Text

Performance Indicators for Apr 1994
	ML20069B798
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	04/30/1994
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20069B786	List: LIC-94-0097, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators for Apr 1994; ML20069B798;
References
	NUDOCS 9405310144
	Download: ML20069B798 (96)
	v • d • e

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

M FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS i

i APRIL 1994 l lI 1

1 SAFE OPERATIONS e

PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE l COST EFFECTIVENESS i

l i D CK 285 R PDR

q r u hwd6lmd%,wasallikub,...

il iswok wisdorn, aus wwndjudynal...

d w a, fediann,, canwv4ng comanilsnal... }

e dwa, wag 9y!>...dwdaimg LGjob 9V i k lin d % , w e uj, % . S L w l wwo-dinabd, ul ik edL se wievnd, a

~~

ftRhbunki, ib ib GWU GUPni % $ Won Uh bi

.astu 4 a.s A u exa ce,m,

/ - % tu 9 u % e pase'n,, uljud in daung i k q u l % p ..

) - ). o'e -

4 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT Prepared By:

Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Pedormance Group APRIL 1994

x FORT CALHOUN STATION

- APRIL 1994 MONTHIX OPERATING REPORT OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month'of April, the station operated at a nominal 100% power level. The spent fuel pool reracking project continued.

On April 4, a DC Bus #2 ground alarm was received causing numerous toxic gas monitor alarms and erratic Qualified Safety Parameter Display System (QSPDS)/ Core Exit Thermocouple indi-cations. Investigation indicated that the alarm was related to the #2 Battery Charger input to QSPDS Channel B. A lead was lifted and the ground was eliminated. A faulty capacitor was subsequently found and the channel was declared inoperable. The capacitor was replaced and QSPDS Channel B was declared operable on April 8.

A problem was discovered with the closing spring for the circuit breaker for Raw Water Pump AC-10D. The problem was corrected by replacing the closing spring. Previous experience within the industry has revealed failures in the springs as a breaker of this type approaches 2,000 cycles. The Electric Driven Fire Pump FP-1 A was declared inoperable due to the concern that its breaker closing spring was approaching 2,000 cycles. It was declared operable on April 12 after replacement ofits closing spring. Other components were inspected, and in some cases the springs were replaced, but none of the other components were close to the 2,000 cycle threshold.

On April 18, an Electro Hydraulic Control (EHC) sysem problem occurred. With no action on the part of the operating crew, turbine control valves mc ved slightly, evidenced by a small shift in the Reactor Coc' ant System (RCS) cold-leg temperr.ture. An EHC circuit card is suspected of causing the problem and plans are in progrest to repit.ce the card. The EHC control cabinet is now open to improve ventilation. The conditier. is teing closely monitored.

On April 23, Omaha Pubhc <

>istrict reported an inadvertent release of about 1500 pounds of sulfuric acid to a berm which dnins to the neutralization basin. Although not a direct release to the environment,it exceeded State of Nebraska release limits and was consequently reported.

A pump failing to shut down properly caused the inadvertent release.

On April 28, personnel discovered Waste Disposal Pump WD-23A to be smoking and glowing red after startup to recirculate Monitor Tank WD-22A. The Auxiliary Building Operator secured the pump and applied CO2 from a fire extinguisher to the pump motor. Abnormal Operating Pro-cedure AOP-06, " Fire Emergency," was entered and subsequently exited. The room was venti-lated to disperse the smoke. It was discovered that WD-23A had no suction path because the outlet valve for WD-22D was shut; therefore, causing the pump to overheat.

The following NRC inspections were completed during this reporting period:

IER No. Descriotion 94-11 Emergency Plan Walkdown Inspection I 94-13 Solid Radwaste and Transportation Programs I L

FORT CALHOUN STATION ..

April 1994 MONTHIX QPERATING REPORT The following Licensee Event Repons were submitted during this reponing period: 4 LER No. Descriotion a

94-002 Inoperability of Boric Acid Pump Due to Inappropriate Feeder Breaker _

94-003 Inoperability of Raw Water Pumps Due to Excessive Sand Accumulation 1

i Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs .

j t

N

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

b Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories U _ g Performance in Industry i

_. . - . _ . _ ~ (Ohplannedh EThermal: Upper 10% and better 1Uniti _ (Unplanned l: Mutomaticil. . ' ' 'l:: Performance, than 1994 OPPD goal ECapabilityj .JCapetqlityl (Scranfsa,0001 >

~ '

? Factor (.? .. dL'oss Factori (Hduiscritica' n 5 Performance Better Than m ~ ad E f..'~ .___ . . . . . 11 M 1994 OPPD Goal E' E E l i i I i, .. !

i EDQ h$;

HPSI Safety 3 ty -

Fuel Performance Not Meeting -

System @Qtep l ; l i lSysted Sell @i(ity -

1994 OPPD Goal Performance # 8005 i N#U" # I -

l .

___ - 2 l

i i

!s! iI!

i i --

__________a_.

f':

January 94 February B4 March 94 Collective Volume of Inhthdl dhemistk Chld sta d l lhedh r1 Radiation Exposure Low-Level Rad osctive A

.SlaMiy nt Ap 4 Best Possible

-i ...

Performance 1994 Year-End Performance INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the months of January through April 1994)

,u _

r TAsto"

[Sdramsj SWhiler-(Critissi; Year-To-Date Value Performance Categories y^j B Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend

~ . . _ . . . .

[Safetyj ?Significanty l Systems . -

? Eventsi -

LActuations{ ,

Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal

=

s s .+

y - -- -

Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or Industry Average Trend IShNty; Forced fS stsnn Outage -

' ' $FalibresF; Rate

~ ' f ~ >

January February March -

'94 94 94 m

l

'U

. - April 1994 l IEq6ismehtEM Year-To-Date

~ TF6t M Q Collective Value Best Possible Radiation

$~0dNges/f; g Performance 1994 Year-End Exposure Performance T. C rit M. 3,G-NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for October 1990 through September 1993. Predictor blocks cannot be generated for these performance indicators because they are based on NRC biannual reports.

All other indicator values are for the months of January through April 1994.) ,

_ _ _ ._ _____.____-___.___.__._._________x_..__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

T FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT

, APRIL 1994 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT '

ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data representing three A Performance indicator with data representing 3 con-consecutive months of improving performance or three secutive months of declining performance; or four or

. consecutive months of performance that is superior to more consecutive months of performance that is trending the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear towards declining as determined by the Manager Sta-Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-OP-37). tion Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per NOD.

OP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator ex-The following performance indicators exhibited positive hibits an adverse trend by this definition may specify in trends for the reporting month: written form (to be published in this report) why the trend is not adverse.

Recordable Iniurv/fliness Cases Frecuency Rate (Page 4) There were no performance indicators exhibiting adverse trends for the reporting month.

Hioh Pressure Safety Infection System Safety System Performance (Page 8)

End of Adverse Trend Report.

AuxiUarv Feedwater System Safety System Performance (Page 9)

Emeroency Diesel Generator Unit Reliability (Page 11) INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Diesel Generator Reliabi!ity f25 Demands) MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (Page 12)

A performance indicator with data for the reporting period Emeroency Diesel Generator Unreliability that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is (Page 13) defined as *Needing increased Management Attention" per NOD-OP-37.

Fuel Reliability Indicator (Page 14) The following performance indicators are cited as need-ing increased management attention for the reporting Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resuttino in Lic. month:

ensee Event Reoorts (Page 20) Number of Control Room Eauioment Deficiencies (Page 15)

Forced Outaos Rate The total number of control room deficiencies has ex- !

(Page 23) ceeded the monthly goal of a maximum of 45 since Sep-tomber 1993.

Secondary System Chemistry (Page 39) Violations Per 1.000 Insoection Hours (Page 18)

Maintenance Overtime The number of NRC violations cited in inspection reports (Page 48) per 1,000 inspection hours for the twelve months from April 1,1993 through March 31.1994 exceeds the 1994 In-Line Chemistrv instruments Outet-Service goalof a maximum of 1.4.

(Page 51)

Unit Caoability Factor .

Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 25)

(Page 52) The year-to-date UCF value for the reporting month (95.1%)is below the 1994 year-end goal of a minimum Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area (Page 53) Unolanned Cacability Loss Factor (Page 26)

The year-to date UCLF value for the reporting month

**' " 9 "' ' * * * * "'" '

End of Positise Trend Report.

7[

5

V

t. --_-- - - - - - - - - - - - - _

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT APRIL 1994 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED ' PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT !

MANAGEMENT AlTENTION REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the pre-Unolanned Automatic Reactor Scrams oer 7.000 HoW1 vious month.

Crrtteal (Page 27) Annunciator Windows The year-to-date number of unplanned automatic reactor (Pages li and iii) scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical (2.46) exceeds the 1994 The annunciator windows have been rcvised to include a goalof 0. predictor block" for performance indicators. This block represents the best possible 1994 year-end performance Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(INPO Definition) based on year-to-date values and predicted optimum (Page 28) - performance values for the remainder of the year.

The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua-tions for 1994 (1) exceeds the goal of 0. Performance Indicators Reoort Summarv (Page iv)

Unolanned Safety Svstem Actuations -(NRC Definition)

The requirement for the responsible department man-(Page 29) ager to submit an action plan has been expanded to in-The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuat,ons i clude performance indicators cited as *Needing in-for 1994 (1) exceeds the goal of 0. creased Management Attention"for three consecutive months. The definition of an Adverse Trond has been -

Thermal Performance revised to remove the requirement for citing 3 consecu-(Page 31) tive months of performance not meetjng the goal as an The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance adverse trend.

value has been below the 1994 year-end goal of a mini-mum of 99.4% since January 1994. Industrial Safety Accident Rate. Disablino iniurv/lliness Frecuenev Rate and Recordable Iniurv/!!! ness Cases Eculoment Forced Outaoes oer 1.000 Critical Hours Frecuency Rate (Page 33) (Pages 2,3 and 4)

The year-to-date number of equipment forced outages These indicators have been revised due to the reclassifi-per 1,000 critical hours has exceeded the 1994 year-end cation of a Recordable injury /lliness Case that occurred goalof 0.20 since February 1994. in March 1994 to a Lost Workday Case.

Maintenance Workload Backloos Comoonent Failure Analysis Reoort (CFAR) Summary (Page 45) and Reoeat Failures The backlog of non outage Maintenance Work Orders for (Pages 34 and 35) corrective maintenance has exceeded the 1994 mon *5!y - The graphs for these indicators have been revised.

goal of a maximum of 325 since March 1994.

In-Une Chemistrv instruments Out-of-Service Ratio of Preventive to Totaf Maintenance & Preventive (Page 51)

Maintenance items Overdue The method of reporting this indicator has been revised (Page 46) from showing the number of instruments out-of service to The percentage of preventive mairtenance items over- reporting the percentage of hours that the in-line chemis-

,l due has exceeded the 1994 montrily goal of a maximum try instruments are out-of-service.

of 0.5% since February 1994.

Contaminated Radiation Contro!Ied Area Document Review (Page 53)

(Page 55) The goals for this indicator have been revised.

There have been document reviews more than 6 months overdue for each month since October 1993. Ooen Corrective Action Reoorts and incident Reoorts (Page 65)

Temocrary Modifications The graph for the open significant CARS has been re-(Pace 57) vised to show a total of 6 for March 1994. This revision The number of temporary modifications >1 cycle old for was necessary because CAR 94 032 was downgraded.

the reporting month exceeds the 1994 goal of O. In addi-tion, the number of temporary modifications >6 months Overall Project Status (Cvele 16 Refuelino Outace) old has exceeded the goaf of 0 since January 1994. (Page 67)

This indicator has been added to the report.

1 End of Management Attention Report.

End of Performance Indicator Report Improvements /

Changes Report vt

,3 x Table of' Contents / Summary EAGE GOALS . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . ..X1 SAFE OPERATONS EAQE

. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO ... ... . .. . . . . . ..2 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 3L RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE... .. m.. . .. . . . . , , . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . 4 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATONS /

21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA. . . . ..5 PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs .. . . . . _ . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . 6 i

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES . .. , . . . .. . ... . .. . .7 ;

r SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ~!

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY:

INJECTON SYSTEM. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .8 -,

AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM.. .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. .9 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM .. . . . . . . -. .. . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . .10 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY .. .. . .... ..... . .. ..... . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .

,,11 H EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR ~

RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) .. . ,.... . . . . . .. .. .. .. .12

-1 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR 1 UNRELIABILITY .. . .. .. .. . . .... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 -

q

. FUEL RELLABILITY INDICATOR 14 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM '

EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES.. ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. -. . . . . . . .. .15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE. 16' 1

MAX! MUM INDIVIDUAL -

RADIATON EXPOSURE.... . . . . . . . . m... ... . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . 17 VOLATIONS PER 1.000 lNSPECTON HOURS . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . .18' SIGNIFICANT EVENTS. -. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .. . .. .. ... . . . . . . . . .. ... ...19 -

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20 :

F PERFORMANCE- EAgE STATON NET GENERATON . . . , ,. . . . . ... . . . .. ... ... .. 22 i

FORCED OUTAGE RATE...... . . .. . ., .. . . . . . . . . ... .. . 23 vii

d i

~

PERFORMANCE (continued) EAGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... ... .. . .. 24 '

UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR ...... . . . . . . ... . .... . .. . . .. ... . 25 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR .. .... . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .- . ... . .. . .. 26 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL.... . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . ..- . 2 7 ~

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS -(INPO DEFINITON). .. . . . . . . . .. . .. 28 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM

' ACTUATONS - (NRC DEFINITON).. . . . . . . . . . 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 RADIOACTIVE WASTE - - 37 -

PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT., . . . . . .. . .. .... .. ... . ... 38 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY .. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . - . . . 39, l

COST EAGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR .. ... . .. . . .. . .. .... ... .- . . . . . ..,41 STAFFING LEVEL.. ....... .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ... . . ... . . .42 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE., ..-.... . . . . . . - . . . . . .. .. . . ... ... . .... 43 l

l? DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD :

. BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE).. . . - . . . . . ...-.. ... . .. . ~45 l 1

viil l 2- - - - - - ----- .----_------- -----.------- ._____,_m,

4-DIVISDN AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCP INDICATORS (continued) EAGE

. RATO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE

& PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE., . . . . . 46 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER !.qNTH 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 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED .- . . . . . 52 CONTAMINATED RADIATON CONTROLLED AREA .. . . 53 RADIOLOGICAL 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 NOTICES OPEN . .. . 61 LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 62 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING .. . . . 63 LICENSE CANDIDA~ EXAMS .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . 64 I t i OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS AND INCL]ENT REPORTS . . .. . . . 65 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) . . 66 OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) . . . . 67 i

l- PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING., . . . . . 68 l 1

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING . ... . . 69 i

IX I

+ = -

O e

e ACTION PLANS DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LfST PAGE ACTON PLANS.. .. . .. . , . . . 70 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . 73 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX . . . .. . . . 80 REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST . . 82 l

1 X

e OPPD NUCLEAR ORG ANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1994 Priorities MISSION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and efficuvely to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment.

GOALS Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional working environment, in the control room and throughout the OPPD nuclear organi-zation, that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus-try leader.

1994 Priorities:

Improve SALP 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, j 1994 Priorities: >

Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork. ji Improve 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 in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable source of electricity.

o 1994 Priorities:

Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

Streamline work processes to improve cost effectiveness.

( Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) 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

Year-to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Rate ,

-O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.50)

-C}- Industry Upper 10%

V

-A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 0.6 -

0.5 - 0 0 0 3 O O C O O O 0.4 -

0.3-0.2 -

0.1-t 0 0 . . , , , 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 0.419 at the end of April 1994. The value for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994 was 0.638.

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

(number of restricted-time + lost-time accidents + fatalities) X 200.000 (number of station person-hours worked)

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis s0.50. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 50.50.

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 2

L---_____________________ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____

1994 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate

--X- 1993 Disabling injury /lliness Frequency Rate - l GOOD l

--O- For1 Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.5)

V 1.2 -

1-0.8 -

0.6 -

C O O , O 0.4 -

0.2 -

0 Q, i ,. , , , , , .

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT R ATE)

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 year-to-date was 0.42 at the end of April 1994. There were no lost time accidents reported for April. There has been 1 lost-time i accident in 1994. q The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994 was 0.26.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5. j Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner.

L Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27-f- 3

);-

D :

o

,c q 4 ~. !

l]

5- -e-- 1994 Recordable injury /Itiness Frequency Rate j sj lGOODI 4.5 - --M- 1993 Recordable injury /II! ness Frequency Rate V

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year End Goal ( 1.5) .

3.5 -

3-2.5 -

2-1.5 - C O O O O Il 1- M h 0.5 -

0 _ _, . , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep- : Oct Nov Dec94 RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE y 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 repor1ed if personnel from any.of the Nuclear Divi-

'sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. 1 The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

]1 The recordable injury / illness rate year-to-date was 0.42 at the end of April 1994. There !

were no recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of April. There has been .j 1 recordable injury / illness case in 1994. j l

The recordable injury / illness rate for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30, .

1994 was 1.28.

- 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- a Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 .l; f

14

]

1

- #- Contamination Events l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 54) 75 - V 70-65 -

60 -

g55- C O O O O O O O O O O O g50-Lu 45-

.h40-f 35-E 30-

$25-U20-15-10-5-

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.

There were 8 contamination events in April 1994. There has been a total of 22 contami-nation events in 1994.

The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 54 contamination events.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 5

)

-R- Preventable (18 Month Totals)

-{-}- Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)

O Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40-35-30-25-20-

~

"" E 15- g 10-

-O 5-0 m

,' g'n s o o

i y

s m

E e

4 3

2 o

a b$

o g

c 4

o 2

8' ] 1 PREVENTABLEPERSONNEL ERROR LFRs 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 March 1994, there were 2 events that were subsequently reported as an LER. No LERs were categorized as Preventable or Personnel Error.

The total LERs for the year 1994 (through March 31,1994) is 3. 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-tor is based on an 18 month period, the 1994 year-end totals will include 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

4

@ Operation l GOOD l

@ Shutdown f - PWR Average Trend 5

E v> 2 -

3_

3 6 3 1- E M -

g g l ,

On ,

g ,

g , i 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93 1 93-2 93-3 Year Ouarter l SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES I 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 " Performance 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.

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.

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 the 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.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 7

E 1994 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value

-M- 1994 High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value Year to-Date j

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004)

--A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) jj 0.02- a a a a a a a a a a a--A l GOOD l 0.015 - y n

0.01 -

~

C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.00036 g_ Q O O O Q-O-O --O -- O- O - O i i -i-i i i i i i i i i i i.

1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun - Jul Aug Sep .Oct Nov Dec94 HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM '

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report-ing month.

The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of April' 1994 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned or unplanned unavailability during the month.. The 1994 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.00013 at the end of April. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.00027.

There has been 1.1 hour1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months of planned unavailability (for surveillance tests) and no hours of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.004.

The 1995 INPO industry goalis 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 Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Positive Trend'

._ 8 1

i E .,

5 Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater Systern Unavailability Value .

1994 Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value Year-to-Date .j lGOODI

--O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01)

V l l

-b- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025)

-{'}- Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) ;

l 0.025 - 4 A A A A .A A A A A A A 0.02-0.015 - 1 0.01 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.005 -

0.0022 Imemakel Q Q b -O--G--O- -G -- O--O--O O I . I 0 4 4 4 4 i I 4 I I I I i 1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug ~ Sep Oct Nov DecS4 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for April 1994 was 0.0064. During the month, there were no hours of planned unavailability and 9.18 hours2.083333e-4 days 0.005 hours 2.97619e-5 weeks 6.849e-6 months of unplanned unavailability for steamline maintenance for FW-10 and breaker spring replacement for-FW-6. The year-to-date unavailability vah e was 0.0027, and the value'for the last 12 months was 0.0025 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 3.7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months of planned unavailability and 11.94 hours0.00109 days 0.0261 hours 1.554233e-4 weeks 3.5767e-5 months of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a rnaximum value of 0.01.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.002.

Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Positive Trend 9

i

i .

E Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value

--M- Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value Year-to-Date l GOODI ,

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal t

1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) j

-o- Industry Upper 10% (0.004)- )

0.07-0.06-0.05-0.04 -

0.03-u Q -O O O O O O O O' O.01 - NS g3- 5 -c o a o o a o a Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for April 1994 was 0.015. During the month, there were 17.1 hours1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months of planned unavailability for testing and repairs, and 5.0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of unplanned unavailability to repair a failed switch. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.023 and the value for the last 12 '

months was 0.008 at the end of the month. The large unavailability value for February.

is due to maintenance outages on both diesel generators.

There has bee.n a total of 120.85 hours9.837963e-4 days 0.0236 hours 1.405423e-4 weeks 3.23425e-5 months of planned unavailability and 11.25 hours2.893519e-4 days 0.00694 hours 4.133598e-5 weeks 9.5125e-6 months 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 goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile 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

v

@ Numberof Failures /20 Demands - Trigger Natues for 20 Demands G 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 T V V V V V V V V V V 4-

= = = = = = = = = =

2 2 2- .

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 g

f m 7 7 T 7 7

0 0 d 0 1 00 ) , 00 f ,

00 00 S 00 I 00 5 00 [- - , 00 E 00 ?

00 1 1

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were moorted during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at ;,

thei

alhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level c. 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- q ues. The Fort Calhoun 1994 goalis to have fewer failures than these trigger values. !

The demands counted for this indicator include the respective number of starts and the respective number of load-runs for both Diesel Generators combined. The number of start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or ,

manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least I 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). l

)

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning '

Positive Trend 11 i

i O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands l GOOD 1 E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands S- -e-- Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O 3-2- -

1-00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 I i i i i i i i i l i i May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS)

This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1994.

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.

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

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

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 12

(

l 1

@ DG 1 Unreliability Value

@ DG-2 Unreliability Value l GOOD l

--+-- Station Unreliability Value Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025 - a Three Year Average) 0.002 - O O' O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015 -

0.001 -

0.0005 -

0 i

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

. , . i , , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 -

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNREllABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling genera--

tor unreliability.

The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value at the end of April 1994 was 0.0. The 1994 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without failure.

In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without failure.

For DG-2: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without failure, in addition, there was 1 load-run demand without failure.

Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessful load-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 valuec Data Source: J.tworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) i Accountability Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend ~

13 $

6. - .. - ., -. . . . ... . . . . . .

___i________._______.-_-______________--_---_i_-s

[] Full Rxliibility indicator 1

-A- 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) lGOODI 10- -O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals Cycle 15 A Refueling A - O O O 4-Outage

~ ~

s i i i i i i i i i i i May93 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRl) value for April 1994 was 2.886 X 10-4 microcuries/

gram. The purpose of the FRIis to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintain-ing a high level of fuel integrity. The April FRI value, which is less than the zero defect threshold value, discussed below, indicates a defect free core. The plant operated at full power during the entire month. The April FRI was calculated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, April 1 through 30.

The April FRI value of 2.886 X 10 microcuries/ gram is comparable to the March value of 2.015 X 10-d microcuries/ gram. The very low FRl value will see a wide range of values due to many outside factors (i.e., which chemist analyzes the sample can pro-vide a significant shift in the data point).

Fission product activity data from April full power operation show a Xenon-133 activity increase and no lodine spiking or increase. The Westinghouse technical expert has determined that there is a potential for a defective fuel rod in the Cycle 15 core. This prediction is based on a change in the Xe-133 to 1-131 ratio. The ratio has a 50%

correlation rate with known defects. A more definitive disposition will be possible when a significant power change is made and specific chemistry data (i.e. Cesium, lodine and Xenon) can be collated. The presence or lack of Xenon and lodine spikes during the power change would confirm or disprove the fuel failure assumption. 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 10-4 microcuries/ gram indicates a high probability of unit operation with one or more fuel defects. The determination of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." The value of 5.0 X 10-' microcuries/ gram is de-fined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the core is defect free or not. The 1994 Fort Calhoun Station FRI performance indicator goal will be to maintain a monthly FRI below 5.0 X 10-4 microcu-ries / gram.

Data Source: Holthaus/Guliani Accountability: Chase /Spilker Positive Trend 14

O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On Line lGOODI

- D - Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V

80- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70- -

60- - I -

[

40 ,

30- 5 ? .ll _ 7 i $; k [ l. ( ,

20- If k l; % ; }

l; k j ',

/

10-l

p ?

O

, i

?

',j ,

.g

}

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94

@ Operator Work Around items Repairable On Line O Total Number of Operator Work Around items 10- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal for Total Operator Work Around items

r. 8 --

O O O O O O O O O O O O f 4-

~

$ i i i A i 9 i 9 i i i i 9 i 9 e r,

i May93 Jun Jul Aug .Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 1 .

NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES .

l l

This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on line), the num.ber.of outstanding control room equip- R ment deficiencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) Items repairable en-line, the number of outstanding OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals.

1 There was a total of 49 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of April 1994. I 28 of these deficiencies are repairable on line and 21 require a plant outage to repair.

There was a 4 week average of 4 deficiencies added and 11 deficiencies closed during q the month, i j

There was 1 identified Operator Work Around item at the end of the month. The OWA l was on equipment tag CH-208, C/R panels CB-1/2/3.

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: None 15 l

4

. __ - . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____________.______.__________.________mw

.q I

l Q Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack)

IGOODl

--0-- Personnel Cumu:ative Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack) i V .l

--O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person-Rem) j b40- C O O O O O O O O O O O I 9'30-g20-1g 10- , _ y ; j e 0 -

' Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94

@ Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack IGOODl

--@-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rorack V >

--O- Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rem)

E

$3: C O O- O O O O O O O O O 6}-

O

$: Jan94 Q-0 i 0 Feb i O Mar i O Apr i

May i

Jun i

Jul i

Aug i

Sep i

Oct e i Nov Dec94 i

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 April 1994 was 0.932 person-Rem.

The year-to-date exposure was 5.512 person-Rem at the end of April.

The Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure to complete the Spent Fuel Rerack is less than 23 person-Rem.

The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure for April was 0.485 person-Rem.

The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure year-to-date was 0.584 person-Rem at the end of April.

I I

The collective radiation exposure at the end of April (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 6.096 person Rem. The collec-tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 154.4 person-Rem at the end of April.

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-rem per year. The yearly average for ;

Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 5/91 through 4/94 was 150.4 person-rem j per year.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett 1 Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 16 1

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem)

O Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) 5000-OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000-3000 -

cr E

2000 -

Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000-324 68 0 i April 1994 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During April 1994, an individual accumulated 68 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

The maximum individual exposure for the year was 324 mrem at the end of April.

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.

1-Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None

(

17 V

4- Violations per 1,000 inspection Hours l GOOD l O-- Fort Calhoun Goal 3.03 g_

e '

Es 1

2-J -

1.4 C O O O O O O O Q

l

.6 I1-5 l

l 6 i 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

'92 '93 Apr93 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar 94 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 in-volved with collecting and processing the data.

The violations per 1,000 inspection hours indicator was reported as 1.57 for the twelve months from April 1,1993 through March 31,1994.

The following inspections ended during this reporting period:

IER No. Iltle No. of Hours None To date, OPPD has received 4 violations for inspections conducted in 1994:

Level ll1 Violations (1)

Level IV Violations (3)

Level V Violations (0)

Non-Cited Violations (NCV) (0)

The 1994 Fort Calhour, goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 inspec-tion hours.

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Short Adverse Trend: None 18

4 O NRC Significant Events l GOOD l

- Industry Average Trend Y 2-1

~

h@,

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

2-1 /. 1 1 1 0

1 i i i I i i i I 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 blannual" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NHQ 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 j 19 ,

ic j

4 3- ;

i

@ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs h I

l 2-4

'I 1-l ll 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- .0- 0. *

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

S2 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94

^

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS

~

This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) th'at result in Lic -

ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows -

the yearly totals for the indicated years.

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

4 L 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 t y =**-y g- g -- w -

i I

I PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the .

highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc- -!

tion.

i 21 i

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

tn 50 -

3 Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours)

.40-35.03 35.12 34.6 '34.9 2 31.21 '

Cycle 15 f30-y 28.01 Refueling 27.8 25.03 2 Outage ,

I

@20-

?,

~

10-y 1.54 0-

- ' ' ~^

^

" " -~ ' ~ " ' ' *

. May93 Jun- Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 1 STATION NET GENERATION During the month of April 1994 a net total of 348,642 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 15 was 1,686,382 MWH at the l end of the month.

l Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal 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 attribut-able 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 10.100%~

power on July 2nd.

Planned energy losses for the month of May 1993 were the result of a maintenance -

L outage.

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

- 22

y g ,

a

.. l I

Forced Outage Rate l GOOD l

-O- j 12%- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) y

-10.1 I 9.3 l 8%-

6%- Cycle 15 Refueling Outage .

4%-

C. O O O O O O O O O O 2%-

1.38 7 i i e i 0% , , , , , , , , , , ,. ,

'91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan .-Feb Mar Apr94 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 1.7% for the twelve months from May 1, 1993 to April 30,1994. ,

A forced outage occurred on February 11 due to a generator and reactor trip that oc-curred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Super-visory Circuit. The generator was off line for 48.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months .

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 hours1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months .- There .

was one forced outage during the month of June 1993. This outage, which occurred when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine -

and reactor trip, lasted 70.6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months . .,

a The 1994_ Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4% 1 The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goal was a maximum value of 2.4%. l Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & NERC GAD Forms l

Accountability: Chase Pusitive Trend 23

)

li 4:

c . Monthly EAF Year to Date Average Monthly EAF $

IGOODI i

- Industry Median Value (76.7%) ,

.. 100% - Cycle 15 - -

7 Refueling ,v sh (n q 85.6 - % $ Outage [d M 76.2 80 % -

E M """

=

E S-9 --E Y

E Jt' b =;d =N =b N

g 'I y if i & N 5 h 7 8 !f M %

3 6 60%- $h m R i g kk 4

bi ,

w i

lil{ g {* g jfj g g g %a j f j l '^ #

t 1l

~ 40%- hd & #

@ N M

5 m

N u 2 m 2

M g

i ; .

E F 6 M S S V M i0 ! ' .i & N di M L ft 26 % ;@y y@ s

$ 20%- j$ ff ffff {g { if g g

" *" < x 8 m agges as s$ e a

2 m 4 : $! $ga I i i l

,, i i i i i i i i i i i I

'91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availabil;ty Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous 3 years.

The EAF for April 1994 was reported as 99.8% .The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 95.6% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates for condenser tube repair and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

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 l_ndustry 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 prior to this report was 75.3%

Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)

- Accountability: Chase AdverseTrend: None 24 ..

1

=.

O Monthly Unit Capability Factor

--at-- Year to Date Unit Capability Factor

--+-- 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% - .o , .sm. ar- . .o - e & 7 80%-

""" ~

O I -% ~ E/ "I" O @

60% ~ 0 b h A My We

gi Cycle 15 nh[

$ ng $ g$

40%- g g ap g& Refueling h );g }g $ jg I i i i i i i i i i 1 l May93 Jun Jul Aug -Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb' Mar Apr94 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 indus-try 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 continu-ously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage.

The UCF for April 1994 was reported as 100.0%. The year-to-date UCF was 95.1%,

the UCF for the last 12 months was 77.2%, and the 36 mcnth average UCF was re-ported as 76,0% at the end of April.

Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to 3 repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. '!

Energy losses for the month December 1993 were due to rampup from the Cycle 15 l Refueling Outage and a plant trip that occurred on December 6 during testing of the EHC system. Energy losses for the month of June 1993 were due to Moderator Coeffi-cient Testing and a forced outage from June 24 through June 27. 1 i

The 1995 INPO industry goalls 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%.

Data Source: Generatlon Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report-Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 25 h

O Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor

--96-- Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 60%- lGOODj

-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal 9

50% -- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%)

40% - Industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average) 30%- Cycle 15 Refueling utage 20% -

10%-

0%

o- 6--c W",^,

c c

o-A-r ,bopQi h May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This 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 vclue. 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 ambi-ent conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of April 1994 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to date UCLF was 4.9%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 5.1%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.2% at the end of April.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of February 1994 were due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. Unplanned energy losses for the month of January were due to derates to repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank.

Unplanned energy losses for the month of December 1993 were the result of a plant trip -

that occurred during EHC testing. Unplanned energy losses for the month of June 1993 1

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 1 Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 3.97%.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase l Adverse Trend: None d 26 j

(

i

- FCs Reactor scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical (Year to-date)

--+-- FCs Reactor scrams Per 7,000 Hours critical (for the last 36 months)

-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals

--6-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal 6- -O- Industry Upper 10% (0.51 per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical over a 36 month time period) 5-4-

3-

~

fr

. . . .4 ,

l~

0 fC M A

D,"

M M M

, y ,

$,D,D,hh M May93 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 5 Numberof Fcs Reactor scrams 3 4-2 3- Cycle 15 Refueling 2- Outage j

7 1 1 1 0 0 -

O pyg 0 0 0 0 0 paq 0 ppJl 0 0

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

90 '91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr$4 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical (as defined in INPO's 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 2.46 at the end of April 1994. The value for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994 is 2.91. The value for the last 36 months is 1.99.

An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11,1994 when supervi-sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on December 6,1993 during EHC testing. An unplanned automatic reactor scram oc-curred on June 24,1993 when the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in 'he switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.51 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical for the 36 month time period from 1/91 through 12/93.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) J Accountability: Chaso Adverse Trend: None ,

27 .)

} )

i

~

O Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

O Fort Calhoun Goal

= Industry Upper 10 Percentile 2-1 1- Cycle 15 g g

y Refueling lj[

Outage gg B b f

.",L",o =,=,=,=,=,=,=,=,= s,=,=,

'91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 -

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of April 1994.

There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 where 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 i turbine and reactor trip.

An INPO unplanned safety system actuation occurred during the month of July 1992. _ lt 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

1

- 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition)

--+-- Critical Hours

@ Safety System Actuat i ons (NRC Definition) 10- 1000 900 j-

[ 8- cycle is 800 i Refueli 700 e 0"' 9' 600 8 f 6-5 500 5 3

j4- 400 g 300 o g 2- g 200 i

Y iii ..

o b b N N N ,

b0

'91 '92 '93 MJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMA 1992 1993 1994 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes -

l the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Em7r-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 actuationa 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 have been 3 unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. 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 29 n

I .

E Monthly Gross Heat Rate

--A- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate

~4- 1994 &1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-10300 Cycle 15 10223 10177 Refueling m m m Outage

" " " O m10- l 1

9.5 -

)

,- i

, 9-31 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 GROSS HEAT RATE This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years.

The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,068 for the month of April 1994.

The 1994 year-to-date GHR was 10,071 at the end of the month.

The GHR was not calculated for the months of October and November 1993 because of 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 a Fahrenheit. .

i The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is s10,190.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 30 .

4 O Monthly Therrnal Performance

--W-- Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance

-O-- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals l GOOD l

--+-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)

a Industry Upper 10% (99.9%)

100 % -

o a A _a_ ,A,. a i a -a A a A y e @ @ 6 . . . . .

0 -

O-pO-O--C g C Y" g g g -

V: v =

99%- e i

g& g T

jg

$9 cycle 15 Refueling f

M s

5 y

'} h 77 l h A y h Out 9' N l 1 l If ,

98 % 8 I i i l i i i i 4 i 1 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal 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 April 1994 was 99.24%. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.2% at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994 was 99.5%.

The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control )

problems on heaters 3A and 58, and to spring runoff resulting in screen carryover and condenser fouling. Improvements made during the month of March are: warm water ]

recire. was taken off-line; some recovery in condenser performance was achieved due '

to backwashing at regular intervals; and the level control problems for heater 3A were I corrected.

Condenser Performance continued to gradually improve during April.- Backwash valve !

adjustments started in early May and improvements due to increased backwash dura- - :i tions should be reflected in the May performance indicator.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 99.5%. The 1993 Fort Cal-- I 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 i

~

Thermal Output

)

-O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1

1 1500 =1 1

1499.5-1499-

, .i 1498.5-1498-i

.1497.5-1497- ^f a

w g 1496.5- .

m i@ "* -

s:, , , > .

N [ ,'

_ $[ " '

I M

m4 sss s ., im "'

"N4ggb j,:fa.f :.s.w.:

ts/;' 4' ' '

~f" '.,.,1 ~<

g - .

1495.5-N 4 o s -s * *

^' *w'sD @,..

~W J[f,:i x.y.y us;,.,

UM (J.2 y w-

,>x x..

K4 . +m

.ss-;p >v s

- q:w as ,

1495< )

ww w s' ; <

,n hM ' <g s,,7 ,

1494.5- 4 $ M '

'P e < W t

+

7 4, >

s . .

^c - '

.m -

, > s.

e @M.< .m,.m, W ' am i 1494-

.%;O:s 1: :n m 4 s s,hm: .m..;m..

w:4 f E;d;q

.. ,&1 -

. {:g~p <

. e , w .,.3. ,4g;_.-

.y s

s s

s ,,,,s.<

-: 4' s , em pa .j, . XM .re 1493 5- WW- " i '

W ' , ' 2^ >- ' T'

' f"e" .mm.

@' gg -

e,

~

~-

4 ~ ~

g<g' a.c

1' , gg

..- a,..

s i

1493- f-f

-., g..

"k- ^'$'

'>'y,;?."

w'

.W' a~g&~ ""j - - -

, Mg em

w ' + an *^+ m y '* (Sm'#v.-'#' Mn

n % y; JL s

~ .wm: na u

, i

~f

^ W d%,:: -

1492.5- I ' ,> < > , l M@hp* " M ' . ## . '

J1 Y , @ &^ -

' J@ i Y, gCO[W ~ ,

,pp. h -k

%f i ^

1492- aelM,< , % .n lN.::$>

" ^

y ' *y

., y M <

v, W

"a@. . _ ~,' g% * ,

y; W~ %gy. > s Wwe.# >

1491.5- * < -

ws > n m C rb , u , s

^~-

v s, ., -1"

.,y < s. .g.,.j 1491 -

4

.v .

m. :,A. ;

a, w yb

' x.

,\

.E. . . y . <

m

/ *D.

,y ; .

s "< m ,

.,:u:: ^

. , . ,. , . 5 -- 7 <

" #.iy.:.

1490.5- 'N ,,f M., g P, ; o 4>

^ '

' 4

, , , :.g .

e, . Y . u,. , -

~

s @qp '. '

i e- ,

-s '

,, o 1490 4 4 4- i i i i l i I I 4 6 4 i iI 4 1-1 4 3. 1. I i 1 . I..I . .

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 ' 15 17 . 19 ' 21- ' 23 ' 125 :

27 . 29- l 7

DAILYTHERMAL OUTPUT "

The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during April 1994, the; 1 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal ,

megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. s Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) ';

Accountability:. Chase / Tills !

4:

Adverse Trend: None i 32

, v

+ , , - , . , , . -

l~

- Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours

-O-- 1994 Fort Calhoun Year End Goal (0.2) 0.75-0.5 0.5 -

0.25-O O O O O O O O O O O O

8 i i i 0 , , , , i , , , , , , ,

'91 '92 '93 Jan94 Feb Mar 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 0.35 for the months from January through April 1994. The value for the 12 months from May 1,1993 through April 30,1994 is 0.14.

An equipment forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 when the plant experi-enced an unplanned automatic reactor trip as a result of the failure of the supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS.

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 Adverse Trend: None 33

4- # of Component Categories 40- -+-- # of Application Categories 35- -A- Total # of Categories m 30- i c) '

E 25- A on ,4~

$20-o ...

O - - -

- v" "

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

N92 D J93 F M A M J J A S O N D93 J F M A94 O Wear Out/ Aging Q Other Devices

@ Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / Action g[ 8.0% 0 Engineering / Design @ Error / Operating Action ION &j 5 i#

40.0% [lg. ;;.y 1' %

\ .3%

hM .,f 'f d Percent of Total Failures During the Past 18 Months f[j ! ,

Q l' f l , p 37.3 %

6.7 dQy COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from July 1992 through December 1993). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 8 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a higher failure rate in 7 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary /

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

l The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 90 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 75. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trend: None 34

--.-- Components With More Than One Failure l GOOD l X Components With More Than Two Failures V 25-20-15-11 11 11 11 11 10-

' \g 9 9 8

6 5- 4 k %^. 1 ,1, ,1, o

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 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 reporting months there were 7 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure.1 of the 7 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.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase l

l Adverse Trend: None 35

Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours l GOOD l Calculated Industry Check Valve Failure Rate per Y Million Component Hours 3-

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 -

g 2- C O O O O O O F

]1.5-1 s j $_

i 1 ,

0.5 -

b d4 0 I i i 3 , i i i i 3 ' ' ' ' ' '

'91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate average. The failure rates are based on submitted failure reports for an 18 month time interval. They do not include failure reports outside of the 18 month time interval. The interval starts 21 months prior to the current month and ends 3 months prior to the current month. For example, the April 1994 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) covers the 18 month interval from July 1,1992 through December 31,1993. This delay is due to the time involved in collecting and processing failure report data.

The actual number of NPRDS reportable check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station are shown above on the graph at the left side of the page.

For April 1994, the CFAR provided the following failure rates:

Fort Calhoun Station 1.17 E-6 l

l Industry (excluding FCS) 1.82 E-6 l

The recent increase in the FCS failure rate is due to two reportabla failures of RC-374, Pressurizer RC-4 Spray Line Check Valve; one occurred in October and another in u November 1993.

1 The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is s1.75 E-6.

l

( Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 36

)

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

Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried ,

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) l GOOD l ' l h . 750 - --A- 1995 INPO Industry Goal (3.884 cubic feet)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet) y 600 -

C C C C C O 450 -

300 -

150 - % d~ 1

'; llL ?

g /, ,

0 ,

kwy Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 i VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE J 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 April (cubic feet) 0.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during April (cubic feet) 51.6 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) .

327.8 Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage after July 1,1994 (cubic feet) 0.0 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 buried is 500 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic .

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)

- Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 37 )

j

]

1

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

-O- 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals y 3%-

2%- C O O O- O C O y Cycle 15 fl Refueling

] Outage 1%- j l

yw

' ~ ',

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

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the pri-mary system chemistry performance by monitoring six key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-pended solids.100% equates to all six parameters being out of limit for the month.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was 0.0% for the month of April 1994.

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 Adverse Trend: None 38

.. j 4

l B Secondary Systern CPI 2- l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 4

1.9 - -

.l

'1.8 -

1 1.7 - l 1.6 -

1.5 - -

O O O O O O O O O O O, i

1.4 -

1.3 -

1.2 -

1.1-1 i i i i i i i i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct ~ Nov DecS4 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. ,

The CPI for April 1994 was 1.1. The year to-date average montdy CPI value was 1.25 '

at the end of the month.

The CPI for December 1993 was 1.92. This relatively higher number was due primarily.

to iron transport following the plant startup.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 1.5.

i 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 impurities.

-Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source).

- Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend i 39 j 1

{

.a u

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

l J

{

40

4

~

--B-- Actuals -D- Budget -h- Plan 3.75 -

3.5 -

'c h

h 3.25-E

$ Y 3-4,4 2.75 -

2.5 , , , , , , , i 3 , , , , , , , , , 3 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 o' this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.

The cents per kibwatt 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 appre ved 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 the 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.

The unit price is averaging lower than budget due to expenses being below budget while generation remains on budget.

Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield Adverse Trend: None

Actual Division Staffing e Authorized Division Staffing 500-452 453 y _ :ll )

400 - . '.

300 -

y: . . . . ,

.n 191 191 200 - [ .

- - 54

.. - p -49, d '/46f 116 117 100 - -

R .. ' L~2

'=../'-

, , r .,

tei O.s4 JM;@ @ :) 15 M 0

l Nuclear Operations Production Engineering Nuclear Services STAFFING LEVEL The authorized and actual staffing levels at the end of April 1994 are shown for the

, three Nuclear Divisions.

I Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source)

Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 l

4 42

i

-s

- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million)'

37_ Cycle 15 Refueling Outage 16- _

15-14-L 13-12-11 -

f' 10 , , , , , , , , i i , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of April 1994 was reported as $16,106,283.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Adverse Trend: None I a

l e

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.

b i

O Corrective Maintenance 8 Non-Corrective / Plant improvements

@ Preventive Maintenance --O- Fort Calhoun Goal 800 - 776 723 700 - = -

600 - Q EEE 500 - E ff 400 - Y Y(Y 300 _ c c c c c c c c c c y #

200 - $ pp

'T , m , m , VA , ral F73 . FG . m . r , rm , @ M , ,

May95 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog O TotaiMwos a Mwos wnich exceed Maintenance Compietion Goais 550 - ~~

500- %

450 - .

400 -

350 -

300-250 -

>3 , >14 >90 >180 100 - days / days days days 5 , ,

g i , ,

i i i i i i i Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Aging MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining.

open at the end of the reporting month, it also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1994 goal for this indicator is less than 325 non-outage corrective MWOs. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as:

GQal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 days Priority 3 Operations Concern 14 days Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant Improvements N/A Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

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

i O Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100 % -

""~

90%- - --

80%- ,.

4 70%- ^ - "

g <

00%- a ~.

50%- @ m 40%- ^

( ns 30%- '

I 20% - w <

s' 10%- N ,

lhj 0% b May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 2%- O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue GOOD

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal V

1%- Data Unavailable - -

o. ._ -C O O O due to Cycle o ._ _c 3_o__g 15 Refueling 0*/' ' ' OU' 0*

I i I i I 4 1 6 1 1 4 l May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance tc total completed non-outage maintenance.

The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 50.3% for the month of April 1994.

The trend of this ratio reflects the revised definition of corrective maintenance which was implemented in March.

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

During April,493 PM items were completed. 3 of these PM items (0.61% 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%

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Data Source: Chase /Schmitz/Melstad (Manager / Sources)

Adverse Trend: None SEP 41 46

4

Rework As identified By Planning or Craft

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal 52%

5%- Cycle 15 Refueling 4.56 %

Outage '

i I 4%-

C ] 3 p ]

h b f i k

4 O h bi p

3%- 2 71*/. O 2.57Y. 2.58*/.

n v 2.51 %

-B ?' . . . . '

0 o2%-

jp ;

f " :

l l pgf lf , o

$ MMn

pm { y 1.06 % ?~

um 1%- pfp gfg t' C

{o '

g g

y j 19 4

!l l

0%

$d ,

t -

Ill - ,

i Md -

OcG3 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Ap64 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS 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 ,

1 l

80*/. - < Maintenance Overtime

-- W nth Amage Maintenance Cmtime 70%- l GOOD l

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

Cycle 15 50% -

Refueling Outa0e 40% -

M 30% - f L s 20%- , 1 p;

$ ;' a8 10% - O ^q O i.Q -

.g 6--O 4 0 0 0% " "

l 4 i i i i i i I l l 1 May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov .Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 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 7.0% for the month of April 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 12.25% at the end of the month. ,

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of .

10%. l Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber j

.1 Positive Trend l

1 48

.I

-. ., , ]

0 Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

@ Closed IRS Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance)

E Procedural Noncornpliance irs (Maintenance) l l

i 2-t 1- 1 1 1

'l 00 000 000 000 0 0 0 000 000 000- 000 00 00 i i i i i i i 4. i i i i May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 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 incident's for maintenance reported for the month of April 1994. There was 1 open IR related to the use of procedures (IR 940163)-

for the month. The incident involved FW 8A being returned to service with VD 341 being inadvertently left closed. The valve manipulation was not approved by the SS or LSO as is required by S.O. O-1.

There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reported in September 1993.

- Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 49

.j l

E Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts)

- Number of Emergent MWOs Completed

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal m 110 I 100g U 90%- 89

- 90 ~*

I

< '77 o. l

80%- ^

^

ff: - 80 !

- ~ 65 ' 70

? '/

5 60 % - (( E "

h[ $ ((: - 60 c-y '// //,- :

'//

'//,

y 50%- '(( -((; *

[j _

j[: - 50

$ 40%-

8 h[ ((;

^

k l Ll jd $hh f'f h h[:

1t

~ 40 h o

5 *~

(( ((; A$h .p p ; - 30 h W '// -

//,'

Gn? -'// $ '//, ~

vo 20%- '// ; ///

~

'// s :

//, - 20 0

'// '

//,- i '// r '//, d 5 10% -

" ((

'//

g ['[/,;

a j

f

'((

'//

l e

l ((;

'//,

10 Z

-0

~

b 0% i ,

0 January '94 February March April'94 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 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 April 1994 was 79.57%. Also, there were 89 emergent MWOs completed during the month.

The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 80%.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 50

E % of Hours the in-Une Chemistry Instruments are Inoperable

-O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 10%)

12-11-10- C O O O O O O O O O O O 9-8-

y 7-E 6- .#

$ 5-4-

3-2 .

a 1- .

0

^^

, ~,", , , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May' Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of April 1994 the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 2.43%.

It should be noted the total number of in-line chemistry instruments considered within this performance indicator has been increased to 51. This is the result of including the new Waterplant panel, Al-160 (5 instruments), and the chemical lagoon pH sensor, PHE-15198, as well as the deletion of 2 PASS detectors.

The entire instrument channelis 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 10% in-line chemistry instruments inoperable. 5 out-of service chemistry instruments make up 10%

of all the chemistry instruments that are counted for this indicator, t

!- Data Source: Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski l Positive Trend 51

@ Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)

Monthly Average Waste Produced During the Last 12 Months (Kilograms) '

-O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal

--B- Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1.000 Kg)

I 1000 - E = = = = = = 2 : F 2_ 3.

800 -

9 600 -

8' g 400-200-O-h-C C O O-O , , , , , , , i i , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb ' Mar Apr94, HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED ,

This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste p_roduced 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-

,.I halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced.

During the month of April 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,161.4 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 310.9 kilograms. The monthly average for haz-ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 23.9 kilograms.

l l- Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste. ;

The 1994 Fort Calhcun monthly average goal for this indicator _is a maximum of 100 kilograms.

L Date Source: Chase / Smith (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend

- 52

s 5 -Contaminated Radiation Controlled Arera

25% -

-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months) l GOOD lt

--O-~ Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months)-

' 20%-

15%-

^ ^ ^

10% - O O O O O O O O f) pfs 7 n.

m

$.h$

M p'3 hfj 5%- i;

{;i h 3 .2 E.T!? \$::

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 10% contami-nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 13% contaminated RCA.

At the end of April 1994, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.6%.

Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager /Sopae) i Accountability: Chase /Lovett Positive Trend SEP 54 )

1 53

Number of Identified PRWPs Year To-Date -

lGOODI 30- --O- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<.25) V 25- C O O O O O O O O O O O Y

g 20-u; 8

y 15-

.E E

m g10-O 5-

~ '

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

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 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 April 1994, there were no PRWPs identified. There have been 2 PRWPs 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

Documents Scheduled for Review 250- @ Documents Reviewed <

Overdue Documents 1 200- '

]

150-7 -

L -; -1

-1

^

100- .-

R

T '

-I;_

50-0 $i ,,

2 ? 'l

~

~' '

0 i i i i i i i i e i i i May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 DOCUMENT REVIEW l 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 i document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the l Operating Manual. ;

During April 1994 there were 33 document reviews scheduled, while 85 document reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there was 1 document review more than 6 months overdue.

There were 32 new documents initiated in April.

Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46 55

g Non-System Failures lGOODI 30-25 - V 20-15- 12 12 10 - 8 .. 7 7 1

$ N 1 m N .,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 90 - @ System Failures l GOOD l 80- _.

y 70 -

60 -

40 - 33 30 31 32 25 26 26 30- 772 E/ ""

23 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 LOGG ABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate graphs. The top graph dep; cts 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/

l reportable incidents conceming system failures which occurred during the reporting month.

During the month of April 1994, there were 28 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 26 (93%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. System failures declined 32% during the reporting month. Environmental failures accounted for 47% of the system failures due to several days of poor weather conditions during the month of April 1994.1 & C and EM continue to troubleshoot the metal detector spiking problems. Further, new CCTV monitors are being replaced in CAS/SAS which will i preclude the shadow problems experienced during the past two months.

1 Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP58 56

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

@ Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line) 8-Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old &

7- Temporary Modifications >6 months old 6-5 5 4-4 4 '2Z'Y >>>Z

,,,,, .,,,, ,'fjff fjg3 3- :

.hhhh jhhh:1 :hh jhhhf 2- :SS SM :%:0 :'S3::

1- I' I 0

O m,h?hj 0 ,h?h' O ,hhSh T&QW ,I

, y , w , v i January '94 February '94 March '94 April '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 is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: Epoxy repairs to ST-48, which is awaiting completion of MWO 931325, scheduled start date 1995 Refueling Outage. This temporary modifi-cation was previously included in the on-line removable >6 months old classification, but was re-classified as an outage modification to save engineering resources from com-pieting 1 ECN to allow the epoxy repair to remain in place and a second ECN to remove it during the 1995 refueling outage. In addition, at the end of April 1994 there were 5 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-118, 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-84-155D, scheduled completion date of 6/30/94; 4) Door 1011-7 lockset replacement,in which ECN 93 408 is approved for accomplishment 1995 on-line; and 5) Rm-060 in-line flowrater, which is awaiting completion of MWO 941229, scheduled start date of 5/05/94.

At the end of April 1994, there was a total of 26 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Sta-tion.11 of the 26 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 15 are removable on-line. In 1994 a total of 22 temporary modifications have been installed.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 57

O Total Modification Packages Open 264 250- -O- Fort Calhoun Year End Goal y

k

$v 200~

hlh w

km 150- C O O O O O O k

7 127 i-y? 100 e * "":l i - 100 - ;

5 b f$ e; ph yN I

' : y 5 s g & if .: 9 8 1 $ g$ $j{ f h g i;

kg 50- .s jg g k$ hf( ,

y

4 g a a g s

id}

a g

g; M

i 2 i y

d y

R y a M M e

$$f i @ L' $$ $ $j g ?ef $l ,-M $ Ri pl j$ --

i i i i 0 , ,, , , , , , , o ,

'91 '92 '93 May93 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb - Mar Apr94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludino outstand-ino modifications which are orocosed to be cancelled).

Category Reoortina Month -

Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 1 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 46 Construction Backlog /in Progress 19 Deslan Enor. Uodate Backloa/In Proaress 13 Total 80 At the end of April 1994,6 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 36 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 79 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC)' had completed 43 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 1 Adverse Trend: None

EARS Requiring Engin:;; ring Clos: cut - Nat in Clas ut O DEN @ SE 50-40- 40- 40- _,,,,,,, 4 0 -

30-

- 30- 30- ,,_,,, 30- -

20-20- 20 - 20-

, , , , , , , -- 0 ,

, i Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr 0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months April '94 Overduo EARS O Closeout (SE)

O Engineering Response 50-40-30-20-10- l l l l 0 , , , , i i i Pr6ority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 O Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200q 150- . Data -

100- Not Availaolo --

50 - 7 0 , , , , , , i i , , , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 O 61 ovardue Responses l E 53 EARS Resolved and in Closeout Q 44 Overdue Closeouts O 112 EARS Requiring Response 8 60 EARS on Schedule

'~, s 26.7 %

,' \ h$, .

hm$sNA%4 32.1*A .. 37.0% U$NENMb$$4 1

4 llllN" ..

67.9% ,,

j j w,,g:,._,., . .r x 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 9 EARS closed during the month 15 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 165 Data Source: Skiles/Pulverenti (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 59 i

E in DEN = 228 23.5*/. D 0-3 Months = 324 3.7% O in Systern engineering = 154 38.2 %

47.8%

20.1 %

l j ! O 3-6 Months - 95 O in Procurement /Constr. - 136 2.7% 14.0*/.sW O >6 Months = 258 G in Closeout = 159 ECN STATUS OVERALL BACKLOG B ECNs Backlogged O ECNs Received During the Month

@ ECNs Cornpleted During the Month 250- b m 200-150-l

(

f 22.4*/. " " '

D 0-3 Months =126 100- N5 55.2 % O 3 6 uonths - 51 l 22.4 %

50 - ggi? O >6 Months = 51 4 I i i 6 4 i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 (Year-to-Date monthly average of ECNs received was 52.5)

ECN STATUS DEN 250-200-g p 3 :25.3 / @ 0-3 Months = 39 150- i i 3 g

's s e 100- j' 56.5% "

g 18.*.

, js L3 i O >6 Months = 87 i i e i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94

__ g ._._ ___ __ ___ __ __ .__ E CN S,{ATU. S; S E_ ,__ _ ,_, __ ___ ,,, __ _

200- g $Njigg D 0-3 Months = 53 150- "

. 39.0 %

100- 5 fj 54.4 % -.

O 3-6 Months = 9 50 - {N f{ Z 6.6%7 ' O >6 Months = 74 0 , , N, , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - PROC /CONSTR 250- q 200- @ 2 0 0-3 Months = 106 150-j* D ~

29.0*/.

l' fg 100- 'gl 3 k 4.4%hl66.6%]

O 3-6 uontns = 7 1 50 -

I' , , , , , , ,

O >6 uontns = 46 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 ECN STATUS - CLOSEOUT ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 60 l

1

. @ FC Type - 203 Priority 1 &2 - 135 OM. M.

@ SRI Typs - 271 1 3 M, @ Priority 3 & 4 - 311

.0% 0 DC Type - 203 46.0% 0 Priority 5 & 6 - 231 TOTAL OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (677 TOTAL) TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (677 TOTAL)

D DEN Engineering Not Complete

@ System Engineering Response, Confirmation Not Complete

@ Maintenance / Construction / Procurement - Work Not Complete E DEN - Closeout or Drafting Not Complete 250 -

200 - "

@ Priority 1 or 2 150 - 5 27.1*

100 - 94

@ Priority 3 or 4 50- ', 58.6*{/ O Priority 5 or 6 53 v 0 i i i ; i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Facility Change ECNs Open 239 N 22 250 - %

95 15.9% A- @ Priority 1 or 2 200-p 35.4 %

150 - 57 , ' a, @ Priority 3 or 4 100- 42 50-

%48.7%- '" Priority 5 or 6 77 w 0-Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 300 -

255

~

203 5.0%- @ Priority 1 or 2 150 -

10 g g 82 65.5%

92 O Priority 5 or 6 0 , , , , , , ,

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 Document Change ECNs Open I

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN l Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski j Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61

)

@ Administrative Control Problem

)

O Licensed Operator Error l

@ Other Personnel Error

@ Maintenance Problem 3- E Design / Construction /InstallatiorVFabrication Problem l

@ Equipment Failures 7

2- - -

~

1- - -

0 Apr93 May Jun 7

Aug Sep lll --l Oct LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN Nov Dec Jan Feb l'

Mar 94 :

This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months frur- April 1,1993 through March 31,1994. To be consistent with the Preventable /Pekonnel Errors LER indicator, this indicator is re- j ported by the LER event date as opposed to the LER report date.

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

There were 2 events in March 1994 that resulted in LERs.

Data Source: Short/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62

l 0 Total Requalification Training Hours O SimulatorTraining Hours 6 Non-Requalification Training Hours 50 O Number of Exam Failures 40- 36 36 .5

~

34 33 33 5 30- 27 20- 18 14 14 14 3 13 E 7' 10- /, 8 5

' 4 5

- 5 7y

/, /,: y ./ ,3 /, y *' .

y 0 I I I i i I Cycle 93-3 Cycle 93-4 Cycle 93 5 Cycle 93-6' i Cycle 93 7 Cycle 94-1 Cycle 94-2

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 i'pr rator Requalification Training.

There were 2 written exam failures, and nc ,anulator exam failures for Cycle 94-2. Both individuals were remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift sched-ule.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani iverse Trend: None SEP 68 63

35_ @ SRO Exams Admir.istered .

l O - SRO exams Passed 30 E RO Exams Administered O RO Exams Passed '

25- ..

20-15-10-NRC Exams 5- - -

0 i i i i i i i i i i i i May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 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.

Hot Ucense class convened April 11,1994, to conduct General Fundamentals training.

There are 4 RO candidates and 2 SRO candidates enrolled in this phase of the training (3 additional SRO candidates, who are not required to take the Generic Fundamentais

examination, will join the class in November).

2 in-house examinations were given during April, and all RO and SRO candidates passed both exams. No NRC examinations were given during April.

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64 I

e . _ - - . - - - . . - - - - . - - - _ - - - _ _ - _ _ . - - . . _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ _ - . - - _ _ . - .

O TotalOpen CARS D Total Open irs G Open cars > Six Months Old S Open irs > Six Months Old 0- ~

Cyde 15 _

280- Refueling : :

Outage 280 240- ! : : 240 200 - f f f f f 200 160- _ _ } [ } [ 3 [ '

[

~

160 120-

} } } { = } } } } } } 120 80 -

~

- 80

- - ~~

40- R P 5 ! ' 40

~

0 I i i

! l i i i 0 4 I I i May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 3 Open Significant CARS cyde 15 O OPen Significant irs O e g 60 $ E 50 - 45 -

40- 37 ---

28 30-20-21 25 ,, 24 3 8

10- 2 2 2 2 2 4 5 5 4 6 6 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May93 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr94 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator shows the total number of open Corrective Action Reports (CARS), CARS

>6 months old, the total number of Open irs, irs >6 months old, the number of open significant CARS and the number of open significant irs.

At the end of April 1994 there were 62 open CARS.16 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 8 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month.

l Also, at the end of April there were 329 open irs.108 of these irs were greater than 6 months old. There were 69 Open Significant IRS at the end of the month.

The 1994 monthly goal for the number of CARS greater than 6 months old is less than 30.

Data Source: Orr/Gurtis (Manager / Source) & CHAMPS Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir/ Gates Adverse Trend: Although the number of irs has been increasing, an adverse trend is-not inoicated because the increase is a result of a revision to Standing -

Order R-4 that lowers the threshold for writing irs and requires completion of all corrective actions prior to closing irs.

65 i

y

.r

. ]

- e-- Engineering Hold -+-- Planning complete -

-O- Planning Hold Ready

--V-- Part Hold - Total 450 -

425-400 -

375-350 -

325-300 -

,j275-

E 250-Q 225-o a 200-l-

f175-150 -

125-100 -

1-75- ,,

50-

l. 25-Dec93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb Mar 95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) 9

~

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) that nave been' approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph inC'es:

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 pec' age)

. . Planning Holds (Planning 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)

L 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

>>O >

a "m.er TH % Complete

a. g c3

$oE 0: -o-cE o o

- ro o

ca o

o m

o e

o y

o e

o eo o

o o

ca CD m -. o- o =. 3 i i e i e i i i i a Q.

i o O a mc c1 u. v wn; yEB age E

rco k O

< All Projects m Tc" o m a-u &

5w -

hE$ 3 E_.$ $ h Steam Generator Services J'" "

ogo 5- 5- E r-ao -

c Cn

t~

BE x< ?. O c me M9 m

'n ca m ra y ; g,Qg O Balance of Plant ECT a cg o,

e ecC m O

o (0

ra c>

o. m.mo

4 Rswints tn 5 U5' O 2E m (f) Erosion / Corrosion 0- o Q. a. r d C g **

c) o tv >

d

$ $ $ ~

c> . 5sv o?Ws1 cn > > c"

@ Z w

' @ y, h Snubber Testing g@ @ m a me - a a a -

,o S 5' m_ R O -

E ooo s

Q: -m -< g R o O CD o o c3 t E r) ISI Exams o uB u B -

o c, - oE F o F F o

m.

eo m a e e .o g

8 a u. g en

- g n, g,7 e, causemwm eul g g a

og o m System Pressure Tests 5~

3 E d E E m

o B 5' $ -

E E E

@ C E 8 8 rn g "y-*9 @ Relief Valve Teving 9 9 m 8 as 2 O

eO o-m m* V O

E 3 3 Check Valves 8 oR C 5

e D9 6m y -

amenevemmunie mn cn ca O o Motor Operated Valves (MOVs) c3 ox m m <: v T m aR -

ca 5 $* mamramwwxann E m5 Boric Acid Inspection a J

j 1995 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS ,

I

Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval

-- Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval i Final Design Package issued 20-l Total Modification Packages (17) (2 added after 1/14/94 To Be Scheduled) j 1

a 15- ll lllllll lllllllllll l llllll lllllll" : l lllll 10- m E

8 8

a.

5-0 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii->iiiieiiiii 8 $ $ $ $ * $ e 8 8 8 8 5 5 5

S $ k $ S s' S S-PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICAYlONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the l 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 identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by October 15,1994. Modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included in this performance indicater and will be scheduled as soon as possible.

. Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) '

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles i Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 -

'68

.. i 1994 ON LINE MODIFICATIONS

--+--- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval & Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package .4 sued (7 FD Dr s issued prior to 1/14/94) l l Total Modification Packages (17) (2 are Close Out Only) (1 Review for Cancellation) 20-T S

o C 15-Es ,!!! lll llll l l lll :::: !!!'*!! lll l lll l E .si m iC En ?

g je10-Ek .. .... E. .]=========~

g , ........ ..

Bt e m 5- h z1! g i E O ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

$ e e g a e e e g e e g

M M

, @ 8 E G s e e 8 5 e

- e o ;

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

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.

In April,1 modification was deleted and 1 was added.

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by August 15,1994. Modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included in this performance indicator and will be scheduled as soon as possible.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None

. 69 e

e

'i ACTION PLANS 70

. i I

ACTION PLANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included in future reports will be Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing increased Management Attention for 3 consecutive months.

l \

l The action plan for Thermal Performance follows: l Actions to improve Thermal Performance are:

1) Pursuing adjustments to condenser backwash valves to enhance condenser performance.

2) Investigate the possibility of FW flow nozzle fouling.

3) Investigate the effects of adding Ethanolamine to secondary chemistry to clean system and possibly reduce S/G blowdown.

The action plan for Document Review follows:

Actions to reverse the Adverse Trend (cited in the February 1994 report) for overdue document reviews 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 reviews.

An overdue document review is not safety significant, in that OPPD's dynamic proce-dural review process ensures documents are kept up-to-date.

Progress is shown by April data indicating only 1 document review overdue at the end of the month.

71

ACTION PLANS (continued)

The action plan for Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies follows:

Actions to reverse the Adverse Trend (cited in the February 1994 report) for the number of control room equipment deficiencies are:

1) Control room deficiencies are being worked and closed routinely by the maintenance department. A target closure rate of 10 per week has been established. Once the goalis met, the target will be adjusted periodically to ensure a positive or neutral trend.

2) To ensure that these deficiencies are being pursued with the best tech--

nical solutions and that all departments are supporting the Control Room Deficiency Goal, a working group of Maintenance, Engineering, and Operations personnel has been established.

4 l

1 I

l l

1 i

72

)

4

, PEFIFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS 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- caloperation 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 muiti- 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 DIS!NTEGRATIONS/ MINUTE PER PROBE the industry check valve f ailure rate (f ailures per 1 million AREA component hours). The data for the industry f ailure 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 Radiatien Controlled Area, which body dose received by all on-site personnel (including includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and 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 indicator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. DAILY THERM.AL 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 unmet 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) fail- 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 f ailures 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 quence of expected wear or aging. (LOSTTIME ACCIDENT RATE) !

Manuf acturing Defect - a failure attributable to inad* This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for 1 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 per 200,000 man-hours Engineering / Design - a f ailure attributable to the inad- workad (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 & 26.

misoperation of another component or system, including associated devices. DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL)

Maintenance / Testing - a failure that is a result of im- The Document Review Indicator shows the number of proper maintenance or testing, lack of main'onance, or documents reviewJ, the number of documems sched-personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- uled for review, and the number of document reviews ing activities performed on the responsible component or that are overdue for the reporting month. A document system, including failure to follow procedures. review is considered overdue if the review is not com-Errors - failures attributable to incorrect procedures that plete within 6 months of the assigned due date. This were followed as written, improper installation of equip- indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.

ment, and personnel errors (including failure to follow procedures properly). Also included in this category are EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as- PERFORMANCE signed to any of the preceding categories. The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer-gency AC power system for the reporting period divided by the number of hours in the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys-tem.

73

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS ,

L EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL. EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY ITY This indicator measures the total unreliability of emor-This indicator shows the number of failures that were gency diesel generators. in general, unreliability is the reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency dio- ratio of unsuccessf ul operations (starts or load-runs) to sel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level combination of start unreliability and load-run of mnfidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob- unreliability.

I tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the demand f ailures are less than the trigger values. ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) i

1) Number of Start Demands: All valid and inadvertent BREAKDOWN start demands, including all start-only demands and a!! This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of start demands that are followed by load-run demands, the EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design En-whether by automatic or manualinitiation. A start-only gineering Nuclear and System Engineering. This indica-demand is a demand in which the rsmorgency generator tor tracks performance for SEP #62.

l is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the emer- ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS gency generator system that prevents the generator from The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were achieving specified frequency and voltage is classified as completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion a valid start f ailure. This includes any condition identified by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks i in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emer- performance for SEP #62.

gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN

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

C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator is expected to be operated for at least one hour while EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-loaded with at least 50% of its design load. CAL HOURS

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical hours is the should be counted for any reason in which the emer- inverse of the mean time between dorced outages gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre- caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal dicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run to the number of hours the reactor is criticalin a period demands. (1000 hours0.0116 days 0.278 hours 0.00165 weeks 3.805e-4 months ) divided by the number of forced outages

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run caused by equipment failures in that period, should not be counted as valid demands or failures when they can be attributed to any of the following: EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available an emergency. generation to gross maximum generation, expressed es B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required during a percentage. Available generation is the energy that an emergency. can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum C)Intentionaltermination of a test because of abnormal power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi-conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be generator damage or repair. produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu.

D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not ously at maximum capacity, prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes. FORCED OUTAGE RATE E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting sys- This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc- the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared cessf ul start with the starting system in its normal align- to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced ment, events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen- require removing the unit from service before the end of erator being declared inoperable should be munted as the next weekend. Forced events include start up fail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during ures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut-corrective maintenance and the successful test that fol- down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service),

lows repair to verify operability should not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG has not been de-clared operable again.

74

. PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FUEL RELIABILITYINDICATOR LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAIN-This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool- ING ant 1-131 activity, 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 bosn deposited on re- ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),

! actor core internals from previous defective f uel or is the number of non-requalification training hours and the present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu. number of exam failures. 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 indicator 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 stato power level attained during the follows:

month. 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and The density correction f actor is the ratio of the specific supervisory 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 personnelinvolved 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 reblems which can the generator in kilowatt hours (KWH). be attributed ii. .et/ rr/ t ;,,vgrammatic deficiencies in the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED cluded in this category are maintenance, tasting, 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 f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ-l 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 failures 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 components included in this category INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors.

This indicator is defined as the number of accidents por diodes, resistors, etc.

200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per-manently assigned to the station that result in any of the LOGG A BLE/REPORTAB LE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) following: 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex- The total number of security incidents for the reporting cluding the day of the accident); 2) one or more days month depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks so-away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and curity performance for SEP #58.

3) f atalities. Contractor personnel are not included for

)

this indicator. MAINTENANCE OVERTIME ;

The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for j IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER- maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as l VICE contract personnel.

Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are out-of service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling 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 indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

75

a PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS -

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUlPMENT DEFI-This indicator shows the backlog of non-catage Mainte. CIENCIES nance Work Orders remaining open at ths and of the A control room equipment deficiency (CRD)is defined as reporting month. Maintenance classifications are de. any component which is operated or controlled from the Control Room, prov> des indication or alarm to the Control fined as. '

Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control Corrective Hepair and restoration of equipment or com- Room, provides automatic actions from or to the Control ponents that have f ailed or are malf unctioning and are Room, or provides a passive function for the Control Room and has been identified as delc, ent, i.e., does not not performing their intended function.

perform under c!lconditions as designed. This definition Preventive - Actions taken to maintain a piece of equip- also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panale Al-179, Al-185, and Al-212.

ment within design operating conditions, prevent equip-ment failure, and extend its life and are performed prior A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is to equipment f ailure. considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) Item"if some other action is required by an operator to compen-Non-Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance ac, sate for the condition of the component. Some examples livities performed to implement station improvements or i OWAs are: 1) The control room favel indicator does to repair non-plant equipment. not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-tor out in the plant; 2) A defcent pump cannot be re.

Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as: p ired because replacement parts require a long lead time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant Emergency Conditions which significantly degrade sta. pump to be operated continuously; 3) Special actions tion safety or availability, are required by an Operator because of equipment de- 3 sign problems. These actions may be described in Op- '

immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which signifi- erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require l

cantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unit shut- changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Defc,ent plant 1 down or power reduction. equipment that is required to be used during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proce-Operations Concern - Equipment deficiencies which dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-hinder station operation, mation during normal or abnormal operations.

Essential Routine corrective maintenance on essential NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE.

station systems and equipment. SULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Non Essential Routine corrective maintenance on non. Li ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting essential station systems and equipment. month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 &

6 Plant improvement - Non-corrective maintenance and plant improvements. OPEN CORRECTIVE I.CTION REPORTS & INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP This indicator displays the total number of open Correc-

36*

tive Action Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are older than six months and the number of open significant MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE CARS. Also displayed are the number of open Incident ,

The total maximum amount of radiation received by an Reports (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 ope i segruficant irs.

a anmabasis.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The number of Modification Reque ;ts (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

" d Pde pC 33 B c p been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modification requests that have not been plant approved during the reporting month staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use). n,so irduded is the number of 2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category MWOs that have engineering raids (ECNs, procedures .

and other miscellaneous enginees;.9 holds), parts hold, Rw@t m m N mvid (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). Ma.in- Proisets Review Committee (NPRC) tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Proj.ects Committee (NPC) have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage and have not yet been converted to MWOs. These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or 76

B

, PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with retumed to Engineering for more information, some ap- the original design of the plant would not be mnsidered proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and preventable).

some approved for planning. Once planning is com- For purposes of LER event classification, a

Personnel plated and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these Error LER is defined as follows: An event for which the Modification Requests may be approved for accomplish- root cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or ment with a year assigned for construction or they may more individuals (as opposed to being attributed to a de-be cancelled. All of these different phases require re- partment or a general group). Also, the inappropriate view. action must have ocx:urred within approximately two

3) Design Engineering Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear years of the " Event Date* specified in the LER.

Planning has assigned a year in which construction will Additionally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error-be completed and design work may be in progress. should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator

4) Construction BarAiog,1n Progress. The Construction trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15.

Package has been issued or construction has begun but the modification has not been accepted by the System PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT Acceptance Committee (SAC). OF LIMIT

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /in Progress. PED The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry has received the Modification Completion Report but the parameters divided by the total number of hours possible drawings have not been updated. for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not Chloride, Hydrogen Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride, and include modifications which a.e proposed for cancella- Suspended Solids. EPRilimits are used.

tion.

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the status of the projects which are The numbor of identified incidents concerning mainte-in the scope of the Refueling Outage. nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the use of procedures (includes the number of PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

The percentage of total MWOs completed per month This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by #15,41 & 44.

maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any main-tenance work repeated to correct a deficiency which has PROGRE'3S OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION reoccurred within 60 days following similar work activi- PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-ties. Any additional work required to correct deficiencies TIONS) discovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to en- This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-sure the component / system passes subsequent Post proved for completion during the Refueling Outage.

Maintenance Tests. This definition can be found in S. O.

M 101. PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLAN.

NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE- This indicator shows the status of modificatioris ap-NANCE ACTIVITIES proved for completion during 1994.

The % of the number of completed maintenance activi-ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte- RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM nance activities each month. This % is shown for all The number of identified poor radiological work practices maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs, radiological work performance for SEP #52.

MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella-neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per- RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

formance for SEP #33. PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil-PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of non-outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-LER event classification, a preventable LER is defined tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, as: An event for which the root cause is personnel error expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-(i.e., inappropriate action by one or more individuals), hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-inadequate administrative controls, a design /construc- nance items in the month that were not completed by the tion /installationMabrication problem (involving work com- scheduled date plus a grace period equalto 25 % of the pleted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main- scheduled interval. This indicator tracks preventive tenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper maintenance activities for SEP #41.

upkeep / repair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of the event must have occurred within approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER (e.g., an 77

4 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS .

RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS CASES FRE- SIGNIFICANT EVENTS QUENCY RATE Significant events are those events identified by NRC The number of injuries requiring more than normal first staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operal-aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ing experience. The screening process includes the trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. daily review and discussion of all reported operating re-actor events, as well as other operational data such as REPEAT FAILURES special tests or mnstruction activities. An event identi-R The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System tied from the screening process as a significant event (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures or potential threat to the health and safety of the public for the last eighteen months. was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a S:fety cystem failures are any events or conditions that transient; 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, primary mol-could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of ant pressure boundary, important associaied leaturss; structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple 4) Scram with complication; 5) Unplanned release of redundant subsystems or trains, f ailure of all trains con- radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or nicalSpecifications; 7) Other.

more trains is not counted as a safety system failure. INPO significant events reported in this indicator are -

The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The significant events and lessons loamed identified through following is a list of the major safety systems, sub- the SEE-IN screening process.

systems, and components monitored for this indicator:

~g Accident Monitoring Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment FCS during the reporting period, and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys-tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, STAFFING LEVEL Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Features instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Detection or Suppression Systems, isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC STATION NET GENERATION Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring Instrumenta- The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during tion, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core isolation the reporting month.

Cooling System Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation. TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves, Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con.

Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- figurations to the plant's systems.

rnate Heat Sink. 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrica!

jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating INDEX systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation PalD, schematic, mnnection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

based on the concentration of key impurities in the sec- 2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil-ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-most likely cause of deterioration of the stoam genera- cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures tors. Criteria for calculating the CPI are: 1) The plant is are not considered as temporary modifications unless the at greater than 30 percent power; and 2) The power is jumper or block remains in place after the test or proce-changing less than 5% per day. The CPI is calculated dure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or using the following equation: CPI - (sodium /0.90) + lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-(Chloride /1.70) + (Sulf ate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper / cations.

0.30)/5. Where: Sodium, sulf ate and chloride are the 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for and copper are monthly time weighted average which MRs have been submitted will be considered as feedwater concentrations in ppb. The denominator for temporary modifications untilfinal resolution of the MR each of the 5 factors is the INPO median value, if the and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently monthly average for a specific parameter is less than the recorded on the drawings. Thb indicator tracks tempo-INPO median value, the median value is used in the cal- rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71.

culation.

l i

78

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

The ratio of the available energy generation over a given time period to the reference energy generation (the en- UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUAT10NS(NRC orgy that could be produced if the unit were operated DEFINITION) continuously at full power under reference ambient con- The number of safety system actuations which include ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per- (an!y.) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low i centage. Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection l Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER classification of safety system actuations includes actua-l 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS tions when major equipment is operated and when the This indicator is defined a: the number of unplanned au- logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- iengwd.

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

The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited l in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , then dividing in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-l that number by the total number of hours criticalin the tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the

! same time period. The indicator is further defined as inspection was actually performed and not based on when follows: the inspection report is received. The hours reported for

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici- each inspection report are used as the inspection hours.

pated part of a planned test.

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control WASTE rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac- This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may tot also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste have been spurious. which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that causod oil that has been shipped ofI site for processing, and the actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro- volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param- shipped off-site for processing. Low level solid radioactive eters and mnditions, rather than the manual scram waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and switches or, in manua! turbine trip switches (or push-but- evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power tons) provided in the main control room, plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive waste

4) Critical means that during the steady-state condition of includes contaminated tags, cleaning materials, dispos- i I

the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication able protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other f actor (k,) was essentially equal to one. material to be disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste disposal site, except rosin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms.

UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR Low-level refersin au radioactive waste that is not spent 1 The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica- J period of time, to the reference energy generation (the for tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. !

energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient con-ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per-contage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION)

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

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS actuation setpoint or from a spurious / inadvertent ECCS signal.

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power sys-tem actuations that result from a loss of power to a safe-guards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation oc-cuts when an actuation setpoint for a safety system is reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is gen-79

- - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ - -

4 A

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX .

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

SEP Reference Number 15 Eggg increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance) .. . . .. . . . .. . .......... .. ..... . . ...... . . . .. 49 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 21,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area.. . .. . ...... 5 Recordable injury / illness 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 /lliness Frequency Rate ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 3 Hecordablo injury /fliness Cases Frequency Rate .. . . . . .. . . 4 SEP Reference Number 26 Evaluate and Implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate . . . . .. .... .. ..... . . ...3 Recordable injury / Illness 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) . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 67 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning . .. . . . . . . 68 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule f ercent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts) . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . .. .. . . . 5 0 i 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 Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue. . . . . 46 Procedural Noncompliance incidents ... .. .. . . .. . 49 11 . SEP Reference Number 43 Implement the Check Vaive Test Program Check Valve Failure Rate. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 36 80 9

/ ;

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continu:d) l SEP Reference Number 44 Eaga j Compliance With and Use of Procedures ;

Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . .. . . .49 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Controland Administrative Program i Document Review ....... .. ... . . . . . . . . 55 l

SEP Reference Number 52 I. Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program. .. . . .. . . . 54 j SEP Reference Number 54 l Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . .. . .16 ,

Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. . . 37 l Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area . .5 l Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area. . . 53 SEP Reference Number 58 l

Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program l Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . 56 l SEP Reference Number 60 Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . 20 ,

i SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . 20 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications . . .. .. . 57 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . . 59 Engineering Change Notice Status . . . . 60 Engineering Change Notices Open. . . . 61 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training . . .. .. . 63 License Candidate Exams. . . . . 64 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications. . . . . . . . . .57 81

e- q

'i REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews B. R. Livingston G. L. Anglehart D. L. Lovett K. L Belek J. H. MacKinnon '

B. H. Biome J. W. Marcil O. E. Boughter N. L. Marfice C. J. Brunnert R. D. Martin G. R. Cavanaugh T. J. Mcivor J. W. Chase K. G. Meistad A. G. Christensen K.' A. Miller O. J. Clayton P. A. Mruz R. P. Clemens Nuclear Licensing R. G. Conner . & Industry Affairs J. L. Connolley J. T. O'Connor -

G. M. Cook W. W. Orr .

S. R. Crites . T. L Patterson D. C. Dietz R. T. Pearce )

R. L. Phelps l H. J. Faulhaber R. L. Plott -l M. T. Frans D. P. Galle W.J.Ponec S. K. Gambhir C. R. Rice A. W, Richard '

J. K. Gasper W. G. Gates D. G. Ried M. O. Gautier G. K. Samide '

S. W. Gebers M. J. Sandhoefner L. V.. Goldberg F. C. Scofield D. J. Golden H. J. Sefick -

1 R. H. Guy J. W. Shannon I J. B. Herman R. W. Short K. C. Holthaus C. F. Simmons L. P. Hopkins E.L.Skaggs i C.K. Huang J. L. Skiles C. J. Husk F. K. Smith T. W. Jamieson R. L. Sorenson R. L. Jaworski K. E. Steele R. A.Johansen M. A.Tesar W. C. Jones J. J. Tesarek J. D. Keppler J. W. Tills D. D. Kloock J. M. Waszak L.T.Kusek S. J. Willrett M. P. Lazar 82

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 10/01/70 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/0196 -12/13R6 Cycle 3 12/1396-9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 -12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77-10/1498 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 1 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034

' 7th Refueling 12/06/82- 04/07/83

Cycle 8 04/07/83 - 03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84 -07/12/84

Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86 - 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 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 Sustained Reaction August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.)

First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial Operation (100,000 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

ML20069B798

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

= = = = = = = = = =

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search