Text

Performance Indicators
	ML20073E068
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	08/31/1994
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20073E054	List: LIC-94-0186, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators; ML20073E068;
References
	NUDOCS 9409280219
	Download: ML20073E068 (84)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:._.____ 4 i }_ r).' FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS p TWilk h ~ =wa s' AUGUST 1994 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS

7"us] % %

os

Pumal e emba w m allihA... g d uk u>iuk and wwndjud nwd... 7 d w a, y%, emAng cananikd... d w a, u>ay 9 y&,...d w da&ng ikjd> e 9V ik,%l &, em7 %. St w tavna-dim &L, ul ik m?L e eskd, g pmae,, a w us an, de u>sa-dw - - a d tu 4 aus A u u ,9 g ik,u w e 3 pan, uljud u do&ng ik 9u k .p Jaans ).O'Cm t

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION 1 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT Prepared By: Production Engineering Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group AUGUST 1994 l

FORT CALHOUN STATION AUGUST 1994 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of August, Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100% power level. Normal plant maintenance, surveillance, and equipment rotation activities occurred during the month,in addition to scheduled on-line modification activities. The installation of the new higher capacity spent fuel storage racks was completed. The Fuel Reliability Indicator continues a slowly increasing trend which indicates the likelihood of one (or more) fuel pin leak (s). OPPD is pursuing actions to be taken during the next sched-uled refueling outage. The following NRC inspections were completed during this reporting period: IER No. Description 94-17 Monthly Resident Inspection l 94-20 Special Inspection regarding the May 26,1994 Hydrazine Spill There were no Licensee Event Reports submitted during this reporting period. 1 l Source: Nuclear Licensing & Industry Affairs I l I

Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories _______7_ ~ (l? [ h@ W g Automalle7} < ^ Performance in Industry ^" ~% +^ Upper 10% and better Unit Unfati% 4 Performance ~ than 1994 OPPD goal Capability 08PMih ~ Screma/T,000( Factor Losp Fseto,r h'Crluesb ^ ~ ~[ Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal 1 { RJlll a IIII j AF]W Be %tr EDCi 3stay jFuelL.. Performance Not Meeting W Dl INN'E l $ $thq Systeiirs, 1Reliabilityj 1994 OPPD Goal grit $rNdrice Pdr'fdrNdrios lIndlcators P6rformorga j I -e h ~ i l ^[EJ!.l$. x May June July 94 34 94 Collective IMAlubbsf3 ENN dh* list I I' Radiation Low-Level ~ W Exposure Year-o ae =- w Value Best Possible q ~ Performance 1994 Year-End Performance INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Performance for the months of January through August 1994) t

, adAiutoli ~ l ',1; m. 9weget Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories 9; x?% h !l? lln d$l?ll 5 Performance Better Than Industry Average Trend ^SaMy'-

$lgrdficant

, System ) Events Actuations! ' Performance Better Than 1994 OPPD Goal ,e___-- Performance Not Meeting 1994 OPPD Goal or Industry Average Trend yg-Forced ! System Outage JFallures Rate ^ May June July '94 '94 '94 y_7 I August 1994 h nept Year-To-Date E yr;cy:Il Collective Value Best Possible Outegesi/-,000 Radiation Performance 1994 Year-End g Midi Exposure Performance l I O NRC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I (Safety System Failures and Significant Events ratings are averages for April 1991 through March 1994. Predictor blocks cannot be generated for these performance indicators because they are based on NRC biannual reports. g All otherindicator values are for the months of January through August 1994.)

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT ' AUGUST 1994 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT A performance indicator wRh data representing three Maintenance Overtime consecutive months of improving performance or three consecutive months of performance that is superior to (Page 49) the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear in-Line Chem. try Instruments Out-of-Service is Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-OP-37). (Page 52) The following performance indicators exhibited positive Harardous Waste Produced trends for the reporting month. (Page 53) Recordable Iniutv/ Illness Cases Frecuency Rate p (Page 54) Auxiliary Feedwa'er System Safety System Performance

- 9' 'I End of Positive Trend Report.

Emeroency AC Power System Safety System Perfor-mance (Page 10) ADVERSE TREND REPORT Emeroenev Diesel Generator Unit Reliability (Page 11) A Performance indicator with data representing 3 con-secutive months of declining performance; or four or Diesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands) mot e consecutive months of performance that is trending (Page 12) towards declining as determined by the Manager - Sta-tion Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per NOD-Emeroency Diesel Generator Unreliabilitv QP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator ex-(Page 13) hibits an adverse trend by this definition may specify in written form (to be published in this report) why the trend ygwber of Missed Surveillance Tests Resuttino in Lic-is not adverse. ensee Event Reoorts (Page 20) The following performance indicators exhibited an ad-verse trend for the reporting month: Forced Ou'ame Ra's (Page 23) Fuel Reliability Indir atnr Unit Caoaci+v Fac+or (Page 14) (Page 24) An adverse trend is indicated based on the FRl value for the reporting month (10.38 X 10d) exceeding the 1994 Unit Cacability Factor Fort Calhoun monthly goal of less than 5.0 X 104, and (Page 26) the potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rods in the core. Uncianned Canability Loss Factor Violations Per 1.000 Insnection Hours (Page 27) (Page 18) I An adverse trend is indicated based on 3 consecutive Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit months of declining performance. (Page 39) l Secondary System Chemistry End of Adverse Trend Report. 1 (Page 40) l l Cents Per Kilowa+t Hour (Page 42) Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue (Page 47) Percentaos of Tota! MWOs Comoleted Per Month identi-l fied As Rework (Page 48) iv

1 FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT AUGUST 1994 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT A performance indicator with data for the reporting period Temocrary Modifications that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is defined as "Needing increased Management Attention. (Page 58) per NOD-OP-37. The number of temporary modifications >1 cycle old ex-coeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of O. The number of The following performance indicators are cited as need. temporary modifications >6 months old has exceeded ing increased management attention for the reporting the goal of 0 since January 1994. month: Industrial Saf etv Accident Rate - INPO End of Management Attention Report. (Page 2) The year-to-date value for this indicator has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 50.50 since May 1994. Number of Control Room Eauioment Deficiencies PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT (Page 15) The total number of control room equipment deficiencies IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES at the end of the reporting month (47) exceeds the 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal of 545. This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the pre-Unclanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7.000 Hours vious month. Critical (Page 28) The number of unplanned automatic scrams per 7,000 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 21.000 Disinte. hours critical has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 orations / Minute Per Probe Area since February 1994 (Page 5) This indicator has been revised to exclude contamina-Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(INPO Definition) tions that were a result of specific activities associated (Page 29) with the Spent Fuel Pool Re-Rack Project. The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua-Unit Canacity Factor tions has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994. (Page 24) This indicator has been added to the report. Unolanned Safety System Actuations -(NRC Definition) (Page 30) The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuations End of Performance indicator Report improvements / has exceeded the Fort Ca:houn goal of 0 since February Changes Report 1994. Therma! Performance (Page 32) The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value has been below the 1994 Fort Calhoun goal of 299.5% since January 1994. I Maintenance Workload Backlocs (Page 46) The backlog of non outage MWOs for corrective mainte-nance for the reporting month exceeds the 1994 monthly goalof a maximum of 400. v

Table of Contents / Summary eaCaE GOALS ........X SAFE OPERATIONS EACaE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE - INPO. -2 DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE. 3 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE-- ..................4 CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 5 21,000 DISBNTEGRATIONS/ MINUTE PER PROBE AREA-l i PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs. -.6 i ..... 7 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES. SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE: HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM -8 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM - ... 9 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM - 10 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR i UNIT RELIABILITY. ........ 1 1 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) : -.................12 j EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR l UNRELIABILITY - ...... 13 I I I FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR 14 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES...... 15 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE. 16 i i MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE.. ..............17 VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS - - -...... -... 1 8 j SIGNIFICANT EVENTS - 19 I l 20 l NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LERS - PERFORMANCE EACaE STATION NET GENERATION - -.. 22 i FORCED OUTAGE RATE.. - - 23 l UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR.. ...... 24 l i vi l l l 1

PERFORMANCE (continued) fMGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR - .........,.......25 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR - -26 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR. ........ 27 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL- ....... 2 8 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATONS -(INPO DEFINITION)- 29 =. UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION). ......... 30 GROSS HEAT RATE.... - ... 31 THERMAL PERFORMANCE. - _. 32 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT. - 33 EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS. 34 COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

35 REPEAT FAILURES. ... 36 CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE 37 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE 38 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT. =39 CHEMISTRY INDEX/ SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY ...... 40 COST fMGE CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR... 42 STAFFING LEVEL - . 43 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE. .. 44 DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS (CORRECTIVE NONOUTAGE).. ...... 46 vii

l DIVISON AND DEPARTMFNT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (continued) 22faE RATO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE 47 & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK-- . _ 48 l MAINTENANCE OVERTIME.. ... 49 l l PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE).- ..~... 50 PFRCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS); -51 IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE ; 52 l HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED . 53 l l CONTAMINATED RADIATON CONTROLLED AREA. - 54 1 i RADOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM.. .. 55 DOCUMENT REVIEW.. 56 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY).. . 57 l TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS 58 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATONS - -59 j ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) BREAKDOWN 60 I ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS.. 61 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN ..................62 l LER ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN. . 63 LICENSED OPERATOR REOUALIFICATON TRAINING.- - 64 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS.. 65 OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTON REPORTS AND INCIDENT REPORTS... .; 66 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE).... - 67 l h OVERALL PROJECT STATU$ (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) - . 68 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATON PLANNING -- . 69 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATON PLANNING - ........ 70 l Viil

A--- 1 A w m+ G-m ,,a a, -a wu--+e -suaaw-4 S p ACTION PLANS. DEFINITONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST EaCaE ACTON PLANS................. 71 i PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS. 74 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX = 81 REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST - _83 a 1 I i i

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION 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 effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment. GOAIS Goni 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. i Reduce NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4. No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations. l l Goal 2: PERFORMANCE l To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production. 1994 Priorities: Improve Quality, Professionalism, and Teamwork. 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. 1994 Priosities: Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget. Streamline work processes to impmve cost effectiveness. l Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) X l

i i i i SAFE OPERATIONS Goal: To ensure the continuation of a " safety culture" in the OPPD Nuclear Program and to provide a professional work-ing environment in the control room and throughout the OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation so that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear ind.us-try leader. 1

. Year-to-Date INPO Industrial Safety Accident Rate O Fort Calhoun Year End Goal ( 0.50) l GOOD l 1.8 - -O-Industry Upper 10% V 1.6 - + 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) 1.4 - 1.2 - 1-0.8 - O.6 - 3----C O O 3----C O----O 0.4 - 0.2 - C C C C C C C C C D o s 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." l The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year-to-date was 0.62 at the end of l August 1994. The value for the 12 months from September 1,1993 through August 31, i 1994 was 0.54. There were no restricted-time and no lost-time accidents in August. There has been 1 restricted-time accident and 2 lost-time accidents in 1994 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 50.50. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 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) I Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None 2

+ 1994 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate l GOOD l -X-- 1993 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate V O Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.5) 1.2 - 1-0.8 - t b ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ C 0.4 - t 0.2 - 0 0 i i i i i i e i i i e i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 DISABLING INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE) This indicator shows the 1994 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1993 dis-abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown. i The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year-to-date was 0.41 at the end of August 1994. There were no lost-time accidents reported for the month. There have been 2 lost-time accidents in 1994. The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from September 1,1993 through August 31,1994 was 0.39. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5. Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner . Adverse Trend: None SEP 25, 26 & 27 3

. 1994 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate -M-1993 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate IGOODl 2.5 - V O 1994 Fort Calhoun Year End Goal ( 1.5) 2.25-l I 2-l 1.75-n n n n n n n 1.5 - C O v v v v v v v v 1.25-v 1- ^ 0.75-0.5 - l 0.25-l 0 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE l This indicator shows the 1994 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1993 recordable injuryAliness cases frequency rate is also shown. A recordable injuryAliness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-4 sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis. The recordable injuryAliness rate year-to-date was 1.03 at the end of August 1994. There were no recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of August. There have been 5 recordable injury / illness cases in 1994. The recordable injuryAliness rate for the 12 months from September 1,1993 through August 31, t994 was 1.04. 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 Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 4

E Non-Rerack Contamination Events -+-- Year-to-Date Total Non-Rerack Contamination Events V --O-- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 54) 60-55-C O O O O O O O O O O O 50-Eg 45-w g40- .!35-E $30-25-(20-e a 15-E 10-E-M E 0 i i i i i ii i i i 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 Non-Spent Fuel Pool ReRack Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month. There was 1 contamination event in August 1994. There has been a total of 28 con-tamination events in 1994. The 1994 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 54 contamination events. I Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett i Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 l 5

' Preventable (18 Month Totals) -O-Personnel Error (18 Month Totals) G Personnel Errors (Each Month) 40-35-30-25-20- = =N 15- = 10-5- 5 ,U o 5 5 $ k' E ??b$$h?N5$$h Q ~n PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs This indicator depicts 18 month totals for numbers of " Preventable" and " Personnel Error" LERs. The graph shows the 18 month totals for preventable LERs, the 18 month totals 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 July 1994, there were no events that were subsequently reported as an LER. No LERs were categorized as Preventable or a Personnel Error. The total LERs for the year 1994 (through July 31,1994) is 6. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1994 is 2. The total Preventable LERs for the year is 2. 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 willinclude LERs occur-ring in 1994 and the last 6 months of 1993.) Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None SEP 15 6 1

O startup f Q Shutdown l GOOD 4-Operation j y, V o Industry Average Trend 3- ? 2-7 x 3 7 g -) f 1-k 7 s 0 i i i i i i i i e i i i l 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 33-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 Year-Ouarter J i 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 j Reactors" report. 1 The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the first quarter of 1993 and the first quarter of 1994: l 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. j Second Quarter 1993: A sect!cn of the piping configuration for the borated water l source of the safety injection sptem was not seismically qualified. This could have l resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event. Fourth Ouarter 1993: 1) During surveillance testing, both PORVs for the LTOP system i failed to open during multiple attempts. The failures were a result of differential expan-sion caused by a loop seal, inappropriate venting line back pressure, and cracked valve disks; 2) Calibration errors of the offsite power low signal relays could have prevented offsite power from tripping and the EDGs from starting in the required amount of time i during a degraded voltage condition; 3) Both AFW pumps were inoperable when one was removed from service for testing and the control switch for the other pump's steam supply valve was out of the auto position; 4) Only one train of control room ventilation was placed in recirc when both toxic gas monitors became inoperable. Later during surveillance, the other train auto-started and brought outside air into the control room for a six minute period. First Quarter 1994: A single failure of an ESF relay could result in a loss of safety injection, due to premature actuation of recirculation flow, and a loss of containment spray flow. Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 7

E 1994 M nthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value 1994 Year-to-Date Hyh Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value l GOOD l O 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004) y --a-1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.02) --{3-Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.03 - 0.025 - 0.02 - A A A A A A A A 0.015 - 0.01 - 0.005 - 0.00036 C U U ~ ~U U U U U 0 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 unawilability value for the month of August 1994 was 0.0004. There was a total of 0.98 hours of planned unavailability for surveil-lance tests and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 1994 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0033 et the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.0028. There have been 57.48 hours of planned unavailability and no hours of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system in 1994. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.004. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93)is approximately 0.001. Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Adverse Trend: None 8

E Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1994 Year-to-Date Auxiliary Feedwater System

UnavailabilityValue l

--O-1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01) l GOOD] - 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025) O Industry Upper 10% (0.0029) 0.025 - A A A A A A A A A A A A 0.02 - 0.015 - 0.01 - C O O O O O O O O O O O -.--O 0 i 1993 Unavailability Value Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 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 August 1994 was 0.0048. During the month, there were 7.12 hours of planned unavailability for FW-6 mainte-nance and FW-10 surveillance tests. There were no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.0034, and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0031 at the end of the month. There has been a total of 21.7 hours of planned unavailability and 17.26 hours of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1994. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 0.002. Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Positive Trend g

l 3 Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value j --W '/ ear-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value I OI O Fort Calhoun Goal t O Induspal (0.025) 0.07- --O-industry Upper 10% (0.004) 0.06 - 0.05 - O.04 - 0.03 - 3--0--C 3--C ^ ^ 0.02 - 0.01 - _ n -.- -n-ar m O O O O l o i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Doc 94 EMERGENCY AC PCWER 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 August 1994 was 0.0055. During the month, there were 8.18 hours of planned unavailability for testing, and no hours of unplanned unavailability. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.0169 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0116 at the end of the month. The large unavailability value for February is due to maintenance outages on both diesel generators. There has been a total of 186.09 hours of planned unavailability and 11.25 hours of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1994. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.025. The 1994 DG unavailability has increased over 1993 DG unavailability due to changes in operational definitions of out-of-service equipment. 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 Positive Trend 10

1 1 Number of Failures /20 Demands Trigger Values for 20 Demands O Number of Failures /50 Demands --V - Trigger Values for 50 Demands E flumber of Failures /100 Demands -- Trigger Values for 100 Demands 8-l GOOD l + 6-4 V T T ? Y Y Y Y Y V V V a I 2-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 00 00 00 0 0,. 00: 00 00 00 00! 00 I I I I I I I I I I I I Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 1 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger val-ues. The 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 j and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a lead-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run i 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). i Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 11 1 4

1 l O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands l GOOD l E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands 5- --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 i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 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. Diesel Generator DG-2 has not experienced any failures during the last 25 demands on the unit. Data Source: Jaworski/Renning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 12

4 d D DG-1 Unreliability Value DG-2 Unreliability Value l GOOD l -+- Station Unreliability Value 0.003 - Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for 0.0025-a Three Year Average) 0.002 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.0015 - 0.001 - 0.0005 - 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 - s - i - i - i - i - i - i i - i - i - i - i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY l The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power j 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. j The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value at the end of August 1994 was 0.0. l The 1994 goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.05. l l For DG-1: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without a failure. In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure. For DG-2: There were 2 start demands for the reporting month with no failures. l In addition, there were 2 load-run demands with no failures. Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows: value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) l where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Positive Trend 13 l l

E Fuel Reliability Indicator lGOODI h A 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) k O O 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals 8 9-O Cycle 15 .h 6 - A Refueling y,~ "l m iiiii i i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 } FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR i The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for August 1994 was 10.38 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram. The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintain- ) ing a high level of fuelintegrity. The August FRI value, which is greater than the zero defect threshold value, discussed below, indicates a potential fuel defect in the core. The plant operated at full power during the entire month. The August FRI was calcu-lated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant 4 during the steady state full power operation days, August 1 through 30. 1 The August FRI value of 10.38 X 10-d microcuries/ gram continued to increase, in excess of the July value of 6.12 X 10 4 microcuries/ gram. The 10.38 X 10-d microcuries/ gram FRI value exceeds the 1994 operational goal. The value will not decrease until the leaking pin or pins are removed from the core. ) l Fission product activity data from August full power operation showed a Xenon-133 I activity incrdase but no lodine spiking. The Westinghouse technical expert on fuel q reliability has determined that there is a potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rod (s) in the Cycle 15 core. This prediction is based on a change in the Xe-133 to l-131 ratio. 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 collected. The presence or lack of Xenon and lodine spikes during the power change would confirm or discrove 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 104 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 is to maintain a monthly FRI below 5.0 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram. Data Source: Hotthaus/ Weber Accountability: Chase /Spilker Adverse Trend: An Adverse Trend is indicated based on not meeting the 1994 goal. 1 14 4

4 O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line lGOODI O Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V 80- -O-Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70-I 60-7 4I E 3 k h h O C C C 'e 30-5 / '/ / 'I 20- ?. / / 7 10- ? G / '/ 9 s O,/ / 't ) ?. / / 0 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 O Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line O Total Number of Operator Work Around items 10- -O-Fort Calhoun Goal for Totai Operator Work Around items 8-6- C O O O O O O O O O O O 4-ra,a, ,a,a, n,n,n,n, Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES 4 This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on-line), the number of outstanding control room equip-ment deficiencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) ltems repairable on-line, the number of outstanding OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals. There was a total of 47 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of August 1994. 16 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 31 require a plant outage to repair. i There were 21 deficiencies added and 21 deficiencies closed during the month. There were 2 identified Operator Work Around items at the end of the month. The OWAs were on equipment tags CH-208, C/R Panel CB-1/2/3 and MOV-D1, C/R Panel CB-10/11. Both OWAs require an outage to repair. 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

O Monthly Personn:l Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fu:1 Rerack) -G - Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure (Non-Spent Fuel Rerack) -O-Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 44 Person-Rem) h40-C O w w w w w w w w w w CF 30-g 20-i g 10-e 0 i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack IGOODl 4-- Personnel Cumulative Radiation Exposure for Spent Fuel Rerack V -O-Fort Calhoun Annual Goal ( 23 Person-Rem) EEf_C O O O O O O O O O O O c< o ^ ~ ~ 2 s s s e s s s s s s s s Q-Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure, excluding the spent fuel rerack, is less than 44 person-Rem. The exposure for August 1994 was 2.367 person-Rem. . The year-to-date exposure was 12.789 person-Rem at the end of August. 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 August was 0.314 person-Rem. The Spent Fuel Rerack exposure year-to-date was 4.622 person-Rem at the end of August. The collective radiation exposure at the end of August (i.e., the sum of non-spent fuel rerack exposure and spent fuel rerack exposure) was 17.411 person-Rem. The collec-tive radiation exposure for the last 12 months was 161.55 person-Rem at the end of the month. 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 9/91 through 8/94 was 147.99 person-rem per year. Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett i 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 - !tc E 2000 - Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal ~ 731 ,4 190 6 72 August 1994 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE i During August 1994, an individual accumulated 190 mrem, which was the highest individual exposure for the month. The maximum individual exposure for the year was 731 mrem at the end of August. The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,500 mrem / year. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem. Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None 17

4-Violations per 1,000 Inspection Hours Dl -O-Fort Calhoun Goal Y l 3.03 E p3-8 82-I o. s 14 C O O a/b O O O O I's 8 351-0 i 4 92 93 Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 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 1.71 for the twelve months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994. The following inspections ended during this reporting period: IER No. Titla No. of Hours 94-09 Maintenance Reliability Initiative 500 To date, OPPD has received 8 violations for inspections conducted in 1994: Level Ill Violations (1) Level IV Violations (5) Level V Violations (0) Non-Cited Violations (NCV) (2) The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 ir rpec-tion hours. Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Trausch Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on 3 consecutive months of declining performance.

1 O NRC Si0nificant Events IGOODI Industry Average Trend y 1 1 1-m, n mm

'5~

0 i i i i i i i i i i i 91-2 91-3 91-4 92-1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 Year-Quarter @ INPO Significant Events (SERs) lGOODI V 2 2-3 3 3 3 ~ M V WM M o i i i i i i i i i i i i 91-2 91-3 91-4 92 1 92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 Year-Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual " Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network. The following NBQ significant events occurred between the second quarter of 1991 and the First quarter of 1994: Second Quarter 1991: Safety related electrical equipment was not adequately protected from a high energy line break. Third Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressurizer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary. The following INP_Q significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), oc-curred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the first quarter of 1994-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 39

3 -. @ Number of Missed STs Resulting in LERs 2-l l t l0 1-l 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 I I I I 4 4 I i i I I 1 8 i S2 S3 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 l l NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (i This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Uc-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years. l There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during August 1994. During the month of January 1993 it was discovered that during December 1992 an ASME Section XI Code required surveillance was not completed nor corrective mainte-nance performed as a result of AC-10A falling into the " Alert Range" (LER 93-003 Fail-ure to Satisfy inservice Testing Requirements for Raw Water Pump). i The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. i Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend SEP 60 & 61 20 i I

j } l i j 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

j ~ E Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours) i 40-35.66 34.6 34.9 34.85 34.88 56 33.91 30-Cycle 15 27.8 R 25.03 Refueling l 2 Outage 8 j ' 10-i 1.54 4 0 i j i l Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 STATION NET GENERATION l During the rilonth of August 1994 a net total of 348,854 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 15 was 3,079,413 MWH at the end of the month. Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occur ed 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 j heater drain tank. i 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 l test failure. Energy losses for September, October and November 1993 were attribut-l able to the shutdown for the Cycle 15 refueling outage, which began on September 25 and ended on November 26. Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None t 22 i. 'e

s - Forced Outage Rate l GOOD l -O-Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) y g_ 10.1 9.3 8%- 6%- Cycle 15 - Refueling 1 Outage j 4%- i C C C C C C O--C C O--C C r 1.38 f

91

'92 '93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 l FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 1.05% for the twelve months from Sep-tember 1,1993 thru August 31,1994.- The 1994 year to-date FOR was 0.84% at the end of August. A forced outage occurred on February 11,1994 due to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. The generator was off line for 48.9 hours. A forced outage occurred on December 6,1993 when the plant tripped during weekly testing of the turbine EHC system. The generator was off-line for 27.1 hours. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4%. The 1993 Fort Calhoun year-end goal was a maximum value of 2.4%. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report' Accountability: Chase o Positive Trend 23

Monthly Unit Capacity Factor -et-Cycle 15 Unit Capacity Factor --+- 36 Month Average Unit Capacity Factor 110 % - ~~~ 100% - c: ~~~ 90%- a W W M @%g su 1 ~ o f n M: 4% f^ > M-y- p f 5? 80%- y,[ il+g $f f W ~ ~; f, i [ 24 e a A jy. y m / e f y yr s p g gj y y g 70%- N-p 60%- Cycie 15 h i D $U tl Refueling f4 9$ k ~ p b~ S;5: @;p s s 50% _ Outage w.g um + (r m up bk NIA: A .sf $\\ e&.7'e 4h; s M 's Y' nf? g g O M(@f 40%- o w:0 w r x J, w t[:- R tM G8 st W 'F W p C W W ^ V j k; g f[ f 0% lgt y 30%- w$g A M @R M s;, w .s g w c, e gg a 20%- a 9 20 I" ti Nt S s ? O** k l:$ a@% YJ h s[ re a cu w ~, 3 10%- g O pp F gg y .d $gh@2 &

K Jf 20l s!O L l!

p 2 -i 4:7 'N A W M D' .i a 6 i e i i i i i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capacity Factor, the Unit Capacity Factor for the current fuel cycle and the 36 month average Unit Capacity Factor. The Unit Capacity Factor for August 1994 was reported as 98.1%. At the end of the month the Cycle 15 Unit Capacity Factor was 88.3%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months was 75.1%. The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows: Net Electrical Eneray Generated (MWH) Maximum Dependable Capacity (MWe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Data Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 24

Monthly EAF Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF $ Industry Median Value (76.7%) 100 % - t a w N hV 85.6 f( h. j [k

.:1 ff 1

s p g m. I.b N )$ I,E N di ~ NI w. 76.2 80%- l'a an 's ] $( p j '4' ( ,[:' [g'.- '^ J; .i ',f E n 'a y @eP:

M l

$ih. ; I 60%- y Cycle 15 (! h T4 y 7 's d g s gkj 3 k gg m Refueling S i Bi >j 533 .p Outage 7 7 fji f'., f 3 Y g 'a

3

g

.m. M +: n 4 5 . ki t sr E !,li e ~# 40%- 9 t' 8 '~ em. [ h khki D D h l !J W:W f 7 0': i;( [ } k + 4 L k i q@ l' f6 d d M 4 A i e t ~ E

1 M 20%-

2 'e @M.h[n i f* v 4% , S' s 4' si Q n (k l ,? 4 e v> e e- - s h [ p% s, y he F v \\ l U$" $g. p?' m 4 a s a g$ i hi T' ,5 (($Q Y t l- , 0% j i i l '91 '92 '93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous 3 years. The EAF for August 1994 was reported as 96.95%. The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 96.44% 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 I condenser tube repair and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 75.59%. The industry median EAF value for the three year period from 7/90 through l 6/93 was 76.7%. Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 25

O Monthly Unit Capability Factor --W-Year to-Date Unit Capability Factor --+- 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor 4 C Fort Calhoun Goal l GOOD l 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 80%) Industry Upper 10% (86.7% for a Three Year Average) 100% - n ^ E/ b 5 E E 80%- 3 n m v. 60%- m4 Mi6 4 P O m 7 1 '" t' Cycle 15 $t g 40%- Sh Refueling 7 9 QE E i' E $a: Isa g m 20%- 5 Outage e( $4 [f8 J ij f@!IAIl 'C fg Mi jg: 's - I a i i 6 i e i e i a i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the year-to-date UCFs, the 36 month average UCFs, and the UCF goals. 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 August 1994 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date UCF was 97.6%, i the UCF for the last 12 months was 79.7%, and the 36 month average UCF was re-ported as 76.3% at the end of the month. dnergy 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 repair condenser tubes and a failed level control valve on a heater drain tank. 1 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 l EHC system. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 86.7%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 96.03%. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 26 i

Q Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 50% _ --et-Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor O Fort Calhoun Goal lGOODI 40%- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 4.5%) t industry Upper 10% (1.48% for a Three Year Average) 30%- Cycle 15 Refueling 20%- Outage T m M hl! 10%- 1 M C O O O O ^ a Kl a 0% Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF and the goal. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage. The UCLF for the month of August 1994 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to-dats UCLF was 2.42%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 3.65%, and the 36 month average UCLF was reported as 8.1% at the end of the month. 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. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 1/91 through 12/93) is approximately 1.48%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 3.97%. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 27

l l - FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical Year-to-date l l -+- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for the last 36 months -O-1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals --b-1995 INPO Industry Goal l 6- -D-Industry Upper 10% (0.51 per 7,000 hours critical over a 36 month time period) 5-4- 3-f Y 1r L: Q-% -6 e c ? O 3 l d, :: l 0-% .y. r -T-T TM l Sep93 Oct Nov Dec - Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 E Number of FCS Reactor Scrams h Cycle 15 Refueling ) 3 x 2-Outage j j f,f,01-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 i 90 '91 '92 '93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL l The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 l hours critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 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 year-to4 ate station value was 1.21 at the end of August 1994. The value for the 12 months from September 1,1993 through August 31,1994 was 1.93. The value for the last 36 months was 1.99. An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11,1994 when supervi-sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed. An unplanned automa!!c reactor scram occurred on December 6,1993 during EHC tasting. The 1994 Fort Calhour: coal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a l maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours critical. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.51 scrams per 7,000 hours critical for the 36 month time period from 1/91 through 12/93. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Ucensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 28

j 3-5 Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition) O Fort Calhoun Goal 0 Industry Upper 10 Percentile i ~ 2-l l 1-Cycle 15 Refueling Outage ,0 C O, O,O,O,b,O,O O,O,O,O, i i '91 '92 '93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO DEFINITION) There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of August 1994. I i There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection l Actuation _ Signal, Containment isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation Signal and Steam Generator Isolation Signal. The Steam Generator Isolation Signal automatically closed both main steam isolation valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip. An INPO unplanned safety system actuation occurred during the month of July 1992. It l 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. i l Data Source: Monthly Operations Repod & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29

12 M: nth Running Totil SSAS (NRC Definition) -+- Critical Hours Safety Systern Actuatiors (NRC Definition) 10- -1000 - 900 88-Cycle 15 800 Ref - 700 $ 6- -600 j j g 500 j.4 - - 400 b 300 fg2- - 200 0 0 N N ,m 0 -0 '91 '92 '93 SONDJ FMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ JA 1992 1993 1994 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION) This indicator shows the number nf unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emer-gency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuations when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged. There was 1 NRC unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concur-rent turbine a'nd reactor trip. There were 3 NRC unplanned safety system actuations in 1993: 1) In December 1993 the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing; 2) In June 1993 the inadvertent Jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip; and 3) in April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse drawer, causing a low voltage alarm on bus 1 A t, 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- '3 142 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 statt 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 2 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 30 l l

i l 4 E MonthY Gross Heat Rate -M-- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate O 1994 81993 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-Cycle 15 10223 10.25-Refuehng b 10171 Z* t N i f i , 9.75-i '91 12 '93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 GROSS HEAT RATE l This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-j date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years. The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,383 for the month of August 1994. The 1994 year-to-date GHR was 10,199 at the end of the month. l. 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 Fahrenheit. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 5;10,190. Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski j Adverse Trend: None 31 I

O Monthly Thermal Performance --M-Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance 0 1994 & 1993 Fort Calhoun Goals lGOODI -+- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%) A Industry Upper 10% (99.9%) 100 % - 4 m %X;f k g__O O O O ? O .O. g ^ Cycle 15 JL k n N g N gj Refueling h Outage gj (({jl j$ 99%- x r g M

h

$A. gh$ k k. k wh k $5 k NI I B k 98 % 5 2 4 E ] Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 4 l INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. The thermal perfcrmance value for August 1994 was 99.37%. The year-to-date aver-age mor,tiil/ thermal performance value was 99.32% at the end of the month. The averapa monthly value for the 12 months from September 1,1993 through August 31, 1994 was 99.39%. Thermal Performance improved in May as a result of the backwash valve adjustments on "A" Condenser and improvements in Heater 2A level control. The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control problems on heaters 3A and SB, and to spring runoff resulting in screen carry-over and condenser fouling. Improvements made during the month of March were: 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 corrected. The 1994 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 99.5%. The 1993 Fort Calhoun 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/Ponek Adverse Trend: None j 32

1 I f i O Tnermaioutput q -O-Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goa! - Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit i 1500 1499.5-1499-1498.5-i 1498-1497.5-4 j 1497-1496.5-1496-(\\ y\\ l 1495.5- "~ w* t.-+ pg.. 1495< 1494.5- _",' s 0 1 +... -e s ~ uv 1494-1493.5- < m. E a 1493-MS 1492.5-

A

^ 1492-rp 1491.5-nff i 9 1491-7.:g., h,k i 1490.5-

M w

1490 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during August 1994, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. Data Source: Holthaus/ Gray (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Tills Adverse Trend: None 33

l l '~ 4.- Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hours i O 1994 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal (02) j 0.75-l GOOD l l v 0.5 0.5-r 025-l C O ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ v v v v v v v v l I O I i i a 0 j H '92 '93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 l EQUlPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours was 0.172 for the months from January through August 1994. The value for the 12 months from September 1, 1993 through August 31,1994 is 0.138. 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 relay for the i Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit. 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 j Control System. l l 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: Chr.se/Jaworsk: Adverse Trend: None l 34

j i 2 # of Component Categories 40-l -+- # of Application Categories 35-30- --h-Total # of Categories g i ~525-E g 20-315-O

10

,_ w g, Y =d 5-i j 0 M93 A M J J A S O N D93 J94 F M A M J J A94 l E WearOut/ Aging S Other Devices @ Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / Action 4.7% 9.4% 0 Engineering / Design @ Error / Operating Action 41.2 % 4.7% Percent of Total Failures During the Past 18 Months i t i f /- 4.1% j 5.9%Illll t 1 j COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

j The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) i failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from November 1992 i through April 1994). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 87 compo-l nent 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. I The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for % 99 failure reports that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past id months. Of these, the failure cause was j known for 85. The pie chart reflects known tailure causes. l Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/ Edwards Adverse Trend: None 35

Components With More Than One Failure V 25_ --X-- Components With More Than Two Failures 20-15-14 12 12 12 12 \\ 10 10-v 9 8 l 7 7 5-4 4 1 ,1, ,1, ,1, Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 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 rnore than 1 failure during the eighteen month CFAR period and the number of NPRDS components with more than 2 failures during the eighteen month CFAR period. l During the last 18 reporting months there were 7 NPRDS components with more than 1 failure.1 of the 8 had more than 2 failures. The tag number of the component with more than 2 failures is AC-10C. 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 Adverse Trend: None 36

_ Calculated Check Valve Failure Rate per Million Component Hours Calculated industry Check Valve Failure Rate per y Million Component Hours 3- -O-Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 - 2-C O O O 9 1 tu 5-1 I 1_ 0.5 - e 31 '92 93 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 No. of Check Valve Failures CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE This indicator shows the calculated Fort Calhoun NPRDS check valve failure rate, the Fort Calhoun goal and the industry check valve failure rate average. The failure rates are based on submitted NPRDS failure reports for an 18 month time interval. They do not include failure reports outside of the 18 month time interval. The interval starts 22 months prior to the current month and ends 4 months prior to the current month. For example, the August 1994 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) covers the 18 month interval from November 1,1992 through April 30,1994. This delay is due to the time involved in collecting and processing failure report data. i The actual numbers of NPRDS reportable check valve failures at Fort Calhoun Station are shown above on the graph at the left side of the page. For August 1994, the CFAR provided the following failure rates: Fort Calhoun Station 1.17 E-6 Industry (excluding FCS) 1.59 E-6 The recent increase in the FCS failure rate is due to 2 reportable failures of RC-374, Pressurizer RC-4 Spray Line Check Valve; one failure occurred in October and another in November 1993. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is s1.75 E-6. Data Source: Jaworski/ Edwards (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Rollins Adverse Trend: None SEP 43 37

O Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet) Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried l GOOD l 750-t --O-Fort Calhoun Goal For Waste Buried (500 cubic feet) V + 1995 M Nustry M (3,W cWe feet) 600- -O-Industry Upper 10% (1,045.12 cubic feet) r / C C C C C O 450-b i i f U 300-r 150-

84TB S

[ fRm] S I i i l I l Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 L VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%. Arnount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during June (cubic feet) 0.0 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during June (cubic feet) 206.0 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1994 (cubic feet) 543.6 Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage after July 1,1994 (cubic feet) 0.0 The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste which has been buried is 500 cubic feet. The goal was exceeded in June because OPPD's 18 month l goal (established in 1993) allowed the opportunity to further reduce the amount of solid radioactive waste. 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 approxi-mately 29.59 cubic meters (1,045.12 cubic feet) per year. Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: Although the 1994 goal was exceeded, this indicator is not exhibiting an adverse trend because Fort Calhoun did not exceed the 18 month goal of 1,500 ft.8 that was established in 1993. The 18 month total for Fort Calhoun was 1,401.4 ft.8 at the end of June 1994. SEP 54 38 1

E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit I l GOOD l 4 i --O-Fort Calhoun Goal V l 3%- ~ 2%~ C C C C C C C C C C 4 i i 1%- i l, 0% i i i i i i j Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 I i PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary' System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the pri-j mary system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-j pended solids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month. j The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was 0.0% for the month of August 1994. i The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this inclicator is a maximum of 2% hours out of i limit. Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 4 i 39 )

E Secondary System CPI 2-lG00Dl -O-Fort Calhoun Goal y 1.9 - i j 1.8 - 1.7 - l' 1.6 - 1.5 - O O O O O O O O O O O i 1.4 - 1 1.3 - E 1 i i i i i i i i i i i I Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 j SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY j l Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) are:

1) The plant is at greater than 30% power; and 2) the power is changing at less than 5%

per day. l The CPI for August 1994 was 1.15. The year-to-date average monthly CPI value was l 1.2 at the end of the month. I The CPI for December 1993 was 1.92. This relatively higher number was due primarily to iron transport following the plant start-up. 1 ) The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a maximum value of 1.5. The CPI calculation is different from that reported in 1993 in that it reflects the recent l lNPO 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. l Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend i 40 1

a l i ) i i 1 i i COST ~ 4 i Goal: To operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as a viable j source of electricity. i i l i J ) ) 1 4 i 4 ) 41

4-Actuals -O-- Budget A Plan 3.75-3.5 - I 3.25-iO 3-2.75-2.5 D91 D92 D93 J94 F M A M J J A S O N D94 D95 D96 D97 D98 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1993 and 1994 revised budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991,1992 and 1993. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for 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 (3.01 cents per kilowatt hour for the reporting month)is averaging lower than budget due to expenses being below budget while generation exceeds the budget. Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Scofield Positive Trend 42

i @ Nuclear Services Division Staffing i O Production Engineering Division Staffing i @ Nuclear Operations Division Staffing 5 TotalNuclearStaffing 7 7 8 7 8 9 0 7 7 7 8 4 4 800 - 9 5 5 5 600 - 3 4 I 4 4 4 4 2 500 - 7 6 400-1 1 1 1 300 - 0 9 0 0 3 5 6 13 1 1 1 200 - 1-1 1 1 4 7 6 6 4 5 5 Jan90 Jan91 Jan92 Jan93 Jan94 Apr94 Jul94 ACTUAL STAFFING LEVEL (UPDATtID OUARTERLY) STAFFING LEVEL The actual staffing levels for the three Nuclear Divisions are shown on the graph above. The authorized staffing levels for 1994 are: 1994 Authorized Staffing ) 453 Nuclear Operations Division 191 Production Engineering Division 117 Nuclear Services Division Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source) Accountability: Ponec Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 43

I j i - Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 17-Cycle 15 Refueling Outage. 16- \\ 15-25 y14- ~O 13-5 12-11 - 10 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of August 1994 was reported as $16,086,342. Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source) Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Adverse Trend: None 44

l l i DIVISION AND i DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE I INDICATORS 1 i l These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con-i tacts the Manager-Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators i referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the original intent l and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this l report. l 45

. _. =. I l l Corrective Maintenance Non-Corrective / Plant Irnprovernents E Preventive Maintenance -O-Fort Calhoun Goal 776 800 - 723 752 691 700 - 626 581 600 - 500 - dM-m m 300 - C /,;,; v v v 2w-gj g; 'I Fa, Pa, Pl, rni %,4,. ,ra, r, Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 l Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog 400 - 350 - 0 TotaiuWos Ed MWOs Which Exceed Maintenance Completion Goals 300 - l 250 - 200 - 112 150 - 146 j 100 - >3 >14 130 >90 f"8,0]"A "180 4 6 days 25r y,mdays days ), days-0 Priordy 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Aging i t MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS l 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 l classification and priority. The 1994 goal for this indicator has been changed to 400 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: l Canal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 days Priority 3 O ^ rations Concern 14 days f Priority 4 Esantial 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 46

I O Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 100% - 90%- 7 [ 80%- g N 70%- ity y y ~ 7' v EWi ~~~ 60%- 50%- !$[n h; h' .b P 40%- 1 M ~ 30%- N v '^ q .,,.? M %w. ^s 4 x v 20%- 1 I y 1 x >s 10%- d'; (. [ e[ N W E Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 2%- O Preventive Maintenance items Overdue GOOD --O-Fort Calhoun Goal V Data 1%- Unavailable l due to Cycle 9 15 Refueling O-O O-E E O l Outage l 0% l Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance. The ratio of preventive to total maintenance was 62.5% for the month of August 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. l During August,575 PM items were completed. 2 of these PM items (0.35% of the total) were not completed within the allowable grace period or administratively closed. l 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) Positive Trend SEP 41 47

E Rework As identified By Planning or Craft i l -O-Fort Calhoun Goal 5.2% 5%- l 4.56 % t t $4%- 8 3%- O O O O O 2.51 % 3 2.43% 2.44 % h 2.06 % 1.58 % e 1%- 0% i i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 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 Positive Trend 48

80*/. - E Maintenance Overtime + Month Amage Maintenance Ovenime l GOOD l 70%- --O-Fort Calhoun "On-L!ne" Goal j 60%- i 50%- Cycle 15 l Refueling l Outage 40%- 30%- l l 20%- l l 10%- O O O ^ 0*i. i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 1 l l MAINTENANCE OVERTIME j 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 6.0% for the month of August 1994. The 12 month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 13.6% at the end of the month. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Positive Trend 49

O Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) 8 Closed irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) E Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) 2-11 1 1 1 0 0 0 000 000 000 000 00 00 000 000 000 000 i i i i i i e i i i a i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) This indicator shows the number of open Maintenance Incident Reports (irs) that are related to the use of procedures, the number of closed irs that are related to the use of procedures, and the number of open and closed irs that received procedural noncom-pliance cause codes for each of the last twelve months. There were no procedural noncompliance incidents for maintenance reported for the month of August 1994. There was 1 procedural noncompliance incident (IR 930225) reponed in September 1993. Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 50

E Completed Scheduled Activities (AllCrafts) O Numberof Emergent MWOs Completed --O-Fort Calhoun Goal 110 g3

f 100%-

100 V 5 90% - 5,7l 90 __ a O O gog 80%- ^ @ 70%- 70 70 s o / .5 60%- '//: // 60 3: '//' 51 2 50%- ((: 46 50 g p//. o / yo '//. ~5 40%- ff % Completed pj: % Completed %%p 40 E) 3 '//. '// Scheduled '//. Scheduled /// g 30%- Activities Not Activities Not jpp - 30 h f, M 25- '((: /g Available Available $[I 20 E .ff E g4 '//. /// d _[_ 10%- ff; [j !((; %%j 10 Z E Z4 / Z0 '$'C': 0%- 3 0 o0 May 94 June July August 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 the months of July and August 1994 are not available due to the software and data collection method changes involved with the implementation of the integrated Plant Schedule. There were 46 emergent MWOs completed during the month of August. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 80%. Data Somco: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accounability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 33 51

i l M % of Hours the in-Une Chemistry instruments are Inoperable i j 12_ -O-- 1994 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 10%) j 11-l 10-C O O O O O O O O O O O g-l 8- { g 7-e 6-5- i i i i i i 6 I I i i i i 1 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 j IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments i are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator j include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS). ] At the end of August 1994 the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-l ments were inoperable was 6.76%. j lt should be noted the total number of in-line chemistry instruments considern d within this performance indicator has been increased to 51. This is the result of Mcluding the j 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 channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-l tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, or 3) the alarm 1 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. 1 j 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. Data Source: Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Positive Trend i 52 4

J Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms) Monthly Average Waste Produced During the Last 12 Months (Kilograms) i --O-Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal q --G-Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max, of 1,000 Kg) 1000 - E = = = = = = = = = = 800 - $ 600-2 E g 400 - ) 200 - C O O O O O M O O O O Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 1 HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by the Fort Calhoun Station each month, the monthly average goal and the monthly average total for hazard-ous waste produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced. During the month of August 1994,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,0.0 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced, and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. T;1e total for hazardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 161.4 kilograms. The monthly average for haz-ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 13.45 kilograms. Hazardous waste is counted based upon til drum of waste. The 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for this indicator is a maximum of 100 kilograms. Data Source: Chase / Smith (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 53 i

E Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area 25%- l GOOD l --O-Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage months) -O-Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months) 20%- 15%- 10%- l;l;l;l;l;l;l;;;ii ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 O O O O 0% i Jun94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 CONTAM!NATED 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-t nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 13% contaminated RCA. At the end of August 1994, the percentage of the totai square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.5%. Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Positive Trend SEP 54 I j

+ Number of identified PRWPs Year-To-Date IGOODI 30- -O-1994 Fort Calhoun Goal (<25) y 25-C O O O O O O O O O O O .j20-8 Q 15-C 1 g I $o 10-- O 5- ~ 0 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTIGS 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 August 1994, there was 1 PRWP identified. The PRWP occurred when an individual exiting the RCA discovered his ALNOR was off. There have been 6 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 SEP52 55 l

- - _ -. ~ _ - _. - O Documents schedui dior neview. @ Documents Reviewed 350-300 - 250 - i 200 - P i 150-f 100 - / ~ ~ ~ Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 DOCUMENT REVIEW i This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 l months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Operating Manual. During August 1994 there wf:re 331 document reviews scheduled, while 110 document reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were no document reviews more than 6 months overdue. There were 19 new documents initiated in August. Data Source: Chase / Keister (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski AdverseTrend: None SEP 46 l 56 M.

l. i-E Non-System Failures 30-1 25 - V 20-15-12 10 10-7 7 i i i i i j i i i i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 i @ System Failures l GOOD l go_ 80-y 70-60 - 4 31 32 h bbb$h & 5 $h h i i i e i i i i i i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 LOGG ABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate graphs. The top graph depicts the total number of loggable/ reportable non-system failures conceming Security Badges, Access Control and Authorization, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors. The bottom graph shows the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents conceming system failures which occurred during the reporting month. During the month of August 1994, there were 20 loggable/ reportable incidents identified. System failures accounted for 17 (85%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. A single microwave zone, which had a bad power supply and transmitter head, was responsible for 4 of the 7 microwave system failures. System and non-system failures continued on a downward trend in 1994. An ECN will be implemented during the month of Septem-ber 1994 which will enhance the security computer system. Further, a new X-Ray machine has been ordered and is scheduled for installation in October 1994. 4 Data Source: Sefick/Woerner(Manager / Source) Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 57

E Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old (RFO required for Removal) Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Remnable on-line) Fort Calhoun Goals for Temporary Modifications >1 cycle old & Temporary Modifications >6 months old 8-7- 6 I 4 4 ~ 3 YY)/> }Y// h 3 1 1 1 1 0 i May '94 June'94 July '94 August '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-4B, 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-pleting 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 August 1994 there were 6 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be ( removed on-line. These were: 1) Localindication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11B,in l which Operations is reviewing a draft FLC. After review, Licensing is to issue an FLC, l and the NRC is to approve; 2) LP-30 transformer, in which ECN 93-183 is approved for accomplishment prior to 10/94; 3) Door 1011-7 lockset replacement, in which ECN 93-408 is approved for accomplis! ment 1995 on-line; 4) CL-106 blank flange installation, in which ECN 94-298 is approved for accomplishment 1994 on-line; 5) Swap leads for DG-1 shutdown solenoid, which is awaiting completion of MWO 941809, scheduled for start date of 10/10/94; and 6) FW-2A/B/C local sample point installation in which ECN 94-054 is approved for accomplishment prior to 11/94. At the end of August 1994, there was a total of 26 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station.16 of the 26 installed TMs reauire an outage for removal and 10 are removable on-line. In 1994 a total of 33 temporary modifications have been installed. 1 Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 58

1 O Total Modification Packages Open 264 ~ --O-Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal 250 - i l k,,W n 150 - c c c 127 m* 100 100 - 7 g g 7 g g g y a p ? k h lhh y j F d 50 - 6 n$ $ L? ?? 8 x::- " ~ > w w'c

n...,,

hk k .'3 ) g; &a r; e s+ se e c c' x g 0 1 1 i 1 i '91 '92 '93 sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstand-ino modificitions which are orocosed to be cancelled). Cateoorv Reoortino Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress 1 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 2 Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 27 Construction Backlog /In Progress 14 Design Engr. Uodate Backloa/In Proaress 13 Total - 57 At the end of August 1994,14 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 40 modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) had completed 110 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 53 backlog modification request reviews this year. The 1994 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 80 outstanding modifications. Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source) Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 59

1 EARO Requiring Engineering Closecut - Not in Closeout O DEN E SE l 40-40-40-50-30-30-40-l 30-20-20 - 30-( 20-I_ ~ 10-10-10-0 ,0 ,0 ,0-- T" l Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug 0-3 months 0-3 months 0-3 months 0-3 months August '94 Overdue EARS G Closeout (SE) O Engineering Response tE F=:1 R i i i i e i i Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 Q Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200 - 150 - 100 - p g:, y M 1 M& W A O 50 - O i o Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 l @ 57 EARS Resolved and in Closeout O 76 me@e Respnses M 48 Overdue Closeouts O '109 EARS Requiring Response S 42 EARS on Schedule f ,'...mN 45.8%

34. N I

28.9 % lll;; ;;lllll 65.7% 5.3% 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: l EARS opened during the month 9 EARS closed during the month 10 Total EARS open as of the end of the month 166 Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworcki/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 60

E in CEN = 191 3 0-3 Months = 285 5.4 % O ' System Engineering = 141 37.8 % 5.8% 0.7 l I O 3-6 Months = 102 1.2% C. ! tocurement/Constr. - 132 22.7 16.4% 0 >6 Months = 235 @ In Closeout = 158 ECN STATUS - OVERALL BACKLOG E ECNs Backlogged O ECNs Receked During the Month E ECNs Completed During the Month 250-g E 0-3 Months -107 % L. L. L. L. h G liF Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 (Year-to-Date monthly average of ECNs receNed was 50.1) ECN STATUS - DEN 250- ~ E E 0-3 Months = 27 I 4 ~ 64.6 % S O >6 Months = 91 0 Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 ECN STATUS - SE 250-f g o.3 Months = 43 200-150-O f 2.6% I 50.7 % O 34 Months = 22 100-50-N $ 16.7% O >6 Months - 67 0 Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 ECN STATUS _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PROC /CONSTR 250-200-E 17.7 E 0-3 Months = 108 3 13.9 % O 3-6 Months = 22 100-7 .4 7 f O >6 Months = 28 50-Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 ECN STATUS - CLOSEOUT ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source) Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61

FM E FC Type = 204 E Priority 1 &2 = 97 G SRI Type = 230 l S Priority 3 & 4 - 325 i 7.0% O DC Type = 188 p52.2%y O Priority 5 & 6 = 200 v TOTAt.OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (622 TOTAL) TOTAL OPEN ECNs BY PRIORITY (622 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 250-213 210 203 205 200 204_ E Priority 1 or 2 150 - i 25M 100 - @ Priority 3 or 4 95 50 - 59.3%?. -\\ O Priority 5 or 6 0-1 Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 Facility Change ECNs Open 25 24 241 247 230 E Priority 1 or 2 S Priority 3 or 4 150 - g 3, 100-W1,NW, 37 O Priority 5 or 6 50-V 65 0 i i i i l Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 250 - 4.8 E Priority 1 or 2 200 - 188 181 182 188 1 3.0% @ Priority 3 or 4 O Priority 5 or 6 81 50-0~ 'T" T Mar 94 Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 Document Change ECNs Open ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Skiles/McShannon (Manager / Source) Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 62

@ Administrative Control Problem O Licensed Operator Error @ Other Personnel Error @ Maintenance Problem 3-M Design / Construction / installation / Fabrication Problem @ Equipment Failures 1 i l 2-l 1-7 3 g ? E i l l E E E E l E E 0 i i e i i i i i e i i Aug93 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul94 i LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN l This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for i each of the past twelve months from August 1,1993 through July 31,1994. To be consistent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is re-ported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date. l The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For detailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section i of this report. There were no events in July 1994 that resulted in an LER. Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 63

O Total Requalification Training Hours O Simulator Training Hours O Non-Requalification Training Hours 50-E Number of Exam Failures y 40-37 37 32 y b ~ y 30-20-18 37 ~ 14 14 11 ~ 10-5 - 5 7 k 4 5 3 3 /f 3 / 2 / 2 / oh / /, h H 7}' 7' o m 0 Cycle 93-6* i Cycle 93-7 Cycle 94-1 Cycle 94-2 Cycle 94 3 Cycle 94-4 Cycle 94-5 i i i i

i i
Note 1: The Simulator was out-of-service during Cycle 93-6 and Cycle 94-4.
Note 2: Includes 8 hours of General Employee Training.

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The Simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches. Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training. There was 1 crew simulator failure for Cycle 94-5. The crew that failed the simulator evaluation was remediated without impacting the Operations Department Shift Sched-ule. Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64

O SRO Exams Administered O sRO exams Passed E RO Exams Administered 20-O RO Exams Passed I 4 15-10-7 5- ? l 3 0 e' i i i i i i i i i i i Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 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 License training convened on August 29,1994. No exams were given in August. Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 65

[] TotalOpen CARS O Tctal Open IR3 Q Open CARS > Six Months Old G Open irs > Six Months Old 400- -400 360- -360 320-Cycle 15 [ [ [ 320 Refueling 280-Outage 7 7 7 - 280 240 - 240 200-200 160-5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 160 120-f f 120 80-3 : 80 k 40-m 2 ! 2 h, 40

r,

C, 23 k, 0, 2 a 0 0 Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 120-E Open Significant CARS O Open Significant irs 100-64 67 69 b b 80-60 - 51 45 E 40-27 N~ 2 4 5 5 4 6 6 8 7 8 8 7 0 ,~ Sep93 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug94 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 August 1994 there were 62 open CARS.13 of these CARS were greater than 6 months old. There were 7 Open Significant CARS at the end of the month. Also, at the end of August there were 367 open irs.185 of these irs were greater than 6 months old. Thera were 79 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 indicated 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. 66

--af - Engineering Hold -+- Planning Complete -O-Planning Hold Ready -V-Part Hold -e-Total 750- ) 700-650-600-550-us 500- $ 450-y 400- < 350-3 300-i O 250 - 200 - 150 - 100 - i hF M 50-0 Dec93Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Feb Mar 95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING OUTAGE) This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Maintenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates: Parts Holds (part hold removed when parts are staged and ready for use) Engineering Holds (Engineering hold removed when appropriate engineering paper-work or support is received for the package) 1 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) Ready (status when all planning, supporting documentation, and parts are ready to go) Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 67

t iI l! ~ 6 A A D pRT .e 8 r d c a ieh e o a r u si 1 v c t of 4 5 s 7 8 g 0 i !0 o_ 0 0 o 0 0 t ei r u S ol n s n nd o e t t a u hg ci T bi e Ru o V 1 r e a r l c Ot O 2rE e i t n y et E r

d as J

fug h R J a eeo A N a w l o w o i w L 0j 3in j-0 n 5 n o r g Ss L 1 s e r St s k O h P Ee R k /i u i S Ds O / t ,g !u h B w a s' t J 1 l o e g a 1 9 u a egt E u C 9 l o g r s s 5 h n t a T al t gi t si o EOE O S w1 $e8' e r f r n T 1 u t ( dt h M a o e A a e hp T ta t ar U

A A g

n c c a vo S m ef e h t t u u ej 1 e g e ( a d i al P e ac C ul c C r l t /r l s Y e o o o S p w C d m m j u oh L

9!

C pi pl e o r c eci E 1 o e e c j r m e ch 1 pl oi oi t t t s t n n sa 6 e ) c e R h! e!e f oi T L S r t n a t o i E l n i s a s t mn F t u M u pt U ( o o el h n n s e EL .;I f t t t n h R e s I bc N 1 e yo G p p 2e o O / o oI > - r 1 0f U t T 1 / t 9 h A ,5 e G S 3C E E:iao E 0y ) c 1 P dl 3 a e y 1 1 s6

82. i 1 1

t l l l

l 1995 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS l Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval ) l Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval 20-l { Final Design Package issued Z g { 15-l Total Modification Packages (17) (3 added after 1/14/94) o-l 88 g ll'llll: '^: l'llllll 35 llllllllllllllllllll'lll/l S k 10-e ?O n Ek s Z g, !?> x k 5~ 8 l = E O iiiiiieiiiiiiiiiiieiiiiiiiiiiiieiiiiiiiieiiii E E E E 6 6 6 l l E l E = = m 8 5 Q g e B e D B S PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 13 MODIFICATIONS) This indicator shows the status of modifications approved forinstallation during the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/14/94) and the current schedule. This information is taken from i the Modification Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering group. In August 1994 no modifications were deleted and none were added. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by October 15,1994. 3 modifications added after 1/14/94 are not included in this performance indicator. The 3 modifications are scheduled and will not impact the 1995 outage. j l This performance goal was achieved on 9/12/94. l l Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None SEP 31 69 l

1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATIONS Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval = Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued (7 FD DCPs issued prior to 1/14/94) _* 20-l Total Modification Packages (17) ('t are Close Out Only) (1 Added after 1/14/94) u :: 82 -f llllllll llllllllllllllllllll:f ( lllllllllll 8, 2> ca 8 h'*~ ________,j====== ==.. g _o eE g 5-ge g E h 4 s1c. 0 b e e e g g 6 6 e g g e g I E e m 8 E G S e G e a e s 3 PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODDiCATIONS) 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 August 1994 no modifications were deleted and none were added. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/14/94 PRC approved by August 15,1994.1 modification was added after 1/14/94 and is not included in this performance indicator. The modification is scheduled and will not im-pact 1994 on-line construction. All packages, except 1, met the goal of PRC approval by 8/15/94. The package which did not meet the goal was ready for PRC review on 8/11/94. However, unavoidable changes to the package were required, and final PRC approval was completed on 8/29/ 94. Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None 70

m ....a__ 4 l \\ ACTION PLANS i f f i a i e l l ) i \\ i 71

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 are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing increased Management Attention for 3 consecutive months. In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-OP-37, the following performance indicators would require action plans based on 3 consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing increased Management Attention": . Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Critical Hours Unplanned Safety Systern Actuations (INPO and NRC) The Plant Manager and Station Engineering Manager have reviewed the daily and ongoing actions being taken to return these performance indicatois to meeting the goals. This review indicates appropriate action is being taken and no explicit action plan is required. The action plan for Fuel Reliability Indicator (page 14) follows:

1) The prediction that there is a potential for 1 or 2 defective fuel rods in the core is based on a change in the Xe-133 to 1-131 ratio. A more definitive disposition will be possible when a significant power change is made and specific chemistry data can be collected.

2) A specification will be prepared for Ultrasonic Testing, if required, during the next refueling outage.

The action plan for Violations Per 1,000 Inspection Hours (page 18) follows:

1) The number of inspections (and thus exposure to potential violations) currently scheduled for the remainder of the year is much less than the first half of 1994 (SALP period ended 7/31/94). Only the SWOPI and Resident inspections are currently scheduled.

2) Pursuit of Resident inspector concerns / problems / issues will be thorough to preclude them from becoming violations.

(

3) Preparation for scheduled inspections (e.g. SWOPI) will be thorough l

and comprehensive. 72

ACTION PLANS (continued) The action plan for Thermal Performance (page 32) follows: Actions to improve Thermal Performance are:

1) Backwash durations have been lengthened over the weekends to improve condenser performance'.

J

2) Investigate the possibility of FW flow nozzle fouling. Test equipment should be installed by the end of September.

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

h f l l 1 l i i 73

PERFORMANCE 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-cal operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the kilowatt hour indcator represents the budget and actual auxiliary feedwater system for the reporting period di-cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi-the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary foedwater approved 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is system. the Financial and Operating Report. CHECK VALVE FAILURE RATE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAM4 NATIONS Compares the Fort Calhoun check valve failure rate to 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS /h4NUTE PER PROBE the industry check valve f ailure rate (failures per 1 million AREA component hours). The data for the industry failure rate This indicator shows the non-spent fuel pool terack per-is three months behind the PI Report reporting month. sonnel contamination events in the clean controlled area. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #43. The clean controlled area contamination goal measures the effectiveness of the Station decontamination pro-COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE gram, provides an early indicator of the material condi-Cellective radiation exposure is the total external whole-tion of the Auxiliary Building, is a quality control check on body dose received by all on-site personnel (including the laundry vendor, and provides input to the poor radio-contractors and visitors) during a time period, as maa-logical work practices goal. This indicator tracks person-sured by the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col-nel performance for SEP #15 & 54. lective radstion exposure is reported in units of person-rem. ThL indicator tracks radiological work performance CONTAMINATED RAD (ATION CONTROLLED AREA for SEP #54. The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) areas of tne C/RP building, that is contaminated based

SUMMARY

on the total square footage. This indicator tracks perfor-The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station mance for SEP # 54. with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) f ail-ure rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT month time period. Failures are reported as component This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as (i.e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e. measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-charging pumps, main steam stop valves, control ele-watts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet ment drive motors, etc.) categories. portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting Failure Cause dategories are: month are also shown. Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse-quence of expected wear or aging. DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) Manuf acturing Defed - a f ailure attributable to inad-This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com-each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start ponent or system. demands and the last 25 load-run demands. Engineering / Design - a failure attributable to the inad-equate design of the responsble component or system. DISABLING INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE Other Devices - a f ailure attributable to a failure or (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE) misoperation of another component or system, including This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for associated devices. all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, Maintenance / Testing - a f ailure that is a result of im-involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test-tor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-ing activities performed on the responsible cx>mponent or mance for SEP #25 & 26. system, including failure to follow procedures. Errors - failures attributable to incorrect procedures that DOCUMENT RE.HW (BIENNIAL) were followed as written, improper installation of equip-The Document Review ind' ator shows the number of c ment, and personnel errors (including failure to follow documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-procedures property). Also included in this category are uled for review, and the number of document reviews failures for which the cause is ursknown or cannot be as-that are overdue for the reporting month. A document signed to any of the preceding categories. review is considered overdue if the review is not com-plete within 6 months of the asshnod due date. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #46. 74

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen-PERFORMANCE erator being declared inoperable should be counted as The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer-corrective maintenance and the successf ul test that fol-gency AC power system for the reporting period divided lows repair to verify operability should not be counted as by the number of hours in the reporting period multiplied demands or f ailures when the EDG has not been de-by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys-clared operable again. tem. EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL-This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer-ITY gency diesel generators. In general, unreliabilty is the This indicator shows the number of failures that were ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die-the number of valid demands. Total unreliabikty is a sei generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also combinaton of start unreliability and load-run shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level unreliability, of confidence that a unit's diesel generatcsrs have ob-tained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) the demand f ailures are less than the trigger values. BREAKDOWN

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

demand is a demand in which the emergency generator is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS

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

in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emor-gency generator in standby mode) that definitely would ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN have resulted in a start failure if a demand had occurred. This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering

3) Number of Load-Run Demands: For a valid load-run Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design demand to be counted the load-run attempt must meet Engineering Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and one or more of the following criteria:

Maintenance. The graphs provide data on ECN Faciltty A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real au-Changes open, ECN Substrtute Replacement Parts tomatic or manualinitiation. open, and ECN Document Changes open. This indicator l B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration tracks performance for SEP #62. as stated in each test's specifications. C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITI-is expected to be operated for at least one hour while CAL HOURS loaded with at least 50% of its design load. Equipment forced outages per 1000 critical hours is the

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure inverse of the mean time between forced outages should be counted for any reason in which the emer-caused by equipment failures. The mean time is equal gency generator does not pick up load and run as pre-to the number of hours the reactor is critical in a period dicted. Failures are counted during any va',id load-run (1000 hours) divided by the number of forced outages demands.

caused by equipment failures in that period.

5) Except:ons: Unsucx:essful attempts to start or load-run should not be counted as valid demands or failures when EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR they can be attributed to any of the following:

This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as an emergency, a percentage. Available generation is the energy that i B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required during can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum { an emergency. power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi- { C) Intentional termination of a test because of abnormal tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be I conditions that would not have resutted in major diesel produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu-generator damage or repair. ously at maximum capacity. D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would have not prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes. E) A f ailure to start because a portion of the starting sys-tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc-cessful start with the starting system in its normal align-ment. 75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FORCED OUTAGE RATE IN-UNE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER-This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that VICE the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Post events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Accident Sampling System (PASS). require removing the unit from service before the end of the next weekend. Forced events include start-up f ail-UCENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS uros and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shut-This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz. down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service). zes and exams that are administered and passed each month. This indicator tracks training performance for FUEL REUABluTY INDICATOR SEP #68. This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool-ant 1-131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contri-UCENSED OPERATOR REQUAUFICATION TRAIN-bution and normahzed to a common purification rate. ING Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re-The total number of hours of training given to each crew actor core internals from previous defective fuel or is during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-present on the surface of fuel elements from the manu. ing hours (which are a subset of the tota! training hours), facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous the number of non-requalification training hours and the operation for at least three days at a power level that number of exam failures. This indicator tracks training does not vary more than + or - SE Plants should collect performance for SEP #68. data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE power above 85% should mliect data for this indicator at BREAKDOWN the highest steady-state power level attained during the This indicator shows the nun'ber and root cause code for month. Licensee Event Reports. The 'oot cause codes are as The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific follows: volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature

1) Administrative Control Pe,olem Management and (540 degrees F., Vf - 0.02146) divided by the specific supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 activities (i.e. poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex-equate management or supervisory control, incorrect changer, VI. 0.016204), which results in a density cor-procedures, etc.)

rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32.

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures errors of omission /mmmission by licensed reactor opera-GROSS HEAT RATE tors during plant activities.

Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omissiorvcommis-energy in Bntish Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the sion committed by non-licensed personnel involved in reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by plant activities.

the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH).

4) Maintenance Problem The intent of this cause code is to capture the full range of problems which can HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated haz-the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-hazardous waste produced by FCS each month.

lance, calibration and radiation protodion.

5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM

- This cause mde covers a full range of programmatic SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, installa-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-tion, and f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to able hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the underrated fuse, equipment not qualrfied for the environ-high pressure safety injection system for the reporting ment, etc.). period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe-

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-nod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres-ronmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for spuri-sure safety injection system.

ous failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE -INPO winds, etc. Generally, it includes spuriom or one-time This indcator is defined as the number of accidents per failures. Electric mmponents included in chis category 200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per-are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, manently assigned to the station that result in any of the diodes, resistors, etc. following: 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex-ciuding the day of the accident); 2) one or more days LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and The total number of security incidents for the, gorting

3) fatalities. Contractor personnel are not included for month depicted in two graphs. This indicator tra:ks so-this indicator.

curity performance for SEP #58. 76

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS MAINTENANCE OVERTIME and planning hold (job scope not yet completed). Main-The % of overtime hours compared to normal ra:, Or tenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage contract personnel. and have not yet been cx)nverted to MWOs. MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFI-This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Mainte. CIENCIES nance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the A control room equipment deficiem (CRD)is defined as reporting month. Maintenance classifications are de. any component which is operated or controlled from the fined as: Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control Room, provides testing capabilities from the Control Corrective - Repair and restoration of equipment or com-Rcom, provides automatic actions from or to the Control ponents that have failed or are malfunctioning and are Room, or provides a passive function for the Control not performing their intended function. Room and has been identified as deficent, i.e., does not perform under all conditions as designed. This definition Preventive - Actions taken to maintain a piece of equip-also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panels 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,s i to equipment failure. oinsidered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) Item"if se me other action is required by an operator to compen-Non-Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance ac-sate for the condition of the component. Some examples l of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indicator does tivities performed to implement station improvements or to repair non-plant equipment. not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-tor out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re-Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as: paired 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-sign problems. These actions may be described in Op-Immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which signifi-erations Memorandums, Operator Notes, or may require cantly degrade station reliabilrry. Potentialfor unit shut-changes to Operating Procedures. 4) Deficient plant down or power reduction. equipment that is required to be used during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proco-Operations Concern - Equipment deficiencies which dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-hinder staten operation. mation during normal or abnormal operations. Essential-Routine corrective maintenance on essential NUMBER OF nSSSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-SULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS station systems and equipment. The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Non-Essential-Routine corrective maintenance on non-Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & essential station systems and equipment. { 61. OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS & INCIDENT plant imp ements 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 INDIYlDUAL 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, qaarterly, months old and the number of open significant irs. and annual basis. RMM MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUELING The number of Modifcation Requests (MRs)in any state OUTAGE) between the issuance of a Modification Number and the The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have completion of the drawing update. { been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 15 Refueling

1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress. This number rep-Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modification requests that have not been plarf.

staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork approved during the reporting month. ready for field use). Abo included is the number of

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category incWes:

MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, A.) Modifcation Requests that are not yet reviewed. (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) B.) Modifcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear 77

i PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS Projects Review Committee (NPRC). tion / installation / fabrication problem (involving work com-C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear pieted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main-Projeds Committee (NPC) tenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper l These Modification Requests may be reviewed several upkeep / repair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of 3 times before they are approved for accomplishment or the event must have occurred within approximately two i cancelled. Some of these Modification Requests are years of the " Event Date* specified in the LER (e.g., an i returned to Engineering for more information, some ap-event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and the original design of the plant would not be considered l some approved for planning. Once planning is mm-preventable). pleted and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these For purposes of LER event classification, a

Personnel i

Modification Requests may be approved for acmmplish-Error" LER is defined as follows An event for which the ment with a year assigned for mnstruction or they may roct cause is inappropriate action on the part of one or be cancelled. All of these drtlerent phases require re-more individuals (as opposed to being attributed to a de-view.- partment or a General group). Also, the inappropriate

3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear action must have occurred within approximately two Planning has assigned a year in which construction will years of the

Event Date* specified in the LER.

be completed and design work may be in progress. Additionally, each event etassified as a " Personnel Error"

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator j

Package has been issued or construction has begun but trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15. i the modification has not been accepted by the System Acceptance Committee (SAC). PRIMARY SYSTEM CHERESTRY % OF HOURS OUT

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress. PED OF LitET has received the Modification Completion Report but the The % of hours out of limit are for six primary chemistry drawings have not been updated.

parameters divided by the total number of hours possible The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, include modifications which are proposed for cancella-Chloride, Hydrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride and i tion. Suspended Solids. EPRilimits are used. OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS This indicator shows the status of the projects which are (MAINTENANCE) in the scope of the Refueling Outage. The number of identified incidents concoming mainte-nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs j PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER related to the use of procedures (includes the number of MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and The percentage of total MWOs completed per month the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs. E identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP l maintenance planning and craft. Rowark is: Any main-

15,41 & 44.

i tenance work repeated to mrrect a deficiency which has { re oocurred within 60 days following similar v,ork activi-PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION i ties. Any additional work required to correct deficiencies PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-dscovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to on. T10NS) sure the mmponent/ system passes subsequent Post This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-Maintenance Tests. This definition can be found in S. O. proved for completion during the Refueling Outage. M-101. PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LME MODIFICATION PLAN-PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE-NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS) i NANCE ACTIVITIES This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-The % of the number of mmpleted maintenance activi-proved for mmpletion during 1994. ties as compared to the number of scheduled maints-s nance activities each month. This % is shown for all RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of The number of identified poor radiological work practices emergent MWOs. Maintenance activities include MWRs, (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator trads MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibtations, and other miscella-radiological work performance for SEP #52. neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per-formance for SEP #33. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR Llh The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveil. This indecator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of lance testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of LER event classification, a preventable LER is defined non outage corrective maintenance and preventive main-as: An event for which the root cause is personnel error tenance completed over the reporting period. The ratio, (i.e., inappropriate action by one or more individuals), expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-inadequate administrative controls, a design /mnstruc-hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte. nance items in the month that were not completed or ad-78

i a PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS ministratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace INPO median value, the median value is used in the cal-period equal to 25 % of the scheduled interval. This indi-culation. cator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP

41.

SIGNIFICANT EVENTS Significant ever ts are those events identified by NRC RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE-staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operat-QUENCY RATE ing experience. The screening process includes the The number of injuries requiring more than normal first daily review and discussion of all reported operating re-aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator actor events, as well as other operational data such as trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. special tests or construction activities, An event identi-fied from the screening process as a significant event REPEAT FAILURES candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System or potential threat to the health and safety of the public (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures are summarized as follows: 1) Degradation of important for the last eighteen months. safety equipment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; 3) Degradation of fuel integrity, primary cool-SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES ant pressure boundary,important associated features; Safety system failures are any events or conditions that

4) Scram with complication; 5) Unplanned release of could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech-structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple nical Specifications; 7) Other.

redundant subsystems or trains, failure of all trains con-INPO significant events reported in this indicator are stitutes a safety system failure. Failure of one of two or SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of more trains is not counted as a safety system f ailure. significant events and lessons learned identified through The definition for the indicator para llels NRC reporting the SEE IN screening process. requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The following is a list of the major safety systems, sub-SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE systems, and components monitored for this indicator: The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and FCS during the reporting period. Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con-trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment STAFFING LEVEL and Coritainment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys-The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Emergency Core Cooling Systems Engineered Safety neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Features instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air indicator tracks performance for SEP #24. Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppression Systems, iso!ation Condenser, STATION NET GENERATION Low Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during Line Isolation Valves, Onsite EmerDency AC & DC the reporting month. Power w/ Distribution, Radiation Manitoring instrumenta-tion, Reactor Coolant System, Rector Core Isolation TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-The numt>er of temporary mechanical and electrical con-tion Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation instrumentation, figurations to the plant's systems. Residual Heat Remova! Systems, Safety Valves Spent

1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and U!ti-jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-mate Heat Sink.

chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE P&lD schematic, connection, wiring, or f!ow diagrams. INDEX

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveil-The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation lance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Pro-based on the concentration of key impurities in the sec-cedures, Special Procedures, or Operating Procedures ondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the are not considered as temporary modifications unless the most likely cause of deterioration of the steam genera-jumper or block remains in place after the test or proco-tors. Cnteria for calculating the CPI are: 1) The plant is dure is complete. Jumpers and bloris installed in test or at greater than 30 percent power; and 2) The power is lab instruments are not considered as temporary modifi-changing less than 5% per day. The CPI is cak:ulated cations.

using the following equation: CPI - (sodium /0.90) +

3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-(Chloride /1.70) + (Sulfate /1.90) + (Iron /4.40) + (Copper /

tion. Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for 0.30)/5. Where: Sodium, sulf ate and chloride are the which MRs have been submitted will be considered as monthly average b!owdown concentrations in ppb, iron temporary modifications until final resolution of the MR and copper are monthly time weighted average and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently feehater concentrations in ppb. The denominator for recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-each of the 5 factors is the INPO median value. If the rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71. monthly average for a specific parameter is less than the

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS THERMAL PERFORMANCE UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(INPO The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the DEFINITION) adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percent-This indicator is definsd as the sum of the following safety

age, system actuations:

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Cooling UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an The ratio of the available energy generation over a given ECCS actuation setpoint or from a spurious / inadvertent time period to the reference energy generation (the on-ECCS signal.

ergy that could be produced if the unit were operated

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system continuously at full power under reference ambient con-actuations that result from a loss of power to a safeguards dations) over the same time period, expressed as a per-bus. An unplanned safety system actuation occurs when contage.

an actuation setpoint for a safety system is reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signal is generated (ECCS UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR only), and major equipment in the system is actuated. The not electrical energy generated (MWH) divided by Unplanned means that the system actuation was not part 1 the product of maximum dependable capacity (not MWe) of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be times the gross hours in the reporting period expressed counted are actuations of the high pressure injection sys-as a percent. Net electrical energy generated is the tem, the low pressure injection system, or the safety injec-gross electricaloutput of the unit measured at the output tion tanks. terminals of the turbine generator minus the normal sta-tion service loads during the gross hours of the reporting UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS (NRC period, expressed in megawatt hours. DEFINITION) The number of safety system actuations which include UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER (gnk) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection l This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au-Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC l tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua-classification of safety system actuations includes actua-tions) that occur per 7,000 hours of critical operation. tions when major equipment is operated And when the The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams lenged. in a specific time period by 7,000 hours, then dividing that number by the total number of hours criticalin the VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION HOURS same time period. The indicator is further defined as This indicator is defined as the number of violations sited follows: in NRC inspection reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an antici-tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the pated part of a planned test.

inspection was actually performed and not based on when

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor the inspection report is rcceived. The hours reported for by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control each inspection report are used as the inspection hours, rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac-tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig-VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTWE nal may have resulted from exceeding a setpoint or may WASTE have been spurious.

This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused radioactive waste actually shipped for burial. This indica-actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro-tor also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste vided from one of the sensors monitoring plant param-which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive eters and conditions, rather than the manual scram oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but-volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been tons) provided in the main control room.

shipped off-site for processing. Low-level solid radioactive

4) Critical means that during the steady-state mndition of waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and the reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power factor (k,) was essentially equal to one.

plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive waste includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, dispos-UNPLANNED CAPABluTY LOSS FACTOR able protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given material to be disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste period of time, to the reference ener9y generation (the disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms. energy that could be produced if the unit were operated Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent continuously at full power under reference ambient con-fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica-dations) over the same time period, expressed as a per-tot tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. centage. 80

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators Index is to list perfor-mance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended. SEP Reference Number 15 Eaga increase HPES and IR Accountability Through Use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance). . 50 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 . 43 SEP Reference Number 25 Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate. .3 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate. .4 SEP Reference Number 28 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). . 67 Overall Project Status (Cycle 16 Refueling Outage). . 68 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning. . 69 SEP Reference Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Cornpleted Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts). . 51 SEP Reference Number 36 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage). .46 SEP Reference Number 41 Develop and Implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue. . 47 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents. . 50 SEP Reference Numbar 43 Implement the Check Valve Test Program Check Vane Failure Rate. .37 81

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (c::ntinued) SEP Reference Number 44 EaQA Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance). .50 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program . 56 Document Review. SEP Reference Number 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program. . 55 SEP Reference Number 54 Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program ..16 Collective Radiation Exposure. Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. .38 Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 21,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area. .5 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area. . 54 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security). . 57 SEP Reference Number 60 Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. .... 20 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. . 58 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . 60 Engineering Change Notice Status. .. 61 Engineering Change Notices Open. . 62 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training. . 64 License Candidate Exams.. . 65 SEP Reference Number 71 Irnprove Controls over Temporary Modifications Ternporary Modifications. . 58 l 82 i j

j REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews M. P. Lazar G. L. Anglehart B. R. Livingston K. L. Belek D. L. Lovett B. H. Biome J. H. MacKinnon J. W. Marcil C. E. Boughter C. J. Brunnert N. L. Marfice f R. D. Martin G. R. Cavanaugh J. W. Chase T. J. Mcivor l A. G. Christensen K. G. Melstad K. A. Miller O. J. Clayton R. P. Clemens P. A. Mruz R. G. Conner Nuclear Licensing J. L. Connolley & Industry Affairs i G. M. Cook J. T. O'Connor S. R. Crites W. W. Orr D. C. Dietz T. L. Patterson M. L. Ellis R. T. Pearce H. J. Faulhaber R.L Pheps M. T. Frans W. J. Ponec D. P. Galle C. R. Rice S. K. Gambhir A. W. Richard D. G. Ried J. K. Gasper W. G. Gates G. K. Samide S. W. Gebers M. J. Sandhoefner L. V. Goldberg F. C. Scofield D. J. Golden H. J. Sefick R. H. Guy J. W. Shannon A. L. Hale R. W. Short J. B. Herman C. F. Simrrons T. L. Herman E.L.Skaggs 4 K. C. Holthaus J. L. Skiles ) f L. P. Hopkins F. K. Smith C.K. Huang R. L. Sorenson T. W. Jamieson K. E. Steele R. L. Jaworski M. A. Tesar R. A.Johansen J. J. Tesarek J. W. Johnson J. W. Tills W. C. Jones J. M. Waszak J. D. Keppler G. R. Williams D. D. Kloock S. J. Wilfrett L.T.Kusek 83

FORT CALHOUN STATION o o - OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES i Event Date Range Production (MWH) Cumulative (MWH) Cycle 1 09/26/73 -02/01/75 3,299,639 3,299,639 1st Refueling 02/01/75 -05/09/75 Cycle 2 05/09/75 -10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/76-12/13/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76 - 9/30f77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/T7-12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77-10/14/78 3,026,832 12,985,720 4th Refueling 10/14/78-12/24/78 Cycle 5 12/24/78 - 01/18/80 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80- 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/06/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/06/82 - 04/07/83 Cycle 8 04/07/83 - 03/03/84 3,406,371 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 --J3/07/87. 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87-14/08/87 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 (Plantw.i Dates) FORT CALHOUN STATION CURRENT ?RODUCTION AND OPERATIONS " RECORDS" First Sustained Reaction August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.) First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 i Commercial OperJtion (180,000 KWH) September 26,1973 Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 days) June 8,1987 Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Not Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992}}

ML20073E068

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search