ML20080M930

FCS Performance Indicators Jan 1995

ML20080M930
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	01/31/1995
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20080M922	List: LIC-95-0060, Forwards FCS Performance Indicators Jan 1995 ML20080M930
References
NUDOCS 9503060093
Download: ML20080M930 (99)

Text

. . , _

l

~

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

~

~

JANUARY 1995 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS 1

38R 2883 8i8880e3 -. -

R PDR

4 i

l Lwil et achna w wn, allanh,...

d insk wisden, wnd wwndjudyrwnl... .

d w a, !%, f caww %ng emnanderwnl...

dwa,wayet7$,...dwdoing Ljob qV l6,bl 6, wwf 6 .

Jt w una-dimini, al ik wdL se wiem' i

, d w GWU OW% % Wen Yb'~WY

- - a a tu 4 wnd A w aet _ p !_, 5 9u w 3 e

puen,, neljud u daung ik 9 V tunp.

)anns).O'Ceinswu

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

": .~

/

JANUARY 1995 SAFE OPERATIONS  %/

PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS

~

3883A8882888888e3 R PDR '

0%il 9 8 acs%a w wn, didnda,...

d Onodos u>iuk wnd sewndjud grnani...

d w a, y%, cam-bn7 caernilrnwnl...

d w a, u>ay g e yL...il w dn&ng Ljob 9V &,%l %, wouj, %. St w inuna-dimlad, ut L wdL 9 e wievnd pwax, d w a wn, ssje u>wJA u>ln

-- wa L p aa 4w sz-p % v 9u 62 ge pwn,, mijud On, daeng & 9 V k p.

e g,,J

61.

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l

l l

1 Prepared By:

1 Production Engineedng Division System Engineering Test and Performance Group I i JANUARY 1995 1

l I

& v 4-f i

r FORT'CALHOUN STATION JANUARY 19% MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT f

OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

.During the month of-January 1995. Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100% power. Normal plant maintenance, surveillance, and equipment i rotation activities occurred during the month, in addition to scheduled on line modification activities.

Vendor correspondence indicated that the wire insulation for PC-765-A/B/C/D I (RPS Containment Pressure Switches) could be subject to breaking if the wires  ;

were moved excessively back and forth. The wiring from all switches was '

inspected. On January 17th PC-765/C was found to have cracked wiring insulation on one lead. The Technical Specification 2.15 Limiting Condition l for Operation (LCO) was entered so that the pressure switch could be replaced.

The LCO was exited on January 18 after restoration of PC-765/C to operability.

All other switches were found to be satisfactory. ,

Three of four weekly new fuel shipments were received in preparation for the refueling outage. ,

On January 27. non-vital 120 VAC inverter #2 transferred to the bypass mode of operation. Technical Specification LC0 2.7.2 was entered with an 8-hour time i limit. It was inspected and no problems were found. It was then placed back into the normal mode of operation and declared operable. Later that day. the inverter again transferred to the bypass mode. The Technical Specification LC0 was entered again and troubleshooting began. Because the corrective  :

actions were not completed before the 8-hour time limit expired. A i Notification of Unusual Event 'NOVE) was declared, and preparations for a plant shutdown were commenced at 1806 hours0.0209 days <br />0.502 hours <br />0.00299 weeks <br />6.87183e-4 months <br />. At 1828 hours0.0212 days <br />0.508 hours <br />0.00302 weeks <br />6.95554e-4 months <br />, the inverter was q returned to service following replacement of two electronic cards and was  :

declared operable. At 1848 the NOUE was terminated. and plant operation ,

continued. .

There were two NRC inspections completed during this reporting period:

IER 94-23 Monthly Resident Inspection l IER 95-01 Safety System Walkdown  ;

s i

l

0 i

FORT CALHOUN STATION  !

JANUARY 1995 MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT- ~

i OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

(continued) l The following LER was submitted during this reporting period: i LER No. LER Date Descriotion  :

94-011 01/27/95 Failure to Satisfy Surveillance Requirement for Steam i Generator Level Check.  !

i f

i b

11 l

1

[

1 Year-To-Date Value -

- ___.-_.___ __ Performance Categories

e- .~

j {${lMlClMlfk e Performance in Industry W

Unplanned 8$I3 M I T Upper 10% and better Unn cepeninty capsbuny Automatic Scremarr,ooo k M 'W e

than 1995 OPPD goal l Factor Loss Factor @hwa NEWe 1,$aE f$s  :

Hours Critics 1 Performance BetterThan i l l .

91.,~$l7T1] * * [] 1995 OPPD Goal i

I _: -

t ll l ) 1^l'l l?l 3 '

HPSI Safety "W 03 O [UFuel 'k ' '- ]~~- Performance Not MeeHnt)

Sy80em 9y m a Stegdigtyrg l System 1995 OPPD Go-- -

Performance Performance ric emps  ? - huSeegorc;.

+ s

'# ~ ' O

^

@% ., =

': rk i ll IIIIi 5 3 1 # h @ li f..,. M.. U El I 4 M. Nov. N, L tsh, h ConocSwe MM M}$stagl%,spel hNinilh5NE6$$

g d. $ @jf W L r cas t RadleWon Exposure j)ggesellesi$ ApeldentGQ January 1995 4 9ptespapR Year-To-Date l l

[

.ggggggg%g@jl%~p$dp4*v{'

F(.f? N ,Efg ] 3+q_$, m mm ..

y ... pg, Value Best Poseth ay w N*wmsnr.

i INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS M9 l

e l

l E l

$ 8 F 6 3 i

! 2 2 e 8 8i E'

5$ b 6 IN

!ie i a j.4 < 3, IE  !

5 5 6 8

_3 9 8' 8 8 eis Rfg-85 s,63 8g

! E I 4# a-E s g g I R 8 e e e 3  :

z e e o

$e iE  :

E E

E w i g

n m)ay 1,,if 19

, ll1l. l

$gy$g ,

}g.l m

aE 1

W ,M 8 u.

?Ms ~ .h" , .gn..,,, 1 MI!f!E,}M4!$$@i4Ed* l 4

h I

l%f l

l

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT JANUARY 1995 -

SUMMARY

o POSITIVE TREND REPORT Cents Per Kliowatt Hour A performance indicator with data representing three (Page 41 )

consecutive months of improving performance or three consecutive months of performance that is superior to Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear Maintenance llams Overdua Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NODCP-37). (Page 46)

The following performance indicators exhibnerf positive in-Line Chamstrv Instruments Out of-Sannon trends for the reporting month: (Page 51) l Hazardous Wasta Produced Daabhno iniurv/ Illness Freouancy Rate (Lost Time Anci. (Page 52) dent Rata)

(Page 3) Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area (Page 53)  ;

Racnrdable Iniuryllunass Casas Freouancy Rate (p g 4) End of Positive Trond Report i

Hnh Pressure Safety insection System Safarv System ADVERSE TREND REPORT Performance (Page 8) A Performance indicator with data representing 3 con-  !

secutive months of declining performance; or four or l Auxiharv Faadwater System Safety System Performance more consecutive months of performance that is trending  !

(Page 9) towards declining as determined by the Manager - Sta- ,

tion Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per NOD-Emercancy Donal Generator Unit Rehabshty OP-37. A supervisor whose performance indicator ex-(Page 11) hbits an adverse trend by this definition may specify in written form (to be published in this report) why the trend Desa! Ganarator Rahabihty (25 Demands) is not adverse. l (Page 12)

The following performance indicator exhibited an ad- l Number of Mamed Survedlance Tests Resukino in Lic- verse trend for the reporting month:

ensaa Event Raoorts (Page 20) Violatnns Par 1.000 Insoection Hours (Page 18)

Forced Outaca Rate The number of NRC violations per 1,000 inspection (Page 23) hours has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 51.4 since March 1994.

Unit Canacity Factor (Page 24) Fuel Rehabihtv Indicator (Page 25) i Unit Canabihty Factor An adverse trend is indicated based on the FRI value for (Page 26) the reporting month exceeding the 1994 Fort Calhoun monthly goal of less than 5.0 X 10d, and the potential for Unolanned Canability Loss Factor 1 or 2 defective fuel rods in the core.

(Page 27)

Fouinment Forced Out=- Par 1.000 Crhical Hours End of Adverse Trend Report.

(Page 34)

Primary System Chemistrv Pareent of Hours Out of Limh (Page 38) ,

Secondary System Chemistry (Page 39) k V

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT "

JANUARY 1995 -CURARARY ,

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES A performance indicator with data for the reporting penod This secton lists signihcent chan0es made to the report that is lE t ; + when compared to the OPPD goal is and to specific indicators within the report since the pro-defined as Hoeding increased Management Attention" vious month.

per NOD 4P 37.

Numhar al Maanad Suntaglianon Tanta Resulhna in Lic-The follounng performance indicators are cited as need- aname Event Ranarts ing increased management attention for the reporting (Page 20) month' This indicator has been revised to include one missed ST, which occurred on 12/29&( during the performance Control Room Emanment Deficiencias of Op.ST SHIFT-001, when data was not entered for (Page 15) Steam Generseor level por Surveillance Requwoments.

The total number of control room equipment deficeencess at the end of the reporting month has exceeded the Fort Pnmary Swatam Chanucal Parcant of Houra Out of Limit Calhoun monthly goal of s45 since March 1994. (Page 38)

The second paragraph of the text has been revised to (Jnplannad Safety Swatam Actuahona - flNPO Defmibon) indicate that the Primary System Chemical Percent of (Page 29) Hours Out of Limit was 0.18% for the month of Decem-The number of INPO unplanned safety system actua. bor 1994 in lieu of 0.0%

tions has one the Fort Calhoun goalof 0 since February 1994. There have been no INPO unplanned  % of Total MWO's comolated oar Morah identnad as Re-safety system aduations since February 1994. EEllk (Pa0e 47)

Unolanned Salaty Sentam Actuahona - (NRC Dalmiten) This indicator has been calculated from the 15th to the (Page 30) 15th beginning with November 1994. This is due to the The number of NRC unplanned safety system actuahons delay in closing open MWO's at the end of each month.

has exceeded the Fort Calhoun goal of 0 since February 1994. There have been no NRC unplanned safety sys. End of Report improvementschanDes Report tem actuations since February 1994.

Thermal Performance (Page 32)

Initist results from testing to verify FW flow requirements indicate biased results from plant instruments is causing the thermal performance indicator to be under-reported.

Corrections to the indicator will be made upon completed of tM FW Flow Nozzle Fouling Study.

Maintenance Workload Bacidons (Pape 45)

The backlog of non outage MWOs for corrective mainte-nance has exceeded the 1994 monthly goal of a maxi-mum of 400 since August 1994.

End of Management Attention Report.

vi I

1;

n+

'e o  ;

a i

L Table of Contents /Sumary 6

Etat =

G0ALS ...........................................x  !

L t

SAFE OPERATIONS Industrial Safety Accident Rate INP0 .......................... 2 Disabling Injury /IllnessCases Frequency Rate ...................................... 3 ,

Recordable Injury /IllnessCases Frequence Rate ...................... 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations  ;

31000 Disintegrations /Hinuteper Probe Area ....................... 5 :

Preventable /PersonnelError LERs ............................. 6 ,

Safety System Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Safety System Performance:

High Pressure Safety Injection System ....................... 8 i Auxiliary Feedwater System ............................ 9 ,

Emergency AC Power System ............................. 10 ;

Emergency Diesel Generator ,

Unit Reliability ................................. 11 i Reliability (25 Demands) ............................. 12 :

Unreliability .................................13 r

14 ;

fuel ReliabilityIndicator ................................

Control Room Equipment Deficiencies .,......................... 15 -

Collective Radiation Exposure .............. ............... 16 j Maximum Individual Radiation Exposure .......................... 17 ;

Violations per 1.000 lnspection Hours .......................... 18 l Significant Events .................................... 19 Number of Missed SurveillanceTests Resulting in LERs .................. 20 !

Vii .

p t.

PERFORMANCE f3ff J

Station Net Generation .................................. 22 j r

Forced Outage Rate .................................... 23 ,

Unit Capacity Factor ..................-................. 24 l

i Equivalent AvailabilityFactor .............................'25  :

Unit Capability Factor ...............................,.. 26 r Unplanned Capability Loss Factor .............................. 27 ,

unplanned Automatic Reactor i Scrans per 7.000 Hours Critical ......... ........... ....... 2C  ;

Unplanned Safety System Actuations ,.

INPO Definition ................................. 29 NRC Definition .................................. 30  ;

Gross Heat Rate ..................................... 31 1

Thermal Performance ................................... 32 Daily Thermal Output ................................... 33 Equipment Forced Outages per 1.000 Critical Hours ................................. 34 l Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Repeat Failures ..................................... 36 Volume of Low. Level Solid Radioactive Waste .................................... 37 Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit .............................. 38 Secondary System Chemistry ..... .......................... 39 Q_0SJ Cents Per Kilowatt Hour ... ............................. 41 -

Staffing Level ...................................... 42 Spare Parts Inventory Value ............................... 43- .

i viii .

f h ;,

r

- DIVISION A10 OEPARTENT PERFORMANCE IlOICATORS . ,

Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non.0utage - ..................... 45 i Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & PreventiveMaintenance Items Overdue .. 46 Percentage of Total MW0s Completed per month identified as Rework. ......... ' 47 Overtime ..................................... 48 <

Procedural Noncompliance Incidents ........................ 49 Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities ............... 50 1 In.Line Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service ....................... 51 i Hazardous Waste Produced ............... ................. 52 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area ......................... 53 I Radiological Work Practices Program ........................... 54 Document Review ..................................... 55 l Loggable/ReportableIncidents (Security) ......................... 56  ;

Modifications Temporary .................................... 57 Outstanding ................................... 5B Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown ...................... 59 Engineering Change Notices Status ...................................... 60 Open ....................................... 61 Licensee Event Report (LER) Root Cause Breakdown ..................... 62  ;

Licensed 0perator RequalificationTraining ........................ 63 License Candidate Exams ................................. 64 Open Corrective Action Reports and Incident Reports ................... 65 Cycle 16 Refueling 0utage IWO Pl anni ng Sta tus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 ,

Overall Pro. ject Status .............................. 67 Outage Mcdification Planning ........................... 68

' Progress of 1994 On.Line Modification Planning ...................... 69 i

ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST Action P1ans .............................. ........ 71 l

Performance Indicator Definitions ............................ 73  ;

Safety Enhancement Program Index 80

{

Report Distribution List ................................. 74 ix l

l

~

i 1

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1995 Priorities l

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 per-sonnel, the general public and the environment.  ;

i GDALS ,

GaaL11 SAFE OPERATIONS ,

Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Obj; 3 & 4 A proactive, self-critical and safety conscious culture is exhibited throughout the nuclear organization. Individuals demonstrate professionalism through reif-ownership and per-sonal initiative and open communication.

I 1995 Priorities:

- Improve SALP ratings.

- Improve INPO rating.

- Reduce NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4.

- No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.

t Objectives to support SAFE OPERATIONS.

OBJECTIVE 1-1:

No challenges to a nuclear safety system.

OBJECTIVE 1-2:

Conduct activities in accordance with applicable policies, technical specifications, procedures, '

standing orders and work instructions. l

- Less than 1.4 NRC violations per 1,000 inspection hours.

- Fewer significant Corrective Action Documents (CADS) originating fmm activities. ,

OBJECTIVE I-3:

Identify conditions BEFORE they affect plant safety and reliability. .

OBJECTIVE 1-4:  ;

Achieve all safety-related 1995 performance indicator goals in the P::rformance Indicator Report.

OBJECTIVE 1-5:

Zero lost Time Injuries and recordable injuries rate BELOW l.5 percent. ,

Goal Source: Scofield (Manager) x i

. ,m

' i r- .,,.

s GOAL 2: PERFORMANCE  ;

Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Obj: 2 and Goal 4, Obj: 1  :

Achieve high standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power production.

1995 PRIORITIES:

- Impmve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork. l

- Impmve Plant Reliability.

- Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals. "

- Reduce the number of Human Performance errors.

- Identify Progrruronatic performance problems through effective self assessment.

Objectives to support PERFORMANCE:

OBJECTWE 2-1:  ;

Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 79% and a unit capability factor of 81%.  :

OBJECTWE 2-2: ,

Execute the 1995 refueling outage in 49 days; emphasize shutdown plant safety.

OBJECTWE 2-3:

Achieve all performance related 1995 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report.

OBJECTWE 2-4: '

All projects and programs are planned, scheduled, and accomplished according to schedules, resource constraints, and requirements.

OBJECTIVE 2-5:

Team / Individual ownership, accountability, performance and teamwork is evident by improved  :

plant reliability; improved ratings both INPO and NRC; reduced number of human per- ,

formance errors and identification of performance problems by effective self manaamment andfor individuals as measured by the successful completion of department goals & objectives and other specific measures. l p

xi l

F GOAL 3: COSTS Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 2, Obj; 1,2 and 3 and Goal 6, Obj: 1 Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear genera-tion as an economically viable contribution to OPPD's " bottom line". Cost consciousness is

exhibited at all levels of the organization.

1995 Priorities:

- Maintain total O & M and Capital expenditures within budget.

- Streamline work pmcesses to impmve cost effectiveness.

Objectives to support COSTS:

OBJECTIVE 3-1:

Conduct the nuclear programs, projects, and activities within the approved Capital and O & M budgets.

OBJECTIVE 3-2:

Implement nuclear related Opportunity Review recommendations according to approved sched-ules and attain the estimated cost savings.

Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) xii

l L  ;

f* '

SAFE OPERATIONS  !

l 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 l OPPD Nuclear Organization that assures safe operation so - ,

that Fort Calhoun Station is recognized as a nuclear indus- l try leader. ,

1 s

-b 1

1

/ l

+ Year-to-Date FCS Industrial Safety Accident Rate (INPO Definition) l GOOD l 0 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 0.50) y

-O- Industry Upper 10%

- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.50) i O O O O O O O O O O O O 0.4 -  :

0.2 - 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O ,

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

Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95

]

+

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE-INPO i As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Asso-  !

clation 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 i improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the .

station."

The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year to date was 0.0 at the end of Janu-ary 1995. The value for the 12 months from February 1,1994, through January 31, .

1995, was 0.41. l There was no lost-time accident and no restricted-time accidents in January. There has  ;

been no restrictea-time accident and no lost-time accidents in 1995.

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

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

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis 50.50. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 50.50.  ;

The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 7/93 through 6/

94) is 0.12.

Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None 2

+

ba .

j'i W4 h o I ( ,'.,C

, e L si- . 1.2 -

=@= 1995 Disabling ifiuryngness Frequency Rate 7,

-*- 1994 Disabling fr$uryANness Frequency Rate

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal h-

~ 0.8 -

0' i

L 0.6 -

-C O O O O C O O 0.4 -

0.2 -

l 0 0 , m , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Luc 05 l

L DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST TMAE ACCIDENT RATE) -

This indicator shows the 1995 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1994 dis-abling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year to date was 0.0 at the end of January 1995. There was no lost-time accidents reported.for the month. There have been no lost-time accidents in 1995. The last disabling injury that occurred in December 1994 was as result of a fall in the parking lot due to icy conditions.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from February 1,1994, through January 31,1995, was 0.41.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 0.5.

I Data Source: Sorenson/Skaggs (Mana0er/ Source) l Accountability: Chase / Conner Positive Trond SEP 25, 26 & 27 .:

I 3

+ 1995 Recordable injury /INness Frequency Rate 2.5 -

-M- 1994 Recordable injury /Hiness Frequency Rate %d y ,

O 1995 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal ( 1.5) 2.25-2-

1.75-1.5 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 1.25-1-

0.75-0.5 -

0.25-0 = , o , , , , , , , , , , , j Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1995 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate. The 1994 recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown.

A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divi-sions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid.

The recordable injuryAliness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate year to date was 0.0 at the end of January 1995. There was no recordable injuryhliness case reported for the month of January. There have been no recordable injury / illness cases in 1995.

The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate for the 12 months from February 1, 1994, through January 31,1995, was 1.10.  ;

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5.

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

Accountability: Conner Positive Trend SEP 15,25,26 & 27 i

L

--G- Centamination Events

-O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal (54) V 60-55- C O O O O O O O O O O O 50-45-f40-

$ 35-l

.5 g30- ]

f25-j f20-15-10-

~

5-0 0 , , , , , , , , , _i , ,

Jan95 Feb Nov Dec95 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS /

MINUTE PER PROBE AREA i This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

This includes the contamination events associated with the spent fuel rerack project.

There were O contamination events in January 1995. There has been a total of 0 con-tamination events in 1995.

The 1995 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 54 contamination events.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None.

SEP 15 & 54 5

i

- Prevertable (18 Month Totals)

- Personnel Error (18 Month Totals)

E Personnel Errors (Esch Month) 25 -

20 -

15-

\_ _

10-5-

0 um e sum umai m ,

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i f$$b$bk$55$kE $$bh 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 December 1994, there was one event which was subsequently reported as an LER, and was categorized as a Preventable / Personnel Error.

The total LERs it.e the year 1994 (through December 31,1994) is eleven. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1994 is three. The total Preventable LERs for the year is four.

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

O Startup O Shutdown IGOODI

,4- O Operation 3- - Industry Average Trend o 2- p T T 1- - T n 3 g

2 o E

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 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual " Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report.

The following NRC safety system failures occurred between the first quarter of 1993 and the first quarter of 1994:

First Quartor 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 l inoperable during certain operating conditions.

Second Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water '

source of the safety injection system was not seismically qualified. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event.

Fourth Quarter 1993: 1) During surveillance testing, both PORVs for the LTOP system 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 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

s l

B 1995 Monthly High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value 1995 Year-to-Date High Pressure Safety injection System Unavailability Value 0 1995 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.004)

- h-- 1995 INPO Indastry Goal (0.02)

-O- Industry Upper 10% (0.0011)

0.03-0.025-0.02- A--A A A A A A A A A A A ,

0.015 -

0.01 -

0.005 -

0.0022 C O O O O O O O O O O O i

E 1O U

-i i a i e i i

~"~

i i i U

i 1994 Unavailability Value Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the report-ing month.

The High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value for the month of January 1995 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned unavailability for surveillance tests, and -

no hours of unplanned unavailability, during the month. The 1995 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.0022.

There has been no hours of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system in 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.004.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.02 and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 7/91 through 6/94)is approximately 0.001.

Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Positive Trend 8

{ .:

E Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value 1995 Year to-Date Auxiliary Fe6dwater System

. + Unavailability Value

-O-- 1995 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.01) lG0001

[-

- 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 0.025)

C andustry Upper 10% (0.0021)

{

L l' O.025- a a a a a a a a a a a a .

l 0.02- l 0.015 -

0.01 - C O---C O O O O O O O O O

)

1 0.005 -

0.0028 C C C C C C C C C C C D i i0 -, , . . , , , , , , , ,

1994 Unavailability Value Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM i SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE )

This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by i INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month. ,

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for January 1995 was 0.0. There were no hours of planned and no hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. ,

The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.0 and the value for the last 12 months was 1 0.0028 at the end of the month.

There lias been a total of 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1995.

4 The 1995 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 is approximately 0.002.

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

1 l

E Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value

-# - Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailabihty Value O iG0001 Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.024) t 0.07- --&- 1995 INPO inclustry Goal (0.n25) 0.06- --O-- Industry Approximate Upper 10% (0.0035) 0.05-0.04 - ,

?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?

0.01 -

o CD , ,

C C

O O

O O

O O

O O

Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined .'

by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for January 1995 was 0.0045.

During the month, there were 6.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability for testing, and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability -

value year-to-date was 0.0045 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0135 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 6.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.024.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value is approxirnately 0.0035.

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 10

I E Number of Failures /20 Demands --5-- Trigger Values for 20 Demands l O Number of Failures /50 Demando -V- Trigger Values for 50 Demands E Number of Failures /100 Demands - - Trigger Valess for 100 Demards 8-l GOOD l 6-t Y Y Y Y  ? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 4_ i

- - - - - - - - - - - - )

2 2-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 111 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Jan95 l EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY

\

This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that l 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 l 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 1995 goal is to have fewer failures than these trigger values.  :

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

manualinitiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a mini- l mum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and i other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report). '

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning -j Positive Trend 11

O oa-1 Fariures/25 oemands iGOODI E DG-2 Failures /25 Demands v

5- e - Failure Trigger Value for 25 Demands / Fort Calhoun Goal  !

i 4- C O O O O O O O O O O O 3- ,

2-i 1- 1 1 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 0 e i e i i i i i i i i .

i i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95  :

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIAE;luTY (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 i failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1995.

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 experienced one failure during the last 25 demands on the unit. On December 8,1984, DG-1 failed its monthly surveillance test because the inlet i air damper would not open. The cause of the failure was found to be ice buildup on the damper louvers from a previous snowstorm.

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

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning ,

Positiva Trend 12 l

i W DG-1 Unreliability Value i E DG 2 Unreliability Value

--+-- Station Unreliability Value IGOODI ,

--Q-- 1995 Goal '

0.08- ,

-.O - Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for a Three Year Average)

O.  !

0.06-0.05 - ["I l 0.04 -

0.03 -

0.02 -

0.01 -

0, 9T9T9T9T9T9T 9T 9 T9T9, .T9,

• Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling genera-tor unreliability.

The year-to-date station EDG unreliability value at the end of January 1995 was 0.00.  ;

The 1995 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

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

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

For DG-2: There was 1 start demand for the reporting month without a failure. >

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

]

Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows: l value per DG = SU + LU - (SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessful load-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values i

l

~\

Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning l i

Adverse Trend: None 13

I l

l E Fuel Reliability indicator

.-A--- 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 X 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) i GOODI

- G-- 1995 Goal

[, 0 g g i , g i i g i g Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The Fuel Reliability Indicator (FRI) value for January 1995 was 15.69 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram.

The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuel integrity. The January 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 month. The January FRI was calculated based on the average fission product activities present in the reactor coolant during the steady state full power operation days, Janu-ary 1 through 31.  ;

The January FRI value of C.69 X 10d microcuries/ gram indicated a slight increase, from the December value of 14.34 X 104 microcuries/ Oram. The 15.69 X 104 micn ,: aries / gram FRl value exceeds the 1995 operational goal. The value will not significantly dE rease until the leaking pin or pins are removed from the core but may show small monthly changes due to i chemistry variability.

t Fission product activity data from January full power operation showed a Xenon-133 activity increase but no lodine spiking. The Westinghouse and ABB/CE technical experts on fuel reliability have concluded 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 1-131 ratio. This prediction has been supported by results from the CHIRON and CADE fuel reliability codes which also indicate  :

1 or 2 fuel pins to be failed. The Cesium isotopes will be evaluated during the end of cycle shutdown in an attempt to calculate the bumup of the leaking assembly. A request for quotation has been issued to provide failed fuel inspection services should they be required to identify the leaking fuel assembly.

The INPO September 1992 Report

• Performance Indicators for U.S. Nuclear Utility Industry" (INPO No.92-011) states that "...the 1995 industry goal for fuel reliability is that units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects. A value larger than 5.0 X 104 microcuries/ gram indi-cates a high probability of reactor core operation with one or more fuel defects. The determina-tion of current defect-free operation requires more sophisticated analysis by utility reactor engineers." The value of 5.0 X 104 microcuries/ gram is defined as a " Fuel Defect Reference" number or a "Zero Leaker Threshold". Each utility will calculate whether the core is defect free or not. The 1995 Fort Calhoun Station FRl performance indicator goal is to maintain a monthly FRI below 5.0 X 10-4 microcuries/ gram.

Data Source: Holthaus/ Weber I

Accountability: Chase /Spilker Adverse Trend: An Adverse Trend is indicated based on continued increases in the FRI value.

14

i l

l

• i O Control Room Equipment Deficiencies Repairable On-Line lGOODI E Total Number of Control Room Equipment Deficiencies V i 80- -O- Fort Calhoun Goal For Total Equipment Deficiencies 70-60- l 50- l , , , - , ,

40- 5 l  ; 5 30-3 ':: ,'

3l !l 20-10-le a ,

0

}; ( f j g {; tg f

=

e i i i i i i i i i i i '

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Jan95

@ Operator Work Around items Repairable On-Line O Total Number of Operator Work Around items 14~ Fort Calhoun Goal for Total Opeator Work Around items

-O-10-8-

8-c 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 -

3 -

O ----o-o

- a i m i i

n i n i n i n i 8

e E

i i

R i

s i

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 Jan95 NUMBER OF CON TROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the number of control room equipment deficiencies that are repair-able during plant operations (on-line), the number of outstanding control room equip-ment deficiencies, the number of Operator Work Around (OWA) items repairable on-line, the number of outstanding OWAs and the Fort Calhoun goals.

There was a total of 56 control room equipment deficiencies at the end of January 1995. 1 13 of these deficiencies are repairable on-line and 43 require a plant outage to repair. l There were 12 OWA items identified at the end month on equipment tags: VA-46A on l C/R Panel Al-106A; CH-208, FIA-3115, PT-3196, RC-3A-1, RC-3C and RC-3D on C/R 1 Panel CB-1/2/3; FW-54, HCV-1040, HIC-1180, and MOV-D1 on C/R Panel CB-10/11; and M/0500 cn C/R Panel CB-4.10 OWAs require an outage to repair.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 45 deficiencies and 5 OWAs.

Data Source: Chasefrills (Manager / Source) .;

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber '

Adverse Trend: None 15 i

t 3 Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure IGOODI  :

--G- . Personnel Cumulative Radisson Exposure

~

-O-- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 151 Person-Rom) 150- C O O O O O O O O O O O 140-  ;

130- i 120-  ;

110 - ,

100-90-s0-70- ,

l 50- l 40-30- l 20 -  !

10 - i Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 l

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure is lose then 151  !

person-Rom.

i The exposure for January 1995 was 1.324 person Rem. ,

I The year-to-date exposure was 1.324 person-Rem.

The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person rom per  !

. year. The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (fo, ti>e Droe-year period l from 7/91 through 6/94) is 106 person-rem per year. The yearly average for Fort Cal- j houn Station for the three years frem 2/92 through 1/95 was 144.128 person-rem per  !

year. )

i Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 54 i

16 l

L .

O Highest Exposure for the Month (mrem)

Q Highest Exposure for the Year (mrem) 5 OPPD 4500 mrem / year Umit sm- OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000-L 1

3000-2000-Fort Calhoun 1,000 mrem /yr. Goal 1000-187 187 0 i January 1995 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During January 1995, an individual accumulated 187 mrem, which was the highest individual exposure for the month'.

The maximum individual exposure for the year was 187 mrem at the end of January.

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

year. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem. '

l Date Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett l Adverse Trend: None l

~i 17

=

+ Violations per 1,ooo inspection Hours 3.o3 3- l GOOD l

-C>- Fort Calhoun Goal (

.5 2-

& 6 O O 3---6---C O O k1-

'92 '93 Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 VIOLA 110NS 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 2.03 for the twelve months of January 1,1994, through December 31,1994.

This indicator is being revised to more accurrately reflect it as a measure of performance rela-tive to our peers.

l The following inspections ended during this reporting period:

IER No. Tjtlg No. of Hours 94-23 Resident Monthly inspection 464 95-01 Safety System Walkdown (AFW) 40 To date, OPPD has received thirteen violations for inspections conducted in 1994:

Level 111 Violations (1)

Level IV Violations (7)

Level V Violations (0)

Non-Cited Violat;ons (NCV) (5)

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 1.4 violations per 1,000 inspec-tion hours. j Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Trausch Adverse Trend: An adverse trend is indicated based on not meeting the goal.

18 s

O NRC Significant Events , g

- - - = Industry Average Trend y 1 1 o.

e i i i i i i e 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

l 2

~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 f i e i i M e V

i e MM i i a MM i i j 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 NEG significant events occurred between the second quarter of 1991 and the  ;

First quarter of 1994:

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

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

The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), oc-curred between the fourth quarter of 1991 and the 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 Ouarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear instrumentation Safety Channel D.

Second Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip Fourth Ouarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal.

First Ouarter 1994: Unplanned dilution of Boron concentration in the RCS.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 19

2 l

I 3-

@ Missed STs Resulting in LERs J i

t 2-l 1-t i

0 13 i

i 94 iO 0

Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Au0 Sep Oct Nov Dec95 I

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS ,

This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-  !

ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows - l the yearly totals for the indicated years. l On December 28,1994, during the performance of OP-ST- SHIFT-0001, data was not entered for Steam Generator level per Surveillance Requirements. j The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.  !

i t

i Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) I Accountability: Chase /Jaworski ,

Adverse Trend: None SEP 60 & 61 )

)

20

i 4 l

)

l PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the highest standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power produc-tion.

21

E Net Generation (10,000 Mw hours)

J 40--

35.66 34.9 34.85 34.88 34.81 33.91 34.14 33.88 2

j30- 27.8 H

c;20-  :

10--

! l 0 i i i i i i i i  ;  ; i i

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 ,

l STATION NET GENERATION During the month of January 1995, a net total of 362,181.4 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 15 was 4,816,519.3 at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of February 1994 were attributable to a generator and reactor trip that occurred following the failure of the relay for the Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit.

Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 22 l

,s _

~

o

n

- Forced Outa0e Rate IGOODl

- O-- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 2.4%) 'y

10.1 10%-

8%'-

6%-

L I

4%-

2%-

g 0.87g- w

'92 '93 '94 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 0.56% for the twelve months from Febru-ary 1,1994, thru January 31,1995. The 1995 year-to-date FOR was 0.0% at the end of the month.

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 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a maximum value of 2.4%.

Data Source: Monthly Operations Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend l .

.. _ - ----_-__---____--____-_-_______-_-__-_-_______________-a

Monthly Unit Capachy Factor l Cycle 15 Unit Capacity Factor

-+-- 36 Month Average Unit Capacity Factor 110 % -

100% - -

M%- _

O O # U 80%- p # , . . . .

y '

; O

^

0

~ '

70%- a 60%-

50%-

40%- 6 30%- ,

20%-

10%-

0% , , , , , ,' , , , , , ,

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 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 January 1995 was reported as 101.8%. At the end of the  :

month, the Cycle 15 Unit Capacity Factor was 92.2%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for >

the last 36 months was 78.0%.

The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows: ,

Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH)

Maximum Dependable Capacity (MWe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Data Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 24

5 Monthly EAF Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF 4 DI Industry Median Value (76.7% for a Three Year Avera0e) 97.2100 % -

i 76.2 80%- _

8 60%- y

[  :

}

40%- 1  ;

i ,

20%-  ! -

3 l

/

s1 m

i

~

'92 13 54 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94Jan95 EQUlVALENT 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 j years. )

The EAF for January 1995 was reported as 100%. The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 100% at the end of the month.

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.

The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 78.5%. The industry median EAF value for the three year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was 76.7%. ,

l Data Source: Dietz/Parra (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None ,;

1 25

E MonthlyUnitCapabilityFactor

- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor

--+- - 36 Month Average Unit Capability Factor ,

4

- &- 1994 and1995 Fort Calhoun Goals GOOD i

1994 and1995 INPO Industry Goals ( 80%)

industry Upper 10% (89.9% for a Three Year Average)

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 UNIT CAPABluTY 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 January 1995 was reported as 100%. The year-to date UCF was 100%,

the UCF for the last 12 months was 98.39%, and the 36-month average UCF was reported as 78.69% at the end of the month.

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. .

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for the three year period from 7FJ1 through 6/94)is approximately 89.9%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 79.65%.

1 Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 26

f i

E Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor Year-to-Date Unplanned Capability Loss Factor O Fort Calhoun Goal (3.97%)

t 1995 INPO Industry Goal (4.5%)

Industry Upper 10% (1.36% for a Three Year Average) l l

15%- i 10%- ,

i 4

O U -

b h h ~0 0 h h h ,

0% -, , , , , , , , ,~, m ,

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95  ;

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 January 1995 was reported as 0.0%. The year-to-date UCLF was 0.0%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 1.26%, and the 36-month aver-age UCLF was reocrted as 5.73% at the end of the month.

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry upper ten percentile value (for j the three year period from 7/91 through 6/94) is approximately 1.36%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%.

i l

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Positive Trend 27

- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Crkical Year-to date

-+- FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Crkical for the last 36 months

- O- 1995 A1994 Fort Calhoun Goals (0.0) <

6- -h-- 1995 INPO Industry Goal Industr 5- -G g)y upper 10% (0.48 pe. 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> crkical over a 36 month time 4-3-

2- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

" ^ '

1- A A A A -- A A A _

^

A 0--O , ,

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 4- t t

3 E Number of FCS Reactor Scrams 3

f 2-3 3 0 E O O O O O O

O O

O O

O 91'92 13 14 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL  !

The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> 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. r t

The year-to-date station value was 0.0 at the end of January 1995. The value for the 12 months from February 1,1994, through January 31,1995, was 0.80. The value for the last 36 months was 2.01.

An unplanned automatic reactor scram occurred on February 11,1994 when supervi- ,

sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a maximum of 1 unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical. The industry ,

upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.48 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical for the  :

36-month time period from 7/91 through 6/94.  ;

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

Accountability: Chase  :

Adverse Trend: None i

26 I l

9  ;

3 Sately System Actuations (INPO DeGr@on)

-O- Fort Calhoun G' oal(0.0)

-O- Industry Upper 10 Percentile j

.)

2-  !

-l l

i 1 1 1- l l

l l

1 0  :

i i i i 0- l

'92'93'94 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep . Oct Nov Dec Jan95 cl

.i UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of January j 1993.

i

-i There was 1 INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February j 1994. It occurred on February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which i resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection l Actuation Signal, Containment isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation - 1 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. l l

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. j l

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

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

Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Adverse Trend: None 29

. - - _ . - - - - . _ _._ _. . ____ _________a

- ~ , . . . , . . . -

F P aW

^

10- _ 12 Month Running Total SSAs (NRC Definition) l 1

- G Salsty System Actuations (NRC Definition) l

's-1995 Goal 6- 10o0 cycle is 900l l

^44 4 II 4+4 ?0 4,

, saj j 4 g -s.

~4 I

2- 300-2 \ -  ;

\

I3I2 200 -

, , , ,o IR _

R c'=

o l

ll2 '93 1l4 FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ J A S O N-D J  !

-1993 1e94 1995 ')

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS-(NRC DEFINITION) 1 This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes .!

the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emer-gency Diesel Generators.. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actuabons when major jl equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged.

There was 1 NRC unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It ]

occurred on. February 11 when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concur-  !

rent turbine and reactor trip. -l There were 3 NRC unplanned safety system actuations in 1993: 1) In December 1993 the main i turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing; 2) in June 1993 l the inadvertent jarring of a 345 KV fault relay in the switchyard caused a turbine and reactor trip; j and 3) in April 1993 a non-licensed operator mistakenly opened the wrong potential fuse i drawer, causing a low voltage. alarm on bus 1 A1, a loadshed on bus 1 A1 and an auto shrt of an j EDG. j i

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, pressurtzer safety valve RC-

]3 142 opened prior to reaching design pressure during a plant transient and trip; 2) On July 3

.j there was an inverter failure and the subsequent reactor trip; 3) On July 23 there was an  !

unplanned diesel generator start when an operator performing a surveillance test inadvertently - j pushed the normal start button instead of the alarm acknowledge bution; and 4) in May the l l turbine generator tripped on a falso high level moisture separator trip signal which caused a i simultaneous reactor trip and subsequent anticipatory start signal to both diesel generators.' i i

There has been 1 unplanned safety system actuation in the last 12 months. The 1994 Fort  !

Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. -i j

Data Souros: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) l Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning  !

Adverse Trend: None i 30 l 1

1 1

E MonthlyGross Heat Rate

-it-- Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate

--O- 1994 &1995 Fort Calhoun Goals 10.5-10300 10223 1025- j l

10176l m l

10-l I

i e i i 9.75 -

i '91 '93 '94 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 GROSS HEAT RATE ,

i This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-  !

date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous 3 years. j The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,033 for the month of January 1995.

The year-to-date GHR was 10,171.

i 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. l l

l The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is s10,157.

'^

! Data Source: Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source) -

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None 4

4

3 Monthly Thermal Performance 1

j

-.et-- Year-to-Date Average Monthly Thermal Performance

--O- 1995 Fort Calhoun Goal (99.6%) lGOODI

-$ - 1995 INPO Industry Goal ( 99.5%)

a industry Upper 1o% (99.9%) l 100% - a a a a a a a a a a a a 99% ~

N' I i 4 i i I i i i i i l Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 THERMAL PERFORMANCE i

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 INPO industry goal and the approximate industry upper ten percentile value. l The thermal performance value for January 1995 was 99.06%. The year-to-date aver-age monthly thermal performance value was 99.06% at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from February 1,1994, through January 31, 1995 was 99.3%. l The low thermal performance value for February 1994 is attributable to level control problems on heaters 3A and 5B, 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. Thermal Performance improved in May as a result of the backwash valve adjustments on "A" Condenser and improvements in Heater 2A level control. .

Initial results from testing to verify FW flow requirements indicates biased results from ,

plant instruments is causing the thermal performance indicator to be under-reported.

Corrections to the indicator will be made upon completion of the FW Flow Nozzle Foul- i ing Study.

i The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicatoris a minimum of 99.6%. The i 1994 Fort Calhoun goal was a minimum of 99.5%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry upper 10 percentile value (for the 1-year period from 7/93 through 6/94) is approximately 99.9%.  :

Data Source: Jaworski/Popek Accountability: Jaworski/Popek  ;

AdverseTrend: None  :

32  !

r, k *

~

ThermalOutput

--O- Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

- Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 1499.5-1499-1498.5-1498-1497.5-1497- j; s.. m +

1496.5-- ', ;jfW . .. . <.

+ 0'ddh$:a ..N W~. M,. f?%m '.'

Mi~n< g x . m. -

1496-a c<

-s ' . ~< msg c. > . :

pR

.. .g g.

~ . .

W-s ;s - gem

,qy n sg _ ..,mg >

f[ff x * ** gqc;ag/

M[@N*W*

YMy db79h.3DY 4, a .,. mis,j p < $,%I5 v .si SWl" g

1495.5- ,, y g g7 .

g': 3 g[<I ,

1495< )

u ,'s ~

. . , , . - ,,w -,

u s^' ,<

~ ', ^ , ,. '

~ :_' , , , 'as '3, V 1494.5- S < n - -

, " ,- . - ,- ' t' ~

q

+>

,' ;<,' < ,, e, 5 's

+,e.,,* ,

4,, <

c~

. > ^-

<<'p ,',

s<, '+. 4>s, ,, ,' ~

g, ,'y

^

^ ,, -

%v w >

e+ ' , , k,

, ~ , , < >1 s s < .s s > s <s '

< 3 ,r sg (

,'>, x, p, <,

[+ '; > > '

y "r . , >, ; , , y ',"} ,

1493.5- >

,, c

n

, ; ,~ s

< a, s 2, ,.

' %- ',, e

. c .: L>:

~, , < >!

,, ,,~$ < .-., , ,4 - s'

, , , ~ - ;

s ' 'ff '3',c

'~: +

1493- '

~ ': , , '%> < >

u 'w.

<1 s s e , L >', ,, , ",: d^, ,

,' < ' ~ , 's

~x , , .,~'

si <+: ' ^ '

1492.5- ,[ ' '

' ' '> ' , , l', , ,

' ' < ' ^ '

^1 ,. ,

s , ,,

ss L /f.,, , ,

~ < , ' d' 1492- ,,j,<b r

< 'J > , ; ;e, , , ': ,', < < a > /' ' , ;

, +,, . o <

, Q,

,' ^ +,. e,, , - , .<s , <+

37, , , ,; - ~, -

1491.5- ' ' '; e ' '

' ^

74 5

'a

^/, ,

s, ,

O'

+ ,,

,\

n r

,/7 ,' , N(',

i ,

1491- ~

> > < jan

, ' , ^,' ', .Q'y

-n

~' ' .

, ,l 1490.5- ,

, :, ~~ , , <*,'.

, ., , , , ,c ,,  :, ~ , ' , ;> > y., ,, .

1490 1 I I i i i l i l 4 I I I I i 1 I I I I i & I 8 4 I I I I 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 January 1995, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

~

Data Source: Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Tills Adverse Trend: None 33

i

)

1

~

Equipment Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical 0.86 Hoursior a 12-Month Interval lGOODI

~

O 1994 & 1995 Fort Calhoun Year-End Goals ( 0.2) V 0.6 -

0.4 -

0.2 - C O O O O O O O O O O O 0.11 - -

g -

g - -

, 7 _

0 ,

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

'92 '93 94 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 2- E Number of Equipment Forced Outages Per Month 1-0-

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 t

i EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from Feb-ruary 1,1994, through January 31,1995, was 0.11. The rate per 1,000 critica! hours for ,

the month of January 1995 was 0.0. [

f 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 Containment High Pressure Signal Supervisory Circuit.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20.

i a

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

Accountability: Chase /Jaworski  ;

Positive Trend i 34

40- # of Component Categories

- + - - # of Application Categories 35-30- --dr-- Total # of Categories ,

I

{$

25-g 20-O y 15- i .

e

= *

• _. 2

~ ~

N 5- "Y Y ~ W& f: [f f 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A94 S O N D J94 F M A M J J A S O N D94 J95 j E WearOut/ Aging Q OtherDevices j

.i 8 Manufacturing Defect O Maintenance / Action  !

8" O Engineering / Design @ Error / Operating Action 45.0%

5.0%

> I Percent of Tctal Failures During l the Past 18 Months

,',' px a

fls >.

m 3.7%

7.5% III l COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total i categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) l failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18 months (from April 1993 through

September 1994). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 4 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18 months. The station reported a j higher failure rate in 6 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary /.

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

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the

• Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 93 failure reports that were submitted to j INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past 18 months. Of these, the failure cause was known for 80. The pie chart reflects known failure causes.

1 Data Source: Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source) ,

Accountability: Jaworski/ Frank  !

. Adverse Trend: None 35 1 i

I .

l

. . __ _ _ . ~ . . m . .

--+- Components With More Than One Failure

-M-- Components With More Than Two Failures 25-

.i 20- -

i 15- >

1_2 1_2_

1_2 10- g

• 8 8 8 8 8 i

7 7 2 2 ,

5-3

\4.*  ;

'(a,2 2

. N, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, t

0 i i i i i . . . . . . . i i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct . . Nov DecC4 Jan95  ;

' REPEAT FAILURES l The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called toe "idaintenance Effectiveness" perfor- l mance indicator) was developed in response to guxielines set forth by the Nuclear -;

Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/ 3 AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator ~'

j has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track repetitive component failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).  :

This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than 1 failure during . l the eighteen month CFAR period and the number of NPRDS components with more .l than 2 failures during the eighteen month CFAR period.

During the last 18 reporting months there were 4 NPRDS components with more than 1 ,

failure.1 of the 4 had more than 2 failures. The tag numbers of the components with more than 1 failure are: AC-10A, AC-100, NT-001 and RC-374. The tag number.of the ..!

component with more than 2 failures is AC-100. Recommendations and actions to l correct these repeat component failures are listed in the quarterly Component Failure s Analysis Report.  :;

Data Source: Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase .

Adverse Trend: None as j

I

)

C O O O O O l l

750- B Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (in cubic feet) l

- Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried l GOOD l

-O- 1995 Fort Cahoun Goal For Waste Buried (900 cubic feet) V -l 600-

- 450- ,

t u.

o 300-150- OISb

.g am; M

egy;p M,y:$$

~

m.

M  : .

0 , , , , , ,  :

Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun94 ,

VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative annual total for radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%.

Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during January (cubic feet) 2,276 Amount of rnetals from rack cut-up shipped off-site for processing during January (Ibs.) 30,300 Volume of Solid Radwaste Buried during January (cubic feet) 0.0 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1995 (asbic feet) 0.0 Amount of solid radioactive waste in temporary storage (cubic feet) 0.0

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 900

cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) per i year. The industry upper ten percentile value from 7/91 through 6/94 is approximately' 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year.

Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None '

SEP 54 37

E Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit IGOODI

--O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 0.02) y t

3%-

l.

2%- C O O O O O O O O O O O _

1%-

0*G i  ; i  ; j i  ;  ; i i M i i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Umit indicator tracks the pri-mary system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key parameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, fluoride, hydrogen and sus-pended solids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit was 0% for the month of January 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 2% hours out of limit.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith L

Positive Trend 38

E 5 Secondary Systern CPI lGOODI 1.6 - --O- Fort Calhoun Goal ( 1.4) $

i 1.5 - r 1.4 - O C C C C C C C C O---C C.

1.3 -  :

1.2 - 8 1.1 -

1 I i i i i i i i i i i I Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY j Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance index (CPI) are:

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

Per day.

The CPI for January 1995 was 1.14. The CPI represents relatively normal secondary cycle chemistry for the month of January 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the CPI is a rnaximum value of 1.40.

Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend  ;

~

?

39

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

t I

[

l

,, 40

--m __- _ _-- --- ____ _ _

4-Actuals -O- Budget a Plan 3.75-3.5- ,

3.25-8 3-2.75-2.5 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,m , , ,

D92 D93 J94 F M A M J J A S O N D94 D95 D96 D97 D98 D99 Months CENTS PEF: 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 1994 and 1995 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 1993 and 1994. In addi-tion, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1996 through 1999 for reference.

The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1995 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclean Fuels.

The unit price (2.62 cents per kilowatt hour for December 1994) is averaging lower than budget due to expenses being below budget while generation exceeds the budget. The unit price for the current' month (January 1995) is not available at this time.

Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield Positive Trend 41

l

)

l E Nuclear Services Division Staffing

- O Production Engineering Division Staffing i G Nuclear Operations DMsion Staffing B TotalNuclearStaffing i

7 8 k 7

9 0 7 7 7 8 7 8004 2 1 4

l 9 4- 3_

700-

~

4 4 4 4 2 - 4 4

' ' 4

: =

l 400 -

1 1 1 1 1 3M- 1 200- 1 1 1 1 5 4 7 6 6 4 3 5  ;

~~

i Jan91 e

Jan92 i

Jan93 i

Jan94 i

Apr94 i

Jul94 i

Oct94 i

Dec94 i

ACTUAL STAFFING LEVEL (UPDATED QUARTERLY)  ;

STAFFING LEVEL l

The actual staffing levels for the three Nuclear Divisions are shown on the graph above, r

The authorized staffing levels for 1995 are: i 1995 Authorized Staffing f 440 Nuclear Operations Division .

183 Production Engineering Division 116 Nuclear Services Division ,

i i

Data Source: Ponec (Manager & Source) )

Accountability: Ponec i Adverse Trend: None SEP 24 l

42 l 1

=@= Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 17-16- -

E E

8 o 15-E

• e s ,

14-13 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of January 1995 was reported as $16,308,989.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Willrett/McCormick .

Adverse Trend: None 43

l DIVISION AND 1 DEPARTMENT  !

PERFORMANCE l INDICATORS  :

t These indicators may be deleted from this report if the responsible group con-  ;

tacts the Manager - Station Engineering to request their removal. Indicators referencing SEP ltems require documentation to ensure that the originct intent - l and scope of the SEP ltem will not be altered by removal of the indicator from this report. >

'l r

)

l

{'

i i

l i

4 i

y Corrective Maintenance @ Non-Corrective / Plant improvements E Preventive Maintenance -4>- Fort Calhoun Goal A ,

Febe4 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog O TotalMwOs G MWOs Which Exceed Maintenance Completion Goals 1

400- 387 350-

[ 212

[ 122 100 >3 >14 >g0

>180 0 17 17 days , _gdays days 3 64 E days

]- '

3 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priorty 5 Priority 6 Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Aging MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1995 goal for this indicator is 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:

GQal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immediate Action 3 days Priority 3 Operations Concem 14 days l Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days l Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days i Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant improvements N/A improvements in the maintenance planning process will allow more timely response to maintenance work requests. Implementation is scheduled for 5/1/95.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None SEP 36 4 45

O Ratio of Proverdive to Total Maintenance 100% -

90%-

80%- M 70%- 3 60%- 7 y 50%- *(( g% M

1. m$ n - - E d 40%. j r$

i NN N !l$  % kJ b'

& & W 30%- [h. 5 I f lk $! Sd M N .[$$

20%- Sh Ek M .N 3 N a; M u $

1 ~

h h;- ' "

i${ d{%k @N b b k i i a i e i e i a i e i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 2%- Proverdive Maintenance items Overdue l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal k 1%-

o- -

o -

U- _c 2 2 _o-- o --c 0 o--o o% , , , , , , , ,n, ti,n , ,

Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 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 67.4% for the month of January 1995.

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

During January,616 PM items were completed. 3 of these PM items (0.49% of the total) was not completed within the allowable grace period or administratively closed.

The 1995 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/Meistad (Manager / Sources)

Positive Trend SEP 41 46

l E ReworkAsidentifiedByCraft 4.7%

~

] --O- FortCalhounGoal(<3%)

f o

34%-

3.3%

6 l m s 3%- O 0 9a P4% 35 To .

l o 1.9%

l

• ~

1.6%

0,9 j  ;

i i i i i i i Jun94 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 l 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.

This indicator will be calculated from the 15th to the 15th beginning with November 1994. This is due to the delay in closing open MWO's at the end of each month.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%.

Data Source: Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber .

Adverse Trend: None 47

-1 i

80%- E Maintenance Overtime I

--)(-- 12-Month Avera0e Maintenance Overtime l GOO ()l .

70%-

--O-- Fort Calhoun "On-Une* Goal ( 10%)  ;

60%-

50%-

40%-

i 30%-  !

20%-

%$ f'

^ ^ ^ ^ ^

10%- O O O O Oh, j i  ; , j  ;

Mm i i

- i M M  ; i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95' MAINTENANCE OVERTIME  !

The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources.

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 5% for the month of January 1995. The 12-month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 5.32% at the end of the month.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 10%.

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Adverse Trend: None 48

O Open irs Related to the Use of Procedures (Maintenance) 3-

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

E Procedural Noncompliance irs (Maintenance) 2-3_ 1 1 1 1 l 000 00 00 000 000 000 000 0 000 000 000 i i i i i l i i i i i i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 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 was one procedural noncompliance incident for maintenance reported for the month of January 1995.

7 Data Source: Chase (Manager)

Accountability: Chase / Conner Adverse Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 49

g Completed Scheduled Activities (MM i y Numberof Emergent WW0s Com#ed

--O- FortCalhounGoal(80%)

e -110 1

~

100

~

M - 90 g j 8 80 % - C O O O - 80 E

c 0 E 70%- - 70 I

~

61 b '

$ 55 54

' - 60

,, 50%- -

3 [": - 50 g

~ 40%-  % Completed f % Completed - 40 b

.n j Scheduled , /: Scheduled

% Completed Scheduled

' ['  % Completed .

Activities Not Scheduled $  !

Activities Not .'

~

g ActWies Not Activities Not  : uJ o 20 % -

Available g Available  ;,

Available hain  : 3E

$ ' >//,-

,/G:

.9 10%- // '//: 10 E

% kk - . kk 0 o , , , ,

U October November December 94 January 95 PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES i (ALL MAINTENANCE CRAFTS) i 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 data for this indicator will not be available until 5/1/95 due to software changes )

required for implementation of the Integrated Plant Schedule.

i The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is  ;

80%.  ;

Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber .

Adverse Trend: None SEP 33  ;

i i

I E  % of Hours the in-Line Chemistry instrurnents are Inoperable 12- + 1995 Fort Cathoun Goal (1W.)

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

7-

$ 6-5-

i 0 i Feb94 Mar d;iiili;il;lil Apr i

May Jun Il Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 l

l IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of January 1995, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments were inoperable was 4.5%.

The entire instrument channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, or 3) the alarm function associated with the instrument is inoperative. If any of the functions listed above are not operational, then the instrument is not performing its intended function.

The 1995 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 51

B Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)

- Monthly Average Waste Produced During the Last 12 Months (Kilog;3ms)'

--O- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal (150 kilograms) I

- Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 Kg) )

\

1000- = = = = = = = = = = = =

800-t E 600-E 8'

g 400-200 -

C O- -C O O O O- -C O-0 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov- Dec Jan95 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- l halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous  ;

waste produced.

1 During the month of January 1995,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated hazardous waste was produced,164.5 kilograms of halogenated hazardous waste was produced , and 90.9 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total for hazardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 815.5 kilograms. The monthly average for haz- ,

ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 67.96 kilograms.

Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste. i The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for hazardous waste produced is a maxi-mum of 150 kilograms. [

Data Source: Chase /Carlson (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Smith Positive Trend 52 i

i

l I

15=/. -

E Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area l GOOD l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (non-outage rnonths)

V l

-O- Fort Calhoun Goal (outage months) j 12%-

C O O O O O O O O O O O 4

9%- )

6%- i 3%- i 0% i  ; i , i- i  ;  ;  ;  ;  ; i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA '

This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is contaminated based on the total square footage. The 1995 monthly non-outage goalis a maximum of 10% contami-nated RCA and the monthly outage goalis a maximum of 13% contaminated RCA.

At the end of January 1995, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.3%.

Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase /Lovett ,

! Positive Trend SEP 54 i

53

?

4 30-

-+- Numberof identfied PRWPs Year To-Date e V

, 3_

8- -O .1995 Fort Calhoun Goal (<15)

B s

. Q. 20-f o

3 Ts ' 15- C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

.9 E

O j10-

[

5

c. 5 -

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

Jan95 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec95 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radio-logical Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month.

The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological performance.

During the month of January 1995, there was one PRWPs identified.

There has been 1 PRWPs in 1995.

The 1995 year-end goal for the number of PRWPs is a maximum of 15.

Data Source: Chase /Little (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Lovett Adverse Trend: None SEP 52 54

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

, .i O Documents Scheduled for Review Q Documents Reviewed E Overdue Documents 350-300-250-200- _

j 150-

~ '

100- -

50 -

~

Feb94 Mar

~

l l Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

_c Oct lb Nov Dec Jan95 DOCUMENT REVIEW This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 i 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 January 1995, there were 196 document reviews scheduled, while 112 docu-ment reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 35 document re-views more than 6 months overdue.

There were 22 new documents initiated in January.

1 i

Data Source: Chase /Plath Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 46  ;

1 55 l

l l

L 60-B SystemFailures lGOODI

~

V 40-30- 26 8

20- f 16 17

% 17

'~

0 Feb94 Mar Apr

$$h$5 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct h k Nov Dec Jan95 16- E Non-System Failures GOOD 14-12-10 10-8-

6- 4 4 4 5 5 0 i  ; i 1 i  ;  ;  ; i i  ; i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

The Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator is depicted in two separate charts. The first chart shows the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents concern-ing system failures which occurred during the reporting month. The second chart de-picts the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authorization, Security Force Error, and Unse-cured Doors. l During the month of January 1995, there were 22 loggable/ reportable incidents identi-fied. System failures accounted for 20 (91%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. Nine (9) of the twenty (20) system failures were environmental failures. Non-system failures consisted of two (2) security badging incidents.

Data Source: Sefick/Woemer(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Adverse Trend: None SEP 58 56

M Temporary Modif6 cat 6one et cycle obcf (RFO required for Removel)

Q Temporary Mocsifwatione >S monthe old (Removable on-16ne) 3

--CD-- Fort Calhoun Gomi for Temporary Modw6catione e1 eycle old  !

S- --C> - Port Calhoun Goal for Temporary Modif6 cat 6one es months old l

4 4 4 4 i O. or u wove or - oeoemuer u sanom,y SS  :

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 tersporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are zero, however, specific tempo-rary modifications have been approved by management to exceed these goals due to cost effectiveness considerations. These are listed below. ,

There is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: Epoxy repairs to ST-48, which is awaiting completion of MWO 931325, scheduled start date 1995 Refueling Outage. This temporary modifi- .

cation was previously included in the on-line removable >6 months old classification, but  !

was re-classified as an outage modification to save engineering resources from com-  !

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 January 1995 there were 4  ;

temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be removed on-line. These were: 1) Local indication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11B,in  :

which Operations is reviewing a draft FLC. After review, Licensing is to issue an FLC, and the NRC is to approve; 2) Swap leads for DG-1 shutdown solenoid, which is awaiting completion of MWO 941809, scheduled for the next DG-1 outage; 3) Replace  ;

FP-156 with new design plug valve, which is awaiting the completion of ECN 94-427, scheduled for completion 2/08/95; and 4) Rubber patch on surface sluice line, which is awaiting completion of MWO 940774, has been re-scheduled for the 1995 Refueling Outage.

Currently,1 temporary modification associated with the surface sluice line is over the goal of 6 months. The other 3 are exceptions to the goal as described in letter PED-STE-94-042.

l At the end of January 1995, there was a total of 29 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station.16 of the 29 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 13 are removable on-line. In 1995 a total of 1 temporary modification has been installed.

l Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) -;

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

l

.. j l

E TotalModification Packages Open  !

250- -O- Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal 200-150 -

'92 '93 '94 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludino outstand-  :

ino modifications which are orooosed to be cancelled).

Catsoorv Reoortino Month f Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 2 ,

Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 1 Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 25 Construction Backlog /in Progress 21  ;

Deslan Enor. Urviata Backlon/in Procrann 0 ,

Total - 49 At the end of January 1995,1 additional modification request had been issued this year and no modification requests had been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Com-mittee (NPRC) had completed 3 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 2 backlog modification request reviews this year.

The 1995 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 50 outstanding  ;

modifications.

Data Sourco: Jaworski/Tumer (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsbery (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Adverse Trend: None 58 i

a EARS Requiring Engineering rSa=aat - Not in Closeout O DEN E sE 70-60- - - .,

40- 40- 40- 50-4 30- 30- 30-3 20- - - - 20 - 20- - -

20-10- 10- qq q 10- 10-0 . . 0 . . i O 4 i 0-- r r i Nov Dec Jan Nov Dec Jan Nov Dec Jan Nov Dec Jan 0-3 months 3-6 months 6-12 months >12 months 7

December 1994 Overdue EARS 3 Closeout (SE) O Engineering Response 80-60- u....

40- 0 Ms 2

0 . . . . i . i Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 O Priority 1 & 2 3 Priority 3 Total Open EARS 200 -

150-100-i e i e i i i a i e a i Febe4 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 O 103 hh Repses

@ 74 EARS Resolved and in Closeout E 71 Overdue Closeouts 0 103 EARS Requiring Response B 3 EARS on Schedule

~

.. se v 41.8% d

[

llllllllllII s8.2*4 1.7% 0.1 %

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer- I ing and System Engineering. The 1995 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of I

140 outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows: ,

EARS opened during the month 15 EARS closed during the month 13 l Total EARS open as of the end of the month 177 Data Source: Skiles/Mikkelsen (Manager / Source) -

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

l \

l E in DEN = 159 E 0-3 Months.269

. 7.8% O in System Engineering .93 32.

I O 3-6 Months = 115 O in Procurement /Constr. - 146 20.1 O d we - *

@ in Closeout - 174 ECN STATUS.OVERALL BACKLOG E ECNsBacklogged O ECNs Recolved During the Month E ECNs Completed During the Month l

250- g E 0 3 Mornha - 79 l 200- - R g g 2 3 f27.7%  !

150 - 7%l D 3-6 Months - 36 O >6 Months - 44 l 4 5 I . I I Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 .

(Year-to-Date monthly average of ECNs rece!ved was 39) l ECN STATUS. DEN 4 250 -

200- -

a e 5 0 3 uonths.27 150- -

g

~ i 100- I O 3-6 Months.13 n l 57.

34 m O >6 uonins . 53 Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 ECN STATUS.SE 250-g g 6 g g  ! E 0-3 Months - 57 T LLLLLL'"^

Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 19 M ECN STATUS PROC /CONSTR <

250-

~

I E R 6 7.8 E O 3 Months.106 3 3 2 .3 a O 3-6 Months - 37 0 6 4 I I i i D >6 Months . 31 Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 i ECN STATUS CLOSEOUT  !

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS l

, Data Source: Skiles/Mikkelsen (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski .

Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 I

60 i

^

l 1

5 FC Type - 186 16. E Priority 1 & 2 - 96 E SRI Type - 268 i S Priority 3 & 4 = 326 6.9% O DC Type - 118 - ( 57.0% ;f O Priorky 5 & 6 - 150 )

v TOTAL OPEN ECNS BY TYPE (572 TOTAL) TOTAL OPEN ECNe BY PRORITY (572 TOTAL)

D DEN - Engineering Not Complete l

@ System Engineering - Response, Confirmation Not Complete l

@ Maintenance / Construction / Procurement - Work Not Complete j E DEN - Closeout or Drafting Not Complete 250- 204 188 186 188 187 186 200 -

' E Priorky 1 or2 150- 22.0" 15.6 %

J 100- g3 , 8 Priorky 3 or 4 50-52 - O Priority 5 or 6 Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 Facility Change ECNs Open g E Priority 1 or 2 150 - Se E Priorky 3 or 4 100- 65 W 1.2% #, D Priorky 5 or 6 50- 85 'v' O i i i i i i Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 ,

Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 250 -

200 - 18a 150- 112 ,,3 11e E Priority 1 or 2 100- 4g l @ Priorky 3 or 4 59.3% 739.0%

M 0 M ,3? O Priorky 5 or 6 '

o , ,

Aug94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95  !

Document Change ECNs Open ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Skiles/Mikkelsen (Manager / Source) ~r Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski Adverse Trend: None SEP 62 61

l D Administrative Control Problem I

O Licensed Operator Error

@ Other Personnel Error

@ Maintenance Problem  ;

3- E DesigrVConstruction/ Installation / Fabrication Problem i

E Equipment Failures k

i 2- -

/

f 1- -

7-: p E E i i  :

s - -

i i i i i i e i i a i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from January 1,1994, through December 31,1994. To be consistent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.

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

of this report.

There was one event in December 1994 that resulted in an LER.

Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Adverse Trend: None 62

y; q.

'^}

1 1

$o.~ ]

I Total RequailliceWon Training Hours O SimulamrTraining Hours

.. Non-Requalahcation Training Hours 1

'50- E Numberof Exam Failures i

l

~

37 37 37 36 f

_ 3 _. - _ .s  ;

.5  ;

so u- -

o 20- is

-- 37 1

- is

,,. - l T -

i, ,, in .i

7. Io _

= t 10- 5 g +

( l I s' ' 3, 3 2 3 3 3 5 I 9 i

% . '9'. o ff '

'y', ,

+

M S$ o i

cycle 94-1 cycle 94-2 cycie 94-3 cycle s4-4 cycle s4-5 cycle 94-s cycle H-7 ,

' Note 1: The Simulator was out-of-servios during Cycle.94-4.

• Note 2: Includes 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of General Employee Training. i 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 i Division Managerlunches.  !

Exam failures are defined as failur9s in the written, simulator, and Job Performance .  !

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

Rotation 94-6 was the annual Requalification Examination rotation. There were 2 crew  !

simulator failures and 1 written examination failure. The crews that failed the simulator i evaluation were remediated without impacting the Operations Department shift sched- l ule, as was the individual who failed his written examination.  ;

i i

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Gasper /Guliani -;

Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 l

)

63 l

. l Fj SRO Exams Administered O SRO Exams passed E RO Exams Administered O RO Exams Passed 20-

=

I 15-7 I

10- f '

[

i

$ 7

:

?  ?  ::

5-3

j

,

5 3  ?  !  ::

3 5 3  :  ::

>  ::  ?

$  ::  ?  ?  :  ::

0 . . . . . . . i i . . i Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS .

This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera-tor (RO) quines and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis- +

tered quines and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

There were no OPPD Reactor Operator or Senior Reactor Operator exams adminis-tered during January 1995.  ;

Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gasper /Guliani  !

Adverse Trend: None SEP 68 64

B Total Open CARS D Total Open irs D Open CARS > Six Months Old E Open irs > Six Months Old 400- - = 400

- ~

360- _

360

=

320- , [ ] [  ;  ;  ;  ;  ; -

-320

~ ~

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 240- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ 240 200-160- -

-200 160 l l 120- _ _ l l 120 80- - -

l - 80

' ' 0 Feb94 Mar Apr * 'av Jan Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 120-100- E Oph bars > Six Months Old O TotalOpen CARS 80-56 56 59 60 - 53 , 50 4g 51 50 50 40-20 15 16 15 16 16 13 12 15 U 12 11 0- - - - - -

5 Feb94 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan95 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 January 1995 there were 57 open CARS. 7 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 January there were 273 open irs.170 of these irs were greater than 6 months old. There were 72 Open Significant irs at the end of the month.

The 1995 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/Phelps/Patterson Adverse Trend: None 65

+ Engineering Hold --+-- Planning Cornplete

-O- Planning Hold --M- Ready i 1

--V- Part Hold Total 850-800 -

, 750 - )

700 - )

650 -

600-

$ 550-y 500-  ;

y 4%- g <

< 400-3 350 -

$300-250 -

200 - . x .

00[ y 7 [ N 50-0 7 -V' ' 7~ '

S i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i Jan94 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec94Jan95 Feb Mar Apr95 l

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 opproved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates:

Palts Holds (part hold removed when parts are staged and ready for use)

Engineering Holds (Engineering hold removed when appropriate engineering paper-work or support is received for the package)

Planning Holds (Planning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process) l Planning Comp!ete (status given when only items keeping the job from being ready to l

work are parts or engineering support) l l 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 66

li A pR r

d i e 1 v of r u 0 e

r t O 0 s S o -

e o t T u h r e O =

e R V n e a E d f

J a ug R N w ee l

A o o ni . L a!a n r gS L _

e s S P ,

ki

/

O u E R S

w e g t

a s' D O J l:

• 1 _

e E 9 _

s o a

C ,

9 5

t a T n

r i t s S 3 ED O

( d aoh T

A ,

%%% u t

M t T , a a e. U S A cA c c g _

n v *I t t e

g a e S h e u a al u

( d e C ,

l ul c C P r

r e o o o I

/ Y d S p C m m j o

u o L " C pl pl o te e e r E ' m ti c

c ,

pl oi o t s

)

e 1 6 e n n c R 1 je t

oi T L h a S t

o n s a E si t t

F ,

M o o M u l U n n s e E t h

t h

t e L I

Ii R y

N p e

G 2

/ O o

r 1

U  ! t T

,5 A ,

G S )

E iaiI E

P d 3 y a ,

1 s ig l] ,

~

1945 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS

--+- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval

--- Projected /Adual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued (17 FD DCP issued prior to 1/3/95)

--l- Total Modification Packages (19)

~

,,,,, ,, ,,2 Ig 1s-E

a. -

E 10- g

a. h y is s h g s-E O iii i ii i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii,iiii iiiiiiiiiiiii

$ $ E $ $ $ $ $

1. d 55 $ b N $ 5 5 5-5 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 19 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of 4 emergent modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. These 4 modifications are not part of the perfor-I mance indicator to have outage modifications approved 6 months prior to the outage.

The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/13/95) and the current schedule. This informLtion is taken from the Modification Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering group.

January 1995 Modifications Added = 0 Deleted = 0 The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/13/95 PRC approved by March 9,1995.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

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

68

1995 ON-UNE MODIFICATIONS

Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval

- - . Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approval Final Design Package issued (6 FD DCPs issued prior to 1/3/95) 20-

, , Total Modification Packages (15) (1 is Close Out Only)

Eb 8

• 8" 15-g aa e  :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: /:::'::::::: . _ _ _ . _. _

j $}10-ge e)

$ __ . M ::::::::::::-

5-

.8 o. a.

!=

zk l

j0 ,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, l a m m m m m m m m m m m m E 8 9 8 8 8 9 8 8 8 8

• g 8

• 8 S S 8 E 5 5 5 5

PROGRESS OF 1995 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator snows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during 1995. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established 1/13/

95) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variance Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.

January 1995 Modifications Added = 0 Deleted = 0 The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/13/95 PRC approved by September 28,1995.

1 Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Adverse Trend: None 69

e h

ACTION PLANS I

f l i l

70

N a

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 three (3) consecutive months.

In accordance with Revision 3 of N0D-0P-37, the following performance indicators I

would require action plans based on three (3) consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing Increased Management Attention":

• Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrans Per 7.000 Critical Hours

• Unplanned Safety System Actuations (INPO and NRC)

• Thermal Performance The Plant Manager and Station Engineering Manager have reviewed the daily and ongoing actions being taken to return these performance indicators to meeting the goals. This review indicates appropriate action is being taken and no explicit action plan is required.

l The action plan for Fuel Reliability Indicator (page 14) follows:

1) Fission product activity data from January full power operation showed a Xenon-133 activity increase but no iodine spiking. The Westinghouse and ABB/CE technical experts on fuel reliability have concluded that there is potential for one or two defective fuel rod (s) in the Cycle 15 l core. This prediction is based on a change in the Xe-133 to I-131  !

radio. This prediction has been supported by results from the CHIRON and CADE fuel reliability codes which also indicate one-or two fuel pins to be failed.

2) The Cesium isotopes will be evaluated during the end of cycle shutdown in an attempt to calculate the burnup of the leaking assembly. A requen for quotation has been issued to provide failed fuel inspection services should they be required to identify the leaking fuel assembly.

71

ACTION PLANS (continued)

The action plan for Violations Per 1.000 Inspection Hours (page 18) follows:

1) The number of inspections scheduled for the first half of 1995 are much less than the last half. of 1994.

2) Pursuit of Resident 1 Inspector concerns / problems / issues will be thorough to preclude them from becoming violations.

3) Preparation for scheduled inspections will be - thorough . ' and comprehensive.

4) This Performance Indicator is being removed in favor of a .more -

meaningful indicator.

-The action plan for Thermal Performance (page 32) follows:

Thermal performance will improve as a result of the following actions:

1) FW Flow Nozzle Foulina Study Initial results from this study have. confirmed losses in plant-electrical output are occurring due to conservatively over calculating Reactor thermal power based on a secondary side heat balance. Nozzle fouling occurs after prolonged operation at steady power. Applying the results of this study (a final report will be presented in late February) will take place over the next year to improve plant output and heat rate.

2) ETA Addition The investigation of the effects of adding ETA (ethanolamine)- to secondary chemistry continues. Initial results dealing with ETA l effects on FW Flow Nozzle deposits will be presented with the final report for the fouling study. ETA testing should be completed following the outage after inspection of secondary systems and equipment.

3) Outaae Maintenance Activities Condenser cleaning and backwash valve repairs will be performed during the upcoming outage.

72

1.

l

4) Imoroved Secondary System Monitorina Electronic storage of ERF log data (hourly as well as daily plant data can now be reviewed) and additional pages incorporated into the logs in November of 1994 have increased the number of data points used for performance monitoring from 85 to 184 and the amount of plant data reviewed by a factor of fifty overall. The additional data points (condensate temperatures, extraction pressures, heater drain temperatures, turbine vibration, seal temperatures, etc.) will aid in L

the detection of equipment problems and improve plant performance as well as reliability.

5) Imoroved Calculation Methods

! Changes by INPO in the methodology for calculating thermal performance

! will be incorporated into the Performance Indicator. Averaging of once a week values for the monthly indicator was started in January 1995. ,

use of the "best achievable heat rate" instead of " design heat rate"

- for calculating the indicator will begin upon completion of a review of

, past operating data.

l 4

73

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINmONS .

AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAANNATIONS PERFORMANCE 21,000 DISMTEGRATIONS/RSNUTE PER PROBE The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail- AREA able hours and the estimated unavailabio hours for the The personnel contamination events in the clean con-auxiliary foodwater system for the reporting period di- trolled area. This indicator tracks personnel perfor-vided by the critical hours for the reporting period multi- mance for SEP #15 & 54.

plied by the number of trains in the auxiliary feedwater system. CONTAMMATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and Collective radiation exposure is the total external whole- areas of the CSP building, that is contaminated based body dose received by all on-site personnel (including on the total square footage. This indicator trad(s perfor-mntractors and visitors) during a time period, as mea- mance for SEP # 54.

sured by the therrnoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Col-lective radiation exposure is reported in units of person- DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT rom. This indicator tracks radiological work performance This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as for SEP #54. rnessured from computer point XC105 (in thermal mega-watis). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting SURAGARY month are also shown. 1 The number of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station with significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) fail- DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABlWTY (25 DEMANDS) ute rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for month time period. Failures are reported as component each emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start (i.e. pumps, motors, valves, etc.) and application (i.e. demands and the last 25 load-run demands.

charging pumps, main steam stop valves, mntrol ele-ment drive anotors, etc.) categories. DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE ,

Failure Cause Categories are: (LOST TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

Wear Out/ Aging - a failure thought to be the conse- This indicator is defined as the number of amidents for quence of expected wear or aging. all utility personnel permanently assigned to the station, Manufacturing Defect a failure attributable to inad- involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours equate assembly or initial quality of the responsible com- worked (100 man-years). This does not include contrac-ponent or system. tor pe sonnel This indicator trad(s personnel perfor.

Engineering / Design a failure attributable to the inad- mance for SEP #25,26 & 27.

equate design of the responsble component or system.

Other Devices - a failure attributable to a failure or DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) misoperation of another component or system, including The Document Review indicator shows the number of associated devices. documents reviewed, the number of documents sched-Maintenance / Testing - a f allure that is a result of im- uled for review, and the number of document reviews proper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or that are overdue for the reporting month. A document personnel errors that occur during maintenance or test- review is considered overdue if the review is not mm-ing activities performed on the responsble component or plote within 6 months of the assigned due date. This system, including failure to follow procedum. Indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.

Errors - failures attributable to incorrect procedures that were followed as written, improper installation of equp- EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM ment, and personnel errors (including f ailure to follow PERFORMANCE procedures properly). Also included in this category are The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail-failures for which the cause is unknown or cannot be as- able and the estimated unavailable hours for the emer-signed to any of the preceding categories. gency AC power system for the reporting period divided by tha number of hours in the reporting period multiplied CENTS PER 10LOWATT HOUR by the number of trains in the emergency AC power sys-The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the emnomi- tem.

cal operation of Fort CathoM Station. The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12 month rolling average for the cuvent year. The basis for the budget curve in the approud 1993 budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report.

74

.. PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABIL- EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY ITY This indicator measures the total unreliability of emer-This indicator shows the number of failures that were gency diesel generators. In general, unreliability is the )

reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency die- ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to j solgenerator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also the number of valid demands. Total unreliability is a shown are trigger values which correlate to a high level combination of start unreliability and load-run of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have ob- unreliability.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

demands. (1,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />) divided by the number of forced outages

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run caused by equipment failures in that period.

}

should not be counted as valid demands or failures when they can be attributed to any of the following: EQUIVALENT AVAILABil.lTY FACTOR A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event of This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available an emergency. generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required during a percentage. Available generation is the energy that an emergency, can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum C) Intentional termination of a test because of abnormal power level permitted by equipment and regulatory limi-conditions that would not have resulted in major diesel tations. Maximum generation is the energy that can be generator damage or repair. produced by a unit in a given period if operated continu-D) Malf undions or operating errors which would have not ously at maximum capacity, prevented the emergency generator from being restarted and brought to load within a few minutes. FORCED OUTAGE RATE ,

E) A f ailure to start because a portion of the starting sys- This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that i tem was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a suc- the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared l cessful start with the starting system in its normal align- to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced ment. events are failures or other unplanned conditions that Each emergency generator failure that results in the gen- require removing the unit from service before the end of orator being declared inoperable should be counted as the next weekend. Forced events include start-up fail-one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during ures and events initiated while the unit.is in reserve shut corrective maintenance and the sucx:essful test that fol. down (i.e., the unit is available but not in service).

lows repair to venfy operabihty should not be counted as demands or f ailures when the EDG has not been de clared operable again.

75 l

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FUEL RELIABILITYINDICATOR LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator is defined as the steady-state primary cool. This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quiz-ant I-131 activity, mrrected for the tramp uranium contri. zes and exams that are administered and passed each bution and normalized to a mmmon purification rate. month. This indicator tracks training performance for Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on re. SEP #68.

actor mre internals from previous defective fuel or is present on the surf ace of fuel elements from the manu. LICENSED OPERATOR REQUAUFICATION TRAIN-facturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous ING operation for at least three days at a power level that - The total number of hours of training given to each crew does not vary more than + or - 5%. Plants shnu4 milect during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator train-data for this indicator at a power level above 85%, when ing hours (which are a subset of the total training hours),

possible. Plants that did not operate at steady-state the number of non-requalification training hours and the power above 85% should mllect data for this indicator at number of exam f ailures. This indicator trads training the highest steady-state power level attained during the performance for SEP #68.

month.

The density correction f actor is the ratio of the specific LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE volume of coolant at the RCS operating temperature BREAKDOWN (540 degrees F., VI - 0.02146) divided by the specific This indicator shows the number and root cause code for volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120 Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as degrees F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat ex- foIIDWS:

changer, Vf - 0.016204), which results in a density cor. 1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32. supervisory deficienciss that affect plant programs or activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of ad-GROSS HEAT RATE equate management or supervisory control, incorrect Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal procedures, etc.)

l energy in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor opera-the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH). tors during plant activines.

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission /commis-HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED sion committed by non-licensed personnelinvolved in The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated haz- Pl ant activities.

ardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other 4) Maintenance Problem - The intent of this cause hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. code is to capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM the maintenance functional organization. Activities in-SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE cluded in this category are maintenance, testing, surveil-The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavail. lance, calibration and radiation protection.

able hours and the est; mated unavailable hours for the 5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem high pressure safety injection system for the reporting - This cause mde covers a full range of programmatic period divided by the critical hours for the reporting pe. deficiencies in the areas of design, mnstruction, installa-riod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pres. tion, and f abrication (i.e., loss of control power due to sure safety injection system. underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environ-ment, etc.).

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO 6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Envi-This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per ronmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for spuri-200,000 man-hours worked for all utility personnel per. ous failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to manently assigned to the station that result in any of the meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high following: 1) one or more days of restricted work (ex. winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time ciuding the day of the accident); 2) one or more days failures. Electric components included in this category away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors,

3) fatalities. Contractor personnel are not included for diodes, resistors, etc.

this indicator.

LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

IN UNE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SER. The total number of security incidents for the reporting VICE month depicted in two graphs. This indicator trads so-Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are curity performance for SEP #58.

out-of-service in the Secondary System and the Poet Accident Sampling System (PASS). MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The % of overtime hours compared to normal hours for maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as contract personnel.

76

T PERFORMANCE MDICATOR DEFINITIONS BRANUENANCEWORKLOAD SACKLOGS MURSER OF CONTROL ROORI EQUIPRENT DEPl-This indicator shows the backlog of non outage Mainte- CIENCIES nonce Work On$ers remaining open at the end of the A control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is dehned as reporting month. Mantenance classNicehons are de- any component which is operated or contro5ed from the fined as: Control Room, pmvides indication or alarm to the Control Room, pnwides testing capabilities from the Control .

Corredive - Repair and restoration of equ'prnent or com- Room, provides automate actions from or to the Control ponents that have failed or are maNunctioning and are Room, or provides a peserve function for the Control not performing their intended function. Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not perform under au condtions as designed. This definition Preventive Adions taken to maintain a piece of equip- also applies to the Alternate Shutdown Panels Al-17g, ment within design operating conditions, prevent equip- Al-185, and Al-212.

ment failure, and extend its life and are performed prior A plant component which is deficient or inoperable is to equipment failure. considered an ' Operator Work Around (OWA) Item" if some other action is required by an operator to compen-Non Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance ac- sate for the condition of the component Some examples tivities performed to implement station improvements or of OWAs are: 1) The control room level indcator does to repair non-plant equipment. not work but a local sightglass can be read by an Opera-tor out in the plant; 2) A deficient pump cannot be re- I Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as: paired because replacement parts require a long lead time for purchrC;g, 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 deliciencies which signifi- erations Memorandums. Operator Notes, or may require cantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unt shut- changes to Operating Pmcodures. 4) Deficient plant down or power reduction. equipment that is required to be used during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Proco-Operations Concem - Equ'pment deficiencies which dures. 5) System indication that provides critical infor-hinder station operation. mation during normal or abnormal operatens Essential - Routine corredive maintenance on essential NURSER OF RSSSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RE-station systems and equipment. SULTB40 Bd arwasass EVENT REPORTS The number of SurveiNance Tests (STs) that result in Non-Essential - Routine corrective maintenance on non- Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reportmg essential station systems and equipment. month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 &

61.

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

1. 36. tive Acton Reports (CARS), the number of CARS that are older than six months and the number of open significant saamaissa 300fVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE CARS. Also displayed are the number of open incident The total maximum amount of radidion received by an Reports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six individual person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, months old and the number of open significant irs.

and annual basis.

OUTSTANDING MODIPICATIONS RfWO PLAleeNG STATUS (CYCLE 16 REFUEL 34G The number of Modification Requests (MRs)in any state OUTAGE) between the issuance of a Modificaten 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 Bacidag/in Progress. This number rep-Outage and the number that are ready to work (parts resents modification requests ther 5 ave not been plant staged, planning complete, and all other paperwork approved during the reportmg month, ready for field use). Also included is the number of 2) Modification Requests Being Renewed. This category MWOs that have engineering holds (ECNs, procedures includes and other miscellaneous engineering holds), parts hold, A.) Modification Requests that are not yet renewed (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) B.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear and planning hold (job scopo not yet completed). Main- Proieds Review Committee (NPRC).

tenance Work Requests (WWRs) are also shown that C.) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear have been identified for the Cycle 15 Refueling Outage Projeds Committee (NPC) and have not yet been converted to MWOs These Moddication Requests may be reviewed several ,

times before they are approved for accomplishment or 77

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINmONS ,

cancelled Some of these Modification Requests are For purposes of LER event classification, a

• Personnel retumed to Engineering for more information, some ap- Error

• LER is defined as follows: An event for which the  !

proved for evaluation, some approved for study, and root cause is inappropriate action on the part of or or  !

some approved for planning. Once planning is mm- more individuals (as opposed to being attributed to a de-plated and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these partment or a general group). Also, the inappmpriate Modification Requests may be approved for accomplish- action must have occurred within approximately two ment with a year assigned for construction or they may years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER.

be cancelled, All of these different phases require re- Additionally, each event classified as a

• Personnel Error

• view. should also be classified as Preventable

• This indicator 1

3) Design Engineering Bacidog/in Progress. Nuclear trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15. l Planning has assigned a year in which construction will ,

be completed and design work may be in progress. PfuMARY SYSTEM CHERASTRY % OF HOURS OUT l

4) Construction Backlog /In Progress. The Construction OF LIIET Padage has been issued or constructen has begun but The % of hours out of limt are for six primary chemistry the modification has not been accepted by the System parameters divided by the total number of hours possible Acceptance Committee (SAC). for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium,

5) Design Engineering Update Bacidogan Progress. PED Chloride, Hydrogen Dissolved Oxygen, Fluoride and has received the Modification Completion Report but the Suspended Solids. EPRIlimits are used.

drawings have not been updated.

The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS include modifications which are proposed for cancella- (MADfTENANCE) tion. The number of identified incidents concerning mainte- r nance procedural problems, the number of closed irs OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) related to the use of procedures (includes the number of ,

This indicator shows the status of the projects which are closed irs caused by procedural noncompliance), and in the scope of the Refueling Outage. the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs.

This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOe COMPLETED PER #15,41 & 44.

MONTHIDENTIFIED AS REWORK The percentage of total MWOs completed per month PROGRESS OF CYCLE 16 OUTAGE RAODIFICATION identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by PLApe#NG (FROZEN SCOPE OF 15 MODIFICA-maintenanc craft. Rework is: Any additional work re- TIONS) ,

quired to correct deficiencies discovered during a failed This indicator shows the status of rnodificatons ap-  :

Post Maintenance Test to ensure the component / system proved for mmpletion during the Refueling Outage.  ;

passes subsequent Post Maintenance Tests.

PROGRESS OF 1994 ON-LINE MODIFICAT10N PLAN-PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTE- NING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 14 BAODIFICATIONS)

NANCE ACTIVITIEld This indicator shows the status of modifications ap-The % of the number of completed maintenance activi- proved for complotion during 1994 r ties as compared to the number of scheduled mainte-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 rnonth. This indicator trods MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscella- radiological work performance for SEP #52. i neous activities. This indicator tracks Maintenance per-formance for SEP #33. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITERAS OVERDUE PREVENTABLE /PERSOfG4EL ERROR LERe The ratio of preventive maintenance (including survel!-  :

This indicator 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 noneutage corrective maintenance and preventive main-as: An event for which the root cause is personnel error tenance completed over the reporting per;od. The ratio, l (i.e., inappropriate action by one or more individuals), expressed as a percentage, is calculated based on man-inadequate administrative mntrols, a design /construc- hours. Also displayed are the % of preventive mainte-tion /installationMabrication problem (involving work com- nance items in the month that were not completed or ad-pieted by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a main- ministratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace tenance problem (attributed to inadequale or improper period equal to 25 % of the scheduled interval. This indi-upkeep / repair of plant equipment). Also, the cause of cotor trads preventive maintenance activities for SEP the event must have occurred within approximately two #41, years of the

• Event Date" specified in the LER (e.g., an event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with the original design of the plant would not be considered preventable).

78

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FRE- SIGNIFICANT EVENTS QUENCY RATE Significant events are those events identrfied by NRC The number of injuries requiring more than normal first staff through detailed screening and evaluation of operat-aid per 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator ing experience. The screening process includes the trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 & 26. daify review and discussion of all reported operating re-actor events, as well as other operational data such as REPEAT FAILURES special tests or construction activities. An event identi-The number of Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System fied from the screening process as a significant event (NPRDS) components with more than 1 failure and the candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual number of NPRDS components with more than 2 f ailures or potentia! threat to the health and safety of the public for the eighteen month CFAR period. was involved. Specific examples of the type of criteria are summarized as folbws: 1) Degradation of important SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES safety equpment; 2) Unexpected plant response to a Safety system failures are any events or conditions that transient; 3) Degradation of fuelintegrity, primary cool-could prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of ant pressure boundary, important associated features; structures or systems. If a system consists of multiple 4) Scram with compication; 5) Unplanned release of l redundant subsystems or trains, f ailure of all trains con. radioactivity; 6) Operation outside the limits of the Tech- '

stitutes a safety system f ailure. Failure of one of two or nical Specifications; 7) Other.

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

! The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of I

requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and to CFR 50.73. The significant events and lessons leamed identified through l following is a list of the major safety systems, sub- the SEE-IN screeriing process.

systems, and components monitored for this indicator:

Accident Monitoring instrumentation Auxiliary (and SPARE PARTSINVENTORY VALUE Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Con- The dollar value of the spare parts inventory value for trol, Component Cooling Water System, Containment FCS during the reporting penod.

and Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Sys-tems, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, STAFFING LEVEL Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level Features Instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air for the Nuclear Operations Division, the Production Engi-Systems, Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire neering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, indicator tracks performance for SEP #24.

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

Cooling System, Reactor Trip System and instrumenta-tion, Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation instrumentation, TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Valves Spent The number of temporary mechanical and electrical con-Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ulti- figurations to the plant's systems.

mate Heat Sink. 1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or me-SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEIASTRY PERFORMANCE chanical blocks which are installed in the plant operating INDEX systems and are not shown on the latest revision of the The Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation P&lD, schematic, connection, wiring, or flow diagrams.

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

0.30)/5. Where: Sodium, sulf at6 and chloride are the 3) Scaffolding is not considered a temporary modifica-monthly average blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron tion. Jumpers and biods which are installed and for and copper are monthly time weighted average which MRs have been submitted will be considered as foodwater concentratons in ppb. The denominator for temporary modifcations until final resolution of the MR each of the 5 factors is the INPO median value. If the and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently monthly average for a specife parameter is less than the recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks tempo-INPO median value, the median value is used in the cal- rary modifications for SEP #62 & 71, culation.

i 79

PERFORMANCE MDICATOR DEFINITIONS .,

TDEfRAAL PERFoleAAf4CE LeMADSED SAFILTY SYSTEIA ACTUATIONS-(Be'O The ratio of the design groes heat rate (corrected) to the DEPWimON) adpusted actual gross heet rate, expressed as a percent- This indicator is dehned as the sum of the following salsty I

age. system =*=hans.

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Coolmg l UBST CAPAtluTY FACTOR System (ECCS) actuations that resut from reasing an The ratio of the avaliable energy generation over a given ECCS actuation seapoint or from a spurious / Inadvertent time period to the reference energy generation (the on- ECCS signal.

ergy that could be produced if the unt were operated 2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system continuously at fugpower under reference ambient con- actuatens that result from a loss of power to a safeguards daions) 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 mached or l when a spurious or inadvertent signal is generated (ECCS l UNITCAPACITY FACTOR only), and major -- -d in the system is actuated.

l The not eledrical energy generated (MWH) divided by Unplanned means that the system aduation was not part the product of maximum dependable capacity (not MWe) of a planned test or evoluton h 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. Not electrical energy generated is the tem, the low pressure injection system, or the safety injec-gross electrical output 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 UNPLAltdED SAFETY SYSTERA ACTUATIONS (NRC -

penod, expressed in megawatt hours. DEFWelfl0N) l The number of safety system actuations which include UNPLAledED AUT014ATlc REACTOft SCRARAS PER (Ank) the High Pressure Safety injection System, the Low T,000 CfuTICAL HOURS Pressure Safety injection System, the Safety injection This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned au- Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC tomatic scrams (reactor protection system logic actua- classification of safety system actuations includes actua-tions) that occur por 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critical operation. tions when major equipment is operated god when the The value for this indicator is calculated by mutiplying logic systems for the above safety systems are chal-the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams longed in a specific time period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividing that number by the total number of hours crtical in the VIOLATIONS PER 1,000 INSPECTION NOURS same time period The indicator is further defined as This indicator is defined as the number of violatons sited follows: in NRC inspecten reports for FCS per 1,000 NRC inspec-t) Unplanned means that the scram was tot an antici- tion hours. The violations are reported in the year that the pated part of a pionned test. inspection was actuaNy performed and not based on when

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor the inspection report is received. The hours reported for by a rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control each inspecten report are used as the inspedion hours, rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by ac-tuation of the reactor protection system. The scram sig- VOLLME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE nel 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 actuaNy shipped for burial. This indica-actuation of the reactor protection system logic was pro- tot 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 oH that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the switches or, in manual turbine trip switches (or push-but- volume of solid dry radioactwo 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 condition of waste consists of dry active waste, sludges, resins, and the reador 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-UNPLApedED CAPA38UTY LOSS FACTOR able protective clothing, plaste containers, and any other The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given material to be disposed of at a low-level radcactive waste period of time, to the reference energy generation (the disposal site, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms energy that could be produced ll the unit were operated Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent continuously at fun power under reference ambient con- fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. This indica-ditions) over the same time period, expressed as a per- tor tracks radiologmal work performance for SEP #54.

contage.

80

r 0 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM MDEX lus; ..

The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Pogram (SEP) Performance indicators index is to list perfor-mance indicalors related to SEP llems with parameters that can be trended SEP Rafarance kmhar 15 Egg increase HPES and IR Accountabinty Through Use of Performance Indicators Pmoodural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) ..... . ...................... ... .... ............ ....... 49 Clean ControHed Area Contaminations 21,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area.......... ..5 Recordable injuryAliness Cases Frequency Rate ....... ......... ...... ................. ... ..................... 4 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs ......................................... .... ... ................... ................... 6 SEP Rafarance Number 24 Complete Staff Studies StaffingLevel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................42 SEP Rafarance kmher 25 TraininD Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented Disabhng injurynunese Frequency Rate . .. ... .... .... ... ... .... ... ............ .. ............ ......... 3 Recordable injuryanness Cases Frequency Rate .......... .... .. .. .....-...... . .......... .. ............ . 4 SEP Rafarance Number 28 Evaluate and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Prachce Requirements Disabling injury /luness Frequency Rate . ................... ........ ... ... ....... ... ...... ..................... .. 3 Recordable injuryneness Cases Frequency Rate ...... ................... ..... .......... .................... . ...... 4 SEP Reference Number 27 Implement Supervisory Enforcement of industrial Safety Standards Disabhng injurynuness Frequency Rate ... ................ ..... .... ....... .................. ..... ................... 3 Recordable injurynuness Cases Frequency Rate . .................. .. 4........... ............................4 SEP Rafarance Number 31 Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 16 Refuehno Outage)................... . ........ .... .... . ..... ......... ... . 66 Overau Project Status (Cycie 16 Refueling Outage) .. ........................ .... ..... .................... ..... 67 Progress of Cycle 16 Outage Modification Planning ........ ............ ............ ..... .......... ... . ... . 68 SEP Rafarence Number 33 Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities

( All Maintenance Craft s) .. . ....... ... .. ............ .. -. ... .. .. . ... . .. ....... ... ........ ... ..... .. ....... . . . .. 50 .I 1

SEP Rafarance Number 38 Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Badiog Maintenance Workload Badiogs (Corrective Non-Outage)..................................... .................. 45 SEP Rafarance Number 41 Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue........ ....... 46 Procedural Noncompliance incidents . . ..... .. .......... . . ........ ... ........ .......... ..................... 49 81

=

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX (continued)

SEP Reference Number 44 Eage.

Compliance With and Use of Procedures Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . ... .. . . . . .. 4 9 SEP Reference Number 48 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review .. .... .... .... . ... .. . ..........................................55 SEP Reference Nurnbar 52 Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program . .... ..... . . . .. ... ... .... . .... . .. ... ..... .... . .. . 54 SEP Reference Numhar 54 Complete implementation of Ra**wral Enhancement Program Collective Radiation Exposure ....... ....................................... . . . .. . .. 16 _

Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations :t1,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area .. . .. . .. . . . . . 5 Contaminaled Radiation Contro!!ed Area ,. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 SEP Reference Number 58 Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 SEP Reference Number 60 Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports... . . . . . . . 20 SEP Reference Number 61 Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in Licensee Event Reports. . .. . . . .. . .. ... . 2 0 SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications . ... .. . .... ....... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.. . .. ... ... .... .. .... . .. .. ... .. . . . . 59 Engineering Change Notice Status . .. .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Engineering Change Notices Open..... ....... ......... . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . 61 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and Establish Means to Monitor Operator Training Licensed Operator Requalification Training ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .... .. . 63 License Candidate Exams.. . . .. . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . 64 SEP Reference Nurnber 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . 57

(

82

. - 4' . ,

• ^ l

,7 i REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST :i R.L. Andrews W. C.' Jones

- K. L Bolsk J. D. Keppler ,

B. H. Biome D. D. Kloock L T. Kusek .

C. E. Boughter M. P. Lazar  !

C. J. Brunnert l M. W. Butt B. R. Uvingston i

G. R. Cavanaugh D. L Lovett i

~ J. W. Chase J. H. MacKinnon A. G. Christensen J. W. Marcil -

O. J. Clayton N. L Marfeos i

R. P. Clemens ' R. D. Martin T. J. Mcivor a R. G. Conner K. G. Motstad i J. L Connogey G. M. Cook K. A. Minor P. A. Mruz i S. R. Criles '

D. W. Dale NuclearLicerwing D. C. Dietz & Industry Affairs M. L. ENis J. T. O'Connor ,

i H. J. Faulheter W. W. Orr M. T. Frans T. L Patterson i

D. P. Galle R. T. Pearce S. K. Garnbhir R. L Phelps  ;

J. K. Gasper W. J. Pcnoc W. G. Gates C. R. Rico S. W. Gebers A. W. Richard ,~

L. V. Goldberg D. G. Ried G. K. Samide  :

D. J. Golden

• D. C. Gorence M. J. Sandhoetner R. H. Guy F. C. Scofield .

A. L. Hale H. J. Sofick K. R. Henry J. W. Shannon i

J. B. Herman C. F. Simmons T. L Herman E. L Ska00s K. C. Holthaus J. L. Skilos L. P. Hopkins F. K. Smith C.K.Huan0 R. L Sorenson T. W. Jamieson K. E. Steele M. A.Tesar  !

R. L. Jaworski R. A.Johansen J. J. Tesarek .i J. W. Tins l J. W. Johnson ~!

R. Jones D. R. Trausch J. M. Waszak j G. R. Williams S. J. Willrett l

I

FORT CALHOUN STATION

,.' OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES I

Event Date Ran0e Produc6cn (MWH) Cumulative (MWH)

Cycle 1 09/26/73 4 2/01/75 3,299,839 3,299,630

• 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 I Cycle 3 12/13/76 - 9/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 -12/09/77 l l

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

• l 4th Refueling 10/14/78-12/24/78 -

Cycle 5 12/24/78 - 01/18/80 3,882,734 16,888,454 l 54h Refueling 01/18/80- 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80- 09/18/81 3,889,714 20,768,168 8th 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 Retuoling 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 - 01/16/06 l Cycle 10 01/16/86- 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646  !

10th Refueling 03/07/87- 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87- 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 a 11th Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,489 12th Refueling 02/17/90 - 05/29/90 l i

Cycle 13 05/29/90 - 02/01/92 5,451,089 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 l

Cycle 15 11/26/93 - 03/11/95 l 15th Refueling 03/11/95 - 04/29/95 (Planned Dates)

FORT CALHOUN STATION CURRENT PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS " RECORDS" First Sustained Reaction August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.) ,

First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973  !

- Commercial Operation (180,000 KWH) September 26,1973 l Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 -l Longest Run (477 days) June 8,1987-Sept. 27,1988  ;

Highest Monthly Not Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987  !

l Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH)(Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992

[

0

1. 4 4

l l

1

,