ML20094R498

Performance Indicators Rept for Oct 1995

ML20094R498
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	10/31/1995
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20094R497	List: LIC-95-0220, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators Rept for Oct 1995 ML20094R498
References
NUDOCS 9512040428
Download: ML20094R498 (101)

Text

_

Omahe PuhMC Power lhmeritt FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

"'C 3

y

//

~'

OCTOBER 1995 ~.

SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS

~ ;BA2oggggg g;;gs,3

1 l

0 % il se wa % a w wn,alhlwk...

i a

ii i/nusD% UNhNa'mi alnb $0U/nb

-l d w a, y%, ~4ng comimil-wnl...

[

d w a, wag g yL...a w dating ikjob e

i 9 V lk,%L %, weuj, %.

at w una-dimbb, al ik wdL e aland, g

piauum, d w owv owrv ft uw&-dn un, as aind ik ius, wnb $%&

p u c_p a th 9u w e

g 3

pevson, uljud u dating ik 9Vk.

~

p

~

iwms 1. O'C m e

o i

l l

I

~,

i i

i i

i OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION j

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT OCTOBER i

4 l

1995 i

i l.

Prepared By:

l Production Engineering Division System Engineering l

Test and Performance Group OCTOBER 1995 i

)

i

e FORT CALHOUN STATION October 199s MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT 1.

OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of October, 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 Rod seal continued.

An emergency drill was conducted on October 3. An inadvertent activation of the Emergency Notification System (ENS) sirens in Harrison County, Iowa, occurred during this drill requiring a 4-hour notification to the NRC.

On October 12, two Omaha Public Power District employees received acid burns during scheduled maintenance in the Water Plant when a badly corroded line parted. One individual received severe burns to the neck and upper chest, while the other received only minor burns to the arm. Both individuals were transported to off-site facilities for medical attention. The State of Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality was notified of the spill and a 4-hour report was made to the NRC.

l 2.

Safetv Valve or PORV Challences or Failures Which Occurred During the month of October, no Power Operated Relief Valve (PORV) or primary system safety valve challenges or failures occurred.

3.

Results of Leak Rate Tests Although above normal, the October Reactor Coolant System (RCS) leak rate was steady at approximately 0.4 to 0.5 gpm throughout the month. This leak rate remained relatively steady following the reactor trip and resultant surveillance

~

testing of the CEDMs on August 26,1995.

The major contributor to the increase in RCS leakage has been classified as "known" leakage. This leakage is being collected in the Reactor Coolant Drain Tank (RCDT). The leakage source has been attributed to seal leakage from CEDM #15.

The "Known" leak rate has stabilized at 0.26 gpm. The remainder of the leakage has been classified as " Unknown" leakage.

i

A

+ Fort calhoun Index Value I

100_

-* Industry Median Index Value 90.

80._

In ustry Median 60 _

g Projected w

40.

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 hours0.081 days <br />1.944 hours <br />0.0116 weeks <br />0.00266 months <br /> 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

i i

M C4,

c' Year-to-Date Value n

ce Performance Categories Unit Unplanned Unplanned Auto Capability Capability Scrams Thermal

~

g Performance better than Factor Loss Factor

~

Performance W

Industry Average Trend l!!

Performance better than 1995 OPPD Goal

~

ME Performance Not Meeting 1995 OPPD Goal HPSI Safety AFW Safety EDG Safety Fuel System System System Reliability Performance Performance Performance June July August 1995 1995 1995 Collective i

Volume of Industrial October 1995 Best Possible l

Radiation Low-Level Safety Accident Year-to-Date 1995 Year-End Exposure RadWaste Rate i

Value d ""*"

• Performance l

t and Avg l

INPO Performance Indicators i

i l

l

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

z

@%LM@il'W,'"

Unplanned Auto Scrams i

Year-To-Date Value Performance Catenones i

Significant E

Performance better than Industry Average Trend 3

Evenh Actuations Performance better than 1995 OPPD Goal r

SM Forced Outage

$jff Performance Not Meeting 1995 OPPD Goal Y*

Rate Failures

\\

l 11111 1

i!j July Aug Sep j

1995 1995 1995 i

Equipment Collective Forced Radiation l

October 1995 Best Possible Outages Exposure hf

~

Value Performance Year-to-Date 1995 Year-End l

'l; Performance NRC Performance Indicators p

4

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT October 1995 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data representing three A performance indicator with data representing three consecutive months of improving performance or three consecutive months of declining performance or three consecutive months of performance that is superior to consecutive months of performance that is trending the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear toward declining as determined by the Manager -

Operations Division Quahty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP.

Station Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per Nuclear Operations Dtvision Quahty Procedure 37 37).

(NOD-QP-37). A supervisor whose performance indicator exhibits an adverse trend by this definition The following performance indicators exhibited positive may specify in written form (to be pubhshed in this trends for the reporting month:

a rcport) why the trend is not adverse.

Safety System Failures The following performance indicators exhibited adverse (p,9 7) trends for the reporting month:

Hiah Pressure Safety Iniection System Safety System Maintenance Workload Backfoos Performance (Page 46)

(Page 8)

End of Adverse Trend Report.

Emeraer ev A C. Power System (Page 10)

Emeroency Dieseffenerator Unreliabiktv MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (Page 11)

Diesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands)

A performance indicator with data for the reporting

)

period that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD (Page 12) goal is defined as "Needing increased Management Emeroency Diesel Generator Unreliabihty Attention" per Nuclear Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37).

(Page 13)

Sianificant Events The following performance indicators exhibited posrtive (Page 20) trends for the reporting month:

industrial Safety A.ccident Rate Missed Surveillance Tests Results in Licensee Event Reoorts (Page 2)

(Page 21; Disablina Iniurv/ Illness Frecuency Rate Volume of Low-Level Sohd Radioactive Waste (Page 3)

(Page 38)

Primary System Chemistrv Percent of Hours Out of LLrD!!

(Page 39)

Secondary System Chemistry l

(Page 40)

Hazard 6us Waste Produced (Page S3)

Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area 4

(Page 54)

End of Positrve Trend Report.

v

i FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT October 1995 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT End of Report improvements / Changes Report.

(continued)

Fuel Reliability Indicator (Page 14)

Number of Control Room Eauioment Deficiencies (Page 15)

Number of On-Line and Outane Control Room Eautoment Deficiences (Page 16)

Collectrve Radiation Exoosure

. (Page 17)

Forced Outaae Rate (Page 24)

Unit Canabilty Factor (Page 27)

Unit Caoablidv Loss Factor (Page 28)

Eauioment Forced Outaae Rate (Page 35)

Percentaae of Total MWOs Comoleted oer Month Idntrhed as Rework (Page 48)

In-Line Chemistry Inscuments Out-of -Service (Page 52)

Radioloaical Work Practices Proaram (Page 55)

Temoorafv Modifications (Page 58)

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT!MPROVEMENTS/ CHANGES This section nsts signr5 cant changes made to the report and to specific indicators wrthin the report since the previous month.

Annunciator Windows The unplanned Auto Scram windows were revised to reflect the reclassification of the August Reactor Trip.

(Pages 111 and 1v) vi

Table of Contents / Summary son GOALS.......................................................................x 1

SAFE OPERATIONS l

Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO................................................... 2 Disabling injuryAliness Cases Frequency Rate

.......,,... 3 Recordable injuryMilness Cases Frequency Rate........................................... 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 1,000 Didntegrations/ Minute per Probe Area

......... 5 rreventabie/ Personnel Error LERs...................

................... 6 i

Safety System Failures

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

High Pressure Safety injection System......................................... 8 AuxiNary Feedwater System................................................... 9 Emergency AC Power System

...........10 Emergency Diesel Generator Unit ReHability 11 ReHabikty (25 Demands)

...............................................12 Unre Ha bility.................................................

. 13 Fuel Reliability lndicator

..... 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 i

Equivalent Availabihty Factor 26 vii i

l

Table of Contents / Summary PERF7RMANCE fcontinued)

E89E Unit Capability Factor................................

..........................27 Unplanned Capabihty Loss Factor

.........................................28 Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams per 7.000 Hours critical..............

......29 i

Unplanned Safety System Actuations INPO DeAnition...

. 30 NRC Deinition

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

.. 32 Thermal Performance

. 33 Daily Thermal Output................

34 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours 35 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) Summary

. 36

. 37 Repeat Failures Volume of Low-Level SoEd Radioactive Waste 38 Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Umit

. 39 Secondary System Chemistry.....

. 40 M

Cents Per Kilowatt Hour..........

... 42 Stafing Level......

. 43 Spare Parts inventory Value

.. 44 DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage).

. 46 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue

.. 47 Percentage of Total MWOs Completed per month identined as Rework

... 48 Overtime 49 Procedural NoncompEance incidents......

.... 50 Daily Schedule Performance - Percent of Completed Scheduled Activities

. 51 viii

-e a-A Table of Contents / Summary DMSION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS P. AGE 1

l 4

In-Une Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service 52 Hazardous Waste Produced

............................................. 53 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area..

. 54 1

55 Radiological Work Practices Program Document Review 56 Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security)...

. 57 Modifications 58 Temporary..

Outstanding........................

. 59 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown.

. 60 Engineering Change Notices Status 61 62 Open Ucensee 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-Une Modification Planning.......

71 Progress of 1995 On-Une Modification Planning.

70

~

ACTION PL.ANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST Action Plans.......

72 Performance Indicator Definitions

. 75 Safety Enhancement Program Index

. 83 Report Distribution ust 85 4

ix

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities MISSION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently ano 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.

e 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.

4 l

OBJECTIVE 1-1:

No challenges to a nuclear safety system.

OBJEC11VE 1-2:

i 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.

l l

OBJECTIVE 1-5:

Zero Lost Time injuries and recordable injuries rate BELOW 1.5 percent.

I l

l

I OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities Goal 2.

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

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

4 1995 PRIORITIES:

Improve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork.

Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

i e

Reduce the number of Human Performance errors.

Identify Programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.

4 i

Objectives to support PERFORMANCE:

OBJECTIVE 2-1:

Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 70% and a unit capability factor of 81%.

i OBJECMVE 2-2:

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

OBJECTIVE 2 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.

OBJECRVE 2-5:

j Team //ndividua/ ownership, accountability, performance and teamwork is evident by improved plant reliability; improved ratings for both INPO and NRC; reduced number of human performance i

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.

l j

)

i xi

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1995 Priorities Goal 3:

COSTS Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 2, 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.

Goals Source:

Scofield (Manager) xil

I i

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

e I

1

l l

l Year to-Date FC5IndushlaiSafety AccidentlGW(MO~DefinRion)

FCS Average Rate (Last 12 Months) e FcS Year-End Goal (<0.50)

IGOOD!

g Industry Current Best Quartile (.24) 1995 INPO Industry Goal (<0.50)

I I 2

1.5 _

1

-5 E

04 l a

c of Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Association 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 1.44 at the end of October 1995.

The value for the 12 months from November 1,1994, through October 31,1995, was 1.33.

There were no restricted-time and two lost-time accidents in October 1995.

While working in the water plant a worked received sulfuric acid burns to his face, i

neck, chest, and arms.

While changing out batteries, a worker sustained a lumbar strain.

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 6/94) is 0.12.

i l

Data Source:

Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Conner Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 2

l

)

4 1995 DisatWing injurymness Frequency

-x -. 1994 Disabling injuryWiness Frequency Average Rate (Last 12 Months)

_e_

1995 Goal (0.50) 2._

1.8 1.6 _

1.4 1.2.

,,/

('

a a

j O.8 3

4

/

N k~"~~1 W

~

~

~

0.4

\\[

'N'x%*Nx x/x I

0.2 _

o Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec F*al DISABLING INJURYllLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1995 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1994 disabling injury /

l illness frequency rate is also shown.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year to date was 1.44 at the end of October 1995.

There were two disabling injury / illness cases reported for the month.

While working in the Water Plant a worker received sulfuric acid bums on his hands, j

face, neck, chest, and arins.

While changing out batteries, a worker received a lumbar strain.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from November 1,1994, through October 31,1995, was 1.33.

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:

Need increased Management Attention SEP 25,28 & 27 3

_,__.199FRecordable injury /iliness Frequency

+ 1994 Recordable injury / Illness Frequency I00o03

_r Average Rate (Last 12 Months) i I

Fort Calhoun Goal

...o...

I I 2.5 _

2.25 __

2__

1.75

.......$....... h.r.-:-;'..~.h.7.%.

1.5 c...... o..............

......o......

.......o.......o f ~.--... y ~~~ ~

,. ~ #'~'

y m

0.75 L 0.5.

0.25 _

0:

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS 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 personnelfrom 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 ten recordable injury / illness cases in 1995. The recordable injury /ill-ness cases frequency rate year-to-date was 1.60 at the end of October 1995. There were no recordable injury / illness case reported for the month of October.

The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate for the 12 months from November 1, 1994, through October 31,1995, was 1.46.

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

m Contamination Events (MontWy)

Contamination Events (YTD) 60.

l I H

50.

4 et 40.

se 31 30 _

ss 20.

10.

O I

I 1

I I

I I

I i

I I

i Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec N

CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 11,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

There were 3 contamination eventa in October 1995. There has been a total of 51 con-tamination events in 1995 through the end of October. This compares to 41 at this time last year.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None SEP 15 & 54 5

g PersonnelErrors (Esch Month)

+ Preventatdo(18 MonthTotals)

PersonnelEirror(18-MonthTotals) 20.

15.

10 _-

c c

03;E

E; Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 1995 1994l PREVENTABLEiPERSONNEL ERROR LERe 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 September 1995, there were no events which were subsequently reported as an LER.

No LERs were categorized as Preventable and as Personnel Error for the month of Sep-tember. The total LERs for the year 1995 (through September 30,1995) is six. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1995 is two. The totai Preventable LERs for the year is three.

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.

Data Source:

Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None SEP 15 j

6 i

l l

h h

Y Pl 1 g~ g es I I 2

E

_=

?

'o 1

..o......o......G

- o'

.a...-..a....-G

....a 50 j

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 i

l

$AFETY $YSTEM FAILURES l

l This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance 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 channels 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 forthe 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 j

requirements during a seismic event.

j i

4th Quarter 1993: 1) During surveillance testing, both PORVs for the LTOP system failed to open during l

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 I

became inoperable. Later during surveillance, the other train auto-started and brought outside air into the control room for a six-minute period.

1st Qua-ter 1994: A design basis review determined that an ESF relay could result in loss of safety injection avi 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 condith;ning 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 M5sthTyHigh Preeeure safiiplsjiction system unavailabilityvalue y_. Year-to-Date High Preesute Safety injection Systern Unavallability Value Fort Calhoun Goal (0.004)

GOOD l

+ INPO Industry Goal (0.02)

Industry Upper 10%(0.0011) l I 0.02.

0.015 _.

0.01 _

0.005 _

c

-e---e f-- y.nEn.g 5. 7.l-7 0-l g

my 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec IN HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE 1

This indicator shows 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 off October 1995 was 0.0001. There were 0.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability, during the month. The 1995 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.0007 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.0006.

There has been a total of 13.39 hours4.513889e-4 days <br />0.0108 hours <br />6.448413e-5 weeks <br />1.48395e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> 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 l

Accountability:

Jaworski/Schaffer Trend:

Positive 8

Monthly Auxiliary Feedwstor Systern Unavailability Year-to-Date Emergency Ac Power unavailability lGoool

...o... Fort Calhoun Goal (0 A1) 4

.--,.. 1995 INPo industry Goal (0A25) 3y industry Upper 10%(0.0021) 0.03..

0.025 l

0.02..

3 w...

... 6 3

3

...e 3

0.015 l

0.01 o......o......o....

.....o......o....

.....o......o......o......o......o 0.005.

O i

i i

i i

i i

i 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec l1995l l

AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for October 1995 was 0.0087. There were 13.05 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned and 0 hcurs of unplanned unavailability during the month.

I The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.0038 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.0039 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 44.61 hours7.060185e-4 days <br />0.0169 hours <br />1.008598e-4 weeks <br />2.32105e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 12.92 hours0.00106 days <br />0.0256 hours <br />1.521164e-4 weeks <br />3.5006e-5 months <br /> 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

i e M55tFJy Emergency ACPower unavailabmtyvalue

.-x.

Year-to-Date Ernergency Ac Power UnavailabHity value

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (0424)

I GoOo l

._o 1995 INPo industry Goal (0.025) industry Upper 10%(0.0035) y c

0.14 0.12 0.1 _

0.08.

0.06 0.04 0.02.

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

mMM W-pu W W @

m c

og O

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec N

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 October 1995 was 0.016.

During the month, there were 25.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of un-planned unavailability for testing and repairs. The Emergency AC Power System un-availability value year-to-date was 0.007 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.008 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 92.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 4.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1995. Unplanned unavailability for August has been revised following an analysis of the DG govemor 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 Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

10

I m FaHures120 Demands a FailureslS0 Demands e Failures 1100 Demands lG000l e

Trigger ValueaI20 Demands

+ Trigger ValuesIS0 Demands II

__s Trigger Values.100 Demands 8.. :

7._

6_

5__

4 3

s.

m2 e.

s~

s.

s-

-u

-- u -

s-

-s f 2-'

'f2 2__

9 99 999 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 9

9 j

0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct i

f9i]

l1995l l

EMERGENCY Diesel GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20, 50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger values. The Fort Calhoun 1995 gcal 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 l

start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands l

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 1

expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator vtas 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).

Data Source:

Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

l 11

)

I l

1 i

I DG1 FsNures/25 Demands i

i e DG2 Failures /25 Demands lGOODj l

5.

3 7

)

4-c o

2 1

1 i

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 y

oo o

o e

o e

o e

o o o o

o l

0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct l

1994 1995l DIESEL 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 teok place during July. This testing enabled the diesel high temperature operability limits to be raised.

Data Source:

Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

12

m DGTllnreliabilityValue DG2 UnreliabiltyValue

+ Station UnreliabilityValue I. GOOD I I

1995 Goal I

o Industry Upper 10%(0D02 for a 3-Year Average)

OD6 -

CD5 _

OD4.

0.03 o.o n s OD2 0.01 _ eo o

eo oo oo oe oo oo oo o

o o

0 9

9 9

9 9

9 9

9 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct P*l P*1 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY t

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 October 1995 was 0.029. The 1995 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1:

There was 1 start demand for the reporting month with 0 failures.

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

For DG-2:

There was 1 start demand for the reporting month with 0 failures.

In addition, there were 0 load-run demands without a failure.

l Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

l value per DG = SU + LU -(SU x LU) where SU = Start Unreliability

= number of unsuccessful starts number of valid start demands LU = Load-run Unreliability = number of unsuccessfulload-runs number of valid load-run demands Station Value = average of DG-1 and DG-2 values Data Source:

Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

13

g FuelReHate y GOOD l

+ 1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 x 10-4 Microcuries/ Gram)

._.o.

1995 Goal 3 y 55,

l 45 -_

50 _

40 _

35 _

= 30.

e,c,,

g 25.

n.,,,n.,

20 _

o,t.e.

3I 15 -

10 h

5_

s e

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Fuel RELIABILITY INDICATOR The FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for October 1995 was 51.20 X 10d microcuries/ gram. The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuel integrity.

]

An effective fuel integrity and performance monitoring program provides a means to detect fuel failures and j

assess the fuel failure number, physical condition, exposure, mechanism, and location.

The October FRl value is based on data from October 1 through 31, 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 SeptemDer.

The October FRI value of 51.2 X 10d microcuries/ Dram indicated an increase from the September FRI value of 25.64 x 10d microcuries/ gram. New fuel failures were determined to have occurred during the month based on changes in the equilibrium Xenon and lodine data. The new failures had not reached equilibrium at the end of the month, thus, a fuel failure / coolant analysis was not run. A recent analysis through Septem-ber 30,1995, performed by the fuel vendor, indicated four to six failed rods at core average power. The j

analysis indicated failures in several different bumup levels. OPPD fuel performance staff personnel esti-i mate that 15 to 25 rods are failed based on the results from the Cycle 15 and 16 RCS chemistry data and the end of Cycle 15 fuelinspection project.

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: " units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects". The 1995 Fort Calhoun Station FRI Performance Indicator goal is to maintain a monthly FRl below 5.0 x 10d microcuries/ gram. A value larger than 5.0 x 104 microcu-ies/ 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

)

I 14

e Cortrd RxrnDeficiences Added i

i ortrdRoomDeficienciesOm1pleend C

e aus conpetedvwenTargetCanWenenDans

• ~

50.

_ _100.0%

d' er.sw

\\

b cbs.cmpw.sovacatwo.o.byT,vm ompw non.

g I

f f

'"5 es.sw Ea f30_

60.0% g 0

^ ' " *

).

8' y

o.

24 24 i

o

?

u 20._

as.ow

.. 40.0% ti j

u 3,

w E

e s

o i

• 10 __

_. 20.0% at i

0 0.0%

j May Jun M

Aug Sep Of h

DH>96 l

Canard RxrnDerciences 1

NuusER OF CONTROL ROOu EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator measures the timeliness of closing Control Room Deficiencies.

1 Target Completion Dates are established by the Emergent Work Committee. The goalis l

to close at least 80% of all CRD's within the Target Due Date.

i j,

There were 16 Control Room Deficiencies completed during October 1995, and 6 were completed within the target completion date.

4 A Scheduling Coordinator has been assigned to track performance on a weekly basis and identify problem areas. Revisions have been made to the scheduling process to allow for more timely completion of CRD's.

I i

I Data Source:

Chase / Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention - Performance Below Goal 15 i

Dwerdue

+ Number of On4.ine Control Room Deficiencies 35.

so 30 _

23 15 8

Goal Lensthan6 overds

' l '

l l

'l l

l May45 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec45 l Number of On-Line m Overdue

+ Number of Outage control Room Deficiencies 25 -

as 20.

8? A _-

e2 U

15.

10 -

5-2 2

a a

2

," " "' "" Y 0

May45 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec45 rete:overdlUrrg!?rgrrh -i 8morths Number of Outage cRfYs 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.

j There were 23 on-line (4 were overdue) and 22 outage (2 were overdue) Control Room j

Deficiencies at the end of October 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for these indicators are less than 8 overdue on-line and no overdue outage Control Room Deficiencies.

4 Data Source:

Chase / Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber/Clemens Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention - Number of On-Line CRD's

<8 Wverdue exceeds goal 16

e Monthly Personnel Radiation F.xposure

,_. Cumulative PersonnelRadiation Exposure lOODD]

...o FCS Goal (143.1 Person-Rem) 150 140 b-----(*

- 4 * --

+

S 130_

^

=

=

120_

110 _-

100 90 b

og 80 __

b 70 __

E o.

60 __

50 __

40 __

30 20.

10 _

0 m, E

W Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec N

COttecTive RADIATION Exposure The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure is less than 143.1 person-l Rem.

The exposure for October 1995 was 0.684 person-Rem (ALNOR), down from 1.275 Rem for September.

The year-to-date exposure through the end of October was 137.439 1

person-Rem (TLD).

The 1995 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 185 person-rem per year. The current industry best quartile is 145 person-rem per year. The yearly average for Fort Calhoun Station for the three years from 11/92 through 10/95 was 107.23 person-rem per year, j

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention SEP54 17

_. ~. - - -

O Hghest Exposure (Month) g Highest Exposure (Year) 5000-OPPD 4500 mRemlyr. Umit 4000 __

3000_

2000_.

1,266 1000 _.

E_.__FC 20 o

i i

i October-95 MAXIMUM lNDIVIDUAL RADIATION Exposure During October 1995, an individual accumulated 80 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

The maximum individual exposure for the year of 1,000 mrem was exceeded during l

March 1995 when an individual received 1,966 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:

Chas 3/Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None 18

m FC5 cited Vioist36ns (M6iithry)

FCS Non Cited Violations (Monthly)

+ FCS Cited Violations (12 Month Averege)

.o FCS Non Cited Violations (12 Month Average)

-- up Reglon IV cited Violations (l2 Month Ave rage for Region IV top quartile) l I NT 10 --

c,

.g a _

x h

~?

LQ

.C:

]

r,, au 1 men

. mim o

r,,

E 5

,5 2

W L

P y

F 2

1 w

x x

=

A 8

[ Meg

[iDH]

I i

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 j

other Region IV plants.

The following inspections were completed during October 1995:

IER No.

Title 95-17 Special Inspection - DG Full Speed Start (Reopened &

Reclosed)

To date, OPPD has received ten violations for inspections conducted in 1995.

Levellil Violations O

LevelIV Violations 6

LevelV Violations 0

Non-Cited Violations 4

Total 10 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.

Data Source:

Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Trausch Trend:

None 19

.., ~

.Q

.hMh m

1..

1 f g

0.5 O

r

=

2, r

r r

c-r ---,

92-2 92,3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93 3 934 94-1 94-2 94-3 94 4 95 1 l Year. Quarter l lNPO Significant Events (SERs)

[d000l 2

y 1

0.

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 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 Pressunzer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

4th Quarter 1994: A potential accident scenario involving a large break loss of coolant Ecident 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 i

MosedSTs FhedtinginLERs 3_

2 1_

4 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 l

l l

l l

l l

l l

l l

l l

93 94 Jan Feb Wr Apr my Jun Jd Aug Sep Oct Mw Dec NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.

There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during October 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 i

Trend.

Positive SEP 60 & 61 21

PERFORMANCE Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the high-l est standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station that l

l result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production.

89 e

)

l

(

Net Generation (10,000 MWh) 40 34.21 34.22 36.04 i

M.81 M'II M.29 M.12 30.46 3

30 i

e R

21.19 E

g20 15.29 i

S i

l

g l

l 0

1 0

i t

I i

I I

i t

I i

I l

l Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct i

I""I Pr51 l

STATION NET GENERATION i

During the month of October 1995, a net total of 360496.4 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 1,924,981.4 MWH at J

the end of the month.

Energy losses for August 1995 were attributable to a plant trip during a test of a backup j

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: (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 g

heat exchangers.

1 j

Data Source:

Station Generation Report j

Accountability:

Chase j

Trend:

None f

23 i

~

forced Outage Rate (Monthly) i Forced Outage Rate (12 Months) l GOOD]

+

e Fort calhoun Goal (2.4%)

40%.

1 P 35%..

30% __

25%._

20%_

15%

10%_ U 5%_

U*%

o.e n c

c

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

3

=[

=

0%

. r-"I. r e

m-92 93 94 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct 95 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 3.7% for the twelve months from Novam-ber 1,1994, through October 31,1995. The 1995 year-to-date FOR was 4.6% 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 oil leaks. 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

, Monthly UnR Capacity Factor

...m... Year-to Date Unit Capacity Factor g

e Unit Capacity Factor for Cycles 15 & 16

.$.. 36-Month Average Unit Capacity Factor h

110 %

FCS Goal (79.65%)

100 %.

-e-d

_. s T

..a.-

80%.

7 3

.a e

60%_

~

g 8-

• ~ -

N

$ng _

.m.

40 %

30%.

c yce. ss neru.une 20%_

ovi.e.

10%.

0%

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct l1994l f955}

UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR i

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 101.4%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months was 81.8%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is 79.65%. The Fort Calhoun 3-year average capacity factor goal for 1995 is 84.05%.

The year-to-date value is 76.04%

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:

Needs increased management Attention (Below 1995 Goal) 25 1

\\

i MonthlyEAF i

._m_ Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF 9.-.12-Month Average EAF w

Industry Median Value (76.7%for a 3. Year Average) 100 %.

s r.a s

,,,,. 3, q

/

\\

W

\\

'g 1

A e

a'

" -"~~~ \\

~~

80% -

=

n.as M

M M

R-M M

M P

M M.

-~.M M

7:

.- /

60%

40%_.

Cycle 15 R ef usHng 20%

0%

a i

92 94 Dec Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct.95 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY EACTOR 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 October 1995 was reported as 98.37%. The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 85.5% 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 88.82%.

The industry median EAF value for the three-year period from 7/90 through 6/93 was 76.7%.

Data Source:

Dietz/Kulisek (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 26

i

, Monthly Unit Capability Factor

.. e.. Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor i

4 _. 36 Month Unit Capability Factor x

Fort Calhoun Goals e

if#OIndustry Goals 100%.

y 80%.

4 g r4

-. - Q - ? - - $ - $

~

5

~ [

5 j

.e-60%-

g........-a...-

40%.

Cyde 15 20% -

nn sre s e as 0%

+-

l Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct i

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 October 1995 was reported as 100.0%. The year-to-date.UCF was 77.4%,

the UCF for the last 12 months was 81.1%, and the 36-month average UCF was reported l

as 85.4% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for May and August 1995 are explained on page 24.

J 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 l

Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor j0000l i

i

...... Year-Toente Unplanned CapabilityLoss Factor

- *_. 12-Month Average Unplanned CapabilityLoss Factor 3 y Fort Calhoun Goal (3.979

.. y..

-e-IPOIndustryGoal(4.5%

_,_. IndustryCurrent Best Quartile j

40% _

30% _-

20% __

A

',.. 3-

~~, I ~~. A+ "--- * --. g 10%.

[

-a a

2..

3 e7 e

_' n e

e e

e e

n 0%

u-m c: -y 7 -y e-n e

Nw Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1994l 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 i

ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of October 1995 was reported as 0.00%. Unplanned energy loss is defined as the energy that was not produced during the period of unscheduled i

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 10.22%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 8.15%, and the 36-month average UCLF was reported as 4.5% 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 Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention.

28

_.e_

rdMsact5r Ecrams Per 7,000 Hours criticaTYear to Date

+ FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critica! for last 36 months

... Fort Calhoun Goal (0.0)

INPO Industry Goal (1)

.g...

- e-. Industry Upper 10%(1 per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical) 3 2

.g 1 __-A_

. _3

_f 0..

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct

{i9H]

f9]

FCS Reactor Scrams 3

3 2

2.

1 1

1 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

91 92 93 94 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct 95 UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL J

The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Intema-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.

The year-to-date e,tation value was 1.2 at the end of October 1995. The value for the 12 months from November 1,1994, through October 31,1995, was 0.96. 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 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical. The indus-try upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.48 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical.

Data Source:

Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention (Above FCS Goal) 29

m SafetySystem Actuations(INP3hition)

ICS Goal (0)

+ Industry Upper 10 Percentile (0) 3.

2.

1_

l;:':*':::::':l::'

l O

E2 93 94 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct 95 UNPLANNED $AFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of October 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 backup automatic shutdown system. The generator was brought back on-line at 3:43 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 Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports Accountability:

Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Trend:

Positive 30

i l

+,

10

.800 m

.700 8

_600 4

I 2 6 I

g n

e 400 4

l 4~

~

_300 o 5

E

.200 2+

s-m---

=====-

..100 l

,m

li

l;l1 0

0.+

i l :

a 4.,+.m+mn :

92 93 94 S O N D J FMAMJJAsoNDJFMAMJJAsO l1993l f9]

l1995l 1

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 inc!; des 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 Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Foley/Ronning Trend:

None 31 i

e Gross Heat Rate

+ Year to-Date Gross Heat Rate f

.. Fort Calhoun Goal 10.75 p

10.5.

10.25 _

em

=

cm

-o e.

a.

_...e M

10 m

E.

~

9.75 n."t..n ns 9.5.

9.25 92 93 M

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct 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.

The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,090 for the month of October 1995.

The 1995 year-to-date GHR was 10,224 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.

1 Data Source:

Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend:

None*

l 32

e M56thlyThermalPerformance g

,12-Month Average a

1. Year-to-Date Average MonthlyThermalPerformance j

...%.. Fort Calhoun (bal(99.6%)

r-@

1 l

INPO industry Goal (99.5%)

l

+

l e

IndustryUpper10%(99.7%)

l 100 %

4 E

i C

C C

C C

C c

c c

c

......n..

... o..

..4,...

...y..

j 99%

J l

l t

ovisse j

)

}

98 %

i i

i i

1 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct I

l Nl N

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.

l l

The thermal performance value for October 1995 was 99.79. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.4, at the end of the month. The average j

monthly value for the 12 months from November 1,1994, through October 31,1995, I

j was 99.4%.

i The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 99.6%. The 1994 4

Fort Calhoun goalwas a minimum of 99.5%. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 99.5% and i

the industry upper 10 percentile value is approximately 99.9%.

i r

l Data Source:

Jaworski/Shubert l

Accountability:

Jaworski/Gorence l

Trend:

None l

i j

i

+ Thermal Output

.. Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal Tech Spec 1800 MW Limit 1800 a,

e 1499.

ia8.

1497i 1496.

149s,._._._._._ _._._._._.._ _ _._ _._._._._._._._._._._._ _._._.

1494.

1493.

1492 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during October 1995, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

Data Source:

Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Tills Trend:

None 34

m Number of Equipment Forced outages (Monthly)

[ggoo]

g_

Equipment Forced outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hrs. (11-Month Interval)

+ Fort Calhoun Year-End ooals (0.2) q 7 2

1_

e d

x w

=

=

=

=

=

e e.:

w 0

92 93 94 Nov Dec Jan Feb M ar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 moriths from Novern-ber 1,1994, through October 31,1995, was 0.41. The year-to-date rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from January through October 1995 was 0.52.

6 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 l

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

i 1

1

-*- pcnesem l

1s.

NM l

u.

N*

a..

12.

j l

10 f U

I S'

1 f -.y

/~~~~*'~~

l g6 q y,

_r 1

2.

{

0 J.

J A

8 O

N D

J.

F M

A M

J J

A 5

O.

96 96 96 S A g eles e ren el u s e WM enuf acturing Defest W E n 0ln e e rin glD e elga WOthes D evlees SM elntenanc e A stle n ST e sting A s tle n Sin tt le l In s t e lle t le n 4%

2% 4 ef,

j 66 t

i COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total l

categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) i l

failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) reporting period (from January 1994 through June 1995). Fort Calhoun Station i

reported a higher failure rate in 6 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 l

application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.) during the past 18-month CFAR perioo.

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of i

this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 47 failure reports (failure discovery dates within the 18-month CFAR period) with known failure causes that were submitted to INPO by Fort l

Calhoun Station. A total of 70 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 j

i 36 1

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

+ Components with more than One Failure x Components with more than Two Failures 15.

3 7 10.

8 8

8 6

4 4

4 4

3 3

3 3

^

1 1

1 1

0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep l'*1 f*1 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called 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 discover dates from January 1993

)

through June 1995) and the number of NPRDS reportable components 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 3 NPRDS reportable components had more than two failures. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat failures are listed in the Biannual CFAR. The description and tag numbers of the NPRDS reportable 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 1

Module Al-31 A AW15-B4,5 Reactor Coolant Pump Motor RC-3D-M Data Source:

Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 37

Rasoscthe Waste MTNs Month (cu.ft.)

- Year 4o Date Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried GOOD l

.o.

Fort Calhoun Goal (900 cu.ft.)

Y 900 _.

e 3

a e

e c

e a

800.-

700.

600_

}500__ o u.

.M j400.

o 300._

200--

100._

M o

1 i

i Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct T

1995l VOtuuE OF LOW LEVEL SOUD 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 approximately 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 0

Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1995 266.3 Amount of solid radwaste in temporary storage 0

t The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 900 cubic feet. The 1995 INPO industry goalis 110 cubic meters (3,884 cubic feet) per year. The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year.

Data Source:

Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None SEP54 38

m Primary system Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Lknit

{odfio]

._e Fort Calhoun Goal (0.02) l f 4

2%. _ e a

4 1%__

' CycIU5--

Refueling outage 1

0%

I l

l l

l t

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct

[ggq

[1995l i

PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the primary 4

i system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key pa-rameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, flouride, hydrogen and syspended sol-ids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month.

4 The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Specification was 0.00% for the month of October 1995.

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

Data Source:

Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Smith Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

i 39

M hrySyrtem CPI

.o--.12-Morth Amrage Goo l

+ RrtCalhoun(bal(1.4) 1.6 1 f 1.5__

]

1.4__

a 1.3_.

l..-._,.

~~"~lilf l....-c a

1.2__

1.1 __

1 1

I i

1 i

l-1 I

I I

Jan Feb Mar Apr May

.km Jd Aug Sep Oct Nw Dec 1995

$ECONDARY $YSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance index (CPI) are:

l

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

l per day.

The CPI for October 1995 was 1.14. The 12-month average CPI value was 1.24 at the end of the month.

1 i

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 chieve for secondary chemistry values. Iron, the one industry average that we are below, almost l

by half, does not assist in lowering the CPI because of the way the CPI is calculated.

4 Data Source:

Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Smith Trend-Positive due to performance better than goal 40

d i

]

i i

e i

i i

i d

i COST l

l Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that l

cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as an eco-nomically viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line.

l Cost consciousness is exhibited at all levels of the or-i ganization.

i I

i i

t s

4 1

i l

?

l 41 I

}

i

+ Actual Rev6 sed Budget Original Budget

...w Pien 4_

l 3.75 3.5 _

I 3.25 3j

--s x

E i

\\,

g,, x o 2.75 e

1 2.5 _

i/

2.25.

2 1

D91 D92 D93 D94 J95 F M

A M

J J

A S

O N D95 096 D97 D98 D99 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.

The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12-month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 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 through1994. 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 (3.15 cents per kilowatt hour for September 1995) aver-aged above the budget due to 12-month generation not meeting the budget expectations, and 12-month expenses slightly exceeding the budget. The Unit Price for the current month (October 1995) is not available at this time.

Data Source:

Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Scofield Trend:

None j

42 l

I 1

)

g NiclearservicesDMalon O Praiuction Wring DMslon 3 NuclearOperations DMsion j

g TotalNuclear l

8" -

7-7.>

7.,

m m

m m

700.

l 600..

'87 4ss 4 s2 44 441 400..

l 300.

1. 2 1' i 18 8 18 7 18 5 foo tre 57.

200 _

I 1M 117 1M tis 1M 113 iM 113 113 l

100__

l l

0 l

I I

I I

I I

I I

j Jan43 Jan-94 Apr-94 Jtd-M Oct-M Dec-M Mar-95 Jun-95 Sep 95 Actual Staffing Level l l

l STAFFING I.EVEL The actual staffing levels for the three Nuclear Divisions are shown on the graph above.

i l

The authorized staffing levels for 1995 and 1996 are:

{

I j

Authorized Staffing l

l, 1995 1996 l

439 432 Nuclear Operations Division l

185 175 Production Engineering Division j

115 113 Nuclear Services Division l

739 720 Total l

Data Source:

Ponec/Kobunski l

Accountability:

Ponec Trend:

None SEP 24 43 b

M A

+ Spare Parts inventoryValue ($ Million) 16.8..

t 16.6 16.4._

) 16.2 i

16 i

15.8 15.6 i

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct l '"' I Spare Paris inventory Vaiue The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of October 1995 was reported as $16,128,648.

• Parts being resupplied and replenished following last outage.

Data Source:

Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Willrett/McCormick Trend:

None*

44 l

i i

i i

l i

l

}

l-D VISION AND i

DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE i

INDICATORS 1

\\

i i

l Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station l

resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power pro-i duction.

1 I

l s

t 4

I I

45 I

~

i 3

Corrective Maintenance Preventive Maintenance Non-Corre ctive/Pla nt im prove m e nts + Fort Calhoun Goal 1000 -.

787 784 764 887 780 781 668 726 664 4

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct fI #l

[ Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog l l1995l g MWOs Which Exceed Maintenance Completion Goals O Total MWOs 600._

500__

400_

300

...r.

- 7 ww._ E si E "d 8?"

E so I ""'e" O

e Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 l

Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog l MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD EACKLOGS l

l This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and l

priority. The 1995 goal for this indicator is 400 non-outage corrective maintenance MWOs. The current backlog of corrective MWO's is 490. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as follows:

l Goal Priority 1 Immediate Action N/A l

Priority 2 Urgent 2 days l

Priority 3 Operational Concerns 14 days l

Priority 4 Routine Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential 180 days i

Continues management attention is required to maintain this improvment.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Fauthaber l

Trend:

Adverse SEP 36 l

46

Ratio of Freventive to Total Maintenance 100%

90% _

80%

70%__hil

. M M Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct e Preventive Maintenance items Overdue Fort Calhoun Goal 2%_

1 P 1%._

n%

E E

i i

i i

i i

i i

i Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct F*l l

• 51 RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

l PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE i

The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total com-l pleted non-outage maintenance. The ratio was 59.7% for the month of October 1995.

The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that are overdue. During October 1995,615 PM items were completed. All but 2 PMs were completed 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%.

l Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber I

Trend:

None SEP 41 & 44 i

47 il

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

m Rework as identified by Craft

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (<3%)

6% _ _

885 5.3 %

4.7%

3 1

E 4% -_

8.8 %

o 3.2 %

3.2 %

1n ~

>=

2.1%

g _g s 2.8%

i m.

ts%

i l

1%-_

i j

nu i

i i

i i

i j

i Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct l1994l

]9]

i PERCENTAGE OFIOTAL MWOs COMPLETED l

PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORF 1

i.

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 to the 15th of each month due to delay in closing open MWO's at the end of each month.

The Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. A detailed review is conducted of rework items each month to identify generic concems.

Data Source:

Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 48

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

4 i

e Maintenance overtime

1. 12-Month Awrage Maintenance Overtime g

.q,..

Fort Calhoun "On.Line" Goal (10%)

45%

1 P 40 %

35%.

30%-

25%.

20% -

)

i

}

15%.

.w..

j 10%_

c a

e e

o o

o_

o 5%-

0%

i i

t i

i I

l l

i i

i i

l Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct N

N j

l l

MAINTENANCE OVERTIME i

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

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 3.0% for the j,

month of October 1995. The 12-month average percentage of overtime hours with i

respect to normal hours was reported as 13.0 % at the end of the month.

l l

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

4 Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber l

Trend:

None I

49 1

)

l No information Received to Date l

i 1

t i'

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

~

l This indicator shows the number of human performance irs related to procedural non-compliance incidents assigned to the Maintenance Department.

October data unavailable due to conversion to new Condition Reporting System.

Data Source:

Faulhaber Accountabi?ity:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 15,41 & 44 l

50

i g% Scheduled Activities Completed 0% Emergent Activities j

100.0 % -

1 86.5%

j 90.0%

84.8%

1 80.0% -

70.0% -

60.0 %

50.0% -

40.0%.

\\

t j

30.0% -

24.7 %

g,g 20.0% _.

I 10.0% -

i j

0.0% -

i i

i i

Sep-95 Oct Nov Dec-95 l

l i

l 5

DAILY SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE PERCENT OF SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES COMPLETED l

~

)

This indicator shows the percent of Integrated Plant Schedule activities completed on l

schedule. Allwork groups and activities are included. Measurement of daily performance was initiated in June.

i The percent of Emergent work is calculated as a percentage of the total number of sched-l, uled activities.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 85%.

i Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source) l Accourntability:

Chase /Faulhaber l

Trend:

None SEP 33 t

51 i

e %of Hours the in-Une Chemistry instruments are inoperable

,_.1995 Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

26 %

20%.

18%.

16 % _

i 14%.

12%_

10%

8%.

I I

I i

i l

I I -

i i

i i

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct l1995l IN LINE CHEMISTRY lNSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-5ERVICE 3

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 October 1905, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 24.11%. The following instruments were out of service during the month:

CE-1582A - B Cation Bed Conductivity The PASS System was out of service most of the month while maintenance was being performed.

AY-6797 - Mixed Bed TOC analyzer was out of service for 26 Days.

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:

Needs increased Management Attention 52

~

i i

I e Waste Produced Each M6iiffi(RIkagrams)

Monthly Average Waste Produced During the last 12 Months (Kilograms) c Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Q>al(150 kilograms)

1. Federal & State Monthly Limit (Max, of 1,000 kg) 1000 =

x x

x x

800.

600.

400_

200.

O i

i l

i i

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct f9T) l1995l

~

i HAZARDOUS WASTE PaoDuCsD 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 October 1995,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,0.0 kilograms of 1

halogenated and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total haz-ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 255.4 kilograms.

Hazardous waste is counted based upon a full drum of waste.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for hazardous waste produced is a maxi-mum of 150 kilograms.

Data Source:

Chase /Carlson (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Smith Trend:

Positive 53

l

\\

i

~

m Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area GOOD l

-.o Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

l V

10%._ e e

e e

c e

e c

e e

l

\\

I i

9%.

I l

l 8%

i.

i i

i i

i i

i i

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct yS4]

1995 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA i

i 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 l

RCA.

l i

l At the end of October 1995, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that

)

l was contaminated was 9.4%.

l l

Data Source:

Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

Positive SEP54 i

54

I I

+ IdentWied PRWPs (Year to Date)

Fort calhoun Goal (<20) l 20

-t:

18 16 15 15 15 i

14

_ 15 14 13 12 12 1

10 __

j 8.

i 4

1 4

i 2_

1 j

O Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec l1994l f39]

4 i

1 RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radiologi-cal Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month.

I The number of PRWPs which are identified each month should indirectly provide a means

~

to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological perform ance.

During the month of October 1995, there were 5 PRWPs identified.

]

There have have 20 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:

Needs increased Management Attention Currently meeting goal, attention needed not to exceed SEP52 55 1

4 O Documents Scheduled for Review g Documents Reviewed j

g Documents Overdue

}

180.

160_

~

140.

120-_

100.

l 80 _

60.

40.

20 -

4 0 _

i i

i

+

i-RIL+.

l 4

+

l H

j Nov Dec Jan Feb Ms.t Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct l1994l l1995l DOCUMENT Review i

This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 i

months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Se-I curity Plan, Maintenance Procedu es, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Op-erating Manual.

During October 1995, there were 159 document reviews scheduled, while 27 reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 10 document reviews mor e than 6 months overdue. There were 2 new documents initiated during October. Beginning September these figures will include PED and NOD procedures.

I Data Source:

Chase /Plath Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 46 56

i J

Y 35

)

30.

25.

23 j

I 20 s

s o

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct i

4 P9 N

1 LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) l This graph shows the Loggable/ Reportable Incidents (Security) Indicator and depicts (1) i the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents conceming system failures which oc-curred during the reporting month, and (2) the total number of loggable/reprotable inci-

)

dents non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authoriza-j, tion, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors.

l l

During the month of October 1995, there were 22 loggable/ reportable incidents identi-i-

fied. System failures accounted for 20 (93%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. Micro-l wave Zone 17 accounted for 53% of the system environmental failures. ECN 94-388, l

which should alleviate these environmental failures, is scheduled to be completed in No-vember 1995. The two (2) non-system errors involved an unattended security badge and i

tailgating.

I Data Source:

Sefick/Woerner (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Sefick Trend; None SEP 58 57 l

TemporaryV531fications >1-cycle old (teo requiredTor removal) e Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line)

Fort Calhoun Goals for >1-cycle and >6 months old a

o e

6.

0 x

x___q Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec pHg

~

TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS l

l This indicator provides information on the r. umber of temporary modifications greater l

than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removab!e 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 ccva gasket pressure indicator, which is await-ing completion of MWO 941450, whien is scheduled for a future refueling outage when-ever cover gaskets are replaced. In addition, at the end of October 1995, there were 6 temporary modifications installed that were greater than six months old that can be re-moved on-line. These were: 1) Local indication for BAST CH-11 A and CH-11 B, in which Licensing sent FLC 94-001 to the NRC 6/27/95 for approval; 2) Control system for inten-sifier on HCV-2987, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-280, scheduled for comple-tion 12/95; 3) brace to IA header 'T" to water plant, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, scheduled for comoletion 11/95; 4) braces on main instrument air header, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, scheduled for completion 11/95; 5) HE-3 Crane safety line, which is awaiting completion of ECN 95-054, scheduled for issue from DEN-Mechanical 1/12/96;. 6) "A" Channel RPS VHPT capacitor, which is awaiting completion of MR-FC-95-010, DEN-Electrical to issue a 1996 on-line mod.

At the end of October 1995, there was a total of 22 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. 8 of the 22 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 14 are removable on-line. In 1995, a total of 36 temporary modifications have been installed.

Data Source:

Jaworski/Tumer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Gorence Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention SEP 62 & 71 58

I e TotalModificaten Packages Open

_o FortCahounYear-EindGoal 140 - ur 120.

100 n

n n

n n

H 80 rs E

60 _

so sr so 4,

M 0

i

,-i

+

p y

92 93 94 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 95 a.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS 4

This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstandina modifications which are proposed to be cancelled).

Reporting Cateaorv

'93

'94

'95

'96

'97

'98 Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0

0 5

0 0

0 5

l Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 0

0 1

21 2

10 34 Construction Backlog /in Progress 5

0 16 3

0 0

24 Design Engr. Update Backlog /In Progress 1

6 10 0

0 0

17 Totals 6

6 32 24 2

10 80 (outage + online)

(3+3)

(0+6) (16+16) (17+7) (0+2) (10+0)

(46+34) l At the end of October 1995,21 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 9 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear. Projects Review l

Committee (NPRC) had conducted 58 backlog modification request reviews this year.

The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 21 backlog modification request i

reviews this year.

• A review of the reports used to determine the total number of outstanding modifications j

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.

I 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/Skiles 1

Trend:

None*

3,

P i

80 -

EARS Requiring Enginsering Closeout - Not in Closeout 60 g SE O DEN 40.

l 20 _

~'"

E E

E O

1

-, - i r"- 1

,ri,o Aug Sep Oct Aug Sep Oct Aug Sep Oct Aug Sep Oct i

i 0-3 Months 3 6 Months 612 Months

>12 Months OCTOBER 1995 Overdue EARS O Engineering Response g Closeout (sE) 80 _

i 60 40 I

20 __

A l

0 l

Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 i

li

, Priority 1 & 2 m Priority 3

,..o.. Total Open EKR]s

'..**D

• C....O

~

~

~ -

150-0--

+-

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1994 MH

,4,,,,

R e s olv ed s1 EARS 27 overdue and in Requiring Repenses Clo s e c ut

Response

21.6%

15.2 %

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REouEST 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 13 EARS closed during the month 17 Total EARS open at the end of the month 125 Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Skiles Trend:

None SEP62 60

{

i

}

a M

i 24 gy I

cLoSE0VT DEN c

T s

s l

ECN Status -Overall Backlog 1

f.

NM+ MSkMMbfy5i6. gem 7s

.:: gp s 0.6M p o 1

l 200 h w, 17' er er 3.

er i

150

{

4 57 32 s.s Months May-June Jul Aug Sep Oct.

>8 Months 34%

i 96 95 Design Engineering l

zsu.

200, c

0-3 j

150.. "

en as er g3 7,

3.s Months y,,

ggg y

4 May-June Jul Aug Sep Oct-f M

M i

System Engineering j

250.

c2 200..in

>S Months jgg,1kLLLL 1 :

,,'[,

l May.

June Jul Aug Sep Oct.

a

... u. n,,s

=

j Procurement / Construction 280.

$12 200.

in us as u o nt hs us

$3, 9g

+

s n

l May.

June Jul Aug Sep Ots.

a.s wenins o.: m entne M

95 Drafting / Closeout ENGINEERING CHANGE NoricE STATUS l

Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski l

Trend:

None SEP 62 61 1

l

l i

l l

1. 8

1. 8 si P'

HF PC TYPg P rio rity DC TYPE 8

sa T ass Total Open ECNs = 537 s2%

Total Open ECNs = 537 O DEN = Closecut er Drafting Not Complete Pr rHy P rio rHy W 94eintenancolConstruction/P rocurement Work Not Complete s&s 1&2 5 system Engineering

• Respense, Confirmation Not Complete 17 %

13 %

5 DEN. Engineering Not Complete g f,

,e s ist ses vs.

<e s 200.

13 8 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct.

s&s Facility Change ECNs Open 95 7s%

29 70 380.

P riority P riority aos aos as7 5&S 1&2 ass not asi 27%

f 22 et 3,

e et 200.

180.

s 2

si 100.

e se e

a st 4

a e,

s 3

52 i Pemy 0

i i

i May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct-96 354 62%

Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open l

o 100.

P rio rity ei 1&2 77 80.

78 to s%

7, 87 4

s 8

s i

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct-95 s&s sg4 I

Document Change ECNs Open 48%

i ENGINEERING CHANGE NoricEs OPEN Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager Source) l Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski t

Trend:

None l

62 f

l

i l

O AdminToftstive contF6fProblem l

~

g Licensed operator Error g Other PersonnelError

]

g Maintenance Problem O DesignConstructionlinstallation/Fabriation Problem g Equipment Failures 2.

l

~

1-0 1

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

[~iHTl

[1HT]

llCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) Root CAUSE EREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from October 1,1994, through September 30,1995. To be consistent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.

The cause codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. For de-I tailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section of this report.

There were no events in September 1995 that resulted in an LER.

Data Source:Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 63 i

O T5Eiiih- "tstion Training Hours a SimuistorTraining Hours a Non-Requalification Trahing Hours a Numberof Exam Failures O " 37 37 35.5 34.5 35 35.

32 30 _

26

~

25 _.

20.

7 16 14 15 12 2

g 10

.5 8

5 5.5 5

.5 4

5__

3 3 3

2.5 3

2 0

0 0

0 0.._

i

_.+_

i_

_ _ + _

i i

i i

i i

Cycle Cycle Cycle CWe Cycle Cycle Cycle CW e 94 2 94-7 95 1 95-2 95 3 95-4 95-5 95 6

• Note 1:The Simulator was out-of-service durbg Cycle 94-4.

" Note 2: Includes 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of General Enployee Training.

blCENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING l

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 itie graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hcurs a e used for APO/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

i Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance l

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

i Data Source:

Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gasper /Guliani Trend:

None SEP 68 i

64

g SROExams Administered l

0 SRO Exams Passed i

O ROExams Administered g ROExams Passed s

15.

=

j l

10 i

i l

5_-

0 a

l Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct P*1 l'* l

)

llCENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS i

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 October 1995, there were 8 RO and 8 SRO exams given.

Data Source:

Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gasper /Guliani l

Trend:

None SEP 68 65 4

4

d

)

e openIRs >6 M6hifis Okt Open SignficantIRs i

+ TotalopenlRs 600 __

500 __

t i

4M

^

^

/

l 300 231 229 22 0

+

e y

i Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 4

TiH]

1995l OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS i

This indicator shows the total number of Open irs, irs greater than 6 months old, and the number of open significant irs.

j Also, at the end of October 1995, there were 437 open irs. 228 of these IRS were 1

greater than 6 months old. There were 99 Open Significant irs at the end of the month.

These numbers have been rastated to reflect the elimination of CARS from the system.

l As of April 21,1995, CARS are no longer being issued. As of September 21,1995 inci-1 dent Reports are no longer issued. All future corrective actions will be documented on

)

Condition Reports.

Data Source:

Conner /Plott (Manager / Source) 1 Accountability:

Andrews/Phelps/Patterson d

Trend :

None 66

i j

O Tahlouhgeimos a WWasMoowork 800.

i

^

800.

700_

MWO Holds system l

a00 _

Nrmr g,7 4 536 176

$00.

j Aarts 41 35 100.

I O.-

-1 sepes oct t*u oscas i

i i

i l

l MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING OUTAGE) l l

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 i

Planner Holds - Maintenance Planner has not completed planning the work package.

- ECN Hold - Awaiting SRI ECN from DEN.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber i

Trend:

None SEP 31 67 i

s l

~...

1996 Outage Projects Status Report g Last Month a This Month 100._

O For schedule 90 _

80 __

70 60 __

l. 50 E

o

1. 40.

33

,, s e 30 20 __

is is is is is y

g t

I f_"

U y

1

=

a p.

1 e

3 I

{

8 8

5 5 *5 i

o z

0 j$

3 3

}

e I

I I

i i

W CK o

Speciai Servicee Engineering Department OVERALL Pao;ECT 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

--*- Baseline Schedule for PRC Approvat Projected /Actualbchedulefor PRC Approval

-- Fsnal Design Pkg lasued (2 FD DCP issued Pro rto 05/Ot95)

-+ TotalModsfacaten Packages (F)(6 Added After05/0795) 9...+ +.+.+.+ +.+.+.+. s..+ +.+.+.+.+ +

-. w.+.+..+.+. u.+..+..+ +.+. u.. + +. +.. +. +. +. +..

i*

57 I8

j' lie h <$ 4

,=

z f; g, 2 g

/-

=

0 5

5 R5

j B5 5

5 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE (1996 MODIFICATION PLANNii4G)

(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 PRC approved by March 22,1995.

6 Modifications added after May 1,1995, not included.

October 1995 Modifications added: 0 Deleted = 0 Graph corrected to represent the baseline schedule.

Data Source: Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 69

]

+ B aseline Schedule for P RC Approval Projected /A ctuat schedule for P RC Appreal Final Design P kg Issued (6 FD DCP issued Prior to 0713195 Total Modification P ackages (14)(i ts Close Out Only, added af ter 0713/96) 9 ke5 2

8.

t

'l l

7.

ro,..,. c

e::::::::: :

$[<

w 6

M k

8 e

}5 L

g

$EE$$$$$$$$

lllElEEIEE$lS E

5 R5 S5 S E RS 5 8 5 S 5 85 r

PROGRESS OF 1995 ON LINE 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 January 13,1995, not included.

Graph corrected to represent the baseline shedule October 1995 Modifcations Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability; Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 70

+ Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval

)

Projected / Actual Schedule for PRc Approval FinarDes nPackageissue To*si ification Packages (7)(1 Added After 05S155)

..g...

6 c...e.... g..g..,,...,....s.. g.. g..g..,,,... g.. g.. g.. 4...

x..g...

..s... g.. g.....,.. g.. x.. g...,.... x.. x..g...j..

. x..x..,,.,....,..x.. g..g 5

l

.E 4 1

l 3.

5 E2 2

1 0

4.1 6d6S5 7G1S5 8G545 9G955 11445 12SS5 1d246 2d646 3G246 PROGRESS OF 1996 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 6 MODIFICATIONS) l 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 data 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 25,1996.1 Modification added after May 1,1995, not included.

October 1995 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Graph corrected to represent the baseline schedule.

Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 71

I J

l i

I I

l i

8 ACTON PLANS l

4 I

i l

i i

f k

i i

i i

fi e

72

i l

ACTION Pl.ANS This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing i

increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months.

l In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-QP-37, the following performance indicators would require action plans based on three (3) consecutive months of performance cited as "Needing increased Management Attention":

. Industrial Safety Accident Rate (page 2)

. Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 46)

The action plan for Industrial Safety Accident Rate (page 2) is as follows:

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 prioirities. The standards for safety will be raised by making the following items part of the station's daily operations:

Promptly resolve safety problems.

Promptly follow-up safety training to supervisors / crew leaders.

Use the Near Miss forms to resolve potential safety concerns.

The action plan for Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 46) is as follows:

a 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 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 3,1,000 PERFORMANCE DISINTEGRATIONS /MNUTE PER PROSE AREA The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable The personnel contamination events in the clean controlled area.

hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the auxiimry Thisindcator tracks personnel performance for SEP #15 & 54 j

feedwater system for the reportsng period devided by the crltcal hours for the reportmg period multiplied by the number of trains CONTAMNATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA i

in the auxiimry feedwater system.

The percentage of the Radebon Controlled Area, which includes COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE the auxilary building, the radwaste buikkng, and areas of the C/RP buNdtng, that is contaminated based on the total square 1

CollectNe radiation exposure is the total external whole-body footage. This indcator tracks performance for SEP #54.

does recewed by al on eas personnel (includmg contractors and visitors) during a time penod, as rnessured by the DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). Collective radiation exposure le reported in units of person tem. This indcator The lndicator shows the daily core thermal output as rnessured tracks radiologmal work performance for SEP #54.

Som computer point XC105 (in thermal megawatts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec hmit, and the untret porten of the 1495 MW COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSi$ REPORT (CFAR)

FCS daily goal for the reporting month are also shown.

SUISMARY DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABK.ITY (25 Demands)

The summary of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station with eignalkarey higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for each the rest of the industry for an eighteen <nonth time period.

emergency diesel generator dunng the last 25 start demands Failures are reported as component (i.e., pumps, rnotors, main and the last 25 load-run demands.

l steam stop valves, control element motors, etc ) categories.

DISASLING INJURYllLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE Failure Cause Catogones are:

(LOSS TIMi! ACCIDENT RATE)

Age / Normal Use -thought to be the consequence of The hdicolor is defined as the number of accidents for all utihty expected wear, aging, end-of-hfe, or normal use.

personnel permanently assigned to the statson, involving days away from work per 200,000 man-hours worked (100 man-Manufacturing Defect a failure att'ibutable to inadequate years). This does not include contractor personnel. The assembly or inthal quality of the responsible component or indcator tracks personnel performance for SEP #25,26 & 27, system.

DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL)

EngineeringlDesign - a failure attrbutable to the inadequate design of the responsible component or system.

The Document Review indcator shows the number of documents reviewed, the number of documents scheduled for Other Devices a failure attributable to a failure or review, and the number of document reviews that are overdue misoperaten of another component or system, including for the reporting rnonth. A document review is considered associated devices.

overdue if the review is not complete within six months of the assigned due date. This indcator tracks performance for SEP Maintenanc4 Action - resulting from improper memtenance,

1. 46.

lack of maintenance, or personnel errors that occur dunng maintenance aettvitieson the component..

EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE Testing Action - resulting from improper testmg or personnel errors that occur dunng testing activtbes.

The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable and w

the estimated unavailable hours for the emergency AC power initial Installat6on Error caused by improper instel system for the reporting per6od divided by the number of hours installation of equipment in the reportmg period multiphed by the number of trains in the emergency AC power nystem.

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR EERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABlWTY The purpose of this indcator is to quanhfy the economical This indcator shows the number of failures that were reported operaten of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kilowatt during the last 20,50, and 100 emergency desel generator hour indcator represents the budget and actual cents per demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Aho shown are tngger kilowatt hour on a twelve-month average for the current year.

valueswhich correlate to a high level of confidence that a unfs The boom for the budget curve is the approved yearly budget.

diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operstmg equalto 95% when the demand failures are less than the trigger l

Report.

values.

74

1-PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS and the successful test that fotows repair to venfy operabilty

1) Number of Start Dornands: All vahd and inadvertent start should not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG demands, including al start-ordy demands and all start has not been declared operable again.

demands that are followed by load 4un dernands, whether by automatic or manualinstetion. A start-only demand m EhERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY a demand in which the emergency generator is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

This indcator measures the total unrehabilty of ernergency a

diesel generators. In general, unreliabil6ty is the ratio of

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to the number of emergency generator system that prevents the generator valid demands. Total unrehabilty a a combination of start from achieving specahed kequency and voRage is classified unrehabihty and load 4un unrehabilRy.

as a valid start failure. This includes any condition 6dentrhed in the course of maintenance inspections (with ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) the emergency generator in standby mode) that definitely BREAKDOWN l

would have resulted in a start failure if a demand had e

occurred.

This indcator shows a breakdown, by age and priorny of the l

EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineenng

3) Number of LoadJtun Dornands: For a vahd load-run Nuclear and System Engineenng. This indcator tracks demand to be counted the load-run attempt must meet one performance for SEP #62.

or more of the following criteria:

A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real l

automatic or manualinitiation.

The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completon by B) A load <un test to satisfy the plant's load and duration DEN forthe reporting month. The indicator tracks performance as stated in each test's specifications.

for SEP #62.

C) Olher specaltests b whch the emergency generator ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN la expected to be operated for at least one hour while loaded with at least 50% of its design load.

The indcator breaks down the number of Engineering Change Notces (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engeneenng i

4) Number of LoadJtun Failures: A load-run failure should Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and Maintenance. The be counted for any reason in which the emergency graphs provkle data on ECN Facihty Changes open, ECN generator does not pick up load and run as predcted.

SubstRute Replacement items open, and ECN Document Failures are counted dunng any vahd load-run demands.

Changes open. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #62.

5) Except6ons: Unsuccessful attempts to start or load 4un EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL should not be counted as vahd demands or failures when HOURS they can be attributed to any of the following:

~

Equipmert forced otAnges per 1,000 critical hours a the inverse A) Spunous tnps that would be bypassed in the event of of the mean time between forced outages caused by equipment an emergency, failures. The mean time is equal to the number of hours the reactor a cribcalin a penod (t,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />) divided by the number B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required dunng of forced outages caused by equipment failures in that penod.

an emergency.

EQUlVALENT AVAILABILfTY FACTOR C) Intentional terrnination of a test because of abnormal conditions that would not have resuRed in major This indcator is defined as the rate of gross available diesel generator damage or repair, generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as a percentage. Available generation is the energy that can be D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would not produced if the unit is operated at the maximum power level have prevented the emergency generator from being permRted by equipment and regulatory limitations. Maximum restarted and brought to load wthin a few minutes.

generation is the energy that can be produced by a unR in a given period if operated continuously at maximum capacRy.

E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting FORCED OUTAGE RATE system was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a successful start with the starting system in its This indcator is defined as the percentage of time that the unit normal abgnment.

was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or Each emergency generator failure that resuRs in the generator other unplanned condetsons that require removing the unit from being declared inoperable should be counted as one demand servce before the end of the next weekend Forced events and one failure. Exploratory tests dunng corrective maintenance include start-up failures and events initeted while the unit is in 75 i

m.- _

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS l

l reserve shutdown (i e., the unM is ovellaine but not in service).

the accident);

FUEL REUAtluTYINDICATOR

2) One or more days away from work (excludng the day of the accident); and This indcator is deAnod as the steady etete primary coolant 1 131 octMiy, corrected for the tramp uranium contribution and

3) Fatellhos.

normalmed to a common purticaten rate. Tramp uraruum is fuel which has been depoelled on reactor core intomais from

. Contractor personnef ore not included for this indcator.

previous defechve fael or is present on the surface of fuel eiements from the manufacturing process Steady state is IN4JNE CHEIASTRY INSTRutEENTS OUT OF SERVICE defined as conhnuous opershon for et least three days et a power level that does not very more then + or -5% Plants Total number of en-kne chemetry 6nstruments that are out-of.

should cobed date for Ms indmetor et a power level above 85%,

service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident when poestile. Pterte that did not operate et steady stete power Semphng System (PASS).

ebeve 85% should cotect date for this Indmetor et the highest steady-etete power level attamed during the month.

LICENSE CANDOATE EXAMS The density correchon factor is the robo of the epochte volume TIG inecator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes and of coolant et the RCS operstmg temperature (540 degrees F., Vf exems that are admrweiered and poseed each month. The

= 0.02146) divided by the spec 4He volume of cooient at normet indicator tracks training performance for SEPf68.

letdown temperature (12D* F et ouust of the letdown cookng heat i

exdenger, Vf = 0016204), which results in a density correcten UCENSED OPERATOR REQUAUFICADON TRAINING The total number of hours of training given to each crew dunng OROSS HEAT RATE each cycle. Also provuled are the ornuistor training hours (which are e subset of the total trainmg hours), the number of Gross host rate is denned as the retto of total thermal energy in norwREQUAUFICATION trainng hours and the number of exam Brulah Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the reactor to the total fetures. The indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

(

groes electrzel energy produced by the generator in kilowett-hours (KWH).

HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED L

The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogensted hazardous weste, heiogensted hazardous weste, and other hazardous weste produced by FCS sech month.

l HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE The sum of the known (planned and unpionned) unevellable hours and the estensted unevellable hours for the high pressure I

safety infection system for the reporbng period devi: led by the crthcal hours for the reporting penod multipled by the number of trains in the high pressure safety injection system.

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE. INPO UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE The hduator is desnod as the number of accidents per 200,000 SREAKDOWN men 4wurs worked for all utility personnel permanentty assigned to the staten that resun m any of the fobowing:

This indcator shows the number and root cause code for Uconese Event Reports. The root cause codes are os fotows:

1) One or more days of restncted work (excludmg the day of 76 I

m

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS

1) Administrative Control Probiern Management and and extend its life and are performed poor to equipment supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or failure.

actJvies (ie., poor planning, breakdown or lack of adequate rnanagement or supervisory control, incorrect Non Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance procedures, etc) activlbes perfonned to implement station irnprovements or to repair non-plant equipment.

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor Maintenance Work Priorstles are oefined as:

operators dunng plant actrvites.

Ernergency-Conditions whch significantly degrade station

3) Other Personnel Error Errors of omisslon/ commission safety or availability.

committed by non-hconsed personnel involved in plant Equipment deficiencies which actrvlties.

Immediate Action signifcantly degrade staten rehability. Potentral 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 attnbuted 8

in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the Operations Concern - Equipment defcsencies whch hinder maintenance functional organitaten. Activities included in station operation this category are mairienance, testing, surveillance, calibraton and radiation protection.

Essential - Routine corrective maintenance on essential station systems and equipment

5) Design /Constructum/Installat6on/ Fabrication Problem -

This cause code covers a full range of programmatic Nonissential Routine corrective maintenance on non-deficiencies in the areas of des #gn, construction, essential station systems and equipment.

Installation, and fabncation (i e., loss of control power due to underrated fuse, equipment not quahfied for the Plant knprovement - Norsorrective 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 electronc piece-parts and failures due MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE to meteorologeal condtions such as hghtning, ice, high winds, etc. Generally, it includes spunous or one-time The total maxrmm amount of radiation received by an individual failures. Electric components included in this category are person working at FCS on a monthly, quarterty, and annual circut cards, reditors, bestables, fuses, capactors, diodes, basis.

resistors, etc.

MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING LOGG ABLE/ 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 indcator tracks secunty approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refuehng 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 number of MWOs that have been engineenng 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 omved) and ma'ntenance. 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 16 Refuehng Outage and have not yet been converted 4

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS to MWOs.

This indacator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Wbrk Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month.

Maintenance classifications are defined as follows.

Corrective - Repar and restoration of equipment or NUMER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPENT DEFICIENCIES components that have failed or are malfunctioning and are not performing ther intended function.

A control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as any i

component which is operated or controlled from the Control Preventive Actions taken to maintain a piece of equipment Room, provides indcation or alarm to the Control Room, wthin design operating condit6ons, prevent equipment failure, provides testing capabilities from the Control Room, provides 77 i

l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS automate actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a Projects Committee (NPC).

poselve fJd6on for the Control Room and has been identified as donceert,i e., does not perform under all conditions as designed.

These Modificaten Requests may be reviewed several times his doenden aino appi.es to the Allemate Shutdown Panele Al-tofore they are approved for accomphshment or canceled.

179, AL185, and Al-212.

Some of these Modification Requests are retumed to Engineerhg for more inbrmation, some approved for evaluation, A plant componert which is deficient or inoperable is considered some approved for study, and some approved for planning.

an " Operator Work Around (OWA) llem"if some other action is Once planning is completed and the scope of the work is clearty required by an operator to compensate for the condition of the defined, these Modification Requests may be approved for component. Some examples of OWAs are:

accomplishment with a year assgned for construction or they may be canceled. AN of these different phases require review.

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

3) Design Engineer 6ng Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear Planning has assigned a year in whch constructen will be

2) A deloont pump cannot be repaired because replacernent comp 6eted and design work may be in progress.

P parts require a long lead time for purchase /dehvery, thus requinng the redundant pump to be opersted continuousty;

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Constructen Package has been issued or construction has begun but

3) Special actens are required by an Operator because of the modificaten has not been accepted by the System equipment des 6gn problems. These actions may be Acceptance Committee (SAC) described in Operat6ons Memorandums, Operator Notes, or rnay require changes to Operating Procedures;

5) Design Engineering Update Backloglin Progress. PED has received the Modification Completion Report but the

4) Denceent plart equipment that is rrquired to be used dunng drawings have not been updated.

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

5) System indcaton that prov6 des crttcalinformation dunng normal or abnormal operations.

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE)

NUISER OF ASSSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING The indcator shows the status of the projects which are in the IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS scope of the Refuehng Outage.

The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Ucensee PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER Evert Reports (LERs) dunng the reporting month. This indcator MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK tracks massed STs for SEP #60 8 61.

The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identsfied OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS as rework. Rework activites are identified by maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any additonal work required to This inchcator displays the total number of open incident Reports correct deflessncses decovered dunng a failed Post Maintenance (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six months old and Testto ensure the component / system passes subsequent Post the number of open significant irs.

Maintenance Test.

OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS PERCENT OF COhPLETED 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 compared to tne 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 modificaten requests that have not been plant Maintenance activites include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, approved dunng the reporting month, cahbratens, and other miscellaneous activites. This indicator tracks Maintenance performance for SEP #33, 2)

Mmear= tion Requests Be6ng Reviewed, This category includes:

A) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed.

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR INDEX B) Moditcation Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Proiaets Review Committee (NPRC).

This indcator index is calculated from a weighted combination of ten overperformance indcator values, which include Unit C) Modh.?stion Requests being revowed by the Nuclear Capabliity Factor, Unit Capability Loss Factor, HPSI, AFW, 78

.-.__._.__m.-.

.. _ _. __~

I i

i PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS l

l t

Ernergency AC Power System. Unplanned Automatic Scrams, PROGRESS OF 1996 ON4JNE MODIFICATION PLANNING

?

Collectwe Radiaten Exposure, Fuel Rolleibuty Thermal Performance, Secondary System Chemetry, Redeten Weste, This indmotor shows the status of modeAcatens approved for i

and industrial Safety Accident Rate.

completon during 1995.

i PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERa RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM l

l This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER The number of ident:6ed poor radeiogiced work practces i

i event clanotAcebon, a

• Preventable LER"is deAnod as:

(PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indcator tracks I

i radmiogmal work performance for SEP #52.

(

i An event for which the root cause is personnel error (i.e.,

i

}*

inappropriate acten by one or more indwiduals), inadequate RADIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

i adminstratwo controis, a design constructen, installsten, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVEROUE j

ineentshon, fabricaten problem (involving work completed by l

or superveed by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance problem The rate of preventwo maintenance (includmg surveillance (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep /repear of plant testmg and calibraten procedures) to the sum of non-outage

[

equpment). Aino,the cause of the event must have occurred correcewe mainterance and preventeve meantenance completed l

wthin approxernately two years of the " Event Date"specined overthe reporkng penod. The ratio, expressed as a percentage, i

in the LER (e g., en event for which the cause is attributed to is calculated based on man-hours. Also deplayed are the a problem with the ongmal design of the plant would not be percent of preventwo maintenance items m the month that were i

considered preventable).

ret completed or admmestratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace penod equelto 25% of the scheduled interval. The For purposes of LER event cleastheation, a ' Personnel Error" indicator tracks preventwo maintenance actwttes for SEP #41.

4 i

LER is defined as foNows s

RECORDA8LE INJURY / ILLNESS CASES FREQUENCY j

i An event for which the root cause es inappropnote acten on RATE the part of one or more indwiduals (as opposed to being j

attributed to a department or a general group). Also, the The number of injunes requiring more than normal first aid per inappropnate schon must have occurred within approximately 200,000 man-hours worked. The indcator trends personnel i

two years of the " Event Date" specited in the LER.

performance for SEP #15,25 and 26.

l Addhonsby, each evert ceaseined as a " Personnel Error" should REPEAT FAILURES also be classeted as " Preventable

• The indcator trends j

personnel performance for SEP ltem #15.

The number of Nuclear Plant Reliabihty Data System (NPRDS)

}

components with more than one failure and the number of PRIMARY SYSTEM CHERSSTRY % OF HOURS OUT OF NPRDS components with more than two failures for the LitST eighteen month CFAR penod.

i The percent of hours out of hmet are for six primary chemmtry j

paramotors dwided by the total number of hours possible for the month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, Chionde, Hydrogen Desolved Oxygen, Fluonde and Suspended Sohds.

a EPRI hmits are used.

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS 4

(MAINTENANCE)

The number of identined incidents concoming maintenance e

procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the use of procedures (edsdos the number of closed irs caused by 4

procedural noncompl6ence), and the number of closed j

r"ocedural noncomphance irs. The indcator trends personnel performance for SEP f tS,41 and 44 5

i SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES i

PROGRESS OF CYCLE U OUTAGE MODIFICATION PLANNING Safety system failures are any events or condelions that could 1

prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of structures or The indcator shows the status of modif cations approved for systems. If a system conauts of multiple redundant subsystems i

completon during the Refuehng Outape.

or trains, failure of all trarns constitutes a safety system failure.

1 79

_ _ ~ -

t PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS

'i Fa61ure of one of two or more trame is not counted as a safety operatensidata such as special tests or constructen actNities.

system failure. The definiten for the indicator paranels NRC An event identrhed from the screening process as a sagrWAcant a

reportng requirements in to CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The overt candidee is further evaluated to determine if any actual or fotowing is a het of the major safety systems, sub-systems, and potentiel threat to the heath and safety of the putdic was components monitored for this ind6cator-involved. Specinc examples of the type of crNoria are summarized as follows:

Accident Monitoring instrumentation, Auxilary (and Emergency) Feedwater System Coveustitde Gas Control,

1) Degradatson ofimportant safety equipment; Component Coobng Water System, Containment and Containment laaman, Contamment Coolant Systems, Control

2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; L

Room Emergercy Ventilation System, Emergency Core Cooling

Systems, Engineered Safety Features

3) Degradetion of fuel integrity, pnrnary coolant pressure instrumentaten, Esserdial Compressed Air Systems, boundary,important associated features; Essental or Emergency Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppression Systems, isolation Condenser, Low

4) Scram wth comphcation; Temperature Overpressure Protecten, Mom Steam Une isolation Valves, OnsMe Emergency AC & DC Power

5) Unplanned release of rodeosctivty; w/Detributon, Redeten Monitonng instrumentaten, Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core leolabon Cooling System,

6) Operstonoutside the hmits of the TechnicalSpeci6 cations; Reactor Trtp System and instrumerdaten, Recirculaton Pump Trip Actuaten instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal

7) Other.

Systems, Safety Valves, Spent Fuel Systems, Standby Uquid Control System and Ultimate Heat Smk.

INPO significant everts reported in this indcator are SERs (Signincent Event Reports) whch inform utilties of signincent SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEheSTRY PERFORMANCE events and lessons learned ident Aed through the SEE-IN INDEX screenmg process.

The Chometry Performance index (CPI) is a calculation based SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE on the concentreten of key impurtos in the secondary made of the plant. These key impurttes are the most hkoty cause of The dotar value of the spare parts inventory for FCS during the detertoraton of the steam generators. Crieria for calculatmg the reportmg pered.

CPI are:

STAFFING LEVEL

1) The pient is at greater than 30 percent power; and The actual stafhng level and the authonzed stafhng level for the

2) the power is changmg less than 5% por day.

Nuclear Operatens Division, The Producten Engmeering Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This indcator The CPIis calculated using the following equaton:

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 not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during the Where: Sodium, sulfate and chlonde are the monthly everage reporting month.

blowdown concentratsons in ppb, iron and copper are monthly time weighted everage feedwater concentratens 6n ppb. The denominator for each of the Ave factors is the INPO median value. If the monthly average for a speel6 parameter is less than the INPO median value, the rneden value is used in the calculaten, e

i SIGNIFICANT EVENTS TEWORARY MODIFICATIONS Signincent everts are the events identifed by NRC staff through The number of temporary mecharucal and electrical i

dotated screening and evaluation of operstmg exponence. The conhguratens to the plant's systems.

j screerung process includes the daily review and docussen of i

all reported operatrng reactor events, as well as other

1) Temporary conhguratens are de6ned as electncaljumpers, 80

.._m

. _ m m i

i l

i PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS 4

f electittel blocks, machenical jumpers, or mechanical blocks The value for this indcator is ceiculated by multiplying the total.

}

which are installed in the plant operating systems and are number of unplanned adomote reactor scrams in a specLc tame

[

not shown on the latest revision of the P&lD, schemotc, period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then devidmg that number by the total

[

2.

connochon, wiring, or flow diagrams.

number of hours critical in the some time period. The indcator la further defined as follows:

l

2) Jumpers and blocks wh6ch are installed for Survemence

{

Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Cambraten Procedures,

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anticipated Special Procedures or Operahng Procedures are not-part of a pionned test.

conadored as temporary modecahons unless the jumper or block remains in piece eIIer she test or procedure is

2) Scram means the automate shutdown of the reactor by a complete, Jumpers and blocks installed in test of lab rapid inserten of negative reactevity (e g, by control rods.

Instrumories are not considered as temporary modificatens.

liquid irjecten system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of j

l the reactor protecten system. The scram signal may have i

3) Scaffold is not considered a temporary modiflesten, resulted from exceeding a set pont or may have been l

Jumpers and blocks whch are installed and for which MRs spureus.

l' t

have been submitted wM be consulered as temporary tr=wearahans untd flnet resolution of the MR and the jumper

3) Automate means that the inihel signal that caused actuation or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the of mo reactor protecton system logc was provided from one i

drawings This indcator tracks temporary modecations for of the sensor's morWtonng plant parameters and conditions, SEP M2 and 71, rather then the manuel scram switches or, manuel turtune tnp switches (or push-buttons) provided in the main control THERMAL PERFORMANCE toom.

The ratio of the design gross heat rete (corrected) to the

4) Critical means that during the steady-state conditen of the l

adgusted actual gross heat rate, exproceed as a percentage.

reactor pnor to the scram, the effective mulupbcation (k,,)

was essentally equel to one, j

UNIT CAPASILITY FACTOR UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR i

j The rate of the available energy gercration over a given trne i

period to me reistence energy genersten (the energy that could The ratio of the unpionned energy losses dunng a given period 1

be produced if the unit were operated conhnuously at full power of time, to the reference energy genershon (the energy that mder roterence ambient condehons) over the same twne period, could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full Expressed as a percentage power under reference amtnent condihons) over the some time period, expressed as a percentage UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR 4

j The not electrical energy generated (MWH) divided by the product of maximum dependeble capacity (not MWe) hmes the e

groes hours in the reportmg penod expressed as a percent. Not i

I electncal energy generated is the gross electrical output of the unit measured at the output termmels of the turb6ne generator minus the normal staton servce loads dunng the gross hours of the reporting period, expressed in megawatt hours.

e a

d i*

J a

i I

t 1

[

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS. (INPO CRITICAL HOURS

+ DEFINITION) i 1his indicator is defined as the number of unplanned autometc This indcator is deflned as the sum of the following safety scrams (reactor protecten system logic actuohons) that occur system actuatens:

per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critcal operaten.

i 81 i

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS

1) 1he twmber of unplanned Emergency Core Coohng System (ECCS) actuetens that result from reachng an ECCS actuation set point or from a spurtouallnedvertent ECCS signol.

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuations that result from a loss of power to a sainguards bus. An unplanned selety system actuation occurs when an actuohon est posit for a satoty system is reached or when a spurious or inadvertent signel is generated (ECCS only),

and mehr eqtapment in the system is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuation was not part of a planned test or evoluten. The ECCS actuatene to be counted are actuohone of the high pressure injecten system, the low pressure infection system, of the safety inpoction tarts.

t UNPLANNEO SAFETY SYSTEM ACTIONS. pdRC DEFINITION)

The number of enfely system aduatens which include (gggg) the Hgh Preeeure Soloty Ingseon System, the Low Pressure Safety Ingeden System, the Seesty injoeon Tenits, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. ThJ NRC c6essificaten of safety system

)

actuations includes actuations when major equipment is operated gag when the loge systems for the above safety systems are challenged.

VIOLATMNi TitEND The indmetor is denned as Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations and NorW3sd Vloistens trended over 12 months. Addahonelly, Cited Violations for the top quartile Region IV plant is trended over 12 months (leggmg the Fort Calhouri Station trend by 2-3 morths). It is the Fort Calhoun Station goal to be at or below the cited v6oletson trend for the top quartdo Region IV plant.

i VOLUTE OF LOW 4.EVEL SOLE ItADIOACTIVE1NASTE This indcator is defined as the volume of low-level solid ra'*aare e weele actually shipped for buriel. This indcator also v

shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste which is in temporary storage, the amount of rodeactive oN that has been stupped off sRe for processing, and the volume of soltd dry radeactive weste which has been sNpped off-sRe for processing. Low-level sohd radmactrve waste consists of dry acDve weste, sludges, resins, and evaporator bottoms generated as a resut of nuclear power plant operaten and maintenance.

Dry radioactive weste includes contameneted rags, cleaning 4

molenets, chaposeble protective clothkg plostic containers, and 1

any other maternet to be desposed of at a low 4evel radeactrve weele etapnaal see, except resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms.

Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing TNs indcator tracks rodeiog6 cal work performance for SEP #54.

82

SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance Indicators index is to list performance indicators related to SEP ltems with parameters that can be trended.

SEP Reference Number 15 East e increase HPES and IR Accountability through use of Performance Indicators 1

Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance)

. 50 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate 4

Clean Controlled Area Contaminations >1,000 DisintegrationsMinute Per Probe Area........ 5 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs

.6 SEP Reference Number 24 e Complete Staff Studies Etaffing 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 e implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate

.3 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate...............

.4 SEP Reference Number 31

= Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Conduct Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 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 Scheduled Maintenance Activities (AllMaintenance Crafts)..

51 i

SEP Reference Number 36

. Reduce Corrective Non Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage)

.. 46 i

SEP Reference Numbers 41 & 44 e Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule

. Compliance With and Use of Procedures Rat'o of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue 47 50 Pru:edural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance)..

l SEP Reference Number 46 e Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program 83

4 4

I SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX 1

i Docu ment Review...................................................

. 56 SEP Reference Number 52 Egga Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices s

1 Radiological Work Practicw Program................................................

55 4

SEP Reference Nurnbar 54 i

. Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program

- Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 2.1,000 CountsMinute Per Probe Area 5

Collective Radiation Exposure................................................... 17 Volume of low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste.......................................... 38 e

Contaminated Radiation Controlled Ares 54 SEP Reference Number 58

. Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program l

Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security).........

57

)

4 SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61

. Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program

{

. Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests l

4 Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Licensee Event Reports...

...... 21

[

t SEP Reference Number 62 Establish Interim System Engineers l

e Temporary Modifications

..... 58 l

Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown........

60 l

Engineering Change Notice Status 61 Engir. sering Change Notices Open......................

62 i

Af.P Reference Number 68

. Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and establish means to monitor Operator Training License Operator RequaHeation Training

.......... 64

........65 l

Ucense candidate Exams............

SEP Reference Number 71

. Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications i

Temporary Modifications 58 r

i i

I 84 l

bPORT DisTaisuTion List R. L. Andrews K. L Belek J. D. Keppler B. H. Blorne 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 N. L. Marfice A. G. Christensen R. D. Martin s

O. J. Clayton T. J. Mcivor R. P. Clemens K. G. Melstad R. G. Conner K. A. Miller J. L. Connolley P. A. Mruz G. M. Cook Nuclear Licensing S. R. Crites

& Industry Affairs D. W. Dale J. T. O'Connor D.C.Dietz W. W. Orr T. R. Dukarski T. L. Patterson M. L. Ellis R. T. Pearce l

H. J. Faulhaber R. J. Phelps M. T. Frans W.J.Ponec D. P. Galle C. R. Rice S. K. Gambhir A. W. Richard J. K. Gasper D. G. Ried W. G. Gates G. K. Somide S. W. Gebers M. J. Sandhoefner L. V. Goldberg F. C. Scoloid j

D. J. Golden H. J. SeSck 4

D. C. Gorence J. W. Shannon R. H. Guy C. F. Simmons A. L. Hale E.L.Skaggs K. R. Henry J. L. Skiles 1

j!

J. B. Herman F. K. Smith l

T. L Herman R. D. Spies i

l K. C. Holthaus D. E. Spires L. P. Hopkins R. L. Sorenson o

C. K. Huang K. E. Steele T. W. Jamieson M. A.Tesar R. L. Jaworski J. J. Tesarek R. A.Johansen J. W. Tills J. W. Johnson D. R. Trausch 4

l R. Jones J. M. Waszak W. C. Jones G. R. Williams S. J. Willrett i

L 85 l

FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES EVENT DATE RANGE PRODUCTION (MWH)

CUMULATIVE (MWH)

Cycle 1 09/26/73 -02/08/75 3,299,639 3,299,639 1st Refueling 02/08/75-05/11/75 Cycle 2 05/11/75 -10/01/76 3,853,322 7,152,961 2nd Refueling 10/01/16-12/13/76 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 -01/18/80 3,882,734 16,868,454 5th Refueling 01/18/80 - 06/11/80 Cycle 6 06/11/80 -09/18/81 3,899,714 20,768,168 6th Refueling 09/18!81 -12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 -12/03/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/03/82 -04/06/83 l

Cycle 8 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 -02/01/92 5,451,069 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92-05/03/92 Cycle 14 05/03/92-09/25/93 4,981,485 F6,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93 -11/26/93 i

Cycle 15 11/26/93-02/20/95 5,043,887 61,065,900 15th Refueling 02/20/95-04/14/95 FORT CALHOUN STATION CURRENT PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS " RECORDS" First Sustained Reaction August 5,1973 (5:47 p.m.)

First Electricity Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial Operation (180,000 KWH)

September 26,1973 i

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 l

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 I

i OPCYCLES. TEM 4 *95