Text

Performance Indicators Rept, for Sept 1995
	ML20094D256
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	09/30/1995
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20094D254	List: LIC-95-0204, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators Rept, for Sept 1995; ML20094D256;
References
	NUDOCS 9511030239
	Download: ML20094D256 (85)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:, ---c-=--.-- --= FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS O-lill$ .s j

A

SEPTEMBER 1995 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS [BA2 2888!!a8ljes

e N FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ~ s SEPTEMBER 1995 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS I jsA2 2888:Zia8ljgs

Fwwd ej waka w m auiLL... d unnda wuda ami wondjud nal... y ~ d w w q%, cwwvdsng coarvindanal... d w a, way se !fs...d w dovng Ljob 9U L,bl 6, S 6. Jl w iruna-duuhd, d L m?t of akd, pvaa,dwaomfewedAw!w i a 4 aa Aw u c_p % s 9u %e pan, neljul u daung L quik .p ) - ). o'e _

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT i ) Prepared By: Production Engineering Division System Engineering \\ Test and Performance Group i l SEPTEMBER 1995 w.

FORT CALHOUN STATION MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT September 1995 i OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of September, Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100% power. Normal plant maintenance, surveillance and equipment rotation activities occurred during the month, in addition to scheduled on-line modification activities. Monitoring of the leaking Control Element Drive Mechanism (CEDM) Mechanical Rod seal continued. i i

I--*- Fort Calhoun Index Value A + Industry Median Index Value joo' og o 100 - 90 80 - .x. _.x. 4 -*-*--* x --~# 70 60 - 30 I e 'T S Pro #cted 30 - 20 10 0 92/1 92/2 92/3 92/4 93/1 93/2 93/3 93/4 94/1 94/2 94/3 94/4 96/1 96/2 96/3 Oct Nov Dec 96 Performance Index Trend The performance indicator index has a value of 0 to 100 and is calculated from a weighted combination of the ten overall performance indicator values, which include Unit Capability Factor, Unit capability Loss Factor, High Pressure Safety injection (HPSI), Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW), Emergency A.C. Power System, Unplanned Automatic SCRAMS, Collective Radiation Exposure, Fuel Reliability Index, Thermal Performance, Secondary System Chemistry Performance, Volume of Radioactive Waste, and Industrial Safety Accident Rate. For the index calculation unit capability factor, unplanned capability loss factor, unplanned automatic scrams per 7000 hours critical, safety system performance, collective radiation exposure, and volume of low-level solid radioactive waste indicator are calculated for a two -year period instead of the normal three-year period to allow the index trend to be more responsive to changes in plant performance. ii

f* '

j

$!s@@( @ffi,4{ffQ ; Year-to-Date Value

[Nk lfNN!M!Edgl Performance Cateaories Unit Unplanned Capability Capability Unplanned Thermal 5

Performance better than Factor Loss Factor Auto Scrams Performance Industry Average Trend ll@ Performance better than 1995 OPPD Goal 'e ftTffd&fyj{JR$!j Pgfg Performance Not Meeting HPSI Safety AFW Safety EDG Safety "'I 4 System System System eHabHity Performance Performance Performance i June July August 1995 1995 1995 Collective Volume of industrial ) September 1995 Chemistry Radiation Low-Level Safety Accident H Year-to-Date Best Possible i Index j l Exposure RadWaste Rate - d Value 1995 Year-End [ll j Performance Performance 1 4k l l l l Ind. Ag ; INPO Performance Indicators

E' Unplanned Auto Scrams Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories Safety Significant E Performance better than industry Average Trend System vents Actuations ll.l Performance better than 1995 OPPD Goal SM eptw4esagn Forced Outage ( Performance Not Meeting 1995 OPPD Goal Sys Failures irurr9uynyisiiirr99iirgi i unrriiru 4 I l l' June July August !NNhEkb!dhh ~ l. i I 1995 1995 1995 J Equipment Collective 3 ( Forced Radiatio,. September 1995 " Best Possibtf j Outages j Exposure j( l Year-to-Date 1995 Year-End 4 i l Value Performance l Performance ...z l i gne avg NRC Performance Indicators 6

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT September 1995 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data representing three A performance indicator with data representing three consecutNe months of improving performance or three consecutNe months of declining performance or three consecutrve months of performance that is superior to consecutrve months of performance that is trending the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear toward declining as determined by the Manager - Operations Division Qualtty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-Station Engineenng, constitutes an adverse trend per 37). Nuclear Operations Duision Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). A supervisor whose performance The following performance indicators exhibited posrtNe indicator exhibits an adverse trend by this definition trends for the reporting morth: may specify in written form (to be published in this report) why the trend is not adverse Safety System Failures eMihMWhw "9' trends for the reporting month: Hiah Pressure Safety Iniection Sntem Safety System Maintenance Workload Backloas Performance (Page 8) (Page 46) Emeraency A C. Power System End of Adverse Trend Report. (Page 10) INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Em ramv Diesel Generator Unrealibihty (pl9e MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT Diesel Generator Reliability f25 Demands) A performance indicator with data for the reporting (Page 12) penod that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goal is defined as 'Needing increased Management Emeraency Diesel Generator Unreliabildv Attention

per Nuclear Operations Division Quality (Page 13)

Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). Sianificant Events The following performance indicators exhibited positive (Page 20) trends for the reporting month: Missed Surveillance Tests Results in Licensee Event Industrial Safety Accident Rate Reports (Page 2) (Page 21) Disablina Iniurv/lliness Freauenev Rate Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste (Page 3) (Page 38) Recordable Iniurv/ Illness Freauenev Rate Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of (Page 4) LUIld (Page 39) Secondary System Chemistry (Page 40) Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 53) Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area (Page 54) End of Posrtive Trend Report. v

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT September 1995 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (continued) Fuel Reliability Indicator (Page 14) Number of Control Room Eauioment Deficiencies (Page 15) Number of On-Line and Outace Control Room gauipment Deficiencies (Page 16) Collectrve Radiation Exoosure (Page 17) Forced Outaae Rate (Page 24) Und Capability Factor (Page 27) Unrt Caoability Loss Factor (Page 28) Eauioment Forced Outaae Rate (Page 35) Temocrary Modifications (Page 58) PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES This section lists significant changes made to the report and to specific indicators within the report since the previous month. Emergency AC Power System Safety System Performance, and Emergency Diesel Generator Unrt Reliabiltty, Reliability (25 Demands, and Unreliability have recalculated for August 1995 following an analysis of the DG governor switch misposition. A new page has been to show the Performance Indicator index, which is calculated from a weighted combination of ten overall performance indicator values. End of Report improvements / Changes Report. Vi

Table of Contents / Summary enas GOALS....... x SAFE OPERATIONS Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO................. 2 Disabling injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate .3 Recordable injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate..... ..4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations >1,000 DisintegrationsMinute per Probe Area .5 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs.. .6 Safety System Failures 7 Safety System Performance: High Pressure Safety injection System .8 Auxiliary Feedwater System .9 Emergency AC Power System 10 Emergency Diesel Generator Unit Reliability. 11 Reliability (25 Demands) 12 Unreliability 13 Fuel Reliability indicator 14 Control Room Equipment Deficiencies.... 15 On-Une and Outage Control Room Deficiencies .. 16 Collective Radiation Exposure. ..... 17 Maximum individual Radiation Exposure. 18 Violation Trend 19 Significant Events ...... 20 Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in LERs.... ... 21 PERFORMANCE Station Net Generation 23 Forced Outage Rate . 24 Unit Capacity Factor. 25 Equivalent Availability Factor . 26 vii

Tabb of Contants/ Summary PERFORMANCE (continued) PAGE Unit Capability Factor... . 27 Unplanned Capability Loss Factor 28 Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams per 7,000 Hours Critical. 29 Unplanned Safety System Actuations INPO DennWon.. 30 31 NRC DennNon . 32 Gross Heat Rate Thermal Performance 33 Daily Thermal Output 34 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours 35 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) Summary. 36 Repeat Failures 37 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste 38 Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Umit 39 Secondary System Chemistry.. ..... 40 i l COST Cents Per Kilowatt Hour ...........42 Staffing Level 43 Spare Parts inventory Value 44 ) DMSION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage) 46 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue 47 j Percentage of Total MWOs Completed per month identified as Rework 48 Overtime . 49 Procedural Noncompliance incidents 50 Daily Schedule Performance - Percent of Completed Scheduled ActMties 51 viii

l Table of Contents / Summary DMSION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE In-Une Chemistry instruments Out-of-Service . 52 l Hazardous Waste Produced.. . 53 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area .. 54 Radinlock;al Work Practices Program 55 Document Review 56 Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) 57 Modifications Temporary.. . 58 Outstanding . 59 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown 60 Engineering Chat.ge Notices Status 61 Open... 62 Licensee Event Report (LER) Root Cause Breakdown 63 Ucensed Operator Requalification Training 64 Ucense Candidate Exams 65 Open incident Reports 66 Cycle 17 Refueling Outage MWO Planning Status 67 Overall Project Status. 68 Outage Modification Planning ...........69 On-Line Modification Planning... . 71 \\ Progress of 1995 On-Une Modification Planning... 70 ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST 72 Action Plans Performance Indicator Definitions 75 Safety Enhancement Program Index 83 Report Distribution Ust 85 ix

I OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities i i MISSION The safe, reliable and cost eNective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment. GOALS Goal 1: 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 self-ownership and personal initiative and open communication. 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. 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. 4 Less than 1.4 NRC violations per 1,000 inspection hours. Fewer significant Corrective Action Documents (CADS) originating from activities. OBJECTIVE 1-3: Identify conditions BEFORE they affect plant safety and reliability. OBJECTIVE 1-4: Achieve all safety-related 1995 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report. OBJECTIVE 1-5: Zero Lost Time injuries and recordable injuries rate BELOW i.5 percent. x

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities 1 9o3,12: PERFORMANCE o Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Obj: 2 and Goal 4, Obj: 1 l Achieve high standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in aafe, reliable and cost effective power production. 1995 PRIORlTIES: Improve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork. Improve Plant Reliability. Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals. Reduce the number of Human Performance errors. Identify Programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment. Objectives to support PERFORMANCE: OBJECTIVE 2-1: Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 70% and a unit capability factor of 81%. OBJECTIVE 2-2: Execute the 1995 refueling outage in 49 days; emphasize shutdown plant safety. ] OBJECTIVE 2-3: Achieve all performance related 1995 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report. OBJECTIVE 2-4: All projects and programs are planned, scheduled, and accomplished according to schedules, resource constraints, and requirements. OBJECTIVE 2 5: Team //ndividualownership, accountability, performance and teamwork is evident by improved plant reliability; improved ratings for both INPO and NRC; reduced number of human performance errors and identification of performance problems by effective self assessment and for individuals as measured by the successful completion of department goals & objectives and other specific measures. xi

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1995 Priorities goall: COSTS Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 7, Obj: 1,2 and 3, and Goal 6, Obj: 1 \\ Operate Fort Calhoun in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as an economically viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line". Cost consciousness is exhibited at alllevels of the organization. 1995 Priorities: Maintain total O&M and Capital Expenditures within budget. Streamline work process to improve 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 schedules and attain the estimated cost savings. 4 i Goals Source: Scofield (Manager) l xii

i 4 l 1 l SAFE OPERATIONS 3 i l l Goal: A proactive, self-critical and safety conscious culture is i exhibited throughout the nuclear organization. Individuals demonstrate professionalism through self-ownership and per-l sonal initiative and open communication. i l j i i 1 1 j i

Year-to Oste FCs Industrial safety Accident Rate (IRMDefinition) e_. FCS Average Rate (Last 12 Months) FCs Year-End Goal (<0.50) g I c industry Current Beet Quartile (.24) _e 1995 INPo Industry Goal (<0.50) U 2 _. 1.5. 0.53 5 g i f c/ a O[V an Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec }1995 INDUSTRIAL $AFETY ACCIDENT RATE As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Associa-tion of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plant': 'The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station." The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year to date was 1.26 at the end of Sep-tomber 1995. The value for the 12 months from October 1,1994, through September 30,1995, was 1.08. There were no restricted-time and no lost-time accidents in September 1995. The values for this indicator are determined as follows: (number of restricted-time accidents + lost-time accidents + fatalities) x 200.000 (number of station person-hours worked) The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is 50.50. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 50.50. The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 7/93 through i 6/94) is 0.12. Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Chase / Booth (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner Trend: Needs increased Management Attention 2

-e 19WDisabling injury /lllnessFrequency 1 j -x 1994 Disabling Injury /lliness Frequency .+.. Average Rate (Last 12 Months) [ Good] - o-1995 Goal (0.50) 2-1.8 -- 1.6 -- 1.4 - / N N 1.2 - 1 ..-4.. .4 j......... &.. ~ ('/ / / 0.8 -- j A.. 4' 1 l / ./ N O.6 _- / A, -X s -/ X '},', -w 4 C o i Nx%x /* e 0.2. O x# l l Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec l1995) DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE) This indicator shows the 1995 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1994 disabling injury / illness frequency rate is also shown. The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year to date was 1.26 at the end of September 1995. There were no disabling injury / illness cases reported for the month. The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from October 1,1994, through September 30,1995, was 1.08. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5. Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Conner Trend: Needs increased Management Attention SEP 25,26 & 27 3

--,__. 1995 Recordable Injur)(lllness Frequency .g . 1994 Recordable injur)tillness Frequency j0000g ... r.. Average Rate (Last 12 Months) .. o. Fort Calhoun Goal 2.25 2 1.75 4.a 5. .o. 1.5 o... o. ..o.. .o 4-...-...~. #. - ____x.., .. * ~ '-x )# x %.- ,/,,,< 1 / / M~~~* 0.75 P j O.5 %. Q ' O.25.- 0: - i 1 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec l1995l RECORDABLE lNJURY/ ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1995 recordable injury / illness frequency rate. The 1994 record-able injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown. A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divisions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis. There have been nine recordable injury / illness cases in 1995. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate year-to-date was 1.62 at the end of September 1995. There was one recordable injury / illness case reported for the month of September. This injury was the result of a burn to the lower abdomen to a welder while performing an overhead weld. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate for the 12 months from October 1, 1994, through September 30,1995, was 1.62. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5. Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source) Accountability: Conner Trend: None SEP 15,25,26 & 27 4

i;

l m Contamination Events (Monthly)

_,._. Contamination Events (YTo) 60 i V l i ) 50 __ ds 4, o 3 42 l f 40 __ ss 31 1 i 30 2e i i i 20. I i i 10._ E-0 i i i i i a j Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec N I i (LEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS l 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month. There were O contamination events in September 1995. There has been a total of 48 contamination events in 1995 through the end of September. This compares to 39 at this time last year. Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: None SEP 15 & 54 5

Personnel Errors (Each Month) w -+- Preventable (ib-Month Totals) C Personnel Error (18-Month Totals) 20 15 - 10 g 3 O C C C ^ 0 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l l1995l PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LER. 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 Per-sonnel 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 August 1995, there were two events which were subsequently reported as LERs. Both LERs were categorized as Preventable and as Personnel Error for the month of August. The total LERs for the year 1995 (through August 31,1995) is five. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1995 is two. The total Preventable LERs for the year is three. i The 1995 goal for this indicator is that the year-end values for the 18-month totals be no more than 12 Preventable and 5 Personnel Error LERs. l Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) l Accountability: Chase Trend: None SEP 15 6

5 i Startup i m Shutdown numinums Operations l GOOD l .c.. Industry Average Trend U ,2-l = $1 j . a.. -... o- .a-c. .. a.. ..a.. . a.. c, -a zo r 92-2 92-3 92-4 93 1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94-3 94-4 95-1 Year-Quarter $AFETY $YSTEM FAILURES l l l This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory l Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance Indica-tors for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report. The following safety system failures occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st quarter of 1995: 1st Quarter 1993: The SG low pressure scram signal block reset values, for all 4 cnannels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating condi-tions. 2nd 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. 4th 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 expansion caused by a loop seal, excessive 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. 1st Quarter 1994: A design basis review determined that an ESF relay could result in loss of safety injection and spray flow, due to premature actuation of recirculation flow. 4th Quarter 1994: An accident scenario was identified that could result in the inoperability of both control room air conditioning units. Following certain accident conditions, CCW temperature could rise causing compressor rupture disc failure and a release of freon. There were no safety system failures in the 1st quarter of 1995. Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Trend: Positive 7

m Monthly High Pressure safetyinjection systern UnavailabilityValue ..*_ Year-to-Date High Pressure safetylnjection systern UnavailabilityValue ._e _ Fort Calhoun Goal (0.004) l GOOD l a INPO Industry Goal (0.02) V __w_ Industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.02. a a a a a a a a a a a a 0.015 - 0.01 - 0.005 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A '~" N -: - 0 - ~- n 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aup sep Oct Nov Dec l1995 HioH PRESSURE SAFETY lNJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator show.s the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month. The High Pressure Safety System unavailability value for the month of September 1995 was 0.0043. There were 9.33 hours of planned unavailability, and 0 hours of unplanned l unavailability, during the month. The 1995 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0008 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.0006. There has been a total of 12.16 hours of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours of un-planned unavailability for the high pressure safety injection 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 1/92 through 12/94)is approximately 0.001. Data Source: Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability: Jaworski/Schaffer Trend: Positive 8

Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater system Unavailability ..x Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability jGooD] ~ .o. Fort Calhoun Goal (0.01) .3.. 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) y c Industry Upper 10% (0.0021) 0.03 0.025 0.02 - .v. .. 6 ...e .. e.. ...a. ..s. .3 s 4 0.015 - 0.01 __

o.,.. o....

..o... ...o. .o. .o. ..o.....o., .o. .c 0.005 - N 3, w-E, 7# i n i mum i 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec ] fi"l AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE J This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month. The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for September 1995 was 0.001. There were 2 hours of planned and 0 hours of unplanned unavailability during the month. The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.0031 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.003 at the end of the month. There has been a total of 31.56 hours of planned unavailability and 12.92 hours of un-planned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1995. 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 ap-proximately 0.002. Data Source: Jaworski/Nay Accountability: Jaworski/Nay Trend: None 9

~ m Monthly Emergency Ac Power Unavailability Value -x.- Year-to-Date Ernergency AC Power UnavailabilityValue Fort Calhoun Goal (0.024) l GOOD l c 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) 0.16. c Industry Upper 10% (0.0035) y 0.14. 0.12._ 0.1 0.06 - 0.06 - 0.04 _- l 0.02 - 0 0 d W r"----41--- mil W ed W O O O Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec b 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 September 1995 was 0.014. During the month, there were 16.4 hours of planned unavailability, and 4.3 hours of un-planned unavailability for testing and repairs. The Emergency AC Power System un-availability value year-to-date was 0.021 and the value for the !ast 12 months was 0.019 at the end of the month. There has been a total of 66.7 hours of planned unavailabikty and 4.3 hours of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1995. Unplanned unavailability for August has been revised following an analysis of the DG governor switch misposition. EA-95-027 has determined that no DG failure would have occurred. 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 ap-proximately 0.0035. Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning ' rend: Positive due to performance better than goal. 10

m Failures /20 Demands CC Failures /60 Demands C:::::3 Failures /100 Demands l GOOD l 5 Trigger Values /20 Demands j - Trigger Values!60 Demands } f -*- Trigg*r Values-100 Demands 8

---+-

7 6 5 A -og aj -a, 3 a m ~s- -m a e-a m -m i 1 117 111 11 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 0 - { -} - (( 0lM ~ ) 0 ~ 00 [ 00 :,; 0 0 o t 0 0 0 y w--+ Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l1994l l1995l EMERGENCY DiEsEt GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger values. 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 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 minimum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report). A DG-1 incident, which counted as a DG failure in August due to the governor switch misposition, has been analyzed by EA-95-027 and been determined not to be a DG fail-ure. Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Trend: Positive due to performance better than goal. 11

DG 1 Failures /25 Demands i m DG-2 Failures /25 Demands l Good l S. U 4 1 4-C 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O O O O 3 2-1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l1*] f% DiesEt GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 DEMANDS) This indicator shows the number of failures experienced by each emergency diesel gen-erator during the last 25 start demands and the last 25 load-run demands. A trigger value of 4 failures within the last 25 demands is also shown. This trigger value of 4 failures within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 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 fail-ures within the last 25 demands on the unit. These actions are described in the Defini-tions 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 year, and zero fail-ures during the last 25 demands on the unit. Diesel Generator DG-2 has experienced one failure during the last 25 demands on the unit. Special diesel testing during hot weather took place during July. This testing enabled the diesel high temperature operability limits to be raised. The DG failure in August has been reevaluated by EA-95-027. It has been determined that a DG failure would not have occurred due to the mispositioning of the governor control switch. Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Trend: Positive due to performance better than goal. 12

o DGTunreliability Value DG-2 Unreliability Value +-. Station UnreliabilityValue l GOOD l 1995 Goal _e Industry Upper 10% (0.002 for a 3-Yeor Average) U 0.07 -- 0.06 0.05. c 3 0.04 - 0.03 -- 0.02 - 0.01 0 ?h- -Q 4 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l 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, opera-tion and test practices in controlling generator unreliability. The year-to-date station EDG unreliability at the end of September 1995 was 0.063. The 1995 goal forthis indicator is a maximum value of 0.05. For DG-1: There were 4 start demands for the reporting month with 0 failures. l In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure. l For DG-2: There were 3 start demands for the reporting month with 1 failure. In addition, there was 1 load-run demand without a failure. Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as ferows: value per DG = SU + LU -(SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability = number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values The August unreliability value has been changed following an analysis of the DG govemor control switch misposition. EA-95-027 has evaluated the govemor prcblem and determined that a DG failure would not have occuned. Data Source: Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Ronning Trend: Positive due to performance better than goal. 13 l

1 m FuelReliability goool w. ifr95 INPO Industry Fuel Defeet Reference (5 x 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram) ...e... 1995 Goal 3 y 30-- y 25 -- 20 -- " 15 - n "ruma g .2 10 - 2 ] 5- +- + + 0 i I I Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Fuel RELIABILITY lNDICATOR The FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for September 1995 was 25.64 X 10d microcuries/ gram. The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity. An effective fuelintegrity and performance monitoring program provides a means to detect fuel failures and assess the fuel failure number, physical condition, exposure, mechanism, and location. The September FRI value is based on data from September 1 through 30, except for September 24th due to problems with the laboratory exhaust fan. The days selected are when the plant chemistry values were at equilibrium for steady-state full power operation. Cycle 16 plant operation started on April 13 and attained 100% on April 23. During the months of June and July the plant operated at 100% power. The plant tripped at the end of August but has operated at 100% during the month of September. The September FRI value of 25.64 X 10d microcuries/ gram indicated a decrease from the August FRI value of 30.39 x 10d microcunes/ gram. No new fuel failures were observed during the month based on the equilibrium Xenon data. This decrease in FRI is not significant and is most likely the result of normal plant operations and uncertanties inherent to chemistry data sampling. The chemistry data was at equilibrium levels for the entire month. A recent analysis performed by the fuel vendor indicates four to six failed rods at core average power. The analysis indicates failures in several different bumup levels. OPPD personnel estimate that 10 to 15 rods are failed based on the results from the Cycle 15 and 16 RCS chemistry data and the fuelinspection project. During the review of the FRI calculation, it was discovered that the Core Average Linear Heat Rate (LHGR) value for a previous cycle was being used instead of the Cycle 16 specific value. The Cycle 16 FRI values were corrected. The INPO July 1995 report, "WANO Performance Indicator Program Utility Data Coordinator Reference Notebook" (INPO No. 94-009, Rev.1) states the Industry 1995 Goal for fuel reliability is: "unas should strive to operate with zero fuel defects" The 1995 Fort Calhoun Station FRI Performance Indicator goalis to maintain a monthly FR1 below 5.0 x 10d microcuries/ gram. A value larger than 5.0 x 10d microcuries/ gram indicates a high probability of reactor core operation with one or more fuel defects. Data Source: Holthaus/ Weber Accountability: Chase /Spilker Trend: Needs increased Management Attention 14

r e-- e _e-a a.-- w -w -,- -,- - - - - - - - -~~ o EIEHil Control Room Deficiencies Added Control Room Deficiencies Comp.eted i i C="I Completed within Target Completion Date -e-- Completion Rate 50 - 100.0% 87 5% d5 Goal. Complete 80% of C R Deficencies by Target Comp 4etion Date 40 - a *5 un I - 60.0 % ti f 30 - lll Y a4 a4 - 40.0 % E lIl h e o $ 20 -- lll }$ 0 is 20.0% $ f .g is is is id 7 jj[ ?^ u ,io 10 O.0% May 22-29 Jun Jul Aug Sep OCt Nov Dec.96 (2 ***"I Control Room Deficiencies NUMBER OF CONTROL Room EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator measures the timeliness of closing Control Room Deficiencies. Target Completion Dates are established by the Emergent Work Committee. The goalis to close at least 80% of all CRD's within the Target Due Date. There were 16 Control Room Deficiencies completed during September 1995, and 10 were completed within the target completion date. A Sche.duling Coordinator has been assigned to track performance on a weekly basis and identify aroblem areas. Revisions have been made to the scheduling process to allow for more timeiy completion of CRD's. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a completion rate of 80%. Data Source: Chase / Walling (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: Needs increased Management Attention - Performance Below Goal 15

C="I Overdue -+- Nurnber of On-Line Control Room Deficiencies 35 - as 30 2e 22 25 - n 20 - ,4 15 - is [ e M/$ 10 - ow ta m.n e.nou. M piiEQ W @f 5 May-95 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec-95 l lNurnber of On-Line CRD's l Overdue + Number of Outage Control Room Deficiencies 25. 2 20 ^ ^ 21 15 10 - 5- " "*"f O. M M i M ay-95 Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec-95 l l Number of Outage CRD's Note: Oerdue stems are those older than 1 > months NUMBER OF ON-LINE AND OUTAGE CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the total number of On-Line and Outage Control Room Deficiencies, and the number of overdue Control Room Deficiencies. l There were 23 on-line (11 were overdue) and 21 outage (2 were overdue) Control Room j Deficiencies at the end of September 1995. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for these indicators are less than 8 overdue on-line and no I overdue outage Control Room Deficiencies. Maintenance resources have been reprioritized to reduce overdue on-line CRDs to below gott by the end of October 1995. Data Source: Chase / Walling (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber/Clemens Trend: Needs increased Management Attention - Number of On-Line CRD's <8 Overdue exceeds goal. 16 l l l

- ~ _.. _. -. _ _.. Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure --+-- Cumulative Personnel Radiation Exposure l GOOD l o-FCS Goal (143.1 Person-Rem) l f 150 [' I 140 130 ^ ~ 120 110 100 90 - E i ** $ 70 l 60 50 - ,/ 'l 30 - 20 ff 10 - 0 #- Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Od Nov Dec l1995l CotteCrive RADIATION ExPoSune The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure is less than 143.1 person-Rem. The exposure for September 1995 was 1.275 person-Rem (ALNOR). The year-to-date exposure through the end of September was 136.755 person-Rem (TLD). l The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-rem per l year. The current industry best quartile is 145 person-rem per year. The yearly average l for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 9/92 through 8/95 was 109.02 person-l rem per year. I Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: Needs increased Management Attention SEP 54 l 17 l

~ sO!iWIM*i#888!he s[m{HighintExposareefear);6",; 5000. OPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Umit 4000. 3000 2000 1,266E FCSGoal 1000 67 0 i l September-95] MAXIMUM lNDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During September 1995, an individual accumulated 67 mrem, which was the highest individual exposure for the month. The maximum individual exposuie for the year of 1,000 mrem was exceeded during March 1995 when an individual received 1,266 mrem (875 mrem of this was received during orifice plate repair in a steam generator). However, the OPPD 4500 MRemlyr limit is not expected to be exceeded. 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. Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: None 18

l m FC5 Ciled Violations (Monthly) a FCS Non4lted Violations (Monthly) FCS Cited Violations (12 Month Average) 000l f ...g. FCS Non44ted Violations (12 Month Average) e Region IV Cited Violations (12 Month Average for Region IV top quartile) 1P g 14 ~N 121 U~' ....... e . e. ~~%. B N 6 \\.y - N-e y ., _..p .p... 4._ y'- 2 - W ') O n n m-I m a m j Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug sep (1994l l1995l VIOL.ATION TREND This indicator illustrates a 12-month trend for Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations, Non-Cited Violations and Cited Violations for the Top Quartile plants in Region IV. Additionally, the Fort Calhoun Station cited and non-cited violations for the past 12 months will be illustrated monthly. The 12-month trend for the Region IV top quartile lags 2-3 months behind the Fort Calhoun Station trend. This lag is necessary to compile information on other Region IV plants. The following inspections were completed during September 1995: IER No. Title 95-12 Resident Monthly inspection 95-17 Special inspection - Diesel Generator Full Speed Start To date, OPPD has received six violations for inspections conducted in 1995. Level lil Violations O Level IV Violations 4 Levei V Violations 0 Non-Cited Violations 2 Total 6 The 1995 Fort Calhoun Station Goal for this performance indicator is to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile plant in Region IV. l Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Trausch Trend: None I 19

a NRC3I0nlficinTEvents __e-Industry Average Trend l GOOD l 1 1 1 -. 3r 0.5 _ 0. l 92-2 92-3 92 4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94-3 94-4 95 1 l Year -Quarter l lNPO Significant Events (SERs) l0000l Z 2-3 q q q 37 3 E, o 92-2 92-3 92 4 93 1 93-2 93-3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94-3 944 95-1 l Year-Quarter l SIGNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as re-ported 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 NRC significant events occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st quarter of 1995: 3rd Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressuri:er Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant presst:re boundary. 4th Quarter 1994: A potential accident scenario involving a large break loss of coolant accident or a main steam line break inside containment could result in the inoperability of both control room A.C. units. The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st Quarter of 1995: 2nd Quarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Change-out. 3rd Quarter 1992: 1) RC-142 LOCA; and 2) Premature Lift of RC-142. 1st Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation Safety Channel D. 2nd Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip 4th Quarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal. 1st Quarter 1994: Unplanned dilution of Boron concentration in the RCS. Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability: Chase Trend: Positive 20 {

Missed STs Resulting in LERs 3 _. 2 I 1 1__ l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 93 94 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec j1995l NUMBER OF MiSSEo SURVElLLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years. There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during September 1995. On December 28,1994, during the performance of OP-ST-SHIFT-0001, data was not entered for Steam Generator level per Surveillance Requirements. The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Trend. Positive SEP 60 & 61 21

- _. -- -_ 7 ) l 1 t t l i PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the high-est standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production. 22

. ~ -.. -... - - - - - -.... -. _ _ - - l Net Generation (10,000 MWh) 40 - 36.21 36.22 I 34.75 33.88 34.12 34.29 30.46 30 - l 2 22.82 21.19 j 20. i 3 g 'N,Nla 10 - O uta g e 0 0 l i i i r I i I I I I oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep f9]94 l1995l STATION NET GENERATION During the month of September 1995, a net total of 342,887.4 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 1,564,485.0 MWH at the end of the month. Energy losses for August 1995 were attributable to a plant trip during a test of a backup automatic shutdown system, which began on August 24th. The generatw was brought back on-line at 3:43 p.m. on Saturday, August 26th, after a two-day outags. Energy losses for May 1995 were attributable to: (1) the component cooling water, which was leaking into the lube oil system of RC-3D reactor coolant pump motor; and (2) the generator and reactor were again manually tripped because of a similar leak. The gen-erator was put on-line after replacement of all of the reactor coolant pump lube oil cooler heat exchangers. Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None l 23 1

1 i ) , Forced Outage Rate (Monthly) i Forced outage Rate (12 Months) l Good l .-a Fort Calhoun Goal (2.4%) 40% _ y 35 % 30 % 25% _- 20% -- 15% - 10% _ "O 5% __ 6 6'7, 5 e[f 188%

o. ors c

g g e o a 0% ,R1 r,, - 92 93 94 oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 FORcEo OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 3.7% for the twelve months from October 1,1994, through SepMmbar 30,1995. The 1995 year-to-date FOR was 5.2% at the end of the month. Energy losses for August 1995 were attributable to a plant trip during a test of a backup automatic shutdown system, which began on August 24th. The generator was brought back on-line at 3:43 p.m. on Saturday, August 26th, after a two-day outage. Energy losses for May 1995 were attributable to two separate shutdowns to repair com-ponent cooling water leaks in the lube oil system of RC-3D reactor coolant pump motor. The generator was put on-line after replacement of all four of the reactor coolant pump lube oil cooler heat exchangers. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 2.4%. Date Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: Needs increased Management Attention 24

i Monthly Unit CapacMy Factor i .. a.. Year-to-Date Unit Capacity Factor n c Unit Capacity Factor for Cycles 15 & 16 36-Month Average Unit Capacity Factor lGOODj x FCS Goal (79.65%) 100 % - ..o O C- -%e, j 90% --3_ =R SO% -- g ..g t.

9...

.g. g 3 -= .a. \\ g-{ 70% - \\ ~ 60% - -~ [ n..... f 40% -- ~ n.7v e*n' e n 20% _ outas. 10%. 0% Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep j1994l l1995l UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capacity Factor, the Unit Capacity Factor for the current fuel cycle, year to date and the 36-month average Unit Capacity Factor. At the end of the month, the Cycle 16 Unit Capacity factor was 99.63%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months was 81.20%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is 79.65%. The Fort Calhoun 3-year average capacity factor goa! for 1995 is 84.05%. Energy losses for May and August 1995 are discussed on the previous page. The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows: Net Electrical Enerav Generated (MWH) Maximum Dependable Capacity (Mwe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Data Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 25

l i Monthly E3F i --a Year-to4 ate Average MonthlyEAF __._ 12-Month Aerage EAF industry Median Value (76.7% for a 3-Year Aerage) 100% _ _ er.as m. -e-m A i e x x ._s 80% _ g h- .a ,,,g \\ y... y y y.. -...y. ~..y y y y y..... y. g..:.. \\ .R W. 60% _ "O ~ 40 % Cycle 15 Refuelmg Outage 20%. 0% 92 94 Nov Jan Mar May Jul sep-95 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous three years. The EAF for September 1995 was reported as 96.89%, The year-to-date monthly aver-age EAF was 84.9% at the end of the month. Energy losses for May and August 1995 are explained on page 24. The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 88.85%. The industry median EAF value for the three-year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was j 76.7%. Data Source: Dietz/Kulisek (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Trend: None 26

i Monthly Unit Capability Facicer i ..m. Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor O .. _ 30-Month Unit Capability Factor x Fort Calhoun Goals ooD] .o INPO Industry Goals 100% -- 2 -u-gri=-y

h. _

h-N - - N.m - N - ~ h ' b.. Y 8 80% __ g .n. 60 % . u- - *

40*/e --

cycio is M/o -- R ef u sim g 0% l Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep [1994) l1995l UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the year-to-date UCFs, the 36-month average UCFs, and the UCF goals. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage (refueling periods excluded). The UCF for September 1995 was reported as 100.0%. The year-to-date UCF was 74.6%, the UCF for the last 12 months was 80.6%, and the 36-month average UCF was reported as 85.3% at the end of the month. ] Energy losses for May and August 1995 are explained on page 24. 1 The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry current best quartile value (for the three-year period ending 12/94) is approximately 85%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is a minimum of 81.64%. The 3-year average capability factor goal for 1995 is 85.5%. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: Needs increased Management Attention 27

, MonthlyUnplanned CapabilHF' Loss Factor [ Good l _m_ Year-To-Date unplanned Capability Loss Factor I 12-Month Average Unplanned Capability Loss Factor Y ._.4 Fort Calhoun Goal (3.97%) o INPO Industry Goal (4.5%) Industry Current Best Quartile 40% _ 30 % 20 % g ,3 ,,,-e..,,, / M d ""~1 m m m m m m m = 0% E- - - - E --=F-@ 1, 5, Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep [19f4] {1995l UNPLANNED (APABILITY I.OSS 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 September 1995 was reported as 0.00%. Unplanned energy loss is defined as the energy that was not produced during the period of unscheduled shutdowns, outage extensions, or load reductions due to causes under plant manage-ment control. Energy losses are considered to be unplanned if they are not scheduled at least four weeks in advance. The year-to-date UCLF was 11.53%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 8.6%', and the 36-month average UCLF was reported as 4.6% at the end of the month. Energy losses for May and August 1995 are explained on page 24. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 4.5% and the industry current best quartile value is ap-proximately 3.2% or lower. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.97%. Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountabilny-Chase Trend: Needs Increased Management Attention. 28

4 FCS~ Reactor Scrams Per 7000 Hours Critical Year to Date e + FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for last 36 rnonths Fort Calhoun Goal (0.0) m_.. INPO Industry Goal (1) o industry Upper 10% (1 per 7,000 hours critical) 3. 2, -+ + + e ,% ~~s NM 1 g g. ...g... ..g.. .- g.- g... g. ...g.. g......./.. g.. g .e De Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Il FCs Reactor Scrarns 4_ 3 3_ 2 2 1 1 4 1-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 t i 91 92 93 94 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS 2 PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 i hours critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tional Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Calhoun Station. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months. l The year-to-date station va!ue was 1.4 at the end of September 1995. The value for the 12 months from October 1,1994, through September 30,1995, was 1.0. The value for the last 36 months was 1.25. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The 1995 INPO industry goal is a maximum of one unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours critical. The indus-try upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.48 scrams per 7,000 hours critical. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Chase Trend: None 29

e SafetyS) stem Actuations (INPO Definition) _e_ FCS Goal (0) + Industry Upper 10 Percentile (0) 3 2 1 1 o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 4 :

q 1

92 93 94 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION) There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of September 1995. There was one INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of August 1995. It occurred on August 24,1995, when the plant was tripped during a test of a l backup automatic shutdown system. The generator was brought back on-line at 3:42 p.m. on August 26th, after a two-day outage. An INPO unplanned safety sytem actuation also occurred during the month of July 1992 due to the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Trend: Positive 30

1 1 g MbfNh h , ice cuesto; m" n s w 1 + 124Wlonth ftunning Totat $$As (NRC Den) -~ Cycle B Cycle 2 ~ R d unim0 RW wehrg Od aos ou ag e 700 8 600 1 500 6.

(

i O 400( E I i e f 300 5 3 [ 200 5 .= .===, \\ 100 I,I;,; \\ {f, 0 0. .I

; A !=: =:=

j 1 92 93 94 AsONDJ FMAMJJAsONDJ FMAMJ JAs {iW3] l1994l {i993] UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION) This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actua-tions when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged. An unplanned safety system actuation occurred in December 1993 when the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing. Also, there was an unplanned Safety system actuation during the month of February 1994 when supervi-sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip. There has been no unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accountability: Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Trend: None 31

m Gross Heat Rate w_ Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate [Go% _a_. Fort Calhoun Goal 10.75 -- p 10.5 o 223 = 10.25 -_,g f 's o---c / l -.--.? 10 g g_ 9.75 -_ n.ruIsins outsp. 9.5 1 9.25 92 93 94 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 Gross HEAT RATE This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous three years. l The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,243 for the month of September 1995. The 1995 year-to-date GHR was 10,269 at the end of the month. "The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR im-proves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is $10,157. Data Source: Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Trend: None* 32 j 1

i i l e MonthlyThermal Perforrnance n i 12-Month Average f + Year-to-Date Average Monthly Therrnal Perforrnance l Fort Calhoun Goal (99.6%) rGoOD7 + INPO IndustryGoal(99.5%) i I j -Ep Industry Upper 10% (99.7%) 100%. c c c c c c c c c a c .....(.. ..3... ...-.g... g s 99% -- I,,,,* r Cycle 15 Yu"i 98 % Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l'*l l' " 51 THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Thermal Performance Value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approximate upper ten percentile value. The thermal performance value for September 1995 was 99.58. The year-to-date aver-age monthly thermal performance value was 99.4, at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months from October 1,1994, through September,1995, was 99.3%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goalfor this indicator is a minimum of 99.6%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goalwas a minimum of 99.5%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and the industry upper 10 percentile value is approximately 99.9%. Data Source: Jaworski/Shubert Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Trend: None 33

+ Thermal Output + Fort Calhoun 1495 MWGoal Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 A. _#.. 4....a. % ~%~ A - & & - & +- * -* 4 e - &- - & ~ & + - k -a~ & *--& - A * -* - *---A 1499-1498 1497 + i1496..- 2 1495! ec-oeccccceecccccccccccccccccc 1494 - 1493 1492 i ; ; ; ' ; i ' ; ; +w i > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 DAILY THERMAL Oureur The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during September l 1995, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 ther-mal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal. 1 i l l I Data Source: Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Tills Trend: None 34

i e Nurrt>er of Equipment Forced Outages (Monthly) l GOOD l _ w-Equiprnent Forced Outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hrs. (12-Month Interval) + Fort Calhoun Year-End Goals (0.2) y 2-I I 4 i 1-2 mF% m mWA e e =, = = = = = u M M 0 n 92 93 94 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep EQUIPMENT FoRCEo OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from Octo-ber 1,1994, through September 30,1995, was 0.41. The year-to-date rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from January through September 1995 was 0.59. An equipment forced outage also occurred on February 20,1995, when the plant experi-enced a problem with a control element assembly motor drive and a related smallleak of reactor coolant. Two equipment forced outages also occurred during May 1995, which were attributable to the component cooling water, which was leaking into the lube oil system of RC-3D reactor coolant pump motor. The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20. Data Source: Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs) Accontability: Chase /Jaworski Trend: Needs increased Management Attention 35

._g Component' Categories + Application Categories ... &. Total Categories 18 -- , 16 $ 14 A 3 [ N..., ,,8 4"' ~ 4 - -#.. .,, ^ ~. -

Ws

'~ d _ n_ _,. z 4 0 A94 M J J A s O N 094 J95 F M A M J J A S95 Error / operating Action 12.6% Maintenance / Testing Action 17.6 % Wear out/ Aging 67.1% other Percent of Failures Wtth Devices Engr > 7.9% Man eturing Known Failure Causes Design 1.8% During the Past 18-Month m CFAR Period COMPONEN, FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) reporting period (from December 1993 through May 1995). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 87 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18-month CFAR period. The station reported a higher failure rate in 7 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18-month CFAR period. The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 51 failure reports (failure discovery dates within the 18-month CFAR period) with known failure causes that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station. A total of 76 failure reports were submitted to INPO with discovery dates within the 18-month CFAR period. Data Source: Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/ Dowdy Trend: None 36 1

i + Components with rnore than One Failure ] l GOOD l 1 4 ._w-Cor@onents with rn>re than Two Failures 15 - y i 10 _ j 8 8 8 8 S. 4 4 4 4 0 1 1 1 1 1 h 0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug (*l l'"51 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly cailed the " Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been discontinued, 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 reportable components with more than one failure during the 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) period (failure ciscover dates from December 1993 through May 1995) and the number of NPRDS reportable component!, with more than two failures during the 18-month CFAR period. During the last 18-month CFAR period,there were 3 NPRDS components with more than one failure. None of these 4 NPRDS reportable components had more than two failures. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat failures are listed in the Biannual CFAR. The tag numbers of the components with more than one failure are listed below: Raw Water Pump AC-10B Reactor Protection System Channel 'A' Axial Power Distribution Trip Calculator Multiplier / Divider Module Al-31 A-AW15-B45 Component Cooling Water Heat Exchanger 'B' Raw Water Outlet Valve Operator Reactor Coolant Pump Motor RC-3D-M Data Source: Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Trend: None 37

1 4 l Nadioactive Waste Buried This Month (cu.ft.) lGOGu} e.-. bar-te Date Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried <,. Fort Calhoun Goal (900 cu.ft.) Y 900.. p e c. o e c+__ o .o o / 800__ / l 700-- j' 600__ j i j500. e c d w .o j j 400._ 1 o } 300 -_ l 1 200-_ 100 0 ___+_ _+_ y j Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l'"dl l'"51 i VOLuuE OF LOW LEVEL $OLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumula-tive year-to-date radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%. Cu.Ft. Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during current month 0 Volume of solid radwaste buried during current month 113.9 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1995 266.3 Amount of solid radwaste in temporary storage 0 The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 900 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry g7al is 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value l:: approximately 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year. Data Source: Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: None SEP54 30

4 4 C"" -) Primary system Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit lG000l --e-Fort Calhoun Goal (0.02) l f 2% c o 'r l k + ?' Cycle is Refueling Outage ~ 5 0% oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l1994l l1995l PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the primary system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key pa-rameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, flouride, hydrogen and suspended solids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month. The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Specification was 0.00% for the month of September 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 Trend: Positive due to performance better than goal. 39

~ _ -. _ - m secondarysystemCPI ...o., 12-Month Aerage l GOOD l _.,_. Fort Calhoun Goal (1.4) 1.6.- U 1.5 1.4 - A A a A A A- -A A 1.3 -- 1.2 l 1.1 p. 1 e i i. i -t-t - -t- + t t . i. 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec N SECONDARY $YSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) are:

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

per day. The CPI for September 1995 was 1.20. The 12-month average CPI value was 1.23 at the end of the month. The Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) was above the goal in July due to slightly higher than average sodium and chloride values. Also the values provided as industry averages by INPO for 1995 are considerably lower than FCS historically has been able to achieve for secondary chemistry values. Iron, the one industry average that we are below, almost by half, does not assist in lowering the CPI because of the way the CPI is calculated. Data Source: Smith / Spires (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith Trend : Positive due to performance better than goal 40 i

i i i COST Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as an eco-nomically viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line. Cost consciousness is exhibited at all levels of the or-ganization. 41

+ Actual ... e... Revised Budget Original Budget Plan s 4. 3.75 _ 3.5 - I 3.25 _ h p,,,a ~.. y_.....,. g -n,,n 3, S li m -# ' s o 2.75 - A 2.5 _ 2.25 _ 2 D91 D92 D93 D94 J95 F M A M J J A S o N 095 D96 D97 D98 099 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOua 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 budgets. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report. The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991 through 1994. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1996 through 1999 for refer-ence. 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 Nuclear Fuels. The 12-month average unit price (3.10 cents per kilowatt hour for August 1995) aver-aged slightly above than budget due to 12-month generation not meeting the budget expectations. The Unit Price for the current month (September 1995) is not available at this time. Data Source: Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Scofield Trend: None 42

. _. ~ l l g Nuclear Services Division 2 O Production Engineering Division 3 Nuclear Operations Division a TotalNuclear l 800.- 7H res IA3 133 127 137 1 54 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 O i .i I i i j Jan-93 Jan-94 Apr-94 Jul 94 Oct-94 Dec-94 Mar-95 Jun-95 Sep-95 l l Actual Stamng Level l I i i STAFFING I,EVEL i l The actual staffing levels for the three Nuclear Divisions are shown on the graph above. l The authorized staffing levels for 1995 and 1996 are: Authorized Staffing 1995 1996 439 432 Nuclear Operations Division 185 175 Production Engineering Division 115 113 Nuclear Services Division 739 720 Total Data Source: Ponec/Kobunski Accountability: Ponec Trend: None SEP 24 43

Spare Parts inventoryValue ($ Million) 16.8. 16.6 -- l a 16.4 _ b } 16.2 8! 16 __ 15.8 _ 15.6 -_ Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep [N1 P"51 Spar Part. Inventory Vaiu. The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of September 1995 was reported as $16,210,427.

Parts being resupplied and replenished following last outage.

Data Source: Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source) Accountability: Willrett/McCormick Trend: None* 44

i l i DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power pro-duction. i i 45

m Corrective Maintenance e Preventive Maintenance i r:ggi Non-Corrective / Plant improvements _o._ Fort Calhoun Goal 1000.- ses Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l1#l l Non-Outage Maintenance VVork Order Backlog l 5 MWOs Which Exceed Maintenance Completion Goals O Totsi MWOs 500.- 400-300 -- ass 200-- 100. ....n us E 88 I f*" 0 o bs sinde---- I o Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 l Ron-outage Maintenance Work order BackW) 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 maintenance MWOs. The current backlog of corrective MWO's is 464. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as follows: Goal Priority 1 Emergency N/A Priority 2 Immedate Action 2 days Priority 3 Operations Concern 14 days Priority 4 Essential Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential Corrective 180 days o iority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant Improvements N/A r This indicator is considered an adverse trend. An action plan has been established to identity problem areas and reduce the backlog. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: Adverse SEP 36 46 l

l-l l Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance l 100 % _ l 90% __ 80% __ j i 70% j 60% - { 50% _- j 40% __ j 30% - j 20 % i 10% - 0%, i i e i i i i i i.. _+_ i H i Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep f*l l' " 51 m Preventive Maintenance items Overdue e Fort Calhoun Goal 2%. y 1% __ 0% E E E i i i i i i i i i Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep F*1 F#9 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE lTEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total com-pleted non-outage maintenance. The ratio was 47% for the month of September 1995. The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that are overdue. During September 1995,580 PM items were completed. All but 4 PMs were com-pleted within the allowable grace period or were administratively closed. The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items over-due is a maximum of 0.5%. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None SEP 41 & 44 47

.. - - -. - -. - _. -. - - - - -. - ~ . - - - - - - - -. -. - - - - ~. -. -... ~.. m Rework as identified by Craft 4 Fort Calhoun Goal (<3%) 1 6% s.ss s.3% 5%.. 3: 4%. 3.ss 2 a.2s s.es [ 87' 2.ss O 2.6% h

c 2% _. tes 2

tss g 1%.- 3 na4 i j j i i j i Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct [99]4 l1995l PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWO. 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 is calculated from the 15th of the previous month to the 15th of the current l month due to delay in closing open MWOs at the end of each month. The Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. A detailed review will be con-ducted of rework items each month to identify generic concerns. i Data Source: Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None 48 l

i i e Maintenance Overtli5e j --.w.-. 12-Month Average Maintenance Overtina l GOOD l o. Fort calhoun "On-Line" Goal (10%) 45%. V 40%.- 35% - 30% - 25% - 20% -_ 15% -- ~~x x 10% l o e.. a. o. o _... .e o I I j l i ) ( Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l1*l Pl MAINTENANCE OvenTius 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 4.0% for the month of September 1995. The 12-month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 13.0 % 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 Trend: None 49

Human Performance irs (Maintenance) j 20. - l 18 -- 16.- 15 14 g 12 ? 10 s o j 8 6 l 4-2 n i i Jul-95 Aug sep Oct Nov Dec-95 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE lNCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) This indicator shows the number of human performance irs related to procedural non-compliance incidents assigned to the Maintenance Department. September data unavailable due to conversion to new Condition Reporting System. Data Source: Faulhaber Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44 50 +

4 l i a % Scheduled Activities Conpleted j 0% Emergent Activities 100.0 % i 90.0 % 80.0 % j 70.0 % i 60.0 % ) 50.0 % l 1 40.0 % I 30.0 % i I 20.0 % 10.0*/. i ) 0.0% i i i i Sep-95 Oct Nov Dec-95 i 1 DAILY SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE PERCENT OF SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES COMPLETED This indicator shows the percent of integrated Plant Schedule activities completed on i schedule. Allwork groups and cciivitics are included. Measurement of daily performance j was initiated in June. l j The percent of emergent work is calculated as a percentage of the total number of sched-j uled activities. 4 ] The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is j 85%. i Data Source: Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) i Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None SEP 33 51

% of Hours the IrR.ine Chemistry Instrumects are inoperable -e-1995 Fort Calhoun Goal (10%) 16% - _g 14% - 12% - g g 10%- c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 8% A 4 M! ~ 6% - I---] Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 11*l Imsj IN-l.lNE CHEMISTRY lNSTRUMENTS 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 September 1995, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments were inoperable was 13.11%. The following instruments were out of service during the month:

CE-1582A - B Cation Bed Conductivity The entire PASS System was out of service for 8 days while maintenance was being performed.

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. Data Source: Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Trend: None* 52

Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms) Monthly Average Waste Produced During the last 12 Months (Kilograms) -o-Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal (150 kilograms) -M-Federal & state Monthly Limit (Max. of 1,000 kg) 1000 x x x x x x 800 m 600 E 5 E 2 400 7 E

h 200 2

C C o = = 0 8 I Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l1994] l HAZARDOUS WASTE PaoDuceD 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 wast produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced. During the month of September 1995,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,0.0 kilograms of halogenated and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total hazardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 654.1 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-l mum of 150 kilograms. l Data Source: Chase /Carlson (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase / Smith Trend: Positive 53

4 m Contaninated Radiation Controlled Area l Good l o Fort Calhoun Goal (10%) U 17% - c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 9% -- l l l l 8% i t-i- - t -- t i i i. . i i t Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l1994l l1995l l 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 9.5% contaminated RCA. At the end of September 1995, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.4% Data Source: Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: Positive SEP 54 54 -~ _

-.e-- Identified PRWPs (Year to Date) { GOOD l l Fort calhoun Goal (<20) U 20. ~ 3 18. l l 16 - 16 15 15 l 14 - 16 g 14 - 13 f 12 E 12. l b 10. 8~ y = l 56 l 6 4 4. 2. 1 O I i l Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l F'*l l' " 51 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM l The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radiologi-cal Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month. The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means l to quantitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological perfor-mance. During the month of September 1995, there were O PRWPs identified. There have been 15 PRWPs in 1995. The 1995 year-end goal for PRWPs is a maximum of 20. Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase /Lovett Trend: None SEP52 55

... ~. _ -- O Documents Scheduled for Review e Documents Reviewed G Documents Overdue 200-180 - l 160-j 140-i 120-i 100-80 - } i 1 60 - l ] 40 - 20 - y i A k f O l Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l1994l l1995l l DOCUMENT Review This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Se-curity Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Op-erating Manual. During September 1995, there were 131 document reviews scheduled, while 65 reviews j were completed. At the end of the month, there were 8 document reviews more than 6 months overdue. There were 10 new documents initiated during September. Beginning in September these figures will include PED and NOD procedures. Data Source: Chase /Plath Accountability: Chase /Jaworski Trend: None SEP 46 56

.. _. -.. -. -.. ~.. - - -.. - -. -. _. _ - -. -... 1 I i g system Failures lcocoj O Non System Fallures 37 I 35 - l i .] 2. 25. ] 22 22 ) 21 3 20.- e e I n n Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Nl Pl 5,0GGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) This graph shows the Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator and depicts (1) the +otal number of loggable/ reportable incidents concerning system failures which oc-curred during the reporting month, and (2) the total number of loggable/ reportable inci-dents non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authoriza-tion, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors. During the month of September 1995, there were 22 loggable/ reportable incidents iden-tified. System failures accounted for 19 (86%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. Ex-tensive repairs were made on the security system computer during this reporting period. The X-Ray problem was also resolved by the vendor during September 1995. The three (3) non-system errors involved an unattended security badge, a vital area security door found unsecured, and a security key leaving site. Data Source: Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source) Accountability: Sefick Trend: None SEP 58 57

Temporary Modifications >1-cycle old (RFo required for removal) = i C":::3 Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line) - M-- Fort Calhoun Goals for >1-cycle and >6 months old e a 6-5 E 7

~

h b Q 7 g 3 3 7 h 7 ?; [rh h { 3 g y R g g g j 2 A EI El CA El Ek C# El EI x x Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec l1995 l TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number

nporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage v, a) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are zero. However, one temporary modification (BAST level indication) has been approved by management to exceed these goals due to cost effectiveness considerations (reference PED-STE-94-042).

There is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one-fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: RC-3D cover gasket pressure indicator, which is await-ing completion of MWO 941450, which is scheduled for a future refueling outage when-ever cover gaskets are replaced. In addition, at the end of September 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-118, in which Licensing sent FLC 94-001 to the NRC 6/27/95 for approval; 2) Control system for intensifier on HCV-2987, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-280, scheduled for completion 12/95; 3) brace to instrument air header "T" to water plant, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, scheduled for issue from DEN-Mechanical 9/29/95; and 4) braces on main instrument air header, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, sched-uled for issue from DEN-Mechanical 9/29/95. At the end of September 1995, there was a total of 20 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. Out of the 20 installed TMs, 7 of them require an outage for removal and 13 are removable on-line. In 1995, a total of 31 temporary modifications have been installed. l Data Source: Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Gorence Trend: Needs increased Management Attention SEP 62 & 71 58

m Total Modification Packages open o._ Fort Calhoun Year End Goal 140 120 100 T 40 20 -- 0-_ ._s y y 92 93 94 Sep Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstandina modifications which are proposed to be cancelled). Reporting Cateaory '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 0 0 1 20 1 8 30 Construction Backlog /In Progress 5 0 18 5 0 0 28 Design Engr. Update Backlog /in Progress 1 6 8 0 0 0 15 Totals 6 6 33 25 1 8 79 (outage + OnLine) (3+3) (0+6) (18+17) (17+8) (0+1) (8+0) (44+35) At the end of September 1995,15 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 9 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) had conducted 53 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 21 backlog modification request reviews this year.

A review of the reports used to determine the total number of outstanding modifications and their various stages of accomplishment was undertaken at the request of the Nuclear Planning Department. The results of the review determined that the reports were not providing complete / accurate data. The reports have been corrected. The revised totals beginning with the March 1995 data are reflected in the current graph.

The 1995 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 63 outstanding modifications. Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Scofield/Lounsberry (Manager / Source) Accountability: Scofield/Phelps Trend: None* 59

.~ 80 -- EARS Requiring Engineering Closeout - Not in Closecut 60 - 3 sE O DEN 40 20 -

O M>O H _+ E a 0

l 1 m > Jul Aug Sep Jul Aug sep Jul Aug sep Jul Aug sep 0-3 Months 3-6 Months 6-12 Months >12 Months September 1995 Overdue EARS O Engineering Response a Closeout (sE) 100801 60 -- 40 M Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Total Open EARS l li Priority 1 & 2 Priority 3 .o. i g.,,, .o. . w.. u- - .e. u .s. ..a. u- . a., g } .o. .o IR R:N: R:4.R.M M E,4 E5 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 1994 1995 '.,"llll ~ ^"- A 'W I'I" 9 29 EARS 10.5 % 4 9 us ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REauEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer-ing and System Engineering. The 1995 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS. Total EAR breakdown is as follows: EARS opened during the month 15 EARS closed during the month 16 Total EARS open at the end of the month 130 Data Source: Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Skiles Trend: None SEP 62 60

e 4 Clo se cut " c.3 Montns OEN s 17s

10 5 115 30.2%

18 4 % >sWapse

#8

,,,o..,... $n Eas' - C n;;;, a ECN Status -Overall Backlog 6 3 Months D Backlogged D Received D Completed [, ',*,, M.nins. M

~

3$.2% = E E E 5 h 6.o M a, i 3 n, i i M a nn

== ,_[2;$hl 5% im 5T-O n 3.s u.atne [7.1 4 p my June M Aug SeP46 Design Engineering too / g o.. Monttis 3.s Montns .g e to 160. 7. 12 0 % 100.kk k k k k >s Montns e Apt 46 May June M Aug Sep46 System Engineering 250 >s Mentne, o.a Monus =I. v. ,u% 7 as L L,,, ,,,,,sLLLL i Apr. May June Jul Aug Sep. 3 8 Months 95 96 s 31 Procurement / Construction 260. o.3 Montne 3.s Months -t 200 - 2s% s 1% g. n. Apr. May June Jul Aug Sep. 96 96 Drafting /Closecut ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source: Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source) Accountability: Ski!es/Jaworski q Trend: None SEP 62 61

DC 7,* " rern,..iu '2 0 i.., i.7, numanin ll ll ( g+Ti..p;,lllllhlhll fll p. f l h fn = T...i.- r: %orx: u is Total Open ECNs by Type (532 Total) Total Open ECNs by Priority (532 Total) O DEN Closeout or Drafting Not Complete p g, ng,,,, Prle m s O Maintenance / Construction / Procurement. Work Not Complete &2 8'8 O Syatem Engineering. Response, Confirmation Not Complete i44% 9 DEN. Engineering Not Complete e iH 200 tes is7 in ir, 150 28 7 i 7 dM4 so i rt u rs r2 l t% 100 u ,4 T hh 50 0 A pr.95 May Jun Jul Aug Sep 95 ""h',"'j' ' S Facility Change ECNs Open 360. 1 3,, p n.ni,,, 300-2ss tot it.ss 27.2% 0 g a 4 se a 0L Pnerttle s i i i i 3s Apr46 May Jun Jul Aug Sep46 .,a Substitute Replacernent item ECNs Open 90. Prtent e s 30 72 73 74 7.s% 8# st 31 0_ i i i i Apr-86 May Jun Jul Aug Sep46 P,dt;*

Document Change ECNs Open 44.2s ENGINEERING CHANGE NoricES OPEN Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager Source) Accountability: Skiles/Jaworski l Trend: None SEP 62 62

'i - ? .y..[ ~ 13l LlooneedOperator;tirterj Teth* Prese@ ,W lejmor PasamiM m w l{Q3DesWimch [! Pfchietn' ali%sipment hiluroM g g ^ 2 s 1 0 sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug pI9T [i995 blCENSEE 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 September 1,1994, through August 31,1995. To be consistent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicatcr, 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 de-tailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section of this report. There were two events in August 1995 that resulted in an LER. Data Source: Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source) Accountability: Chase Trend: None 63

O Total Requalification Training Hours a Simulator Training Hours a Non-Requalification Training Hours a Nunter of Exam Failures ' 37 37 37 6.6 34.6 36 35 - 30._ 26 25 20 16 4 15 - 2 11 1.6 12 0' 7.6 .6 6 .6 6 5 3 33 3 2.6 3 0 0 0 0-__ + _+_ ____+_ i + g Cycle Cycle C)cle Cycle Cycle C)cle CWie Cycle 94-5 94-6 94-7 95-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 95-5

Note 1:The simulator was outef-service during Cycle 944.
- Note 2: Includes 8 hours of General Ertployee Training.

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. The simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for APO/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches. Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training. j 1 Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Trend: None SEP 68 1 64

g SR0' Exams Administered O SRO Exams Passed O RO Exams Administered a RO Exams Passed 15 10 i f + i i i j i i i i i 5 h E s i i i 9 { i j i i 0 1 .y Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep [i994l ps55] I.,1 CENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera-tor (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis-tered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress. For the month of September 1995, there were no RO or SRO exams given. Data Source: Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source) Accountability: Gasper /Guliani Trend: None SEP 68 65

l open irs >6 Months old { = open Significant irs = -+- Total open irs 600 - 500-I ^ 400-F 300 22s 231 1 91 g& g ses 200 - ,7, 1,, 1,i G f y f g y {B g$ 1'e 143 f ( s g

y s

g g-g- g- ) i 4 e-- t-j- g g g ios 'os ico ioo - ioo g-it f 100 - t ro r* rs ra is rg g g [ g" .i i t a 3 g i g l 0 oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep l1994l l1995l OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS This indicator shows the total number of Open irs, irs greater than 6 months old, and the number of open significant irs. Also, at the end of September 1995, there were 516 open irs. 218 of these IR were greater than 6 months old. There were 104 Open Significant irs at the end of the month. These numbers have been restated to reflect the elimination of CARS from the system. As of April 21,1995, CARS are no longer being issued. As of September 21,1995 Inci-dent Reports are no longer issued. All future corrective actions will be documented on Condition Reports. Data Source: Conner /Plott (Manager / Source) Accountability: Andrews/Phelps/Patterson Trend : None 66

O Total outage MWos a MWos ReadytoWork 800-- MWO Holds ~ System Planner Engineenng 536 500__ 38 % 36% 400-300-ECNs Parts g 14% 12% 100 + 0 i i i sep-95 oct Nov Dec-95 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING OUTAGE) This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Main-tenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates: - Parts Holds - Planning Complete, Awaiting Parts - System Engineering Holds - Awaiting System Engineering input to Planning - Planner Holds - Maintenance Planner has not completed planning the work package. - ECN Hold - Awaiting Substitute Replacement item (SRI) ECN from DEN. Data Source: Chase /Schmitz Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None SEP 31 l 67

1996 Outage Projects Status Report a LastMonth a This Month 100 O For schedule 90 80 70 80 5 & 50 O at 40 32 30 2428 20 is 0 3 5 I l f i i 3 g" l: if E d ? 3 ) [ k of 0 E j } !. ] f 5 k j a E E k m g e Speciai Semices Engineering Department OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage) This performance indicator shows the status of projects which are in the scope of Cycle 17 Refueling Outage. SSED's goalis to have all projects complete by August 23,1996, 30 days prior to the Refueling Outage start date. Data Source: Jaworski/Swearngin (Manager / Source) Accountability: Jaworski/Boughter Trend: None SEP 31 68

m -+. Baseline schedule for PRc Approval - e Projected / Actual schedule for PRC Approval Total Modification Packages (17)(5 Added Late) _ 10 E* 9 j 8-t.8

S 7.-

I'} 6-- x?22 gj s f $ 4.- 3 $2 1 0 1 i ,l l l i 1 > i i 1 1 1 1 EE$EEEE$EEEEEEElEEEElEE E B. : E E. E. E

e. !5SEE: A EEGEe 5,E 33:

3 ~ e PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE (1996 MODIFICATION PLANNING) (FROZEN SCOPE OF 9 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS) This indicator shows the status of Modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage. Modifications added to the outage list after May 1,1995, are not part of this indicator. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (es-tablished June 16,1995) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the modification variation report produced by Design Engineering Nuclear. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to May 1, 1995, and PRC approved by March 22,1996. 5 Modifications added after May 1,1995, not included. September 1995 Modifications added: 1 Deleted = 0 FC95-013 Steam Generator Orifice Removal Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Trend: None SEP 31 69

e 4 + Baseline schedule for PFtC Approval ~ .. u.. Projected / Actual schedule for PRC Approal Total Modification Packages (11)(1 is Close Out Only,1 added late.) 10 E C2 9 8E I

a.

ij e-F2 t& I <O a oE7-EC m 5F zt a: g 6-E s 4

>.>s EEEEEEE$E$EEEEE$EEEEEEE 58EC EEE "Sm E$GE5a E E E. G E B E a

m n 4 m s . g g PROGRESS OF 1995 ON-l !NE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 9 MODIFICATIONS) This indicator shows 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 Variation Report produced by the Design Engineering Nuclear group.

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to 1/13/95 PRC approved by October 30,1995.1 modification added after May 1,1995, not in-cluded. This goal was met September 21,1995. September 1995 Modifications Added:1 Deleted = 0 Mod FC95-015 DG Governor Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Trend: None SEP 31 70

l

+ Baseline schedule for PIltb Approval --e_. Projected / Actual schedule for PRC Approval Total Modification Packages (8)(2 Added Late) 6 5- } $ 4-- 4 12 g3-- 1 o 1 j 2-1.- O

>;,'a l

l ;'.iii-ii;>; > pi

p; i1

>1 1 ii EE$EEEE$EEEEEEE{8$NEEEEl$E E. 8 : G E. G. ! e !89EEn i Ra 5,E n n g - ~ PROGRESS OF 1996 ON LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 6 MODIFICATIONS) This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during 1996. Modifications added to the on-line list after May 1,1995, are not part of this indica-tor. The date is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established June 16, 1995) and the current schedule. This information is taken from the Modification Variation Report produced by Design Engineering Nuclear. The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages identified prior to May 1, 1995 PRC approved by March 25,1996. 2 Modifications added after May 1,1995, not included. September 1995 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source) Accountability: Phelps/Skiles Trend: None SEP 31 71

,,4& .m-p_ __-_wu_..A-amhao-m--a-..m.- 4 4.w-a,s.m__ee4._am.a an-m a m m-sAmw.4A _mma 4wahome434.4 .._w2-2eMMmee _JA._m 0 4 l i ACTION PLANS l 1 i i 72

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 4 Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing Increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months. 1 In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-QP-37, the following performance indicators would l require action plans based on three (3) consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing increased Management Attention"- 4 . Industrial Safety Accident Rate (page 2) i j . Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 46) i l The action plan for Industrial Safety Accident Rate (page 2) is as follows: 1 REVERSING THE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ADVERSE TREND Even though the goal of zero lost-time accidents will not be met in 1995, the emphasis on safety and the reporting of potential safety hazards are still high priorities. The standards for safety will be raised by making the following items part of the station's daily operations: I Promptly resolve safety problems. Promptly follow-up safety training to supervisors / crew leaders. l Use the Near Miss forms to resolve potential safety concerns. The action plan for Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 46) is as follows: A detailed review is being conducted to determine which stage of the maintenance process has a higher than expected backlog. Areas being reviewed are: Planning Scheduled Maintenance Bulk Work 73

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR j PERFORMANCE l The purpose of this indicator is to ~antify the economical The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable operation of Fort Calhoun Station. cents per Hlowatt hour hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the auxiliary indicator represents the budget h..a aumt cents per kilowatt feedwater system for the reporting period divided by the entical hour on a twelve-rnonth average for the current year. The basis hours for the reporting penod multiplied by the number of trains for the budget curve is the approved yearly budget. The basis in the auxiliary feedwater system. for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 3,1,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA Collective radiation exposure is the total extemal whole-body dose received by al orHiste personnel (including contractors and The personnel contarrunation events in the clean controlled area. visitors) during a time period, as measured by the Thisind6cator tracks personnel performance for SEP #15 & 54. thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Collerw, radiation exposure la reported in units of person-rem. iris indicator CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which includes COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and areas of the

SUMMARY

C/R P building, that is contaminated based on the total square footage. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #54. The summary of INPO categones for Fort Calhoun Station with sgrvficantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT the rest of the industry for an eighteen-month time penod. Failures are reported as component (i e., pumps, motors, main This ridicator shows the daily core thermal output as measured steam stop valves, control element motors, etc ) categories. from computer point XC105 (in thermal megawatts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec hmit, and the unmet portion of the 1495 MW Failure cause Categones are: FCS daily goal for the reporting mo,ith are also shown. Wear Out/ Aging a failure thought to be the consequence of DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (26 Dernands) expected wear or aging This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for each Manufacturing Defect - a failure attributable to inadequate emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands assembly or initial quality of the responsible component or and the last 25 load-run demands. I

system, DlSABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE Engineenng/ Design a failure attnbutable to the inadequate (LOSS TIME ACCIDENT RATE) design of the responsible component or system.

This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for all utility Other Devices - a failure attnbutable to a failure or personnel permanently assigned to the station, involving days misoperation of another component or system, including away from work per 200,000 man-houni worked (100 man-associated devices. years) This does not include contractor personnel. This indicator tracks personnel performance for SEP #25,26 & 27. Maintenance / Testing - a failure that is a result of improper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or personnel DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) errors that occur dunng maintenance or testing activities perbrmed on the responsibie component or system, including The Document Review Indicator shows the number of i failure to follow procedures. documents reviewed, the number of documents scheduled for review, and the number of document reviews that are overdue 1 Errors - failures attnbutable to incorrect procedures that were for the reporting month. A document review is considered followed as wntten, improper installation of equipment, and overdue if the review is not complete within six months of the personnel errors (including failure to follow procedures assigned due date. This indicator tracks performance for SEP property). Also included in this category are failures for whK;h

46.

cause is unknown or cannet be assigned to any of the preceding categones. EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM j PERFORMANCE TN sum of the known (planne't sad unplanned) unavaitat'e and the estimated unavailable hours for the emergency AC power system for the reporting penod divided by the number of hours in the reporting penod multiplied by the number of trains in the emergency AC power system. 74

N e i PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS i EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting I system was disabled for test purpose,if followed by This indicator shows the number of failures that were reported a successful start with the starting system in its during the last 20, GO, and 100 emergency diesel generator normal abgnment. ] demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are tngger ) values which correlate to a high level of confidence that a unit's Each emergency generator failure that results in the generator diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or being declared inoperaMe should be counted as one demand equal to 95% when the demand failures are less than the tngger and one failure. Exploratory tests during corrective maintenance j values and the successful test that follows repair to venfy operabihty should not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG f

1) Number of Start Demands: All vahd and inadvertent start has not been declared operable again.

l demands, including all start-only demands and all start j l demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY j j by automatic or manualinihation. A start-only demand is i a demand in which the ernergency generator is started, but This hidicator measures the total unrehabihty of emergency 4 no attempt is made to load the generator, diesel generators. In general, unreliabihty is the ratio of unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to the number of

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the valid demands. Total unrehabihty is a combination of start emergency generator system that prevents the generator unreliabihty and load-run unrehabihty.

tom achieving spectiled tequency and voltage is classified as a valid start failure. This includes any condition ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) identified in the course of maintenance inspections (with BREAKDOWN the emergency generator in standby mode) that definitely would have resulted in a start failure if a demand had This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and pnonty of the occurred. EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering Nuclear and System Engineenng This indecator tracks

3) Number of Lead-Run Demands: For a valid load-run performs me for SEP #62.

demand to be counted, the load-run attempt must rneet one or rnore of the following critena: ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real The number of ECNs that were opened. ECNs that were automatic or manuat initiation. completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion by DEN for the reporbng rnonth. This indicator tracks performance B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration for SEP #62. as stated in each test's specifications. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN C) Other specal tests in which the emergency generator is expected to be operated for at least one hour while This indicator breaks down the number of Engineenng Change loaded with at least 50% of its design load. Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineenng Nuclear (DEN), System Engineenng, and Maintenance. The

4) Ntsnberof Load 4 tun Failures: A load-run failure should graphs provide data on ECN Facility Changes open, ECN be counted for any reason in which the emergency Substitute Replacement items open, and ECN Document generatet does not pick up load and run as predicted.

Changes opert This indicator tracks performance for SEP #62. Failures are counted dunng any valid load-run demands. EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CR:TICAL

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load-run HOURS should not be counted as vahd demands or failures when they can be attributed to any of the following-Ecppment Ibreed outages per 1,000 cntical hours is the inverse of the mean time between forced outages caused by equipment A) Spunous tnps that would be bypassed in the event of failures. The mean time is equal to the number of hours the an emergency.

reactor is critical in a penod (1,000 hour *) divided by the number of forced outages caused by equipment failures in that period B) Malfunction of equipment that ts not required dunng an emergency. EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR C) Irtentionaltermination of a test because of abnormal This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available conditions that would not have resulted in major generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as a diesel generator damage or repair. percentage. Available generation is the energy that can be produced if the unit is operated at the maximum power level D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would not permstted by equipment and regulatory hmitations. Maximum have prevented the emergency generator from being generation is the energy that can be produced by a unit in a restarted and brought to load within a few minutes given penod if operated continuously at maximurn capacity. 75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFlNITIONS FORCED OUTAGE RATE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE INPO 1 This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that the unit This indicatoris deAned as the number of accidents per 200,000 was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time mantiours worked for all utility personnel permanently assigned planned for electncal generation. Forced events are failures or to the station that result in any of the following-other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service before the end of the next weekend. Forced events

1) One or more days of restricted work (excluding the day of j

include start up failures and events initiated while the unit is in the accident); reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available but not in service).

2) One or rnore days away from work (excluding the day of FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR the accident), and This indicator is defined as the steady-state pnmary coolant b

3) Fatalities.

131 activity, ccrrected for the tramp uranium contnbution and normalized to a :ommon purl 6 cation rate. Tramp uranium is fuel Contractor personnel are not included for this indicator. which has been deposited on reactor core intemals frorn previous defectrve fuel or is present on the surface of fuel IN LINE CHEMISTRY lNSTRUIENTS OUT OF 9ERVICE elements from the manufactunng process. Steady state is defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are out of-power level that does not vary rnore than + or -5% Plants service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident should collect data for this Indicator at a power level above 85%, Sampling System (PASS). When possible. Plants that did not operate at steady state power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at the highest LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS steady-state power level attained dunng the month. Thss indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes and The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific volume exams that are administered and passed each month. This of coolant at the RCS operating temperature (540 degrees F, Vf indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68. = 0 02146) divided by the specific volume of coolant at rormal letdown temperature (120* F at outiet of the letdown cooling heat LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING exchanger, Vf = 0.016204), which results in a density correction factor for FCS equal to 1.32. T!e total number of hours of training given to each crew dunng each cycle. Also provided are the simulator training hours GROSS HEAT RATE (which are a subset of the total training hours), the number of non-REQUALIFICATION tranng hours and the number of exam Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal energy in failures. This indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68. British Thetmal Units (BTU) produced by the reactor to the total I gross electrical energy produced by the generator in kilowatt-j hours (KWH). i HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED j The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated hazardous I waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced by FCS each month. HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable hours and the eshmated unavailable hours for the high pressure j safety injection system for the reporting penod divided by the j cnbcal hours for the reporting pertod multiplied by the number of trains in the high pressure safety injection system. 1 i 76 i

-. -. ~ _ _.. - - - - - -- -.. - - -. ~. _.. i e i l 1 1 4 l i PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS i LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE Corrective Repair and restoration of equipment or j BREAKDOWN components that have failed or are malfunctioning and are not J 4 performing their intended function. This indcator shows the number and root cause code for I Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as follows: Preventive - Actions taken to maintain a piece of equipment within design operating conditions, prevent equipment failure, I

1) Administrative Control Problem Management and and extend its life and are perforrned pnor to equipment supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or failure.

activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of adequate management or supervisory control, incorrect Non4orrective/ Plant improvements - Maintenance j procedures, etc), actNties performed to implement station improvements or to i repair non-plant equipment. l

2) Licensed Operator Error This cause code captures f

errors of omission / commission by hcensed reactor Maintenance Wwk Priorities are defined as: operators dunng plant activities. Emergency - Conditions which significanty degrade station

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission / commission safety or availabihty.

committed by non-hcensed personnel involved in plant actNties. Immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which significantly degrade station rehabihty. Potentia! for unit

4) Maintenance Problem-The intent of this cause code is to shutdown or power reduction.

capture the full range of problems which can be attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the Opershons Concern - Equipment deficiencies which hinder maintenance functional organization. Actwities included in station operation. this category are maintenance, testmg, surveillance, cahbration and radiation protection. Essential Routine correctNe maintenance on essential station systems and equipment.

5) DesignPConstructionlinstallation/ Fabrication Problem.

This cause code covers a full rarage of programmatic Non-Essential - Routine corrective maintenance on non-deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, essential station systems and equipment, betallation, and fabncation (i.e., loss of control power due to underrated fuse, equipment not quahfied for the Plant knprovement - Non-corrective maintenance and plant environment, etc.). improvements.

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece Parts or This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP #36.

Environmental-Related Failures) This code is used for spunous failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE to meteorological conditions such as hghtning, ice, high winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time The total maxrnum amount of radiation received by an individual failures. Electnc components included in this category are person working at FCS on a rnonthly, quarterty, and annual crcut cards, rectrlers, bestables, fuses, capacitors, diodes, basis. resistors, etc. MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) OUTAGE) The total number of security incidents for the reporting month The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have been depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks secunty approved forinclussonin the Cycle 17 Refucling Outage and the performance for SEP #58. number that are ready to work (parts staged, planning complete, and al other paperwork ready for field use). Also included is the MAINTENANCE OVERTIME nurnber of MWOs that have been engmeenng holds (ECNs, procedures and other miscellaneous engineenng holds), parts The percent of overtime hours compared to normal hours for hold,(parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrNed) and maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as planning hold (job scope not yet completed) Maintenance Work contract personnel. Requests (MWRs) are also shown that have been identified for the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and have not yet been MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS converted to MWOs. Thrs indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. Maintenance classifications are deflned as fobows. 77

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS NUMER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUlPENT DEFICIENCIES A) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed. A control room equipment denciency (CRD)is de Aned as any B) Modilcabon Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear component which is operated or controlled from the Control Projects Review Committee (NPRC). Room, provides indicatson or alarm to the Control Room, provides testing capabikties from the Control Room, provides C) Modi 6 cation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear automatic actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a Projects Committee (NPC). passive funcbon for the Control Room and has been identified as deAcient, i.e, does not perform under all conditions as designed These Modification Requests may be reviewed severat times Thss deRnition also apphes to the Altemate Shutdown Panels Al-before they are approved for accomphshment or canceled. 179, Al-185, and Al-212. Some of these Modification Requests are retumed to Engineenng for more information, some approved for evaluation. A plant component which is deGeient or inoperable is considered some approved for study, and some approved for planning-an " Operator Work Around (OWA) item"if some other action is Once planning is completed and the scope of the work is clearly required by an operator to compensate for the condition of the dehned, these Modification Requests may be approved for component. Some examples of OWAs are: accomplishment with a year assigned for construction or they may be canceled. All of these different phases require review.

1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local sight glass can be read by an Operator out in the plant,

3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress Nuclear Planning has assigned a year in which construction will be

2) A de6cient pump cannot be repaired because replacement completed and design work may be in progress parts require a long lead time for purchase /dekvery, thus recuenng the redundant pump to be operated continuously;

4) Construction Backlopin Progress. The Construction Package has been issued or construction has begun but

3) Special actions are required by an Operator because of the modif! cation has not been accepted by the System equipment design problems. These actions may be Acceptance Committee (SAC).

described in Operations Memorandums. Operator Nctas, or may require changes to Operating Procedures;

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress. PED has received the Modification Completion Report but the

4) DeAcient plant equipment that is required to be used dunng drawings have not been updated.

Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating Procedures; The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not include modifications which are proposed for cancellation.

5) System indication that provic'es enticalinformation during normal or abnormal operations.

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) NUWlER OF MSSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING This indicator shows the status of the projects which are in the IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS scope of the Refueling Outage. The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that resutt in Licensee PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER Event Reports (LERs) dunng the reporting month. This indicator MONTHIDENTIFIED AS REWORK tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & 61. The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identined OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any additior,al work required to lhes indicator displays the total number of open Incident R? ports correct denciencies escovered dunng a fdled Post Maintenance (irs), the number ofIRs that are greater than six rnonths old and Test to ensure the component / system passes subsequent Post the number of open signi$ cant irs. Maintenance Test. OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES The number of Modification Requests (MRS) in any state between the issuance of a Modification Number and the The percent of the number of completed maintenance activities completion of the drawing update. as cornpared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities each month. This percentage is shown for all maintenance

1) Form FC 1133 Backlog'In Progress, This number crafts. Also shown are the number of emergent MWOs.

represents modification requests that have not been plant Maintenanen activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, approved dunng the reporting month. calibrations, and other miscellaneous actnelties. This indicator tracks Maintenance performance for SEP #33.

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category includes:

78

l 9 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS 4 1 PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR INDEX PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE MODIFICATION j PLANNING j This indicator index is calculated from a weighted combination of ten overperformance indicator values, which include Unit This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for 1 Capabihty Factor, Unit Capability Loss Factor, HPSI, AFW, completion dunng the Refueling Outage. Emergency AC Power System, Unplanned Automatic Scrams, Collective Radiaton Exposure, Fuel Rehaibhty, Thermal PROGRESS OF 1996 ON LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING Performance, Secondary System Chemistry, Radiation Waste, and industrial Safety Accident Rate. This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for completion dunng 1995. f PRWiNTABLE/ PERSONNEL ERROR LERs RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER event classification, a " Preventable LER* is defined as: The number of identified poor radiological work practices (PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks An event for which the root cause is personnel error (i e., radiological work performance for SEP #52. Inappropnate action by one or more induiduals), inadequate administrative controls, a design construction, installation, RADIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & installabon, fabncation problem (invoMng work completed by PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep / repair of plant The ratio of preventNe maintenance (including surveillance equipment) Also, the cause of the event must have occurred testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of non-outage wthin approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified correctue maintenance and preventNe maintenance completed in the LER (e g., an event for which the cause is attnbuted to over the reporbng penod. The ratio, expressed as a percentage, a problem with the original design of the plant would not be is calculated based on marFhours. Also displayed are the considered preventable). percent of prevertve maintenance items in the month that were not completed or adminsstratuely closed by the scheduled date For purposes of LER event classificahon, a " Personnel Error" plus a grace penod equalto 25% of the scheduled interval. This LER is defined as follows: indicator tracks preventive maintenance actuibes for SEP #41 An event for which the root cause is inappropriate action on RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY the part of one or more individuals (as opposed to being RATE attnbtfed to a department or a general group). Also, the riappropnete action must have occurred within approximately The number of injunes requinng more than normal first aid per two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER. 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP #15,25 and 26. Addibonaty, each event classified as a " Personnel Error" should also be classified as " Preventable." This indicator trends REPEAT FAILURES personnel performance for SEP ltem #15. The number of Nuclear Plent Rehabihty Data System (NPRDS) PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT OF components with more than one failure and the number of LIWT NPRDS components with more than two failures for the eighteen-month CFAR penod. The percent of hours out of limit are for six pnmary ct.emistry parameters duided by the total number of hours possible for the month. The key parameters used are: L!thium, Chionde, Hydrogen, Drssolved Oxygen, Fluoride and Suspended Solids. EPRI hmits are used. PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE) i ) The number of identified incidents conceming maintenance ) procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the j use of procedures (includes the number of closed irs caused by procedural noncomphance), and the number of closed procedural noncomphance irs. This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP #15,41 and 44. 79

~ -~ e PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES SIGNIFICANT EVENTS Safety system failures are any events or conditions that could Signecant events are the events identifled by NRC staff through prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of structures or detailed screening and evaluation of operating expenence. The systems. If a system connasts of multiple redundant subsystems screening process includes the daily review and dtscussion of or trains, failure of all trains constitutes a safety system failure. all reported operating reactor events, as well as other Failure of one of two or more trains is not counted as a safety operationaldata such as special tests or construction actNites. system fa!!ure. The definition for the indicator parallels NRC An event identified from the screening process as a signdcant reporting requrements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The evert candidate is further evaluated to determine if any actual or blowing is a list of the major safety systems, sub-systems, and potential threat to the health and safety of the public was components monitored for thrs indicator: involved. Specific examples of the type of enteria are summanzed as follows: Accident Monitonng Instrumentation, Auxiliary (and Ernergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Control,

1) Degradation of important safety equipment, Component Cooling Water System, Containment and Containmert isoinhon, Containment Coolant Systems, Control

2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; Room Emergency Ventilation System Emergency Core Cooling

Systems, Engineered Safety Features

3) Degradation of fuel integnty, primary coolant pressure instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air Systems, boundary,important associated features; Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, Low

4) Scram with comphcation; Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC Power

5) Unplanned release of radioactivity; w/Distnbubon, Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core Isolation Coohng System,

6) Operation outside the limits of the Technical Specifications; Reactor Trip System and instrumentation, Recirculabon Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal

7) Other.

Systems, Safety Valves, Spent Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ultimate Heat Sink. INPO significant events reported in this indicator are SERs (Significant Event Reports) which inform utilitiu of signdcant SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE events and lessons leamed identified through the SEE-IN INDEX screening process. The Cherriistry Performance index (CPI)is a calculation based SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE on the concentration of key impurities in the secondary side of the plant. These key impurities are the most likely cause of The dotar value of the spare parts inventory for FCS during the deteriorabon of the steam generators. Cntena for calculating the reporting period. cpl are: STAFFING LEVEL

1) The plant is at greater than 30 percent power; and 1

The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level for the

2) the power is changing less than 5% per day.

Nuclear Operations DNision, The Production Engineenng DNision, and the Nuclear Services DNisbn. Thrs indicator The CPI is calculated using the following equation: tracks performance for SEP #24. CPI = (sodium /0 90) + (Chloride /1.70) + (Sulfate /1.90) + STATION NET GENERATION (Iron /4 40) + (Copper /0.30)/5 The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS dunng the VWere: Sodium, sulfate and chloride are the rnonthly average reporting month. blowdown concentrations in ppb, iron and copper are monthly time weighted average feedwater concentrations in ppb. The denorninator for each of the fNe factors is the INPO median value. If the rrey average for a specific parameter is less than the INPO rnedian value, the median value is used in the calculation. 80

o 9 PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 i CRITICAL HOURS I The number of temporary mechancal and electncal conngurations to the plant's systems. This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned automatic d scrams (reactor protect >on system logic actuations) that occur

1) Temporary conAgurations are denned as electncaljumpers, per 7,000 hours of entcal operation.

i electncal blocks, rnechancal jumpers, or mechancal blocks which are installed in the plant operating systems and are The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total not shown on the latest revrsion of the PalD, schematic, number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams in a specific time 1 connection, winng, or flow diagrams. period by 7,000 hours, then dNiding that number by the total number of hours enticalin the same time penod. The indicator j

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveillance is further deAned as follows:

Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Procedures, Specral Procedures or Operating Procedures are not

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anticipated considered as temporary modiReations unless the jumper or part of a planned test.

j block remains in place after the test or procedure is complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or lab

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a instruments are not considered as temporary modifications.

rapid insertion of negatwo reactNity (e g, by control rods, liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of

3) Scaffold is not considered a temporary modification, the reactor protection system. The scram signal may have i

j Jumpers and blocks whch are installed and for which MRs resulted from exceeding a set point or may have been have been submitted will be considered as temporary spunous modiAcations until Anal resolution of the MR and the jumper i or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused actuation I

drawings This indicator tracks temporary modifications for of the reactor protection system logic was provided from one SEP #62 and 71. of the sensor's monitonng plant parameters and conditions, rather than the manual scram switches or, manual turbine 1 THERMAL PERFORMANCE tnp switches (or push-buttons) provided in the main control room. l The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percentage.

4) Cntcal means that dunng the steady state condition of the i

reactor pnor to the scram, the effective multiplicabon (k,) UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR was essentially equal to one. The ratio of the available energy generation over a gNen time UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOS5 FACTOR penod to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given penod under reference ambient conditions) over the same time penod, of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that expressed at a percentage. could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR pened, expressed as a percentage. The net electrical energy generated (MWH) dNided by the product of maximum dependable capacity (net MWe) times the gross hours in the reporting penod expressed as a percent Net electrical energy generated is the gross electrical output of the unit measured at the output terminals of the turbine generator rninus the normal station service loads dunng the gross hours of the reporting penod, expressed in megawatt hours 81 b

PERFORMANCE INDICATOa DEFINITIONS UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS - (INPO + DEFINITION) This indicator is defined as the sum of the following safety system actuations:

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

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuations that resaft from a loss of power to a safeguards bus. An unplanned safety system actuation occurs when an actuation set point for a safety system is reached or when a spurlous or inadvertent signal rs generated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system is actuated.

Unplanned means that the system actuation was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuations of the high pressure safety injection system, the low pressure safety injection system, or the safety injection tanks. UNPLANNED S4FETY SYSTEM ACTIONS -(NRC DEFINITION) 'the number of sLfety system actuations which include (2$) the High Pressure Safety injecbon System, the Low Pressure Safety injecten System, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of safety system actuations includes actuations when major equipment is operated gag when the logic systems for the above safety systems are challenged. VIOLATION TREND This indicator is defined as Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations and NorKAed Violations trended over 12 months. Additionally, Cited Violatons for the top quartile Region IV plant is trended over 12 months (lagging the Fort Calhoun Station trend by 2-3 months). It is the Fort Calhoun Station goal to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile Region IV plant. VOLUME OF LOW LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator is defined as the volume of low level solid radioactwo waste actually shipped for bunal. This indicator also shows the volume of low-level radioactwo waste whicts is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactrve oil that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the volume of solid dry radioactive waste which has been shipped off site for processing Low-level solid radcactive waste consists of dry actNe waste, sludges, resans, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power plant operction and maintenance. Dry radioactwo waste includes contaminated rags, cleaning matensis, dsposable protective clothing, plastic containers, and any other matenal to b2 disposed of at a low-level radioactwe waste dmposal site except ressn, sludge, or evaporator bottoms. Low-level refers to all radcactive waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing. Thrs indicator tracks radiologcalwork performance for SEP #54. l 82 ( l

i SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM lNDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators Index is to list performance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended. SEP Reference Number 11 Eggg . Increase HPES and IR Accountability through use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) 50 i Recordable Injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations >1,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area 5 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs 6 SEP Reference Number 24 . Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level 43 SEP Reference Numbers 25. 26. & 27 . Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented . Evaluate and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements . Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling Injury / Illness Frequency Rate 3 Recordable injury /lliness Cases Frequency Rate 4 SEP Reference Number 31 . Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manualand Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage) 67 Overall Project Status (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage) 68 Progress of Cycle 17 Outage Modification Planning . 69 SEP Reference Number 33 . Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduted Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts) 51 SEP Reference Number 36 . Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage) 46 SEP Reference Numbers 41 & 44 . Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule . Compliance With and Use of Procedures Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue 47 Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) 50 SEP Reference Number 46 Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program 83

1 SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX Document Review 56 SEP Reference Number 52 Ea2R . Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program . 55 SEP Reference Number 54 . Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations >1,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area 5 Collective Radiation Exposure 17 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste 38 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area 54 SEP Reference Number 58 . Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) 57 SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61 . Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program . Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Ucensee Event Reports 21 SEP Reference Number 62 . Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications 58 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown 60 Engineering Change Notice Status . 61 Engineering Change Notices Open 62 SEP Reference Number 68 . Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and establish means to monitor Operator Training License Operator Requalification Training . 64 License Candidate Exams 65 SEP Reference Number 71 Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications 58 84

~- e REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews K. L. Belek J. D. Keppler B. H. Biome D. D. Kloock C. E. Boughter L.T.Kusek C. J. Brunnert M. P. Lazar M. W. Butt B. R. Livingston C. A. Carlson D. L. Lovett G. R. Cavanaugh J. H. MacKinnon J. W. Chase J. W. Marcil A. G. Christensen N. L. Marfice O. J. Clayton R. D. Martin R. P. Clemens T. J. Mcivor R. G. Conner K. G. Melstad i J. L. Connolley K. A. Miller G. M. Cook P. A. Mruz S. R. Crites Nuclear Licensing D. W. Dale & Industry Affairs D.C.Dietz J. T. O'Connor M. L. Ellis W. W. Orr H. J. Faulhaber T. L. Patterson M. T. Frans R. T. Pearce D. P. Galle R. J. Phelps S. K. Gambhir W.J.Ponec J. K. Gasper C. R. Rice W. G. Gates A. W. Richard S. W. Gebers D. G. Ried L. V. Goldberg G. K. Samide D. J. Golden M. J. Sandhoefner D. C. Gorence F. C. Scofield R. H. Guy H. J. Sefick A. L. Hale J.W.Shannon K. R. Henry C. F. Simmons J. B. Herman E.L.Skaggs ) T. L. Herman J. L. Skiles i K. C. Holthaus F. K. Smith L. P. Hopkins R. D. Spies C.K. Huang D. E. Spires T. W. Jamieson R. L. Sorenson R. L. Jaworski K. E. Steele I R. A. Johansen M. A. Tesar J. W. Johnson J. J. Tesarek R. Jones J. W. Tills W. C. Jones D. R. Trausch I J. M. Waszak G. R. Williams S. J. Willrett ] 85 l I

.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ l ) i FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES i EVENT DATE RANGE PRODUCTION (MWH) CUMULATIVE (MWH) I Cycle 1 09/26/73-02/08/75 3,299,639 3,299,639 1st Refueling 02/08/75-05/11/75 4 Cycle 2 05/11/75-10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/76 -12/13/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76 -09/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77 -12/09/77 Cycle 4 12/09/77 -10/13/78 3,026,832 12,985,720 4th Refueling 10/13/78-12/24/78 Cycle 5 12/24/78 -01/18180 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 - 09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 ) 6th Refueling 09/18/81 -12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/03/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/03/82-04/06/83 Cycle 4 04/06/83 -03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84 -07/12/84 Cycle 9 07/12/84 -09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85-01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86 -03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87 -06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 -09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 -01!31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89-02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90 -05/29/90 Cycle 13 05/29/90 -02/C1/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 -05/03/92 Cycle 14 05/03/92-09/25/93 4,981,48F 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93 -11/26/93 Cycle 15 11/26/93-02/20/95 5,043,887 61,065,900 15th Refueling 02/20/95-04/14/95 FORT CALHOUN STAVON 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 Achieved Full Power (100%) May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 Days) June 8,1987-Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Net Generation (364,468,800 KWH) October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH - Cycle 13) May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992 Shortest Refueling Outage (52 days) Feb. 20,1995-April 14,1995 ..}}

ML20094D256

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search