Text

Performance Indicators Rept,Aug 1995
	ML20098B078
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	08/30/1995
From:	; OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20098B075	List: LIC-95-0178, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators Rept, Aug 1995; ML20098B078;
References
	NUDOCS 9510020123
	Download: ML20098B078 (86)
	v • d • e

.

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 3

/

AUGUST 1995 SAFE OPERATIONS l

1 PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENESS

$sA A8sER 8E88Siss P

PDR

9 0%il e acs%z w wn, alhhA...

9 a uk aahm wnd sowndjud nnni...

y a w a, y%, cans

%g cunandrnani...

d w a, u>ay s y!>...d w dang ikjob e

4V ik,% l %, weu, %.

St w l

wns-dinchd, d ik wall e w%d, 9

puuum,, a w a um ssje u>ea,u6

- - wnd la p a wnd A w lu < - g w ik 9u %e g

l pewn,, djud u dang ik 9V l%p.

)wn).O'cm 4

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l

t l

Prepared By:

l Production Engineering Division System Engineering l

Test and Performance Group l

AUGUST 1995 l

t FORT CALHOUN STATION August 199s MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT 4

OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

During the month of August, Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100%

power until 1114 hours0.0129 days 0.309 hours 0.00184 weeks 4.23877e-4 months on August 24th. At that time, the plant experienced a reactor trip and associated diesel generator (DG) starts. The trip occurred during the performance of the Diverse Scram System Actuation Relay Operability Test, when a licensed operator inadvertently repositioned the incorrect switch from TEST to NORMAL. All systems responded normally to the trip with the exception of the DG-1 accelerating to full speed vice idle speed. After evaluation of the DG-1 electrical system conditions, this DG-1 full speed event was reported on August 28th in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72(b)(1)(ii)(B).

The reactor was taken critical at 0220 hours0.00255 days 0.0611 hours 3.637566e-4 weeks 8.371e-5 months on August 26th and was generating at 100%

capacity by August 29th. Reactor criticality was delayed because of a failure of the motor brake on one of the Control Rod Drive Motors.

4 e

t I

l This page has been left blank intentionally.

O i

R

,l

!l.

ll' j

,l!'

l

<i

I i

i:

d ne g

r nT n

i n

a a

t h e hl el s

t g t a e a e

r a r o Mo ly ir e r eG G

u o

t e

t J

y,

t t v t

e g eA eD oD u

e b

bP NP t

a a

ey eP eP e

p l

r n

V C

ct cO cO u

ns n

n J

e e

au a5 a5 9

5 t

c nd m9 m9 9

9 e a

n nn r

t D

a oi o

o a

a r

1 1

y 9

n f

f f

1 M

De" o

n r

r r

u" t

t e

e e

o s ol f

P P

P ut r

a a

r g

r-V e

e Y

P ua AeY j$

a h

@dN

(;]['@ 3 f p,v %

~

Q

]p _ N.j Q 'o'2 l [#

~

-..[bQ:::

$. 7 Uh 3

y k-

.,}

~

t 6."

M :

n c.}J:b -

l e

a W ;. }l e

eN L

_Jl d

m. /. X..

i

}

ai n

a l

~

h o.j~ -. :.

M/d r c m

f t ct r

sAa f

er

- 7 u

R f

y T r g

e

E R

}

nte i

f P [

l a

M S

s I

r o

g m

t a

c s

e af g

d n y

c l

e oet i

er t

n vs d

n a ema eea r

f nc aem amLW n

g aS g

St l

sr ud I

w po Gyo l

D Sf ooa nt e

uVLR e

r g

Uu g E A

P c

s n

a a

m

~

ji 0

'._j il I.

r i

n.

k o

n f

Sgd yo g

y e

i, r

l ne$

r c

i t

N n

w et t e

or ma e -

i u

e nlic f

s$

i oReio$

ia a

n t

nb F

g Stem P

a g a a n

k nEl d p sr l

n p ps n as Wyo ax$

Sf nE RE $

O r

E U Co N

F o

L

1 '

g A P

mM P

e n

n.

f -

. a.1

.l N

t -

,.3

. f I

[: fs f

[j IN2;_

$?s1.hy:h:y. E.

a

~

g. 7 E,

ph g.

y e

y t

c a

y i o yd n

r ema t

t i r fa s x 3

. t ibt l;NgStem l

e i

.E a c J

sr a

md n

Upa yo en S

I aF S

I Sf h

r M

C gP e

C H

P m

S i

E E ~

f l.

l, i;l-l\\

ll il

!l 1Il l

'l i

i Unplanned Auto Scrams i

Year-To-Date Value Petformance Cateoories t

Safety S6gnificant E

Performance better than Industry Average Trend System E w nts Actuations Performance better than 1995 OPPD Goal Forced Outage Performance Not Meeting 1995 OPPD Goal 3

l Failures i

May June July f

1995 1995 1995 j

Equ6pment Collective l

Forced Radiation August 1995 Best Possible l

Outages Exposure Year-to-Date 1995 Year-End Value Performance i

Performance NRC Performance Indicators i

j

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT August 1995 -

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data represenbng three A performance indcator with data represenbng three consecutnre months ofimproving performance of three consecutive months of dechning performance or three consecutNo months of performance that is superior to the consecutve months of performance that is trendng stated goal is exhitxbng a postbve trend per Nuclear toward dec6ning as determined by the Manager - Stabon Opersbons DMaion Quakty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37).

Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per Nuclear Opersbons Division Quahty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37).

The following performance indcators exhitzted positive A supervisor whose performance indicator exhibits an trends for the reportng month:

adveme trer d by tha oef6nibon may specify in wntten form (to be pub 6shed in this report) why the trend is not Safety System Failures a&eme The fotowing performance indicators exhibited adverse Hiah Pressure Safety Iniecton System Safety System trends for the reporbng month:

(pfg, )N Thermal Performance (Page 33)

Maintenance Workload Backloos a 20)

(Page 46) l Missed Surveillance Tests Results in Licensee Event Reports End of Adverse Trend Report.

(Page 21)

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED Unolanned Auto Scrams per 7.000 Hours Cnbcal Unolanned Safety System Actuatons (INPO Defintbon)

A performance indicator with data for the reporting period (Page 30) that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goalis defined as "Needing increased Management Attention' Unolanned Safety System Actuaton3 hf. Defintbon) per Nuclear Operatons Division Quahty Procedure 37 (Page 31)

(NOD-QP-37).

Pnmary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limrt The following performance indicators exhibited poordve (Page 39) trende for the reportng month:

Secondary System Chemistry Industrial Safety Accident Rate (Page 40)

(Page 3)

Hazardous Waste Produced Emeroency AC Power System (Page 53)

(Page 10)

Contaminated Radiabon Controlled Area Emeroency Diesel Generator Unit Reliabilrty (Page 54)

(Page 11)

End of Positve Trend Report.

Diesel Generaaor Reliabihty (25 Demands)

(Page 12)

Emeroency Diesel Generator Unrehabilrty (Page 13)

Fuel Reliability Indicator (Page 14) v

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT August 1995 -

SUMMARY

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT (continued)

Number of Control Room Eauipment De6cences (Page 15)

Number of On-Une and Outane Control Room Eauipment Denciences (Page 16)

~

+

Collective Radston Exposure (Page 17)

Forced Outaae Rate (Page 24)

Unit Capability Factor (Page 27)

Unit Capability Loos Factor (Page 28)

Eauipment Forced Outaae Rate (Page 35)

Temporary Modi 6 canons (Page 58) 1 l

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT IMPROVEMENTS / CHANGES This section lists signiRcent changes made to the report and to speer6c indicators within the report since the previous month.

The annual Year-to<iste Unit Capability Factor (Page 27) was revsed to re6ect a calculation correebon change in the unplanned energy loss.

Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) -

Page Ag, has been revloed to reRect human performance related to irs seeigned to the maintenance functional area.

End of Report Improvements / Changes Report.

l i

l Table of Contents / Summary enan o oAi.s......................................................................... x l

SAFE OPERATIONS Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO................................................. 2 Disabling injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate...................

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

........ 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations

>1,000 DisintegrationsMinute per Probe Area

.... 5 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs................................................. 6 Safety System Failures

.... 7 Safety System Performance:

4 High Pressure Safetyinjection System..

8 l

Auxiliary Feedwater System

.....9 Emergency AC Power System 10 Emergency Diesel Generator U nit Relia bility...........................................................

1 1 Reliability (25 Demands)

...................................................12 Unreliability............

.... 13 Fuel Reliability lndicator........

....... 14 J

Control Room Equipment Deficiencies...........................

............15 4

On-Une and outage Control Room Deficiencies.................................... 16 Collective Radiation Exposure.................

..... 17 l

Maximum individual Radiation Exposure..............

...............18 Violation Trend....

19 Significant Ever9s...................

. 20 Mssed Surveillance Tests Resulting in LERs.....

21 PERFORMANCE Station Net G eneration..........................................

. 23 Forced Outage Rate

..... 24 1

Unit Capacity Factor 25 Equivalent Availability Factor........

26 vii

Table of Contents / Summary PERFORMANCE fcontinued)

MQE Unit Capability Factor................................................................. 27 Unplanned Capability Loss Factor....................................................... 28 Unplanned Automatic Reactor Scrams per 7,000 Hours Critical..................................................... 29 Unplanned Safety System Actuations INPO Definition........................................................... 30 NRC Definition

............ 31 G ross H e at Rate.................................................................. 32 Thermal Performance........................................................... 33 Daily The rm al Output................................................................. 34 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours...................................... 35 Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) Summary.................................. 36 Repost Failures

.................................................... 37 Volume of low-Level Solid Radioactivo Waste

.......... 38 Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of umit................................... 39 Secondary System Chemistry........................................................ 40 998.I Cents Per Kilowatt Hour...................

42 i,

Staffing Level..

...... 43 Spare Parts inventoty Value

.............. 44 DM810N AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l

i 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 identified as Rework.................48 Ove rtim e............................................................... 4 9 Procedural Noncompliance lncidents........

.. 50 Daily Schedule Performance - Percent of Completed Scheduled Actmbes.............. 51 viii l

Table of Contents / Summary DMSION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PAGE in-Une Chemistry instruments Out-of-Service.......................................... 52 Hazardous Weste Produced........................................................... 53 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area........................................... 54

]

Radiological Work Practices Program

............................ 55 Document Review 56 Loggable/ Reportable tncidents (Security)............................................. 57 Modifications Tempora ry.............................................

.... 56 Outsta nding........................................................

59 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown

.......... 60 Engineering Change Notices Status

........................................................ 61 Open..........................................

.... 62 Ucensee Event Report (LER) Root Cause Breakdown..................................... 63 Ucensed Operator Requalification Training

............................................ 64 Ucense C andidate Exams.................................................

..... 65 Open incident Reports......................................

................. 66 i

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 PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST Actio n Pl a n s................................................................... 72 Performance indicator Definitions.......................

...........75 i

Safety Enhancement Program lndex

........ 83 Report Distribution Ust............................

85 ix

9 OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities MI6SION The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently and effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the general public and the environment.

GOALS I

9.g3L1:

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

1995 Priorities:

Improve SALP ratings.

Improve INPO rating.

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

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations.

Objectives to support SAFE OPERATIONS.

OBJECTIVE 1-1:

No challenges to a nuclear safety system.

OBJECTIVE 1-2:

Conduct activities in accordance with applicable policies, technical specifications, procedures, standing orders and work instructions.

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 14:

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

OBJECTIVE 1-5:

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

x

l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President-1995 Priorities j

ftg@jj:

PERFORMANCE Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Obj: 2 and Goal 4, Obj: 1 Achieve high standards of performance at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power production.

1995 PRIORITIES:

Improve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork.

Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

1 Reduce the number of Human Performance errors.

Identify Programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.

4 Objectives to support PERFORMANCE:

OBJECTIVE 2-1:

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

OBJECTIVE 2-2:

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

OBJECTIVE 2-3:

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

OBJECTIVE 2-4:

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

OBJECTIVE 2-5:

Team //tdviduat ownership, accountability, performance and teamwork is evident by improved plant reliability; improved ratings for both INPO and NRC; reduced number of human performance errors and identification of performance problems by effective self assessment and for Irdviduals as measured by the successful completion of department goals & objectives and other specific measures.

J 4

l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS Vice President - 1995 Priorities gstgLl:

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 Priorttles:

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:

l Implement nuclear related Opportunity Review recommendations according to approved schedules and attain the estimated cost savings.

l l

l Goals Source:

Scofield (Manager) d

l l

i i

1 i

i l

1 l

SAFE OPERAT ONS l

Goal: A proactive, self-critical and safety conscious culture is j

exhibited throughout the nuclear organization.

Individuals l

demonstrate professionalism through self-ownership and per-sonal initiative and open communication.

i

)

i l

l-i i

1 i

i 1

4

+ Year-to-Date FCS Industrial Safety Accident Rate (INPo Definition)

+ FCS Average Rate (Last 12 Months)

+ FCS Year-End Goal (<0.50) l GOOD l

--e-Industry Current Best Quartile (.24)

+ 1995 INPO Industry Goal (<0.50) j f 2'

1.5 1

b5

'5 0.5 [!: j C

C C

O Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l INDUSTRIAL $AFETY ACCIDENT RATE As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Associa-tion of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plant': "The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station."

The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year to date was 1.39 at the end of August 1995. The value for the 12 months from September 1,1994, through August 31,1995, was 1.08.

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

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

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

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is 50.50. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 50.50.

The approximate industry upper ten percentile value (for the period from 7/93 through 6/94) is 0.12.

Data Source:

Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Conner Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 2

_. =

-e 1995 Disabling injur)dlinese Frequency

-x 1994 Disabling injur)dlineos Frequency

_.4...

Average Rate (Last 12 Months)

(GOOD l

_e-1995 Goal (0.50) 2-1.8 -

1.6 --

1 1.4 --

1.2 -

a 4

^

0.8..

S

h. ----X. %

4 a

g*W

~x -

y

/*

O.2 -_

i 0

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

[1996l 4

DISABLING lNJURY/ ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

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

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate year to date was 1.39 at the end of August 1995. There were no disabling injury / illness cases reported for the month.

The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from September 1,1994, through August 31,1995, was 1.08.

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

Data Source:

Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Conner Trend:

None SEP 25,26 & 27 3

I

+ 1995 Recordable injurynliness Frequency

+ 1994 Recordable injurynliness Frequency l0000l

+ Average Rate (Last 12 Months)

- O**

Fort Calhoun Goal 2.5 -

2.25 -

2-j 1.75

^

~~~~~

- - - - O***** ****O'****O

- - - - w

O'***

~

1.5

1.25 -

1 A

0.75 0.5 -

l 0.25 -

0 :.

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1995 recordable injury / illness frequency rate. The 1994 record-able injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown.

1 A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Division are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment oeyond first aid. The recordable injury illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis There have been eight recordable injury / illness cases in 1995. The recordable injury /

illness cases frequency rate year to date was 1.59 at the end of August 1995. There was one recordable injury / illness case reported for the month of August. These injuries were the result of a slip by an employee when getting out of a car causing a fractured foot.

The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate for the 12 months from September 1, 1994, through August 31,1995, was 1.48.

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

BM Contamination Events (Monthly) l000D)

-*-- Contamination Events (YTD)

I f f

j

~

4e e

42 l

g.

39 31 30 -

t a

20 -

~.;

10 -

1 NN 3

.e';

N*.

BE

??

M 0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

There were 2 contamination events in August 1995. There has been a total of 48 con-tamination events in 1995 through the end of August. This compares to 39 at this time last year.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None SEP 15 & 54 5

1535 Personnel Errors (Each Month)

-+- Preventable (18-Month Totals)

-e-Personnel Error (18-Month Totals) 20 -

15 -

~

10 -

E E'

0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul l1994l l1995 l PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LER.

This indicator depicts 18-month totals for numbers of " Preventable" and " Personnel Error" LERs.

The graph shows the 18-month totals for preventable LERs, the 18-month totals for Personnel Error LERs and the Personnel Error totals for each month. The LERs are trended based on the LER event data as opposed to the LER report date.

In July 1995, there were no events which were subsequently reported as an LER. No LERs were categorized as Preventable or as a Personnel Error for the month of July.

The total LERs for the year 1995 (through July 31,1995) is three. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1995 is zero. The total Preventable LERs for the year is one.

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 6

i Startup i

m Shutdown I 000D I I

e m Operations o-Industry Average Trend U

2-31-

'G' G-

.o

..a

,o.

. a..

.c

.o O

I I

i I

I e

i i

i I

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-Q uarter

$AFETY $YSTEM FAILURES J

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 greeter than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating condi-tions.

2nd Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuratior'. for the borated watersource of the safety injection system was not seismically qualified. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meet design requirements during a seismic event.

4th Quarter 1993: 1) During surveillance testing, both PORVs for the LTOP system failed to open during multiple attempts. The failures were a result of differential expansion caused by a loop seat, excessive venting line back pressure, and cracked valve disk 3; 2) Calibration errors of the offsite power low signal relays could have prevented offsite power from tripping and the EDGs from starting in the required amount of time during a degraded voltage condition; 3) Both AFW pumps were inoperable when one was removed from service for testing and the control switch for the other pump's steam supply valve was out of the auto position; 4) Only one train of control room ventilation was placed in recirc when both toxic gas monitors became inoperable. Later during surveillance, the other train auto-started and brought cutside air into the control room for a six-minute period.

1st Quarter 1994: A design basis review determined that an ESF relay could result in loss of safety injection and spray flow, due to premature actuation of recirculation flow.

4th Cluarter 1994: An accident scenario was identified that could result in the inoperability of both control roorn air conditioning units. Following certain accident conditions, CCW temperature could rise causing compressor rupture disc failure and a release of freon.

There were no safety system failures in the 1st quarter of 1995.

Data Source:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Positive 7

m Monthly High Pressure Safetyinjection SystemunavailabilityValue

._x-. Yem..to-Date High Pressure Safetyinjection systemUnava!!abilityValue

..e.

Fort Calhoun Goal (0.004)

(GOOD l

+ INPo IndustryGoal(0.02)

V w._

industry Upper 10% (0.0011) 0.02 -

0.01 5 -

0.01 0.005 -

c 3

f --;-

5rs-b:5,bi 0

l l

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

51 HioH PRESsuaE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The High Pressure Safety System unavailability value for the month of August 1995 was 0.0. There was 0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of planned unavailability, and 0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of unplanned unavailability, during the month. The 1995 year-to-date HPSI unavavailability value was 0.0002 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.0002.

There has been a total of 2.83 hours9.606481e-4 days 0.0231 hours 1.372354e-4 weeks 3.15815e-5 months of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of unplanned unavailability for the high pressure safety injection system in 1995.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goalfc; t!.is 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.

I Data Source:

Jaworski/Schaffer Accountability:

Jaworski/Schaffer Trend:

Positive 8

Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater system Unavailability Year.to.Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability lGOODj

.. o... Fort Calhoun Goal (0.01) 1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) c industry Upper 10% (9.0021) 0.03.

0.025 0.02 3

a

___3.,

6 6

a

+

0.015 0.01 o.... o.... o....

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

....e.....o.... o....o.....o 0.005 O

i ig i

i i

a i

i i

1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec AUXILIARY FEEDWATER $YSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability Value for August 1995 was 0.0. There was 0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of planned and 0 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of unplanned unavailability during the month. The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.0034 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.003 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 29.56 hours6.481481e-4 days 0.0156 hours 9.259259e-5 weeks 2.1308e-5 months of planned unavailability and 12.92 hours0.00106 days 0.0256 hours 1.521164e-4 weeks 3.5006e-5 months 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

Illlins Monthly Emergency Ac Power Unavailability Value

+ Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value

-*-- Fort Calhoun Goal (0.024)

-e--

1995 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) l GOOD l

-e-Industry Upper 10% (0.0035) 0.16 0.14 0.12 R

0.1 I

0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02

~

0

~

C C

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec l1995l 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 August 1995 was 0.143. Dur-ing the month, there were 6.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months of planned unavailability for testing, and 205.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months of unplanned unavailability due to inadvertent switch position. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.022 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.018 at the end of the month.

The switch on DG-1 was believed to have been mispositioned on August 16 and discov-ered 8 days later on August 24 for a total of over 200 hours0.00231 days 0.0556 hours 3.306878e-4 weeks 7.61e-5 months of unavailable time.

There has been a total of 50.3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months of planned unavailability and 205.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months of un-planned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1995.

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

The 1995 INPO industry goal is 0.025 and the industry upper ten percentile value is ap-proximately 0.0035.

Data Source:

Jaworski/Ronning Accountability:

Jaworski/Ronning Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 10

m Failures /20 Demands CC"3 Failures /60 Demands Em Failures /100 Demands l Good l Trigger Values /20 Demands

-e-Trigger Values /50 Demands

] f Trigger Values.100 Demands 8-7 6-5 e

a 4

3-as a.

~a e

4-e

-4 O

e, 5

1 1

1 11 !.

111 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994 l l1995l EMERGENCY DiEsEt GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20, 50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger values. The Fort Calhoun 1995 goal is to have fewer failures than these trigger values.

DG-1 was declared inoperable for over 200 hours0.00231 days 0.0556 hours 3.306878e-4 weeks 7.61e-5 months on August 24th due to a mispositioned governor control switch.

The demands counted for this indicator include the respective number of starts and the respective number of load-runs for both Diesel Generators combined. The number of start demands includes all valid and inadvertent starts, including all start-only demands and all start demands that are followed by load-run demands, whether by automatic or manual initiation. Load-run demands must follow successful starts and meet at least one of the following criteria: a load-run that is a result of a real load signal, a load-run test expected to carry the plant's load and duration as stated in the test specifications, and a special test in which a diesel generator was expected to be operated for a minimum of one hour and to be loaded with at least 50% of design load (see exceptions and other demand criteria in the Definition Section of this report).

Data Source:

Jaworski/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Ronning Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 11

O DG-1 Failures /25 Demands M DG-2 Failures /25 Demands l GOOD l

I 5-4-

C 0

0 0

2 2

0 3

1 i

3-2 1

1 1

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l l1995l 1

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-l 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 two failures during the last year. On December 8,1994, DG-1 failed its monthly surveillance test because the inlet air damper would not open. On August 14, it was discovered that DG-1 was inoperable due to a mispositioned switch. Without this failure, it would have been more than 25 demands since the last failure of DG-1. The August 24 failure replaces the December 8 failure.

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

l Special diesel testing during hot weather took 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:

Needs increased Management Attention 12

m DG 1 Unreliability Value m DG-2 Unreliability Value

-*- Station Unreliability Value lo000l

+ 1995 Goal

--G-Industry Upper to% (o.co2 for a 3. Year Average) s.es o.os o.co o.o2 o.o2 c.o1 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l199e]

l1995l EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergency AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of i

maintenance, operation and test practices in controlling generator unreliability.

i The year-to-date station EDG unreliability at the end of August 1995 was 0.038. The 1995 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1:

There were 5 start demands for the reporting month with 1 failure.

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

For DG-2:

There were 4 start demands for the reporting month without a failure.

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

DG-1 was declared inoperable for over 200 hours0.00231 days 0.0556 hours 3.306878e-4 weeks 7.61e-5 months on August 24th due to a mispositioned gover-nor control switch.

Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

value per DG = SU + LU -(SU x LU)

=

number of unsuccessful starts where SU = Start Unreliability 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:

Needs increased Management Attention 13

Fuel lleliability

[0000g

~

1995 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 x 104 Microcuries/ Gram)

_o_

1995 Goal 30 _

! 25.-

]2a -

m C

C* "

= 15 "

M P

an=ans i

g b,

f h;

h L

.g 10

_ E a

e a

s

=y 5.

O O

E w

l Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug p9R) l1995l Fust RELIABILITY lNDICATOR The FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for August 1995 was 29.71 X 10d microcuries/ gram. The purpose of the FRl is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity.

An effective fuelintegrity and performance monitoring program provides a means to detect fuel failures and assess the fuel failure number, physical condition, exposure, mechanism, and location.

The August FRI value is based on data from August 2 through 23. The days selected are when the plant chemistry values were at equilibrium from steady-state full power operation.

Cycle 16 plant operation started on April 13 and attained 100% power was achieved on April 23. During the months of June and July the plant operated at 100% power. At the end of August, the plant tripped and was not part of the FRI evaluation after August 23.

The August FRl value of 29.71 X 10d microcuries/ gram indicated an increase from the July FRI value of 17.29 x 10d microcuries/ gram. No new fuel failures were observed during the month based on the equilib-rium Xenon data. This increase in FRI is consistent with the increasing size of the existing rod defects, based on the evaluation of RCS chemistry isotopic ratios. The chemistry data was at equilibrium levels for the month, prior to the plant trip. A recent analysis performed by the fuel vendor indicates four to six failed rods at core average power. The anaysis indicates failures in several different bumup levels. OPPD personnel estimate that 10 to 15 rods are failed based on the results from the Cycle 15 and 16 RCS chemistry data and the fuel inspection project.

The INPO July 1995 report, "WANO Performance indicator Program Utility Data Coordinator Reference Notebook" (INPO No.94-009, Rev.1) states that the Industry 1995 Goal for fuel reliability is: " units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects". The 1995 Fort Calhoun Station FRl Performance Indicator goalis to maintain a monthly FRl below 5.0 x 10d microcuries/ gram. A value larger than 5.0 x 10d microcuries/

gram indicates a high probability of reactor core operation with one or more fuel defects.

Data Source:

Holthaus/ Weber Accountability:

Chase /Spilker Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 14

m Control Room Deficiencies Added j

Q Control Room Deficiencies Completed M C ;-AtI within Target Completion Date O

Completion Rate i

50 -

- 100.0 %

1 si n 4s 80.0 %

3 8

}=

na y

g g 30 -

a 5

n 24 m

- @.0%

u a

u

- 20.0%

]l i

10 -

g' '

i

- lj i

u 0 -- 0.0%

1 4

Eny 22-29, '95 Jun-96 Jul-95 Aug-95 Control Room Deficiencies NUMBER OF CONTROL Room EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES l

This indicator measures the timeliness of closing Control Room Deficiencies.

l l

Target Completion Dates are established by the Emergent Work Committee. The goalis to close at least 80% of all CRD's within the Target Due Date.

i There were 41 Control Room Deficiencies completed during August 1995, and 26 were completed within the target completion date.

A Scheduling Coordinator has been assigned to track performance on a weekly basis and identify problem areas. Revisions are being made to the scheduling process to allow for

~

more timely completion of CRD's.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a completion rate of 80%.

Data Source:

Chase / Walling (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber i

Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention - Performance Below Goal 15

EIEE Overdue

+ Number of on-Line Control Room Deficiencies 35 -

y 2

20 -

E--.se.eREEBR e

M nunu May-95 Jun-95 Jul-95 Aug-95 l Number of on-Line CRD's l EEE Overdue

+ Number of outage Control Room Deficiencies n

25 -

20 -

w-15 10 6'

3 3

2 3

7g3m g-

'M

-~

___ Ocal None Omdue szuws-.

May-95 Jun-95 Jul-95 Aug-95 l Number of outage CRD's l Note: Overdue items are those older than 18 months NUMBER OF ON-LINE AND OUTAGE CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES 4

This indicator shows the total number of On-Line and Outage Control Room Deficiencies, and the number of overdue Control Room Deficiencies.

There were 28 on-line (14 were overdue) and 23 outage (2 were overdue) Control Room Deficiencies at the end of August 1995.

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

l Data Source:

Chase / Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber/Clemens Trend:

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

<8 Overdue exceeds goal.

16

m Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure Cumulative Personnel Radiation Exposure l GOOD l o_.

FCS Goal (143.1 Person-Rem) 150,.

E 0

0 0

^

140 e

130-120 i

)

+

110.

100.

90..

5of 80 70 _

0.

60.

50 40 30 20.

10.

O r-Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec i

L'".')

COtteCrive RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure is less than 143.1 person-Rem.

The exposure for August 1995 was 2.857 person-Rem (ALNOR).

The year-to-date exposure through the end of August was 137.772 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 8/92 through 7/95 was 111.16 person-rem per year.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention SEP 54 17 1

i

O Highest Exposure (Month) g Highest Exposure (Year) 5000 T

oPPD 4500 mrem /yr. Limit 4000.

3000 2000-1,266 FCS Goal 1000,

360 0

l August 95l MAXIMUM lNDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During August 1995, an individual accumulated 360 mrem, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month. (This dose was received while adding oil to RC-3C.)

The maximum individual exposure for the year of 1,000 mrem was exceeded during March 1995 when an individual received 1,266 mrem (875 mrem of this was received l

during orifice plate repair in a steam generator). However, the OPPD 4500 Mrem /yr limit is not expccted 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.

l Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Chase /Lovett l

Trend:

None i

18 l

l m FCS Cited Violations (Monthly)

CC FCS Non-Cited Vloist6ons (Monthly) lGooDj

-D-FCS Cited Violations (12-Month Average)

-e--

FCS Non Cited Violations (12-Month Average)

-se--

Region N Cited Violations (12 Month Average for Region N top quartile) 14 -

12 N

~

10 -

A_

~

8 6-

_,J) 4-

_g' "N_

2-- V '_

M M

C E

E O

Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug l1994l l1995l VIOLATION 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. Titis lag is necessary to compile information on other Region IV plants.

The following inspecuans were completed during August 1995:

IER No.

Title 95-11 Engineering & Technical Support Team inspection 95-12 Resident Monthly inspection To date, OPPD has received five violations for inspections conducted in 1995.

Levellli Violations 0

LevelIV Violations 3

Level V Violations 0

Non-Cited Violations 2

Total 5

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

i m NRC Significant Events INPO Significant Events (SERs) l GOOD l

. O Industry Average Trend 2-l f 1

o n..,.

.....a..... n..

... s i..... n..... s i..... n

....n.....n....

.....n 92 2 92 3 92-4 93 1 93 2 93 3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94 3 94-4 95-1 l Year-Quarter l

$1GNIFICANT EVENTS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Sta.

tion as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual " Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Network.

The following NRC significant events occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st quarter of 1995:

l 3rd Quarter 1992: The failure of a Pressurizer Code safety valve to reseat initiated a LOCA with the potential to degrade the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

4th Quarter 1994: A potential accident scenario involving a large break loss of coolant accident or a main steam line break inside containment could result in the Inoperability of both control room A.C. units.

The following INPO significant events, as reported in Significant Event Reports (SERs), occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st Quarter of 1995:

2nd Quarter 1992: Intake of Transuranics during Letdown Filter Change-out.

3rd Quarter 1992: 1) RC-142 LOCA; and 2) Premature Lift of RC-142.

ist Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation Safety Channel D.

2nd Quarter 1993: SBFU Breaker Relay (Switchyard) Plant Trip 4th Quarter 1993: Unexpected CEA Withdrawal.

1st Quarter 1994: Unplanned dilution of Boron concentration in the RCS.

Data Source:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Positive 20

Missed STs Resulting in LERs l 3-2-

J 1

1-l 1:.

o C;

o o

o e

o o

0 93 94 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec d

i NUMBER OF MISSED $URVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS 1

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 i

yearly totals for the indicated years.

),

There were no missed surveillance tet ts resulting in LERs during August 1995.

On December 28,1994, during t.,

performance of OP-ST-SHIFT-0001, data was not entered for Steam Generator leve per Surveillance Requirements.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend :

Positive SEP 60 & 61 21

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

9

l Not Generation (10,000 MWh) l 40 -

34.21 36.22

"'N N.M 33.88 M.12 30.44 I

30 le

[

22.82 21.18 g20 g

u.M i

10 -

a i

0 i

i i

I Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 11*l L*5j l

STATION NET GENERATION During the month of August 1995, a net total of 304,623.0 MWH was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 1,221,597.6 MWH at the end of the month.

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

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.

4 Energy losses for May 1995 were attributable to: (1) the component cooling water, which was leaking into the lube oil system of RC-3D reactor coolant pump motor; and (2) the

+

generator and reactor were again manually tripped because of a similar leak. The gen-erator was put on-line after replacement of all of the reactor coolant pump lube oil cooler heat exchangers.

I Data Source:

Station Generation Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 23

Forced Outage Rate (Monthly)

--+-- Forced Outage Rate (12 Montha) l0000l

--e-- Fort Calhoun Goal (2.4%)

40%

3 f 35%

30% -

25% -

20 %

15%-

10.1%

10% -

5% -

o.s7%

c

-3 5

5 3

"8%

=

2 0%

0 92 93 94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 95 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 3.5% for the twelve months from Septem-ber 1,1994, through August 31,1995. The 1995 year-to-date FOR was 5.8% 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

e

' Monthly Unit CapacNy Factor

' YearbDate Unit Capacity Factor h

^

Unit CapacNy Factor for Cycles 15 & 16 lG00Dl

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

---M-FCS Goal (79.68%)

+

10..

5

^

S 'b 60 %

g m

s.-

,gs.

e.....g 40% -

m-l,C[

m-10%-

0%

l l

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l d

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 78.33%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months was 81.20%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is 79.65%. The Fort Calhoun 3-year average capacity factor goal for 1995 is 84.05%.

Energy losses for May and August 1995 are discussed on the previous page.

The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows:

4 Net Electrical Enerav Generated (MWH)

Maximum Dependable Capacity (Mwe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 4

25

MontNy EAF.

-e-Year 40 Date Average MontNy EAF

-*- 12-Month Average EAF

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

r

-=

e

/

"~

I 0

x x

g -

so n 60% -

40% -

Cysis 15 20% -

N 0% !

l l

l 92 93 94 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 95 EQUlVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, and the year-end average monthly EAF for the previous three years.

The EAF for August 1995 was reported as 83.73%. The year-to-date monthly average l

EAF was 77.9% at the end of the month.

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

~

The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 87.8%.

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

l l

Data Source:

Dietz/Kulisek(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 2e

C"""3 Monthly Unit Capability Factor A

-e-- Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor S

--*-- 36-Month Unit Capability Factor lGOODI

--M-Fort Calhoun Goals

==*= INPO Industry Goals 100% -

r

\\m m

m

_m 80%

~

T T

80% -

A 40% -

cva is n

=

0%

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Au l1994l 1995 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 4

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 August 1995 was reported as 87.7%. The year-to-date UCF was 65.5%,

the UCF for the last 12 months was 76.8%, and the 36-month average UCF was reported as 85.3% at the end of the month.

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

1 The 1995 INPO industry goal is 80% and the industry current best quartile value (for the three-year period ending 12/94) is approximately 85%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is a minimum of 81.64%. The 3-year average capability factor goal for 1995 is 85.5%.

4 1

Data Source:

Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 27

g---)

Monlhly Unplanned CTpa5IIIty Loss Factor (Good l m

Year To-Date Unplanned capability Loss Factor 6

12. Month Average Unplanned Capability Loss Factor

.. *.. Fort cathoun Goal (3.97%)

e INPO Industry Goal (4.5%)

e Industry Current Best Quartile 40%..

30 %

~

20 %

p A

y 10%

/

A~f I

A

./

A m

og u

7.

m.

y-v Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug f99]

l1996l UNPLANNED (APABILITY BOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF and the goal. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of August 1995 was reported as 12.3%. Unplanned energy loss is defined as the energy that was not produced during the period of unscheduled shutdowns, outage extensions, or load reductions due to causes under plant manage-ment control. Energy losses are considered to be unplanned if they are not scheduled at least four weeks in advance. The year-to-date UCLF was 14.66%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 9.76%, and the 36-month average UCLF was reported as 4.99% 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%.

4 d

Data Source:

Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Needs Increased Management Attention 28

+ FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical Year to Date

+ FCS Reactor Scrams Per 7,000 Hours Critical for last 36 months Fort Calhoun Goal (0.0)

INPO Industry Goal (1)

_g Industry Upper 10% (1 per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical) 2_

h 1p

. 3...

w..

.c n

a c.

0:

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

[ *j l 51 FCS Reactor Scrams 4_

3 3

l 2

1 1

0 0

0 91 92 93 94 Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug O

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tional Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort Calhoun Station. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during each month for the last twelve months.

The year-to-date station value was 0.0 at the end of August 1995. The value for the 12 months from September 1,1994, through August 31,1995, was 0.0. The value for the last 36 months was.94.

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 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical. The indus-try upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.48 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months critical.

Data Source:

Monthly Operations Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Positive 29 1

a

1 m Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

_ FCS Goal (0)

+ Industry Upper 10 Percentile (0) 2.

1 1.

r

.e 0

0 0

0-

-+

92 94 Oct Dec Feb Apr Jun Aug-95 UNPLANNED SAFEW $YSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

There were no INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of August 1995.

There was one INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of February 1994. It occurred on February 11,1994, when supervisory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in tripping relay 86B/CPHS. The CPHS relay trip actuated the Safety injection Actuation Signal, Containment Isolation Actuation Signal, Ventilation isolation Actuation Signal and Steam Generator Isolation Signal. The Steam Generator Isolation Signal au-tomatically closed both main stam isolation valves, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip.

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

m Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition) a FCS Goal (0) l Critical Hours 10 -

800 cyc. is c,e. ie t

e 700 l

8 800 8_

c 8

400 2 4~

~

300

_200 I

2 e

_:====-

-l I

.100 l

l I

._,=:=p,

_o

.e 0

I 929394 8 0 NDJ FMAMJ J A 8ONDJ F J FMAM J J A (lit]

l1996l UNPLANNED $AFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

This indicator shows the number of unplanned safety system actuations (SSAs), which includes the High and Low Pressure Safety Injection Systems, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of SSAs includes actua-tions when major equipment is operated and when the logic systems for these safety systems are challenged.

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred in December 1993 when the main turbine cnd reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing. Also, there was en unplanned Safety system actuation during the month of February 1994 when supervi-sory relay 86B/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concurrent tusine 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:

Positive 31

1 l

i ElEl Gross Heat Rate

--M-- Year-to-Data Gross Heat Rate l GOOD l

-o-Fort Calhoun Goal 10.75 -

] f 10.5 -

e 10.25 - to in icire E E

MD E

Z Q

4Q Q

W

$9 W

m 0

10 -

3]

h h

EM L-m f

yg g

3 a

3 g&

G 7

m 3:

Ce

['{

O 03 h

hf; A

75 -

9.

j-y W

p fi p

Cyde 15 y;

, t :-

1 f

9.5 -

f-

N l

(?

R:-

c j

A d

M C

,,3 _

92 93 M

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

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 10,538 for the month of August 1995.

The 1995 year-to-date GHR was 10,273 at the end of the month.

The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR im-proves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. This is because the gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is $10,157.

Data Source:

Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend:

None*

32

j l

I' j

m Monthly Thermal Performance i

C" 3 12-Month Average j

- *- Year-to Dele Average Monthly Thermal Performance j

Fort Calhoun Goal (90.0%)

l GOOD l-

-+- INPO Industry Goal (99.5%)

4

-e-industry upper 10% (90.7%)

j l

100% -

i

~

J i

i i

l i

90% -

i c,e is j

O b

4 90%

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

l1994l g

i THERMAL PERFORMANCE i

i l

[

This indicator shows the Thermal Performance Value for the reporting month, the year-to-i date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1995 INPO industry goal and the approxiraate upper ten percentile value.

i.

The thermal performance value'for August 1995 was 99.18. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.4, at the end of the month. The average l

monthly value for the 12 months from September 1,1994, through August 31,1995, was i

99.3%.

{*

The 1995 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a minimum of 99.6%. The 1994 Fort Calhoun goal was a minimum of 99.5%. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 99.5% and i

the industry upper 10 percentile value is approximately 99.9%.

d i

i The reason for not making the goal is explained in the Action Plan on pages 73 and 74.

Data Source:

Jaworski/Shubert Accountability:

Jaworski/Gorence Trend:

Adverse 33

-,mv

-+- Thermal output

-e-Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal a

Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1600 -

<w w.w.w.w.w w w.w.w.w w w.w.w w w w w.w w,w w.w.w w w w.wa 1400 -

em,n

-.m.

ay 1200--

1000-l800-o 600-400 -

200-0 1 23 45678 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031

(

DAILYTHERMAL Ourpur l

The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during August 1995, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 thermal megawatt Fort Calhoun goal.

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.

Data Source:

Holthaus/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Tills Trend:

None 34

i i

4 m Nurnber of Equipment Forced outages (Monthly) jooopg

._w Equipment Forced outage Rate /1,000 critical Hrs. (12-Month Interval) e Fort calhoun Year End Goals (0.2)

} f 2.

i 1

)

i x

x x

c p

x 0

s2 se oct o.c Feb Apr Jun Aug-es EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from Sep-tomber 1,1994, through August 31,1995, was 0.41. The year-to-date rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from January through August 1995 was 0.69.

An equipment forced outage also occurred on February 20,1995, when the plent 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:

Chass/Jaworski Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 35

-e-Component Categories

-+- Application Categories

~*-- Total Categories 20 18 -

16 -

\\'%- g

]

[

'a A

N g

-N

~r%/ s' u;i#w na

?

a 2

ge 4

2-0 i

M94 A M

J J

A s

O N D94 J95 F

M A

M J

J A95 Errorloperating Action 9.8%

Maintenance /

> 1 ",f' -. hhx Action U[

28.0%

p[QjQ]p W"earout/

. 4;. g tt

,N Q:n.2 _% j;&;ggd M L i,- - 17 7;:.k M;i M

l ' ' ')

w o,,,,,

with known failure causes sign Defect 3.7%

3.7%

during the Past 18-Month CFAR Period COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) $UMMARY The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and j

total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard j

deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18-month Compo-nent Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) reporting period (from November 1993 through l

l April 1995). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 87 component i

categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.) during the past 18-month CFAR period. The station reported a higher failure rato in 6 of the 173 application categories (main steam stop valves, auxiliary / emergency feedwater pumps, control element drive motors, etc.)

during the past 1ti-menih CFAR period, i

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 63 failure reports with known failure causes that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station during the past l

18-month CFAR period. The pie chart reflects known failure causes. A total of 88 failure reports were submitted to INPO during the past 18-month CFAR period.

1 i

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source) l Accountability:

Jaworski/ Dowdy i

Trend:

None l

36 l

l

-+- Components with more than One Failure lGooM

-*- components with more than Two Fallares 4

15 -

10 -

i 8

8

)

8

+

5-4 4

4 3

,3

,3 3

1 1

j k

k k

k 0

sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug F*l d

REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness Perfor-mance Indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regu-latory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/AEOD).

The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been dropped, but station management considers it useful to continue to track repetitive com-ponent failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).

i This indicator shows the number of NPRDS components with more than one failure dur-ing the 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) period and the number of l

NPRDS 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 had more than two failures. The tag numbers of the compo-

)

nents with more than one failure are:

Raw Water Pump AC-1B Reactor Protection i

System Channel'A' Axial Power Distribution Trip Calculator Multiplier / Divider Module Al-31 A-AW15-B4, 5 and Component Cooling water Heat Exchanger 'B' Raw Water Outlet Valve Operator HCV-2881B-0. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat failures are listed in the biannual CFAR.

l 1

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Frank (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 37

l e Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (cu.ft.)

=e= Year-to Date Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried (Good l o-.

Fort Calhoun Goal (900 cu.ft.)

900 c

=

c 800 700 4

600.

]500 e

e o

I 400_

300.

200 -

100 0

7

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

O VOLUME OF LOW LEVEL $OLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumula-tive year-to-date radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the 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 152.4 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1995 152.4 Amount of solid radwaste in temporary storage 0

The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 900 cubic 3

feet. The 1995 INPO industry goal is 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.

i Data Source:

Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None SEP54 38

i 4

m Primary System chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit l GOOD l

-*- Fort calhoun Goal (0.02) 2% -

c l

i k

i 1

1% -

[

cych is

~' L RefueNng

c outage e

'I.

i;'-

0%

~~

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l PRIMARY $YSTEM CHEMISTRY l

PERCENT OF HOURS OUT OF LIMIT i

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the primary system chemistry performance by monitoring 6 key chemistry parameters. The key pa-rameters are: lithium, dissolved oxygen, chlorides, flouride, hydrogen and syspended sol-ids.100% equates to all 6 parameters being out of limit for the month.

The Primary System Chemistry Percent of Hours Out of Specification was 1.09% for the month of August 1995. Hydrogen and Lithium were out of specification during the plant trip and recover of 8/24/95.

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.

39

M Secondary System CPI 12-Month Average l GOOD l

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (1.4) 1.6 -

1.5 -

1.4 '

i i

i Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l 4

SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) are:

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

per day.

The CPI for August 1995 was 1.30. The 12-month average CPI value was 1.23 at the end of the month. The CPI fell below the goal because of a reduction in the Steam Generator sulfate concentration as well as a decrease in the Condensate Pump Dis-charge dissolved oxygen concentration.

The Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) was above the goal in July due to slightly higher than average sodium and chloride values. Also the values provided as industry averages by INPO for 1995 are considerably lower than FCS historically has been able to achieve for secondary chemistry values. Iron, the one industry average that we are below, almosty by half, does not assist in lowering the CPI because of the way the CPI is calculated.

i Data Source:

Smith / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Smith Trend :

Positive due to performance better than goal 40 i

i a

l I

i i

e i

i COST

)

i i

{

Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that j

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

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

l.

t i

l t

i 1

l 41

4

-+- Actua!

-e-- Revised Budget Original Budget

-M~

Plan 4-3.75 3.8 3.28 3

3' 4

5

\\

u 2.78 N

\\/

7.5 2.25 2

D91 D92 D93 D94 J05 F M

A M

J J

A 8

o N D95 D96 D97 D98 D99 Months CENTS Pen KILOWATT HOun 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 (3.10 cents per kilowatt hour for August 1995) aver-aged slightly above than budget due to 12-month generation not meeting the budget expectations. The Unit Price for the current month (September 1995) is not available at this time.

Data Source:

Scofield/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Scofield Trend:

None 42

4 I

i E Nucieer Services Division O Production Engineenng Division 5 Nuclear Operations Division A Total Nucieer l

900 800 -

m iss m

m m

m i

i t

t i

i i

i Jan-92 Jan-93 Jan-N Apr-N Jul-N Oct-N Dec-M Mar-96 Jun-96 l Actual stamng Level l I

STAFFING LEVEL l

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

The authorized staffing levels for 1995 and 1996 are:

j Authorized Staffing 1995 1996 440 432 Nuclear Operations Division j

181 175 Production Engineering Division i

114 113 Nuclear Services Division l

735 720 Total i

l Data Source:

Ponec/Kobunski l

Accountability:

Ponec Trend:

None SEP 24 43

i

-*- Spare Parts inventory Value ($ Million) 16.8 -

5 i

i 16.6 -

i 16.4 -

2 i

2 o 16.2 8 i

\\

16 -

15.8 -

i 15.6

+

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l l1995 l Spare Part. Inventory Vaiue The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of August 1995 was reported as $15,965,520.

Data Source:

Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Willrett/McCormick Trend:

None 44 i

a 1

1 2

i DIVISION AND 1

l DEPARTMENT i

i PERFORMANCE i

l INDICATORS i

Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power pro-l duction.

!o l

l

}

l l

)

i l

45 t

i i

Y a

l l

m Corrective Esintenance Preventive Maintenance Non-Corrective / Plant improvements Fort calhoun Goal 1000 j

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

lNon-outage Maintenance Work order Backlog l l1995l g MWos Which Exceed Maintenance completion Goals O Total MWos 600.

500__

400._

j 300 l

~

$a

~

c ',' ;aum__ E ',', y m y EuB "a**

i'"

i, 0

Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 lNon Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog l 1

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and priority. The 1995 goal for this indicator is 400 non-outage corrective maintenance MWOs. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely manner, non. outage maintenance completion goals have been established as follows:

Goal Priority 1 Emergency N/A i

Priority 2 Immediate Action 2 days Priority 3 Operations Concern 14 days l

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

Priority 6 Non-Corrective / Plant Improvements N/A Improvements in the maintenance planning and scheduling process will allow more timely responses to maintenance work requests.

This indicator is considered an adverse trend. An action plan has been established to identify problem areas and reduce the backlog.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Adverse SEP 36 46 4

Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance l 100 %

90% -

80 %

g fkf py 70%

gi;j na e,r p'

80%

g 4

tw,,

50 %

,f gi

~

};p h,

g g4

.1 40%

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994 l l1995l EEE Preventive Malntenance items Overdue

-4>- Fort Calhoun Goal l f 2%

d M

1%

DE E s M

=

a E

IE II)

M M

ERE Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994 l l1995l RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

l PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE lTEMS OvEnouE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total completed non-outage maintenance. The ratio was 58.4% for the month of August 1995.

The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that are overdue. During August 1995,554 PM items were completed. All of these PM items was completed within the allowable grace period or were administratively closed.

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue is a maximum of 0.5%.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 41 & 44 47

EEEE Rework as identified by Craft

-*- Fort calhoun Goal (<3%)

6%

e.n en i

1 8"

iB: 4%

0 5

f 3%

e---e 1.

6 2%

1.8%

1%

0%

i i

i 1

1 I

I i

i i

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct l1994l l1995l PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWO. COuptETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK This graph indicates the percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft.

This indicator is calculated from the 15th to the 15th of each month due to delay in closin; open MWO's at the end of each month.

The Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. A detailed review will be con-ducted of rev.ork items for August to identify generic concems.

Data Source:

Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None 48

e MasntenanceOvertwne

+ 12-Month Average Mamtenance Overtime lo000g o

Fort Calhoun "On-Une" Goal (10%)

0.45.

0.4.

0.35.

/d 0.3 wy 0.25 -

)

p 0.2.

rf y

0.15 -

g p

~

0.1 c

c c

e e

a I

'I I

lB m

- ss Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug E$

l'*l MAINTENANCE OVERTIME The Maintenance Overtime Indicator monitors the ability to perform the desired mainte-nance activities with the allotted resources.

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 7.0% for the month of August 1995. The 12-month average percentage of overtime hours with re-spect to normal hours was reported as 12.6% at the end of the month.

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

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None 49

Human Performance irs (Maintenance) l 20.

18 _.

16 _

u

~&

14.

i 9

3 p

u j

t j

12 -

NA$,

e Wwa 4 10.

d fb?

i kh h; kkh afa as, f(m;ES lM!I I

8.

s}

lQ z

wr..n j';', 9,l) h,~;::',

Y @p 6..

f';Ms 3

W:'

gb w ts :

{$:'(k$

khhk 4.

y%$

ff}

$p$$dd h.ckN op g

2__

N[:h; Q "f t : <.,

n 0

Jul-95 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec-95 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

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

There were 15 human performance related irs assigned to the maintenance functional area in August 1995.

Data Source:

Faulhaber Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 15,41 & 44 50

~~~ Completed Scheduled Activities (All Crafts)

-e-Fort Calhoun Goal (85%)

100.0 % -

90.0% -

C O

O O

O en TL1%

E N

.3 70.0% -

x U

60.0% -

g

] 50.0% -

a I

s n

eh i

p.

v m.0% __

b n4h 30.0% -

kh

$N$

o

%:lf Q Q}$

l 20.0% -

h b

?

0.0%

Jun-95 Jul-95 Aug-95 Sep-95 Oct-95 Nov-95 Dec-95 DAILY SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE PERCENT OF SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES COMPLETED This indicator shows the percent of Integrated Plant Schedule activities completed on schedule. Allwork groups and activities are included. Measurement of daily performance was initiated in June.

The Plant Manager has established schedule performance as a high priority. Daily schedule performance is discussed at the 7:15 A.M. and 12:30 P.M. plant meetings. Weekly cri-tique meetings are being held to address problem areas.

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

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 33 51 l

i

% of Hours the in l.ine Chemistry Instruments are Inoperable

~~

--e-1995 Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

16% -

14% -

12%

g^

10% -

c

^

IE!El Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l 1

lN-I.,1NE CHEMISTRY lNSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-service This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator include the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS).

At the end of August 1995, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments were inoper-able was 12.08%. The following instruments were out of service during the month:

CE-1578 - A Mixed Bed Effluent Conductivity CE-1582A - B Cation Bed Conductivity

. CE-1535 - Primary Water Storage Tank Deaerated Water Dissolved Oxygen

+ CE-15478 - Primary Water Storage Tank Deaerated Water Specific Conductivity The in-line instrument indicator is above the goal because of four Martek instruments that are out of service long term. Also,6 instrument loops at Al-126 were out of service the first 10 days of the month due to an annunciator manfunction.

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

The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 10% in-line chemistry instruments inoperable. 5 out-of-service chemistry instruments make up 10% of all the chemistry instruments that are counted for this indicator.

The out-of-service instruments have been consistently between 4 and 8%. As was stated above, this month's performance was higher than the goal due primarily to a single failure on Al-125, causing a substan-tial number of out-of-service instruments. Given the previous month's indicators, it was concluded that the trend was none though, by definition, need's increased management attention.

Data Source:

Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source) 1 j

Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend:

None*

52

i i

tilEm Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)

==*=* Monthly Average Waste Produced During the last 12 Months (Kilograms)

-o-- Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal (150 kilograms)

-M--

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

x x

800 600 5 400 200 c

o 2

2 2

1 0 _-- --

Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l1994l 2

HAZARoOUS WASTE Paoouceo 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 August 1995,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,0.0 kilograms of halogenated and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced. The total haz-

],

ardous waste produced during the last 12 months is 654.1 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

FE23 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area l GOOD l

_e_.

Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

1P4 -

c 0

0 0

0 o

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug L1"4]

I " 51 CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the RCA that is contaminated based on the total square footage. Th.e 1995 monthly non-outage goalis a maximum of 9.5% contaminated RCA.

At the end of August 1995, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 9.4%.

Data Source: Chase /Gundal (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

Positive SEP 54 54

+ Identified PRWPs (Year to Date)

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (<20) t 20 18 16 14 14 14 12 E 12 -

3 10

?

1 l'

f6 4

l 2-

)

1 g

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

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

During the month of August 1995, there were O PRWPs identified.

There have have 14 PRWPs in 1995.

The 1995 year-end goal for PRWPs is a maximum of 20.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Lovett Trend:

None SEP52 55

I l

l l

O Documents Scheduled for Review E Documents Reviewed B Documents Overdue 200-l 180-160 -

140-i 120 100 -

i 60 -

4 40 -

20 -

0--

-- +

+

+-

E+

k Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug l',a4j 11asi DOCUMENT Review This indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and overdue (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the reporting month. These document reviews are performed in-house and include Special Procedures, the Site Se-curity Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Procedures, and the Op-erating Manual.

During August 1995, there were 123 document reviews scheduled, while 91 reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 2 document reviews more than 6 months overdue. There were 4 new documents initiated during August.

Data Source:

Chase /Plath Accountability:

Chase /Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 46 56

5 System Failures l GOOD l 0 Non-System Failures 35 -

30 -

2e 25 3

22 21 se 20 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug d

b I,0GGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

This graph shows the Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator and depicts (1) the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents concerning system failures which oc-curred during the reporting month, and (2) the total number of loggable/ reportable inci-dents non-system failures concerning Security Badges, Access Control and Authoriza-tion, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors.

During the month of August 1995, there were 21 loggable/ reportable incidents identified compared to 21 for the previous month. System failures accounted for 17 (81%) of the loggable/ reportable incidents. Repairs on the security system computer are scheduled in September 1995. There were four (4) security force errors during the reporting month, all of which are currently being addressed by security management.

Data Source:

Sefick/Woemer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Sefick Trend:

None SEP 58 57

1 c-"] Temporary Modifications >1-cycle old (RFO required for removal) tilEER Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line)

-*- Fort Calhoun Ocals for >1 cycle and >6 months old 6

6 6

q d

1 I

a 3

3 y

l ll l

I I

i 1

4 1

1 1 $

1 1

N fr il r 1 2 E

E El r e%El 1

x x

x Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l1995l TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications greater than one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary modifications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1995 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are zero. However, one temporary modification (BAST level indication) has been approved by management to exceed these goals due to cost effectiveness considerations (reference PED-STE-94-042).

There is currently 1 temporary modification that is greater than one-fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to remove: RC-3D cover gasket pressure indicator, which is await-ing completion of MWO 941450, which is scheduled for a future refueling outage when-

]

ever cover gaskets are replaced. In addition, at the end of August 1995, there were 5 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-118, 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 9/95; 3) brace to IA header 'T" to water plant, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, scheduled for issue from DEN-Mechanica19/15/95; 4) braces on main instrument air header, which is awaiting completion of ECN 94-482, scheduled for issue from DEN-Mechanical 9/15/95; and 5) mechanical seal and seal flush for DW-434, which is awaiting completion of ECN 95-096, scheduled for completion 9/95.

At the end of August 1995, there was a total of 19 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. 7 of the 19 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 12 are removable on-line. In 1995, a total of 28 temporary modifications have been installed.

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Gorence Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention SEP 62 & 71 58

4 m Total Modification Packages open

-e-Fort calhoun Year-End Goal 120 -

m 100 -

J n

n n

n.

n n

es se S

U M

es es u

so 60 -

T.

g j

40 -

i

(

20 -

O 92 93 94 Sep Oct Ncv Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 95 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS i

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

Reporting l

Cateaory M

'M

'95

'2Q

'9Z

'9g Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /In Progress 0

0 0

i Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0

0 3

0 0

0 3

Design Engr. Backlog /in Progress 0

0 2

21 1

7 31 l

Construction Backlog /In Progress 5

3 18 3

0 0

29 Design Engr. Update Backlog /in Progress _1 4

8 0

0 0

13 1

Totals 6

7 31 24 1

7 76 (Outage + OnLine)

(3+3)

(0+7) (18+13) (16+8) (0+1) (7+0)

(44+32)

At the end of August 1995,12 additional modification requests had been issued this year and 9 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Commit-tee (NPRC) had conducted 51 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) had completed 4 backlog modification request reviews this year.

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

The 1995 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 63 outstanding modifications.

Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsberry (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Scofield/Phelps Trend:

None*

g

80 -

EARS Requiring Engineering Closeout - Not in Closeout 60 -

5 SE D DEN 40 -

20 -

0 U'"

U U

U l

l Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug Jun Jul Aug 0 3 Months 3 6 Months 612 Months

>12 Months August 1996 Overdue EARS 0 Engineering Response B Closeout (sE) 80 60 -

40 -

2 N

0 Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Priority 3 O. TotalOpen EARS l l.

. Priority 1 & 2

- ' ~

o................u...........o.....................~.....o...'O i

100 0

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1994 1995 21 ov.reue 87 am n:=

w w

n j

((d@M3lh"Y g

=.

-m-4.

u.

=_

,m

~

a---

.7.m 15..%

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REauEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineer-ing and System Engineering. The 1995 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 15 EARS closed during the month 61 Total EARS open at the end of the month 122 Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 62 60

_~m.

k DEN e qu e4 Months e Clomeout = tig 22.9%

34 Months =

j

>6 Months a 77 346 14 D%

j Procurement

] Sys Engr.* 87 i

Constr. = 1se 13.9%

293%

ECN Status -Overall Backlog j.

j O Backlogged O Received a Completed

" U""

260 -

>e Moes a s1 1

200 --

is, i.,

tu 1" ~

5 5

5 1

4a -

2 "-

m.,,

i i

g'j

$)

i

! E

!~h!I II NS 2 El um

.n y

Mar 46 Apr May June Jul Aug-46

]

Design Engineering 2.

u M

-si j

20o -

l in..,,,

H

'88 m

.g g,

73 3 l..

E

=

a e

3 so. is" v on

=

L

],. n

.n i

i M

im 5 m f-en t

en T-E!n.

Mar-96 Apr May June Jul Aug46 System Engineering

...n ai too _.,,,

1

=

,o L-4 I

V i

ioo.

i i

1 i

i i

ris 5

5 5

?

5

-E a

o 68 -

a a

n..

s.a s

a a n.

=-

I kT b

E3 k

. b".

kT "L.

)

g M.r-96 Apr blay June Jul A ug46 l

Procurement / Construction 1

l i

i:

~

4

=

e e

e s

=

,n m

=

s e

e R ! "b i "h h., li ! l Mar-86 Apr May June Jid Aug46 Drafting / Closeout ENGINEERING CHANGE NoricE STATUS Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 62 61 4

gy, 74 Priorey 8 & 4 e Prierty 1 & 2 e 14 3%

FC Type e tog tes 103 x 4%

to es 18 **

lllll llllllllllllll llllU w=======e=ame T EE"W~

iii u

, prio,py 3 & 4 e i

SRI Type e 256

-====

de.3%

att et.2%

Total Open ECNs by Type (517 Total)

Total Open ECNs by Priority (517 Total) l 0 DEN.Closecut or Drafting Not Complete enorm,. t

1 erie.s s e Maintenance / Construction / Procurement. Work Not Complete as e System Engineering Response, Confirmation Not Complete

,,,g

' 7 '%

W DEN -Engineering Not Complete i [ ii jiliR L,,\\(T.H, l lllllllll11,,,

200 tre su ser m

Mar-96 Apr May Jun Jul Aug-96

'7" Facility Change ECNs Open 3" '

aos enorte s Priorma 1 j

300 ae a2 260 es s4 et 22 soi

' i 0

i e

i i

Mar-SE Apr May Jun Jul Aug66 a4 l

Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open P'*** 1 90 -

et

,", g 8

80 -

7' T'

F2 g

Mar 96 Apr May Jun Jul Aug 96 Prie'ma '

4 Document Change ECNs Open u,'g ENGINEERING CHANGE Nonces OPEN Data Source:

Skiles/ Parsons (Manager Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski Trend:

None 62

l i

O Administrative Control Problem E Licensed Operator Error S Other Personnel Error a Maintenance Problem O Design / Construction / Installation /Fabriation Problem W Equipment Failures 2

)

1 l

o Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul l1994l LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) Roor CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from August 1,1994, through July 31,1995. 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-tailed descriptions of these codes, see the " Performance Indicator Definitions" section of this report.

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

Data Source:Trausch/Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 63

i O Total Requalification Training Hours a simulator Training Hours a Non-Requalification Training Hours a Number of Exam Failures

~

37 37 37 34.s 35 __

3e 30.

26 25.

20.

7 15 ~

2 11.s 1

10._

,g 8

.5 3

5 3

33 3

2.5

.g.

O_

i i

+

i_

i-t i

Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle

'94-4*

94-5 944 94-7 95-1 95-2 95 3 95-4

Note 1: The simulator was out of-service during Cycle 94-4.

" Note 2: Includes 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months of General Employee Training.

UCENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each ca..wr during each cycle. The simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset c' th.e total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for APO/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

Exam failures are defined as failures in the written, simulator, and Job Performance Measures (JPMs) segments of the Licensed Operator Requalification Training.

Due to the fact that Rotation 95-5 Requalification Training was not comp!sted during I

August, no new statistics are being provided.

Data Source:

Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gasper /Guliani Trend:

None SEP 68 64-

l g SRO Exams Administered O SRO Exams Passed D RO Exams Administered g RO Exar.is Passed 20.

's l

10 i

i i

I i

5.

i E

"E i

e i

i E

i i

i 5

s l

E i

E l

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

LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS This indicator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Opera-tor (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally adminis-tered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

For the month of August 1995, there were no RO or SRO exams given. The Hot License class is currently in Simulator training.

i Data Source:

Gasper /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gasper /Guliani Trend:

None SEP 68 65

/

ml3 Open irs >6 Months old CC Open Significant irs

- Total Open irs 600 -

500 -

7' N,

300 -

231 191 M~

tri tro 171 trs

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

b l

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

Also, at the end of August 1995, there were 507 open irs.175 of these IRS were greater than 6 months old. There were 103 Open Significant irs at the end of the month. These numbers have been restated to reflect the elimination of CARS from the system. As of April 21,1995, CARS are no longer being issued. All future corrective actions will be documented on irs.

Data Source:

Conner /Plott (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Andrews/Phelps/Patterson Trend :

None I

se

Data for the 1996 Refueling Outage is not available.

MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Main-tenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 t

Refueling Outage. This graph indicates:

- Parts Holds (Part hold removed when parts are staged and ready to use)

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

- Planning Holds (Planning hold removed when planning is completed to the point when package is ready or other support is necessary to continue the planning process)

- Planning Complete (status given when only items keeping thejob from being ready to work are parts or engineering support)

- Ready (status whsn all planning, supporting documentation, and parts are ready to go)

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 31 67

1996 Outage Projects Status Report I

a Last Month a This Month O For Schedule 100 90 -

80 -

70 -

60 -

3 I

g 50 -

o

$ 40 -

so -

20 -

's

^

's aa 3

3:

0 3

3 i

{

l

{

l i

{

ji 1

1 s

]

i 1

h" a

j s

}

j o

o

=

g f

6 f

~

j e

w a:

m Special Services Engineering Department OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage)

This performance indicator shows the status of projects which are in the scope of Cycle 17 Refueling Outage. SSED's goalis to have all projects complete by August 23,1996, 30 days prior to the Refueling Outage start date.

Data Source:

Jaworski/Swearngin (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Boughter Trend:

None SEP 31 68

+ Baseline Schedule for PRc Approval e

Projected / Actual Schedule for PRc Approval -

-+ Total Modification Packages (16)(4 Added Late)

_ 10 9.

a

}l '

7__

g [t

5 m

E 4.

1c.

3.

2 1

l 0

l :

6/16/95 7/21/95 6/25/95 9/29/95 11/3/95 12/6/95 1/12/96 2/16/96 3/22/96 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE (1996 MODIFICATION PLANNING)

(FROZEN SCOPE OF 9 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS) i l

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

j

\\

August 1995 Modifications acided: 1 Deleted = 3 j

FC89-019 transferred from 1995 on-line FC92-017, FC93-013, a id FC92-029 cancelled Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 69

+ Baseline Schedule for PRC Approval p.

Projected / Actual Schedule for PRC Approal Total Modification Packages (10) (1 is Close Out Only) 10.

in' 8

9 e

(

2 15 5 n.

f 8__

frel-

~

SE E

o a 7

O

s

m_

6 l

5 m m m m m m m m m m m m m en an m m m m m m an an e

$$$$$e RRS i !gRe $SS$$ggR@SS 55 E!5S5 E E E R 5 S 5 en S~

PROGRESS OF 1995 ON llNE 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.

August 1995 Modifcations Added: 0 Deleted = 1 Mod FC89-017 moved to '96 outage.

l Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 70 l

f Baseline schedule for PRC Approval e

Projected / Actual Schedule for PRc Approval Total Modification Packages (9)(2 Added Late,1 review for Cancel) 6.%4 5-B 5 4.

?

g 3.

2_

1 0

EEe sis $SS$$$$esss si:$$$$EIe55gg5l5s.,gII!

sn en en m m an m m an m m en m m m

$e s*s PROGRESS OF 1996 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 6 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for on-line installation during 1996. Modifications added to the on-line list after May 1,1995, are not part of this indica-tor. The 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. 2 Modifications added after May 1,1995, not included.

August 1995 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Mod FC89-017 moved to '96 outage.

Data Source:

Skiles/Ronne (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Phelps/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 31 71

4 a

4 4

a i

4 I.

1, a

4 1

s J

i, ACTION PLANS l.

d 4

f l

i i

i, l

l l

l t

1 i

i 1

72

j j

ACTION PLANS I

This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators j

cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this report. Also included are Action j

Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing 4

increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months.

o In accordance with Revisio,3 of NOD-QP-37, the following performance indicators would j

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

1

. Industrial Safety Accident Rate (page 2) i

. Thermal Performance (page 33) l

. Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 46) i 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.

i i

Use the Near Miss forms to resolve potential safety concerns.

i o

The action plan for Thermal Performance (page 33) is as follows:

Plant Heat Rate as measured by the INPO Performance Indicator has shown a decreasing l

performance trend. This is suspected to have resulted from degraded condenser performance with river water temperatures in excess of 65-70*F. This is based on decreases seen in total station electrical output, turbine first stage pressure, condenser l

inlet / output differential temperatures, and condenser vacuum compared to previous i

I 73 I

Action plan for Thermal Performance (continued):

operating cycles. Another loss is suspected to be resultant from non-optimum operation of the condensate vacuum compared to previous operating cycles. Another loss is suspected to be resultant from non-optimum operation of the condensate cooler which controls cooling water to the generator hydrogen coolers, generator stator coolers, and generator field rectifier banks. Operation of this cooler with temperatures below optimum values rejects excessive amounts of thermal energy to the river and decreases overall plant efficiency, GOALS-

1. Improve Plant Heat Rate as measured by the INPO Performance Indicator above the OPPD Goal of 99.6%.

2. Improve Plant Heat Rate during periods when the river water temperature exceeds 65-70*F.

1 1

3. Improve plant officiency to ensure maximum station electrical generation is achieved and maintained.

DUE ACTION (Si REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH GOALS RESPONSISJMIX DAlf COMMENTS 1.

Review the ceiculations utillred to justify the power incrosse SYE 10/3045

)

from 1420 MWT to 1500 MWT es it reistes to secondary plant i

performance and the condeneer evolustion completed during the 9344 Power Uprete Study.

2.

Evoluste the temperature correction factor utillaed to correct SYE 10/3045 actuel plant heet rate date to design condit6ons for INPO report.

ing purposes This mothematical correlation may not accursiely renset the pient dorating expertenced at elevated rivw water temperatures 3.

Review current operettonal procedures for condensate cocier SYE/ OPS 10/1545 operations implement changes required to ensure e mmimum amount of heat is rewed to the river while providmg sufncient protection for opwatmg equipment 4.

Contmus to evaluate operstm0 plant systems to determine SYE Oncomo Currentty. SYE reviewmg oil components operating at less then optimum values of requiring plant parameters daily.

meerm to ensure no impact on stehon efnciency 5.

contmus to develop bener tooie to monnot plant performance.

SYE Ongoing Currently, wortong toward like t,..; of bener computer models to predict and another program that will quantify equipment performance impacts on stehon etnciency provide computer snelys e and troubisehooting essetence 6.

Complete EAR 96477, Evolushon of Best Method of Messunng DEN /SYE 10/31/96 Per EDITS on 9/14/95.

Ckculehng Water Flow.

7.

Implement corrective schone as outlined in EAR 95-077 using DEN /SYE/CM Later Date will be determined by the ECN Process NPRC after ECN is prepared 74

]

ACTION PLANS (continued)

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

A detailed review is being conducted to determine which stage of the maintenance process has a higher than expected backlog. Areas being reviewed are:

Planning Scheduled Maintenance Bulk Work Package closecut Corrective actions will be initiated based on the results of that review.

The action plan for Temporary Modifications (page 57) is as follows:

The Temporary Modification program needs to have its program goals revised to reflect current NPRC scheduling practices. This will be completed by October 1,1995.

O e

75

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS 1

AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR PERFORMANCE The purpose of this indicator is to quenufy the act,anucal The sum of the known (planned and unpionned) unevedeble operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kliowett hour hours and the estimated uneveliable hours for the aux 86ery indcolor represorts the budget and actual cents per kilowett hur feedwater system for the reporting period dMded ty the critical on a twehe mont everage for the current year. The beam for the hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains budget curve is the approved yearty budget. The been for the in the =adwy feedweler system.

actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report.

COLLECTNE RADIATIDN EXPOSURE CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS E 1,000

)

DISINTEGRATXWS/ MINUTE PER PROBE AREA 1

Casselho radlebon engiosure is the total extemel whole-body does receNed by all on-site personnel (including contractors and The personnel conterrunstion events in the clean controlled area.

visitors) during a time period, as moseured by the This indecator tracks personnel performance for SEP #15 & 54.

thermoluminsecent doometer (TLD). Cotective redebon exposure is reported in mes of person 4em. Th6s indicator tracks CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA radiological work performance for SEP #54.

The percentage of the Redehon Controlled Area, which includes COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) the auxHiery building, the redweste building, and areas of the

SUMMARY

C/RP building, that is contammsted bened on the total equare footage. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #54.

The summary of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station with signficantly higher (1.645 standard devishone) fanure rates then DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT the rest of the industry for en eighmonth tmo period Failures are reported as component (i e., pumps, motors, mein This indacator shows the deny core thermal output as measured steem stop volves, control element motors, etc.) categories.

from computer pomt XC105 (in thermal meGewetts) The 1500 MW Tech Spec imit, and tie unmet portion of the 1495 MW FCS Failure Cause Categortes are:

dedy goal for the reportmg month are sieo shown.

Weer Out/ Aging a failure thought to be the consequence of DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (28 Demands) expected weer or ageng.

The indicator shows the number of fadures occurrin0 or each f

Manufacturing Defect a fadure attributable to inadequate emergency ciensi genersbor during the last 25 start demands and essembly or initial quatty of the responsible wigwe or the lost 25 lood<un demands system.

DISABLING INJURYALLNr.JS FREQUENCY RATE Engineering / Design - a failure attributable to the inadequate (LOSS TIME ACCIDENT RATE) desagn of the responsible wigwa or system.

This indicator is defined as the number of accidents for aR utitty Other Devices a failure attributobie to a failure or personnel permanently assagned to the station, invoMng days mmoperation of another w,wwa or system, including eney from verk per 200,000 rnon-hours worked (100 men-years).

associated devices This does not hebde contractor personnel The indicator tracks personnel performance for SEP #25,26 8 27.

Maintenance / Testing a faHure that is a result of improper maintenance or testing, lack of maintenance, or personnel DOCUMENT REVIEW (81ENNIAL) errors that occur dunng mamtenance or testing actMtes performed on the responsible w,g, 4 or system, includin0 The Document Revient Indicator shows the number d documents fadure to follow procedures rewoned,the number of doctanents scheduled for review, and the number of document reviews that are overdue for the reportm0 Errors. fatures attributobie to incorrect procedures that were

- A A documert review is considered overdue if the review is followed as wntten, improper installebon of equipment, and t.ot comp 6ste within six months of the sosigned due deter. This personnel errors (including failure to follow procedures indicator tracks performance for SEP #46.

property). Also included in thes category are fedures for which cause is unknown or cannot be assigned to any of the preceding categories EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE The sum of the known (pienned and unpienned) unevadable and the eshmeted unevedobie hours for the emergency AC power system for the reportmg period dev6ded by the number of hours in the reportmg period multiplied by the number of trains in the emergency AC power system.

76

. - = -

m

.. m

l l

[

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY E) A failure to start tocause a portion of the starting system was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a successful This indecator shows the number of failures that were reported start wth the starting system in its normal alignment.

dunng the last 20, 50, and 100 emergency dessel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Stahon. Also shown are tngger Each emergency generator failure that resuRs in the generator values which correlate to a hegh level of confldence that a unt's besng dedared hoperable should be counted as one demand and diesel generators have obtained a rehetnitty of greater than or one failure. Exploratory tests dunng correctrve maintenance and equalto 95% when the demand failures are less than the trigger the successful test that follows repair to venfy operatWity should values not be counted as demands or failures when the EDG has not been declared operable again.

1) Number of Start Demands: All vehd and inadvertent start demands, including all start.only demands and all start EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY demands that are Iblowed by lood-run demands, whether by automahc or manuelindistion A start-only demand is a This rukutor measwes the total unrohatxidy of emergency dessel demand h which the emergency generator is started, but no generators. In general, unrelaatxhty is the ratio of unsuccessful attempt is made to load the generator.

operations (starts or lood-runs) to the number of vahd demands.

Total unrehabihty is a comtnnaten of start unrehabihty and load-

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the run unrehabilty.

emergency generator system that prevents the generator from schnMng specified frequency and voltage is clase#fied ENnlNEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR) as a veld alert future. This includes any cond: tion idenhfied BREAKDOWN in the course of me6ntenance inspections (wth the emergency generator in standby mode) that defindely would This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and pnority of the have resuRed in a start failure if a demand had occurred.

EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering Nuclear and System Engineenng This indicator tracks

3) Number of Load-Run Demands: For a valid lood-run performance for SEP #62.

demand to be counted the load-run attempt must meet one or more of the following cntene:

ENGINEEitlNG CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS A) A lood-run of any duration that results from a real The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were automatic or manualindistion.

completed, and open bacidog ECNs awaiting completon by DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks performance for l

B) A lood-run test to satisfy the plant's load and duration SEP #62.

l as stated in each test's specifications.

I ENGINEERfNG CHANGE NOTICES OPEN l

C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator l

lo expected to be operated for et least one hour while This indicator breaks down the number of Engineering Change i

loaded with at least 50% of its design loed.

Nakas (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineenng Nuclear i

(DEN), System Engineenng, and Maintenance The graphs l

l

4) Number of Load 4 tun Failures: A load-run failure should provide data on ECN Faciidy Changes open, ECN Substitute be counted for any reason in which the emergency Replacement items open, and ECN Document Changes open.

generator does not pick up load and run as preiscted.

This indicator tracks performance for SEP #62.

Failures are counted dunng any vahd lood-run demaruts EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL

5) Exceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or lood-run HOURS should not be counted as vahd demands or failures when e

they can be attributed to any of the following:

Equpmert forced outages per 1,000 critical hours is the inverse of the mean hme between forced outages caused by equipment A) Spurious tnps that would be bypassed in the event of failures. The mean time is aquel to the number of hours the en emergency.

reador is crtical in a period (1,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months ) divided by the number of forced outages caused by equipment failures in that period.

B) Marunctmn of equipmert that is not required dunng an emergency.

EQUfVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR C) Intenhonal terminehon of a test because of abnormal This indcator is defined as the rato of gross available genershon condtions that would not have resuRed in major diesel to gross maximum genernhon, expressed as a percentage generator damage or repair.

Avadable genershon la the energy that can be produced if the unit is operated at the mammum power level permitted by equipment D) Malfunctions oroperating errors which would not have and regulatory limestons. Maximum generston is the energy that I

prevented the emergency generator from being can be produced by a unR in a given period if operated l

restarted and brought to load wtthin a few minutes.

continuously at maximum capacty 77

)

i

l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS FORCED OUTAGE RATE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE lNPO This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that the unit Tha lndcater is defined as the number of accidents per 200,000 t

l was unavadable due to forced events compared to the time rnon-hours worked for all utshty personnel permanently assigned planned for electrical generabort Forced events are fadures or to the station that result in any of the following:

other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service before the end of the next weekend. Forced events

1) One or rnore days of restncted work (excluding the day of includs start-up failures and events Irvtated while the unft is in the accident);

reserve shutdown (i e, the urut is available but not in service).

2) One or more days away from work (excluding the day of the FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR accident); and This hdcador is defined as the steady-state pnmary coolant I-131

3) Fatalities.

activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contnbution and normatzed to a common purification rate. Tramp uranium is fuel Contractor personnel are not included for this indicator.

which has been depceded on reactor core intemals from previous defective fuel or is present on the surface of fuel elements from IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SERVICE the manufacturing process. Steady state is defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a power level that Total number of in-hne chemistry instruments that are out-of-l does not very more than + or -5%. Plants should collect data for service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling the indcator at a power level above 85%, when possible. Plants System (PASS).

that did not operate at steady-state power above 85% should collect data for this indicator at the highest steady-state power LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS level attained dunng the month.

The ridkator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes and The denedy correction factor rs the ratio of the specific volume of exams that are admirustered and passed each month. This coolant at the RCS operating temperature (540 degrees F., Vf =

indicator tracks training performance for SEP#68.

0.02146) drvided by the specific volume of coolant at normal letdown temperature (120' F st cutiet of the letdown coonng heat LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING exchanger, Vf = 0 016204), which results in a denssty correction factor for FCS equal to 1.32.

The total number of hours of training grven to each crew dunng each cyde. Also prtMded are the simulator training hours (which GROSS HEAT RATE are a subset of the total training hours), the number of non-REQUALIFICATION training hours and the number of exam l

l Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal energy in fakses. This indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

British Thermal Units (DTU) produced by the reactor to the total grote electrical energy produced by the generator in kilowatt-hours (KWH).

HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED The total ernount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated hazardous waste, holoDenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste produced by FCS each month.

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable haunt and the estimated unavailable hours for the high pressure safety injection system for the reporting penod divided by the crtical hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains in the high pressure safety injection system.

78

l l

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE Preventive. Achone taken to mewitem a pace of equipment BREAKDOWN wipiin design operating conditione, prevent equipment fedure, and seend As Rfe and are performed prior to equipment failure.

This indicolor shows the number and root cause code for Ucensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as fcNows:

Non Corrective 4'lant improvements Memtenance actMhes performed to implement stehon improvements or to

1) Administrative Control Problem. Management and repair non-pient equipment supeMeory danciencies that effect plant programs or actMies (ie., poor pionning breeladown or lack of =<iary =da Maintenance Work Priorttles are defined es:

management or supervisory control, incorrect procedures, etc).

Emergency - Condihons which significantly degrade station safety or availability

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures emws of ominaiorWoommission by hcensed reactor operators immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which during plant actMhos significantly degrade station rehetwHty Potenbal for unit of utdown or power r=* dan

3) Other Personnel Error. Errors of omission /comr9menon commuted by non-hcensed personnet involverl in plant Opersuons Concern Equipment deficiencies which hinder actMeios station opershon

4) Maintenance Prohtam.The irtent of this cause code le to Essential Rouhne correctrve maintenance on essental capture the fun range of problems whech can be attributed stehon systems and equipment h any way to proyammehc deficiencies in the memtenance functional organizabon ActMtes included in this cologory Non Essential. Routine correchve maintenance on non-I are memtenance, teetmg, survedence, cohtwebon and sesenhol stehon systems and equipment i

^

-l redehon protechon Plant ^. A_._.. - Norkcorrecuve memtenance and plant I

5) r-1-

^~ ' ' ~ ^ ~ebrication Problem -

improvements This cause code covers a full range of programmatic donaences in the areas of design, construction, installation, This indicator tracks mentenance performance for SEP IN16.

and tabnceben (i.e., loss of control power due to underreted fuse, equipment not quehfled for the envronment, etc ).

MAXIMUM INDfVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or The total medmum amount of redebon recorved by en indMdual Environmental Related Failures). This code is used for person workmg at FCS on a monthly, quarterty, and annual beeis.

spurtous failures of electrorwe piece-parts and feitures due to meteorological condihone such as hghtning, ice, high MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING w6nds, etc. GenereNy, N includes spurtous or one-time OUTAGE) fetures Electric components included in this category are cocut cards, redsflers, bietables, fuses, caracants, diodes, The total number of Memtenance Work Orders that have been resistors, etc.

epprowd for inclueen in the Cycle 16 Refuehng Outage and the nurreer that are ready to work (parts staged, plannmg complete, LrmAIR8 F4tEPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) and el other paperwork ready for fleid use). Also included is the number of MWOs that have been engineering holds (ECNs, The total number of securty incedents for the reportmg month procedures and other trueceNoneous engineenng holds), parts deseted in two graphs. This ww$icator tracks secunty hold, (parts staged, not yet triaf'acent, parts not yet arrived) and performance for SEP #58.

planning hold (Job scope not yet completed). Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) are eleo shown that have been identifled for MAINTENANCE OVERTIME the Cycle 16 Refusimg Outage end have not yet been corwerted to MWOs.

The percent of overtwne hours compared to normal hours for maintonence This Inchies OPPO personnel as wet as contract personnel MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOOS This indicator shows the bacidog of non-outage Memtenance Work Orders remawung open et the end of the reportmg month.

Montenance cieseaficehons are denned as tonows:

Corrective. Repeer and restorehon of equipment or corriponerts that have failed or are malfunctioning and are not performmg their intended function 79

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS NUISER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES B) Modfcahon Requests bemg reviewed by the Nucleer Projects Review Comtruttee (NPRC).

A control room equipment derciency (CRD) is defined as any component which is operated or controlled from the Control C) Modficaten Requests bemg reviewed by the Nucieer Room, pnMdes We*n or alarm to the Control Room, provides Protects Commatee (NPC).

testing capabihhes from the Control Room, provulos autometc actions from or to the Control Room, or prov6 des a poesive These Modifcation Requests may be reviewed several times function for the Control Room and has been ident:fied as before they are appnud for accomphehment or canceled Some defkzert,l.a., does not perform under all condehone as designed of these Modification Requests are returned to Ergpneenng for The defirition sieo applies to the Altemete Shutdown Panels Al-more hforrnation, some approved for evaluston, some approved 179, Al 185, and Al 212.

for study, and some approved for planning Once planning is completed and the scope of the work is clearly dermed, these A plert component whch is defenent or inoperable is considered ModIIcahon Ra9 =*e may be approved for accomphshment with an

Operator Work Around (OWA) Item"if some other acten is a year seeigned for construction or they rnay be canceled. All of required by an operator to wig : for the condehon of the these drfferent phases require review.

ww.ra Some examples of OWAs are:

3) Design Engineermg Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear

1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local Plannmg has assigned a year in whsch construction will be sight gloss can be reed by an Operator out in the plant; completed and c;asa0n work may be in progress.

2) A dorcient pump cannot be repeired because replacement

4) Construction Backlogtln Progress. The Construction parts requ6re a long lead time for purchase / delivery, thus Padage has been issued or construction has begun but the re@lnng the redundant pump to be operated continuously; modtficaten has not been accepted by the System Acceptance Commatee (SAC)

3) Special actions are required by an Operator because of squipment design problems These actons may be

5) DesignEngineering Update Backlog /in Progress PED 1

described h Opershons Memorandume, Operator Notes, or has received the Modificebon Completion Report but the may require changes to Operstmg Procedures; drawmps have not been updated.

4) Defldert plant equ6pment that is required to be used dunng The above rnenboned outstanding modfcations do not include Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operahng modifcahone which are proposed for cancellation Procedures; OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE)

5) System indestion that provides crtcal information during normal or abnormal operations.

This indcator shows the status of the projects which are in the j

scope of the Refuehng Outa0e l

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month This indestor The percenta0s of kN MWOs completed per month identified as tracks messed STs for SEP #60 & 61.

rouwk Rework adMess are identified by maintenance planntng and craft. Rework is: Any adddional work required to correct OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS defloonces discovered during a failed Post Maintenance Test to ensure the component / system posses subsequent Post This indcator displays the total number of open incklent Reports Maintenance Test.

(irs), the number of irs that are greater than six months old and the number of open signifcant irs.

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTNITIES OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS The percent of the number of completed maintenance actMhos The number of Mndriceton Requests (MRs) in any state between as compared to the number of scheduled memtenance actMties the issuance of a Modifestion Number and the completion of the each month. This percentage is shown for all maintenarce drawmg update.

crafts. Also shown are the number of emergent MWOs.

Maintenance actMties include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs,

1) Form FC 1133 Backloglin Progress. This number calibratens, and other miscellaneous actMbes. This indicator represents modifcation requests that have not been plant tracks Maintenance performance for SEP #33.

approved dunng the reporting month.

2) Moditcat6on Requests Being Reviewed. This category includes:

A) Modifcahon Requests that are not yet reviewed 80

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS

=.

PREVENTABLE > PERSONNEL ERROR LERs RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER The number of identmed poor radiological work practices event classacehon, a "Preventehte LER' is denned as:

(PRWPs) for the reportmg man'h.

This indicator tracks radiological work performance for SEP #52.

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

inappropnote action tn one or more indMduais), inadequale RADIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

administrative controls, e deegn constructen, trem, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE Ina*=mahan, fatrication problem (invoMng work completed by or egervised by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance problem The reto of prenrewe mortenance (includmg surveillance testm0 (ettributed to ir-empaa or improper upkeep 4epe6r of plant and cahlrebon procedures) to the sum of non-outage correchve eqdpmert). Also, the cause of the event must have occurred maintenance and preventrve memtenance completed over the Wlhei appnedmetely two years of the " Event Dete" specmed in reporting period. The raho, egressed as a percente0s, is the LER (e g., en event for which the cause is attributed to e calculated bened on men-hours. Also displayed are the percent problem with the ortgmel doogn of the plant would not be of preventive mentenance items m the month that were not considered preventable).

conipisted or admerweiratively closed by the scheduled dele plus a grace perted equal to 25% of the scheduled interval This For purposes of LER event classiflcohon, a " Personnel Error" indicator tracks preventive memtenance activites for SEP #41.

LER is denned as follows:

RECORDABLE INJURYALLNESS CASES FREQUENCY An event for wtuch sie root cause is inappropriate schon on the RATE part of one or more indMduels (as afyamad to bemg sitrtbuted to e department or a general group). Also, the inappropnote The number of irjuries requinng more then normel first aid per l

action must have occurred withm approidmetely two years of 200,000 men-hours worked This indicator trends personnel the " Event Dete" specmed in the LER.

performance for SEP #15,25 and 26.

Adc$tonelly, each event clees.ned as a " Personnel Error" should REPEAT FAILURES l

eiso be clesomed so *Proventable* This indicator trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15.

The number of Nucieer Plant Rei6stmilty Data System (NPRDS) components with more then one failure and the number of l

PRIMARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY % OF HOURS OUT OF NPRDS ceniponerts wth more Itun two failures for the eighteen-l LIMIT month CFAR penod.

l The percent of hours out of hmit are for soc primary chenwetry SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES j

parameters dMded by the total number of hours f-m for the l

month. The key parameters used are: Lithium, Chloride, Safety system failures are any wants or condehone that could i

Hydrogen, Dissolved Oxygen Fluoride and Suspended Solids.

prevent the fulnllment of the oefety funchone of structures or EPRI hmits are used.

systems. If a system consists of mulhpie redundant subsystems or trams, failure of all trains constitutes a safety system failure.

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS Failure of one of two or more trains is not counted as e esfety (MAINTENANCE) system failure. The dennihon for the ir*aear parensis NRC reportry recpremertsin 10 CFR 50 72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The The number of idenhfied incidents concomm0 memtenance fotowmg is a list of the maior safety systems, sub-systems, and procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the use components monitored for this trv$cator-of procedures (includes the number of closed irs caused by procedursi nencomphence), and the number of closed procedural Accident Monitoring instramentshon, Auxillery (and e

noncomptance irs This indkator trende personnel performance Emergency) Feedwater System, Combushble Gas Control, for SEP #15,41 and 44.

Component Coolmg Water System, Contamment and Coremnmort i-emm, Contamment Cooient Systems, Control PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE MODIFICATION Room Emergency Ventilshon System, Emergmcy Core PLANNING Coceng Systems, Engneered Safety Features instrumentshon, Essenhol Ce,c,,, : -i Air Systems, Essenhed or Emergency TNe indicator shows the status of modscehons approved for Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppreseson Systems, completen during the Refuehng Outage leoistion Condenser, Low Temperature Overpressure Protechon, Mein Steam Line laal=han Velves, Onsite PROGRESS OF 1906 ON11NE MODtRCATION PLANNING Emergency AC & DC Power w/Dietribubon, Radiation Monnoreg instrumerWahon, Reactor Coolent System, Reactor TNe indicator shows the status of modmcehone approved for Core lecishon Cociing System, Reactor Tnp System and compiehon dunng 1996.

Instrumentshon, Recirculaten Pump Trip Actuohon Instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal Systems, Safety Velves, Spent Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ultrnate Heat Smk.

j l

l 81 l

l l

l I

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE STAFFING LEVEL INDEX The actual stofRng level and the authortred staffing level for the The Chemistry Performance Irdat (CPI) is a calculation bened on Nucieer Opershons DMeson The Production Eng6neenn0 the concentrobon of hoy impurttee in the secondary made of the DMason, and he Nteiner Services DMeion. This indmetor tracks plant. These key impurtbes are the most likely cause of performance for SEP #24.

detenorshon of the steem generators Crtlerta for calculehng the CPI are:

STATION NET OENERATION

1) The pient is at greater then 30 percent power; and The not genershon (sum) produced by the FCS dunng the reportmo month.

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

TEMPORARY MOO 1FICATIONS The CPI is calculeled uomg the following equation.

The number of temporary mechanical and electrical CPI = (sodium /0.90) + (Chloride /1.70) + (Sulfate /1.90) +

confl0urstens to the plants systems.

(iron /4.40) + (Copper /0.30)/5.

1) Temporary con 6gurshons are deflned as electnced jumpers, Where: Sod 6um, sulfate and chloride are the monthly evere0e electrical blocks, machen6 cal jumpers, or mechanical blocess blowdown concentratens in ppb, iron and copper are monthly whch are instaged in the pient operahng systems and are not time weighted everage feedwater concentrahons in ppb. The shown on the latest revision of the P&lD, schemehc, denominator for each of the five factors is the INPO median connection, wiring, or flow disgrams.

wius. If the morthly swrege for a specific parameter is less then the INPO median value, the medien value is used in the

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Survenience calculshon.

Tests, Memtenance Procedures, Calibration Procedures, Special Procedures or Operahng Procedures are not SIGNIFICANT EVENTS connedored es temporary modificahone uniees the jumper or bicek ramens H place aber me test or procedure is complete Signincent events are the events identifled by NRC staff through Jumpers and blocks instened in test or lab instruments are detailed screening and evolueton of operehng exponence The not considered ai temporary modiflcatens.

screenmg process includes the daily review and discussion of all reported operstmg reactor events, as well as other opershonal

3) Scaffold is not considered a temporary modificehon data such as special tests or construchon actMues An event Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for which MRs identified from the screenmg process as a significent event have been submitted wlN be considered as temporary candedste is further evaluated to determme if any actual or modificahons until flnel resoluhon of the MR and the jumper potereal threat to the hasah and safety of the public was involved or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the Specific exemples of the type of criteria are summartzed as drawings This indcator tracks temporary modthcohone for follows:

SEP #62 and 71.

1) Degradation of important safety equipment; THERMAL PERFORMANCE

2) Unexpected plant response to a transent, The rato of the design gross heet rate (corrected) to the adjusted actual groes heet rate, expressed as a percentage.

3) Degradstion of fuel integnty, pnmary cooient pressure boundary, importent associated foetures; UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR

4) Scramwithcomphcaten; The robo of the available energy generation over a given hme e

period to the reference energy genersten (the energy that could

5) Unpenned reisees of redmectMty, be produced if the unit were operated conhnuously at full power under reference ambient condehone) over the some twne period,

6) Operation outsade the hmits of the Technical Specthcahone; expressed as a percentage

7) Otner.

UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR INPO storWficant events tororted in this indcator are SERs The not electrical energy generated (MWH) dMded by the (Signrncent Evers Recor*.s) which inform uttubes of signancent product of maximum deperulebte capocNy (not MWe) times the events and lessons loomed identshed tnrough the SEE-IN groes hours in the reportmg period expressed as a percent Not screenin0 process.

electrical energy genersted is the groes electrical output of the unit measured at the output terminals of the turbine generator SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE rnmus the normal station service loads during the gross hours of the reportmg period, expressed in megewett hours.

The domar value of the apare parts inventory for FCS dunng the reportm0 period.

82 1

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTIONS -(NRC CRITICAL HOURS DEFINITION)

This indcator is defined as the number of unplanned automate The number of safety system actuations which include (g)h) the cerams (reacbr protection system logc actuatons) that occur per High Preneure Safety injecten System, the Low Pressure Safety 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months of crtical operation.

Iryoction Syntam, the Safety injection Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classificaten of safety system The value for this indicator is calculated by muRiptying the total actusbons h:ludes adualmns when major equipment is operated number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams in a specific time 3Dd when the logic systems for the above safety systems are period by 7,000 hours0 days 0 hours 0 weeks 0 months , then dividing that number by the total challenged.

number of hours critical in the same time perlod. The indicator is further defined as follows:

VIOLATION TREND o

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anteipated part The indicator is defined as Fort Calhoun Staten Cited Violabons of a planned test.

and Non-Cited Vloistions trended over 12 months. AdditionaNy, Caed Vloistions for the top quartie Region IV plant is trended over

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a 12 months (lagging the Fort Calhoun Station trend by 2-3 repid insertion of negative reactMty (e g., by control rods, maths). It is the Fort Calhoun Staten goal to be at or below the Iquid hgocton system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of the cited violabon trend for the top quartile Region IV plant.

j reactor protection system. The scram signal may have resulted from exceeding a set point or may have been VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOUD RADIOACTIVE WASTE spurious This indicator is deilned as the volume of low-level solid i

radoective weste actually shipped for burial. This indcator also

3) Aubmetc means that the inibal signal that caused actuation shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste which is in of the reactor protection system logic was provided from one temporary storage, the amount of radmactive oil that has been of the sensor's morhirg plant pararneters and conddbns, shipped off-ste for processing, and the volume of solid dry rather than the manual scram swtches or, manual turb6ne trip redcactimeste wNch has been shipped off-site for processing swiches (or pusMxAtons) provided in the main control room.

Low-level solid radioactue waste consists of dry active weste, sludges, nisins, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of

4) Critmal rneens that dunng the steady-state condition of the nuclear power plant operation and maintenance. Dry radioactive reactor pror to the scram, the effective multiplication (k,,)

waste hciudes contaminated rage, cleaning materials, disposable was essentselly equal to one.

protech clothing, plastic cortainers, and any other material to be tsaf-d of at a low-level radmectue waste disposal site, except UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms. Low-level refers to all radioactive waste that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent The rate of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of fuel processing. This indicator tracks radiological work hme, to the referenta energy generation (the energy that could be performance for SEP #54 produced if the unit were operated continuously at fut power under reference ambient conditons) over the same time penod, expressed as a percentage.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS. (INPO DEFINITION)

This hdcator is defined as the sum of the following safety system cetuations:

1) The number of unplanned Emergency Core Coohng System (ECCS) actuations that result from reaching an ECCS actuaten set point or from a spuriousanadvertent ECCS signal.

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuations that result from a loss of power to a safeguards bus. An mplanned safety system actuation occurs when an actuation set point for a safety system is reached or when a spurious or hadvertent signal is generated (ECCS only), and major equipment in the system is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuaten was not part of a planned test or evoluten. The ECCS actuations to be counted are actuabons of the high pressure injection system, the low pressure injection system, or the safety injecten tanks.

83

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

SEP Reference Number 15 Pane

. Increase HPES and IR Accountability through use of Performance indicators i

Procedural Noncompliance Incidents (Maintenance)

.... 50 Recordable injuryMilness Cases Frequency Rate........................

........... 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 11,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area 5

Preventable / Personnel Error LERs.....................

... 6 SEP Reference Number 24

. Complete Staff Studies Staffing Level.....

43 SEP Reference Numbers 25. 26. & 27

. Training Program for Managers and Supervisors implemented

. Evaluate and implement Station Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements

. Implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate.........

3 Recordable injuryMliness 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 (All Maintenance Crafts) 51 SEP Reference Number 36

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

46 SEP Reference Numbers 41 & 44

Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule

. Compliance With and Use of Procedures Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Wintenance items Overdue.

47 Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance)..

50 SEP Reference Number 46

. Design a Procedures Controland Administrative Program Document Review 56 84

i 5

s SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX i

SEP Reference Number 52 Eggg 4

-

Establish Supervisory Accountability for Workers Radiological Practices

}

Radiological Work Practices Program................................................... 55 SEP Reference Number 54 e Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program i

a o

1 i

Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations 11,000 CountsMinute Per Probe Area.................... 5 Collective Radiation Exposure......................................................

17 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste.............................

........... 38 4

Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area............................................... 54 SEP Reference Nurnber 88

Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program 4

- Loggeble/ Reportable incidents (Security).............................................. 57 SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61 l

= improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program e Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests 6

Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Licensee Event Reports..................... 21 i

SEP Reference Number 62 Establish interim System Engineers l

4 Temporary Modifications

............................................ 58 Engineering Asamtance Request (EAR) Breakdown.................................... 60 l

Engineering Change Notice Status............................................... 61 Engineering Change Notices Open..................................................... 62 SEP Reference Number 68 Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and establish means to monitor Operator Training 1

i License Operator Requalification Training........................................... 64 License Candidate Exa ms...................................................... 65 e

SEP Reference Number 71

improve Controls over Temporary Modifications j [

Temporary Modifications.......................................................... 58 d

i 1

4 4

85

.,,n

REPORT DISTRIBUTION blST R.L. Andrews J. D. Keppler i

K. L. Belek D. D. Kloock i

B. H. Blome L.T.Kusek C. E. Boughter M. P. Lazar C. J. Brunnert B. R. LMngston M. W. Butt D. L. Lovett C. A. Carlson J. H. MacKinnon G. R. Cavanaugh N. L. Marfice J. W. Chase R. D. Martin A. G. Christensen T. J. Mcivor O. J. Clayton K. G. Melstad R. P. Clemens K. A. Miller R. G. Conner P. A. Mruz J. L. Connolley Nuclear Licensing G. M. Cook

& Industry Affairs S. R. Crites J. T. O'Connor D. W. Dale W. W. Orr D.C.Dietz T. L. Patterson T. R. Dukarski R. T. Pearce M. L. Ellis R. J. Phelps H. J. Faulhaber W.J.Ponec M. T. Frans C. R. Rice D. P. Galle A. W. Richard S. K. Gambhir D. G. Ried l

J. K. Gasper G. K. Samide W. G. Gates M. J. Sandhoefner S. W. Gebers F. C. Scofleid L. V. Goldberg H. J. Sefick l

D. J. Golden J.W.Shannon D. C. Gorence C. F. Simmons R. H. Guy E.L.Skaggs A. L. Hale J. L. Skiles K. R. Henry F. K. Smith J. B. Herman R. D. Spies T. L. Herman D. E. Spires K. C. Holthaus R. L. Sorenson L. P. Hopkins K. E. Steele C. K. Huang M. A.Tesar T. W. Jamieson J. J. Tesarek R. L. Jaworski J. W. Tills R. A.Johansen D. R. Trausch J. W. Johnson J. M. Waszak l

R. Jones G. R. Williams W. C. Jones S. J. Willrett l

86

FORT CALHOUN STATION OPERATING CYCLES AND REFUELING OUTAGE DATES r

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 10/01/76-12/13/76 Cycle 3 12/13/76-09/30/77 2,805,927 9,958,888 3rd Refueling 09/30/77-12/09/77 s

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 17/21/81 -12/03/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/03/82 - 04/06/83 Cycle 8 MD6/83 - 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 l

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 l

Cycle 14 05/03/92- 09/25/93 4,981,483 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93-11/26/93 e

Cycle 15 11/26/93- 02/20/95 5,043,887 61,065,900 15th Refueling 02/20/95-04/14/95 Cycle 16 04/14/95- 09/21/96 16th Refueling 09/21/96 -11/02/96 (Planned Dates)

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

First Electricrty Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial Operaton (180,000 KWH)

September 26,1973 Achieved Full Power (100%)

May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 Days)

June 8,1987-Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Net Generston (364,468,800 KWH)

October 1987 Most Productve 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 Highest Calendar Year Generation (4,118,368.7 MWH) 1994

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

ML20098B078

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

=.

=

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search