmeester J. B. Kuhr F K. Smith R.- D. DeYoung L. T. Kusek- 'R. L.:Sorenson D. C.'Dietz L. E. Labs. D. E. Spires q D. E. Dirrim M. P. Lazar- K. E. Steele K. S. Dowdy R. C. Learch W. . Steele-J. A. Drahota S. E. Lee H. F. Sterba T. R. Dukarski R. E. Lewis R. K. Stultz R.-G. Ellis R. C. Liebentritt G. A.tTeeple R. G. Eurich C.'J. Linden M. A. Tesar H. J. Faulhaber B. R. Livingston P. L. Thompson M. A.'Ferdig J. M. Lofshult J. W. Tills V. H. Frahm J. H. MacKinnon D. R. Trausch F. F. Franco G. D. Mamoran -P. R. Turner H. K. Fraser J. W. Marcil J. M.'Uhland !
J. F. W. Friedrichsen N. L.'Marfice C. F. Vanecek R. M. Fussell D. J. Matthews G. L.-Van ~0sdel S. K. Gambhir J. M. Mattice L. P. Walling !
J. K. Gasper T. J. Mcivor J. M. Waszak j W. G. Gates R. F. Mehaffey W. O. Weber-M. O. Gautier R. A. Miser G. R. Williams J. M. Glantz K. J. Morris S. J. Willrett
'J. T. Gleason D. C. Mueller W. C. Woerner L. V. Goldberg i iv
L PREFACE i
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT IMPROVEMENTS Three indicators have been changed. The Gross Heat Rate Indicator in the Operations Section, the - Eauivalent Availability Factor Indicator in the Operations Section, and' the Decontaminated Auxiliary Buildina Indicator in the Chemistry and Radiological Protection Section have been changed.
The Gross Heat Rate Indicator found on page 19 has been changed._ A monthly gross heat rate goal and a year to date gross heat rate goal have been added. The Fort Calhoun goal that used to be represented in this indicator has been deleted. These new goals should show how the Fort Calhoun Station is performing on a monthly basis instead of showing-end of the year results only.
The Eauivalent Availability Factor (EAF) Indicator found on page 20 has been caanged.-This indicator now shows the plant's EAF in a year to date form. A monthly EAF goal and a year to date EAF goal -have been added.
_The 12 month average EAF_-data has been deleted from tnis indicator. The new method of data presentation and the new goals should show the Fort Calhoun Station's performance on a monthly basis instead of showing end -!
of.the year results only, t
The Decontaminated Auxiliary Buildina indicator found on page 51 -has been changed. This indicator now shows a Fort _ Calhoun goal of 85% ] 4 decontaminated auxiliary building (non-outa months) and 75% ;
decontaminated auxiliary building (outage months). ge !
i
)
i i
i i
l h
L
_ -))
ORPOSE-P This program titled " Performance Indicators" is -intended to provide. l 1
selected Fort - Calhoun plant performance information' to' OPPD's personnel responsible for ' optimizing unit performance. The'-
information is_ presented in; .a way that provide's ready identification of trends- and a .means tc track progress toward reaching corporate goals. The information can be used for~ assessing and monitoring Fort Calhoun's plant-- performance, with emphasis' on -
safety and reliability. Some performance indicators show company goals or industry information. This information ~ can ' be used for i comporison or.as a means-of promoting pride'and motivation.-
'l
.j 2-l
SCOPE
'In order for the Performance Indicator-Program to be effective,._ '
the following_ guidelines were followed while implementing this program:
{
i
\
l Select the ' data which most effectively monitors Fort Calhoun's performance in key areas.
Present the data in a straight forward graphical- format using averaging and smoothing techniques.
Include established corporate _ goals and industry 1 information for comparison.
Develop formal definitions for each performance parameter.
This will ensure consistency -in future- reports and allow comparison with industry averages where appropriate. ~i Comments and input are encouraged to ensure that this program is tailored to address the areas- which are most meaningful to _
the people using the report.
i i
3 l
ADVERSE TREND REPORT The Adverse Trend-' Report explains the conditions:under which certain
- indicators are showing ~ adverse trends. An indicator that is defined' as AN' ADVERSE TREND IS- ONE IN WHICH THE DATA REPRESENTED FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS IS SHOWING t. DECLINE IN PERFORMANCE for that ,
particular indicator. Indicators which show an apparent three month l decline, but. are ng1 considered an adverse trend, will display an ;
explanation which defines the reason why an . adverse -trend does not exist.
1 No adverse trends were identified during the month of-. August, 1990.; !
.]
i j
, j i
.)
}
1 INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION
- This section lists the indicators which show inadequacies as compared to the OPPD goal and indicators which show inadequacies as compared to the industry upper quartile. The indicators will be compared to the industry upper quartile as relevant
.to that indicator.
Forced Outaae Rat.e_ - Page 16
'The' forced outage rate for the month of August,1990, was reported as being higher than the Fort Calhoun goal of 2.4%. This rise in the forced outage rate during the-month of August was due to seal problems encountered in reactor coolant pump RC-3A. ,
These problems resulted in 172.6 forced outage hours. I i
Unolanned Safety System Actuations - Page 16 The Fort Calhoun Station has experienced an unplanned safety system actuation during 1990. .This unplanned actuation was a start and load of- DG-2 due to an-inadvertent trip of backup lockout -relay 86/2BF5. The Fort Calhoun goal for unplanned safety system actuations during 1990 was set at zero actuations. j Gross Heat Rate - Page 19 The monthly gross heat rate for the month of August was reported as being above the monthly goal of 10,250 BTV/KWH. This high monthly gross heat rate was due to the -
{
forced shutdown of the plant which occurred during August. j The year to date gross heat rate is currently above the goal of 10,326 BTV/KWH. The I gross heat rate values for January and February were high due to the fact-that the-
, first stage of the high pressure turbine was removed during the months of January '
and February. During the months of May, June, and August startup from the 1990 -
Refueling Outage, various derates, and a forced outage caused the gross heat rate values for these months to be higher than the Fort Calhoun goal.
Eauivtlent Availability Factor - Page 20 The monthly EAF for August was below the goai of. 93% due to the forced . outage which occurred during August involving reactor coolant pump RC-3A. The year to date EAF is currently below the year to date goal of 51.9% due to various power fluctuations which occurred during the month of June and due to forced outage hours which occurred during the month of August.
4 Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) - Page 21 The FRI has been above the Fort Calhoun goal of 1.0 nanocuries/ gram. The FRI was
, previously below the Fort Calhoun goal. This indicator was then changed to follow the INPO definition for FRI. This definition uses an industry normalized ,
purification rate instead of the actual purification rate of the plant.
DG Reliability last 100 Demands - Page 29 The diesel generator start and load reliability of DG-1 is currently below the Fort Calhoun goal of 95%. This is due to the fact that _ diesel generator DG-1 has experienced 7 start and load failures in its last 100 demands.
R Reliability last 20 Demands - Page 30 The start and load reliability of diesel generator F,G-1 is below the Fort Calhoun goal of 95% reliability. This low start and load reliability for diesel generator DG-1 is due to two start and load failures which occurred in July, 1990. These two-failures were caused by high engine coolant temperature problems.
-s- l
L
-INDICATORS NEEDfMG INCREASED-MANAGEMENT ATTENTION (CONTINUED)
Currective Maintenance Backloo Greater Than 3 Months Old (Non-OutAgel - Page 33 The percentage of open corrective non-outage MW0's older than 3 months old is currently above the industry quartile value of 45.8% due to 254 open MWO's that are !
older than 3 months C.d. '
i Number of Out-of-S ice Control Room Instruments - Page 36
-The number of out 4ervice control room instruments has been above the Fort {
Calhoun goal of 7 on-af-service control room instruments and above the industry <
upper quartile value of 7 out-of-service control room instruments since November of ,
1989.
Check Valve Failure Rate - Page 43 The Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate is currently above the industry check valve failure rate. The reason for the high check valve failure rate is that the plant is performing maintenance on check valves which have not been checked for failures before. The check valve failure rate is expected to decrease as the check valves are maintained and monitored through the Check Valve Program. l Secondary System Cnemistry - Page 44 The Secondary System Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) for the months of- June and
. July is above the industry upper quartile value of 0.20. The high CPI for June was due to startup after the 1990 Refueling Outage and various power fluctuations which occurred during June. The CP1 for the Fort Calhoun Station may also be higher than the industry upper quartile value because the plant uses morpholine for ph control, in-line Chemistry instruments Out-of-Service - Page 47 The number of instruments out of service at the end of August was above the goal of 6 out-of-service instruments. The current number of chemistry instruments that are
, out-of-service is 8.
Total Skin and Clothino Contaminations - Page 50 The 'otal number of skin and clothing contaminations has been above the Fort Calhoun goal of 150 contaminations since the month of Apri!,1990. The total number of skin and clothing contaminations has been above the industry upper quartile value of 129 contaminations since the month of March, 1990. The high number of skin and clothing i contaminations during the months of March and April, 1990, was- due to increased activity in the Radiation Controlled Area (RCA) associated with the 1990 Refueling Outage, j
Decontaminated Auxiliary Buildino - Page 51 The square below the Fortfootage Calhounofgoal the of auxiliary (building which 85% non-outage). Thisisisdecontaminated due to activitiesiswhich currently ,
took place in the auxiliary building associated with the forced outage which '
occurred during August.
Temoorary Modifications (Excludino Scaffoldino) - Page 72 The number of temporary modifications which are installed in the plant is currently above the Fort Calhoun goal of 15 temporary modifications. The number of temporary modifications which are installed in the plant has been decreasing and is expected to keep decreasing.
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (SEP)
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS The-- purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance- Indicators pages is to list the indicators related to the SEP items with parameters that can be trended.
SEP Reference Number IS - Increase HPES and IR Accountability PjLqe Through Use of. Performance Indicators ProceduralNoncomplianceInc! dents (Maintenance).........38~ =
. Total.5 kin and Clothing' Contaminations . . . . . . . . . . .:. . 50 Recordable Injury Cases Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76- [
Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LER's . . . . . . . . . . 77-CAR's Issued versus Significant CAR's Issued versus -
NRC Violations Issued versus LER's Reported . . . .-. . . . . . 91 SEP Reference Number 20 - Quality Audits and Surveillance Programs are Evaluated, Improved in Depth and Strengthened CAR's issued versus Significant CAR's Issued-versus NRC Violations Issued versus LER's Reported . . . . . . . .-. . 91
~
SEP Reference Number 21 - Develop and Conduct Safety System Functional Inspections CAR's Issued versus Significant CAR's Issued versus NRC Violations issued versus LER's Reported . . . . . . . . . . 91 SEP Reference Number 24 - Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 SEP Reference Number 26 - Evaluate and Implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling Injury Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-Recordable Injury Cases Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 SEP Reference Number 36 - Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Work Order Backlog (CorrectiveNon-OutageMaintenance) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 SEP Reference Number 41 - Develop and Implement a Prtlentive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Preventive Maintenance Items Overdue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
- y g
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT. PROGRAM (SEP)~
-PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:
(CONTINUED) l t
SEP Reference Number 43 - ImplementLthe Check; Valve Test Program I Check Valve Failure Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 SEP Reference Number 44 - Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance) .-. . . . . . . 38 SEP Reference Number 52 - Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices 1
-Radiological Work Practices Program. . . . .-. . . . . . . . . .-52.
j SEP Reference Number 54 - Complete Implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Personnel Radiation Exposure (Cumulative). . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Volume of Low-Level. Solid P.adioactive Waste. . .;. . . . . . . . . 23 Total Skin and Clothing Contaminations . . . . . . . . .-. . . .
. 50' Decontaminated Auxiliary Building. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
-SEP Reference Number 58 - Revise Physical Security Training and' I Procedure Program i
-Loggable/ReportableIncidents(Security)....;..........56
~
Security Incident Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. 57 !
Security System Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 58 i SEP Reference-Number 60 - Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number.of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .
. . . . 40 a
SEP Reference Number 61 - Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule .
Surveillance' Tests ,
Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. 40 i SEP Reference Number 62 - Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Engineering Assistance Request Priority Breakdown. . . . . . . . 73 i
SAFETYENHANCEMENTPROGRAM(SEP)
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS -
(CONTINUED) _;
SEP Reference Number 62 - Establish Interim System Engineers (Continued)
Engineering Change Notice Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 _
Engineering Change Notice Breakdown.-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 SEP Reference Number 71 - Improve Controls over_ Temporary Modifications =
Temporary Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . 72 .T wx M
Z
.g.
F
. PERFORMANCE-INDICATORS' INDEX TO GRAPHSt INDUSTRY KEY PARAMiTERS-Forced Outage Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .>. 16 Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams While Critical. -.- . . .: . . . ,17 Unplanned Safety System Actuations ... . . . . . . . . . .-. .-. 18 Gross Heat Rate. . .-. . . ... . .- .-. .-. . . . . .-. . . . . . 19 Equivalent Availability Factor . . ._. . . ._. . . . . . . . . . 20 Fuel Reliability _ Indicator'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Personnel Radiation Exposure (Cumulative). . . . . . . . .'. . . . 22 q
Volume of Low-level-Solid' Radioactive Waste. . . . . . . .~ . . ...!23 Disabling injury Frequency Rate. . . ._.-. . . . . . .-. . . .-. 24 -i i
.-}
.i i
_(
(
l N
i l
I
i i
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l INDEX TO GRAPHS I (CONTINUrD) i OPERATIONS
]
Station Net Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Force Ou t a ge Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams While Critical. . . . . . . . 17 Unplanned Safety System Actuations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Gross Heat Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Equivalent-Availability Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 i
Fuel Reliability Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Daily Thermal Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Equipment Forced Outages per 1000 Critical Hours . . . . . . . . 26 Operations and Maintenance Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Document Review. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 MAINTENANQ Oiesel Generator Reliability (100 Demands) . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Diesel Generator Reliability (20 Demands). . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Age of Outstanding Maintenance Work Orders . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Maintenance Work Order Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 l Corrective Maintenance Backlog >3 Months Old . . . . . . . . . . 33 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance . . . . . . . ... . . . 34
~ eventive Maintenance Items Overdue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Number of Out-of-Service Control Room Instruments. . . . . . . . 36 Meintenance Overtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance) . . . . . . . . 38 Maintenance Work Order P vklog (Corrective Non-Outage) . . . . . . 39 l Number of Surveillance. Tests Resulting in i
Licensee Event Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 a
l PERFORMANCE INDICATORS !
INDEX TO GRAPHS 1 (CONTINUED) 1 MAINTENANCE (CONTINU[.[D, j i
Number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data Systen (NPRDS) I Reportable Failures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
]
Maintenance Effectiveness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
]
Check Valve Failure Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
43 i l
CHEMISTRY AND RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION 3 1
Personnel Radiation Exposure (Cumulative). . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Volume of Low-level Solid Radioactive Waste. . . . . . . . . . . 23 Secondary System Chemis;.y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 4 Primary System Chemistry - Percent of Hours Out of Limit . . . . .'45 Auxiliary Systems Chemistry Hours Outside Station Limits . . . . 46 l
In-Line Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service . . . . . . . . . . . 47 .
, Hazardous Waste Produced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Maximum Individual Radiation Exposure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Total Skir W d Clothing Contaminations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Decontaminated A1xiliary Building. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Radiological Work Practices Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Nurber of Hot Spots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .-. 53 Gaseous Radioactive Waste Being Di charged to the Eavir9nr t. . 54 ;
7 Liquid Radioactive Waste Being Discharged to the Environi..ert . . JI SECliRITY c
Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) . , ,, . . . . . . . . 56 l Security Incident Breakdown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e.57 .
Security System Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 MATERIALS AND OUTSIDE SERVICES Amount of Work On Hold Awaiting Parts. . . . . . . . . . . . . , 59 J f
f
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS INDEX TO GRAPHS (CONTINUED) i MATERI AL AND OUTSIDE SERVICES (CONTINUED; j
)
Spare Parts Inventory value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 -
Spare Parts !ssued . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 t
Inventory Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 :
Stockout Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Warehouse Receipts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Warehouse Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Warehouse Returns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Material Requests Awaiting Approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Expedited Purchases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Invoice Breakdown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Meterial Request Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70 DESIGN ENGINEERING l 1
Outstanding Modifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Temporary Modifications. . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 72' 1
Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Priority Breakdown. . . . . 73 ;
Engineering Change Notice Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Engineering Change Notice Breakdown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 1
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY 1
Disabling Injury Frequency Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 i
Recordable Injury Cases Frequency Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 HUMAN RESOURCES 1 Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LERs. . . . . . . . . . . 77
]
1 j.
Personnel Turnover Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 ;
Staf f ing Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 D
. 1 I
l 1
PERFORMANCE INDICAT0r.S j INDEX TO GRAPHC >
(CONTINUED) i TRAINING AND OUALIFICATION i
SRO License Examination Pass Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
]
R0 License Examination Pass Ratio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 J
License Candidate Exams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Hotlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 !
Classroom (Instructor) Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Total Hours of Student Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 ;
OVALITY ASSURANCE ,
Number of Violations per 1000 Inspr.ction Hours . . . . . . . . . 86 1 Cumulative Violations and Non-Cited Violations (NCV's) . . . . . 87 ?
Percent of CAR's Greater Than Six Months Old . . . . . . . . . 88 Overdue and Extended Corrective Ac', ion Reports . . . . . . ' . . . 89 Corrective Action Reports Current Status . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 l CAR's Issued versus Significant CAR's Issued versus. . . . . . . 91 NRC Vio"ations Issued versus LERs Reported l
i e
'- 1 l
)
T 500000- 1 IStation Net Generatisn j .
400000-M e .
9 i 6
W 300000-a t '
t H 200000- .
o .
u ,
r s
100000- !
c 0- i Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ,
1990 i STATION N[J GENERATION .
i This indicator shows the net generation of <
l the Fort Calhoun Station for the , reporting month. -
During the .nonth of August 1990, a net total .
of 268,935.5 MWH was generated by the Fort' Calhoun Siation. The net generation for the month of August was low due to a forced-outage which occurred during the month. This forced estage was due to seal problems on '
reactor coolant pump RC-3A.
The net generation totals for the months of ^
March and April were zero and the net generation tttal for the month of May was low due to the plant being shutdown for the 1990 Refueling Outage.
Adverse Trend: None 1
- t
- Forced Outage Rate !
-G- Fort Calhoun Goal
, 6 l
& Industry Upper 10 Percentile ;
5- t GOOD l 4- 4 l R
a i t 3- !
' i 2 --- O --- G - --O -- - G--- -O -- - G -- - G -- - O - O -- - O i 1.4 i y=7 ;
di? 1'
++s ,
0 0 Mi: " " " " " "'
0
'87 '88 '89 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 I
l FORCED OUTAGE RATE 1
The forced outage rate was reported as 3.2% for the month of August 1990. The rise in the !
forced outage rate for the Fort Calhoun Station during the month of August was due to a forced outage which occurred to replace a -seal in reactor coolant pump RC-3A.
The last forced outage at Fort Calhoun occurred in September of 1989.
The industry upper ten percentile value for the forced outage rate is 0.25%.
The 1990 goal for forced outage rate is 2.4%
and is based on seven days of forced outage time. The basis for establishing the 1990
performance goals can be found on page 107.
Adverse Trend: None - Reason for increase is given above.
5-x Reactor Scram G- Fort Calhoun Goal l
-G Industry Upper 10 Percentile I 4- i i
S >
3 GOOD c ,
r 4 >
a m
2- :
I 1 c . ..q. . . . q. .. 9.. . . q. . .. e . .. .o . . . . O ---- O -- --O ----O -- --O l0 0 0
'86 '87 '88 '89 0
Sep 0-:.t
~
Nov Dec
~
Jan
~
Feb Mar Apr
~
May Jun Jul
~
Aug '
1989 1990 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS WHILE CRITICAL There were no unplanned automatic reactor scrams in August. It has been 1,521 days !
since the last unplanned automatic reactor scram which occurred on July 2, 1986.
The 1990 goal for unplanned automatic reactor ,
scrams while critical has been set at 1.
The industry upper ten percentile value is zero scrams per unit on an annual basis. -ine Fort Calhoun Station is currently in the ,
upper ten percentile -of nuclear plant performance in this area.
Adverse Trend: None .
1 e
l
4- S Safety System Actuations G- Fort Calhoun Goal
-G- Industry Upper 10 Percentile I 3 I A !
c -
t ;
j GOOD i k 2- I' .
o n
s ,
1-O---- G---- O -- -9 ;
\,
\
'N 0 0 0 '\ .
O m m m m m m m m m m m m-
'87 '88 '89 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug i 1989 1990 ,
UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS There were no unplanned safety system ,
actuations during the month of August '
1990.
The 1990 goal for the number of unplanned safety system actuations is zero. This goal is based on past .
performance at the Fort Calhoun ,
Station.
The industry upper ten percentile value for the number of unplanned safety system actuations per year is zero. >
Adverse Trend: None I
I
~ , , ~
13000-1 IMonthly Gross Heat Rate
. - Year to Date Gross Heat Rate G- Fort Calhoun Monthly Goal 12000- -+- Fort Calhoun Year to Date Goal
-G Industry Upper 10 Percentile B
T ~ l U ;
/
K GOOD w 11000- 4 H '
10520 "C'd.- : 4 10014 : O- -
G-O O- O -
G -
E- G -
28 ~t@
g [g ,
TD 3D
" .:,<.3
. av asi
.Yi%j 9000
'87 '88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 t I
GROSS HEAT RATE The Gross Heat Rate Indicator has been changed. This indicator now shows a monthly gross heat rate goal as well as a year to date gross heat rate goal.
The gross heat rate for the Fort Calhoun Station was reported as 10,317 I BTV/KWH during tbs month of August. This monthly gross heat rate was above -
the monthly gross heat rate goal of 10,250 BTU /KWH. The high monthly gross heat rate was due to the shutdown of the plant which occurred due to a forced outags during the month of August.
l The year te date gross heat rate was reported as 10,421 BTV/KWH. This year l to date value was higher than the year to date gross heat rate goal of 10,326 BTU /KWH. The year to date gross heat rate is above the Fort Calhoun goal due to the fact that the first stage of the high pressure turbine was removed prior to the 1990 Refueling Outage. Additionally, the gross heat ratt values for the months of May, June, and July 1990, were high due to stutup after the 1990 Refueling Outage and various derates. The year to '
dste gross heat rate value is expected to decrease as the river water temperature decreases, f The gross heat rate industry upper ten percentile value is 9,935 BTV/KWH.
Adverse Trends: None l
19
I IMonthly EAF
- Year to Date EAF A i O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Goal
--+- Fort Calhoun Year to Date Goal GOOD ;
E - Industry Upper 10 Percentile {
100-
, g .s o
,o... 9... e....e ... o . . . .e O'( -O- -O -O- ----O p-O- G -O- -O " O 71 i / I 66
\ ;--- l 60- g \. l c -
&h I sf 40- \ \ !
Nlj ,
20- \ l
\ l
\ l
\ , L 0
A ^ #
'87 '88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun .Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ;
1990 i
E0VIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR l The Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) Indicator has been changed.
I This indicator aow shows a monthly EAF goal as well as a year to date EAF goal. The 12 month average EAF has been deleted and replaced with year to date data.
The EAF was reported - as 73.1% for the month of August. This EAF was lower than the Fort Calhoun monthly goal of 93% due to a . forced outage i
! which occurred during the month of August. This forced outage occurred '
due to problems encountered with a seal in reactor coolant pump RC-3A.
The year to date EAF was reported us 48.8%. This year. to, date value was l lower than the year.to date goal of 51.94. The icw year to date EAF was I due to various power fluctuations which occurred during the month of l June and the forced outage which occurred during the month of August.
l The EAF industry upper ten percentile value is 82.5%. l i
Adverse Trends: None l I
l
I 5- .--- Fuel Reliability Indicator j G- Fort Calhoun Goal !
1 G Industry Upper 10 Percentile 1 4
n 1 a
n !
8 3-u GOOD ,
2.4 y 4, j 2-i 1' ,
$:w 3 m .
NIk 1- O ---O--- G --- G---G ---O --- G--- G- --e --- --- G - -- -O py, _
b ;
O n -- n -- n - - n -- n ---m --n m. m m.m e '
'88 '89 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) is calculated using
- an industry normalized purification rate instead of the l plant's actual purification rate. The FRI was reported as 1.16 nanocuries/ gram for the month of August.
The 1990 fuel reliability goal has been set at 1.0 l nanocuries/ gram.
The fuel re percentile va indicator industry upper ten lueliability is 0.04 nanocuries/ gram.
Adverse Trend: None
Personnel Radiation Exposure l 388 400 G- Fort Calhoun Goal
-e Industry Upper 10 Percentile ,
GOOD ~
300-272 + . . . .O -O .
-C -O * * ~
. . .G ;
R e' E 200-M O --- - O -- O "/ O --G - O--G D-O- O - - O-O l
6 93.4 100 /
p
/
,0 l _
o" .
'87 '88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4
PERSONNEL RADIATION EXPOSURE (CUMULATIVE)
During August 1990, 6.9 man-rem was recorded by TLD's worn by personnel while working at the Fort Calhoun Station.
The monthly cumulative exposure goal for Aegust i was 263.4 man-rem while the actual cumuiative -
exposure through August totaled 245.6 ran-rem.
The exposure cumulated in 1990 has been high due ;
to the increased activity in the Radiation i Controlled Area (RCA) associated 'with the 1990 3 Refueling Outage, i The personnel radiation exposure industry upper .
ten percentile is 166 man-rem per unit per year. I l
Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 1 l
l 1
i I
" Monthly Radioactive Waste Shipped 12500- - Cumulative Radioactive Waste Shipped G- Fort Calhoun Goal l O Industry Upper 10 Percentile 10000-C u
b GOOD c 7500- 4 6195 F e
e 4454 t 5000- &--- G -- --o --- G--- e --- G----o --- G----o --- G--- 0 ----O
- 4 p D- D- ~O -O-O -O- -O-O- -O- -O fj 2
$5 2500-g 17,22 gp g %j Fis ,
d '
b h 0 -- ##
'87 '80 '89 , 'n Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990
+
VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE -
The above graph slaws the amount of low-level radioactive waste '
shipped off-site for disposal. The table below lists the amount of waste actually shipped off-site for disposal plus the change in inventory of waste in on-site storage in final form ready for burial.
The voiume of solid radioactive waste is (cubic feet):
, Amount Shipped in August -
0.0 Amount in Temporary Storage -
983.0 1990 Cumulative Amount Shipped -
1568.6 1990 Goal 5000.0 l -
The industry upper ten percentile ve.lue is 3,072 cubic feet per unit per year. The Fort Calhoun Station war in the upper ten percentile of nuclear plants for this indicator in 1985,1987 and 1988. ,
l Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 l
l l'
l i
i 2- / 1990 Disabling Injury FrequGncy Rate
- -
- 1989 Disabling Injury Frequency Rate j 1.75- a 5 Year Average Disabling Injury Frequency Rate
-G- Fort Calhoun Goal 1.5- O Industry Upper 10 Percentile i
1.25-R a GOOD 1
t , 4
.75- ,
b
.5-
, m
-s -,
e.... .e_ .. .o..... ..... e .... .....o.... 9.....o .....g .....o ....o
.25- %
'O S AM 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AYg Sep Oct Nov Dec i
DISABLING INJURY FRE0VENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)
This indicator shows the current monthly disabling injury rate in column form. The 1989 disabling injury frequency rate and the Fort Calhoun Station 5 year average disabling injury frequency rate are also shown. There was one disabling. injury re)orted at the Fort Calhoun Station in August. The total number of dtsabling injuries in 1990 is one, the 1990 disabling injury frequency rate goal was set at 0.31% and was based on one disabling injury occurring in 1990. l The industry upper ten percentile disabling injury frequency rate is j 0%.
The year end disabling injury freque:ncy rates for 1987, 1988, and 1989 were 0.6, 1.6, and 0.4 respectively. l 1
Adverse Trend: None SEP 26 l
l l
l l
l 1
l I
-+- Thermal Output j
- Technical Specification Limit
-e- Fort Calhoun Goal l 15 0 0 " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - . ^ ^ - - - ^ ^ 7 1200- f/ i M . i e j ,
/ 1 ;
600 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 7 14 21 28 August 1990 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The above thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. The cross hatched area represents the difference between the maximum allowable operation and the actual plant operation.
The percent power operation of the Fort Calhoun Station during August 1, 1990 through August 23, 1990 was approximately 100%. The plant was then shutdown for a forced outage due to seal problems on reactor coolant pump RC-3A.
It must be noted that normal update oscillations on test ,
point XC105 prevent Operations from continually operating the plant above 1495 thermal megawatts. Because of these oscillations,. power is sometimes backed down to decrease the risk of violating the 1500 thermal megawatt technical specification limit.
l Adverse Trend: None I
i 2-Equipment Forced Outage Rate 1.6- !
1.4-1.2 GOOD --
R .
4, a
3 t .
.8- I i
.6-
]
.4-
.13 .
E3 .2-0 0 M~ 0 . . : . .,
'87 '88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ;
1990 j l
1 E001PMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1000 CRITICAL HOURS There were 172.6 equipment forced-outage hours reported during the month of August 1990. This forced outage was due to seal problems on reactor coolant pump RC-3A.
The last equipment forced outage occurred in September of 1989 and was due to a ct. se problem' with the resistive temperature detector on reactor coolant pump motor RC-3A. ,
Adverse Trend: None - Reason for increase is given above. :
f
. , - - . , r- -
- Actual Operations Exp:Inditures X Operations Budget 100-M i
1d 75- '
lo .
i1 -
o l 50- ,
na s 25- '
0 ,
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep_ Oct Nov Dec 1990 40-
- Actual Maintenance Expenditures gy : Maintenance Budget i
h .
4)20-o1 na s r 10-0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET The Operations and~ Maintenance Budget Indicator shows the budget year to date as well as the actual expenditures for operations and maintenance for the Fort Calhoun Station.
The budget year to date for Operations was 55.8 million dollars- for August t
' while the actual c;wlative expenditures through August totaled 48.9 million dollars.
The budget year to date for Maintenance was 19.2 million dollars for August while the actual cumulative expenditures through August totaled 14.7 million dollars.
Although Operations and Maintelance are currently 11.4 million dollars under budget, a cost variances study from January through July 1990, *
- predicts that Operations and Maintenance will be approximately 6.f. million dollars under budget at year end 1990.
Adverse Trends: None
- 27-
, - - ~ - - ,,,._,e ~, -new,
1500- . - D:cu:nents Scheduled fer Review
-X. Documents Reviewed
- Overdue Documents A 1200{
r ND , ! ;
$ 900- j!'\, j bu ! i i em l \
re ! i n 600- l \ '
ot / i -
is j \
l \ !
300- ,! \!
9' l \ <
,# , o
\.
/~ .x \, I _ .y U-y .y y '
q ...~.y- +- ....g ,
0 Sep Oct Nov Dec lan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of biennial reviews completed during !
the reporting month, the number of biennial reviews scheduled for the ;
reporting month, and the number of biennial reviews that are overdue.
These document reviews are performed in house and . include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive ,
Maintenance, and the Operating Manual. 1 During August there were 1,303 document reviews completed while 162 document reviews were scheduled. At the. end of: August, there:were 30 document reviews overdue. The overdue document reviews at the end of August consisted primarily of maintenance documents.
During the month of August there were 30 new or renamed documents l reviewed. These new or renamed documents will need to be reviewed l again in 1992.
The high number of documents scheduled for review for the month of June 1990 was due to the high number of document reviews that were completed during the month of June 1988. The reviews that were l
completed during June 1988 are now due to be reviewed.
Adverse Trend: None l
1
)
l !
l
l l
1001 i Diesel Generator No. 1 )
x- Diesel Generator No. 2 )
98-G- Fort Calhoun Goal ,
96- :
4 3. . . . . e. . . . e . . . .s . - - e . . . . e . . . .e. . . . ..e. . . . . . . . . e . . . . .e- . . . . e 94- x- x- x - X-~ -X- -X X X - - --- X -- - X-- -x '
l l 92-p e
r 90 C
e 88 g n .
t 86- GOOD 84-82-80 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug -
1989 1990 ;
DG RELIABILITY LAST 100 DEMANDS Diesel generator D-1 did not have a start and
. load failure during August 1990. Diesel generator D-1 has a 93 percent reliability factor over the last 100 valid demands.
Diesel generator D-2 did not have a start and load failure during August 1990. Diesel generator D-2 has a D percent reliability-factor over the last 100 valid demands.
, The Fort Calhoun goal for the diesel generator l reliability is 95%. D-2 currently meets this goal over the last 100 demands on the unit.
Adverse Trend: None
1
-+- Olesel Generator No. I !
X- Diesel Generator No. 2 G- Fort Calhoun Goal 100- l : : : : , : !
i 95- 3-- - - - G- - - --- fr - - -- G -- - -- D - - -- & - - - - G - - -- - & -- - & - - - - G - -- - - 0 i P
e r ,
90- , ;
n t
A 85-GOOD 80 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug '
1989 1990 l
l DG RELIABILITY l LAST 20 DEMAND $
Diesel generator D-1 did not have a start and load failure during August 1990. Diesel generator D-1 has a 90 percent reliability factor over the last 20 valid demands.
Diesel generator D-2 did not have a start and load failure during August 1990. Diesel generator D-2 has a 95 percent reliability factor over the last 20 valid demands.
The Fort Calhoun goal for the diesel generator reliability for the last 20 demands -is set at 95%. Diesel D-2 ,
i presently meets this goal.
Adverse Trend None
I l
i 400-E June 1990 m July 1990
. l 0
l l l August 1990 )
300-l l t
a I
n d
i 200- I n :
9 l M
' W O 100- : ;
~~
"= == "
0-
~~
0-3 3-6 6-9 9-12 >12 i Age in Months i
i AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAIRTENANCE WORK ORDERS (CORRECTIVE ~ nuTAGE)
This indicator shows the of corrective non-outage maintenance work orders (MWO's) remaining open at the end of the reporting month.
Adverse Trend: None i
l 1
l l
.. __ . . . .. . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ _. .. . a
500- !
June 1990 ;
E July 1990 l 400 $ I IAugust 1990
. = ,
24!
300- f!d Ej w==
== $
lb 200-
=
ll?
N 100- G. I ul.i ,
m=
g l i = .
0l l ll l 0- !!L - l- - " '
l Total Open Total Open Open
! Open MWe.- Open Safety High ,
l MW0s > 3 Months Safety Related Priority l Old Related MW0s MW0s MW0s > 3 Months Old ,
MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN (CORRECTIVE NON-0UTAGE)
This indicator shows the total number of corrective non-outage MWO's remaining open at the end of the reporting month, along with a breakdown by several key categories.
Adverse Trend: None 1
I i
- Corrective Maintenance Backlog > 3 Months Old ;
O- Industry Upper Quartile 80- :
60- # N o . . .. o._.. _ _o _.. .. .. o .. ..o . -O --O -O---O O c 40-e n
t .
l 20-i 4 .
O Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 199n CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG-SREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLD (NON-0UTAGE)
This indicator shows the percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that are greater '
than three months old at the end of the reporting month.
The percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that are greater than three ,
months old at the end of August was reported as 60.0%
The percentage of open corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that are greater than three ,
months was recalculated for the months of May 1190 through July 1990 and the actual values for these three !
months is now shown.
The industry upper quartile value for corrective maintenance backlog greater than 3 months old is 45.8%.
Adverse Trend: None i
lI
,mm ..,,s. -,y _ _
- Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance j
<>- Industry Upper Quartile l 90- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal N
80- 1 70-P r 60-g_ - g---g----g- --g J- ,---g ,---g ---4 --- g-- _--g-----g e
n 50- -
t h
40-GOOD 30-i I
20 Sep Oct Nov Gec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 -
RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE (NON-0UTAGE)
The ratio of preventive to total maintenance indicator shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance.
The ratio of preventive to total maintenance at the Fort Calhoun Station decreased to 62.6% in August.
The Fort Calhoun goal is to have a raf-u of preventive to total maintenance greater than 60%.
The industry upper quartile value for the ratio of proventive to total maintenance is 57.7%. The Fort Calhoun Station is currently performing in the upper quartile of nuclear power plants in this area.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 41
i
)
- Preventive Maintenance Items Ovordue j 5- -O- Industry Upper Quartile e- Fort Calhoun Goal ;
i 4- 1 GOOD l
p 4 !
e 3- :
r 1
C -
e i
" 2-o- o o ._ 4.. __ q_ .._4 ' !
O---- - - -- G - ~ ~ -- O - -- - - O -- - --& - -- '-C - O---- O -- ----O-----O 1-Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 s
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE
[
The purpose of this indicator is to monitor. progress in the administration and execution of preventive maintenance programs. A small percentage of ,
preventive maintenance items overdue indicates a station commitment to the ,
preventive maintenance program and an ability te plan, schedule, and perform preventive maintenance tasks as programs require.
I During August 1990, 952 PM items were completed. A total of 2 PM items were not completed within the allowable grace period.
The Fort Calhoun goal is to have less than 1.2% preventive maintenance items overdue. The industry upper quartile for preventive maintenance items overdue is 1.2%. The Fort Calhoun Station is currently p2rforming in the industry l upper quartile for this indicator.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 i
i 40 % Total C!ntrol Room Instruments Out-of-5:rvice
+ Industry Upper Quartile For Total Out-of-Service Instruments G- Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Out-of-Service Instruments :
IO' I GOOD '3
}
lit.
+
Nn , , i jfj >
l m
br i
fi%
9 M2 ;
! e u 20- Y$
l ra b M e A >
~ l
! 7" p $
10- % '
g . ._ o _ _ ._ .
fp .
0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 NUMBER OF OUT-OF-SERVICE CONTROL ROOM IdSTRUMENTS This indicator show- the number of out-of-service . control room l instruments, the industry upper quartile for this indicator, and the Fort Calhoun goal. r There was a total of 24 out-of-service control room instruments at the end of August. The increase in the number of out-of-service control room instruments is due to an Engineering evaluation of the INPO definition of out-of-service control room instruments. The Fort Calhoun Station is now reporting out-of-service control room instruments as requested by the INP0 definition. Another reason for ;
the high number of out-of-service instruments is due to the high number of control room instrument deficiencies being added each' month.
l The Fort Calhoun goal is to have less than 7 out-of-service control room instruments. The industry upper quartile value for the number of out-of-service control room instruments is 7.
Adverse Trend: None
h i
J 80-
- Maintenance Overtime
-++- 12 Month Average ;
G- Fort Calhoun Goal GOOD 60- f g . .. ..q P
's ',~
c , 1 O M r 40-c
/ s
/ s
' / \
n / s
+- / s
/ \
G-----G-----O-----O
6-----G--~~-O i 20- :, % .,
w '
= i.
0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 l
t L MAINTENANCE OVERTIME I The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors -the ability to I perform the desired maintenance activities with the allotted resources. Excessive overtime indicates insufficient resource allocation and can lead to errors due to fatigue, j The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours I
was reported as 11.1% during the month of August 1990. The 12 month average percent > 1e of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was rept..ed as 18.4%.
l The high percentage of overtime hours reported for the I months of February 1990 through May 1990 was due to .l increased maintenance support associated with the 1990 i Refueling Outage. l The Fort Calhoun goal for the percent of maintenance I overtime hours worked has been set at 25% for non-outage '
months and 50% for outage months.
Adverse Trend: None 1 l
l
I 20- 1 IOpen IR's Related to the Use of Proc;dures (Maintenance)
~
Closed IR's Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) l i:$?i Procedural Noncompliance IR's (Maintenance) i
)
N 15-u a :
b ,
e
- o. 10-f !
88 !
I .
R :
i s '
5-33 33 33 :
3 3 ;
- 22 .
1 51 1 1 11 l 1 .
7 o
E o 1 0 000 dB LB -
E 10 3 0 00 lo o 0 0 0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) l This indicator shows the number of identified Maintenance Incidents Reports (IR's) . that are related to the use of procedures, the number of closed IR's that are related to the use of procedures (includes IR's that were caused by procedural noncompliance), and the nue.ber of closed IR's that were caused by procedural noncoepliance.
It should be noted that the second and third-columns will lag behind the first column until the .
IR's are closed. This reporting method is due to the process in which Iris receive category codes.
IR's receive their category codes when they are closed.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 44 I
t
.,--,n -
900-
. - Open..MWO's G- Fort Calhoun Goal 800-
~
o 700-Nf -
?
u ,
m bWM 600- - -- - G - -- --& --- - G - - - - G - -- - G - -- - s - - - - G ---- G - -- - G -- - - G - -- - O -
eo -
r' ,
~
8 '
500- _
V .
400 >
4 ,
G 300 -
'Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar :Apr May on 'Jul .Aug 1989 1990' MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER DACKLOG (CORRECTIVENON-0V!AGEMAINTENANCE)
This indicator shows -the number. of corrective non-outage maintenance work orders that' are ' open at the end of the reporting month. .;
At the end of August 1990,- there were 423t -
corrective non-outage maintenance work orders-l remaining open.
The goal for _this indicator' is . to have iess than 600 corrective non-outage maintenance work ' orders '
I remaining open.
Adverse Trend: None 'SEP 36 L
- . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ . ~ . - _ . _ - -
p.
v
.,. 1 5-~ E Numbcr'_of Missed ST's Resulting'in LER's j l
4- i N 3- ,
u i m
- b. ,
e r 2- .
1- "
1 0 9 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O 0 j 0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan feb Mar Apr May= Jun_ Jul: 'Adg 1989- 1990 si E'MBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE-EVENT REPORTS:
This indicator shows the - number of missed
-Surveillance Tests (ST's)-that result- in Licensee Event Reports (LER's) during the! ' -
reporting month. ,
During the month of August 1990, there' were !
no missed ST's that resulted in LER's.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 60 & 61 1 l
1
(-
1
35- e
~
l l Total NPRDS Component-Failures-30- as Confirmed NPRDS Component Failures j
'25-F -
g*I-2e e M _N T
.r u -
7/Q ;q
, r 15- -
e L^ - ,
oe C>
f5-10-
_ gfp .
4 gg p
l h 3 ! h
^
h : .,.,L, O
- N N --
Sep. Oct Nov Dec Jan. Feb : Mar Apr May Jun Jul -Aug 1989 1990 NUMBER OF Hl' CLEAR PLANT RELI ABILITY DATA SYSTEMS (NPRDS) !
-REPORTABLE FAILURES This indicator shows - the total number of NPRDS component f ailures ~ and the number. of. confirmed f; NPRDS . component failures. The total: ' number-of "
NPRDS component failures is based upon the: number of failure reports sent to INP0. The number of' "
confirmed NPRDS - com)onent failures is based upon the number of fa' lure reports that. have .been accepted by INP0. The difference of these two figures is the number of failure reports: still under review by INPO.
l During August 1990, there was a total. of zero ,
l confirmed NPRDS component failures.
Adverse Trend: None ;
i l
[
i 3
1 7
J J
o
.y
. ' --+- Components With More Than One Failure
-X- Components With More lhan Two Failures
.u -
m.
b GOOD V
10- -
g o
f C
.d!
f P-o 5- ,
n
, j< ,,, ' ,_ _ _ _ _ , __ _ _ _ y _ _ _ __ g, n x, ',x' g . i t -,
3
,x , - , ,,
g _ _ _ . .g . _ . . .g - ;
O Sep Oct- Nov Dec Jan ~Feb Mar Apr May ~Jun Jul' -Aug -
1989 1990 MAINTENANCE EFFECTIVENESS The Maintenance Effectiveness Indic'ator was -developed following guidelines set forth by the- Nuclear; Regulatory Commission's ,
Office for Analysis and Evaluation u of. Operational Data ,
(NRC/AE0D). The-NRC/AE00 is currently' developing and-verifying a. -
i maintenance effectiveness indicator' using the Nuclear Plant l ReliabilityDataSystem(NPRDS)componentfailures.:
This indicator shows the number - of NPRDS components. with more.
l- than one failure during the last twelve months and the number of NPRDS components with more than two. failures- during the last twelve months. The number of NPRDS components with more.than two I failures in a twelve-month period should indicate the effectiveness of plant maintenance.
During August 1990, there were 6'NPRDS: components with more than one failura and 2 NPRDS components with more than two failures.
The tag a bers of the 2 NPRDS components with more than two I failures v the last twelve m nths include: r4-1B and CH-1C. i l
Adverse Trend: None ~
I j
i
_u____.. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ ___ - _ . _ _
._r-I 20- - Check Valve Failure Rate l
-& Industry Check _ Valve Fai_ lure P, ate
, 15-a GOOD 1
o ' j,
_)M" u
ie ,
r l ,i n~ 10-s 1j .t _
oH -
p"0 ,. ,
e u
r r 5-s
& 6------6 6 6---A 0
'Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun- Jul Aug - Sep Oct - hov 1989 1990 ,
CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate and the industry check valve failure-rate.
The data for the industry check _ valve failure rate. is three months-
, behind the Performance Indicators ' Report- reporting month: due to the time involved in collecting and processing the data. The industry failure rate is - based upon failures that have occurred in the previous 18 month interval For May 1990, the Fort Calhoun Station reported.a check valve failure rate of 8.04E-6 while the industry reported a failure rate of 2.5E-6. ,
l At the end of August, the Fort Calhoun Station reported a check-valve -
failure. rate of 4.8E-6. At this-present time, the check valve failure-L
-rate for Fort Calhoun is high. The reason for the high check valve failure rate is that the plant' is performing maintenance on check valves which have not been tested for failures 'before. As time goes on, the check valve failure rate is expected to decrease due to-the "
fact that the check valves are now being maintained through the Check Valve Program. ,
Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 P
4 i-e-n,--
J
+
- Secondary System CPI
+- SecondaryLSystem CPI Limit 1.5-
-DilndustryUpperQuartile- -
i
). .p....+... + . +. . + ....+... + ....+__ -+... +- ...p--- +
~
i GOOD l
.38.
I .5-
~
4' / .,
- p .
Q_ Q.- f _...Q.....Q. .Q-,.. g ,9_ g.,,,,4 g___ Q 0
0 '
'88 '89 Aug Sep Oct Nov, Dec .Jan. Feb. Mar Apr May' Jun Jul. -
i 1989 - 1990- 1 1000-
- Hours Chemist ide_0G Guidelines 757.7 800-H o 600-G000 u -
359 r 400- +
I-0 s
200-
'87 '88 Aug Sap Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul -
1989 1990 l
SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY ,
The top graph, Secondary System Chemistry - Performance Index (CPI), is ;;
calculated using three parameters. The three parameters used. include;. cation "
conductivity in steam generator blowdown, sodium in steam generator blowdown, and condensate pump discharge dissolved oxygen.'The CPI was reported as10.58 for the month of- July. The CPI values for June and July are 'high due to ,
startup after the 1990 Refueling Outage-and to various fluctuations in power which occurred. The industry upper-quartile ~ value:for.this indicator is 0.20. -
The bottom graph, Hours Chemistry is Outside Owners Guidelines, tracks. the. 3 total hours of 13 parameters exceeding guidelines during power _ operation.-The -
number of hours outside owners group-guidelines was reported as 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />'for the month of July.
The above two chemistry indicators are one month behind the reporting period due to the time needed for data collection and evaluation of the station chemistry data.
Adverse Trends: None >
4 i
10- - Primary System Chemistry Out of Limit i 1
8-1 7
P 6-i GOOD
. +
n-t 4 ..
P 1.9 2-0 0
'88 '89 Au'g Sep 0'c't _Nov D'ec Jan. Fe'b Mar Apr May Jun 'Jul 1989 1990 !
l t ;
i PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY- .
PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT '!
i The Primary System Chemistry - Percent ~ of ~[
Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the primary system cheQistry performance' by monitoring six key chemistry parameters.-
The Primary System Chemistry Percent of' l Hours Out of Limit was reported as 2.8%-for-the' month of July. The high percent of l hours out of limit for the primary systerr.'
L was.due to startup after the 1990 Refueling Outage and various power fluctuations which-occurred during June and July. 100% equates
, to all six parameters .being out of limit l for the month.
Adverse Trend: None l
1 l
.l
-1 l
- Auxiliary System Chemistry Out.0f Limit
+ Industry Upper Quartile 40-GOOD 4*
I 30-i, .
I
.H o .
u 20- -
r s -
s L10-
.i 0 0 O~~O O~~b -O-4 Oss
'^ ^ ^ ^ ^
0
~
'88 89 A'ug::Sep Oc't Nov Dec Jan Feb - MIr Apr M'ay fun fu'l -
1989 1990 AUXILIARY SYSTEM (CCW) CHEMISTRY HOURS 0VTSIDE STATION LIMITS The Auxiliary System Chesistry: Hours Outside Station Limits indicator tracks the monthly' I hours that the Component Cooling Water (CCW) system is outside the station, c.hemistry L limit. The above chemistry indicator. is one month behind the reporting period due'to the I
time n e e d e d - f o r. d a t a collection' and l evaluation of the chemistry data for ..the -
station.
The auxiliary system chemistry-hours outside station limits was reported as zero for.:the month of July.
I i 1
The- industry- upper quartile value for L auxiliary systems . chemistry hours outside station limits is 2.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. The Fort '
Ge'lhoun Station- is currently performing in the upper quartile of a'il nuclear power plants for this indicator.
Adverse Treh6: None i
j
I g g Number of Out-of-Service Instruments '
20 -e- Fort Calhoun Goal ,
g
~~~2
- z===;
16- 8 ZG g__
= =5 1 _
== _ _ _ _
Nn -
r == -
= = _ _ _ -._
213 - _ _
u$ ._- _T - -
= ____ . _ _ _ _ _
Ci t 12-
~
Z E.5 a=. ; _2 E- T ZZZ -
_=s br i ~~
1 -- =
~
- X":' - =
e u - === 9 i~~] :__ ;~2Z ===i ===
E=== x s_-=
rm = x _ =- __ - _ = gg pg =Z = _ _
on 2hrh 2 2.[~l -
[
~
b5 3@f5I
=-_ =---
=___._
ft m=a gx g ; ;; __ =.y --
==; __
- =_= p.gg;g_ggg e--
. ;gg_z
_g g mg,y .
gg c=__g
,. ___- .: === --
~ ~ '
4- -
- Rg
- -. z===2
=='= '= --
zeem L~K ME-M-
=--
M -M m
___ g=_ = . ==;;
~
l __=
~~
- tm __
-7 7 r
p-_ _ _ _ _ _ .___- g_ _. -; --
7_; kr=
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-0F-SER_y,,[Q This indicator shows the total number of in-line chemistry system instr'uments that are out-of-service at the end of the reporting month.
The chemistry systems involved in this indicater .
include the Secondary System and the Post Accident SamplingSystem(PASS).
At the end of August there were a total of ' 8 in-line chemistry instruments that were
- out-of-service. Five of these instruments were from the Secondary System and three were from PASS.
The Fort Calhoun goal for the number of in-line l c h t: m i s t r y system instruments that are i
out-of-service has been set at 6. Six out-of-service chemistry instruments make up 10%
of all the chemistry instruments which are counted for-this indicator.
Adverse Trend: None
10000 I ITotal Waste Produc'ed ,
s L - Federal and State Limit "
't
- l. .
u t
'8000-1 I- K 1o r 1I 6000-W 9 - .
ra a s a t 4000-s' j 2000-I i
' ' ' ' I I ' '
O Sep Oct Nov Dec. Jan Feb Mar- -Apr 'May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 l
HAZARDOUS 1 JTE PRODUCED- s This indicator shows the total amount of-hazardous; l' waste produced by Fort Calhoun 'each month.- ,Tiis. l hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated; hazardous. waste,, and other hazardous waste produced.
During che month of August,. 0.0 kilograms-of non-halogenated hazardous waste was ' produced, 89.8 -
kilograms of halogenated hazardous , waste was-
-produced, and 0.0 kilograms of other: hazardous waste was produced. .
The large amount of hazardous was'te produced during the months of September and' October.1990 was caused by a mercury spill at the sulfuric acid tank located on the east side of the service building. i Adverse Trend: None i
3
+- - - - e ,~, , . , . . . . , . . . , - , , , -
- 5000-L J %1th.
Quarter OPPD Year Limit ;
4000-9 3000- -
! , m R ~
i
.E
-l
'. M -1 August 1990 t
MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During August 1990, an individual accumulated 243 mrem which was the highest individual exposure for the month.
The maximum indiyidual exposure to . date for the- third I quarter of 1990 hat been 365 mrem.
The maximum individual exposure reported to -date for 1990.
l has been 2,090 mrem.. 1 The high maximum individual exposure reported so far for the
- 1990 year to date value was due to increased activities in
- the Radiation Controlled Area (RCA) associated with the 1990 Refueling Outage. {
The maximum accumulated 1989 individual exposure was 1,165 p mrem, received by a Health Physicist.
The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation l- exposure is 4,500 mrem / year.
Adverse Trend: None o
- , , - - .- ~ _ - . - _ . , , , .,. _ . , , ,. . . . . - . . - - , .,- -.
"e Monthly' Contaminations
- Cumulative Contaminations
'00]
G- Fort Calhoun Goal s
+ Industry Upper Quartile 400-357 P e -]
r s 300- GOOD o
n d' 7
n _
i- e 200-157 I e....e ._. e.. .g ... e ... g .. 9 ... e .. g ... e ... g .. e o_. o_ . .o ..o .. .-. o _ _ .o ___ o ._ ...o.__.o . o--- 9. .-..o . , q 100-r a sw 0 .
1
'88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -
1990 .)
l l
7 J.QTAL SKIN AND' CLOTHING CONTAMINATIONS There was a total-.of 4 skin and clothing. contaminations- ,
reported for the Fert: Calhoun Station during August, 1990. l There has been a total of 210 skin and clothing contaminations-so f ar 'in 1990. The _ high number of skin and -cicthing contaminations which occurred during the: months of. March and-April 1990 were related to increased' activity in the Radiation ,
Controlled Area (RCA) during the 1990 Refueling Outage. '
There was a total of 157 skin and clothing contaminations in 1989. j The 1990 goal for skin and clothing is 150 contaminations. This 1990 goal of 150 contaminations includes a Fort:Calhoun-goal'of-23 skin contaminations. ;
The industry upper quartile value, for total' skin and clothing contaminations is 129 per unit annually.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 l
l l
( ,
1 l l
-i Decontaminated Auxiliary Building )
-G- Fort' Calhoun Goal 100-l 1
l o.. . . . .p - _ _ - 9 ,,,e----- 1 3 80- f _.. n ..__-o ,, D ~..~~ .. ... P P
0 60-C ,
e .
n-t' 40- -
A GOOD ~
20- -
0-- "
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb . Mar Apr May Jun .Jul Aug 1989 1990 DECONTAMINATED AUXILIARY BUILDING The Decontaminated- Auxiliary- Building Indicator has been ' changed. 'This indicator now shows a Fort Calhoun goal of 85%. -
decontaminated auxiliary bui1d_ing (non-outage- months) and :a goal .of 75%
, decontaminated auxiliary - building (outage i
(
months).
This graph shows the percentage of the ,
auxiliary building - which is decontaminated (clean) based on the total square footage.
!-. As of August 30, 1990, 84.5's of the total square footage of the auxiliary builaing was' decontaminated.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 54
._. . _ _ . .. . -m
l t
20- i db Number of-Identified PRWP's l
'N
- u 15- 1 m '
b e .
r .
j 10- '
- p. '
~
R 7 W .
l' P
' 5-g '
s
,- i I 2 2
[
f .
Q'E -
k 1 . 1 E-1 !
1 0 L 0 )
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 'Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec c 1990 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES' PROGRAM s The Radiological Work Practices. Program Indicator shows the number of Poor-
,. Radiological Work Practices (PRWP's) which-were identified during the reporting month; .
The number of - PRWP's which are identified- ,
each month should indirectly provide a means '
to qualitatively as s es s ' supervisor -
accountability for their workers' radiological performance. i During the month - of August 1990, one PRWP was identified.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 52 i
a
~
w- - w-,- , - . - , - - ,- - v
80-
- Total Number of. Hot' Spots 60- ,
NH 50- 50 uo 49 ,
i p
-at- '
t t
l d ]J
- be 'S40- i ; 1 l T
(
rp di '
o 1 a 1
ot fs il H l-
~
S ? ; .
o ,
20-h
? Li i
, l ;
! 1
- l. l .
hk 0-Jun Jul Aug Sep- Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May-NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS This indicator shows the tetal number of ' hotL 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 or1 greater _ thanL100' mrem / hour.
Since January 1, 1990, 17 identified and documented hot spots have been removed from the Fort Calhoun Station. The removal of these hot spots reduced the total number of hot spots from 60,- at the beginning of January 1990 to 59 at the end of August 1990.
At the end of August, 49 hot spots .were- identified and documented - to exist in the Fort Calhoun Station. During the. month of August, one hot spot was removed from the Fort Calhoun Station.
The Station ALARA committee established a coal to eliminate at least 5 l~ hot spots during 1990. The Fort Calhoun" Station has exceeded this l goal.
Adverse Trend: None
o l
l 1 IMonthly Radioactise Gas Discherged 1 l - Cumulative Radioactive Gas Discharged ;
E '
-G- Cumulative Goal
! 785 800-l GOOD .;
g 4
.C 600- -
u r
i ,
400- ..
O---- O ---G----O --- G----O---- O --- G----O ---G----O --- O 3
.. e 164 200-0'
'88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr- May- Jun Jul Aug Sep' Oct Nov Dec ';
1990 GASEOUS RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE Bfdhg DISCHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT The gaseous radioactive waste being-discharged to the environment is .shown for
, January 1990 through June 1990. cA total of l 261 curies have been : released- to the
- environment from January through June of i L 1990. The Fort Calhoun Station goal is 360 curies for this indicator.
The high. value of gaseous radioactive waste:
that was released to the environment during the month of February 1990 -was due to containment purge associated with the 1990 Refueling Outage.
The gaseous radioactive waste being discharged to the environment is calculated every six months. ,
Adverse Trend: None
I IMonthly Radioactive Liquic' Discharged l
- Cumulatlve Radioactive Liquid Discharged-G- Cumulative Goal 228 231 228 300- I O--- e-- G-- - G --- O -- - O ---0 ---9 ---G--- G-- G--- O '
1 u 200- 1' r
i GOOD lllC
'87 '88 '89 100-0
+
-Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 20000- i T -
h 15000- >
G u, -
s 10000-a)j n
0 d
s 5000-f 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul . Aug Se~p Oct Nov Dec 1990 LIOUID RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT The liquid radioactive waste being discharged to the environment =is . I shown for the months of January 1990 through June 1990. The liquid radioactive waste - that was discharged to the environment from all sources totaled 55 curies from January through . June 1990. The Fort i Calhoun Station goal for 1990 is 256 curies. :
The bottom graph shows the volume of liquid radioactive waste that has been released from the radioactive waste monitor. tanks' and steam-
!4 generators. The volume of- liquid radioactiveEwaste discharged. to the !
environment from the radioactive waste monitor tanks and the steam !
generators totaled 11.6 million gallons from January through. June 1990.~
The liquid radioactive waste -that was released to the environment.
, includes liquid released from the steam: generators due to the fact that p radioisotopes were detected in the steam generator blowdown. <
The liquid radioactive waste being discharged to = the environment - is 't I. calculated every six months.
Adverse Trend: None t'. ,
i 100; K Number of Loggable/ Reportable Incidents #
N. t u 80-m
's b j e - '
r 60 59- :l" o
f -
3
. t I
" 40- -.
j -
d -
e 20- .
s 5 -
0- 0 0 ._
LDV Badges Escort System- Key Access Failures- Control Control August.1990 ,
I i
i-LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS
-(SECURITY)-
The Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) Indicator? shows the total number of loggable/ reportable. incidents concerning l Licensee Designated Vehicles (LDV's), security l badges,-
p security key' control, escorting, access control, and security-I system failures for the reporting month.
1 i During the month of August .1990, there were 66 i lot;able/ reportable incidents identified. Security ' system.
i fat'ures accounted for 59 of the loggable/ reportable incidents (89%) reported this month. Of the=300 system failures to date, 179 hav_e occurred during the past three month period. Although not as yet an adverse trend by . definition, the need to.
increase attention in this area-is recognized. Several factors which have caused an increase . are environmental conditions, increased , awareness concerning degraded CCTV system, ar.d a complex, sophisticated security system which requires daily dedicated maintenance.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 58
i LicenseeDesignatedVehicles(LDV's)
Security Badges j l l Security Key Control. 1 Escorting I s;i;i; Access Control l Security System Failures. J LDV's 1.5% Badges 8%
,-' cort 1.5%
- T '
5 l . .
SystemFailures89%i
\ >
'x ,:
~ :
~~ -- >
% -f, i
SECURITY INCIDENT BREAKDQW1
.The Security Incident Breakdown Indicator shows the ,
percentage of incidents concerning the foll. . sing items .
for the reporting month. These items include:. Licensee <
Designated Vehicles (LDV's), security badges, security key control, escorting, access control, and security system failures.
Security Items Number of Incidents ~ -
AUG 1990 JUL 1990 Licensee Designated Vehicles (LDV's) -1 0 Security Badges 5 3~
Security Key Control 0 2 Escorting 1 0 Access Control 0 0 l Security System Failures 59 47 l l Total 66 52- :
l Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 1
1
30- i 25- !
N u
23 '
. 22 '
m b 1 e 20- -
r ,
+
o f
15- -
F ,
-c i-1 10-u r 'i e '6 s
5- 4- :
3 __
, 3 --
I I 0
Alarm fystem CCTV Computer LTerminal Door Card Reader SECURITY SYSTEM FAILURES The Security System Failures Indicator 'shows the number ~ of incidents concerning the following ' items for - the reporting :
month. These items' include: alarm system failures,' CCTV failures, ' security computer failures, terminal' failures, doors _l equipment failures, and card reader failures.-
System Failures- Number of'Inc'idents-1 AUG 90'- JUL~90 Alarm Systems 22 14 CCTV 23 26 i Computer 3 2.
Terminal 4 0 Door Equipment 6 5 Card Reader 1 0-Total 59- 47 Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 1
g -,w p--e
a 15- - Amount'of Work On Hold Awaiting Parts-1 12-
- i GOOD i P 9- +
e r .
?
C -
e n: .
t 6- -
. A_ ^
3-
- 4 0-Sep Oct Nov . Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul' Aug 1989 1990 AMOUNT OF WORK ON HOLD AWAITING PARTS (NON-0UTAGE)
This procurement indicator- displays 'the amount of open, non-outage, maintenance items that are- on hold awaiting parts, to the total amount of open, non-outage, maintenance items, expressed as a
! percentage.
The percentage of work on hold. awaiting -
parts decreased to 3.6% in August.
As of August 30, 1990, there were a total of 1,048 open, non-outage, maintenance items with 38 of these items on hold awaiting parts.
1 Adverse Trend: None l i
1 1
l
10- 4
- Spare Parts Inventory Value '
M
- 9 l
/ .'
8-o
~
D: 7 o .
1 !
1 .
a r
s 6-t 5
^Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May .Jun Jul Aug 1989 .1990 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station- at the end of August 1990 was reported as $9,132,942.
Adverse Trend: None i
1 u
i l
'l l
1 i
750-T. - Spare Parts Issued
'h o
u 600-
, s a ,
n '
d - 450-s.
o '
f' 300-D >
o '
I j- 150- "
s a
7 ..
s 0 (
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan- Feb' Mar Apr May. Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 1'
1 SPARE PARTS ISSUED I The- value of the spare parts issued 'during 1 August 1990, totaled $76,310 Adverse Trend: None i
l 2 .- _ _
l i
l-1 l
! O..' Inventory-Accuracy 100- .
, ggl % <
l @f p n7 tV:;
Q;s.
N /d &
80- "# W I!
TV
< 1
.N sta t v5
- f; ? .; l
' o. -
L P- [$t r.g% $k W
e Y i r 60-n T '.
L
" g i (i
- c. . -
s...
e ,
L ::
n-t- 40 .( ~ ; .y ;
l
?,q: 7 -
.'y g .
20- ':l:. . <
N..
=
,:is.
- y.; (4 y 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun- Jul Aug Sep' Oct Nov Dec 1990 4
INVENTORY ACCURACY .
This indicator shows the accuracy of the actual parts count for the warehouse l compared to the counts contained 'in the
[ MMIS computer system for the reporting month.
l During August, 825 difierent line items were counted in the warehouse. Of the 825
! line items -counted 20 items needed count
- adjustments. The inventory accuracy for the month of August was reported as 98%.
1 Adverse Trend: None 1
1 i
- Pick Tickets With-Parts Not Available 1
-1 1
4-i P
pi .
ec rk 3 C
eT ,
ni , i l
tC k 2-o e- . 1 ft .
s 1-J
^
0 -
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul /.g Sep Oct Nov. Dec 1990 :
t t
STOCK 0VT RATE-This indicator shows the percentage of the number of Pick Tickets generated with no parts available during-the reporting month.
During the month of August, a total of . 924 Pick
- Tickets were generated. 0f the 924 Pick Tickets generated, one Pick Ticket was generated with no parts available.
Adverse Trend: None
1
=1500 -O- Total Receipts 1 6- Spare = Parts Receipts !
O Standard Stores Receipts
-X . Direct Charge Receipts 1200- .
N -
R u
m e 900- '
b ,c '
e4 ,
"p -
O t 600- '
s f .
O 300- N: ,0.,
N x
- g,'f.. -b -- .g%&g ,:f ~
0
- Feb Mar Apr .May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nny Dec Jan 1990 1991 r
WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS This indicator shows the' total number -of warehouse receipts, the number of -spare . parts ;
receipts, the number of standard stores receipts, ;
and the number of direct charge receipts during '
the reporting month. -
During August. the warehouse received a total off i 338 receipts. Of the 338 receipts . received,115 were ' spare parts receipts, 74~ were- standard stores receipts, and 149 were direct charge receipts.
I
- . Adverse Trend
- None l <
l r
i
4000- O Total Issues Spare Parts Issues
-O- Standard Stores-Issues ' '
-M- Direct Charge _ Issues 3000-N u
O; '
~bs
- e.s.
u 2000- .
r ,
e s .-
s Q o -
A f ~'
' o-~.o ~
1000- 'N - El
,b.. ,
. ..., O . -o 0
) .. .f ;
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul. Aug .Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 1990 1991 i
WAREHOUSE ISSUES-This indicator shows the total number of warehouse
- issues, the number-of spare parts issues, the number '
l of standard stores issues, and the number direct charge issues for the reporting month.
During August the warehouse completed a total of- t 1,014 issues. 0f the 1,014 issues - completed, 184 were spare parts issues, 568 were standard stores issues,.and 262 were direct charge issues.
Adverse Trend: None i
l l-i
I.
80- [] Total Returns ;
& Spare Parts Returns O ' Standard Stores Returns
-X- Direct Charge Returns >
60-T ,
Po et .
ra- t Cl 40-nI s *
,A '
.ou .l .
fe A. /
' ~' , j' 5
20 ~,
j ;
l 'd O .... -
~ '
l ./
,, ",b----b - 9 _'.- o- i 0 I ~ ~, [ ,oX..- .oX X X X Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec .Jan 1990 1991 4
ERF: ;dSE . RETURNS
- e The Warehouse Returns -Indicator shows the - percentage ;of the total number of wai; house returns, the - number - of spare parts returns,- the ' number of standard stores returns, and the . number of direct charge returns- -
j compared to the total: number of ' warehouse issues during-l- the reporting month. ;
l- During the month of August there were a total of 1,014 i warehouse issues. Of the 1,014 issues, there - were 498 total returns. These returns consisted of 338 spare- i i
parts returns and 160 standard ~ stores returns. !
1
( Adverse Trend: None
- I p l l
l l
. . .- . . . - - - . .- -. -~ _ _-_ _ _ .. .-- . - _ __ _-_
25- 1 IJune 1990 I July 1990 August 1990 3 i
M 20- l a ,
t 1 e i Nr i u 1 15- 1 aa bl ,
)
rR '
e 10-og l fu .
s re=2m t 5- ;
s :
- i e i O' L - - - - b -
0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20. 21-30 >30 Age in Days l
l t
l l- MATERIAL RE0 VESTS AWAITING APPROVAL This indicator shows the number of material requests awaiting approval at the end of the reporting month broken down into their age by '
days.
At the end of August, 21 material requests were awaiting approval.
Adverse TrtDA: None
[
l
. _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ .-...._.. _ ~ _ _
g
- Percente;e of Total Purchases that are Expedited ,
1.5- ;
P e
r -
, c 1-e n '
t -
.5-O Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 EXPEDITED PURCHASES This indicator shows the percentage of expedited purchases compared to the total number of purchase orders generated during the reporting inonth. ,.
During August, there was a total of 309 ;
purchase orders generated. Of the 309 purchase orders generated, there were no expedited purchases. l Adverse Trend: None v
i l
50-June 1990 .
- . Q July 1990 l l August lo30 i
-~
120-
~
N l 90-V '
b l ej
, r
)
C o
e 60- !
fs I. . ,
30-O Shelf Life CQE iscellaneous i
l t
INVOICE BREAKDOWN -
This indicator shows the number of invoices that are on hold at the end of the reporting month due to shelf t ife ,
CQE, and miscellaneous reasons.
At the end of August, 3 invoices were on hold due to shelf life t>easons, . 71 i r.vo ice s were on hold due to COE reasons, and 27 invoices were on hold due to miscellaneous reastens.
Adverse Trend: None t
4 t P
- . . . , , _ . . . , . _ . . . , ..,_,.y , _ , _ ,.s,..,,, ,,, , , _ , .
~. . . . - ..
100-
- Percentage of Material Requests for Issues with the Request Date the same as the Need Date t 80- :
'W(
P 60- .
r c
e ., .
n 40- i t
i 20- !
I B
0 -
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct. Nov Dec 1990 ;
MATERIAL REOUIST PLANNING This indicator shows the percent of material >
requests (MR's) for issues with their request date the same as their need date compared to the total number of MR's for ,
issues for the reporting month, t
During the month of August, a total of 924 .
MR's were received by the warehouse. Of the 924 total MR's received by the warehouse, '
676 MR's were for issues with their request date the same as their need date, ,
1 Adverse Trend: None ,
I
t 700] - Total Modification Packages Open 600-l 500-l 425 425 .
384 400-
[
ty ,
ac h -
300-O %
hv
$d $E 200
'87 '88 '89 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 .
OUTSTANDING MODIFICATICNS The total number of outstanding modifications decreased by three during the month of August.
CATEGORY JUL 90 AUG 90 Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 13 15 Mod Requests Being Reviewed 109 108 ,
- Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 117 113 Construction Backlog /In Progress 42 42 Desian Enar. Update Backloa/In Proaress & J Total 341 338 As of the end of August 46 additional modification requests have been issued this year and 12 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) has completed . 89 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) has completed 72 backlog modification request reviews this year, The number of reviews completed is high due to the fact that som9 of these regests were reviewed more than once.
! Adverse Trend: None 1
l l- .
. . . _ . . . . - _ .. - .- - - - .. . _ . . ~. .--
i 1
100- - Total Temporary Modifications !
M -
O- Fort Calhoun Goal
{
Nd 80-ui -
N60-ec
- ra 40 .
t oi
, j i
fo 20 o......g......g ,' g ,,,,,g ,,,,,g ,,,,,g ,,,,4 8
0- 1 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Har Apr May Jun Jul Aug ;
1989 1990 June 1990 N
10- Ed July 1990 Nd l l August 1990 ui 8- g :
0f g lli bi 6- Ei ,.
ec BM- fj '
ra 4 , j i oi fo 2- "I $ J g
=
g n
S n, ___
x __ p w 03 3-6 5-9 9-12 > 12 Age in Months :
TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS (EXCLUDING SCAFFOLDING)
The top graph shows the total number of temporary modifications.
installed in the Fort Calhoun Station and-a Fort Calhoun goal.
The number of electrical temporary modifications and the number ,'
of mechanical temporary modifications have been deleted from this indicator because the Plant no longer categor% temporary modifications in this manner.
At the end of August, there was a total of 19 temporary nodifications installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. The Fort >
Calhoun goal for the total number of installed temporary 1 modifications is less than 15' installed temporary modifications.
The bottom graph, Ace of Temoorary Modifications, displays the age of all temporary modifications by months installed in the ,
plant.
l Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71
. _ . _ _ .. ._. _ - _ _ . _ _ . ~ . _ . _ .
4 l j
50- 1 IOperv EAR's EAR's Closed During the Reporting Month 1
- EAR's > 30 Days Past Current Schedule l
!1 l
40- 1 i
o Nf 30-u j mE .
bA eR i r' s 20-i 10- i i i s
0_
3 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 August 1990 t
i ENGINEIRLNG ASSISTANCE REOUEST i
?R' ORlTY BREAKDOWN i
l This indicator Engineering shows Requests Assistance the number of op)en (EAR's broken and down closed into priorities at the end of the reporting month.
Along with the r,riority breakdown, the number of ,
EAR's remaining open 30 days past the current- ,
schedule are shown for each priority category. .
>30 Days Past Priority Doen Closed Current Schedule ha h1 bB h.S M bB kn M bM Priority 1 7 6 6 1 1 4 6 3 4 ;
Priority 2 12 12 13 3 0 8 2 4 6-Priority 3 27 30 29 4 0 7 11 11. 16 Priority 4 21 21 35 3 1 8 10 10 12 Total 67 69 83 11 2 27 29 28 38 Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 1 ,
Y
150- -e- Total ECN's Open ,
)
-M- ECN's Opened During the Month ;
-o- ECN's Completed During the Month 120- ,
N :
u m -
b g e 90-r R ,h-g 0
l \ !
f l '\ . -
E M'- / \ '
C ~
~
I' '%
' E- * *
' Y' N
,! 's
\, ,.-
'* - '\co \ ,-
,f \;.
i F
~~
s 30- / 'X - ~ ~ # Y \o -
j \ ~<' '
j .
\ /h a
,o
./
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jen Jul Aug l 1989 1990 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS The indicator shows the total number of open Engineering Change Notices (ECN's), the number of ECN's opened during the reporting i month, and the number of ECN's completed during the reporting month. -
At the end of August 1990, there was a total of 98 open ECN's. During the month of August,. 37 ECN's were opened, and 34 ECN's were completed.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 l
l
l 300 I IDocument Change E Substitute Replacement !+?-
l Facility Changes i
250- ,
. 221 1 i
200- 190 l i -
h 150-Riill I siisi j 100 96' g
=m
?? i 50- 42 :
31 1- '
m=s= 25 18 =
0 -- - - I - I Total ECN's ECN's Opened ECN's Completed Total ECN's Open During the Month During the Month Received -
l l
l ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN ,
i This indicator beaks down the total number of Engineering Change Notices (ECN's) that remain open at the end of the reporting month, the number of ECN's that were opened during the reporting month, the number of ECN's that were completed during the reporting month, and the number of ECN's receiveo by _ Design Engineering during the.
reporting month into several categories. These categories include:
ECN's requiring a document change to complete, ECN's requiring substitute replacement items to complete,.and ECN's requiring facility changes to complete.
Total Ooen Opened Completed Received Document Changes 42. 13 13 221 Substitute Repla ument 31 6 9 190 Facility Changes 25 18 12 96 '
Adverse Trend: None SEE 52 ,
l >
4, ,, . . . , -. , , , em.----- ~------c- ' ' + - ~ " '
5- E 1990 Rec:rdable Injury Frcquency Rate
-*- 1989 Recordable Injury Frequency Rate i 4.S[ ; +- 5 Year Average Recordable Injury Frequency Rate ]
4- !
i 1
3.5- ,
GOOD 3- !
4, l R
J a p,$. ,
e
' *\, ,,,+... -
n 2- N, ,
. \
s ', , .4 ,'+..
1,5- %,, +..... ...4..,+.....+......p.....+ 1
}. ?*g hr Q 5:
0 g/
~
ggg g- g'
[
g 3 '
l Ja'n Fe'b Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :
l RECORDABLE INJURY CASES FRE00ENCY RATE This indicator shows the monthly recordable injury cases frequency rate in column form. The above graph also includes the 1989 recordable injury ,
cases frequency rate and the Fort Calhoun Station 5 year average recordable injury cases frequency rate.
A recordable injury case is reported if Nv; lear Operations Division personnel are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment. The recordable- cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis. There were 2 recordable injury cases reported during the month of August. There has been a total of 5 recordable injury cases 1 so far in 1990. l There were eleven recordable cases reported.in 1989, eleven reported in 1988, and eight reported in 1987. The year end recordable injury frequency rates for 1987, 1988, and 1989 were 2.5, 2.6, and 2.2 respectively.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 26 4
J i
1
,. . . . , , , . , n . , , . . _ - - -
1 i
l Licensee Event Reports '
I IPersonnel Errors Reported in LERs )
- Cumulative Licensee Event Reports j
- Cumulative Personnel Errors Reported in LERs 50-46 ;
t 39 40 31-30-6 :
20-g 2 .
10-0 E E E
'87 '88 '89 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 ,
i HUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS ;
- REPORTED IN LER'S The Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LER's Indicator 1 l reports the Licensee Event Reports (LER's) by their ever.t .
date.
l In August 1990, there were zero LER's eported. Thus, there '
were zero LER's attributable to personnel error.
There have been 21 LER's reported so far in 1990 and 6 LER's have been attributable to personnel errors.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 l
u l
[
wm y , - . . , , , ., ~, - e n -
I INuclear Divisions Turnover Rate
- CPPD Corporate Turnover Rate 8-T u 6-r n ,
o y
e 4- i r
R a
t 2 ,
O Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services Division Division Division l
P i
PERSONNEL TURNOVER RATE The turnover rate for three Nuclear Divisions is shon:
l for the last twelve months.
The personnel turnover rate -is plotted against the OPPD corporate turnover rate of 4.0%. This OPPD corporate turnover rate is based on the turnover rate over the last three years.
l Adverse Trend: None ,
l l
l u
l l
600 if Actual Stiffing 1 561 539 1 IAuthorized Staffing 1
P 400-e r
s o -
n n
e 205 1 200 192 ,
55 52 0-Nuclear Operations
- M
Production Engineering Nuclear Services Division Division Division STAFFING LEVEL The authorized and actual staffing levels are shown for the three Nuclear Divisions.
Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 1
i
- 1. I SRO Exa2inaticn Pass Ratio !
100- f l 80- t 0 ,
P >
a 60- :
s
$ 40-l t
l i .
! o l
20-l '
No Exams No Exams No Exams Administered Administered Administered- >
NRC Administered NRC Administered NRC Administered OPPD Administered Generic Site Specific Requalification Requalification i Funaamental Exams Exams Exams :
Exams .
I SRO LICENSE EXAMINATION PASS RATIO The SRO License Examination Pass Ratio Indicator shows the number of NRC administered. Generic Fundamentals E2 ""s (GFE 's), '
the number of NRC administered Site Specific Exams, ie number l of NRC administered license requalification exat and the number of OPPD administered license requalification exams. 4 No SRO License examinations were administered during August 1990. The table below lists the examination pass ratio for examinations which have been taken during 1990.
OPPD ADMINISTERED NRC ADMINISTERED Requal Generic Fund. Site Spec. Requal.
DATE % PASS RATIO % PASS RATIO % PAS 1 1A,T,,[Q % PASS RATIO
~
Feb 1990 -
100 - -
l Adverse Trend: None 1
s
. , - ,, , , .- - ,, e . . , , .-
d l
1 IR0 Examination Pass Ratio i
100- )
R 80-0
~
P a
s 60- ,
5 R !
a 40- I t ,
i .
o 20- ;
No Exams No Exams Administered Administered 0
NRC Administered NRC Administered NRC Administered OPPD Administered Generic Site Specific- Requalification Requalification Fundamental Exams Exams Exams Exams i R0 LICENSE EXAMINATION PASS RATIO >
The R0 License Examination Pass Ratio Indicator shows the number of NRC administered Generic Fundamentals Exams (GFE's), the number of '
NRC administered Site Specific Exams, the number of NRC l
~
administered license requalification exams, and the number of OPPD administered license requalification exams.
No R0 License examinations were administered during the month of
. August 1990. The table below lists the examination pass ratio for l
examinations which have been taken during 1990.
OPPD ADMINISTERED NRC ADMINISTERED -
Requal Generic Fund. Site Spec. Requal.
DATE % PASS RATIO % PASS RATIO % PASS RATIO % PASS RATIO Feb 1990 -
100 - -
May 1990 - -
100' -
Adverse Trend: None
l i I ISRO Exams Administered i 20-SRO Exams Passed j l
R0 Exams Administered J
E R0 Exams Passed 15- ;
m i b '
e
? b r I 3 a j I o 10- g j .
i f d y j E -
3 X @
i a s m
s 5- h' $
F N .
. Ei
=l? Ef di j lh 0
E
" E( I l o l Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 1990 1991 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS .
This indicator shows the number of SRO and '
R0 quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally administered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and R0 candidates' monthly progress. t During the month of August 1990, no SRO exams were administered.
During the month of August 1990, no RO exams were administered.
T:
Adverse Trend: None
1 I r
!!!! Hotlines Initiated l 1 50- /. Hotlines Closed Sn; Hotlines Open Under 4 Weeks j Hotlines Open Over 4 Weeks 40-a b 35-e ;
r i 30-o
- f 25- !
H '
20- ;
t 1 15- M 3 9 E 3
- M Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug .
1989 1990 HOTLINES This indicator shows the number of Hotlines initiated during the reporting month, the number of Hotlines closed during the reporting month, the number of Hotlines that remain open and are less than four weeks old, and the number of Hotlines that remain 1 open and are older than four weeks old.
During the month of August 1990, there were 11 Hotlines initiated, 12 Hotlines closed, 5 Hotlines that remained open and were less than four weeks old, and 6 Hotlines that remained open and were older than four weeks old.
Adverse Trend: None t
-h i
M Planned Classroom Hours I R Actual Classroom Hours 1
T --.
h '
3-s , 1 a I d 3 S 2- .i 4^
I Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 1989 1990 l CLASSROOM (INSTRUCTOR) HOURS o s the r lhoun Stat on.
!h due to the t col ec and process needed information.
Adverse Trend: None
1 IOperations J 5-lill Maintenance E Chemistry and Radiation Protection i 30 E Technical Support !
T E General Employee Training h Other 0 25-u s [
a '
n 20-d '
I s
0 15- Es*5 ,
f sis :
x:l.::5 ii H -
i$!:i ::x:::
o 10- . ;
- -i M !s.i!!! :
u l S!8 s
5-E T -
h[ - E Ib l__
} -
0 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul ;
l 1989 1990 l
TOTAL HOURS OF STUDENT TRAINING l :
This indicator shows the total number of student hours for Operations, Maintenance, Chemistry and Radiation Protection, Technical Support, General Employee Training, and Other training conducted for the Fort Calhoun Station. -
This indicator is one month behind the reporting month due to the time needed to collect and evaluate the data.
Total Hours
- TRAINING JUN 1990 JUL 1990 Operations 2,623 2,742 Maintenance 3,843 3,180 :
Chemistry and 826 580 Radiation Protection Technical Support 301 1,768 General Employee Training 4,604 3,359 r 722 277 Tota 12,919 11,906 r Adverse Trend: None
_ _ _ . _ ~ _ ._ . . _ _ _ . . . _ _
- Violations per 1000 Inspection Hours O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4 15-11.1
- 10.6 GOOD 12-4 1
7.1 i 9- :
& - -- + - - - G - --- - -- - @ -- - e --- G- --- G --- @ - - -G - -- G -- - O i
4
'87 '88 I6-
'89 3-0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 1990 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec t
i t
VIOLATIONS PER 1000 INSPECTION HOURS ,
This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per 1000 NRC inspection hours. This y# indicator was ca:culated using the number of violations and 1
the number of inspection hours from sifMtted inspection reports. These inspection reports constup cf reports from the months of January 1990 through June WJ0.
l l This indicator is one month behind the reporting month due to the time involved with collecting and processing the .
data.
The violations per 1000 1.ispection hours indicator was reported as 7.5 for the month of June 1990.
There have been a total of 1,972 inspection hours in 1990 which have resulted in 15 violations.
The goal for the number of violations per 1000 inspection hours is less than 8.2.
Adverse Trend: None 1
_ _ _ __ _ ______. _ _ _ . . ~ _ , _ __ - .- ___ _. _ - . , . . . _ _ _ _ _ __ __
75- 1 INumber of Violations During the Last 12 Months E Number of NCV's During the Last 12 Months V
i o
1 a
t 50- 47 ,
N u
i -
00 41 41
~~
bn 38 37 e
5 -
E -
34 34 r, - -
oO fd 25-21 21 h 19 ,20 m C 16 M E 16 V 14 M T)
?
- Ff! e 0
Jan Feb .hr Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 CUMULATIVE VIOLATIONS AND NCV's (TWELVE-MONTH RU:lNINC TOTAL)
The Cumulative Violations and Non-Cited Violations (NCV's) Indicator shows the cumulative number of violations for the last twelve months and the cumulative number of NCV's for the last twelve months.
During the last twelve months, 34 violations have been ident!fied and 16 NCV's have been identified. '
Adverse Trend: None
~
n R
l
- Total Outstanding CAR's E Outstanding CAR's > Six Months Old
' Outstanding CAR's That Are Modification Related 200, 150-o Nf -
u N100-eR r' q s
50- W'NkM48$N5%
[);$T ll.3s *;f:((fD)tQ ,. . ,y.,. q q Qg% Y' y ;
f]fQ G Mdif;l%.l F_j.N
.w.
'_ b. ; 73 ; j.J ll'TJ[:S
'5 plj'!lJ
- , Q ; ; ;; !.N y r.J 0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe b Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1989 1990 OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding Corrective Action Reports (CAR's), the number of outstanding CAR's that are greater than six months old, and the number of outstanding CAR's that are modification related.
As of the end of August 1990, there were 148 outstanding CAR's reports, 53 CAR's that are greater than six months old, and 10 CAR's that are modification related.
Adverse Trend: None
y40- C: NOD Overdue CAR's u 30- -& NOD CAR's With Extensions Granted mC bA 20-r g -- - - 6 s g _ - A. - - 4 _ _g _ _, 4 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1989 1990
, 50-Nf 40- -e- PED Overdue CAR's u
-b PED CAR's With Extensions Granted mC 30-bA go.
I. 10 4 9
g- _
- H ---g ,
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr iday Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1989 1990 10-N 8- -9 Other Overdue CAR's u -& Other CAR's With Extensions Granted aC 6-bA 4 eR r' 2-
~
5 0 '" " ~~' ~~k- "'b Nov Dec fin fe'b har Air May En 51 Aug Sep Oct 1989 1990 OVERDUE AND EXTENDED CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS This indicator shows the number of overdue CAR's and the number of CAR's which received extensions broken down by organization.
OVERDUE CAR's ORGANIZATION JUN 90 JUL 90 AUG 90 N00 0 0 0 PED 0 0 1 Others 0 0 0 Total 0 0 1 CAR's WITH EXTENSIONS GRANTED ORGANIZATION JUN 90 JUL 90 AUG 90 N00 4 4 2 PED 8 7 13 Others 1 0 1 Total 13 11 16 Adverse Trend: None
~
2
Ny150- -G- NOD CAR's >6 Months Old
-& NOD CAR's <6 Months Old nC 100 _
e 50- A--O' 6- - - 6 r ~0- ~ ~O ' t - A O C " " "
F "
n s
Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep- Oct Nov 1989 1990 o 150-Nf C PED CAR's >6 Months Old u
, 100- -A- PED CAR's <6 Months Old bA
'7 r ~'O --A-~
5 0-Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 1989 1990 o 40- .
Nf -G- Other CAR's >6 Months Old u
mC
-A- Other CAR's <6 Months Old bA 20-r 10- 6 O .6 O
3 -o 0& 4 - -g -- - A '
s o
- 0 - -
N Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 1989 1990 CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS CURRENT STATUS This irdicator shows the number of CAR's that are older than 6 months and the number of CAR's that are less than 6 months old broken down by organization.
CAR's GREATER THAN 6 MONTHS OLD ORGANIZATION JUN 90 JUL 90 AUG 90 N00 10 8 6 PED 49 49 48 Others 4 3 1 Total 63 60 55 CAR's LESS THAN 6 MONTHS OLD ORGANIZATION JUN 90 JUL 90 AUG 90 NOD 55 39 45 PED 34 31 35 Others 9 8 13 Total 98 78 93 Adverse Trend: None
1989 1990 OPPD SIGNIFICANT NRC OPPD- SIGNIFICANT- NRC SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA CAR's CAR's VIOLATIONS LER'S CAR's CAR's- VIOLATIONS LER'S A. Plant Operations 11 0 8 2 36 (6) 0 1 9 B. Radiological Controls 30 1 2 1 22 (1) 2 0 0 C. Maintenance / 140 8 2 10 152 (2) 7 (1) S 4 Surveillance D. Emergency 8 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 Preparedness E. Security 26 2 6 10 23 (4) 0 4 1 F. Engineering / 134 2 7 7 102 (24) 2 (1) 1 (1) 7 Technical Support G. Safety Assessment / 68 0 1 0 15 (4) 0 0 0 Quality verification H. Other 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 417 13 26 31 357 (41) 11 (2) 13 (1) 21 CAR'S ISSUED VERSUS SIGNIFICANT CAR'S VERSUS NRC VIOLATIONS ISSUED VERSUS LER'S REPORTED The above matrix shows the number of Corrective Action Reports (CAR's) issued by the Nuclear Services Division versus the number of Significant CAR's issued by the Nuclear Services Division versus the number of violations issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the Fort Calhoun Stdtion in 1989 and 1990. Included in this table is the number of Licensee Event Reports (LER's) identified by the station each year. The number of NRC violations reported are one month behind the reporting month due to the time involved in collecting and processing the violations.
In August, 1990, there were 41 CAR's issued, 2 Significant CAR's issued, and zero LER's identified. During July -ne NRC violation was issued. This violation was attributable to personnel error. The monthly distribution of CAR's, Significant CAR's, NRC violations, and LER's are shown in parentheses.
SEP 15, 20 & 21
. - - - - - - ~ - "
SIGNIFICANT ITEMS OF INTEREST This section is intended to provide information on events which are significant to the Fort Calhoun Station and will give a " heads-up" look at what is scheduled in the coming months.
The NRC Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) Review is scheduled for August 20 through August 31- 1990.
The Procedure Upgrade Project and the Plant have a) proved and issued 813 safety related procedur~3 T11s meets a Safety Enhanent Program (SEP)- cv Number 48 milestone comitment.
The NRC - Maintenance Inspection Team follow-up rt e has been rescneduled until November, 1990.
The 56 day 1991 Refueling Outage is planned to start 9/28/91 and finish 11/22/91.
The 1990 Emergency Preparedness Graded Exercise is planned for the week of 11/26/90.
i I'
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS l
l AGE OF OUTSTANDING MAINTENANCE WORK ORDERS This indicator tracks the total number of outstanding corrective non-outage Maintenance Work Orders at the Fort Calhoun Station - versus their age in months.
AMOUNT OF WORK ON HOLD AWAITING PARTS This indicator is defined as the percentage of open, non-outage maintenance work orders that are on hold awaiting parts, to the totai number of open, non-outage, maintenance work orders.
f,RU.IARY SYSTEMS CHEMISTRY HOURS OUTSIDE STATION LIMITS tie cumulative hours that the Component Cooling Water system is outside tha station chemistry limit. The hours are accumulated from the first
- am)le exceedin) the limit until additional sampling shows the parameter to >e back with n limits. ,
j CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE The Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate and the industry check valve f ailure rate (failures per 1 million component hours). The data for the industry f ailure rate is three months behind the Performance Indicators Report reporting month. This indicator tracks performance for SEP item 43.
CLASSROOM (INSTRUCTOR) HOURS The number of planned classroom hours and the number of actual classroom hours for the Fort Calhoun Station.
1 CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT CURRENT STATUS l
The number of Corrective Action Reports (CAR's) that are older than 6 months and the number of CAR's that are less than 6 months old broken down by organization for the last 6 months. >
CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKL N GREATER THAN 3 MONTHS OLO I The percentage of total outstanding corrective maintenance items, not requiring an outage, that are greater than three months old at the end of the period reported.
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS (CONTINVED)
CUMUL ATIVE VIO! ATIONS AND NON-CITED "10LAT10NS (TWELVE-MONTH Rl!NNING TOT AL_)_
The cumulative number of violations and Non-Cited Violations for the last 12 months.
DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The daily core thermal output as measured from computer point XC105 in thermal megawatts.
DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY
~
A Diesel Generator- (DG) unit consist;, of the engine, generator, combustion air isystem, cooling wa t r, c system, fuel supply- system, lubricatin controls, g oildiesel ard system, starting generator air system, autostart controls, manual breaker.
Peliability of each DG unit will be reported for two situati$nt, one for the last 20 demands and one for the last 100 demands. Reliability is the ratio of the number of successful runs to the number of demands, for each individual DG unit.
A successful run is defined as a start of a DG unit and the loading of this unit to a minimum of 50% rated load (1250 KW) for a minimum time period of 60 minutes. ,
s A failure is defined as the failure to start, accelerate, and assume the 3 design rated load for the given time period as specified for an emergency -l or a valid test.
The total number of demands (or valid tests) will be equal to the sum of the failures and the successful runs. l This definition of DG Reliability was taken from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission " Regulatory Guide 1.108, Revision 1". This is -the ;
definition being applied in calculating the diesel generator reliability at the Fort Calhoun Station.
DISABLING INJURY FRE00ENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)
This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, . involving days away from work par 200,000 man-hours worked (100 man-years). This does not include contractor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel performance for i
SafetyEnhancementProgram(SEP) Item 26. '
_o
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS (C0f' 1NUED) j DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) )
)
The - Document Review Indicator shows the number of documents reviewed l during the. reporting month, the number of documents scheduled for review- j during the reporting month,- and the number of document reviews that are ;
overdesi.
l ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE RE00EST (EAR's) PRIORITY BREAKpDW_!i
~
The number of open and closed EAR's broken down into priorities' at the end of the reporting month. This . indicator tracks performance for SEP item 62. -
ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) BREAKDOWN The breakdown of the total number of open ECN's,-the number of ECN's that t were opened during the repoi' 'ng month, the number of - ECit's - th.at were ;
completed during the reporting .wth, and- the number of ECN's received r during the reporting month intu three categories. These categories ,
include, 1) document changes are rauired to complete the- ECN's, 2 subs +,tuteorreplacementitemsarerequiredtocompletethe-ECN's,or.3)) -
f a".ility change:, are required to complete the ECN's. This indicator
' racks performance for SEP item 62.
RGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS I ;
l The number of ECN's that remain open at the end of the' reporting month, l the number of ECN's that were opened during the reporting _ month, and the-number of ECN's that are completed during the . reporting conth. ' This - y indicator tracks performance for SEP item 62.
l l
E0VIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1000 CRITICAL HOURS ,
Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical- hours is theLinverse of- the ,
mean time betweer, forced outages. caused by equipment failures. The- mean time is equal to the number of hours the reactor is critical in .a period (1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />) dividei by the number of forced outages caused by equipment f ailures in that period. ,. ;
EQUIVALENT AVAILABill V FACTOR This ' indicator is defined as t% ratio of gross available generation-to gross maximum generation, expres, as a percentage. Available-' generation, is the energy that can be produceo the. unit is operated.at the tuaximum power level oarmitted by equipment and regulatory limitations.= Maximum, generation'is the' energy ti.at can be prodcced by a unit in a given period if operated continuously at maximum capacity.
EXPE01TED PURCHASES The percentage of expedited purch3tes.which occurred during the reporting i month compared to the total number of purchase orders generated.
3 >
s . _
b '
. FORT lCALH0 'N PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS (CONTINUED)'
FORCED OUTAGE RATE This: indicator is - defined as the percentage of. time that the unit was
~
o unavailab_le due to forced events. compared to .the time planned for electrical generation. Forced- events are failures or other unplanned-conditions. that require removing the unit from service before the end of the ,axt weekend.. Forced events, : include startup failures and ' events .
initiated while: the' unit is in - reserve shutdown - (i .e'. , thec unit is available but not.in service. !
FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR; This . indicator is ; defined as. the. steady-state : primary cool 6nt .1-131:
activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contribution and normalized .to a common purification rate.
Tramp uranium is fuel which has' been deposited 'on reactor core internals, from previous. detectue -fuel- or is present- on :the surface of -fuel elements from the manufacturing process.- ,
Steady- state is defined as continuous operations above 85: percent power for at Ir:ast seven days.
GASt00S RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT, This indicator displays tho total number of Curies of 'all gaseous radioactive nuclides released from the Fort'Calhoun Station.,
GROSS HEAT RATE-Gross heat rate is defined as the r.tio of' total thermal energy in British Theimal Units (BTV) . produced by ' the reactor to the ctotal gross electrical energy produced by the generator in' kilowatt-hours'(KWH).
HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED
-The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous -waste, 'and other hazardous waste produced: by 'the Fort Calhoun Station each ianta.
HOTLINES The number of Hotlines that are initiated, closed, overdue, and open for a given month. A Hotlire is a training document- sent out for immediate review. The Hotline ' should be reviewedi and signed within 5. days of receipt of the Hotline.
t-Y l
. ~ _ - . -
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS (CONTINUED)
HOURS' CHEMISTRY IS OUTSIDE OWNERS GROUP GUIDELINES-Tctal hours for 13 secondary side chemistry- parameters exceeding guidelines durin0 power operation, Power operation is, defined as greater than 30% power. The 13 parameters tracked are steam generator pH,. cation
, conductivity, boron silica, chloride, sulfate, sodium, feed ' water pH , -
dissolved oxygen,. hydrazine, iron, copper, and condensate pump discharge dissolved-oxygen.
IN-LINE CHEMISTRY' INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE Total number of in-line chemistry int.Nments that are out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Post Ace :ent Sampling System (PASS).. ,
INVENTORY ACCURACY The percentage of line items that are counted each month by the warehouse whici need count adjustments. '
~
INVOICE BREAKDOWN The number of invoices that are on hold due to shelf life, CQE, and miscellaneous reasons. >
LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS l This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or R0 quizzes and exams that i are administered and passed eacn month, e
- LIN.0 RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE BEING DISCHARGED TO THE ENVIRONMENT j l
This indicator displays the volume .of liquid radioactive. waste released '
s I from the radioactive- waste monitor tanks. The curies from all releases from the Fort Calhoun Station to the Missouri River are also shown.
LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) r l
l The total -number of security incidents for the reporting month. This i
indicator tracks security performance for Safety Enhancement Program Item Number 58.
11 MAINTENANCE EFFECTIVENESS :
\;
h The numoer of Nuclear P'lant Relicbility Data System (NPRDS) components with more than one failure and the number of NPRDS compaents with more ,
than two failures during the last twelve mon ^hs. I i
1 1
I l
- _ - , . . .. _ - ....c.. _ . L ., _. ,
l FORTCALHOUNPERFORMANCEPARAMETERDEFINITIONS(CONTINUED)' l L%INTENANCF WORK ORDER BACKLOG
, i L Tiie ' number of ' corrective non-outage maintenance work: orders that remain :1 l' open at. the end of the reporting month. This indicator was added to the )
Performance Indicators Report to trend .open corrective non-outage- '
l= maintenance work orders' as stated in Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) l E Item No. 36.
l MAINTENANCE WORK ORDER BREAKDOWN l This indicator is a breakdown of. corrective noneoutage maintenance work- 1 orders by several categories that remain open at the end of the reporting i month. j MAINTENANCE OVERTIME il The - percentage of ~overtiine hours ~ compared to -normal hours- for !
maintenanco. This includes OPPD personnel as well as contract personnel.--
MATERI AL RE0 VEST P! ANNING The percent of material recuests (MR's) Jfor issues with their' request .l date the same as their need cate compared to the total number of MR's.
J MATERIAL RE0 VESTS AWAITING APPROVAL- ,
1 The number of material requests awaiting approval at the' end .of the. I reporting month-broken down by their age in days.
MAXIMC, INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE l The total maximum amount of Gamma and Neutron -(Whole Body) radiac.M received by-an individual person working at'the Fort Cilhoun Station on a ,
monthly, quarterly, and annual basis. "
NUMBER OF HOT SPOTS The ~ number of radiological hot spots which 'have been identified, and - .
documented to exist at . e Fort Calhoun Station at the end of th reporting month. A hot spot is a small localizedisource of radiation. A 1 L hot r .'t occurs .dien the contact dose rate of an item is at least 5 times l l the teneral Area dose rate and the - item's dose rate is equal- to or- J l> greater than 100 mrem / hour.
L.
u I -
1 1 L
-4 l
H
i l
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS (CONTINUED)
NUMBER OF NUCLEAR PL ANT RELI ABILITY DATA SYSTEM (NPRDS) FAILURE _ REPORTS 1 SUBMITTr0 l The data plotnd is the total number of NPRDS component failures -
(confirmed and possible) and the number of confirmed NPRDS component f ailures. The total number of NPRDS component failures are based on the number of failure reports that have been sent to the Institute of Nuclear Operations (INP0).
L Confirmed NPRDS component failures are based upon failure reports that have been accepted by INP0. .Possible NPRDS component failures are based 1 upon failure reports that are still under review by .INP0.
NPRDS is the Nuclear Plant - Reliability Data System, and is a utility industry users group program which has been outlined by INP0 and implemented at the Fort Calhoun Station.
NUMBER OF OUT-0F-SERVICE CONTROL ROOM INSTRUMENTS A control room instrument that cannot perform its- design function ' is considered as out-of-service. A control room instrum~ ^ which has had a Maintenance Work Order ("WO) written for it and has no. been repaired by the end of the reportir riod is considered out-of-service and will be counted. The duration'c out-of-service condition is not considered.
l Computer CRTs are not considered as control room instruments. _
NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ERRORS REPORTED-IN LER'S The number of Licensee Event Reports (LERs) attributed _to personnel error on the original LER submittal. This indicator - trends per'sonnel performance for SEP Item No. 15. '
FUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN L CENSEE EVENT REPORTS The number of Surveillance Tests (ST's) that result - in Licensee Event l l Reports for hfety Enhancement (LER's) during the rep Program SEP)(orting. This indicator Item Numbers'60 and 61. tracks missed ST's 1
- OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET I 1
The year to date budget compared to ' the actual expenditures for I operations and maintenance.
OUTSTANDING CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS
, This indicator displays the total number of outstanding Corrective Action l Reports (CAR's), the number of CAR's that are older than six months and '
the number of modification related CAR's.
1
I L FORTCALHOUNPERFORMANCEPARAMETER-DEFINITIONST(CONTINUED)-
OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The number ofi Modification Requests: (MR'S) -in any state between the' i issuance of a Modification Number and the completion of:the drawing update. 1
' Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress The Form FC-1133 has not been plant. approved. . ;
t Modification Requests Being Reviewed
'This category includes: 1 1.)
- Modification Requests that are not yetireviewed.
r 2.) *' Modification Requests being reviewed by)the!
NuclearProjectsReviewCommittee(NPRC. J l 3.)
- reviewed by the- c ModificationRequestsbeing(NPC).
Nuclear Projects Committee j These Modification Requests- may' be dreviewed': several1 times before they are approved for_ accomplishment or cancelled.- Some of these Modification Requests are returned to Engineering for more information, some . approved far evaluation,- .some epp:oved tfor study, and some approved'for e inning. Once planning is completed:-
and the scope.of the work ic clearly defined, these: Modification.
l Requests may be approved for- accomplishment-with'a year assigned for construction -or they may be . cancelled. All-'of these different phases require review.-
Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress Nuclear Planning has assigned a year.'in which constructiva will be completed and design work may be.in progress.
Construction Backlog /In Progress- ,
The Construction Package has been- . issued orlconstruction has i begun but the modification has not. been accepted by the System AcceptanceCommittee~(SAC).
r Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress PED has received' the Modification Completion Report 'but the drawings have not been updated.
OVERDUE AND EXTENDED CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS The number of overdue Corrective Action Reports (CAR's) and the number of ,
CAR's which received extensions broken down by-organization for'thm last 6 i months.
-100- ,
i FORTCALHOUNPERFORMANCEPARAMETERDEFINITIONS-(CONTINUED) 'i PERSONNEL RADIATION EXPOSURE (CUMULATIVE): ?
Collective radiation exposure is- the total external whole-body dese received by all on-site personnel (including contractors and visitors) .
during a tin period, as measured by ' the thermoluminescent- dosimeter -
(TLD). Collective . radiation exposure- is reported in units of man-rem.
This indicator tracks radiological work performance for- Safety :
EnhancementProgram(SEP)ItemNumber54.
Pf!SONNEL TURNOVER RATE The ratio of the number of turnovers to average employment. A turnover is a vacancy created by voluntary resignation from the company. Retirement, '
drath, termination, transfers within the company, and part-time employees-are not considereu in +urnover.
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDul This indicator is defined as the percentage - of preventive maintenance items in the month that were not completed by the scheduled date plus a grace period equal' to 25 percent of the scheduled interval. This indicator tracks preventive maintenance' activities for Safety Enhancement ,
Program (SEP)ItemNumber41.
PR'IMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY - PERCENT OF HOURS OUT 0F LIMIT The percent of hours out of limit are for six-primary chemistry-parameters divided by the total number of hours possible for the month.
The key parameters used are: Lithium, Chloride, Hydrogen, -Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride, and Suspended Solids. EPRI limits are used.
_ PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)
The number of identified incidents concerning maintenance procedural 3 t
p(roblems, includes thethe number number of closed of closed IR's IR's causedrelated to the use by procedural of procedures noncompliance),
and- the number of closed procedural noncompliance IR's. This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP Item Numbers 15 and 41. .
RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES-PROGRAM- !
The number of identified poor radiological work practices,(PRWP) for.the reporting month. This inPcator tracks radiological work performance for SafetyEnhancement(SEP)ItemNumber52.
RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE-l I
The ratio of preventive maintenance - (including surveillance testing' and l calibration procedures) to the sut # non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive maintenance e m N ed over the reporting period. The ratio, expressed as a percente is calculated based on man-hours. This indicator tracks preventive. ar.ncenance activities for Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Item Number 41.
-101-
1 FORTCALHOUNPERFORMANCEPARAMETERDEFINITIONS(CONTINUED)- 4 RECORDARLE INJURY CASES FRE0VENCY RATE (RECORDABLE INJURY RATE) l The number of injuries requiring' morei than: normal first aid per 200,000= 1
- manhours worked. This indicator trends personnel performance'for SEP Item i No. 15 and SEP' Item 26.'- l q
AO LICENSE EXAMINATION PASS RATIO The' R0 license examination pass ratio for NRCc administered Generic ~ !
Fundamentals Exams (GFE's), NRC' administered Site _ Specific Exams, .. NRC. I administered license requalification- exams,. and OPPD administered license requalification exams.
SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE INDEX The. Chemistry Performance -Index (CPI) -is a -calculation based on the. I concentration of key impurities: in the secondary side; of(the plant. :These l key impur.ities are the most likely cause of deterioration 'of the' steam R
- generators.. The chemistry parameters are reported. only.-for _ the: period of ,
time greater than 30 percent power.
The following equation is how the CPI-is calculated:)
CPI ='((Ka/0.8)+(Na/20)+(0/10))/3- 2 Where the following parameters are monthly averages of; ,
Ka = average blowdown cation conductivity, '
Na = average blowdown sodium concentration 02 = average condensate pump discharge dissolved oxygen concentration SECURITY INCIDENTS BREAKDOWN i This indicator shows a percentile breakdown of. the types of Security incidents for the reporting month;-
The' following items are the types of Security; incidents represented-in this indicator.-
Licensee Designated Vehicles (LDV's) j Incidents related to the :use of LDV.'s,n e.g. keys left in the vehicle, loss of keys, or failure to return keys.
-Security Badges L
Incidents involving lost / unattended badges, badges removed from site,'or failure a wear badges.
l- Escorting l s I l
-102--
l m .
,4.'
1 FORT CALHOUN PERFO'RMANCE PARAMETER' DEFINITIONS"(CONTINUED)
SECURITY INCIDENTS BREAKDOWN (CONTINUED) l Incidents involving escort responsibilities, e.g.. improper L
I controlorescortofavisitor(s).
- Security System Failures ,
Incidents ' involving alarm system faiiures, CCTV failures, security com) uter f ailures,- terminal in 1s , door equipment f ailures, anc card reader f ailures,
~
! l Security Key Control Incidents' . involving Security key control, e.g., lost Security-keys, Security keys ' removed from site, or failure to return Security keys. This type'of incident does not reflect incidents concerning LOV-keys. ;
Access Control 1
Incidents involving the ins'pect.iun and control of personnel, packages, and. vehicles', e.g. failure to properly search personnel, packages, and vehicles. This' item also includes the introduction of ' contraband tr prohibited items into the Protected Area, or the attempteo introduction of_such items.
This indicator tracks security performance for Safety Enhancement Program ,
(SEP) Item Number 58. ,
SECURITY SYSTEM FAILURES The number of Security incidents concerning' alarm systems failures,1CCTV-failures, security computer f ailures, terminal f ailures, door equipment failures, and card reader failures. This; indicator _ tracks ' security-performance for Safety Enhancement Program (SEP). Item Number 58.- t
, E ARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE ,
L The dollar value of the spare parts. inventory at the end of.the reporting period.
' M . PARTS ISSUED Ti.e dollar value of the- saare parts issued for the Fort Calhoun Station.
/ 'ig the reporting perioc.
SR0 OPERATOR LICENSE EXAMINATION PASS RATIO The SR0 license examination pass ratio for NRC ' administered Generic - <
Fundamentals Exams (GFE's), NRC administered Site Specific Exams, NRC. .
administered license requalification ' exams, and OPPD administered license. !
requalification exams.
-103-m l
., .s
~ FORTCALHOUNPERFORMANCE-PARAMETERDEFINITIONS(CONTINUED)-
i STAFFING LEVEL- -!
~
The actual steffing' level- and the authorized staffing level for ~ the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engineering Division, and the Nuc' ear Services-Division.
STATION NET GENERATION The net-generation (sum) produced by the Fort.Calhoun St'ation during the-reporting month STOCK 0VT RATE The total' number of Pick. Tickets that were generated during the-reporting _
month and the total number of Pick Tickets that were generated during the' reporting month with no parts-available.
TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS The ' number of. temporary mechanical and electrical _ configurations to the plant's systems,
]
o Temporary - configurations are defined as electrical jumpers, clectrical ,
blocks, mechanical jumpers, or mechanical blocks -which are instelled in.
t the plant operating systems and.are not shown on the latest: revision ~of-the P&ID, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.
Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveillance -Tests,. ,
Maintenance Procedures,. Calibration Procedures, Special? Procedures, or Operating Procedures are not considered-as. temporary modifications unless the jumper or block remains in place after the test or procedure 'is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or lab instruments are not: '
considered as temporary modifications.
7 Scaffolding is not considered a: tem)orary? modification. Jumpers and. ;
blocks which are installed and for whici EEAR's have.been submitted, will '
be considered as a temporary modifications until final: resolution of the
! EEAR and the, jumper or block is removed or~is permanently recorded on'the drawings. ,
This indicator tracks temporary modifications for Safety Enhancement Program (SEP)ItemNumber62&71..
TOTAL HOURS OF STUDENT TRAINING The total number of student hours of trainin for Operations, Maintenance, Chemistry and Radiation Protection, gTechnical. Support, General Employee Training, and Other ~ trainir g conducted for the Fort Calhoun Station. -
t
-104-
I FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE _ PARAMETER DEFINITIONS-(CONTINUED)
TOTAL SKIN AND' CLOTHING CONTAMINATIONS- ~
l Reportable skin- and clothing contamirations above background luels greater than 5000 dpm/100 cm squared. This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP Item No. 15.
I UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS WHILE CRITICAL .I This indicator is defined as- the number of unplanned automatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actuations) that occur while the reactor is critical. The indicator is further defined as follows:
Unplanned means that the scram was not part of a _ planned test or evolution.
Scram meansthe automatic shutdown of the reactor by a- rapid-insertion of all control rods that is caused by actuation of the. reactor protection system._ The scram signal may have resulted from exceedinn a setpoint or may have been-spurious.
Automatic means that the initial signal . that caused actuation of the reactor protection system logic was provided from one of the sensors monitoring plant parameters and conditions, rather than ' the manual scram . switches (or pushbuttons) in the main control room.
Critical means that during the steady-state condition of .the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication: factor (keff) was equal to one.
UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS This indicator is defined as the sum of the following safety ' system actuations:
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 ,
the number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuations that result from a loss of power to a safeguards bus A7 unplanned safety- system actuation occurs when an. actuation setpoint for a safety (system is generated ECCS -is reached only), or when and m.jor a spurious equipment in the or inadvertent system signal is actuated.
Unplanned means that the system actuatien was not part of a planned test or evolution.
The ECCS actuations- to be ccunted~ are actuations of the high pressure injection system, the low pressure injection system, or the safety.
injection tanks.:
l 4
-105-
FORT CALHOUN PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEFINITIONS-(CONTINUED)I i
VIOLATIONS PER 1000 INSPECTION HOURS-This indicator is- defined as the number of violations sited 'n c NRC -,
=
inspection reports for the' Fort Calhoun' Station per 1000. NRC- ins)ection-hours. The violations are reported'in the year that the inspect on:was-actually performed and ' not based on when: the inspection report -is received. The hours reported-for each inspection report are used as the- ?
inspection hours, j VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RA)10 ACTIVE WASTE r This indicator ~ is1 defined as the volume of tow-level . solid: radioactive- -
waste produced, in' final form ready for burial, during a given period. It- !
is calculated using the amount -of waste actually shipped. for dis 3osal, ;
plus the change in inventory of waste- in v. -site storage in fina form !
ready for burial. The volume of radioactive waste: that is not yet in
- final form-- ready . f or shipment is not- included. Low-level - solid radioactive waste- consists - of dry active. waster sludges, : resins, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear, power-plant operation i and maintenance. ,
1' Dry active waste includes contaminated rags, , cleaning materials, disposable protective clothing, ~ plastic containers, and any other material to be disposed of at a low-level. radioactive';uaste disposal. ,
site, except resin, sludge,: or. evaporator bottoms. Lod ' level refers to !
all radioactive waste that. is not ' spent fuel or-' a tj-product of spent fuel processing.
This indicater tracks radiological work perfor: nance for Safety ;
EnhancementProgram.(SEP)ItemNumber54.
~
WAREHOUSE ISSUES The total number.of warehouse issues',.the number of non-CQE stock issues, the neber of CQE stock issues, the number: of direct charge . non-CQE -
issues, .and the nunber ofL direct charge CQE issues which occurred during.
the reporting month.
WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS The total number of warehouse receipts', the - number = of .non-CQE stock l receipts, the number of CQE stock receipts, the . number 'of direct charge-non-CQE receipts, and thei number of direct charge .CQE receipts which occurred during the reporting month.
WARCHOUSE
_ RETURNS The percentage. of the total number of warehouse returns,. the number of l spare parts returns, the number of standard stores returns, and the number of_ direct charge returns compared to the-total number of warehouse ,i
- issues.
1
-106-- l 1
l
- 7) .
BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING.1990 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR GOA' S-This section will explain the basis used in establishing the 1990-performance goals.
L FORCED OUTAGE RATE AND E0VIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR .
-The Forced Outage Rate (FOR) and Equivalent Availability Factor '(EAF) goals have been- established from 1990- to 1992. The following table is a breakdown of the hours allotted for each category over the -next three ,
years.
STARTUP GENERATOR FORCED- OUTAGE PLANNED ON LINE t OUTAGE TIME- OUTAGE PERIOD EAF FOR-YEAR (HOURS) (HOURS) -(HOURS)~ (HOURS) (HOURS) (%) (%)
1990(*). 6356 168 172 2064 8760- 65.4 2,4 I 1991(*) 6956 168 172 1464 8760 75.9 - 2. 3-1992 8520 240 0 0 8760 92.9 =2.7
)
(*) Refueling Outage Years i
UNPLANNEO AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS WHILE CRITICAL The 1990 goal for Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams While Critical has I been set at one. The Fort Calhoun Station has had one unplanned automatic-reactor scram in the past four years of operation.
L UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS The Unplanned Safety System Actuations goal for 1990'has been established at zero. The Fort Calhoun Station did not have an unplanned safety system ;
actuation for six years.
CROSS HEAT RATE The 1990 Gross Heat Rate gcol for the Fort Calhoun ' Station has been set at 10,200 BTV/KWH. This heat rate goal is based' on-10,435= BTU /KWH for the month of January, 10,450 BTU /KWH for the month of February, 10,325 ,
BTU /KWH for the month of May, '10,225 BTU /KWH for-- the . month ; of June, L 10,^,25 BTU /KWH for the. month of July, 10,250: BTU /KWH for the month' of '
L August, 10,125 BTU /KWH for the month of September,10-050 BTU /KWH for the l
month of October, 10,000 BTU /KWH for the month of November, and 9,975 '
BTU /KWH for the month of December. .
l
-107-
. . x. . .
BASIS'FOR ESTABLISHING 1990 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR GOALS ~
(CONTINUED) ,
.k
-l FUEL RELIABILITY IND.0ATOR ,
The 1990 - Fuel Reliability aor (FRI) goal has - been- set- at 1.0 nanocuries/ gram. This level c> c , for approximately one to two fuel. pin .
f ailures. Although Cycle 11 was completed without any sapparent fuel; pin' ; '
f ailures, there: are a . number of Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation (AhF) assemblies - entering into a. third orcfourth cycle -of o3eration. When 'a:
fuel pin has , been used for = three ? ori four fuel cycles there ~is: an' increased probability of fuel failure. The Failed Fuel Action Plan, '
Standing . Order 0-43, allows for approximately. four fuel pin failures -
prior to implementing any increased action levels' .
PERSONNEL-RADIATION EXPOSURE (COMUL'TIVE)A !
s The c 1990 Personnel Radiation Exposure -(Cumulative) . goal -is 287: man-rem. Ll This.- goal ;was based on 234 man-rem of cumulative exposure for - the 1990 s -
Refueling Outage and approximately 5.9 man-rem of: cumulative exposure for each non-outage month.
~
a a
VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE q
s The 1990 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste-goal is 5,000 cubic feet. This goal was based on a recommendation made by .the Fort: Calhoun ,
AL',RA Committee and approved by .the Division Manager of thef Nuclear i Production Division.
' DISABLING INJURY FP.E0VENCY RATE The Disabling Injury Frequenc) Rate 1990- goal' has baen set.at 0.31. This g goal allows for one lost time accident in the Nuclear Production Division J during 1990.
'f 1
I
\
.r
-108-l l
FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES PRODUCTION CUMULATIVE i EVENT FROM -
T0 (MWH) (MWH)
Cycle 1 09/26/73 - 02/01/75 3,299,639 3.299,639 :
First Refueling 02/01/75 - 05/09/75 Cycle 2 05/09/75 - 10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 Second Refueling 10/01/76 - 12/13/75 Cycle 3 12/13/76 - 09/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 Third Refueling 09/30/77 12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77 - 10/14/78- 3,026,832 12,985,720 Fourth Refueling 10/14/78 - 12/24/78 Cycle 5 12/24/78 - 01/18/80 3,882,734- 16,868,454 Fifth Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 Sixth Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 i Cycle 7 12/21/81 - 12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 Seventh Refueling 12/06/82 - 04/07/83 Cycle 8 04/07/83 - 03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 Eighth Refueling 03/03/84 - 07/12/84 Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 Ninth Refueling 09/28/85 - 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/85 - 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 Tenth Refueling 03/07/87 - 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 Eleventh Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 Twelfth Refueling 02/17/90 - 05/29/90
-109-
< l FORT CALHOUN STATION ;
OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING-0UTAGE DATES. .
I (CONTINUED)
PRODUCTION' CUMULATIVE-EVENT FPOM - T0 (MWH) (MWH)' I Cycle 13 05/29/90 - 09/28/91*
Thirteenth Refueling 09/28/9. :11/22/91*-
Cycle 14 11/22/91*- 02/12/93*
Fourteenth Refueling. 02/12/93*- 05/06/93*
Cycle 15 : 05/06/93*- 09/30/94*
Fifteenth. Refueling _ 09/30/94*--11/26/94* ]
l y
h
'r-i Planned Dates
-110-l I
4 4 b er tr _s - ---v-r t _ m _e- a e- %5i
FORT CALHOUN STATION
,PJ0 DUCT 10N AND OPERATION RECORDS The .following' seven items are the current production and operation
" records for the Fort Calhoun Station.
- 1. First Sustained Reaction. . . . ... . . . . . . . August 5, 1973 (5:47 p.m.) >
- 2. First Electricity Supplied to the System. . . . . August 25, 1973 4 30 CommercialOperation(180,000 KhM . . . . . . . . September 26', 1973 >
40 AchievedFullPower(100%).. . . . . . . . . . May 4, 1974
- 5. Longest Run (477 days). . . . . . . . . . . . . . June 8, 1987 - Sept. 27,1988-
- 6. Highest Monthly Net Generation (364,468,800-KWH) October 1987-
- 7. Most Productive Fuel Cycle (4,936,859 MWH). . . . June 8, 1987 - Sept. 27, 1988 (Cycle 11) 5 b
h w
t
-111-l
- . ~ .
- w. a 4 a 4 -aMta nu. A,,=A -- *--e , <--ona m -
- , deH *e-Ai- m-mA-e- A- -- A+-l- J --- 4 PERFORMANCEcINDICATOR DATA SOURCES-PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ,
MANAGER / INDIVIDUAL
- Age of Outstarid!ng Maintenance Work Orders- Peterson/Schmitz c
Amount of Work On Hold Awaiting Parts Peterson/ CHAMPS'_
- Auxiliary Systems Chemistry Hours Outside Sthtion Limits Franco /Glantz.
- CAR's Current Status Orr/Gurtis CAR's Issued Versus NRC Violations Issued Orr/Gurtis l Classroom'(Instructor) Hours Gasper /Newhouse f l ~
Corrective Maintenance Backlog > 3 h nths Old' Peterson/Schmitz y Cumulative Violations and NCV's_ Chase /Simmons.
Daily Thermal Output Holthaus/ Gray Decontaminated Auxiliary Building Peterson/Gundal Diesel Generator Reliability L DG Log' 1
Disabling Injury Frequency Rate Sorenson/Skaggs a
Document Review Peterson/McKay- :
Engineering Assistance Requests Priority Breakdown _ '
Jaworski/ Van Osdel .
Engineering Change' Notice Breakdown- Phelps/Bera l~ Engineering Change Notice Status Phelps/Bera !
Equipment Forced Outages per 1000 Critical Hours Holthaus/ Gray Equivalent Availability Factor' Dietz/Kulisek Expedited Purchases - Willrett/Fraser !
Forced Outage Rate Holthaus/ Gray.
Fuel Reliability Indicator Holthaus/Lofshult Gaseous Radioactive Waste Discharged to the Environment Franco /Stultz Gross Heat Rate Holthaus/ Gray- l Hazardcus Waste Produced Peterson/Sayre i
k 112-
_-- ~ _. _ ~ _ _ .
h -
i
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DATA SOURCE l (CONTINUED) ,
I Hotlines Gasper /Newhouse In-Line Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service. Peterson/Renaud Inventory' Accuracy. Willrett/Fussell l
l Invoice Breakdown Willrett/Fussell License Candidate Exams Gasper / Lazar i Liquid Radioactive Waste Discharged to the Environment Franco /Stultz ]
Loggable/ Reportable Security Incidents Sefick/Woerner Maintenance Effectiveness- Jaworski/ Dowdy Maintenance Work Order Backlog (Corrective Non-Outage) Peterson/Schmitz Maintenance Work Order Breakdown Peterson/Schmitz Maintenance Overtime Peterson/Schmitz.
Material Request Planning Willrett/Fussell Material Requests Awaiting Approval Willrett/Fraser Maximum Individual Radiation Exposure Peterson/Mattice Number of Hot Spots .Peterson/Mattice Number of NPRDS Reportable Failures Jaworski/ Dowdy.
Number of Out-of-Service Control Room Instruments Peterson/ Adams. <
Number of Personnel Errors Reported in LER's Chase /Simmons l
-l Number of Missed ST's Resulting in LER's _ Plant LER's
{
Operations and Maintenance Budget Gleason/ Parent- i Outstanding CAR's Orr/Gurtis. ,
Cutstanding Modifications -Jaworski/ Turner Overdue and Extended CAR's Orr/Gurtis.
Personnel Radiation Exposure (Cumulative) Peterson/Mattice
-113- -
t sa
'l l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ~ DATA SOURCE- l (CONTINUED) !
y Personnel Turnover Rate .Sorenson/ Burke' Preventive Maintenance Items Overdue Peterson/ Linden Primary System Chemistry _- Percent. Hours Out of Limits Franco /Glantz ProceduralNoncompliance-Incidents-(Maintenance) Peterson/McKay Radiological-Work Practices Program Peterson/Mattice Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance Peterson/Schmitz Recordable Injury Cases Frequency Rate Sorenson/Skaggs
.R0 License Examination Pass Ratio Gasper / Lazar :
Secondary System Chemistry- Franco /Stultz Security Incident Breakdown Sefick/Woerner Security _ System Failures .Sefick/Woerner Spare Parts Inventory Value -Steele/Huliska Spare Parts Issued Steele/ Miser SR0 License Examination Pass Ratio Gasper / Lazar-Staffing Level Sorenson/ Burke
~
Stocmut Rate Willrett/Fussell Temporary Modifications Jaworski/ Turner Total llours of Student Training Gasper /Newhouse-Total Skin and Clothing Contaminations Peterson/Mattice- a i Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams While Critical Holthaus/ Gray Unplanned Safety System Actuations- Holthaus/ Gray Violations per 1000 Inspection Hours -Chase /Simmons Volume of Low-level Solid Radioactive Waste Peterson/Breuer Warehouse Issues Willrett/fussell .
Warehouse Receipts Willrett/Fussell i
Warehouse Returns Willrett/Fussell j
-114-l v l 1 ;
1 l '1
INPO Good Practices OA-102, " Performance Monitoring - Management Information" IEEE Standard, 762, "IEEE Trial Use Standard Definitions for Use in Reporting Generating Unit Reliability, Availability and Productivity" INP0 Report Dated November 1984, " Nuclear Power. Plant Operational Data"
(
-V.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission " Regulatory Guide 1.108 '
1
. 6
-}
e I
i 1
(
f l
i r
l: -115-
.