ML20112C953

Performance Indicators Rept for Apr 1996

ML20112C953
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	04/30/1996
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20112C954	List: LIC-96-0076, Forwards Fort Calhoun Station Performance Indicators Rept for April 1996 ML20112C953
References
NUDOCS 9606030246
Download: ML20112C953 (104)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

'lllN inns

-a'

./

./'

APRIL 1996 SAFE OPERATIONS PERFORMANCEEXCELLENCE COSTEFFECTIVENESS R

D CK O

85 R

PDR

0%il of ac&nca w wn, alliinh,...

i a tawda wuden, awl wondjud rwnl...

y d w a, q!diurn, cans

' sng censrabinwni...

dwa,waygq!>...dwdang ikjd>

e 94 lk,6l 6, S 6.

Jl w wns-diadad, rwl ik wdl 8 aland, 9

puun,,aw a wn,9 uwJk wk 98 un, an, aaul ik a wad & Main, p

n ot - p,n, u t k,u w e

p 3

peun,, rwljud u dang ik 9 Vk.p 2

% ). 6'67.

O h

3 i

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION 1

i PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT I,

1 4

i l

APR L i

l l

1996

)

i Production Engineering Division i

System Engineering Test and Performance Group APRIL 1996 4

i

a FORT CALHOUN STATION April 1996 Monthly Operating Report OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

The Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) continued a power ascension on April 1,1996 from 80% and reached 100% on April 3rd. The plant was at 80% power following a brief shutdown in March for condenser tube repairs. For the remainder of the month, FCS operated at a nominal 100% power. Normal plant maintenance, surveillance, equipment rotation activities and scheduled on-line modifications were conducted during the month.

On April 9th, at 1858 hours0.0215 days <br />0.516 hours <br />0.00307 weeks <br />7.06969e-4 months <br />, Reactor Coolant System (RCS) letdown was aligned to rinse in Cation Exchanger CH-10. After rinsing in CH-10, letdown was returned to a normallineup. Letdown Strainer CH-24 oifferential pressure increased causing high back pressure and letdown relief valves CH-223 and CH-224 to relieve to the Quench and Neutralization Tanks. At 0001 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> on April 10th, the leakage was estimated to be 3 gpm. Technical Specification (TS) 2.1.4(1) and Abnormal Operating Procedure AOP-22, Reactor Coolant Leak, were entered an appropriate notification were made. Letdown was diverted to bypass the ion exchanger beds and the relief valves reseated. The letdown strainer was flushed and the differential pressure returned to normal. At 0529 hours0.00612 days <br />0.147 hours <br />8.746693e-4 weeks <br />2.012845e-4 months <br />, a Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Leak Rate test was completed satisfactorily with a total leakage of 0.263 gpm and AOP-22 v.as exited.

On April 25th at 1644 hours0.019 days <br />0.457 hours <br />0.00272 weeks <br />6.25542e-4 months <br />, a four-hour non-emergency not fication was made to the NRC pursuant to 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(iii)(D) upon discovering a discrepancy between the Operating Instruction (01) procedure OI-FH-1, Fuel Handling Equipment Operation, and assumptions in an FCS Engineering Analysis, Control Room Habitability Evaluation. The analysis assumes the Control Room Charcoal Filtration System is in operation during movement of irradiated fuel, while the 01 only requires it to be operable.

Four additional incore nuclear detectors failed in April 1996, rendering eight of the twenty-eight detector strings inoperable. Because less than 75% of the totalincore strings are operable, an increase of 1% to the total uncertainties has been applied to the plana, integrated and total radial peaking factors. The frequency for surveillance'est RE-ST-RX-0001, Determination of the Total Integrated and Planar Radial Peaking Factors, has been increased from monthly to a minimum of once every 15 days. All failures have occurred in detectors installed during the 1995 refueling outage. These failures are under investigation with assistance from ABB/CE and the incore detector vendor.

i

N j

+ Fort Calhoun index Value l

+ Industry MedianindexValue 90.

M 83 83 83 m

A a

79 81

.I

( 70._

q Industry

.E Median Projected 60.

Monthly Value for April 96 is 82.97%

1 50.

40 j

95/1 95/2 95/3 95/4 96/1 Apr May.

96/2

'Jul Aug 96/3 PERFORMANCE INDEX 1 REND For the index calculation unit capability factor, unplanned capability loss factor, unplanned i

automatic scrams per 7000 hours0.081 days <br />1.944 hours <br />0.0116 weeks <br />0.00266 months <br /> critical, safety system performance, collective radiation exposure, and volume of low-level solid rad lcactive waste indicators are calculated for a two-year period instead of the normal three-year period to allow the index trend to be more responsive to changes in plant performance.

i ii

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

a AxmuuvALUE 39EEK POWrS AprN 'os m

I 10.=

5 "j

l 1s.co.

14.00.

t 8

N" 12.o0.

i to N -

8 8

8 8

8 8

=

=

n e

n g

j g g 3

a a o

a i

o.co.

8 11,iii]i i

8 8

i gg g

d s.co.

R 1

aa i

~

)

e.co.--

i i

i e

i UCF UcLF FPSI AFW EACP LMS7 CfE FN TM CPI fled.

ISAR Weste This graph shows the difference between the Maximum No. Of points for each INPO indicator and the actual value achieved by Folt Calhoun for the i

month of April

[

UC.c Unit Capability Factor CPI Chemistry Performance Indicator

[

UCLF Unplanned CapabiRty Loss Factor.

Rad. Waste Volume of Low Level Red Waste HPSI High Pressure Safety injection ISAR Industrial Safety Accident Rate AFW Auxiliary Feedwater EACP Emergency AC Power i

UAS7-Unplanned Auto Scramms/7000 Hours CRE Collective Radiation Exposure FRl Fuel Reliability 7.1dicator i

iii i

a

_,_..._.______.____.._..._.__________._.________._.________________._.m

i l

i i

noi n

ui n iin iiiii,u n n i, n ii n.

EE j

Performance Catenories i

Unplanned i

Unplanned Thermal Unit Capability Factor Capability Auto Scrams Performance 5

Performance better than Industry Average Trend l

Loss Factor i

Performance better than smuhm da, 996 PPD Goal lllllllllllllllllllElllllllll l $$ @

fjR Performance Not Meeting mesT#Ms 1996 OPPD Goal HPSI Safety

' AFW Safety EDG Safety I Fuel System System System Performance Performance Performance j

Reliability l

l j

l l

i lll iiii.iin huinin mninin g

ununuiuuninuuinuou lllll llllllllll'lll llll llll l

l l

1996 1996 1996 l l

Collective

'j I

lib 4

illi 11 lililli!!!

I I lill lfhi lill l )

i Volume of ll Industrial Apr.-1996 Best Possible I Chemistry ll l

Low-Level l lll 1996 Year-End Safety Accident Year-to-Date index l,

ig Radiation

.k l

Exposure RadWaste l

l Rate Value l

d l

ll kN O lbU i

uuu h

i INPO Performance Indicators l

I

i 1

I Unplanned Auto Scrams i

Year-To-Date Value Performance Cateaories l

Safety

-E' Performance better than Industry Average Trend i

Significant System vents Actuations Performance better than 1996 OPPD Goal i

i Safety Forced Outage W$$

Performance Not Meeting 1996 OPPD Goal System Rate Failures i

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

1996 1996 1996 l

Equipment Collective f

Forced lladiation Apr.-1996 Best Possible Year-to-Date 1996 Year-End Outages posure Value Performance llill l Performance

..s.....-

NRC Performance Indicators l

I h

i

1 i

i FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT April 1996-

SUMMARY

POSITIVE TREND REPORT POSITIVE TREND REPORT (cont.

A performance indicator with data representing three Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area consecutive months of improving performance or three (Page 55) consecutrve months of performance that is superior to the stated goalis exhibiting a positive trend per Nuclear Temocrary Modifications Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-(Page 59) 37).

)

The following performance indicators exhibited positive End of Positive Trend Report.

trends for the reporting month:

Safety System Failures (Page 7)

ADVERSE TREND REPORT Hiah Pressure Safety iniection System Safety System A performance indicator with data representing three Performance consecutive months of declining performance or three (Page 8) consecutive months of performance that is trending 3

toward declining as determined by the Manager -

i Auxiliarv Feedwater System Station Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per (Page 9)

Nuclear Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). A supervisor whose performance Emeroency A.C. Power System indicator exhibits an adverse trend by this definition (Page 10) may specify in written form (to be published in this i

Emeroency Diesel Generator Unit Reliability (Page 11)

The following performance indicators exhibited adverse trends for the reporting month:

riiesel Generator Reliability (25 Demands)

(Page 12)

Fuel Reliability Index l

(Page 14) l Emeroenev Diesel Generator Unreliability (Page 13)

Maintenance Workload Backloos (Page 47)

Sianificant Events (Page 20)

Preventative Maintenance item Overdue (Page 48)

Missed Surveillance Tests Resutts in Licensee Event Reports End of Adverse Trend Report.

(Page 21)

Unolanned Safety System Actuations (INPO)

(Page 30)

Secondary System Chemistry (Page 39)

Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 54) vi

1 i

INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT A performance indicator with data for the reporting period that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD goalis defined as *Needing increased Management Attention

• per Nuclear Operations Division Quahty Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37).

Industrial Safety Accident Rate (Page 2)

Disablina iniurv/filness Freauenev Rate (Pags 3)

Number of On-Line and Outaae Control Room Eauipment Deficiencies (Page 16)

Eauioment Forced Outaae Rate (Page 35)

Cents per Kilowatt Hour (page 44)

Percentaae of Total MWOs Comoteted oer Month identified as Rework (Page 50)

Temocrarv Modifications j

(Page 60)

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

No new additms were made to the P.I. book this month.

End of Report improvements / Changes Report.

i l

VII j

Table of Contents / Summary em i

GOALS........................................................................xi SAFE OPERATIONS Industrial Safety Accident Rate - INPO.................................................

2 i

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 i

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

6 Safety System Failures.......................................................... 7 l

Safety System Performance:

High Pressure Safety injection System 8

Auxiliary Feedwater System.................................................... 9 Emergency AC Power System

............................10 Emergency Diesel Generator i

Unit Reliability

.... 11 l

Reliability (25 Demands)

...................................................12 Unre li ability............................................................. 13 Fuel Reliability Indicator........................................................... 14 Control Room Equipment Deficiencies............... -.................................. 15 1

On-Line and Outagc Control Room Deficiencies........................................ 16 Collective Radiation Ex posure......................................................... 17 1

Maximum individual Radiation Exposure............................................... 18 Vio lati o n Tre nd...............................................................

19 Significant Events.................

............20 Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in LERs

.......... 21 PERFORMANCE Statio n N et G e n e ratio n............................................................. 23 Forced Outage Rate

............................24 Unit Capacity Factor............

25 Equivalent Availability Factor..........................

......... 26 viii

1 l

Table of Contents / Summary PERFORMANCE (continutd)

EAfdi 4

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

........ 32 Thermal Performance

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

34 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours..................................... 35 Cornponent Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) Summary.................................. 36 Repeat Failures

............................................ 37 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste........................................... 38 Secondary System Chemistry......................................................... 39 Chemistry Action Levels Exceeded - Event Days......................................... 40 Primary System Lithium % Hours Out of Umit.......................................... 41 M

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

.........................................43 Staffing Level 44 Spare Parts inventory Value........................

..........................45 DIVISION AND DEPARTMEKT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non Outage) 47 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance Items Overdue 48 Percentage of Total W0s Completed per month identified as Rework 49 Overtime 50 Procedural Noncompliance Incidents 51 Daily Schedule Performance - Percent of Completed Scheduled Activities 52 ix

Table of Contents / Summary DIVISION AND DEPARTMENTPERFORMANCEINDICATORS PAGE in-Line Chemistry Instrurmats Out-of-Service................

...............53 Hazardous Waste Produced....................................................... 54 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area...........

........ 55 Radiological Work Practices Program

..................... 56 Document Review 57 Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security).............................

.... 58 Modifications Temporary

........59 O utsta nding...............................

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

...............................61 Engineering Change Notices Status

..........62 O pe n...........

...............................................63 Licensee Event Report (LER) R90t Cause Breakdown.................................. 64 Licensed Operator Requalification Training....................

... 65 License Candidate Exams...............................

.............. 66 Ope n Incident Reports.. -..................................

...............67 Cycle 17 Refueling Outage MWO Planning Status

..............................68 Overall Project Status...................................................... 70 Outage Modification Planning 71 On-Line Modification Planning................

.............................72 Progress of i996 0n-Line Modification Planning

........... 72 AC lON PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST Action Plans.................

73 Performance indicator Definitions

.. 78 Safety Enhancement Program index 86 Report Distribution List..

...........89 X

i OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS 996 Priorities i

MIGSION The safe, milable and cost eNective generation of electricity for OPPD customers through the professional use of nuclear technology. The Company shall conduct these operations prudently, efficiently a:ed effectively to assure the health, safety and protection of all personnel, the genersi public and the environment.

GOALS Goal 1:

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

1996 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 1-4:

Achieve all safety-related 1996 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report.

j OBJECTIVE 1-5:

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

xi l

l

4

}

l OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS 1996 Priorities Goal 2:

PERFORMANCE Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Flan 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 product!on.

I J

1996 PRIORITIES:

improve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork.

e Improve Plant Reliability.

Meet or exceed INPO key parameters and outage performance goals.

e Reduce the number of Humart Performance errors.

j 1

identify Programmatic performance problems through effective self assessment.

e Objectives to support PERFORMANCE:

OBJECTIVE 2-1:

j Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 82% and a unit capability factor of 83.56%

OBJECTIVE 2-2:

Execute the 1996 refueling outage in 42 days; emphasize shutdown plant safety.

OBJECTIVE 2-3:

Achieve all performance related 1996 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicatur Report.

OBJECTIVE 2 4:

All projects and programs are planned, scheduled, and accomplished according to schedules, j

resource constraints, and requirements.

OBJECTIVE 2-5:

Team /individualownership, accountability, performance and teamwork is evident by improved plant reliability; improved ratings for both INPO and NRC; reduced numtier of human performance errors and identification of performance problems by effective self assessment and for j

individuals as measured by the successful completion of department goals & objectives and other specific measures.

j i

l xii

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS 1996 Priorities Goal 3:

COSTS Supports: April 1994 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 2, Obj: 1,2 and 3, and Goal 6, Obj: 1 Operate Fort Calhoun in a manner that cost effectively maintains nuclear generation as an economically viable contribution to OPPD's " bottom line". Cost consciousness is exhibited at all levels of the organization.-

1996 Priorities:

Maintain total O&M and Capital Expenditures within budget.

Streamline work process to improve cost effectiveness.

4 Objectives to support COSTS:

OBJECTIVE 3-1:

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

l OBJECTIVE 3-2 Implement nuclear related Opportunity Review recommendations according to approved schedules and attain the estimated cost savings.

i h

l Goals Source:

Scofield (Manager) xiii

i 1

b i

Ii e

i i

I i-l 1

l l

SAFE OPERATIONS i

i i

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

exhibited throughout the nuclear organization. Individuals demonstrate professionalism through self-ownership and per-l sonalinitiative and open communication.

l 1

l i

i i

i 1

i 3

l i

1 i

b

I

+

i

,_. Year-to-Date FCS Industrial Safety Accident Rate (INPO Definition)

_ FCS Average Rate (Last 12 Months)

+ FCS Year-End Goal (<0.50

--e-. Industry Current Best Qua)rtile (.24)

F00003 Year 2000 INPO Industry Goal (<0.40 I

1995 Industrial Safety Accident Rate ()INPO Defination)

V i

2..

1.5 m

~

^

1, e

0.5 f K -

c 5

5 5

5 5

5 5

5

[5

/ 5 5

0 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE 1

As stated in INPO's December 1993 publication ' Detailed Descriptions of World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Performance Indicators and Other Indicators for Use at U.S. Nuclear Power Plant'; "The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in improving industrial safety

)

performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station."

i The INPO industrial safety accident rate value year-to-date was 0.44 at the end of April 1996.

The value for the 12 months from May,1995, through April 31,1996, was 1.13.

There were no restricted-time and no lost-time accident in April 1996.

The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

1 (number of restricted-time accidents + lost-time accidents + fatalities) x 200.000 (number of station person-hours worked) i The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is 50.50. The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is 50.40. 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 / Bishop Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention 2

I i

l

_e 1996 Disabling injuryfillness Frequency

_x_1995 Disabling injury / Illness Frequency

_a_ Average Rate (Last 12 Months) l GOOD l

+ 1996 Goal (0.50)

V 2.

1.8 1.6..

1 A ?.

lNa A

0.8,

'I

,, 7 g

0.2..

1 0

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

l1996l 1

DISABLING IN]URY/ ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

This indicator shows the 1996 disabling injury / illness frequency rate. The 1995 disabling injury /

illness frequency rate is also shown.

l The disabling injury /i:! nets frequency rate year-to-date was 0.44 at the end of April 1996. There j

were no disabling injury /ilhess cases reported for the month.

l The disabling injury / illness frequency rate for the 12 months from May 1,1995, through April 30,1996, was 0.86.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal forthis indicator is a maximum value of 0.5.

Data Source:

Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Bishop Trend:

Need increased Management Attention SEP 25,26 & 27 3

9 1996 Recordable injuryllliness Frequency 4

x 1995 Recordable injuryllilness Frequency I a000 l Average Rate (Last 12 Months) i I

...o...

Fort Calhoun Goal 2.25..

4 2..

1.75..

1.5

.....5......."...3.

.......o} h o......

z

....o.....

......o 1.25...

1 L 0.75..

0.5.

4 0.25..

O May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the 1996 recordable injury / illness frequency rate. The 1995 record-able injury / illness cases frequency rate is also shown.

A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divisions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a year-to-date basis.

i There have been 4 recordable injury / illness cases in 1996. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate year-to-date was 2.19 at the end of April 1996. There was 1 recordable injury / illness cases reported for the month of April.

1 The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate for the 12 months from May 1,1995, through April 30,1996, was 2.42.

l The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5.

Data Source:

Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Bishop Trend:

None SEP 15,25,26 & 27 4

m Contamination Events {" Monthly)

I"I Oes"en"#'f" War

)

60 V

l 50 40 a-

.c.

v 30 20..

10 _.

3 3

0 f

~

=

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec l1996l CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area for contaminations 11,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for the reporting month.

There were O contamination events in April 1996. There has been a total of 3 contami-nation event in 1996 through the end of April. This compares to 31 at this time last year.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers Trend:

None SEP 15 & 54 5

l l

g Personnel Errors (Each Month)

+ Preventable (18-Month Totals)

Personnel Error (18-Month Totals) 20..

15..

i 10..

m====- p

,/

E:

-' i E:

0 i

e i

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

{1996 i

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

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

In March 1996, there were two events which were subsequently reported as LERs. One LER was categorized as Preventable and a Personnel Error for the month of March.

The total LERs for the year 1996 (through March 31,1996) is two. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1996 is one. The total Preventable LERs for the year is one.

Due to the manner in which documentation are closed out, data for this Performance Indicator is always one month behind.

The 1996 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:

Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None SEP 15 6

9

, startup Shutdown m Operations l g-l

...o...

Industry Average Trend

.2..

1 I i

I I

o1--

.5

..... o......n....... J...

i

!20

- 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-Quarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator i!!ustrates 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.

j 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 sigr,al block reset values, for all 4 channels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits, rendering this scram input inoperable during certain operating condi-tions.

2nd Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration forthe borated water source of the safety injection j

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

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

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

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

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

Data Source:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Positive 7

e Monthly High Pressure Safetyinjection System Unavailability Value Year-to Date High Pressure Safety injection system Unavailability value j

-e--

Fort Calhoun Goal (OA03)

+ Year 2000 INPo industry Goal (0.02)

V 022 -

0415..

041 __

0.005 __

c 0

0 0

0 0

O O

O o

O

==, x x

1994 1995 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec j1996l HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The High Pressure Safety System unavailabilay value for the month of April 1996 was 0.0001. There were 0.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavail-ability, during the month. The 1996 year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.00004 at the end of the month. The unavailability value for the last 12 months was 0.00047.

l There has been a total of 0.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the high pressure safety injection system in 1996 There was a total of 13.39 hours4.513889e-4 days <br />0.0108 hours <br />6.448413e-5 weeks <br />1.48395e-5 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the high pressure safety injection system in 1995.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goalfor this indicator is a maximum value of 0.003. The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is 0.02.

Data Source:

Skiles/Schaffer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Schaffer Trend:

Positive 8

m Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater system Unavailability x

Year-to-Date AFW Unavailability l Good l

...o...

Fort Calhoun Goal (041) roar 2000 INPo industry Goal (0425)

DA2 -~

0418..

0416 __

j 0214 __

0.012.

041 -.

o........... o..... c...... o..... o..... o................ c o..... o..... o 0408._

o.co4ss 0A06..

o,co4sy 0204 -4.co2s 0A02__

0 E

0 O

en-

= -

1994 1995 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec l1996 l AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the reporting month.

The Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavallubility Value for April 1996 was 0.00. There were 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability during the month.

The year-to-date unavailability value was 0.' 003 and the value for the last 12 months was 0

0.0032 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 2.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 6.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of enplanned unavailability for the auxiliary feedwater system in 1996. The unplanned unavailability on FW-10 was due to a failed relay on HCV-1045B.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01.

The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is 0.025.

Data Source:

Skiles/Fritts (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Fritts Trend:

Positive i

9 l

o O

g Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value

_x Year-to-Date Emergency Ac Power Unavailability Value

+ 1996 Fort Calhoun Goal (0.024) l Good l, Year 2000 INPO Industry Goal (0.025) 3 7 0.14..

0.12..

0.1.

0.08..

0.06 0.04..

042..

dhx, x d x W Xe

,x 0.hx.

_x May

.:c Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 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 April 199fi was 0.00625. Dur-ing the month, there were 9.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for testing and repairs. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.0054 and the value for the last 12 months was 0.013 at the end of the month.

There has been a total of 39.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1996.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.024.

The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is 0.025.

Data Source:

Skiles/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Ronning Trend:

Positive 10 1

g

• FaHuresI20 Demands a Failures /50 Demands e Failurest100 Demands

{ GOOD]

_a _ Trigger Vains/20 Demands Trigger Values /50 Demands Trigger Values.100 Demands I I l

1 8..

7..

6..

4 S..

4..

3..

m.

e__

.e_

_m,

.-P2'~~f2 - m2'

^s2-

-a2-u2'--8 2

--e2 2_

99 9$

$9 9

9 93 3

9 9

9 9

o May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l I

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY This bar graph shows three monthly indicators pertaining to the number of failures that were reported during the last 20, 50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Calhoun Station. Also shown are trigger values which correspond to a high level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a reliability of greater than or equal to 95% when the failure values are below the corresponding trigger values. The Fort Calhoun 1996 goal is to have fewer failures than these trigger values.

4 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 4

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).

t 1

Data Source:

Skiles/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

11

4 e

DG1 Failures /25 Demands i

i e DG-2 Failures /25 Demands l GOOD l

+

6 Gal 5~

V 4-C 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 3

3 2.

i 1

1 5

1 i

e i

i i

- 7 7

o May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 1

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 OEMANDS)

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 l

within 25 demands is the Fort Calhoun goal for 1996.

It must be emphasized that, in accordance with NUMARC criteria, certain actions will take place in the event that any one emergency diesel generator experiences 4 or more fail-ures within the last 25 demands on the unit. These actions are described in the Defini-tions Section of this report. A System Engineering Instruction has been approved for the Fort Calhoun Station to institutionalize and formally approvr/ adopt the required NUMARC actions.

l 4

Diesel Generator DG-1 has experienced one failure during the last year, and zero fail-i ures during the last 25 demands on the unit. Diesel Generator DG-2 has experienced one failure during the last 25 demands on the unit.

Special diesel testing during hot weather took place during July. This testing enabled the diesel high temperature operability limits to be raised.

i s

i Data Source:

Skiles/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance better than goal.

i 12

^

o o

DG-1 Unreliability Value DG-2 Unreliability Value

+ Station UnreliabilityValue lOOODl 1996 Goal DD6..

045 -- c OD4..

[*

' '8 8 0.03..

0 02s 1

042..

041.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996)

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to monitor the likelihood that emergent i AC power generators will respond to off-normal events or accidents. It also provides an indication of the effectiveness of maintenance, opera-tion and test practices in controlling generator unrehability. The last event occured on September 1,1995 when the Field Flash Relay on DG-2 failed.

The year-to-date station EDG unreliability at the end of April 1996 was 0.0. The 1996 goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.05.

For DG-1:

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

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

For DG-2:

There were 2 start demands for the reporting month with 0 failures.

In addition, there were 2 load-run demand without a failure.

4 Emergency diesel generator unreliability is calculated as follows:

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

= numberof unsuccessfulstarts 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:

Skiles/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Ronning Trend:

Positive due to performance betterthan goal.

13

o e

Fuel Reliability (E-4) l GOOD l a.

+ Year 2000 INPO Industry Fuel Defect Reference (5 x 10 4 Microcuries/ Gram) 1996 Goal (9/1/96 through 12/31/96) 130..

120..

110 _

Eg 100..

Q 90..

80..

E 70..

f60..

50..

y m 40..

T 30..

S 20..

A T

I I

I I

I I

i i

I l

i May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR The FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for April 1996 was 121.9 X 10d microcuries/ gram. The pur-pose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuelintegrity. An effective fuel integrity and performance monitoring program provides a means to detect fuel failures and assess the fuel failure number, physical condition, exposure, mechanism, and location.

The March FRI value is based on data from April 45 through 30*. The days selected are when the plant chemistry values were at equilibrium for steady-state operation (above 85% power for at least 3 days).

Cycle 16 plant operation started on April 13* and attained 100% on April 23*,1995.. During the months of June and July the plant operated at 100% power. The plant tripped at the end of August but has operated at 100% during the months of September through March 14,1996. On March 15, a mini-outage powerdown commenced and the plant remained at zero per cent power until March 24, when power ascension began.

The plant then tripped on March 29. Ascension to 100% power began on March 31,1996. The plant has operated at 100% power since April 3,1996.

The April FRl value of 121.9 X 10d microcuries/ gram indicated an increase from the March FRl value of 78.42 X 10d microcuries/ gram. No new fuel failures were determined to have occurred during the month based on changes in the equilibrium Xenon and lodine data. This is consistent with the normalincrease of fission products during a cycle and the increased power production of the peripheral assemblies due to shim bumout arid the subsequent power distribution changes with power shifting from the center of the core to the periphery. Pecent analysis through February 29,1996, performed by nuclear engineering, indicated five to ten failed rods at core average power. The Ceslum isotopic analysis indicated failures in several different bumup levels. OPPD personnel estimate that 15 to 25 rods are failed based on the results from the Cycle 15 and 16 RCS chemistry data and the end of Cycle 15 fuelinspection project.

The INPO "WANO Performance Indicator Program Utility Data Coordinator Reference Notebook" (INPO No.94-009, Rev.1) states the industry Goal for fuel reliability is: " units should strive to operate with zero fuel defects". The 1996 Fort Calhoun Station FRI 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. The 1996 year end goal can be met after the 1996 RFO. See page lii.

Data Source:

Bostelman/Riva Accountability:

Chase /Stafford Trend:

Adverse 14

m ControlRoom Deficiencies Added

, ControlRoom Defciencies Completed

,e com ed within Target Completion Date

+ Com tion Rate 50..

. 100.0%

Goab Corrpiste80%of C R. Ddmeeru a by Taget CorrpistenDate 40 A"",,

80.0 %

'785 38 s.7s sa

,,,, g 30.

82 ' ! 60.0% y og as o

21 21

]

?20 i

.. 40.0% ]

3 l-is 0

o

• 10 -.

.. 20.0 % 8 0

0.0%

Sep Oct Ibv Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Control Room Defciencies I

NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES This indicator measures the timeliness of closing Control Room Deficiencies.

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

There were 33 Control Room Deficiencies completed during April 1996, and 15 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 have been made to the scheduling process to allow for more timely completion of CRDs.

Data Source:

Chase /Kermoade (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Short/Faulhaber Trend:

None 15

r m overdue

+ Nur'nber of On-Line Control Room Deficiencies 30..

as 0

15.

is is liiiiiii - liiiii ~,

Sep Oct Nov Dec

!an Feb Mar Apr l Number of On.'ane CRDs l Overdue

+ Number of outage controlRoom Deficiencies 30..

0

.:^

at 15..

pg. : overdue tems are those older than 18 rnonths 10 --

co..

.,.o,...

S.

0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l Number of Outage CRDs l NUMBER OF ON-LINE AND OUTAGE CONTROL ROOM DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the total number of On-Line and Outage Control Room Deficiencies, j

and the number of overdue Control Room Deficiencies.

There were 16 on-line (4 were overdue) and 21 outage (2 were overdue) Control Room Deficiencies at the end of April 1996.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for these indicators are less than 8 overdue on-line and no overdue outage Control Room Deficiencies.

Data Source:

Chase /Kermoade (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Short/Faulhaber/ Herman Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention - Number of On-Line CRDs

<8 Overdue exceeds goal 16

A g Monthly Personnel Radiation Exposure Cumulative Personnel Radiation Exposure j 0000 g

+ FCS Goal 138 person-REM i

l' o

130-_

120.

110 100__

90._

E 80..

I 70..

Eg 60..

50..

i 40..

i 30..

20..

~~

0ar-Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec l 1996 l 4

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure for the year is set a 138.0 person-REM.

The exposure for April 1996 was 2.901 person-Rem (ALNOR).

1 The year-to-date exposure through the end of April was 15.405 person-Rem (ALNOR).

The Year 2000 INPO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 120 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 5/93 through 4/96 was 108.773 person-rem per year.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers Trend:

None SEP54 17

1

h

\\

4

,lighest Wrthly hdNdual Sposure (1996)

+ Fort Calhoun Limit iM 900.

800.

i l

700.

i 600.

500.

l 400.

300.

244 l

1 72 175 l

y 100.

O I

Jan Feb Wr Apr Wy Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec j

1996 l

I l

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE During April 1996, an individual accumulated 175 mRern, which was the highest indi-vidual exposure for the month.

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

year. The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is a maximum of 1,000 mrem.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers Trend:

None 18 I

m FU5 CRed Vlalations (Monthly)

FCS Non-Cited Violations (Monthly)

I a

FCS Cited Violations '12-Month Average) l G000 l o

FCS Non-Cited Violations (12-Month Average)

._m__

Region IV Cited Violations (12-Month Average for Region IV top quartile) l I

' N s..

N

~

~

~

~

6 4..

2 E

=

0 e

r a

c 4

m 6

x e

A g

5 5

4 4

0 4

I 5

1996 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. This lag is necessary to compile information on other Region IV plants.

The following inspections were completed during March 1996:

IER No.

Title 96-02 Resident Monthly inspection i

To date, OPPD has received three violations for inspections conducted in 1996.

Levellli Violations 0

LevelIV Violations 5

LevelV Violations 0

Non-Cited Violations 0

Total 5

The 1996 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:

Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Tills i

Trend:

None

)

i 19

NRC Significant Events

_,_. Industry Average Trend l GOOD l i

1 1 --

3 7 0.5 __

0

=

r r

92-2 92-3 92-4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93 4 94-1 94-2 94 3 94 4 95-1 l Year - Quarter l INPO Significant Events (SERs) lOOODj 2 -. y j

i j

j 37 1..

O 92-2 92-3 92 4 93-1 93-2 93-3 93 4 94-1 94-2 94 4 94-4 95-1 l Year-Quarter l SIGNIFICANT EVE"TS This indicator illustrates the number of NRC and INPO Significant Events for Fort Calhoun Station as re-ported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance Indicators for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report and INPO's Nuclear Netwcrk.

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

3rd Quarter 1992: The failure of a 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 a,cident 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 quader of i992 and the 1st Quader of i995:

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

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

1st Quarter 1993: Inoperability of Power Range Nuclear instrumentation Safety Channel D.

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

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

Data Source:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Positive 20

(

~

i Missed STs Resulting in LERs 3..

GOOD lv 2..

l l

1..

0 0

0 0

0 0

f 0

l l

93 94 95 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 1996 i

NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TEST RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Lic-ensee Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. The graph on the left shows the yearly totals for the indicated years.

There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during April 1996.

On December 28,1994, during the performance of OP-ST-SHIFT-0001, data was not entered for Steam Generator level per Surveillance Requirements.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Chase /Skiles Trend :

Positive SEP 60 & 61 21

I i

I l

l l

l i

I

\\

i l

l l

PERFORMANCE l

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

4 i

i 22 1

l

Net Generation (10,000 MWh) 40..

36.04 36.27 36.23 34.75 34.12 34.29 34.55 33.85 30.46 30..

tains.

2 22.82 o utase 20.16 20 i

10..

O I

I I

I i

1 l

l 1

l May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 STATION NET GENERATION During the month of April 1996, a net total of 345583.1 MWh was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 3,893,823.8 MWh at the end of the month.

Energy losses for March 1996 were attributed to (1) a planned mini-outage, and (2) con-denser tube leakage repair.

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: (1) the component cooling water, which was leaking into the lube oil system of RC-3D reactor coolant pump motor; and (2) the generator and reactor were again manually tripped because of a similar leak. The gen-erator was put on-line after replacement of all of the reactor coolant pump lube oil cooler heat exchangers.

Data Source:

Station Generation Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 23

a Forced Outage Rate (Monthly)

+ Forced Outage Rate (12 Months) l GOOD l 1996 Fort Calhoun Goal (1.4%)

40%..

3 y 35%..

30%..

25%..

20%..

15%.

10%.

5%.

~

,,m 0%

.83 94 85 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe b Mar Apr 1996 FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) was reported as 3.64% for the twelve months from May 1, 1995, through April 30,1996. The 1996 year-to-date FOR was 1.3% at the end of the month.

Energy losses for the month of March were attributed to a forced shutdown due to a condenser tube leak.

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.

The generator was put on-line after replacement of all four of the reactor coolant pump lube oil cooler heat exchangers.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.4%.

Date Source:

Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 24

, Monthly Unit Capability Factor

...m...

Year-to-Date Unit Capability Factor N

+

36-Month Unit CapabilityFactor 1996 Fort Calhoun Goals GOOD

+ INPO Industry Goals Year 2000

'100%..

_.....g 80%._

h. - j-j

.[.

EM 7

---'%^~-

.u-

.a-60%

n-'

40%..

20%

0%

i i

i May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capacity Factor, the Unit Capacity Factor for the current fuel cycle, year-to-date and the 36-month average Unit Capacity Factor.

At the end of the month, the Cycle 16 Unit Capacity factor was 90.67%, and the Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months was 81.69%. The 1996 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is 82.00%.

The year-to-date value is 98.15%

Energy losses for March 1996, are due to the unit being shutdown for 1) a planned mini-outage and 2) condenser tube leak repair.

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

The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows:

Net Electrical Enerov Generated (MWH)

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

Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase d

Trend:

None 25

I l

a Monthly EAF Year to-Date Average Monthly EAF

+ 12-Month Average EAF

1. Industry M edian Value (76.7% for a 3. Year Avorage) 100%..

njs b

1-

/

.s

~

80%

~

d x

x

= ~f x

x x

x x

x x

f

.ar l

60%..

l 40%..

)

20%..

l l

\\

0%

92 93 94 95 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe b Mar Apr 1996 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR 4

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 April 1996 was reported as 97.6%. The year-to-date monthly average EAF was 87.9% at the end of the month.

l Energy losses for March 1996 are due to a scheduled " mini-outage" and repair to a l

ruptured condenser tube.

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

The Fort Calhoun average monthly EAF for the three years prior to this report was 88.022%.

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

Data Source:

DietzNandervort (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 26 l

, Monthly Unit CapatWitty Factor Year 4o-Date Unit Capability Factor N

1. _ 36. Month Unit Capability Factor 1996 Fort Calhoun Goals GOOD 3

INPo industry Goals Year 2000 100%._

j, 1

.N *

~ ~ - -

T-~

-g 80%._ N- -- h"' [

m I

'E

.3 60%..

~

m--

40%._

20%..

0%

i May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 2

1 UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, the year-to-date UCFs, the 36-month average UCFs, and the UCF goals. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period, expressed as a percentage (refueling periods excluded).

The UCF for April 1996 was reported as 98.1%. The year-to-date UCF was 81.2%, the UCF for the last 12 months was 91.9%, and the 36-month average UCF was reported as 84.3% at the end of the month.

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

Energy losses for March 1996 are due to a scheduled mini-outage and condenser tube

repair, i

The Year 2000 INPO industry goalis 87% and the industry current best quartile value (for the three-year period ending 12/94) is approximately 85%. The 1996 Fort Calhoun an-nual goal for this indicator is a minimum of 83.56%.

Data Source:

Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None

]

27

, Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor i

_a_

Year.*To-Date Unplanned capability Loss Factor l Good l

_p 12-Month Average Unplanned Capability Loss Factor y

+ Fort calhoun Goal (3.00%)

e_. Year 2000 INPo industry Goal (4.5%)

_ Industry Current Best Quartile 30%..

20%._

-~"

10% __ %.

=

b:

0%

h

=

=

M i

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec l1996l UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), the year-to-date UCLF and the goal. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions), expressed as a percentage.

The UCLF for the month of April 1996 was reported as 1.98%. Unplanned energy loss is defined as the energy that was not produced during the period of unscheduled shut-downs, outage extensions, or load reductions due to causes under plant management 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 3.74%, the UCLF for the last 12 months was 5.35%, and the 36-month average UCLF was reported as 4.9% at the end of the month.

The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is 3.0% and the industry current best quartile value is approximately 3.2% or lower. The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 3.0%.

Data Source:

Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability:

Chase Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention.

28

~

g 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)

- Yeat 2000 INPo Industry Goal (1) e Industry Upper 10%(1 per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical) 3..

2._

1 5

2 9

c.,

g p

m m

0 May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 j

FCs Reactor scrams -1996 4..

3 3..

2 2..

1 1

1..

O o

o o

j 0

c c

92 93 94 95 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical (as defined in INPO's 12/93 publication " Detailed Descriptions of Interna-tional Nuclear Power Plant Performance Indicators and Other Indicators") for Fort 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 April 1996. The value for the 12 months from May 1,1995, through April 30,1996 was 0.94. The value for the last 36 months was 1.22.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0. The Year 2000 INPO industry goal is a maximum of one unplanned au+.omatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical. The indus-try upper ten percentile value is approximately 0.48 scrams per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountabi!ity:

Chase Trend:

Needs increased Management Attention (Above FCS Goal) 29

m Safety System Actuations (INPO Definition)

Fcs Goal (0)

+ Industry Upper 10 Percentile (0) 3..

2.

1 1

1 1..

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 e

; e 1

1 92 93 94 May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 95 96 9

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION)

There were rn INPO unplanned safety system actuations during the month of April 1996.

There was one INPO unplanned safety system actuation during the month of August 1995. It occurred on August 24,1995, when the plant was tripped during a test of a backup automatic shutdown system. The generator was brought back on-line at 3:43 p.m. on August 26th, after a two-day outage.

An INPO unplanned safety sytem actuation also occurred during the month of July 1992 due to the loss of an inverter and the subsequent reactor trip on 7/3/92.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports Accountability:

Skiles/Foley/Ronning Trend:

Positive 30

l 4

i e Safety System Actuations (NRC Definition)

, R:S Goal (0) 1

_ CriticalHours l

12-Month Running Total sSAs (NRC Definition) 10.-

. 800 c ea. s

.700 r

Rdudmg 8.

omso.

}

.600 oa 5

d 6._

500 15 a

l

.400 :$

4 g

j f

__300

{

2.

__200

= = = = === ="

0

;,;;-l

; ;_;_;,=;;;_; ; ;

0 92 93 94 95 MAMJJAsONDJFMAMJJASONDJ FMA l1994l l1996l UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

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

An unplanned safety system actuation occurred in December 1993 when the main turbine and reactor tripped during Electro-Hydraulic Control pump start testing. Also, there was an unplanned SSA during the month of February 1994 when supervisory relay 868/CPHSS failed, which resulted in a concurrent turbine and reactor trip.

There have been no unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability:

Skiles/Foley/Ronning Trend:

None 31

=..--

i e Gross Heat Rate

)

j

+ Year.4o.Cate Gross Heat Rate lGo00l j

i Fort Calhoun Coal I

10.75.

y 10.5 _.

1o25 -

g

>

.m 10 __

i m

9.75

{

L l

l 9.5..

i

}

}

f 9.25

~-

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

GROSS HEAT RATE I

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

GHR, the goals and the year-end GHR for the previous three years.

~'

The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,067 for the month of April 1996.

j The 1996 year-to-date GHR was 10,069 at the end of the month.

i'

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

{

Fahrenheit.

l The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 10,166.

Data Source:

Bostelman/Willett (Manager / Source) 1 Accountability:

Chase /Skiles J

Trend:

None f

32

l m MonthlyThermalPerformance g

i 12-Month Average

+ Year-to-Date Average MonthlyThermalPerformance o

Fort Calhoun Goal (99.6%)

l Good l

+ Year 2000 INPo industry Goal (99.53Q 100%..

j

=

T K

i 99%

)

1 I

98 %

1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec l1996l THERMAL PERFORMANCE l

This indicator shows the Thermal Performance Value for the reporting month, the year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value, the Fort Calhoun goals, the 1996 INPO industry goal and the approximate upper ten percentile value.

The thermal performance value for April 1996 was 99.59. The year-to-date average monthly thermal performance value was 99.6, at the end of the month. The average monthly value for the 12 months frorn May 1,1995, through April 30,1996, was 99.47.

^

The 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goalfor this indicator is a minimum of 99.6%. The 1995 Fort Calhoun goal was a minimum 'of 99.5%. The Year 2000 INPO industry goalis 99.5%.

Data Source:

Skiles/Naser(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

.Skiles/Gorence Trend:

None 33 4

+ ThermalOutput Fort Calhoun 1495 MW Goal

+ Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1600._

1400__

1200 o

1000 j

800..

m B

600__

400__

200__

0

;;'>';;;;;,4 1 23 4 56 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031 l

DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during April 1996, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technical specification limit, and the 1495 th.ermal mega-watt Fort Calhoun goal.

Data Source:

Bostelman/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Short Trend:

None 34

l

+ Number of Equipment Forced Outages (Monthly)

_w Equipment Forced outage Rate /1,000 Critical Hrs. (12-Month interval) l GOOD l

_.e Fort Calhoun Year-End Goals (0.2) y 2..

1-.

c 6

0 93 94 96 Jan Fe b Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from May 1, 1995, through April 30,1996, was 0.482. The year-to-date rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from January 1996 through April 1996 was 0.4122.

An equipment forced outage occured at the end of the March due to condenser tube leakage.

An equipment forced outage also occurred on February 20,1995, when the plant experi-enced a problem with a control element assembly motor drive and a related small leak of 1

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 1996 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20.

Data Source:

Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accontability:

Chase /Skiles Trend:

Needs increased Managem-t Attention 35

o

-4= b ^' M A t

g

+

18.

Tatd Categories 14.

y o

/

/

/

8 8.

o N/

j si 5

5 5

g

=

2.

O D

J.95 F

M A

M J

J A

S O

N O

J46 F

M A

A g etN o rm al Us e Initial la s tellatio a 2.3 %

T esting A ctlen 4.7 %

M anuf acturing M alnte nance Dofect

^ * ' ' "

'";? 'l'*" s.,ine e,ig,D e.,,n COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

SUMMARY

The top chart illustrates the number of component categories, application categories and total categories in which the Fort Calhoun Station has significantly higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the industry failure rates during the past 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) reporting period (from July 1994 through December 1995). Fort Calhoun Station reported a higher failure rate in 5 of the 83 component categories (valves, pumps, motors, etc.)

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

The pie chart depicts the breakdown by INPO cause categories (see the " Definitions" section of this report for descriptions of these categories) for the 43 failure reports (failure discovery dates within the 18-month CFAR period) with known failure causes that were submitted to INPO by Fort Calhoun Station. A total of 70 failure reports were submitted to INPO with discovery dates within the 18-month CFAR period.

Data Source:

Skiles/ Frank (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/ Dowdy Trend:

None 36

I i

+ Components with more than One Failure

+ Components with more than Two Failures -

10000II i

15..

3 y 10..

7 6

6 5

5 5

5..

4 W

1 1

1 1

1 0-

-?

?

,?,

?

?,

?,

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 REPEAT FAILURES The Repeat Failures Indicator (formerly called the " Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator) was developed in response to guidelines set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (NRC/AEOD). The NRC requirement for a Maintenance Effectiveness Performance Indicator has been discontinued, but station management considers it useful to continue to track repetitive component failures using the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).

l This indicator shows the number of NPRDS reportable components with more than one failure during the 18-month Component Failure Analysis Report (CFAR) period (failure discovery dates from July 1994 through December 1995) and the number of NPRDS reportable components with more than two failures during the 18-month CFAR period.

During the last 18-month CFAR period, there were 5 NPRDS components with more than one failure. One of these 5 NPRDS reportable components had more than two failures. Recommendations and actions to correct these repeat failures are listed in the Biannual CFAR. The description and tag numbers of the NPRDS reportable components with more than one failure are listed below:

125 VDC/120 VAC Static inverter HPSI Altemate Header isolation Valve Operator Airintensifier, HCV-2987-O-1 (NPRDS Database specific tag number)

Reactor Coolant Pump Motor RC-3D-M Containment Cooling Coil VA-88, CCW Outlet Valve V/P-403C (> 2 failures)

Control Element Drive Mechanism, RC-10-08 Data Source:

Skiles/ Frank (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 37

1 m Radioactive Waste Buried This Month (cu.ft.)

- o - Year-to-Date cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried l GOOD l

_o Fort Calhoun Goal (1500 cu.ft.)

Y 1100 c

o 1000 900..

800..

700 600..

$ 500 400..

300 200..

113.20 100-0.00 0.20 0.80 0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator shows the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumula-tive year-to-date radioactive waste buried, the Fort Calhoun and INPO goals, and the approximate industry upper 10%.

Cu.Ft.

Amount of solid radwaste shipped off-site for processing during current month 0

Volume of solid radwaste buried during current month 112.4 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1996 113.2 Amount of solid radwaste in temporary storage 132.0 The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for the volume of solid radioactive waste (buried) is 600 cubic feet. The Year 20001.NPO industry goal is 45 cubic meters (1,589 cubic feet) per year.

The industry upper ten percentile value is approximately 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year.

Data Source:

Chase /Breuer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers Trend:

None SEP54 38

.m 4

i g 5econdary 5ystem CPI

_o 12-Month Average l Good l l

+ Fort calhoun Goal (1 A)

{

1.6 _ -

1 f 1.5..

1A.

I "

o Ii ldI Ih May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr f

1996 i

i SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY' I

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

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

per day.

l

}

The CPI for April was 1.16. The 12-month average CPI value was 1.28 at the end of the j

month.

i i

The Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) has risen in January 1996 because the new INPO industry median values are in effect. These values are generally lower, while the Fort Calhoun Station values have not changed. This will continue to cause the Chemistry l

Perfromance Index to be higher than in the past.

l The Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) was above the goal in July due to slightly higher than average sodium and chloride values. Also the values provided as industry averages by INPO for 1995 are considerably lower than FCS historically has been able to achieve for secondary chemistry values. Iron, the one industry average that we are below, almost i

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

i Data Source:

Spires /Reneaud (Manager / Source) j Accountability:

Spires j

Trend :

Positive due to performance better than goal i.

39 i

l

\\

CHEMISTRY ACTloN LEVEL 5 EXCEEDED i._...., e... _ _...,.........

_ <. y e.

5 g 4 illL tua m.

a

..am

=

=

f

(

4 I

i E

F F

F F

F 1

s a

8 s

a s

s a

s s

x l

NONTH CHEMISTRY ACTION LEVELS EXCEEDED - EVENT DAYS i

l The Chemistry Action Levels Exceeded indicator tracks the number of days in which chemistry parameters exceeded a corresponding action level for the reporting month, as well as a 12 month average of days an action level is exceeded. The parameter action levels are delineated in Chem-l istry procedure CH-AD-0003, Plant System Chemical Limits and Corrective Actions.

l An action level is considered to have been exceeded for the purpose of this indicator, whenever the parameter exceeds the CH-AD-0003 action level for the current system mode, with the excep-1 tion of the Steam Generators during Mode 1.

The Steam Generators are considered to have exceeded an action level in Mode 1 when the plant power is greater than 30% and the power is changing less than 5% per day.

The number of event days can exceed the number of days in a month since each event is counted separately and there can be multiple events per day.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is the 12 month average of two event day per month. There is no goal established for the number of event days per individual month.

Historical data is used to calculate the monthly average event days. The 12 month average was calculated by dividing the number of event days by the number of preceding months, until twelve months were reached.

Two events occured in which hydrazine was low out of specification in the feedwater sys-tem due to problems with the chemical injection system. Four events occurred when a condenser tube failed causing four steam generatror parameters to exceed action levels.

Data Source:

Chase / Spires Accountability:

Spires Trend:

None 40

I t

i 7.00 6.00 Goal 5.00 E 4.00 8

Z 3.00 g

2.00 1.00 E

0.00 Jun Jd Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Wr Wr 1996 PRIMARY SYSTEM LITHlUM % HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the hours per month that the primary system lithium is out of specification.

The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit was 6.94% for the month of April 1996. Lithium exceeded its' limits for the following reasons:

1. Lithium was out of specification coming out of the condenser outage.

2. Lithium was low, out of specification following paint startup during powerup and boron dilution.

3. Lithium was high on 04/14/96 to 04/16/96 because of inability to place CH-10 ion exchanger into service due to equipment problems.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 5% hours out of limit Data Source:

Chase / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Spires Trend:

None i

41

i 4

COST Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost offectively maintains nuclear generation as an economi-cally viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line. Cost con-sciousness is exhibited at all levels of the organization.

i 42

w Actual

+ Revised Budget

.,._ Original Budget Plan 4..

3.75.

t 3.5 _.

1 2 3.25 _

$3 3 _<.

E o 2.75 2.5 2.25._

2 D91 D92 D93 D94 D95 J96 F M A M J

J A s O N D D96 D97 D98 D99 Months CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station.

The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt hour on a 12-month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved 1995 and 1996 revised budgets. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operating Report.

The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1991 through 1995. In addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1997 through 2000 for refer-ence. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1996 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels.

1 The 12-month rolling average unit price (period of April,1995 through March,1996) averaged below the budget due to 12-month rolling generation exceeding the budget expectations, and 12-month rolling expenses exceeded the budget. The 12-month rolling average (04/95 through 03/96) is 3.00 cents per kilowatt hour.

Cents per KWH Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Budget Y-T-D 2.79 2.84 2.76 2.76 2.78 2.76 2.73 2.75 2.81 2.97 3.10 3.11 Actual Y T-D 2.91 2.77 2.96 Data Source:

Lounsberry/Jamieson (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Lounsberry Trend:

Needs Management Attention 43

I

\\

l g Nuclear Services Division O Production Engineering Division g NuclearOperations Division i

g TotalNuclear 784 l

800 7ss yes 727 727 725 7n I

700 --

say 600..

500._

457 4ss 4s2 m

m o

m 400__

300__

"2 no tra

$7s 17, 200..

tu 117 tie tu in su tu

,a 100__

0 l

1 1

I I

I I

i i

Jan-93 Jan-94 Jan-95 Mar-95 Jun-95 Sep-95 Dec-95 Feb.96 Jun-96

)

ActualStofing Level l STAFFING LEVEL l

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

i i

The authorized staffing levels for 1995 and 1996 are:

i j

Authorized Staffing 1995 1996 439 432 Nuclear Operations Division 185 175 Production Engineering Division 115 113 Nuclear Services Division 739 720 Total Data Source:

Ponec \\Balis (Manager)

Accountability:

Ponec Trend:

None SEP 24 44

i

+ Spare Parts inventoryValue ($ Mmion) 16.3..

l 16.2..

16.1.

$ 16.

b 5

Eo E 15.9._

15.8,

j 15.7..

15.6

,1 May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 SPARE PARTS INVENTORY The spare parts inventory value at the Fort Calhoun Station at the end of April 1996 was reported as $15,668,157.

Data Source:

Steele/Huliska (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Willrett/McCormick Trend:

None 45

a f

e.

i 4

l i

i l

l DIVISION AND l

DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE l

INDICATORS i

l Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station j

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

I i

i I

?

1 i

(

46

O g Corrective Maintenance m Preventive Maintenance m Non-Corrective /Plantimprovements + Fort Calhoun Goal 1000..

O g

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1995l l Non-outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog l l1996l completion g Tm MWosl Date 46 %

M

-o 1,

4 }

" 80 ^

Mk M

E-

[~ - 1 o._

ii Riorty Riarty Riarty Ricrty Riarty 1

2 3

4 5

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOG 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 1996 goal for this indicator is 400 non-outage corrective maintenance MWOs. The current backlog of corrective MWOs is 480. 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 Immediate Action 2 days Priority 2 Urgent 5 days Priority 3 Operational Concems 21 days Priority 4 Routine Corrective 90 days Priority 5 Non-Essential 180 days Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Adverse SEP 36 47

4 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 80%..

70%..

60%..

50%..

40%..

30%..

f 20%..

10%..

0%

1 I

I I

I I

i l

l I

l 4

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l m Preventive Maintenance items Overdue o_. Fort Calhoun Goal 2%..

l f 1%..

0%.

l l

i l

i i

[

j i

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total com-ploted non-outage maintenance lhe ratio was 77.9% for the month of April 1996.

The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that are overdue. During April 1996,547 PM items were completed.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items over-due is a maximum of 0.5%.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz/Meistad (Manager / Sources)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Adverse SEP 41 & 44 48

t o

e Rework as identified by Craft e

Fort Calhoun Goal (<3%)

i 6% _.

s.:s 5%

1 3

1 3 4%-.

s.e s y

s.7 %

I E

llE s.2 %

.2 %

3%..

2.e s 2 s

[

2.s s j

e ej 2%

tes tes 1%..

l l

l n*4 i

j i

i j

i l

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l i

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK This graph indicates the percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft.

This indicator is calculated from the 15th of March to the 15th of April, due to the delay in i

l closing open MWOs at the end of each month.

l The Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is <3%. A detailed review is conducted of

)

rework items each month to identify generic concerns.

Data Source:

Faulhaber/Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

Improving 4g w

l l

e Maintenance Overtime

1. 12-Month Average Maintenance Overtime IGoooI

_o Fort Calhcun"On-Line" Goal (10%)

I I

30%.

[

V 25%._

i 20%..

E 15%.

r

=

10%.

I I

l 1

I I

I I

I 1

I May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 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 16.00% for the month of April 1996. The 12-month average percentage of overtime hours with respect to normal hcurs v;as reported as 11.0 % at the end of the month.

The 1996 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 50

i o

Human Performance CRs(Maintenance) l 18 16..

14.

13 3 12

.e so g 10..

O o

e e

1 llh Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr i

1 PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS (MAINTENANCE)

This indicator shows the number of Condition Reports related to procedural noncompli-ance incidents assigned to the Maintenance Department.

Data Source:

Faulhaber Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 15,41 & 44 1

1 e

51

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

I i

A 1

5% Scheduled Activities Completed 0% Emergent Activities 100.0%

j 90.0%.-

83.2%

80.0%..

67.0 %

70.0%.

60.0%.-

50.0*/. --

40.0%..

30.0% --

3.4%

.8'/.

9.0%

9.0%

8 W' 20.0%..

10.0%..

0.0%.

)

i i

i g

Dec-95 Jan-96 Feb-96 Mar-96 Apr-96 DAILY SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE PERCENT OF SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES COMPLETED This indicator shows the percent of Integrated Plant Schedule activities completed on schedule. All work groups and activities are included.

The percent of emergent work is calculated as a percentage of the total number of sched-uled and emergent activities.

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for completed scheduled maintenance activities is 85%.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 33 52

I 1*

e % of Hours the in-Une Chemistryinstruments are Inoperable GOOD l

+ 1996 Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

I 26%..

24%..

22%.

i 20%.

18%..

16%.

14%..

12%..

10%__

8%..

i i

l i

i l

i El I

i i

I NLey Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr i

l1996l IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system iristruments 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 April 1996, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instru-ments were inoperable was 6.67%. The following instruments were out of service during the month:

SL PASS Containment Grab Sample; leaking fitting in sample circuit.

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

l Data Source:

Chase /Reneaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Skiles Trend:

None 1

53 l

i

m Waste Produced Each Month (Kilograms)

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

+

_.g Fort Calhoun Monthly Average Goal (150 kilograms)

1. Federal & State MonthlyLimit (Max.of1,000 kg) 1000:

f x

800..

600 I

i

• 400_

200 c

e c

e e

e r

0 2

2 2

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1995l HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED i

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 April 1996,0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,139.6 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 247.5 kilograms.

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

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for hazardous waste produced is a maxi-mum of 150 kilograms.

Data Source:

Chase /Shubert (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase / Spires Trend:

Positive 54

i e Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area

{ GOOD l

_e Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

I I i

10%--

e

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

a i

l J

l I

1 9%..

I i

1 l

4 8%

i

i..

.t i.

i g

l May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr l1996l i

CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA j

This indicator shows the percentage of the Radiologically Controlled Area that is contami-nated based on the total square footage. The 1996 monthly non-outage goal is a maxi-mum of 10.0% contaminated RCA.

i I

At the end of April 1996, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was j

contaminated was 9.4%.

i 4

l Data Source:

Chase /Gundal(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers 4

Trend:

None SEP 54 55

Identified PRWPs (Year to Date)

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (<20) 20 -

18..

l 16..

l 14 __

E E 12..

11 10._

8..

I g

6..

n.

4 2

2__

0 0

0 0

Jan Feb Mar,

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec N

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 meant to qualitatively assess supervisor accountability for their workers' radiological performance.

During the month of April 1996, there were O PRWPs identified.

There have been 2 PRWPs in 1996.

The 1996 year-end goal for PRWPs is a maximum of 20.

Data Source:

Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Gebers Trend:

None SEP 52 se

e l

O Documents Scheduled for Review g Documents Reviewed g Documents Overdue 300..

250..

200

~

~

150..

I 100..

)

50..

]

O i

- k

" i E+- 4 E+

k-4 May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 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 April 1996, there were 156 document reviews scheduled, while 56 reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 9 document reviews more than 6 months overdue. There were 3 new documents initiated during April 1996. Beginning in Sep-tember 1995, these figures include PED and NOD procedures.

Data Source:

Chase /Plath Accountability:

Chase /Skiles Trend:

None SEP 46 57

e g System FaHures g Non System Failures 4

as 25..

at 20..

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

\\

This graph shows the Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) Indicator and depicts (1)

)

the total number of loggable/ reportable incidents conceming system failures which oc-l curred during the reporting month, and (2) the total number of loggable/ reportable inci-dents non-system failures conceming Security Badges, Access Control and Authoriza-tion, Security Force Error, and Unsecured Doors.

During the month of April 1996, there were 12 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 86% of the loggable/ reportable incidents. Several micro-wave zones were repaired by the vendor during the reporting month. Six (6) of the twelve (12) system failures were environmental. The two (2) non-system failures included a lost /

i unattended security badge and tailgating.

This indicator provides information on security performance for Safety Enhancement Pro-gram (SEP) Item No. 58.

Data Source-Sefick/Woemer (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Sefick Trend:

None SEP 58 i

58

]

r

~

s 1

s

, Temporary Modirmations >1-cycle old peu required for removal) e TemporaryModrmations >6 months old(Remowable on4ine)

+ Fort Calhoun Goals for >1 cycle and >6 months old j

7.

l l

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1996 1

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 modi-fications removable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are zero.

There are currently no temporary modifications that are greater than one-fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage to remove. In addition, at the end of Apnl 1996, there are O temporary modification installed that are greater than six months old that can be removed on-line.

At the end of April 1996, there was a total of 9 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. 4 of the 9 installed TMs require an outact lor removal and 5 are removable on-line. In 1996, a total of 6 temporary modifications have been installed.

Data Source:

Skiles/ Turner (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Gorence Trend:

Positive SEP 62 & 71 59

s i Total Modification Packages Open i

__o_

Fort Calhoun Year-End Goal (68) j 100..

90..

]

80..

ya 73 70 _

7 7

7 7

7 7

=

3 60 __

50..

1 40..

30.

20..

10..

O a

i i

93 94 95 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec 96 OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excludina outstandina modifications which are proposed to be cancelled).

Reporting l

Cateaorv

'93

'94

'95

'96

'97

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

0 0

0 1

1 2

Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0

0 0

2 0

0 2

Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 0

0 0

14 3

11 28 Construction Backlog /in Progress 4

0 9

18 0

0 31 Design Engr. Update Backlog /in Progress 1

2 7

0 0

0 10 Totals 5

2 16 34 4

12 73 (outage + online)

(3+2)

(0+2) (7+9) (23+11) (0+4) (12+0)

(42+29) i At the end of April 1996,7 modification requests have been issued this year and 2 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) has conducted 24 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) has completed 7 backlog modification request reviews this yece The 1996 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 68 outstanding modifications.

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Scofield/Lounsberry (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Scofield/Jaworski Trend:

None 60

~ -

-_ _ _ ~ _

80 -

EARS Requiring Engineering Closeout - Not in Closeout 60 g sE O DEN 40..

20..-

,C,O;m

n,O;C,

E,E, 0

Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr Feb Mar Apr 0 3 Months 34 Months 612 Months

>12 Months O Engineering Response g Closeout (sE) 30 _

20..

i i

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

...o... Total Open EARS l ji i

o.......G...... a,

• ..o...... o.......a.......g.......g...,,,

May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1995 1996 80 EARS 25 EARS S e ule Re enses Requiring Resolved 52.4 %

18.3 %

Response

and in 78.2%

Clo s ec ut 3.8%

j 32 Overdue Clo sec uts

)

29.8%

l ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering and System Engineering. The 1996 year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS.

Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 34 EARS closed during the month 75 Total EARS open at the end of the month 105 Data Source:

Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 62 61

122 162 114 CLOSEouf DEN 0-3 Months CONST.

8 38 %

6 3-4 M.mths 12 %

ECN Status -Overall Backlog 78 g Backlogged O Received a Completed

,g

j.

44 %

164 90 157 158 157 182 g3 3 8 Months

>$ Months 17 %

'M -

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr as%

Design Engineering zoo.

11 6

200.

o.

s-S gg Months Months too n

n 33 Fev Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr

• 8 ",'"th*

System Engineering zu.

in 200..wr 1r e W8

, g,1. o;. f(,..

>s k"

40.

so.

m.x 0

.,,h.

w-Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr u enin.

11%

Procurement / Construction 250.

200.

>6 Months (,;

150<

"8 un 1* '

e.

87 %

S T '

n~ -'

~

%/

t 5.

Mo ths Mon hs 0

3%

~

9%

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Drafting / Closeout ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS Data Source:

Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Jaworski/Skiles Trend:

None SEP 62 62

i 182 84 63 FCTYPE P rio rity go4 1

I*

'Y gg.

4 Pr ity

\\[. [

^

W J

• " Q y.

9 sR1 TYP E Total Open ECNs= 537 Total Open ECNs = 537 27 27 O DEN

• Closeout or Drafting Not Complete of y P

y 5 Melntenance/ Construction /P rocurement. Work Not C omplete gg S System Engineering Response, Confittnetton Not Complete 15 %

)

5 DEN. Engineering Not Complete l

300..

)

200

. 1s t is s 281 te s

,e s is 7

o 7t 128 I

I I

I I

P riority Nov Dec-95 J an-se Pet >ss Mer SG A pr-SS 3&4 Facihty Change ECNs Open yo%

300.

27s 2s4 2ss toy ass 33 yg 2ss 37 22 s7 P rio rity P rio rity.

250 18 i

ftw Dec-95 Jan-96 Feb-96 Mar-96 Apr-96 gg Substitute Replacement Itern ECNs Open 83%

Bo.

7s re Pdormy a

70.

se es 50 23 17 is s

3%

l c

p

,e e

f to Pd* F 8&4 Nov De c-95 Jan-96 Fe b-96 M ar-96 Apr-96 Document Change ECNs Open 47%

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source:

Jaworski/Livingston (Manager Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Jaworski Trend:

None 63

O Administrative Control Problem a Licensed operator Error g Other Personnel &ror E Maintenance Problem O Design / construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem g EquipmentFailures 2..

i l

l 1..

1

,,I l

l l

0 i

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

N LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from April 1,1995, through March 31,1996. To be consistent with the Preventable /Personne!.irror LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.

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

There were two events in March 1996 that resulted in an LERs.

j Data Source:

Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Chase Trend:

None 64

r3 Total Requalification Training Hours a simulator Training Hours a Non4% qualification Training Hours a Number of Exam Failures 40.

37 34.5 35 35 --

32 32.5 30..

26 25..

20 7

16 5.5 15 ~~

11.5 12 12 10..

.5 s

.5 6

5

.5 5

3 2.5 3

2 2

0.

_.p.

l

[

i Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle 95-1 95-2 95 3 95-4 95-5 95 6 96-1 96-2

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

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

LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each Cycle. The simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for APO!EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

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

Data Source:

Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Conner /Guliani Trend:

None SEP 68 65

g SRUExams Administered O SRO Exams Passed O RO Exams Administered g ROExams Passed 10..

=,

5.

0 l

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

N 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.

During the month of April 1996, there were O RO and 0 SRO exams given. There is no Licensed Operator training class currently in progress. The next class is scheduled to begin in July 1996.

Data Source:

Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Conner /Guliani Trend:

None SEP 68 66

s.

, Ready to Close l

m Oosed

+ TotalCRs

-+-. Opeo 1200 l

1000.

i i

800.

i I

600.

4

{

4001e 1

.

• s ys

• O' i

l 200.

^"

,,j 3 i

n 5-Jan 1W 2-Feb 16-Feb ihr 15-Mar 29%r 12-Apr 26-Apr i

i i

1 l

CONDITION REPORTS BY LEVEL l

This indicator shows the total number of Condition Reports which are Closed, Ready to j

Close, Open and the Total Number of Condition Reports to date.

l Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

~ Level 6 Total j

open 17 5

73 558 15 30 702 l

Closed 1

0 9

122 133 25 290 i

Eighty-nine (89) Condition Reports are " READY" to "CLOSE".

i At the end of April,1996 there were 281 "OPEN" incident Reports, of which,77 were l

Significant.

As of September 21,1995, incident Reports were no longer issued.

i i

a Data Source:

Conner /Plott (Manager / Source) j Accountability:

Andrews/Gambhir/Patterson Trend :

None 3

i 1

67 i

4 1

o TotaloutageMWos a MWosReadytoWork 900..

800..

MWORIDs 700..

1. '~

mmr Rrts 32%

16 %

200 _

,ggg, 100.

O i

[

l

[

Jan.96 Fet>96 Mar.96 Apr.96 MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Main-tenance Work Orders (MW0s) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 16 Refueling Outage. This graph indicates:

- Parts Holds - Planning Complete, Awaiting Parts

- System Engineering Holds - Awaiting System Engineering input to Planning

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

- ECN Hold - Awaiting Substitute Replacement items ECN from DEN.

Data Source:

Chase /Schmitz (Manager! Source)

Accountability:

Chase /Faulhaber Trend:

None SEP 31 68

1 1996 Outage Projects Status Report g Last Month a This Month 100..

O For schedule 90 __

80 70..

, 60. se 3,

se y

E

?

l 1

i is 5%

E o

i is i

1 e

i El 11 3

S 3

a t

E 7

t 7

as

!E i

1

$5

~

5

]

5 3

2 a

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 the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage. SSED's goalis to have all projects completed by August 23, 1996,30 days prior to the Refuc's.g Outage start date.

Data Source:

Skiles/Sweamgin (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Skiles/Boughter Trend:

None SEP 31 69 I

I

--e-- Baseline Schedule forPRC Approval

--G-- Projected /ActualScheduleforPRC Approval

--Final Design Pkg lasued Q FD DCP lasued Prio tto 05/0795)

Total M odifcate n Packages G2)(11 Added After 05/0795) 9 28.

n_

7.

1.g*e.

/:::

} s.

ii '

gl<

3-

= h 2.

i,

/.--.-

o.!

l l l

E E

E E E! llllEEE E

B 5

M 5

M 5

a PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE (1996 MODIFICATION PLANNING)

(FROZEN SCOPE OF 9 OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of Modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage. Modifications added to the outage list after May 1,1995, are not part of this indicator. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (es-tablished June 16,1995) and the current schedule.

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages which were identified prior to May 1,1995, PRC approved by March 22,1996. 11 Modifications added after May 1, 1995, not included.

April 1996 Modifications added: 0 Deleted = 0 Graph corrected to represent the baseline schedule.

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gambhir/Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 31 70

g REAppwdTarget me g M REW Ne 91296.

~

82396.-

W396.

7/1496.

62496.

&496.

51596 5

96 5

5 96-5 5

5 5

5 025 001 0 23 011 002 006 013 022 007 020 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE (1996 MODIFICATION PLANNING)

(1996 MODIFICATION PLANNING)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycie 17 Refueling Outage. These modifications were added to the outage list after May 1, 1995. The data is represented with respect to the baseline schedule (established May 1, 1996).

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages PRC approved by their target date.

April 1996 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Data Source:

Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability:

Gambhir/Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 31 71 l

i l

+ Basehne Schedule for PRC Approval

_,_ Projected / Actual Schedule for PRc Approval Final Design Package issued Total Modification Packages (10)(4 Added After 0521S5) 6,, --

x x x x

,e 7 x x x x,, x x x,, x y x,

-x 5..

} 4..

E

___[:

g 33..

E 32.

i

• 1 O

E E

E E

E l

E E

E E

l E

E E

E S

E E

8 2

S R

e 5

S S

E 9

y n

n 4

m e

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 which were identified prior to May 1,1995, PRC appraved by March 25,1996.1 Modification added after May 1, 1995, not included.

April 1996 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 Graph corrected to represent the baseline schedule.

Data Source:

Jaworski/ Walling (Manager /Sourm)

Accountability:

Gambhir/Jaworski Trend:

None SEP 31 72

9 ACTION PLANS I

l 73 l

1 ACTION PLANS-This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators cited as Adverse Trends during the month preceding this repo:t. Also included are Action Plans for indicators that have been cited in the preceding month's report as Needing increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months.

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

• Fuel Reliability indicator (page 14)

. Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 47)

FAILED FUEL ACTION PLAN Problem Statement:

Fuel failures in Cycle 16 have caused elevated reactor coolant system activities subsequently resulting in higher radiological dose rates ( and exposures with access problems) as well as a fuel reliability indicator (FRI) which does not meet the performance indicator goal. The elevated FRI has resulted in lowering the plant performance indicator index to an undesirable value.

_GQill Reduce the reactor coolant activity levels for Cycle 16 operations and take measure to achieve zero defect fuel performance for Cycle 17 and beyond.

PJian The plan below is compromised of both short term corrective actions to address the Cycle 16 operations goals identified above and long term corrective actions for Cycle 17 and beyond.

74

l l

Fuel Reliability j

SHORT TERMlCYCLE 16 OPERATIONS)

' jlEM 6GIlQff BEEE DATE DUE

-STATUS 1.

Evaluate replacement of two-rmeron filter in CVCS with one-Hothaus Completed Complete.1/4/96. Finer replacement will micron filter.

resut in irnproved parbculate removal 01/04/96 and consequently lower dosG rates.

1a.

Installone-micron #Rers in CVCS 01/31/96 Completed 03/13/96 2.

Evaluate benetts ofincreasing letdown flow.

Hothaus/Spilker Completed Previously evaluated in Radiological 01/19/96 Analysis95-005, which supports increased letdown How.

3.

Evaluate need for and effectiveness of more frequent of HoRhaus Completed Complete. 01/04/96. Resin bed effecbve puri# cation and cation ion beds.

01/04/96 in minimizing RCS activity. Resin beds replaced in November 1995.

IIEM ACTION RESP.

Date Due STATUS 3a.

Replace resin beds during Spring 1996 outage.

Spires -

03/22/96 Canceled 4.

Prepare and issue Nuclear Network request for industry Completed Complete. 01/12/96. Transmitted experience in reducing FRI.

01/12/96 proposed inquiry to Ucensing for Nuclear Network entry.

5.

Evaluate installation of silver mordenite ARration system HoRhaus/ Spires Completed Received general (unclassited) forincreasedlodine removal.

01/26/96 information on system used at Savannah River Project.

6.

Identify number of old design assemblies to be placed Cornpleted Previously identited eight assemblies to in peripherallocations for second cycle and consider Holthaus/Guinn 01/12/96 be placed on core periphery for second replacement with new design assembly, cycle.

75 6

Fuel Reliability 7.

Evaluate whether these assemblies could be used for Holthaus/Guinn Completed more than one cycle to reduce cost.

01/19/S6 8.

Determine if Westinghouse can suppiy the above fuel Completed Complete. 01/12/96. Westinghouse has assemblies for Cycle 17. Also, can Fuels Division Holthaus/ Hanger 01/12/96 Indicated that they can fabricate the provide necessary uranium.

assemblies. Cost estimates by Fuels Division is approx.12M. Discount from Westinghouse also requested.

9.

Evaluate Cycle 18 preliminary pattern same as 5 & 6 Holthaus/Guinn Completed Cycle 18 preliminary pattem indicates 01/17/96 four additional assemblies would be required. Cost $1.0M

~

10.

Evaluate Cycle 19 preliminary pattern same as 5& 6 Holthaus/Guinn Completed Cycle 19 preliminary pattern indicates 01/17/96 eight additional assemblies would be required. Cost $2.0M 11.

Analyze additional assemblies to be procured Holthaus/Hangor Completed Total cost is $5.0M for 20 additional 01/17/96 assemblies.

12.

Evaluated cost / benefit with assumption of Holthaus/ Hanger Completed i

$10,000/ person exposure.

01/25/96 i

l l

l l

l l

l l

76 1

i

\\

The action plan for Maintenance Workload Backlog (page 47) 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 77

Performance Indicator Definitions AUXLIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS g 1,000 PERFORMANCE DISINTEGRATIONS /lWNUTE PER PROBE AREA The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavaisble The personnel contamination events in the clean controlled area.

hours and the eshmated unavailable hours for the auxdiary This hdicator tracks personnet performance for SEP f815 & 54.

feedwater system for the reportmg period divided by the critical hours for the reporting period mulbplied by the number of trains CONTA14NATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA in the auxhiary feedwater system lhe percentage of the Radimbon Controlled Area, which t scludes COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE the auxiliary buddeg, the radweste buildmg, and areas of the C/RP buildeg, that is contaminated beoed on the tedal square Collective radiation exposure is the total extemel whole-body footage. This indicator tracks performance for SEP 354.

does received by al on-site personnel (includmg contractors and visitors) dunng a time period, as measured by the DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT thermoluminescent dosameter (TLD). Collective radiation exposure is reported in units of person-rom. This indicator This hdcator shows the daily core thermal output as measured tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54.

tom computer point XC105 (in thermal megswatts). The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet portion of the 1495 MW COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR)

FCS daily goal for the reporting month are also shown.

SUMMARY

DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 Demands)

The summary of INPO categories for Forf Calhoun Station with signlicar My higher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for each the rest of the industry for an eighteen-month time period.

emergency diesel generator during the last 25 start demands Failures are reported as component (i.e., pumps, motors, mein and the last 25 load 4un demands, steam stop valves, control element motors, etc.) categones DISABLING INJURY /lL1 NESS FREQUENCY RATE Failure Cause Categories are:

(LOSS TilWE ACCIDENT RATE)

AgelNormal Use -thought to be the consequence of This becatoris defined as the number of accidents for a5 utgity expected wear, aging, end of-nfe, or rr>rmal use,

personnel permanently assigned to the station, involving days away from work per 200,000 rnan-hours worked (100 man-Manufacturing Defect a failure attributable to inadequate years). This does not include contractor personnel. This assembly or initial quality of the responsible component or indicator tracks personnel performance for SEP #25,26 & 27.

system.

DOCUM!NT REVIEW (BENNIAL)

. EngineeringlDesegn a failure attributable to the inadequate design of the responesbie componunt or system.

The Document Review Indicator shows the number of documents reviewed, the number of documents scheduled for Other Devices - a failure attributable to a faaure or review, and the number of document reviews that are overdue misopershon of another component or system, includmg for the reportog month. A document review is considered associated devices.

overdue if the review is not complete within six months of the assagned due date. This indicator tracks performance for SEP MaintenanceIAction - resulting from improper maintenance,

1. 46.

lack of maintenance, or personnel errors that occur during maintenance actrvitieson the w,p, a..

EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE Testing Action resuemg from improper testing or personnel errors that occur during testmg activities.

The sum of the imown (pionned and unplanned) unavaRable and the eshmated unavailable hours for the emergency AC power initial Installation Error - caused by improper initial system for the reporting period drvided by the number of hours insteHetion of equipment in the reportmg period multiplied by the number of trains in the emergency AC power system.

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per knowatt Tha hdicator shows the nunter of failures thol were reponed during the hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per last 24 50, and 2 eniergency diesel generator dernands aHhe Fort

- knowou hour on a twelve 4nonth average for the current year.

Cahoun Shimon. Mo shmi are trigger v6m dich consk k a high The beeis for the budget curve is the approved yearly budget.

level of conadence that a unts diesel generators have obtahed a r6bilty of grer Dian w @ 9M Nw W h m The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and Operatmg less own om ingger values.

Report.

1) Number of Start Demands: AH valid and inadvertent start 78

Performance Indicator Definitions demands, includmg aN start-only demands and al stort has not been declared operable again, demands that are fonowed by lood-run demands, whether by automatic or manuelinitiatiort A start only demandis EhERGENCY DESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY a demand h which the emergency generator is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

This indmetor measures the total unreliebiNty of emergency diesel generators in general, unrebabiNty is the ratio of

2). Number of Start Failures: Any Isilure within the unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to the number of

_ _,-,ey generator system that proyents the generator valid demands. Total unreisebety es a combination of stort kom achieweig spectand toquency and voltage is classilled unreliability and lood-run unreliabiuly, as a vand start insure. This includes any condition klontilled in the course of maintenance inspections (with ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST WAR) the emergency generator in standby mode) that dellnitely BREAKDOWN.

would have resuted in a stort feGure if a demand had occurred This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and priority of the EAR, of the number of EARS assagned to Design Engmeering

3) Number of Load Run Demands: For a valid load-run Nuclear and System Engineering. This indicator tracks demand to be counted, the lood-run attempt must meet performance foi *EP #62.

one or more of the fonowing criteria:

ENGSdEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS A) A load-run of any duraten that results from a real automete or manuelinitiation.

The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completon by B) A lood run test to satisfy the plants load and durobon DEN for the soporting month. This indcator tracks performance as stated in each test's speci8 cations for SEP #62.

C) Other special tools m which the emergency generator ENGgdEERSIG CHANGE NOTICES OPEN is expected to be operated for at least one hour while loaded with at least 50% of its design loed.

This indcator breaks down the number of Engmeeting Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineering

4) Nisidierof t.osdJtun Failures: A lood-run feMure should Nuclear (DEN), System Engineenng, and Maintenance The be counted for any reason in which the emergency graphs provide data on ECN Faciuty Changes open, ECN generator does not pick up lood and run as prodcted Substitute Replacement items open, and ECN Document Faauros are counted during any valid lood-run demands.

Changesoport This indcator tracks per'ormance for SEP 862.

5) Eaceptions: Unsuccessful attempts to start or ioed run EQUIPhENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,400 CRITICAL should not be counted as valid demands or failures when HOURS they can be attributed to any of the following-Equipment forced outages per 1.000 critices hours is the inverse A) Spurious trips that would be bypseeed in the event of of the mean time between forced outages cat.'ed by equipment an emergency failures. The mean time is equal to the numier of hours the reactor is crRicalin a penod (1,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />) divideo by the number B) Malfunction of equipment that is not requred during of forced outages caused by equipment failures in that period.

. an emergency.

EQUIVALENT Avan ama rTY FACTOR C) Interdional termination of a test because of abnormal condibons that would not have resulted in rnajor This indcator is doened as the ratio of gross aveReble dieselgenerator demoge or repair, generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as a percentage. Available generation is the energy that can be D) Melfunchons or operating errors which would not produced if the unit is operated at the maximum power level have prevented the emergency generator from being permitted by equipment and regulatory limitations. Maximum restarted and brought to load within a few mmules.

generaton is the energy that can be produced by a unit in a given period if operated continuously at maximum capacity.

E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting system was disabled for tost purpose, if followed by FORCED OUTAGE RATE a successful start with the starting system in its normalalignmord.

This indcator is delined as tim percentage of time that the unit was unevenable due to forced events compared to the trne Each emergercy generator failure that resuRs in the generator pionned for electrical generation. Forced events are Indures or being dociered inoperable should be counted as one demand other unplanned conditens that require removing the unit from and one inaure. Expkiratory tests during corrective maintenance service before the end of the next weekend. Forced events and the successful test that fonows repair to verify operability include start-up faNures and events initiated while the unit is in should not be counted as demands or tauures when the EDG reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is avagable but not in service).

79

Performance Indicator Definitions IN UNE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SERVICE FUEL REUABILITY INDICATOR Total number of irWine chemistry instruments that are out-of-This indicator is defined as the steady-state pnmary coolant I-service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident 131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contribution and Sampling System (PASS).

normaltzed to a common puri6 cation rat 9. Tramp uranium is fuel which has t**n depoOted on rector core intems!s frem UCENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS previous defictive fuel or is resent on the surface of fuel 1

elements fron, the manufactuing process. Steady state is This indcator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes and defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a exams that are administered and passed each month. This power level that does not vary more than + or -5%. Plants indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

I should colect data for this indicator at a power level above 85%,

j when possible. Ptarts that did not operate at steady-state power UCENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFIC ATION TRAINING l

above 85% should collect data for this indicator at the highest steady-state power level attained during the month.

The total number of hours of training given to each crew during each cycle. Also provided are the simulator training hours The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific volume (which are a subset of the total training hours), the number of of coolant at the RCS operating temperature (540 degrees F., Vf non-REQUAllFICATION training hours and the nurrber of exam

= 0.02146) divided by the specific volume of coolant at normal failures. This indicator tracks training performance for letdown temperature (120* F at outlet of the letdown cooling heat SEP # 68.

exchanger, VI = 0.016204), which results in a density correction factor for FCS equal to 1.32.

UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN GROSS HEAT RATE This indicator shows the number and root cause code for Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal energy in Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as follows:

Bribsh Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the reactor to the total gross electrical energy produced by the generator in kilowatt-

1) Administrative Control Problem - Management and hours (KWH).

supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED adequate management or supervisory control, incorrect procedures, etc).

The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous

2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures waste produced by FCS each month.

errors of omission / commission by licensed reac'or operators during plant activities.

HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission / commission committed by norWicensed personnel involved in plant The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable activities.

hours and the eshmated unavailable hours for the high pressure safety injection system for the reporting period divided by the

4) Maintenance Problem -The htent of this cause code is to enbcal hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of capture the full range of problems which can be attnb'2ed trains in the high pressure safety injection system.

in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the maintenance fundional organization. Activities included in INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE -INPO this category are maintenance, testing, surveillance, cahbration and radiation protection.

This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per 200,000 mar > hours worked for all utility personnel permanently assigned

5) Dessgn/ Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem -

to the station that result in any of the following:

This cause code covers a full range of programmatic deficiencies in the areas of design, construction,

1) One or more days of restricted work (excluding the day of installation, and fabrication (i.e., loss of control power due the accident);

to underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for the environment, etc.).

2) One or more days away from work (excluding the day of the accident); and

6) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or Environmental-Related Failures) - This code is used for

3) Fatalities.

spurk,usfailures of electronic piece-parts and failures due to meteorological conditions such as hghtning, ice, high Contractor personnel are not included for this indicator, winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time failures. Electric components included in this category are 80

Performance Indicator Definitions circuit cards, receders, histables, fuses, cepectors, diodes, The total tnaximum amourt of radiaten received by an individual resistors, etc.

person wortdng at FCS on a rnonthly, quarterly, and annual basis.

LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE WCIDENTS (SECURITY)

MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING The total number of securtly incsdents for the reporting month OUTAGE) depicted in two graphs. This indecator tracks security performance for SEP #58.

The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have been -

approved for hciumenin the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and the MAINTENANCE OVERTIGE number that are ready to work (parts staged, planning complete, and al other paperwork ready for fleid use). Aino included is the The percent of overtime hours compared to normal hours for number nf MWOs that have been engineenne holds (ECNs, maintenance This includes OPPD personnel as wed as procedures and other rmecetaneous engineering holds), parts contract personnet hold, (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) and pionning hold Gob scope not yet ca. f ' $ Maintenance Wbrk MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS Requests (MWRs) are also shown that have been identmed for the Cycle 17 Refusing Outage and have not yet been converted This indicator shows the becklog of norwutage Maintenance to MWOs Mhrk Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month.

Maintenance classifications are defined as logows:

NURSER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUP9ENT DEFICENCES Corrective - Repair and restoration of equipment or A controi room oquipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as any components that have Seted or are malfuncboning and are not component which is operated or controNed itom the Control performing their intended funchon Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control Room, provides testmg capabelies from the Control Room, provides Preventive - Actens taken to meintain a piece of equipment automatic actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a wthin doeign operating conditens, prevent equipment failure, pasewe functon for the Control Room and has been identded as and extend its hfe and are performed prior to equipment deGceent, Le., does not perform under au conditions as designed inRure.

This deinden also applies to the ARemote Shutdown Panels Al-179, Al-185, and Al-212.

Non Corrective / Plant c

^.- Maintenance actMeles pe formed to implement station improvements or to A pierd component which is delicierd or inoperable is considered repair nor>-pient equipment.

an" Operator Work Around (OWA) Item"if some other action is required by an operator to compensate for the condibon of the Maintenance Work Priorities are defined as:

component. Some examples of OWAs are:

E-.

-i-Condihons which segrwficantly degrade station

1) The control room levelinchcator does not work but a local safety oravonsbety sight glass can be read by an Operator out in the plant; immediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which

2) A dolcaent pump cannot be repared because replacement signdcantly degrade station reliability. Potential for unit parts require a long lead time for purchase /dehvery, thus shutdown or power reduction.

requmng the redmdant pump to be operated continuously; Operations concern - Equipment deficiencies which hinder

3) Special schons are required by an Operator because of station operation, equipmerd design problems. These actions may be-descnbod in Operations Memorandums, Operator Notes, Essenhal - Routine corrective maintenance on essenhal or may require changes to Operating Procedures; station systems and equipment.

4) Deicient pierd equipment that is required to be used during Non Essential - Rouhne corrective maintenance on non-Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal Operating essential station systems and equipment.

Procedures; Plant improvement - Norworrectwo maintenance and plant

5) System indication that provides crttical information during improvements.

normal or abnormal operatens.

This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP #36.

MAXIMUM INDNIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE NuhmER OF RSSSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS 81

l l

Performance Indicator Definitions PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Licensee MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK Event Reports (LERs) dunng the reporting month. This indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & 61.

The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identifed as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS planning and craft. Rework is: Any additional work required to correct deficiencies discovered dunng a failed Post Maintenance Thi+ indicator displays the total number of open incident Reports Testto ensure the component / system passes subsequent Post (irs),the number ofIRs that are greater than six months old and Maintenance Test.

the number of open significant irs.

PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE OUTSTANDING MODIF! CATIONS ACTIVITIES The number of Modification Requests (MRs) in any state The percent of the number of completed maintenance activities between the issuance of a Modification Number and the as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities completion of the drawing update.

each month. This percentage is shown for all tr:aintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of emergent MWOs.

1) F o... FC 1133 Backlog /in Progress. This number Maintenance activities include MWRs, MWOs, STs, PMOs, represents modification requests that have not been plant calibrations. and other miscellaneous activities. This indicator approved dunng the reporting month.

tracks Mantenance performance for SEP #33.

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category PERFORMANCE INDICATOR INDEX includes:

This indicator index is calculated from a weighted combination A) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed.

of ten overperformance indicator values, which include Unit Capability Factor, Unit Capabihty Loss Factor, HPSI, AFW, B) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear Emergency AC Power System Unplanned Automatic Scrams, Projects Review Committee (NPRC).

Collective Radiation Exposure, Fuel Reliaibhty, Thermal Performance, Secondary System Chemistry, Radiation Waste, C) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Accident Rate.

Projects Committee (NPC).

PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times before they are approved for accomplishment or canceled.

This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER Some of these Modification Requests are retumed to event classification, a " Preventable LER* is defined as:

Engineenng for more information, some approved for evaluation, some approved for study, and some approved for planning.

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

Once planning is completed and the scope of the work is clearty inappropriate action by one or more individuals), inadequate defined, these Modification Requests rnay be approved for administrative controls, a design construction, installation, accomplishment with a year assigned for construction or they installation, fabncation problem (involving work completed by rnay be canceled. All of these different phases require review.

or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance problem (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep / repair of plant

3) Design Engineering Backlog /in Progress. Nuclear equipment). Also,the cause of the event must have occurred Planning has assigned a year in which construction will be within approximately two years of the " Event Date" speerfied completed and design work may be in progrest.

in the LER (e.g., an event for which the cause is attributed to a problem with the original design of the plant would not be

4) Construction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction considered preventable).

Package has been issued or construction has begun but the modification has not been accepted by the System For purposes of LER event classification, a " Personnel Error" Acceptance Committee (SAC).

LER is defined as follows:

5) Design Engineering Update Backlog /In Progress. PED An event for which the root cause is inappropnate action on has received the Modification Completion Report but the the part of one or more individuals (as opposed to being drawings have not been updated, attributed to a department or a general group). Also, the inappropriate action rnust have occurred within approximately The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not include two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER.

modifications which are proposed for cancellation.

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE)

Addeonally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error" should This indicator shows the status of the projects which are in the also be classified as " Preven'able." This indicator trends scope of the Refuehng Outage.

personnel performance for SEP Mem #15.

l 82

Performance Indicator Definitions Pf4 MARY SYSTEM LITHIUM % OF HOURS OUT OF Lit 4T prevent the fulMment of the safety funcbons of structures or systems. If a system conomes of multiple redundant subsystems The percent of hours out of limit are for lithium divided by the or trains, failure of a8 trains conelitutes a safety sy-tem failure.

totel number of hours poseable for the month.

Failure of one of two or more trains is not counted as a safety system failure. The detInition for the indicator parahels NRC

]

PftOCEDURAL NONCOhPLIANCE INCIDENTS reporeng regmements b 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The (MANTENANCE) tbtowing is a ist of the major safety systerrns, aut> systems, and j

The number of identitled inculents concommg maintenance procedural problems, the number of closed irs reisted to the Accident Monitonng instrumentation, Auxihsry (and use of procedures (indudes the number of closed irs caused by Emergerry) Feedwater System, Combushbie Gas Control, procedural noncompliance), and the number of closed Component Cooling Water System, Containment and procedural noncernpilence irs. This indicator trends personnel Cordainment leologon, Contammert Cooient Systems, Control performance for SEP #15,41 and 44.

Room Emergency VentHetion System, Emergency Core Coolmg Systems, Engirmered Safety Features PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE MODIFICATION Instrumentation, Essenhal Compressed Air Systems, PLANNWG Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire Detection or Suppreseson Systems, leolation Condenser, Low This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for Temperature Overpressure Protechon, Main Steam Line complebon during the Refueling Outage Isointion Valves, Onsite Ernergency AC & DC Power.

w/Dietrtmmon, Radiation Morutoring instrumentation, Reactor PROGRESS OF 1996 ON LME MODIFICATION PLANNING Coolant System, Reactor Core isolaten Coohng System, Reactor Trip System and instrumentaten, Recirculation Pump This indicator shows the status of moddicehons approved for Trip Actuation instrumentation, Residual Heat Removal completion during 1995.

Syalems, Safety Valves, Spent Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ultimate Heat Sink.

I SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEIASTRY PERFORMANCE The number of identiRed poor radiological work prochoes INDEX (PRWPs) for. the reporting month. This indicator tracks radmiogical work performance for SEP #52.

The Cherrustry Performance index (CPI) is a calculaten bened on the concentreten of key impurities in the secondary side of RADIO OF PREVEN 1WE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE &

the plant. _These key impurthos are the most likely cause of PREVENTIVE MANTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE deteriorabon of the steem generators. Crilorie for calculebng the CPI are:

The ratio of prevenhve maintenance (including survetence testing and calibration procedures) to the sum of non-outage

1) The plant is at greater then 30 percent power; and corrective maintenance and preventive meintenance completed over the reportng period. The rato, expressed as a percentage,

2) the power is changmg less than 5% per day, i

is calculated based on men. hours Also displayed are the i

percent of preventive maintenance items in the mordh that were The CPIis calculated using the following equation:-

not completed or adtrurustratively closed by the scheduled dele i

plus a grace portod equelto 25% of the scheduled interval This.

CPI = ((sodium /0.79) + (Chloride /1.52) + (Sulfate /1.44) +

l indicator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP #41.

(IrorV3.30) + (Copper >0.30)+(Condensate 02/2.90))4 RECORDABLE WJURY/E.LNESS CASES FREQUENCY Where: Sochum, sulfate, chlonde and condensate dissolved RATE oxygen are the monthly average blowdown concentratens in ppb, iron and copper are monthly time weighted everage

- The number of tryuries requiring more than normal first aid per feedwater concentratens in ppb. The denominator for each of 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator trends personnel the "rve factors is the INPO rnedian value. If the monthly performance for SEP #15,25 and 26.

average for a spec 4Ac parameter is less than the INPO median value, the medlen value is used in the calculation.

REPEAT FAILURES

' The number of Nuclear Plant Reliebaty Data System (NPROS)

SIGNIFICANT EVENTS components with more then one failure and the number of NPRDS components with more then two failures for the Signikart everts are the events identined by NRC staff through eighteen-month CFAR period.

detailed screenmg and evaluation of operatmg experience. The screenmg process includes the deHy review and des==mn of SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES all reported operating reactor events, as well as other operobonel data such as special tests or construchon activibes.

Safety system failures are any events or conditons that could An event identified from the screening process as a signWicent 83

i Performance Indicator Definitions event condulate is further evaluated to determine if any actual or Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for which MRs potential threat to the health and safety of the public was have been subtrutted will be considered as temporary involved. Spectflc examples of the type of criterte are moditeetions until flnal resolution of the MR and the jumper summarized as follows or block is removed or is permanently recorded on the drawings. This indicator tracks ternporary modsHcations for

1) Degradobon ofimportant safety equepment; SEP #62 and 71.

2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; THERMAL PERFORMANCE

3) Depadation of fuel integnty, primary coolant pressure The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the boundary, important associated features; adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percentage.

4) Scram with m.,,a.AW,,

UNIT CAPASILITY FACTOR

5) Unplanned release of radoectivity; The ratio of the available energy generation over a given time period to the reference energy generation (the energy that could

6) Operaten outside the limits of the Technscal SpecrHeations; be produced K the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time period,

7) Other, expressed as a percentage.

INPO significant events reported in this indicator are SERs UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR (Signincent Event Reports) which inform utilities of segnincent events and lessons teamed identified through the SEE-IN The not electrical energy generated (MWH) divided by the screening process.

proNet of maximum dependable cancity (not MWe) times the gross.Nurs in the reportmg period expressed as a percent. Not SPARE PARTIS INVENTORYVALUE electncai energy generated is the poss electncal output of the unit measured at the output termmels of the turbine generator The dotar value of the spare ports inventory for FCS during the minus the normal station service loads during the gross hours of reportmg period.

the reporbng period, expressed in megawatt hours.

STAFFING LEVEL UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 CRITICAL HOURS The actumistaf!Ing level and the authorized stafRng level for the Nuclear Operations Division, The Producten Engmeenng This indicator is defined as the number of unpienned automatic Divison, and the Nuclear Services Division. This indicator scrams (reactor protection system logic actuatens) that occur tracks performance for SEP #24.

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

STATION NET GENERATION The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total number of unplanned automebc reactor scrams in a speciAc time The not generation (sum) produced by the FCS during the period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividmg that number by the total reportmg month.

number of hours criticalin the same time period. The indmator is further defined as foRows:

TEWORARY MODIFICATIONS t) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anbcipated The number of temporary mechanical and electrical part of a planned test.

configurabons to the plant's systems.

2) Scram means the automatic shutdown of the reaclor by a

1) Temporary conAgurations are deHned as electrical jumpers, rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e.g., by control rods, eisdncal blocks, mechanicaljumpers, or mechanical blocks Isquid inpochon system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of which are instaHed in the plant operating systems and are the reactor protection system. The scram signal may have not shown on the latest revision of the P&lD, schematic, resulted from exceeding a set poirst or may have been

' connochon, wiring, or flow diagrams, spurious.

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveillance Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibraten Procedures,

3) Automate means that the initial signal that caused actuaten Special Procedures or Operstmg Procedures are not of the reactor proleden system logic was provided from one considered as temporary modr6 cations unless the jumper or of the sensor's monitoring plant parameters and condibons, block remains in piece after the test or procedure is rather than the manual scram switches or, manual turbine complete. Jumpers and blocks installed in test or lab trip switches (or push-buttons) provided in the main control instruments are not considered as temporary modiScations.

room.

3) Scaffold is not conssdered a temporary modiGcation.

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

M

i Performance Indicator Definitions reactor prior to the scram, the effective mulhplicaten (k,)

adwe weste, aludges, resins, and evaporator bottoms generated was essent;sfy equalto one.

as a result of nuclear power piant operation and maintenance.

Dry radioactive waste includes contaminated rags, clostung UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR metennis,'h =*= protective clothing, plastic containers, and f

any other material to be disposed of at a low-level radioedive The ratio of the unplanned energy losses dunng a given period waste disposal see, exompt resin, sludge, or evaporator bottoms, of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that Low 4evel refers to at radioactive waste that is not spent fuel or could be produced if the unit were operated contmuously at fuH a by-product of spent fuel processang This indmetor tracks power under reference ambient conditions) over the same bme radiological work performance for SEP #54.

period, expressed as a percentage UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS. (INPO

+ DEFINITION)

This indicator is deflned as the sum of the fotowng safety system actuations:

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

2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuatens that result from a loss of power to a safeguards bus. An unplanned esfoty system actuation occurs when an adunton set point for a safety system is reached or when a spunous or inadvertent signal is generated (ECCS only),

and mapor equipment in the system is actuated. Unplanned means that the system actuaton was not part of a planned test or evoluhon. The ECCS actuatons to be counted are actuatens of the high pressure ingecten system, the low pressure irgection system, or the safety injection tanks.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

The number of esisty system aduations which include (9Dk) the High Prosauro Saluty injecton System, the Low Pressure Safety tryodion System,the Safety injadion Tanks, and the Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classificaten of r.afety system actuations includes actuations when major equipment is cperated gg[ when t m logic systems for the above safety systems are challenged.

VIOLATION TREND This indicatoris deined as Fort Cahoun Station Cited Violatens and Nort Cted Vloietions trended over 12 months. Additionally, Citec Velations for the top quartile Region IV plant is trended over 12 months (lagging the Fort Calhoun Staten trend by 2-3 months). It is the Fort Camoun Staten goal to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile Region IV plart VOLuhE OF LOW 4.EVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid radoedive weste aduaNy shipped for burial. This indicator also

'shows the volume of low-level radioactwo waste which is in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive ou that has been shipped off-site for processing, and the vok.me of soild dry radioactrve waste which has been shipped off-site for proceseng Low-level solid radioactrve waste conssets of dry 85

l

$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 Eggg

. Increase HPES and IR Accountability through use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompiance Incidents (Maintenance)...................................... 51 Recordable injuryAliness Cases Frequency Rate........................................ 4 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations >1,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area

............5 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs............................................... 6 SEP Reference Number 24 i

. Complete Staff Studies Staffi ng Level.................................................................... 44 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 injuryAliness Frequency Rate................................................ 3 Recordable injuryAHness 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)...................................... 68 i

Overall Project Status (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage)...........

.........................69 Progress of Cycle 17 Outage Modification Planning................................,... 70

)

SEP Reference Number 33

. Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule Percent of Completed Scheduled Maintenance Activities (All Maintenance Crafts).............. 52 SEP Reference Number 36 i

. Reduce Corrective Non. Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage)................................ 47 SEP Reference Numbers 41 & 44

. Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule

. Compliance With and Use of Procedures Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue............. 48 Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance)....................................... 51

]

86

~

I SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM lNDEX SEP Reference Number 46

. Design a Procedures Controland Administrative Program Document Review.................................................................. 57 EN.E.Baf*.Iance Number 52 Enea

. ii=tablish Supervisory Accountability for Woskers Radiological Practices Radiological Work Practices Program................................................. 56 SEP Reference Number 54

. Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations >1,000 CountsMinute Per Probe Area................ 5 Collective Radiation Exposure...................................................... 17 Volume of low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste....................................... 38 Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area

................................ 55 SEP Reference Number 58

. Revise Physical Security Training and Procedure Program Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security)............................................ 58 SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61

. Improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program

. Modify Computer Program to Correctiy Schedule Surveillance Tests Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Ucensee Event Reports.................... 21 SEP Reference Number 62

. Establish Interim System Engineers Temporary Modifications..............._........................................... 59 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown......................................

61 Engineering Change Notice Status................................................... 62

^

Engineering Change Notices Open................................................. 63 SEP Reference Number 68

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

........................65 License Candidate Ex ams......................................................... 66 SEP Reference Number 71

. Improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications

............................................................59 j

87

s REPORT DISTRIBUTION blST R. L. Andrews S. J. Willrett G. C. Bishop C. E. Boughter J. L. Bostelman C. J. Brunnert 1

J. W. Chase R. G. Conner G. M. Cook M.R. Core T. R. Dukarski H. J. Faulhaber S. K. Garnbhir J. K. Gasper W. G. Gates S. W. Gebers D. C. Gorence R. H. Guy A. L Hale K. R. Henry J. B. Herman R. L. Jaworski J. W. Johnson D. D. Kloock J. B. Kuhr (7)

L.T.Kusok B. R. Livingston T. J. Mcivor K. A. Miller P. A. Mruz g

R. J. Mueller Nuclear Licensing (7)

T. L. Patterson R. L Plott W.J.Ponec D. G. Ried M. J. Sandhoefner F. C. Scofield H. J. Sefick R. W. Short J. L Skiles R. D. Spies (2)

D. E. Spires M. A.Tesar J. J. Tesarek J. W. Tills D. R. Trausch B. J. Van Sant L P. Walling G. R. Williarns 88

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

CUMULATIVE (MWH)

Cycle 1 09/26/73 - 02/08N5 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 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 - 01/18/83 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 8th Refueling 09/18/81 - 12/21/81 Cycle 7 12/21/81 - 12/03/82 3,561,866 24,330,034 7th Refueling 12/03/82 - 04/06/83 Cycle 8 04/06/83 - 03/03/84 3,406,371 27,736,405 8th Refueling 03/03/84 - 07/12/84 Cycle 9 07/12/84 - 09/28/85 4,741,488 32,477,893 9th Refueling 09/28/85 - 01/16/86 Cycle 10 01/16/86 - 03/07/87 4,356,753 36,834,646 10th Refueling 03/07/87 - 06/08/87 Cycle 11 06/08/87 - 09/27/88 4,936,859 41,771,505 11th Refueling 09/27/88 - 01/31/89 Cycle 12 01/31/89 - 02/17/90 3,817,954 45,589,459 12th Refueling 02/17/90 - 05/29/90 Cycle 13 05/29/90 - 02/01/92 5,451,000 51,040,528 13th Refueling 02/01/92 - 05/03/92 Cycle 14 05/03/92 - 09/25/93 4,981,485 56,022,013 14th Refueling 09/25/93 - 11/26/93 Cycle 15 11/26/93 - 02/20/95 5,043,887 61,066,900 15th Refueling 02/20/95 - 04/14/95 Cycle 16 04/14/95 - 09/21/96 18th Refueling 09/21/96 - 11/02/96 (Planned Dates)

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

First Electric Supplied to the System August 25,1973 Commercial son (180,000 KWH)

September 26,1973 Achieved Full 100%)

May 4,1974 Longest Run (477 Da June 8,1987-Sept. 27,1988 Highest Monthly Not eneration (364,468,800 KWH)

October 1987 Most Productive Fuel Cycle (5,451,069 MWH - Cycle 13)

May 29,1990-Feb.1,1992 Shortest Refueling Outage (52 days)

Feb. 20,1995-April 14,1995 l

l

.....