ML20065B195
| ML20065B195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1994 |
| From: | OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065B190 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9404010192 | |
| Download: ML20065B195 (95) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- . - . - - - - - . - - - - - . - - - , - - - - - , - 4 - ~ ~ - ~~ - - '
~l .. , . . . .. .
J... FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I a gf FEBRUARY 1994 SAFE OPERATIONS l PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS E884A8$EE3$888383
"" -_-____-_-____ - - }
%wd of wn%, w wn, abb,...
d weh wudern, wnd wwndjudynnd... dwa,fiduns,cwuwu %7 coinandannni... l d w a, wag of f6,...d w dn&ng Uwjob 9M Un,bl 6, wyuf 6 . Jl w unecduabd, rwl Un wdl, of udevaal, puuwn, a w owv ow,n, af wedk uk ws am wnd Ga pub, wnd $!achen, L%d coins lwn, %&ng Un 'uyU knd of peu,n,, rwljud u do&ng Ca 9V LUsup.
) - ). o'e -
i
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT Prepared By: Production Engineering Division System Engineering - Test and Performance Group , W FEBRUARY 1994 l l
')
u .
FORT CALHOUN STATION FEBRUARY 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT QERAHONS_SE MARY During the first week of February while Fort Calhoun Station operated at 100% power, sched-uled Diesel Generator (DG) maintenance and modification outages were conducted for DG 1 and DG-2. Each was successfully completed and the diesel generators were returned to operable sta-tus. On Friday, February 11,1994 at 0340 hours, the plant experienced an unplanned automatic reac-tor trip from 100 percent power. The trip occurred following a failure of the supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS which resulted in tripping the Containment Pressure Ifigh Signal (CPIIS) lockout relay 86B/CPilS. The CPIIS relay trip actuated the Safety Injection Actuation Signal (SIAS), Containment isolation Actuation Signal (CIAS), Ventilation Isolation Actuation Signal (VI AS) and Steam Generator Isolation Signal (SGIS). SGIS automatically closed both main steam isola-tion valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip. Details of this event, includ-ing corrective actions, are included in Licensee Event Report 94-001. Following completion of the post-trip assessment and replaceme of the failed relay,86B/ CPilSS, the reactor was taken critical at 1324 on February 12. The generator was synchronized to the grid at 0415 on February 13. Power ascension was commenced, and the station returned to 100 percent power on February 17. On February 15, OP-ST-DG-0002, a monthly surveillance test on Diesel Generator DG 2 was conducted. A ponion of the test requires a manual start from a local pushbutton; however, the diesel generator did not start. The root cause of the problem was identified as broken pieces within the local pushbutton switch. The problem was corrected and the diesel generator was then successfully tested. The corresponding local pushbutton on the other diesel generator is rou-tinely tested at approximately the same frequency, and has not exhibited similar problems. On Febmary 16, low water levels in both steam generators occurred. Narrow range instrument readings reached below the 65% alarm setpoint, but remained well above the 31.2% Reactor Pm-tection System trip setpoint. It was determined that Condensate Recirculation Control Valve FCV-1172 had failed open, restricting feedwater flow to both generators. The valve was iso-lated, steam generator levels were returned to normal, and a maintenance work request was initi-ated. A pressure switch was repairrd and the valve was returned to service later that day. A one-hour report was made to the NRC on F.:tyruary 18 at 1101 hours because of the results of an engineering evaluation initiated after the February 11 reactor trip discussed above. The evalu- i ation identified a concern involving a po',tulated premature actuation of either of two Safety In-jection and Refueling Water 'ank low Signal (STLS) lockout relays, i.e.,86A/STLS or 86B/ STLS, due to a coil-shorting failure of a supervisory relay. If such a failure were to occur coinci-dent with certain accidents, i.e., a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), a Steam Generator Tube i Rupture (SGTR), or a Main Steam Line Break (MSLB), a premature Recirculation Actuation l Signal (RAS) could be generated. Such a premature RAS could result in loss of water to the I liigh Pressure Safety injection (llPSI),Imw Pressure Safety injection (LPSI) and Containment l l l
FORT CALHOUN STATION FEBRUARY 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT ll OPERATIONS
SUMMARY
(continued) p Spray pumps due to the realignment of the suction header from the Safety and Injection and -
- Refueling Water Tank (SIRWT) to the containment sump. Details of this event, including cor-rective actions, are included in Licensee Event Repon 94-001.
y Power operation at 100 percent continued throughout the remainder of February 1994. p , The following NRC inspection was completed during this reporting pericxt: , IFR No. Descriotion , t 94-03 Monthly Resident Inspection The following LER was submitted during this period: , I ER No. Description 93-020 Ventilation Mode Requirement Not Met While Toxic Gas Monitors Inoperable Rev.I l Source: Nuclear Licensing & Indusuy Affairs I li
- e. 4_=,..%.. w . .; u - _ e-.&..2 . ._ .. m - m .. . m _-. -- . _ _ --
I Year-To-Date Value , Performance Cateaories r
! E Performance in Industry ,
_ , . _ . . 1 . ?= ~ .. . . .~ ' [Unplannedl ~ Whsrmap Upper 10% and better
. ..fjynttC.... . 'fCapabilityM NRNY TAutoinatids i~ PAffbrmanbeg than 1994 OPPD goal 3"3 Capability) IS$ramEt,0002 ' "
?Factori s -
c slos
, ,s Factor
.c--1 inriCritical}
~
; . . .. . , . .. 3 Performance Better Than
; ihs# l
~
- Esds;,1 u .. . . . . . . 1994 OPPD Goal l
m m.m M ^ s. _ ll l ii
'f FW Safety j EDG Safety , i FpM !
Performance Not Meeting HPSI Safety System System Reibi,qy l " 1994 OPPD Goal System Performance ce rf rmance , ; nummm.myrrsl! maw j g 3
^
[
.) ,
iiil.,.... l!! l ll l
!l: ,,,;;,
November December January 33' S3' S4 il Chirddtt Collective Volume of industrial
,Uses 1993 Goal Radiation Low-Level Safety !ilhdEd%es i Radioactive Accident I figygptihg'3 Exposure February 1994 !i j jg% i Waste Rate Year-To-Date ll value -
l
~ l
. Performance INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the months of January through February 1994) E
___.Em3 7 { Auto?. Scrams.; t.Whlie
/ Critical) Year-To-Date Value Performance Categories y
m- [ .. s.. . .n E Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend iSafety) ' isSignifidanti _ System sl ^t Events --
'5Astuationg- -
1 __1 Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal
,y . . -
- ^
_ - wq. ::q w
- >ggas ; gg5 Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or R
a.x i, . . . . , . . . . - Industry Average Trend
'Yk D IkkCEd3 isystud a toutans
,y .
gr - i;;;,. ---
'?r November December January AW3f g: -
- , 93' 93 94
' , - f' '; g :%'4.M
%Y, '
y - y
~ "* / *Uses 1993 Goal ,
vm a e a mz L,
@Pw amm wg February 1994 Collective Year-To-Date 3 -- .
Outa,g_es/1,0005 7.*[wf Radiation Value gggt Exposure Performance dg ; l ; ap NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for October 1990 through September 1993. All other indicator values are for the months of January through February 1994.)
FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT FEBRUARY 1994 -
SUMMARY
POSITIVE TREND REPORT ADVERSE TREND REPORT (continued) A performance indicator with data representing three consecutive months of improving performance or three Document Review consecutive months of performance that is superior to (Page 55) the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear An adverse trend is indicated based on more than 3 con-Operations Division Quality Prv dure a 37 (NOD-OP-37). secutive months with document reviews more than 6 ( months overdue. l The following performance indicators exhibited positive trends for the reporting month: Temocrary Modifications (Page 57) Fuel Reliabihtv Indicator An adverse trend is indicated based on more than 3 con- I (Page 11) secutive months of performance not meeting the estab- . lished goal of 0 temporary modifications removable on-Emeroency Diese! Generator Unit Reliabihty line that are >6 months old. (Page 12) l Diesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands) End of Adverse Trend Report. ' (Page 13) Emoroency Diese! Generator Unreliabihtv (Page 14) INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resultina in Lic-ensee Event Reoorts MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (Page 20) A performance indicator with data for the reporting perioo Forced Outace Rate that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is (Page 23) defined as *Needing increased Management Attention" Although the FOR has risen in recent months, perfor- per NOD-OP-37. mance has been superior to the 1993 and 1994 goals since September 1993. The following performance indicators are cited as need-ing increased management for the reporting month: Hazardous Waste Produced "9" Recordable Iniurv/ Illnesses Cases Frecuency Rate (Page 4) l End of Positive Trend Report. The recordable injury / Illnesses cases frequency rate I value for the reporting month (1.61)is above the 1994 goalof a maximum value of 1.5. l Emeraency AC Power System Safety System Perfor- l ADVERSE TREND REPORT mance A Performance indicator with data representing 3 con
- fhe e e ency AC power system year-to-date unavail-secutive months of declining performance; or 3 consecu- ability value for the reporting month (0.0417) is above the tive months of periormance that is not meeting the estab- 1994 year-end goal of a maximum value of 0.025. (The fished goal; or four or more mnsecutive months of per. large increase in the number of unavaitable hours during formana that is trending towards declining as deter- February reflects maintenaace outages for both diesel mined by the Manager - Station Engineering, constitutes generators.)
l an adverse trend per NOD-OP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator exhibits an adverse trend by this Unit Caoability Factor definition may specify in written form (to be published in (Page 25) this report) why the trend is not adverse. The year todate UCF vclue of 90.0% is below the 1994
"" 9* * *"
The following performance indicators were exhibiting ad-verse trends for the reporting month
- Unolanned Cacabihty Loss Factor (Page 26)
Number of Control Room Eauioment Defsignqiga The year-to<f ate UCLF value of 9.97% is above the
- 9* *** '
An adve e trend is indicated based on more than 3 con-secutive months of performance not meeting the estab-lished goal of a maximum of 45 deficiencies. v
l FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l FEBRUARY 1994 -
SUMMARY
I INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT l MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES This section lists significant changes made to the report Unotanned Automatic Reactor Scrams oor 7.000 Hours and to specific indicators within the report since the pre- ; fdajgg vious month. l (Page 27) The year-to-date number of unplanned automatic reactor The DefinRion of an Adverse Trend has been expanded scrams per 7,000 hours critical (5.06) exceeds the 1994 to include 3 consecutive months of performance that is Goalof O. not meeting the established goal. Unolanned Safety System Actuations - flNPO Definition) Revised INPO Industry Uoner 10% Values have been (Page 28) included in this report based on the INPO 1993 Year End The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua. Report. tions for 1994 (1) exceeds the goal of 0. INPO and NRC Annunciator Windows have been revised Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(NRC Definition) to be based on year-to-date performance values rather (Page 29) than 12 month performance values. The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations for 1994 (1) exceeds the goal of O. Gross Heat Rate (Page 30) Thermal Performance The graph for this indicator has been revised to show a (Page 31) lower GHR for January 1994. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value for the reporting month (99.2%) is below the 1994 Enaineerina Chance Notice Status year-end goal of 99.55%. (Page 60) Graphs have been added to this indicator to depict ECNs Eouioment Forced Outaces oer 1.000 Critical Hours by type, location and priority. (Page 33) The year-to date number of equipment forced outages Document Chanao Enoineenna Chanae Notices Ooen per 1,000 critical hours (0.723) exceeds the 1994 year. (Page 61) and goalof 0.20. This indicator was formerly titled " Engineering Change Notice Breakdown *, The graphs have been revised. Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours out of Umit (Page 38) The primary system chemistry percent of hours out of End of Performance Indicator Report improvements / limit for the reporting month (2.4%) exceeds the 1994 Changes Report goalof a maximum of 2%. Percentaae of lotal MWOs Comoteted oor Month identi-fied as Rework (Page 47) The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework for the reporting month (4.56%) ex-coeds the 1994 monthly goal of a maximum of 3%. End of Management Attention Report. k
--n - , ,_ - -
Table of Contents / Summary PAGE GOALS . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ,, . ..XI SAFE OPERATONS ElfaE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO . . .. . . .. 2 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. .3 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE.. . .. . . . . . . . .. 4 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA.. . . . . . . .. .. . 5 PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs .. . . .6 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES . . . .7 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY: INJECTON SYSTEM . . . . . . .8 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM.. .
...._.....9 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM . . . .10 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 11 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY .. . . . . . . . , .. . .. . .12 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR REllABILITY (25 DEMANDS) . . . . . . . .. .13 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY . . . . .. . .. . 14 ,
NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES.. . .. .. .15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE. 16 I MAXIMUM .'NDIVIDUAL RADIATON EXPOSURE.. . . . . . . .. . . , . . .17 VOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTON HOURS .. . .. .. . . . . . .. 18 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS .. .. .. . .19 , l NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS . .. . . . 20 l PERFORMANCE EAGE STATON NET GENERATON . . . .. . 22 FORCED OUTAGE RATE.. .. . . . - . . . . . . 23 - vii l l
1 PERFORMANCE (continued) PAGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR.... . . . . . .. ... 2 4 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR . . .. .. ... . .. .. .. ......26 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL... .. . . . . . . .. 27 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS -(INPO DEFINITION). .. .. .. . . . . . . .28 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION).. . . . . ... . . 29 GROSS HEAT RATE.. ..-.. . . . . . .. . . 30 THERMAL PERFORMANCE.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT .. .. . . . . . . . . . . - . . . 32 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS .. .. . . .. .. .. .. 33 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)
SUMMARY
. . . .. . . 34 REPEAT FAILURES .. .. . . . . . . 35 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE., . . . . . .36 VOLUME OF LOW. LEVEL SOLID j RADIOACTIVE WASTE 37 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT.. . . . ,, .. . 38 1
CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY.. . .. .. .. .. . . 39 l I COST EAGE i CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR . . . ... . . . . . .. .. 41 STAFFING LEVEL.. . . ..-.. . .. . 42 .I SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE .. . .. . . . - 43 J DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS EAGE MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE).. .. .- 45 viii , 1 l
-1
l l DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) PAGE j
)
1 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE
& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE . . . . . . . 46 1
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK.. . , . 47 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . 48 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE).. . . . . . . . . . . . 49 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS).. . . . . .. . 50 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF SERVICE .. . . . . . . . 51 HA7.ARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED .. . . . . . 52 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA . . .. . 53 3ADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM.. . .. . . 54 DOCUMENT REVIEW ... . . . . 55 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) . . 56 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS.. . 57 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS . .. . . 58 ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN. . 59 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS . . . . . . . . 60 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE BREAKDOWN . . . . 61 LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN.. . 62 I LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING . . . . 63 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS . . . . . . . . . . . 64 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS . . .. . . 65 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) . .. .. . 66 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 MODIFICATION PLANNING . . . . . . . . .. . . 67 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON LINE MODIFICAT6ON PLANNINC -.. .. .. . . .. . . 6 8 ix
a 4 it & ~ ACTON PLANS. DEFINITONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST g ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS - . . . . . . . . . 69 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITONS . . --~. . ... . ... . 71 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX.. .. .. . . . . .. . 78 REPORT DISTRIBUTON LIST .. .. .* - ~~- - . . . 80 4 s i i i 1 1 4 i l i l l X
l l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1994 Priorities MISSION ) The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers thmugh the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment. GOAI S Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS To ensum the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional working environment, in the control room and throughout the OPPD nuclear organi-zation, that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader. 1994 Priorities: Impmve S ALP ratings. Improve INPO rating. Reduce NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4. No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations. Goal 2: PERFORMANCE To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production. 1994 Priorities: Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork. Impmve Plant Reliability. Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals. Reduce the number of human performance errors. Identify programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment. Goal 3: COSTS Operate Fort Calhoun Station m a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity. i l, 1994 Priorities: Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget. Streamline work processes to impmve cost effectiveness. I Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) I xi
SAFE OPERATIONS Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional work-ing environment in the control room and throughout the OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation so ' that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader. 1 1
- Year-to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Rate
--O-- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal
-C}-- Industry Upper 10%
0.6 -
--6-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 0.5 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3--G 0.4 -
0.3 - O.2 - 0.1- U U 0 0 , O , , i i , , , , , i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE -INPO As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Asso-ciation of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants': "The purpose of this indicator is monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station. Accident rate was chosen by INPO as the personnel safety indicator over other indicators, such as the injury rate or severity rate, because the criteria are clearly de-fined, utilities currently collect this data, and the data is least subjective." The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year-to-date was 0.0 at the end of Febru-ary. The value for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through February 28,1994 was 0.76. The values for this indicator are determined as follows: (number of restricted-time + lost-time accidents + fatalities) X 200.000 (number of station oerson-hours worked) The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis 60.50. The1995 INPO industry goalis s0.50. The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 1/93 through 12/93) is 0.12. Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Chase / Booth (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None P 2
_- - . ..- . ~. . ,- -q 1 , --G- 1994 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate
-M- 1993 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate IGOODI
--O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal W
1.2 - , 1-0.8 - 2 0.6 - C O O 0.4 - -! 0.2 - 0 , . , , , , , , , , , , , Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 - i DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE) This indicator shows the 1994 disabling injury / illness frequency rate.' The 1993 dis-
~ abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown.
The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for January through February 1994 was 0.0. 4 There were no lost time accidents repor1ed for February.- The Gsabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through February 28,1994 was 0.38. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5. Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source) ' Accountability: Chase / Conner , Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 k
5- -+- 1994 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate
--M-- 1993 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate lGOODI 4.5 -
V
--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 1.5) 3.5 -
3-2.5 - 2-l 1.5 - C - O O O O O y ' 1- M b 0.5 - .! O A , , , , , , , , , . , , , Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1994 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1993 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown. A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis. The recordable injury / illness rate for January through February 1994 was reported as 1.61. There were 2 recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of February. The recordable injury / illness rate for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through Febru-ary 28,1994 was 1.52. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5. Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Accountability: Conner Adverso Trend: None SEP 15,25,26 & 27 4
+ Contamination Events l GOOD]
--O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal y 75-70-65- C O O O O C O O O O O O 60-g 55-
@ 50-t$45-
,o 40-f 35-
$30-
{25-U 20-15-10-5- 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month. Thoro were 4 contamination events in February 1994. There has been a total of 11 contaminstion events in 1994. The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 65 contamination events. Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 l 1 l 5 I
- Preventable (18 Month Totals)
--C}- Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)
O Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40- - 35-30-25-- 20-
~
15- - E 10-5- 0 " 4 I i I i i i i i i i I i i i i I I Ekb$$E$NNh$Y R 8 k kb $ $ E' 8 PREVENTABLEPERSONNEL ERROR LERs This indicator depicts 18 month totals for numbers of " Preventable" and " Personnel Error" LERs. The graph shows the 18 month totals for preventable LERs, the 18 month total for personnel error LERs and the personnel error totals for each month. The LERs are - trended based on the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date. + in January 1994, there were no events that were subsequently reported as LERs. Con-sequently, no LERs were categorized as Preventable or Personnel Error. The total LERs for the year 1994 (through January 31,1994) is C . The total personnel error LERs for the year 1994 is 0. The .1994 goals for this indicator are that the year-end values for the 18 month totals be no more than 12 Preventable and 5 Personnel Error LERs. (Note: Because this indica-toris based on an 18 month period, the 1994 year-end totals willinclude LERs occur-ring in 1994 and the last 6 months of 1993.) , Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 6
@ Operation l GOOD l O Shutdown $~
u.
- PWR Average Trend E $ 2- --
b 62 % 1-
$) g g e i s @ $
0 i i i i i i i i 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 Year-Ouarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual "Pe formance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report. The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993: First Quarter 1992: 1) Defective control switches in the 4KV switchgear could have rendered safety equipment inoperable. 2) All 4 channels of the SG DP trip for RPS had been calibrated nonconservatively. This occurred due to an incorrect procedure which specified a tolerance band that was too wide. i Second Quarter 1992: Fuse and breaker coordination problems for the DC buses could , cause a loss of the entire bus if a fault occurred on one of the loads. I First Quarter 1993: The SG low pressure scram signal block reset values, for all 4 channels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating conditions.
]
Second Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water source of tne safety injection system was not seismically qualified. This could have . resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event. l l I Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase l i Adverse Trend: None 7
M 1994 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection Systern Unavailability Value 1994 High Pressure Safety injection System Unaval' ability Value Year-to-Date
-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004) 1995 INPO industry Goal (0.02)
-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.02 - A A A A A A A a a a a 4 I GOOD l 0.015 - y 0.01 -
0.005 - C C C C C C C C C C C C' O.00036 g 0-0-0 0 0 0 0 0 0-0 O i i 0 -,-, , , , , , , , , , i 1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 ! l HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report- 1 ing month. The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of Febru- ! ary 1994 was 0.0. There were no hours of plannM or unplanned unavailability during i the month. The 1994 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0 at the end of February. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.000293. There have been no hours of planned unavailability (for maintenance and surveillance tests) and no hours of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system in 1994. j The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.004. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.0011. Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountabihty: Jaworski/Schaffer Adverse Trend: None 8
E Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1994 Auxilicry Feodwater System Unavailability Value Year to-Date lGOODI
-O- 1994 Fort Ca!houn Goal ( 0.01) v
--A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025)
-{ t- Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) 0.025 - A A A a a a a A--A A a a 0.02 -
0.015 - 0.01 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.005 - O O O O O O O O O O i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , 1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec04 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Podormance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month. The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for February 1994 was 0.00143. There was at total of 1.83 hours of unplanned unavailability for repair of YCV-1045 leakage during the month. The year-to4 ate unavailability value was 0.00145, and the value for the last 12 months was 0.00207 at the end of February. There has been a total of 1.25 hours of planned unavailability (for surveillance tests) and 2.76 hours of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for i the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 0.002. ) Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Adverse Trend: None 1 9
E E Monthly Ernergency AC Puwer Unavailability Value
-N- Emer0ency AC Power Unavailability Vaiue Year-to-Date )
lGOODI. . --O- Fort Calhoun Goal , I i' -A-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (C .25) j
-{ 1- Industry Upper 10% (0 004)
- 0.07-0.06-0.05- ,
O.o4 - O.03- 4
^
0----G- 0 0 0 0 0 3-----O ! i 0.o2 - 2 0.01 - , i O C C C C U-- -C C C C 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 l ! EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM ' SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE } This indicator thows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.
- l
! The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for February 1994 was 0.0709. During the month, there were 89 hours of planned unavailability for surveillance tests
- and maintenance, and 6.25 hours of unplanned unavailability due to the failure of the -
- emergency start pushbutton. (The large increase h the number of unavailable hours I during February reflects the maintenance outages on both diesel generators.) The l Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.0417 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0087 at the end of February.
There has been a total of 118.15 hours of planned unavailability (for surveillance tests ; and maintenance) and 6.25 hours of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC , power system in 1994. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.025. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 0.025 and the industry upper ten percontile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 0.004. Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None . 10 WW - T
E Fuel ReliabilityIrdicator
- 1995 INPO trdustry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) lGOODI
~
-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals y E 8-E C O O O O O O 3
y 6-Cycle 15 -
^ ^ ^ ^
A ^ A Refueling A w C l4-
.9 2
Outage Y [ .. enum - menu
^ ~'
0 , , , , , i , i i , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for February 1994 was 0.931 X _10-4 microcuries/ gram. The purpose of the FRlis to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuel integrity. The February FRl value, which is less than the zero defect threshold value, discussed below, indicates a defect free core. Except for a trip and power recovery from Febru-ary 11 through 16, the plant operated at full power. The February FRI was calculated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, February 1 through 10 and February 20 through 28. The February FRI value of 0.931 X 104 microcuries/ gram is comparable to the December 1993 and January 1994 FRI values of 0.944 X 104 and 0.701 X 104microcuries/ gram respectively. Fission product activity data from February full power operation, trip and power ascension show no Xenon -133 activity increase and no iodine spiking due to fuel defects. A slight increase in lodine 134 seen on February 18 was due to a reduction in purification letdown flow from 73 to 33 gpm. The last detected fuel failure was during Cycle 13. The INPO September 1992 Report " Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility Industry" (INPO No. 92-011) states that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value larger than 5.0 X 104 microcuries/ gram indi-cates a high probability of unit operation with one or more fuel defects. The determination of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." < The value of 5.0 X 10d microcuries/ gram is defined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a l "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the core is defect free or not. The l 1994 Fort Calhoun Station FRi performance indicator goal will be to maintain a monthly FRI j below 5.0 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram. j Data Source: Holthaus/Guliani Accountability: Chase /Spilker Positive Trend 11
@ Number of Failures /20 Demands --R- Trigger Values for 20 Demands O Number of Failures /50 Demands -V- Trigger Values for 50 Demands E Number of Failures /100 Demands --
Trigger Values for 100 Demands 8-l GOOD l 6-
+
V V Y Y -Y Y V V V- V V V 4-
= = = = = = = = = = = =
2 2 2 2 2-
$ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 I I I I i i i i i I 3 i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-ues. The Fon Calhoun 1994 goalis to have fewer failures than these trigger values.
The demands counted for this indicatorinclude the respective number of starts and the respective number of load-runs for both Diesel Generators combined. The number of start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a mini-mum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report). Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 12
I s i E DG 1 Failures /25 Demands < lGOODl E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands ; 5- --s- Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal - 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O i 3-i
- 2-1
< 1-t 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)- This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel i generator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger l- value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 i' failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1994. f it must be emphasized that, in accordance with NUMARC criteria, certain actions will take place in the event that any one emergency diesel generator experiences 4 or more failures within the last 25 demands on the unit. These actions are described in the Definitions Section of this report. A System Engineering Instruction has been approved , for the Fort Calhoun Station to institutionalize and formally approve / adopt the required NUMARC actions. l= ! !. Diesel Generator DG-1 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands on
- the unit.
Diesel Generator DG-2 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands l on the unit. i . l Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) ! Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend ] 13 i 1
D DG-1 Unreliability Value DG-2 Unreliability Value
@ lGOODI )
-+- Station Unreliability Value + '
O.003 - 1 Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025 - a Three Year Average) 0.002 - C C O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015 - 0.001 - 0.0005 - 0,0 00 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
. . . , , , - i , , .
. . i , , . , , , . , . ,
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling genera-tor unreliability. The year-to< late station EDG unreliability value at the end of February 1994 was 0.0. The 1994 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05. For DG-1: There were 4 start demands for the reporting month without failures. In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without failure. For DG 2: There were 6 start demands for the reporting month without failures. In addition, there were 2 load-run demands without failures. Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows: value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 14
I l l
@ Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line I lGOODI l
@ Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V
80- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies - 70- -
~ ~
~
60- ! - - l 40- h, C I C 5 C I I
;, j
, 7 .
7 , , 30- 9 ,
. / 7 - ~, / , . , i 20-5'
, l [ [ '
/ I [
5: [ 10- ? $' $; [' ,
;$; j ' ' '
0 i i i i i i i i i i i i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 Q Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line I O Total Number of Operator Work Around items 10- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Total Operator Work Around items 8-0~ 4-C C O-O O O O O O O O O 0 i i i , i i i i i i i i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 .i NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on-line), the total number of control room equipment defi-ciencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) Items repairable on-line, the total number of OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals. There was a total of 65 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of February 1994. 44 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 21 require a plant outage to repair. There were 8 deficiencies added and 3 deficiencies completed during the month. There were 2 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 45 deficiencies and 5 OWAs. Data Source: Chase / Tills (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on more than 3 consecutive months of performance not meeting the established goal. 15
O Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rorack) l GOOD l
--e- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rorack) V
-O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person Rem) h40- O C C C O C 0- 4 C C C C CC 30-c 20-h10- , ,
y0 - Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 3 y Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack l GOOD l
--G-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rorack V
-O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rom)
E @E: C C C C C C C C C C C C 6}: ~ 0 i 0 e i i i i i i e i i i Q- Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure, excluding the spent fuel rerack, is less than 44 person-Rem. The exposure for February 1994 was 1.123 person-Rem. The year-to-date exposure was 3.064 person-Rem at the end of February. The Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure to complete the Spent Fuel Herack is less than 23 person-Rern. The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure for February was 0.020 oerson-Rem. The Spent Fuel Rorack exposure year-to-date was 0.044 person-Rem at the end of February. The collective radiation exposure at the end of February (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 3.108 person-Rem. The collec-tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 156.209 person-Rem at the end of February. The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-rem per year. The industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 110.5 person-rom per year. The yearly average for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 3/91 through 2/94 was 151.818 person-rem per year. Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 16
O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem) O Highest Exposure for the Year (mRom)
~
sooo_ OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000 - 3000 - m E 2000 - Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000 - 243 68 g a.
.s g February 1994 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During February 1994, an individual accumulated 68 mrem, which was the highest individual exposure for the month.
The maximum individual exposure for the year was 243 mrem at the end of February. The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,500 mrem / year. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem. Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None 17
I ~ Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours t 7 4_ l GOOD l
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4
3.03 Y o 2- \ 14 I I$ E C O O O O O O O O j1-3 a
, i i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,- .
'92 93 Feb93 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan94 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS This indicator displays the number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports per 1,000 NRC inspection hours. This indicator is one month behind the reporting month !
due to the time involved with collecting and processing the data. The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 1.35 for the twelve months from February 1,1993 through January 31,1994. The following inspections ended during this reporting period: IER No. Iille No. of Hours 94-03 Resident Monthly inspection 480 To date, OPPD has received no violations in 1994: Level 111 Violations (0) LevelIV Violations (0) Level V Violations (0) ' t Non-Cited Violations (NCV) (0) The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 inspection hours. Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None , 1B
@ NRC Significant Events l GOOD l
- Industry Average Trend Y
2-1
~
je@c 0 , , , , , , , , 91 4 92 1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 Year - Quarter ;
@ INPO Significant Events (SERs) l GOOD l ,
V 2 2-I I I I I
?// I
/ I I f 3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 Year - Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual " Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.
The following NBQ significant events occurred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993: Third Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressurizer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the_ reactor coolant pressure boundary. The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), oc-curred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the fourth quarter of 1993: Second Quarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Change-out. Third Quarter 1992: 1) RC-142 LOCA; and 2) Premature Lift of RC-142. First Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear instrumentation Safety Channel D. Second Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip Fourth Quarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal. Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 19
3-
@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs l
2- l 1-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t i l i i i i i i 4 4 i I 4 1
'92 '93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years. .
l There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during February 1994. During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillance was not completed nor corrective mainte-nance performed as a result of AC-10A falling into the " Alert Range" (LER 93-003 Fail-ure to Satisfy inservice Testing Requirements for Raw Water Pump). The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. : Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend SEP 60 & 61 20
PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station . that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion. . 21 1
l E Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) 1 40-35.03 35.12 Cyc 15 34.6 g 32.14 e 31.21 Outage j30- 28.01 27.8 g 25.03 20 -- e 10-1.54 0 ; i g ; M ; 3 3 3 i 3 i : Mar 03 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 STATION NET GENERATION During the month of February 1994 a net total of 278,033.4 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Energy losses for the month were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January 1994 were attributable to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. Energy losses for the month of December 1993 were a result of a forced outage that began on December 6 and ended on December 7. The outage was caused by an EHC test failure. Energy losses for September, October and November 1993 were attributable to the shutdown for the Cycle 15 refueling outage, which began on September 25 and ended on November 26. Unplanned energy losses for the months of June and July 1993 were attributable to a forced outage that began on June 24 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip. The plant returned to 100% power on July 2nd. Planned energy losses for the months of April and May 1993 were the result of a main-tenance outage. f Data Source: Station Generation Report l Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 22
l Forced Outage Rate l GOOD l . 12%- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) y 10.1 10% - 93 l 8%- Cycle 15 0*l* ~ Refueling Outage 4%- C O O O O b O O O O O O
#*~
1.38
/
i i i i W' s i i i i i i i i a i
'91 '92 '93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 2.06% for the twelve months from March 1,1993 to February 28,1994. A forced outage occurred on February 11 due to a gen-erator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Contain-ment High Pressure Supervisory Circuit. The generator was put on-line on February 13.
A forced outage occurred on December 6,1993 when the plant tripped during weekly testing of the turbine EHC system. The generator was off-line for 27.1 hours. There was one forced outage during the month of June 1993. This outage, which occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip, lasted 70.6 hours. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4%. The 1993 Furt Calhoun year-end goal was a maximum value of 2.4%. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 23 ; l l
O Monthly EAF Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF k IGOOD] Industry Median Value (76.7%) 100 % - ,i Cycle is _ Refueling f%
, 7 85.6 n, _
f Outage 3 g _ 7s'2' 80% - ~ ~ 7 S C 0 i V. S-@-9-@-@ ~ S--E fD-- h @ S
? l,_ ? <
l
"'~
l N M @ M M ' ~ (j 7 60.8 "g 60% - % M
- I<
y g $lI < j
$M k $ [ [ '(
m[ e > v s, y > s a n ~
$h siM @m 40%- , , p. g !! ,*
\'
, " , ~ $N Q ?
Q 5: Q a # Q yn
;&v m m W,
n 4 a 9 ' c^
, , , 1:1!!: f, .
of s$ N-
- 20%- k ;
s 4% pqn y' Q q J , s > . , m + n lik bh ' '< < i i i i 0% ,
'91 '92 '93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to.
date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous 3 years. The EAF for February 1994 was reported as 86.99%. Energy losses for the month were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the l Containment High Pressure Supervisory Circuit. The year-to-date monthly average ! EAF was 91.26% at the end of the month l l lThe EAF for January 1994 was reported as 95.5%. Energy losses for the month were due to derates for condenser tube repair and a failed level control valve on a heater , drain tank. l The April, May and June 1993 EAF values are the result of a maintenance outage and a forced outage that occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip. The industry median EAF value for the three year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was 76.7%. The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years preceding this report was 75.0%. Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 24
l 3 Monthly Unit Capability Factor )
--tt- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Flctor
--+- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor 4
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 80%)
Industry Upper 10% (86.7% for a Three Year Average) 100% - __ m _ .er er , 80% - 80%- x g -- f; 8 + -- o: : .
? ?-- uM; , ~q V
g j a %g
' ; . . < u < Cycle 15 m 9 40%- ~
t l Refueling f; 3; 20%- g g ;; g (l Outage %g
% ( (,,
a M w a r @* *.i sk ::, w i i l I i i i # i i i i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the 1994 and 1993 year-to-date UCFs, the goals, the 36 month average UCFs, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage. The UCF for February 1994 was reported as 83.7%. Energy losses for the month were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Supervisory Circuit. The year-to4 ate UCF was 90.0%, the UCF for the last 12 months was 75.7%, and the 36 month average UCF was reported ac 75.7% at the end of February. The UCF for January 1994 was reported as 95.8%. Energy losses for the month were due to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. , The UCF for December 1993 was reported as 92.4%. Energy losses for the month were due to rampup from the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and a plant trip that occurred on December 6 during testing of the EHC system The UCF for June 1993 was reported as 82.6%. Energy losses for the month were due to Moderator Coefficient Testing and a forced outage from June 24 through June 27. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 86.7%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 96.03%. l l Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report j Accountability: Chase ' Adverse Trend: None ; 25 ' l I I l
l D Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor
--96-- Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 60% - l GOOD l
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4
50% ~ 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%) 40% - Industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average) 30% - Cycle 15 Refueling 20% - #9'
~~~~
Y "Ti 10% - e o o-ahk c o o o-a--o h _ gn k
, ,~,
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR Thls indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF, the goal, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage. The UCLF for the month of February 1994 was reported as i6.3%. Unplanned energy losses for the month were due to a generator and reac+or trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Supervisory Circuit. The year-to date UCLF was 9.97%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 5.1%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.5% at the end of February. The UCLF for the month of January 1994 was reported as 4.2%. Unplanned energy losses for the month were due to dorates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. The UCLF for the month of December 1993 was reported as 7.2%. Unplanned energy losses for the month were the result of a plant trip that occurred on December 6 during EHC testing. The UCLF was reported as 16.6% for the month of June 1993. Unplanned energy losses for the month were the result of a forced outage that occurred as a result of the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 1.48%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-ered goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 26
===== FCs Reactor scrams Per 7,000 Hours Cntical(Year-to-date)
--+- FCs Reactor scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical (for the last 36 months)
--O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals
- 1995 INPO Industry Goal
-O-- Industry Upper 10% (0.51 per 7,000 hours critical over a 36 month time period) 6-5-
4-3-
. . .5 . : - 2 MX II .
i e i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 Y 3 E Number of Fcs Reactor suams Rfd :
- 2- 1 Outage g g 0 0 h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i i a i i i i a i i a i i i e i i 90 91 92 93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 i UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL q The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 1-hours critical (as defined in INPO's 12/92 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna- -
tional Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Cal-houn Station. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months. The 1994 station value is 5.06 at the end of February 1994. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed. The value for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through February 28,1994 is 2.98. The > value for the last 36 months is 1.99. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on December 6,1993 during EHC testing. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on June 24,1993 when the . e inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goalis a maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.51 scrams per 7,000 hours critical for the 36 month time period from 1/91 through 12/93. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) y Accountability: Chase - Adverse Trend: None 27
3-5 Safety Systern Actuations (INPO Definition)
-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal O Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-1 1~ Cycle 15 m Refueling Outage q 0 O i i , 3 0 O i O i O i O i O i Oj O , O i O i O i O i .. j '91'92'93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan FeL*34 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)
There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection Actuation Signal, Containment isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation Signal and Steam Generator Isolation Signal. The Steam Generator Isolation Signal automatically closed both main steam isolation valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip. An INPO unplanned safety system actuation occurred during the month of July 1992 and was due to the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 28
- 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)
- Critical Hours
@ Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) 10- 1000 cycle 14 900 Refueling
$ 8~ Outage Cycle 15 800 Refueling
'9*
-700 e f 6- 600 S E 500 3 f4- 400h b 300 0 h 2- "
5 200 r i i i o 0 N N0 , 0k 0
'91 '92 93 MAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJF 1M2 103 1994 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(NRC DEFINITION)
This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emer-gency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuations when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged. There was 1 NRC unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concur-rent turbine and reactor trip. There were 3 NRC unplanned safety system actuations in 1993: 1) In December 1993 the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing; 2) in June 1993 the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip; and 3) In April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer, causing a low voltage alarm on bus 1 A1, a loadshed on bus 1 A1 and an auto start of an EDG. There were 4 unplanned safety system actuations in 1992: 1) In August, due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control system, pressurizer safety valve RC-142 opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip; 2) On July 3 there was an inverter failure and the subsequent reactor trip; 3) On July 23 there was an unplanned diesel generator start when an operator performing a surveillance test inadvertently pushed the normal start button instead of the alarm acknowledge button; and 4) In May the turbine generator tripped on a false high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a simultaneous reactor trip and subsequent anticipatory start signal to both diesel generators. There has been 1 unplanned safety system actuation / quarter for the last 12 months. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. l Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant IJcensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29 l
y ' ll
\
)- E Monthly Gross Heat Rate 0
--A-- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate
-G-- 1994 &1993 Fort Calhoun Goals
- l. 10.5-i 10300 l 10223 Cycle 15 10177 Refueling l h *
- a O O 4 E Outage 0
i m 10- . ! 8 - l . ., j' ; 9.5 - l l . i 1
., g, . .
- 91 '92 93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 l l
GROSS HEAT RATE : i This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the 1993 goal and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years. The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,103 for the month of February 1994. The 1994 year-to-date GHR was 10,091 at the end of the month. The GHR was not calculated for the months of October and November 1993 because of I the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR im-proves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees , Fahrenheit. . The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 10,190. Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 30 l
I E Monthly Thermal Performance
--M- . Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance 4
-O-- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD l
--+-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)
-A-- Industry Upper 10% (99.9%)
~
o A A A o A A e i a A Thermal E L.- i. . LI . . . r o 8 Perform. Q---- value not . 99%- required or Cycle 15 I ' x trendable Refueling l . I below Outage F ry
?
-l 80%
power fp p}p M 98 % , , , , i , , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Therrnal Performance value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average thermal performance value, the 1994 and 1993 Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. The thermal performance value for February 1994 was 99.1%. The year-to-date aver-age monthly thermal performance value was 99.2% at the end of the month. The aver-age monthly value for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through February 28,1994 was 99.5%. The thermal performance values for the months of November and October 1993 were not calculated due to the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. The thermal performance value for April 1993 could not be calculated (per INPO guidance) because the plant was operated at less than 80% power from April 1 through 23 prior to the maintenance outage. , The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 99.55%. The 1993 Fort Cal-houn Goal was a minimum of 99.4%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the one year period from 1/93 through 12/93) is approximately 99.9%. Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek : Adverse Trend: None 31 , l
1 Thermal Output :
-O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal
- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit u
i 1500 y.y ' ', I51
- x if:j . . . .
1400-
, . , #sJ W, . . <- u+
' .c:p-; ;&::
,.; .N Q -
m . , ~ ' _pr - in .. < >4N
, , 4 1300 - %;;m
;:e ,
~.,,
9:rv: ~. : z. . . u e
, ~ na s w -
< r
._ ; 'M:SI'; :W.
i> w:
~
1200-
- fMz ' _2 um-g- ,
{$:Il[.., ;q, .;
~
1100 - ' ~: b :N . Oh$ g. - ;:0' gg r:p ' uni ?f - - y:5 < 8
<< <+<.y yr ; e s
1000 - - @ly. ' a L s j j y A .* y .= 900- g; gg. ,
. , . , <+ , < ~'::':- , c
. A:t %
800 _ ,m - m,. y - gg
, U f.; , ( ,
s
> . 9 700 -
;4 ,
t, MP ^ g,;: ,; -;_ <>
,. (l;&. ;;}:;) ~
~
,^ ,
4 n 600 - e r*
~
m
,ljpu-I- y '
$'k? h',$g.s -[w s ,
,> > .J ,, ,
500 - : > ^ - '
, ;f2 gg >
e 43 ^ s x
'M ' (V 400- .
& m, , u,
- p
< ~
s >~> . y;; ,; ,
.W:. )
W; 4. _ . .<>
?:#,:1
) -
}f 3 ; 3 g<jg m
" ~
300 _ ri,f ;4.g. is'; '9, . ,. _ x s , <
, 1
- < - - ^ -
.;y - -
m., 200 - ,n. . . ,
.s.,'..
p.g
, ,., :[:
. .~ . l, 4 .
100 - - ' e" ,' ;w M :
,x' -
, ~
QM
- g; 2 .
e .
;-.p,: - < .
. 4 -
g i i . .
. i i i . i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27
- DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during February 1994, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. Energy losses during the month are due to an unplanned automatic reactor trip that occurred as a result of the failure of the supervi-soty relay 86B/CPHSS. i 1
l Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) l i Accountability: Chase / Tills Adverse Trend: None 32 l
- I
I~ l
- + Equipment Forcud Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours
--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal 1
0.75-4 4 0.5 0.5 - l I 0.25-O --C O O O O O O O O O O O i i i i 0 0, , , , , , , , , , , ,
'91 '92 '93 Jan94 Feb t%r Apr May Jun Jul -Aug Sep . Oct Nov Dec94 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.723 for the months from January through February 1994. An equipment forced outage occurred on Febru-ary 11,1994 when the plant experienced an unplanned automatic reactor trip as a result of the failure of the supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS. The value for the 12 months from March 1,1993 through February 28,1994 is 0.142, An equipment forced outage occurred in August 1992 and continued through Septem-ber, it was due to the failure of an AC/DC converter in the Turbine Electro Hydraulic Control System.
The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) ! . Accountability: Chase /Jaworski , t Adverse Trend: None I 33 ,
l I
--R- # of Component Categories 40- -+- # of Application Categories I 35- --*- Total # of Categories g 30-5 25-cm f
h20- _ 215- _ j 0 [N !
# 10- ~Y" "
_ _ y"-= " 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 S92 O N D92 J93 F M A M J J A S O N D93 J F94 E WearOut/ Aging G OtherDev'ces 8 Manufacturing Defect O Maintenancertesting B.0% 0 Engineering / Design D Error 41.0 % 7.0% percent Of Total Failures During the J Past 18 Months ill dlll kIlllllllllllllIllllll37" COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)
SUMMARY
The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, appilcation categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from June 1992 through November 1993). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 7 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 6 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 85 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 71. The pie chart reflects known failure causes. Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trond: None 34
l
--+-- Components With More Than One Failure GOOD
--X-- Components With More Than Two Failures V 25-20-18 15 -
\ 11 11 11 11
~ ~ ~ Io 10- 9 9 8
6 5- 4
'~ ' '
, , 1, 1, 0
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness" perfor-mance indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/ AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track repetitive component failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS). This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than 1 failure during the last eighteen months and the number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures during the last eighteen months. During the last 18 rece; ting months there were 6 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure.1 of the 6 had more than 2 failures. The tag number of the component with more than 2 failures is AC-100. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure Analysis Report. . 1 Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 35
I
'l 1
6-Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours 5- --6-- Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours ;
--O.- Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l
+ !
L & ^L h 2- C 0 0 0 0 0 gq q
.l 1 1 1 1-M0
'90 '91 '92 No. of Check Valve Failures
\
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 C' 'K VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate. This rate is based upon failures during the previous 18 months. The number of check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station for the previous three years are shown on the left. i The data for the industry check valve failure rate is three months behind the reporting month due to the time involved in collecting and processing the data. l 1 For November 1993, the Fort Calhoun Station reported an actual check valve failure l rate of 0.585 E-6, while the industry reported an actual failure rate of 1.81 E-6. At the end of February 1994, the Fort Calhoun Station reported a calculated check valve failure rate of 1.169 E-6, The increase in the calculated check valve failure rate is due l to two failures of RC-374: one occurred in October, and another occurred in November -l 1993. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 1.75 E-6. Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 36 l
O Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet) Curnulative Radioactive Waste Buried l GOOD l
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) V 750 -
- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (3,884 cubic feet)
-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet) 600 -
C O O O O O 450 - 300 - 150 -
<b[
Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10% Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during February (cubic feet) 0.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during February (cubic feet) 88.4 Cumulative volurne of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) 88.4 Amount of solid radioactivo waste in temporary storage after July 1,1994 (cubic feet) 0.0 i A graph will be added to this indicator in July 1994 to depict the amount of solid radioac-tive waste in temporary storage. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste which has been j buried is 500 cubic feet.. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic l feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value from 1/91 through 12/93 is approximately 29.59 cubic meters (1,045.12 cubic feet) per year. Data Source: Chase /Breuer(Manager / Source) l i Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 37
i l E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit {
-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals V 3%-
2%- C O O O O O O C : Cycle 15 Refueling Outage i Mar 93 Apr i I May i Jun i Jul i Aug i Sep i Oct i Nov i Dec i Jan i Feb94 i I PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT ! The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Umit indicator tracks the pri- ; mary system chemistry performance by monitoring six key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus- ; pended solids.100% equates to all six parameters being out of limit for the month. ; The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was 2.4% for the month of February 1994. Hours out of specification are due to 24.6 hours for lithium and 73.6 hours for hydrogen. Total available hours was 4,032. The 1994 and 1993 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are a maximum of 2% Hours Out of Limit. Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith t Adverse Trend: None i 38
E Secondary System CPI 2- GOOD
--O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4
1.9 - 1.8 - i 1.7 - 1.6 - 1.5 -- C C C C C C C C C .C C - 1.4 -
.1.3 -
1.2 - t 1.1-1 i i i i i i e i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance index (CPI) are: ,
- 1) The plant is at greater than 30% power; and 2) the power is changing at less than 5%
per day. l, The CPI for February 1994 was 1.25. The CPI for December 1993 was 1.92. This relatively higher number was due primarily ) to iron transport following the plant startup. 1 l The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 1.5.~ l l The CPI calculation is different from that reported in 1993 in that it reflects the recent INPO revision to the calculation. This revision addresses the penalties for the beneficial effect of alternative chemistry,i.e.,' morpholine, such as used at Fort Calhoun Station, and focuses more on specific impurr 's. I Data Source: Smith / Spires (Mant;tdSource) Accountability: Chase / Smith Adverse Trend: None 39
COST Goal: To operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity. 40 p
--G- Actuals -O- Budget -n-- Plan 3.75 -
3.5 - I 3 h 3.25-E . 3-i 2.75 - 2.5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , D91 D92 D93 J94 F M A M J J A S O N D94 D95 D96 D97 D98 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilo-watt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1993 and 1994 revised budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991,1992 and 1993. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for tha years 1995 through 1998 for refer-ence. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1994 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels. 1 The unit price is averaging higher than budget due to a shortfall in February's genera- l tion. j I Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Scofield ! Adverse Trend: None i 1
1
)
l O ActualDivisionStaffing E Authorized Division Staffing 500 - 455 453-400 - 300 - 191 191 200 - 116 117 100 - 0- - i . i i Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services STAFFING LEVEL The authorized and actual staffing levels at the end of February 1994 are shown for the three Nuclear Divisions. Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source) Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None ' SEP 24 6 P 42 , _m - =i*'e
- Spare Parts Inventory Value ($ Million) -I f
'7_
j Cycle 15 . Refueling ;1 Outage I l N I 15-14-4 13 -
'12-11 -
10 , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct . Nov Dec Jan Feb94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE
- The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of February 1994 ' ~
was reported as $15,629,881. The rise in inventory value is the result of several fac- a tors:
- 1. Prior to July 1993, incorrect reports from MMD gave low inventory values.
- 2. Significant amounts of material previously purchased as "non-stock"
' have been added to the inventory.
- 3. Significant amounts of material purchased and sMged for outage use were not used and remain in the inventory.
Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source) Accountabil_ity: Willrett/McCormick , Adverse Trend: None 43
1 DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE l INDICATORS These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con-tacts the Manager- Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the original intent and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this report. 44
O TotaiBacktog(uannours) 10000- 84 10000 - B Backlog >3 Months Old (Manhours) 9000 - 9000-8000-8000-
, 7000 - 7000-6000- 2 6000-5000 - j 5000-g 4000- E 4000-2 3000--
3451 3000 2000- 1587 1464 2000- 1361 1024
'*7 i e i ELMS rams i i i December 93 January 94 February '94 December'93 January 94 February '94 1
Safety Related Backlog Safety Related Backlog >3 5000-g (Manhours) ;;;; O Months Old (Manhours) 4000- 4000-m m p" 3000- " 3000-c 2003 m 2000- ,,,f,- E 2000-2 '///// 2 1000 - 800 '///// 768 805 414 '///// 1000~
,,,,,, 402 .
I'' ~
*** FSSS2i 0 i i 0 e i i i December 93 January 94 February '94 December'93 January'94 February 94 2000-O High Priority Backlog (Manhours) e 1500-1000-n 2 500 -
0 0 0 0 , , , December 93 January 94 Fobruary '94 MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD B ACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NON-OUTAGE) This indicator shows the estimated manhours for corrective non-outage MWOs remain-ing open at the end of the reporting month, along with a breakdown by several key categories. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase //Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 45 l l
O Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100% - ~ 90%- - - Y m -
~~~
{ - - 4 .,,,,,,,
'^ "
80%- g , g! c '
- .g m 70%- i y .* p #5 Iffk, . g . [. id 60%- '
. .I $p 2 5
~
$ M ^
50%- J. ,.
+ 5
^ 34 h*
40% - W.. l ,. , 30%- th- < h 47 O [ g"" 20%- ' u > _ M - A ua a ' 10%- 7e J2 ; [. g_ [ h , '( .' Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 2%- O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue GOOD l
--O- Fort Calhoun Goal V
1%- Data Unavailable due to Cycle
.o. _o_ .o.,_ _ C O O -
O 15 Refueling O --C O i i l Outa00 0% i i i 4 i e i i l i I I Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE 4 The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance. 1 The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 86.8% in February 1994. 4 The lower graph shows the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue. During February,495 PM items were completed. 4 of these PM items (0.81% of the total) were not completed within the allowable grace period. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance , items overdue is a maximum of 0.5%. ;
)
i Accountability: Chase //Faulhaber l u Data Source: Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources) l Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 i 4 i 46
, . , _ _ .. - -. . - ~ . . ~ _ _ - - - - - . - . - . - - . - .-
E Rework As identified By Planning or Craft i 4.56 %
--O-- Fort Calhoun Goal 4%- C O O O Cycle 15
, 3 Refueling Outage f , m 2.57 % 2.58 % 2.38 % 2.13%
=
To
- o 2% -
f... ! E b 1.06 % Q-1%- i 0% -
;- -; - - - r-
--r-- -;- -;
Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS l REWORK This graph indicates the percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft. , The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. Data Source: Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source) ! Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber . Adverse Trend: None 47
80%- 5 Maintenance Overtime
-M-- 12 Month Average Maintenance Overtinw lGOODI
-O- Fort Calhoun *On-Line" Goal 60%-
ycle 15 l 50%- Refueling Outage 40%- 30%- 1 1 20%- 10%- C v O O 0% , , ,",", ' , , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 MAINTENANCE OVERTIME ; The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources. The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 9.0% for - the month of February 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with l respect to normal hours was reported as 11.85% at the end of the month, j The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%. 4 Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None 48 _ -_- -- - _--- -----_ _ _ _-_--------_-_--_-----------__ ----- J
l 0 Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)
@ Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)
E Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) 2-l 1- l 000 000 00 000 000 000 0 0 0 000 000 000 000 1 I i 4 i i i 4 i i ! l Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 , PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) This indicator shows the number of open Maintenance incident Reports (irs) that are related to the use of procedures, the number of closed irs that are related to the use of procedures, and the number of open and closed irs that received procedural noncom-pliance cause codes for each of the last twelve months. There were no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the month of February 1994. There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reported in September 1993. Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner
]
Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 i I l 49
E Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts) O Number of Emergent MWOs Completed
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal m 110 100 u
*~
- 90 _
8 80 % - E c Cycle 15 73 80 o Refueling
- 70 l 70%- / 65 .5 60%- Outage ,p 2'/ so >
g // /r f y 50%- Data Not
'fI ff: - 50 g o
Available E a 40%- p'
.p'^:
p.
/
- 40 =e g 30%- ')j f; - 30 h g 20%~ $j',k ,f ' 20 ja ' *~ '{,j ((!- 4 a 0% i i i
-0 0 November '93 December January February '94 l
PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS) This indicator shows the percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities concerning all Maintenance Crafts. Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, cali-brations, and miscellaneous maintenance activities. The number of emergent MWOs l completed for the month is also shown. The percent of the number of completed scheduled maintenance activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities for February 1994 was 79.8%. Also, there were 65 emergent MWOs completed during the month. Due to the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage, data for this indicator was not available until after the first month on-line during Cycle 15. 1 l The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 1 80%. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber i Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 50
I
@ Number of instruments Out-of-Service l G000)
-O- Fort Calhoun Goal v 24-20- 19 18 17 17 Cycle 15 16- Refueling 14 i Outage 12- 11 -
- 10 8- .
j l1
~ ~ ~ ^~
I i i i i l I i i i i 1 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the total number of in-line chemistry system instruments out-of-service at the end of the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indi-cator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS). At the end of Feoruary 1994 there was 1 in line chemistry instrument out-of-service. The instrument was from the Secondary System. There were no instruments out-of-service from PASS. The trend for PASS instruments for this reporting period has not changed. The trend for
^
Secondary instruments this reporting period has decreased from 4 to 1. The blowdown sample panel had 1 instrument out-of-service at the end of the reporting month. The entire instrument channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, or 3) the alarm function associated with the instrument is inoperative. If any of the functions listed above are not operational, then the instrument is not performing its intended function. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 5. Six out-of-service chemistry instruments make up 10% of all the chemistry instruments that are l counted for this indicator. Data Source: Chase /Renaud (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski i Adverse Trend: None 51
1 I
@ Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)
Monthly Average Waste Produced During the Last 12 Months (Kilograms)
-O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal
-H- Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 Kg) 1000 - C = = 2 = = 2 2 "
2 2 = 3 800 - y 600-Ed E g 400- . 200 - 4 C C > & C C C C O
' ^
O , , , , , 3 , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 HAZARDOUS WASTE PFIODUCED This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by the Fort Calhoun Station each month, the monthly average goal and the monthly average total for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced. During the month of February 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,0.0 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total for hazardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 299 kilograms. The monthly average for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months is 24.9 kilograms. Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for this indicator is a maximum of 100 kilograms. Date Source: Chase /Henning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Henning Positive Trend 52
a I
.l E Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area
--O-- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months) lG000l 20%-
-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months)
~5%-
1 O C O O O O O O O O C- 0 10%- 5%- 0% Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is contaminated based on the total square footage. The 1994 monthly non-outage goalis a maximum of 12% contami-nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 15% contaminated RCA. At the end of February 1994, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.6%. Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) Accountability Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 53
1
- Number of identified PRWPs Year-To-Date IGOODI
-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<25) V 25- C O O O O O O O O O O O 5 20-8 g 15-E 5
g10-O 5-I I I l i i l i 3 l l 1 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 l RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radio-logical Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month. The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological performance. During the month of February 1994, there no PRWPs identified. There has been 1 PRWP in 1994. The 1994 year-end goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 25. Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 52 54
I Documents Scheduled for Review 250 - 2 Documents Reviewed a Overdue Documents i 200- 7 1 ~ r 100- - _ 7 50- - l
^ ~'
y _
- + /
0 ,
, , , , ~', '
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual. During February 1994 there were 116 document reviews scheduled while 143 docu-ment reviews were completed. At the end of February, there were 6 document reviews ! more than 6 months overdue. There were 19 new documents initiated in February. Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) , Accountability: Chase /Jaworski l Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on more than 3 consecutive months with document reviews more than 6 months overdue. SEP 46 i 55 i l l _ - - ._ -_ _ __ _ _ ___ __ _ 1
l i E Non-System Failures lGOODI 30 - 25 - V 1 20 - 15 - 12 12 10- 6 8 7 7 0
~
i E;1 i ; i 1 ; i i i ; i i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 90-
@ System Failures l GOOD l 80- y ,
70-60 - 50-38 40- 33 32 30 - . 31 24 25 7 26 30 [- 31 23 i i i i i i i i i i i i i Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul ?ug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 LOGG ABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate ; graphs. The top graph depicts the total number of loggable/ reportable non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authorization, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors. The bottom graph shows the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents conceming system failures which occurred during the reporting month. l During the month of February 1994, there were 25 loggable/ reportable incidents identi-fled. System failures accounted for 23 (92%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents.17 of , the 23 system failures were environmental failures due to inclement weather conditions (snow) during the reporting period. The 2 non-system failures involved a lost /unat-tended security badge and failure to follow escort procedures. Data Source: Sefick/Woerner(Manager / Source) Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 . 56
I E Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO required for Removal) O Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line) Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old & Temporary Modifications >6 months old 8-7 7- ,,,, -
'////
'hh I
~
5- $h"h
'/ / 4 4 4 #~
Nhhhh ////) '//// ///// [ hh,hf, bb! b bbf 1- If / h/ '
/
o 0 ,hhhhh 0 ,bhhbi 0 bhhh 0 , b'NNh' y , y , y , v i November '93 December '93 January '94 February '94 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are 0. There are currently no temporary modifications that are greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage to remove. In addition, at the end of February 1994 there were 4 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be removed on-line. These were: 1) Local indication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11 B, in which Operations is reviewing a draft FLC. After review, Licensing is to issue an FLC, and the NRC is to approve; 2) LP-30 transformer, in which ECN 93-183 is approved for accomplishment prior to 8/31/94; 3) Refrigerated air dryer for Rm-057, which is awaiting installation of MR-FC-84-1550, scheduled completion date of 6/30/94; and 4) Epoxy repairs to ST-48, which is awaiting completion of MWO 931325, scheduled start date 1995 Refueling Outage. At the end of February 1994, there was a total of 25 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station.12 of the 25 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 13 are removable on-line. In 1994 a total of 14 temporary modifications have been installed. Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on more than 3 consecutive months of performance not meeting the established goal for the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. Actions to remove these are defined and no additional action plan will be prepared. SEP 62 & 71 57 e
I i 5 Total Modification Packages Open l 264
- l % 250- -O-- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal j w
g
%Ny y 200 -
- g" 65 b
$$ 150 - C O O O O O O O O 127 Q$
W$
"g 7 g 100 p
v W y 99 pq (f {gm c 100 - :. L.
.w .'.'. .
.a W.
u ec y h; pg AF gjp p 1l :., 1., . . .- c l l _
- g. {j g 1 y n;n
- q pj g p
5 so- G
. .v J
v.< p u g3 p J t y ,,
=. yg $',m w gy g W ;& .p- g k
g b; 39. i 5 3
$ kn g;f O- 'M Lf 8
$;5 (*$ $ {5 M l l w $ sh! S I i i i O i i i i i i 1 i i i i I
'91 '92 '93 Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS Thic Indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstand-ino modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).
Categorv Renorting Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 5 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 48 Construction Backlog /in Progress 30 Deslan Engr. Uodate Backlog /In Progress 10 Total 94 At the end of February 1994,3 additional modification requests had been issued this-year and 28 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) had completed 45 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 4 backlog modification request reviews this year. The 1994 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 80 outstanding modifications. Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source) Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 58
1 l EARS Requiring Engineering Closecut - N:t in Closeout O DEN E sE 50- ) 40- 40- 40- 40- - _
)
30-. - 30- 30- - 30- l
-~~
20- .___ 20- - _ 20 - - 20- , 10- 10- 10- 10- ' O , , 0 , , i0 ", , 0 N E E 3 3 , , , Dec Jan Feb Dec Jan Feb Dec Jan Feb Dec Jan Feb 0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months February '94 Overdue EARS O Closeout O Engineering Response 28: s8: . _ 20-10-O , , I- 1 M , , , Priority O Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 Q Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200 - 150 - Data -- 100- Not Available - - - A A 0 , , , , , , , , , ,
-'-~
Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 3 ve us esponses Q 42 EARS Resolved and in Closecut G 38 Overdue Closoouts 0 114 EARS Requiring Response 8 79 EARS on Schedule 24.4 % 269% 25.0*/ / j 50.6 % ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer-ing and System Engineering. The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS. Total EAR breakdown is as follows: EARS opened during the month 11 EARS closed during the month 7 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 156 Data Source: Skiles/Pulverenti (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59
I l 35.0% o% E FC Type - 199 O sri Type - 246 O DC Type - 234 TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY TYPE (679 TOTAL) E in DEN -202 23.0 % - O in system Engineering - 199 18. G In Procurement / Construction - 122 29.0 % O in Cioseout - 158 TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY LOCATION (679 TOTAL) 17.0 % 3 Priority 1 &2 - 113 O Priority 3 & 4 - 298 O Priority 5 & 6 - 268 TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (679 TOTAL) 250 - 225 - E ECNs Backlogged in DEN 200 - 175 - O ECNs Received During the Month 150 -
@ ECNs Completed During the Month 75 -
50 -
~
0 i i 1 4 8 i i I i I i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec94 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS This indicator shows the number of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) awaiting completion by DEN, the number of ECNs opened during the reporting month, and the number of ECNs com-pleted by DEN during the repo> ting month. At the end of February 1994, there was a total of 202 DEN backlogged open ECNs (50 Facility Change,69 Substitute Replacement items, and 83 Document Change type). There were 38 ECNs received by DEN, and 44 ECNs completed during the month. The year-to-date monthly . average number of ECNs received was 38.5 at the end of the month. Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source) Accountability:- Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 60
l
@ DEN - Engineering Not Complete
@ System Engineering - Engineering Complete, Response Under Review
@ Maintenance / Construction MWO/CWO Scheduled, but Work Not Complete E DEN - Closoout, Drafting Not Complete 203 199 I U' 150 - 1 28.0 %
100 - 92 . O Priority 3 or 4 57.0% 50- 0 Priority 5 or 6 0 , , , , , , , , , , , i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Facility Change ECNs Open C DEN - Engineering Not Complete
@ System Engineering - Engineering Complete, Response Under Review
@ Procurement Engineering / Maintenance / Construction E DEN Closecut, Drafting Not Complete 240 250 - 239 ,
200 - % . } 69 20.0 % 26.0 % 150 - : 64 '
' O Priority 3 or 4 d' O Priority 5 or 6 5
0 , , , , , , , , , , , , Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open M DEN - Engineering Not Complete
@ System Engineering - Walkdown or Confirmation Not Complete E DEN - Drafting Not Complete i
250 - 235 234 200 - 83 8.0% E Priority 1 or 2 22.0 % 0 Priority 3 or 4 100 - 120 70.0% i 50- O Priority 5 or 6 ; 31 l 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , ; JanO4 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Document Change ECNs Open DOCUMENT CHANGE ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source) Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61
. . . ~ _ . . --
I i l 1 O Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error
@ Other Personnel Error l
@ Maintenance Problem 3- E Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem
@ Equipment Failures 2- g R
1- - - - -- E I ' q E - 0 i , , , , , , , , , , , Feb93 Mar Apr May _ Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan94 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from February 1,1993 through January 31,1994. To be consistent with the Preventable / Personnel Errors LER Indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date. The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For detailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance indicator Definitions" section of this report. There were no events in January 1994 that resulted in LERs. Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62
O Total Requalification Training Hours O Simulator Training Hours
@ Non-Requalification Training Hours 50- 5 Number of Exam Failures 36 40- .5 36 33 33 33
~
U 30- 27 20- 18 32 23 ,, 10- 4
~
8
' 5 4 6 *
/, 3 /, .
,r' g ',' 3 ,/ ,- g 0 , , , , .. i i Cycle 93-2 Cycle 93-3 Cycle 93-4 Cycle 93-5 Cycle 93-6 Cycle 93-7 Cycle 94-1
- Note: The Simulator was out-of-service for maintenance and modifications during Cycle 93-6.
LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches. Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training. There were 3 written exam failures, and 2 individual simulator e::am failures for Cycle 94-1. The failure of the 2 individuals in the simulator also caused that crew to fail. All individuals were remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift sched-ule. Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 63
i 35- O . SRO Exams MministerW D SnO exams eassed - 30 . E RO Exams Administered .1 O RO Exams Passed y 25-F 20-15-l 10-NRC ' Exams 5- - - - O , , , , , , , , , , i. , j Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 . LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera- ; tor (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis-tered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress. There were no OPPD Reactor Operator or Senior Reactor Operator exams adminis-tered during February 1994. 1 Currently, there is no Hot Ucense class being conducted. The next Licensed Operator class will convene on April 11,1994. Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani ' Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64 i
j l G TotalOpen CARS . D Total Open irs : 4
' O Open CARS > Six Months Old S Open irs > Six Months Old 320- 320 280- . cyde 15 :
Refueling ._
-280 240- O**9* 2 2 2 240 :
200- 2 I E E
-200 160- : : : : : 160- ,
120- : : : : _
- : : : : 120 :
80 - : : : : : -
- : : : : 80 40-
? g l- g ;
[: s
- 40 t
0 , , , , , , , , , , , "', O Mars 3 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94 E Open signiricant CARS cyde 15 80 - Refueling 0 Open Significant irs **9' so E 4 37 3 30- 21 25 24 3 1 20- - 10- 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 .4 5 5 4 6 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , Mar 93 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb94-OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS- I Tl.is indicator shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS
>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of open-significant CARS and the number of open significant irs.
At the end of February 1994 there were 68 open CARS.15 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 6 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month. Also, at the end of February there were 305 open irs. 51 of these irs were greater a
- than 6 months old. There were 64 Open Significant irs at the end of the month. i The 1994 monthly goal for the number of CARS greater than 6 months old is less than -;
30. 1
. )
Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source) & CHAMPS Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates - Adverse Trend: Although the number of irs has increased in recent months, an adverse trend is not indicated because the increase is a result of the . Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and a revision to Standing Order R-4. g 1
l
+ Engineering Hold - Planning Complete
-O-- Planning Hold -M- Ready
-V-- Part Hold -e- Total 375-350 -
325 - , 300 - 275 - g 250- $ 225-f 200-j175-8 150-125-100 - 75- :., 50-25-0 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Dec93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb Mar 95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling OLAage. This graph indicates: Parts Holds (part hold removed when parts are staged and ready for use)
- Engineering Holds (Engineering hold removed when appropriate engineering paper-work or support is received for the package)
Planning Holds (Pbnning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process) Planning Complete (status given when only items keeping the job from being ready to work are parts or engineering support) Ready (status when all planning, supporting documentation, and parts are ready to go) Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Johansen Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 66
Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval & Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued l Total Modification Packages (21) (2 under review to cancel or rnove) 25 - 1 I I 1 iI I I t t t i I i 1 t t 1 1 l i I I ! ! I i 1 f I t i I t t t I t t iI I t iI E I i J l J l # I 3 5 & I I I 6 3 3 3 3 3 I I & I 3 I I 3 4 I 3 3 I I I 4 I i4 l 15-E 10-a. 5-0 , , , , , , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
@ 5 $ $ $ $ 3 $ $ $ $
5 5 s * * * ! S 8 8 3 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 21 MODIFICATIONS) This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering group. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by Octo-ber 15,1994. Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 67
l l i
- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval & Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval
--X- Final Design Package issued (6 FD DCPs issued prior to 1/14/94)
Total Modifcation Packages (19)(3 under review to cancel or move) 25-y f,20- ,,, e ~m 815- .e e e 8e 8 b 10- E OO .___ z j 5-a i l 0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
$ $ $ $ $ 5 E $ $ $ $
=
M M a m n G s n e n m e o u PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 19 MODIFICATIONS) i This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during 1994. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/
- 94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.
The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by August 15,1994. I Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles ! Adverse Trend: None = l
_Ja.,, = as.- 3 - - J ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS 69
l I ACTION PLANS FOR ADVERSE TRENDS i This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators ! cited as exhibiting adverse trends during the three months preceding this report. The action plan for Engineering Change Notice Status follows: Actions to reverse the Adverse Trend cited in the December 1993 Performance Indica-inrs Report -
- 1) Focus resources on backlog reduction.
- 2) Reduce the number of ECNs entering the system.
- 3) Implement a consistent method for tracking / counting ECNs that enter and exit the system.
Itern 2) will be discussed to reach an agreement with Production Engineering Division and the NPRC to reduce the total number of ECNs entering the system to a maximum of 500 per year. Then DEN's goal will be to maintain the backlog to a level that pre-cludes an adverse trend. l The action plan for Docurnent Review follows: Actions to reverse the Adverse Trend (cited in this report) for overdue document re-views are:
- 1) Continue to provide resources to perform biennial review assignments.
- 2) A Facility License Change (FLC) request has been submitted to reduce the number of required periodic reviews.
- 3) A PRC subcommittee has been formed to take the maximum advan-tage of the FLC request to reduce the number of periodic document review.
An overdue document review is not safety significant, in that OPPD's dynamic proce-dural review process ensures documents are kept up-to-date. i 70 l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS , 1 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR PERFORMANCE The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economi-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- cal operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual auxiliary feedwater system for the reporting period di- cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi- the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is system. the Financial and Operating Report. CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS Compares the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate to 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE the industry check valve failure rate (f ailures per 1 million AREA component hours). The data for the industry failure rate The personnel contamination events in the clean con-is three months behind the Pi Report reporting month. trolled area. This indicator tracks personnel performance This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43. for SEP #15 & 54. COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA Collective radiation exposure is the total external whole- The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which body dose received by all on-site personnel (including includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, ar,d contractors and visitors) during a time period, as mea- areas of the C/RP building, that is contaminated based sured by the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col- on the total square footage. This indicator tracks perfor-lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person- mance for SEP # 54. rom. This indcator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-
SUMMARY
watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmot The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) f ail- month are also shown. ure rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen month time period. Failures are reported as component DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) (i e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e. This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for charging pumps, main steam stop valves, control ele- each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start ment drive motors, etc.) categories. demands and the last 25 load-run demands. Failure Cause Categories are: Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse- DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE querce of expected wear or aging. (LOSTTIME ACCIDENT RATE) Manuf acturing Defect - a f ailure attributable to inad- This indicator is defined as the number of accidonts for equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com- all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, ponent or system. involving days away from work por 200,000 man-hours Engineering / Design - a f ailure attributable to the inad- worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-equate design of the responsible component or system. tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-Other Devices - a f ailure attributable to a failure or mance for SEP #25 8 26. misoperation of another component or system, including associated devces. DOCUMENT CHANGE ENGINEERING CHANGE NO-Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure that is a result of im- TICES OPEN proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- Change Notees (ECNs) that are assigned to Design ing activities performed on the responsible component or Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and system, including failure to follow procedures. Maintenance. The graphs provide data on ECN Facility Errors failures attributable to incorrect procedures that Changes open, ECN Substituto Replacement Parts were followed as written, improper installation of equip- open, and ECN Document Changes open. This indicator ment, and personnel errors (including failure to follow tracks performance for SEP #62. procedures property). Also included in this category are failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as- DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) signed to any of the preceding categories. The Document Review Indicator shows the number of documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-uled for review, and the number of document reviews that are overdue for the reporting month. A document review is considered overdue if the review is not com-plete within 6 months of the assigned due date. This indcator tracks performance for SEP #46. 71
1 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS j EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen-PERFORMANCE erator being declared inoperable should be counted as The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail. one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer. corrective maintenance and the successfultest that fol-gency AC power systern for the reporting period divided lows repair to venfy operability should not be counted as . by the number of hours in the reporting period multiplied demands or f ailures when the EDG has not been de- l by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys- clared operable again. tom. EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNREUABluTY EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT REUABIL. This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer-ITY gency diesel generators. In general, unreliability is the This indicator shows the number of failures that were ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die- the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a solgenerator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also combination of start unreliability and load-run shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level unreliability. of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob-tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) the demand failures are less than the trigger values. BREAKDOWN
- 1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of start demands, including all startonly demands and all the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design En-start demands that are followed by load-run demands, gineering Nuclear and System Engineering. This indica-whether by automatic or manual initiation. A start only tor tracks performance for SEP #62.
demand is a demand in which the emergency generator is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS
- 2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the emer. The number of ECNs that were opened. ECNs that were gency generator system that prevents the generator from completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks a valid start failure. This includes any condition identified performance for SEP #62.
in the course of maintenance inspections (with the amor-gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-have resulted in a start failure il a demand had occurred. CAL HOURS
- 3) Number of Load-Run Demands: For a valid load-run Equipment forced outages per 1000 cntical hours is the i demand to be counted the load-run attempt must meet inverse of the mean time between forced outages one or more of the following criteria: caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real au- to the number of hours the reactor is criticat in a period tomatic or manualinitiation. (1000 hours) divided by the number of forced outages B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration caused by equipment failures in that perind.
as stated in each test's specifcations. C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator EQUIVALENT AVAILABluTY FACTOR is expected to be operated for at least one hour while This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available loaded with at least 50% of its design load. generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as
- 4) Number of Load Run Failures: A load run failure a percentage. Available generation is the energy that should be counted for any reason in which the emer- can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre. power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi-dicted. Failures are cx>unted during any valid load run lations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be demands, produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu-
- 5) Exceptions: Unsuccessf ul attempts to start or load-run ously at maximum capacity, should not be counted as valid demands or f ailures when they can be attributed to any of the following: FORCED OUTAGE RATE A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that an emergency, the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required during to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced an emergency. events are failures or other unplanned conditions that C) Intentional terminaton of a test because of abnormal require removing the unit from service before the end of conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-generator damage or repair. ures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut-
- 0) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service).
prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes. E) A failure to start because a porton of the starting sys-tem was disabled for test purpose, it followed by a suc-cessful start with the starting system in its normal align-ment. 72
}
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR LICENSED OPERATOR REOUALIFICATION TRAIN- , This indcator is defined as the steady-state primary cool- ING ant 1-131 activrty, corrected for the tramp uranium contri- The total number of hours of training given to each crew bution and normalized to a common purification rate. during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re- ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours), actor mre internals from previous defective f uel or is the number of non-requakfication training hours and the present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu- number of exam f ailures. This indicator tracks training facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous performance for SEP #68. operation for at least three days at a power level that does not vary more than + or 5%. Plants should collect LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when BREAKDOWN possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state This indcator shows the number and root cause code for power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as the highest steady-state power level attained during the follows: month. 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific cupervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-(540 degrees F., Vf . 0.02146) divided by the specific equate management or supervisory control, incorrect volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 procedures, etc.) degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- 2) Licensed Operator Error This cause code captures changer, Vf - 0.016204), which results in a density cor- errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32. tors during plant activities.
- 3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission /commis-GROSS HEAT RATE sion committed by non-licensed personnel involved in Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal plant activities.
energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the 4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by code is to capture the full range of problems wh'ch can the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH). be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated haz- lance, calibration and radiation protection. ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other 5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. - This cause code covers a full range of programmatic deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, installa-HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM tion, and fabrication (i.e., loss of control power due to SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE underrated fuse, equipment not quahfied for the environ. The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- ment, etc.). able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-high pressure safety injection system for the reporting ronmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for spuri-period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe- ous failures of electronic piece-parts and f ailures due to riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres- meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high sure safety injection system. winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time failures. Electric mmponents included in this category INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, This indcator is deftned as the number of accidents per diodes, resistors, etc. 200,000 man-hours worked for all utihty personnel per-manently assigned to the station that result in any of the LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) following: 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex- The total number of security incidents for the reporting ciuding the day of the accident),2) one or more days month depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks se-away from work (excluding the day of the accident) and curity performance for SEP #58. 3).1atalities. Contractor personnel are not included for 3 this indicator. MAINTENANCE OVER11ME The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER. maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as VICE contract personnel. Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are out-of-service in the Semndary System and the Post Accident Samphng System (PASS).
- LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz-zes and exams that are administered and passed each
, month. This indcator tracks training performance for SEP #68. 3 1
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-This indicator is a breakdown of the manhours associ. SULTING IN UCENSEE EVENT REPORTS ated corrective non outage maintenance work orders by The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in several categories. Safety related MWOs are those Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting MWOs in which the Equipment Data Base in CHAMPS month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & has identified the equipment as Critical Quality Equip. 61. ment (COE). Therefore, this indicator is identifying those MWOs that have been identified as COE and reports the OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS & INCIDENT number of estimated manhours associated with the REPORTS backlog. This indicator tracks maintenance performance This indicator displays the total number of open Correc-for SEP #36. tive Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are oluer than six months and the number of open significant MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE C .Rs. Also displayed are the number of open incident The total maximum amount of radiation received by an Heports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, months old and the number of open significant irs. and annual basis. OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The number of Modification Requests (MRs) in any state MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 15 REFUELING between the issuance of a Modification Number and the OUTAGE) The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have completion of the drawing update. been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling 1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress. This number rep-Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modification requests that have not been plant staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork approved during the reporting month. ready for field use). Also included is the number of 2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category MWOs that have engineering hokfs (ECNs, procedures includes: and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, A.) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed. (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) B.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Main. Projects Review Committee (NPRC). tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage Projects Committee (NPC) and have not yet been converted to MWOs. These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUtPMENT DEFp cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are CIENCIES returned to Engineering for more information, some ap-A control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and any cx>mponent which is operated or controlled from the some approved for planning. Once planning is com-Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control pleted and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control Modification Requests may be approved for accomplish-Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Control ment with a year assigned for construction or they may Room, or provides a passive function for the Control be cancelled. All of these different phases require re-Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not View. perform under all conditions as designed. This definition 3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear also applies to the Afternate Shutdown Panels Al-179, Planning has assigned a year in which construction will Al-185, and Al-212. be completed and design work may be in progress. A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is 4) Construction Backlog /In Progress. The Construction considered an
- Operator Work Around (OWA) ltem" if Package has been issued or construction has begun but some other action is required by an operator to compen. the modification has not been accepted by the System sate for the condition of the component. Some examples Acceptance Committee (SAC).
- 5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /in Progress. PED of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera. has received the Modification Completion Report but the toi out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re. drawings have not been updated.
paired because replacement parts require a long lead The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant include modifications which are proposed for cancella-pump to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions tion. are required by an Operator because of equipment da. sign problems. These actions may be described in Op. OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require This indicator shows the status of the projects which are changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant in the scope of the Refueling Outage. equipment that is required to be used during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormat Operating Proce-dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-mation during normal or abnormal operations. 74 1 i l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS : PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS MONTHIDENTIFIED AS REWORK (MAINTENANCE) The percentage of total MWOs completed per month The number of identified incidents concerning mainte-identified as rework. Rework adivities are identified by nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any main, related to the use of procedures (includes the number of tenance work repeated to correct a deficiency which has closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and re-occurred within 60 days following similar work activi, the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs. ties. Any additional work required to correct deficiencies This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP discovered during a f ailed Post Maintenance Test to on. #15,41 & 44. sure the component / system passes subsequent Post Maintenance Tests. This definition can be found in S. O. PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE M 101, MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 21 MODIFICATIONS) PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE. This indicator shows the status of modrfications ap-NANCE ACTIVITIES proved for completion during the Ref ueling Outage. The % of the number of completed maintenance activi-ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte. PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLAN-nance activities each month. This % is shown for all NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 19 MODIFICAllONS) maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-emergent MWOs. Maintenance activitiet include MWRs, Proved for completion during 1994. MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella-neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per- RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM formance for SEP #33. The number of identified poor radiological work practices (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs radiological work performance for SEP #52. This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER event classification, a preventable LER is defined RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & as: An ovent for which the root cause is personnel error PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE (i.e., inappropriate action by one or more individuals), The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-inadequate administrative controls, a design /construc. lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of tion / installation /f abrication problem (involving work com. non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-pleted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main. tenarne completed over the reporting period. The ratio, tenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-upkeep / repair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-the event must have occurred within approximately two nance items in the month that were not completed by the years of the
- Event Date" specified in the LER (e.g., an scheduled date plus a grace period equal to 25 % of the event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with scheduled interval, This indicator tracks preventive the original design of the plant would not be cx)nsidered maintenance activities for SEP #41.
preventable). For purposes of LER event classification, a " Personnel RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE-Error LER is defined as follows: An event for which the OUENCY RATE root cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or The number of injuries requiring more than normal first more individuals (as opposed to being attnbuted to a do. aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator partment or a general group). Also, the inappropriate trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. action must have occurred within approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER. REPEAT FAILURES Additionally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error- The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System should also be classified as " Preventable? This indicator (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15. number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures for the last eighteen months. PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT OF UMIT SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry Safety system failures are any events or conditions that parameters divided by the total number of hours possible could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of fcr the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple Chloride, Hydrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride, and redundant subsystems or trains, failure of all trains con-Suspended Solids. EPRilimits are used. stitutes a safety system f ailure. Failure of one of two or more trains is not counted as a safety system f ailure. The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The following is a list of the major safety systems, sub-systems, and components monitored for this indicator: Accident Monitoring Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and 75 . 1 I l
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys- FCS during the reporting period. tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety STAFFING LEVEL l Features Instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water Fire for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam indicator tracks performance for SEP #24. Line isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring instrumenta- STA110N NET GENERATION tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core isolation The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta- the reporting month. tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Fuel Systems. Standby Liquid Control System and Utti- The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-mate Heat Sink. figurations to the plant's systems.
- 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-INDEX chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculaton systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the based on the concentration of key impurities in the sec- P&lD, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.
ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the 2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil-most likely cause of deterioration of the steam genera- lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-tors. Criteria for calculating the CPI are: 1) The plant is cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures at greater than 30 percent power; and 2) The power is are not considered as temporary modifications unless the changing less than 5% per day. The CPI is calculated jumper or block remains in place after the test or proco-using the following equation: CPI - (sodium /0.90) + dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or (Chloride /1.70) + (Sutf ate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper / lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-0.30)/5. Where: Sodium, sulfate and chloride are the cations. monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-and copper are monthly time weighted average tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for feedwater concentrations in ppb. The denominator for which MRs have been submitted will be considered as each of the 5 factors is the INPO median value. If the temporary modifications untilfinal resolution of the MR monthly average for a specific parameter is less than the and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently INPO median value, the median value is used in the cal- recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-culation. rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71. SIGNIFICANT EVENTS THERMAL PERFORMANCE Significant events are those events identified by NRC The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected)to the staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operat- adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent. ing experience. The screening process includes the ago, daily review and discussion of all reported operating re-actor events, as well as other operational data such as UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR special tests or construction activities. An event identi- The ratio of the available energy generation over a given fied from the screening process as a significant event time period to the reference energy generation (the en-candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated or potential threat to the health and safety of the public continuously at full power under reference ambient con-was invohted. Specific examples of the type of criteria ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important contage. safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, primary cool-ant pressure boundary, important associated features;
- 4) Scram with complicaten; 5) Unplanned release of radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-nicalSpecifications; 7) Other.
INPO significant events reported in this indicator are SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of significant events and lessons learned identified through the SEE-IN screening process. 76
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l l UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS(NRC 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS DEFINITION) This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- Tne number of safety system actuations which include i tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- (gdy) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low l tions) that occur per 7,000 hours of critical operation. Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection l The value for this indcator is calculated by multiplying Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams classification of safety system actuations includes actua- 1 in a specific time period by 7,000 hours, then dividing tions when major equipment is operated and when the i that number by the total number of hours critical in the logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-same time period. The indicator is further defined as lenged. follows:
- 1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici- VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS pated part of a planned test. This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited
- 2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac- inspection was actually performed and not based on when tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- the inspection report is received. The hours reported for nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may each inspection report are used as the inspection hours.
have be6n spuricus. , 3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro- WASTE vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param- This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid eters and conditions, rather than the manual scram radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- tor also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste tons) provided in the main control room, which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive
- 4) Critical means that during the steady state condition of oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been factor (k,,) was essentially equal to one, shipped off site for processing. Low-level solid radioactive waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and UNPLANNED CAPABluTY LOSS FACTOR evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power The rato of the unplanned energy losses during a given plant operation and maintenance. Dry radoactive waste period of time, to the reference energy generation (the includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, dispos-energy that could be produced if the unit were operated able protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other continuously at full power under reference ambient con- material to be disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste ditons) over the same time period, expressed as a per- disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms.
contage. Low-level ref ers to all radioactive waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica-UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS- tor tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. (INPO DEFINITION) This indicator is defined as the sum of the following safety system actuations:
- 1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS actuation setpoint or f rom a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal.
- 2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-tem actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-curs when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is reached or when a spurous or inadvertent signal is gen-erated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation ,
was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pres- 1 sure injection system, the low pressure injection system, j of the safety injection tanks. I I 77 I
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators Index is to list perfor-mance indcators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended. SEP Reference Number 15 Page ircrease HPES and IR Accountability Through Use e' Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenar as) . . . . . . . ... . . .49 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 21,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area.. .5 Recordable injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate . . , .4 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs . . . . . . . . . . .6 SEP Reference Number 24 Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level . . . . . . . . . . .42 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . .3 Recordable Injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate . . . .4 SEP. Reference Number 26 Evaluhte and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury /lliness Frequency Rate . . .. .3 Recordable Injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate . . . .. .4 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / illness Frequency Rate . .. . . .3 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . .4 ) SEP Reference Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage). . . 66 Overall Project Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage). . ..Not Reported untillaterin 1994 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning . . 67 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts) . . . . 50 SEP Reference Number 36 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage). .45 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Proventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue. .46 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents.. . . 49 SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate. .
.36 78
SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued) SEP Reference Number 44 g Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . .. . . . . . . . . .49 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . 55 SEP Reference Number 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program. .. . .. .. . . . 54 SEP Reference Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure . . . .. . .16 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste . .. . . . . 37 Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area . . .5 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area . . . . . . . . 53 ' SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . .. . . . . .. . . . 56 SEP Reference Number 80 ' improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveitlance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports.. . .. 20 - SEP Reference Number 81 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . . 20 SEP Reference Number 82 Establish interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications.. . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . 57 Engineering A.ssistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . .. 59 Engineering Change Notice Status . . . . . . .. . .. . . 60 Engineering Change Notice Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . 61 SEP Reference Number 88 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training .. . .. . . . . . ... . 63 License Candidate Exams, ... . . . . . . . . . . 64 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications .. . .. . . . . . .. .57 79
l REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews B. R. Livingston G. L. Anglehart D. L. Lovett K. L. Belek J. H. MacKinnon B. H. Bloine J. W. Marcil C. E. Boughter N. L. Marfice C. J. Brunnert R. D. Martin G. R. Cavanaugh T. J. Mcivor J. W. Chase K. A. Miller A. G. Christensen Nuclear LicensinD O. J. Clayton & Industry Affairs R. P. Clemens J. T. O'Connor R. G. Conner W. W. Orr J. L. Connolley T. L. Patterson G. M. Cook R. T. Pearce D. C. Dietz R. L. Phelps H. J. Faulhaber R. L. Plott M. T. Frans W. J. Ponec D. P. Galle C. R. Rice S. K. Gambhir A. W. Richard J. K. Gasper D. G. Ried W. G. Gates G. K. Samide M. O. Gautier M. J. Sandhoefner S. W. Gebers F. C. Scofield L. V. Goldberg H. J. Sefick R. H. Guy J. W. Shannon J. B. Herman R. W. Short K. C. Holthaus C. F. Simrnons C.K. Huang E.L.Skaggs C. J. Husk J. L. Skiles T. W. Jamieson F. K. Smith R. L Jaworski R. L. Sorenson R. A.Johansen K. E. Steele W. C. Jones M. A. Tesar J. D. Keppler J. J. Tesarek D. D. Kloock J. W. Tills L.T.Kusek J. M. Waszak M. P. Lazar S. J. Wilfrett 80
FORT CALHOUN STATION ' OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES Event Date Range Production (MWH) Cumulative (MWH) Cycle 1 09/26/73 -02/01/75 3,299,639 3,299,639 1st Refueling 02/01/75 -05/09/75
- Cycle 2 05/09/75 -10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/76-12/13/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76- 9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 -12/09/77
- Cycle 4 12/09/77-10/14/78 3,026,832 12,985,720 4th Refueling 10/14/78-12/24/78
- Cycle 5 12/24/78-01/18/80 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/06/82 3,561,866 24/330,034 7th Refueling 12/06/82- 04/07/83 *
- Cycle 8 04/07/83 - 03/03/84 3,406,371 17,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84 - 07/12/84 *
- Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86 - 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87- 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90- 05/29/90 Cycle 13 05/29/90 - 02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 05/03/92 Cycle 14 05/03/92-09/25/93 4,981,485 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93-11/26/93 Cycle 15 11/26/93-03/11/95 15th Refueling 03/11/95- 04/29/95 (Planned Dates)
FORT CALHOUN STATION CURRENT PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS " RECORDS" First Sustainee ' wetion August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.) l First Electricity & Alled to the System August 25,1973 l Commercial Operation (180,000 KWH) September 26,1973 Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 days) June 8,1987 Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Net Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992 j}}