Text

Monthly Performance Monitoring Mgt Info Rept, Nov 1995
	ML20137N366
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie, Turkey Point
Issue date:	12/18/1995
From:	; FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20137K821	List: ML20137K816; ML20137K910; ML20137K940; ML20137K961; ML20137K972; ML20137K998; ML20137L016; ML20137L023; ML20137L046; ML20137L065; ML20137L077; ML20137L081; ML20137L092; ML20137L116; ML20137L130; ML20137L141; ML20137L162; ML20137L191; ML20137L205; ML20137L226; ML20137L346; ML20137L359; ML20137L389; ML20137L786; ML20137M723; ML20137M926; ML20137N194; ML20137N205; ML20137N211; ML20137N220; ML20137N238; ML20137N278; ML20137N314; ML20137N327; ML20137N343; ML20137N366; ML20137N431; ML20137N791;
References
	FOIA-96-485 NUDOCS 9704080346
	Download: ML20137N366 (71)
	v • d • e

-. - - - -.

1 i

I 3

FPL NUCLEAR DIVISION i

l TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR STATION l

ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR STATION l

l 1

l MONTHLY PERFORMANCE MONITORING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION REPORT t

November 1995 i

l l

t l

Ig l

g6 i

{

issued: December 18,1995 i

708488?269704o2

)

BINDER 96-485 PDR I

i

A i

l FPL NUCLEAR DIVISION i

4 TURKEY PolNT NUCLEAR STATION ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR STATION l

)

i

)

MONTHLY PERFORMANCE MONITORING l

MANAGEMENT INroRMATION' REPORT November 1995 4

/

4 i

i c.-

1 i-

~,. '

6\\VW issued: pacember18,1995 40 6 970402 BINDER 96-485 PDR

Inter Office Correspondance PPL JNE-NBS-95-217 To:

Page Z-1 in Attachment DATE: December 18,1995 FROM:

R. L. Wade LOCATION: Nuclear Division /JB

SUBJECT:

PERFORMANCE MONITORING M ANAGEMENT INFORM ATION Enclosed is the Nuclear Division Performance Monitoring Management Information Report (PMMI) for November 1995.

Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF). The combined Y T-D Equivalent Availability Factor for both Turkey Point units through November was 92.4% Which was higher than the 87.9% target. St. Lucie's combined Y-T-D Equivalent Availability for both units through November was 76.4% which was below the 89.9% target. For the Division, EAF year-end projection is 83.5%.

O&M expenditures through November 1995 were $242.9 million which represented a budget underrun of $11.9 million (or 4.7%). The variance was primarily due to: underruns in materials and contracted services at Turkey Point due to less trouble and breakdown than planned; Nuclear Division O&M Contingency not yet needed; and over-accrual of estimated 1964 Year-End liabilities.

l Capital expenditures tha. ugh November 1995 were $37.5 million. This represented a budget underrun of $19.4 million (or 34.0%). The variance was primarily due to: project cancellations, scope / estimate reductions, and schedule changes for various projects; underrun in Contractor Wrap-Up Insurance; and, delay in support services and staffing under budget for the Steam Generator Replacement Project at St. Lucie.

Fuel expenditures through November 1995 were $120.3 million representing a budget underrun of $0.3 million (or 0.3%). The underrun was primariliy due to lower than planned electncal generation partially offset by a higher than planned amortization rato.

OSHA Recordable injuries. St. Lucie reported seven OSHA Recordable injuries in November. Year-to-date, the Nuclear Division reported a rate of 2.08, which is below the Corporate Target of 3.10.

i Unplanned Automatic Trips. No Unplanned Automatic Trips were reportea in November. Year-to-date, St. Lucie j

has experienced two auto trips.

Any questions or comments conceming this report may be addressed to John Pizzutelli at 694-4245 or 12 me at 694-l 3786.

Manager, Business Services RLW/JGP/skb Attachment L

I FOREWORD 4

The Nuclear Division Performance Monitoring Management Information Report presents a monthly compilation of performance indicators which provide a quantitative indication of plant performance. Specific areas of focus include nuclear and personnel safety, plant reliability, and economic performance.

The specific indicators included in this report have been selected by senior management as key indicators of operating performance. Summaries of NRC indicator and INPO indicator peiormance have been incorporated in this report.

Data contained herein will be refined on the basis of feedback from data providers, of continuing quality control efforts, and of comparisons to other data sources. Each monthly report will reflect the best available data.

4 l

i

l TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PAGE Forward i

l Table of Contents ii l

B. COST PERFORMANCE Executive Summary ill O&M Budget Variance Division...

.......B1 Nuclear Division Business Plan indicator Overview v

Capital Budget (Non-Fuel) Variance - Division..

.......B2 l

l NRC indicator Performance 0verview vl Fuels Variance PTN......................... B-3 l

Fuels Vanance PSL...

.................mB-4 INP0 0verallindicator Performance overview vil Inventory Levels PTN.......

.........B5

~~ '" '

INPO OverallIndicator Performance Overview Discussion of FPl. Performance Unfavorable to industry Mean v11i C. CHEMISTRY & HEALTH PHYSICS A. OPERATIONS Collective Radiation Exposure PTN.........

.....C1 Operations Highlights.............................. A 1 CollectiveRadiationExposure PSL Equivalent Availability PTN Unit 3.................... A 2 Secondary Chemistry Performance 5. " ' ' 'C-2 C-3 i

Equrvaient Availability PTN Unit 4................... A-3 SecondaryChemistry Performance PSL.,........C 4 Equivalent Availability PSL Unit 1.,.

.............A4 SoldWasteDisposed PTN '

C-5 Equivalent Availability PSL Unit 2.................

.A-5 So id Waste Disposed PSL * ' ' ' ' " " ' ' * * " ' C-6 Forced Outage Rate PTN Unit 3..

.......... A-6 l

Forced Outage Rate PTN Unit 4..

................A7 D. LICENSING Forced Outage Rate PSL Unit 1................... A 8 Forced Outage Rate PSL Unit 2................. A-9 Unplanned Auto Trips WMie Critical-PTN Units 3 & 4... A 10 NRC Violations PTN..........................D-1 Unplanned Auto Trips WMe Critical-PTN Unit s 1 & 2..

A 11 NRC Violations PSL.......................... D-2 Safety System Failures P iN..................... A 12 Licensee Event Reports PTN Unit 3.................D 3 Safety System Failures PSL....................... A 13 Licensee Event Reports PTN Unit 4.............

..D4 Unplanned Safety System Actua5cns PTN Units 3 & 4... A 14 Ucensee Event Reports PSL Unit 1................. D-5 Unplanned Safety System Actuaties PTN Units 1 & 2... A 15 Licensee Event Reports PSL Unit 2.................D-6 Safety System Performance: Safety INPO Assessment Ratings....................... D 7 Injection System - PTN....................... A 16 SALP Category Ratings.............

............D8 Safety System Performance: High Pressee Safety injecton System PSL..............

..... A 17 E. TRAINING Safety System Performan At iliary Feedwater System - PTN................................ A 18 Operator Examination Performance PTN............E-1 Safety System Perforraance: Auxiliary Feedwater Operator Examinaton Performance PSL............E 2 System PSL................................. A 19 Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability. PTN Unit 3................ A 20 F. EMPLOYEE SAFE 1Y Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability PTN Unit 4................ A 21 Industrial Safety Statistics PTN...........

....F1 Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Industrial Safety Statistes PSL.... '.....

.......F-2 Generator Unavailability - PSL Unit 1...........

...A-22 Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Generator UnavaRability PSLUnit 2.

......... A-23 Fuel Reliability PTN Unit 3...................... A-24 Fuel Reliability PTN Unit 4........................ A-25 Fuel Reliability-PSL Unit 1...

................. A-26 Fuel Rehability - PSL Unit 2........................ A-27 Fuel Utilization PTN Unit 3..................... A 28 i

Fuel Utilization PTN Unit 4....................... A-29 l

Fuel Utilization PSL Unit 1.......

..... A 30 l

Fuel Utilizaton PSL Unit 2.................... A-31 Capacity Factor (MDC Net) PTN.................. A-32 Appendix Capacity Factor (MDC Net) PSL..............

.. A 33 I

ThermalPerformance(GrossHeatRate) PTN.

.... A-34 Distribution List...

.... 21 Thermal Performance (Gross Heat Rate) PSL,....... A-35 ii R15:02/17/95

l EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

DIVISION O&M expenditures through November 1995 were $242.9 million which represented a budget underrun of

$11.9 million (or 4.7%). The variance was primarily due to: underruns in materials and contracted services at Turkey Point due to less trouble and breakdown than planned; Nuclear Division O&M Contingency not 1

yet needed; and over accrual of estimated 1994 Year End liabilities.

YTD O&M budget performance variances are stratified as follows:

Turkev Point Site Soecific $ 5.7 million (or 5.0%) below budget St. Lucie Site Soecific

$ 0.9 million (or 0.9%) below budget Other Nuclear Division S 5.3 million (or 15.9%) below budget Capital expenditures through November 1995 were $37.5 million. This represented a budget underrun of

$19.4 million (or 34.0%). The variance was primarily due to: project cancellations, scope / estimate reductions, and schedule changes for various projects; underrun in Contractor Wrap-Up insurance; and, delay in support services and staffing under budget for the Steam Generator Replacement Project at St.

Lucie.

Y-T-D Capital budget performance variances are stratified as follows:

Turkev Point Site Soecific $ 3.0 million (or 27.7%) below budget St. Lucie Site Soecific

$ 7.8 million (or 20.6%) below budget Other Nuclear Division S 8.6 million (or 101.5%) below budget PLANT & STAFF Turkey Point reported no NRC Violations in November. Year to-date, Turkey Point has received one NRC Violation.

St. Lucie reported three NRC Violations for November:

95-18 Failure to Follow Procedure and Not Properly Log Locked Key-Switch Deviations.

Exit Meeting Date: 11/1/95.

95-18 Failure to Follow Procedure and Issue a Clearance, Which Resulted in Personnel injury.

Exit Meeting Date: 11/1/95.

95-10-03 -Inadequate Design of Unit 2 EDG Resulting in Reverse Powering of the EDG During ESFAS Testing. Exit Meeting Date: 11/1/95.

Year-to-date, St. Lucie has received 17 NRC Violations.

iii

Other plant statistics are as follows:

PTN Unit 3 PTN Unit 4 November Y-T D November Y-T -D Gross Generation (MWh) 507,903 4,918,932 500,532 5,548,918 Net Generation 484,808 4,687,455 477,225 5,288,128 Net Heat Rate 10806.6 11057.6 10947.7 11042.3 Equivalent Availability 99.7 %

87.6 %

96.8 %

97.2 %

Capacity Factor 101.1 %

87.8 %

99.5 %

99.1 %

Auto Trips 0

0 0

0 Forced Outage Rate 0.0%

0.6%

0.0%

1.6%

PSL Unit 1 PSL Unit 2 November Y-T -D November Y-T -D Gross Generation (MWh) 576,770 5,176,380 0

5,606,960 Net Generation 545,144 4,879,055

-1,761 5,294,188 Net Heat Rate 11068.4 11003.0 0.0 11127.1 Equivalent Availability 90.9%

73.1 %

0.0%

79.7 %

Capacity Factor 90.2%

72.6 %

0.0%

78.7 %

Auto Trips 0

1 0

1 Forced Outage Rate 4.3%

23.8%

0.0%

2.4%

I 1

i iv

NUCLEAR DIVISION BUSINESS PLAN INDICATOR OVERVIEW (DATA THROUGH NOVEMBER 1995) 1995 1995 1995 Indicator Plant Y-E YTD YTD Comments Target Target Actuals Collective Radiation Exposure PTN s275 270.0 212.6 St. Lucie Man-Rem for November (Man-Rem)

PSL s240 231.0 352.2 exceeded the Y-T-D target.

3 The SALP period for St. Lucie ends PTN 1.00 1.00 NRC SALP Ratings Jan. 6,1996; for PTN, the period PSL 1.25 1.00 ends Aug. 31,1996.

PTN reported no NRC Violations in PTN

<7 1

NRC Violations PSL 27 b

November. PSL reported three for 17 g j!

the month.

g PTN3 s1 0

No auto trips occurred in 4

s1 0

Unplanned Automatic Trips g

November.

Y-T-D, St. Lucie has PSL2 21 bb experienced two auto trips.

1 O&M and Capital actuals were Capital 64.7 56.4 37.5 below Y-T-D targets in November; Budget Performance O&M 279.2 244.4 242.9

. underruns were mainly due to

($ Millions)

Div. Total 343.9 300.8 280.4 schedule revisions and project underruns.

PTN3 82.0 80.7 87.6 EAF(%) for PTN exceeded Y T D PTN4 95.0 95.0 972 targets in November. The Division Equ.ivalent Availability Factor (%)

1 PSL1 95.0 95.0 73.1 EAF Y T-D was 84.4% and below PSL2 82.0 84.7 79.7 the 88.9% target.

PTN Cap.

n/a $

7.3 Inventory Levels ($ Millions) eg.

3 PSL Y-T-D Regular Inventory Level was higher than the Year-End

,p, a

PSL Reg.

s 40 43.1 target in November.

Production Costs (c/KWh) for PSL Production Cost PTN 1.94 1.96 1.80 (0&M and Fuel)

PSL 1.62 1.60 1.85 were higher than the Y-T-D target,in t;

November due primarily to lower than planned aeneration.

3 In November, Division Total Cost g

Total Cost (0&M, Fuel,and Div. Total 4.08 5.22 (c/KWh) was higher than the Y E o

Capital Carry,ng Costs) target due primarily to changes in i

I capital strateov.

FPL 2237.0 h 2,044.0 Nuclear Division Total Nuclear Division Staffing Level LT tr 4

Staffing Levels 4B was below target in November.

p pp PTN3 53 M

34 PSL2 is currently refueling. Future Refueling Outage PTN4 NA G"

0 Refueling Outage schedules are as IOU 0 Duration (Days)

PSL1 NA f@sm 0

pT 03/08/97 PSL10$26/96 PSL2 53 53 PTN4 03/01/96 PSL2 04/15/97 Lost Time injuries / Restricted No Lost Time Injuries or Restricted gg Duty Cases were reported in PTN 0.40 0.22 Duty Cases per 200,000 Hours PSL 0.40 0.40 Worked (12 Month Running)

November.

v

l NRC INDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW (Data through Quarter Ending March 31,1995) y,

Psu Plant Self Trend Deviations From Peer Short Term Grouc Median Lono Term PTN4 PSL2 Declined improved Worse Better OPERATIONS r

0.23 0.0 Automatic Scrams While Critical 0.23

ru J0.39 b.3I4 /

M

-0.68 m 018 Safety System Actuations r,f,,,

0.90

-0.45 0.0

-0.45 1

00 Significant Event o,o l@;@

0.0 3

to o i

-0.34 1

-0.22 j

Safety System Failures 0.08 2

'. 0 O

0.00 i

Cause Codes (ALL LF.R's) 4 043,,M7 l

Admnstrative Contro! Problem

- 0.17

,,,. 0.76 O 42 0 E2 ll gp Licensed Operator Problem 0

j as 0.0 Other Personnel Error 023 n

Maintenance Problem 0.30 0 30 oesgrVConstructionlinstallation 0.13 5 044 6 030 0.0 i

Faencation Proctem 0.26 %0 3 no 0.0 0.15 "

0.0

""" O.45 i

Miscellaneous

0.50 030 S

OWN

- 0.79 Safety System Actuations

<ffffff 2.36

-gg

-10.0 1.06 Significant Events

"""""'""o b o0l O

4 0.0

-0.02 A""""""v 3.78 0.07 Safety System Failures 0.76 4

Cause Codes (ALL LER's) y Admastrative Control Problem

,@j 0,01 q

Ucensed Operator Problem

"""""""'g} 0 90 oo

.13 Other Personnel Error

- 0 14 Mantenance Problem N18 029 0

9 0o j

oesign/Constructiordnstaliaton

00 2.70

.~0 jo m

t Fabncaton Problem 04 is o no 0 11 lf 0$

0-@ 0$

Miscellaneous j

FORCED OUTAGES M

-0.4f g 0.05 0.02 Forced Outage Rate.

go.10

.08

- 0.041 0.18

- 01M 0.0 1

Equipment Forced Outages

0.56 m m m 0.27 e 0.34 gg

/1000 CommercialHours

-0.42 I

I I

i I

I I

1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

Not Coculated for Ooers'ional ce Performance index PerformanceIndex j

NOTES Plant SeM. Trend Short Terrn: Based on the slope of a linear regression line plotted over each plant's data. Time intervals used in the trends are 4 Quarters for' Operations

and Forced Outages

indicators and 6 quarters for Shutdown' indicators.

Deviations from Peer Grous fledtan Lono Term: Compansons are made of each plant to the performance of its peers over a 12 Quarter time interval.

Peer Grouns: PSL 1&2 Combustion Engineenng with core protection calculator plants.

PTN 384 Older Westinghouse 3-Loop.

Vi

INPO OVERALLINDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW (November 30,1995)

Unit or Station Values industry MedianValues* l Performance indicators 3 Year Distribution l 1995 P

3 PU 4 PSL1 PSL2 (7/92 - 6/95) l l

Unit Capability Factor (Unit %, 3-Yr.

88.4 %

87.2 %

77.9 %

75.8 %

79.7 %

80.0 %

Distribution Ending November,95) l Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (Unit 2.8%

4.5%

10.9%

11.9 %

6.0%

45%

%,3-Year Distr. Ending November 95)

Unplanned Automatic Scrams Per 7000 Hours Critical (Per Unit, 3-Year Distri-0.3 0.9 1.6 -

0.7 1.0 1.0 bution Ending November'95) l g

High Pressure Safety injection 8

System (Per Unit,3-Year Distribution 0.008 0.009 0.025 0.010 0.003 - 0.008 0.020' g

Ending September '95) t-E Auxiliary Feedwater System (Per 5

Unit, 3 Year Distribution Ending 0.015 0.012 0.010 0.013 0.004 0.009 0.025 1

September'95) m b

Emergency AC Power System (Per

'Ei Unit, 3 Year Distribution Ending 0.003 0.003 0.016 0.013 0.009 - 0.014 0.025 September '95)

Thermal Performance (Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heat Rate, 1 Yr.

99.8%

1002 %

99.1%

98.5 %

99.4% "

99.5% "

Distribution Ending September'95)

Collective Radiation Exposure (Man-Rem per unit per year,3-year running 1162

.162 220 220 157 185 avg. ending November'95)

Volume of Low-level Solid Radioactive Waste (Cubic meters per unit per year, 392 392 54.6 54.6 62.0 #

110 #

3-year avg. ending November'95)

Chemistry index (January through U9 W

M7 U 9 **

November,95) Average Industrial Safety Lost-time Accident Rate (Station rate per 200,000 man-hours worked, year ending November '95 022 0.40 0.51 "

0.50 includes Restricted Duty Cases)

Fuel Reliability (Unit microcuries/g, 1.00E-6 5.20E-6 2.45E-5 n/a Refe e month ending November,95)

I 5.0E-04"*

NOTE: shaded a rea denotes FPL performance is unfaverable to actual industry rnedian.

source of Industry Data:

1995 Mid-Year Report for Perforrnance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility industry (7/92 6/95 Distribution).

l

- 1995 Mid-Year Report for Performance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility industry (7/944/95 Distribution).

I

- - 1995 Mid-Year Report for Performance indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility industry (4/954/95 Distribution).

1995 Mid Year Report for Performance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility Industry (1/9212/94 Distribution).

Rev.10/15/95

r INPO OVERALL INDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW Discussion of FPL Performance Unfavorable to Industry Median (November 30,1995)

UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR (3-Years Ending 11/30/95) j St. Lucie Unit 1. The 3-year running Capability Factor for the unit was 77.9%. Capability loss is attributed to the following: Refueling Outage and extension fro'm 3/29/93 to 6/17/93 (7.4%); Hot Leg Valve MV-3480 leak repairs from l

3/29/94 to 4/2/94 (0.4%); Main Transformer trip from 6/6/94 to 6/11/94 (0.4%); Quench Tank leak repairs from l

2/27/95 to 3/8/95 (0.9%); 1 A2 Reactor Coolant Pump seal repairs from 8/2/95 to 8/9/95 (0.7%); inoperable Power Operated Relief Valves from 8/9/95 to 8/17/95 (0.7%); and, inadvertent Containment Spray actuation and clean-up from 8/17/95 to 9/3/95 (1.3%) 182 Diesel Generator failure from 9/1/95 to 9/6/95 (0.5%); 1 A Diesel Generator l

Radiator leakage from 9/6/95 to 9/10/95 (0.4%); and, Code Safety Valve repairs and modifications from 9/11/95 to l

10/13/95 (2.4 %). Other miscellaneous unplanned outages and derates accounted for the remaining 7.0% Unit Capability Factorloss.

St. Lucie Unit 2. Capability Factor for the three years ending 11/30/95 was 75.8%. Capability loss is attributed to the following: Turbine Valve Repairs from 11/24/92 to 12/2/92 (0.3%); Reactor Cooling System Vent Gas Valve Repairs from 12/2/92 to 12/8/92 (0.5%); 2A1 Reactor Coolant Pump repairs due to high vibration from 1/13/93 to i

3/2/93 (4.4%); Pressurizer Nozzle leak repairs initiated on 3/2/93 through 4/1/93 (2.8%); dropped CEA's on 5/21/93 (0.5%); Condenser Tube leak repairs from 8/9/93 to 8/11/93 (0.2%); refueling outage from 2/13/94 to 4/22/94 (4.6%);

shutdown for auto reactor trip investigation on 4/23/94 (0.3%); and, a refueling outage which began on 10/9/95 i

(4.8%). Other unplanned outages and power reductions accounted for the remaining 5.8% Unit Capability Factor loss.

UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR (3-Years Ending 11/30/95)

St. Lucie Unit 1. The Unplanned Capability Loss Factor for the three years ending 11/30/95 was 10.9% compared to an industry median of 6.0%. Unplanned outages and power reductions contributing to this performance included:

Waterbox cleaning due to jelly fish intrusion from 9/18/93 to 9/29/93 (0.7%); Refueling Outage extension from 6/1/93 to 6/17/93 (1.6%); Hot Leg Valve MV 3480 leak repairs from 3/29/94 to 4/2/94 (0.4%); Main Transformer trip from j

6/6/94 to 6/11/94 (0.4%); Quench Tank leak repairs from 2/27/95 to 3/8/95 (0.9%); 1 A2 Reactor Coolant Pump seal repairs from 8/2/95 to 8/9/95 (0.7%); inoperable Power Operated Relief Valves from 8/9/95 to 8/17/95 (0.7%);

inadvertent Containment Spray actuation and clean-up from 8/17/95 to 9/1/95 (1.3%) 182 Diesel Generator failure from 9/1/95 to 9/6/95 (0.5%); 1 A Diesel Generator Radiator leakage from 9/6/95 to 9/10/95 (0.4%); and, Code Safety 4

Valve repairs and modfications from 9/11/95 to 10/31/95 (2.4%). Other miscellaneous unplanned outages and derates accounted for the remaininp 0.9% Capability Loss.

St. Lucie Unit 2. The Unplanned Capability Loss Factor for the three years ending 11/30/95 was 11.9%. Major l

unplanned occurrences contributing to this performance included: Turbine Valve Repairs from 11/24/92 to 12/2/92 l

(0.3%); Reactor Cooling System Vent Gas Valve Repairs from 12/2/92 to 12/8/92 (0.5%); 2A1 Reactor Coolant Pump repairs due to high vibration from 1/13/93 to 3/2/93 (4.4%); Pressurizer Nozzle leak repairs initiated on 3/2/93 through 4/1/93 (2.8%); dropped CEA's on 5/21/93 (0.5%); and, shutdown for auto reactor trip investigation on 4/23/94 (0.3%).

Other unplanned outages and power reductions accounted for the remaining 3.1% in Capability Loss.

viii I

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC SCRAMS PER 7000 HOURS CRITICAL (3-Years Ending 11/30/95)

St. Lucie Unit 1.

Increased rate for Unit 1 was the result of five auto trips occurring on 3/18/94,4/3/94,6/6/94, l

10/26/94 and 7/8/95.

t HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95)

Turkey Point Unit 4. Average performance was affected due to last year's on-line replacement of the HPSI pump motors following discovery of cracked rotor bars.

St. Lucie Unit 1. Average performance for the last three years was affected by on line Motor Operated Valve testin in the 3rd Quarter of 1994 and a breaker failure on 2B in the 1st Quarter of 1995.

St. Lucie Unit 2. In the 1st quarter of 1995, average performance was affected as a result of Component Cooling Water (CCW) Heat Exchange cleaning which placed the respective HPSI pump OOS due to lack cf dedicated seal i

l cooling.

AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95)

Turkey Point. Average performance for both units was affected by the B AFW Turbine failure in the 4th quarter of 1994 due to malfunction of the mechanical overspeed trip device, in the 3rd quarter of 1995, performance was affected by: Part 21 repairs on the Trip and Trottle Valves, and Unit 3 outage work.

St. Lucie. Average performance for three-years was affected by failure in the 4th Quarter of 1994 of the 1C AFW Pump Govemor, in the 3rd quarter of 1995, performance was attributed to: failure of the AFW PP 2C Steam Admission Valve MV-08-13 to open, a mechanical trip linkage for AFW PP 20 when the Electrical Overspeed Solenoid was energized, and a discrepancy between field wiring and plant wiring drawing for the AFW PP 28.

I EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95)

St. Lucie Unit 1. Unit 1's average performance for three-years was the result of a high water jacket temperature trip of 1 A EDG and failure of the govemor on 1B2 during monthly surveillance run which closed off fuel to the 12 cylinder engine in the 2nd quarter of 1995, and 18 diesel 12 cylinder engine valve failure in the 3rd quarter of 1995.

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE - MAN-REM (3-Years Ending 11/30/95)

Turkey Point. The three-year running average Collective Radiation Exposure level for Turkey Point was 162 Man-Rem per unit which was greater than the industry median of 157 Man-Rem. Site performance was influenced by scheduled refueling outages.

St. Lucie. Collective Radiation Exposure three-year running average level for St. Lucie was 220 Man-Rem per unit which was greater than the industry median of 157 Man-Rem. Site performance was influenced by unplanned and scheduled outages.

l l

CHEMISTRYINDEX PERFORMANCE (12-Months Ending 11/30/95) 1 St. Lucie Unit 1. Unit 1's Chemistry index Performance exceeded target as a result of elevated condensate dissolved oxygen.

ix

OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTS (November 1995) 1 OPERATING

SUMMARY

Turkey Point Unit 3. Unit 3 essentially operated at a 99.7% Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) in November. Power losses totaled 2.0 equivalent hours for repair to the 3C Level Control Circuit.

Year to date, Unit 3 operated at a 87.6% EAF which is higher than the 80.7% target.

Turkey Point Unit 4. Unit 4 EAF for the month was 96.8%. The unit experienced power losses which totaled 23.1 equivalent hours as a result of Turbine Valve testing (0.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months ) and Waterbox cleaning (22.2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months ). For the year, the unit achieved an EAF of 97.2%, which is higher than the 95.0% target.

St. Lucie Unit 1. For the month, Unit 1 operated at 90.9% EAF. Power losses totaled 65.2

' equivalent hours as a result of: a manual reactor trip and repair to the 'B' Main Feedwater Regulating Valve (31.1 hours1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months ); repair to the Main Transformer Control Panel which caused loss of cooling to the 1A Main Transformer (2.4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ); and Waterbox cleaning (31.7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months ). Through i

November, Unit 1's EAF was 73.1% which is below its target of 95.0%.

St. Lucie Unit 2. Unit 2 remained shutdown through November for a scheduled refueling outage.

Year to date, Unit 2 operated at a 79.7% EAF which is below the 84.7% target.

AUTOMATIC REACTOR TRIPS:

No Unplanned Automatic trips occurred in November; year-to-date, two have been reported for St.

Lucie.

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY:

No Lost Time Accidents or Restricted Duty Cases were reported by Turkey Point or St. Lucie for the month.

)

Turkey Point had no OSHA Recordable injuries in November; St. Lucie reported seven for the month.

i A1 l

l

J 1

1 EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY i

E " ""

TURKEY POINTUNIT3

-O-YTD%

l W Y-E %

100 a, af'~m a

A Y E Target l

5 80 _

W '

~ "" "" ""

=

r f

h 60(

" "h" E

s M."

$ 40--

_~

?

\\

20 _

\\

4 I

O--

Year End Year 1995 l

Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1

l EAF% Current Month 100 100 97.7 94 2 100 97.1 100 99.5 10.0 65.1 99.7 l

EAF% Y T D 58.9 l 22.3 l 66.3 l 94.6 l 83.5 100 100 99.2 98.0 98.4 982 98.4 98.6 88.8 86.4 87.6 i

' Definitions Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be produced operating at full power for the sarne period expressed as a percent. Equivalen1 Availability provides an j

indication of the effectiveness of plant prograrns and practices in maximizing electrical generaton.

EAF% = Available Hrs -(Ecuivalent Unit Derated Hours + Ecuivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) x 100%

]

Penod hours

}

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance i

H 3 vr Runntna NERC/ GADS EAF - 1995 99.7%

87.6 %

88.4 %

1994 (PWR's) 77.8%

j EAF 1994 99.5%

83 2 %

81.9 %

1994 (AllTypes) 74.1 %

Taraets-1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 %

i Monthly Y T D 1995 80.7%

1990 1994 (All Types) 71 2 %

)

Year End - 1995 82.0 %

g

~ Year End - 1994 74.4 %

July 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %

ea End 1995 88.5 %

I

89' l

Performance Summary 4

l Unit 3 essentially operated at a 99.7% Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) in November. Power losses totaled 2.0 equivalent hours for repair to the 3C Level Control Circuit. Year to date, Unit 3 operated at a 87.6% EAF which is j

higher tnan the 80.7% target.

2 3

l 1

Data Source: GADS Report j

Tarcets: Plant Manaaernent j

Indicator Type O aRe inro corp x

Div A2

)

E EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY l

TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 i

-C")= Y T D %

l W Y-E %

100 j

A Y E Target mm,

4

]

gQ -

3

~

3*e m

H l

5 gn x

e E

l g

go-W 20-i G

0--

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec EAF% Current Month 100 100 78.0 100 100 96.9 100 97.7 100 100 96.8

}

EAF% Y T-D 75.7 13.9 85.5 81.1 83.1 100 100 92.4 94.3 95.5 95.7 96.3 96.5 96.9 97.2 97.2 Definitions Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be produced operating at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practices in maximizing electrical generation.

EAF% = Available Hrs - (Eauivalent Unit Derated Hours + Eauivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) x 100%

j Pened hours l

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance f

M M 3 w Runnina NERC/ GADS EAF 1995 96.8 %

97.2 %

87.2 %

1994 (PWR's) 77.8 %

EAF 1994 50.1%

82.0 %

82.6 %

1994 (All Types) 74.1 %

l Taroets:

1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 %

j Monthly Y T D 1995 95.0 %

1990 1994 (All Types) 71 2 %

j Year End 1995 95.0 %

g YearEnd 1994 74.2%

July 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %

Y

'Y

^#'9' i.

ea End 1995 97.3%

l Performance Summary i

{

Unit 4 EAF for the month was 96.8%. The unit experienced power losses which totaled 23.1 equivalent hours as a result of Turbine Valve testing (0.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months ) and Waterbox cleaning (22.2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months ). For the year, the unit achieved an EAF of 97.2%, which is higher than the 95.0% target.

Data Source: GADS Report j

Taroets: Plant Manaaernent j

Indicator Type nnc snFo carp x Div A-3 i

i i

7-EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY i

ST. LUCIE UNIT 1

-C}- Y T-D %

f T rpt beesTarpe es.o.lA Y

j 30

.g...

..g..g ioxdi l

{ 60-

-g-i 5

4 o.

g 4o_-

i l

20--

0-Year End Year 1995 j

Legend / Period 1990 1901 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

}

EAF% Current Month

~ '

100 92.9 75.0 100 100 99.5 88.6 2.0 0.0 56.6 90.9 EAF% Y T D 61.2 l 78.5 l95.4 l 74.0 l 84.5 100 96.6 89.2 91.9 93.5 94.5 96.3 82.0 73.0 71.3 73.1

-Definitions Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF)is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be produced operatng at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practces in maximizing electrical generation.

EAF% = Available Hrs -(Ecuivalent Unit Derated Hours 4 Eauivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) x 100%

Period hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 32y.

MD. 3 v' Runne NERC/ GADS EAF 1995 90.9%

73.1 %

77.9%

1994 (PWR's) 77.8 %

EAF 1994 94.1 %

84.5 %

84.6 %

1994 (All Types) 74.1 %

Tamets-1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 %

Monthly Y T D 1995 95.0 %

1990 1994 (AllTypes) 71.2 %

Year End 1995 95.0 %

g YearEnd 1994 76.7 %

July 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %

ye End 1995 75 2%

My y 25 Mge M

Performance Summary For the month, Unit 1 operated at 90.9% EAF. Power losses totaled 65.2 equivalent hours as a result of: a manual reactor trip and repair to the 'B' Main Feedwater Regulating Valve (31.1 hours1.157407e-5 days 2.777778e-4 hours 1.653439e-6 weeks 3.805e-7 months ); repair to the Main Transformer Control Panel which caused loss of cooling to the 1A Main Transforrner (2.4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ); and Waterbox cleaning (31.7 hours8.101852e-5 days 0.00194 hours 1.157407e-5 weeks 2.6635e-6 months ). Through November, Unit 1's EAF was 73.1% which is below its target of 95.0%.

Data Source: GADS Report Targets: Plant Managernent Indicator Type uRc supo corp Div A4

)

EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY Month %

ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 o_ y.y.o s l

W Y-E %

100

&W

-a 1995

~

A Y ETarget u

'T ein a

n j

so_ 2-T 2 g-m i

EB 5

60-8 i

4 m

a

i u-40-5 I

20-1 i

0 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Ps Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec EAF% Current Month 100 89 99.8 99.0 99.7 98.6 93.8183.3 94.0 21.9 0.0 f

EAF% Y T-D 72.2 98.5 l 73.271.8 l 77.4100 93.3 95.5 96.4 97.1 97.3 96.6}95.1.95.0 87.5 79.7 Definitions j

Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF)is the ratio of the actual energy producton capabihty to the energy that would be l

produced operating at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practices in maximizing electrical generation.

1 EAF% = Available Hrs - (Ecuivalent Unit Derated Hours + Eauivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) x 100%

4 Period hours 1

3 j

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance

{

h2Y.

.UD S yr Runntna NERb / GADS j

EAF 1995 0.0%

79.7%

75.8%

1994 (PWR's) 77.8 %

EAF 1994 96.5 %

77.4 %

74.1 %

1994 (All Types) 74.1 %

Taraets:

1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 %

l Monthly Y T D 1995 84.7 %

1990-1994 (AllTypes) 71.2 %

{

YearEnd 1995 82.0%

g j

Year End 1994 76.7%

July 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %

'Y

Y

9

~

ea End 1995 72.9%

4 Performance Summary j

i Unit 2 remained shutdown through November fx a scheduled refuehng outage. Year to date, Unit 2 operated at a l

79.7% EAF which is below the 84.7% target.

1 i

I Data Source: GADS Report 1

Tarcets: Plant Manacement I

l Indicator Type unc unpo corp Div j

1 A5

FORCED OUTAGE RATE Month %

a y.r.o %

TURKEY POINTUNIT3

@ YE%

100 i

A Y E Target V

g

$ 60 -

w u

m E 40 _"""""A

\\

as.1%

\\

i um 20 -" """""""*" irn" " "

A

- m sa i

s A

l tous T-E Teen.2n l 0

^

Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec FoR% Current Month 6.P,iilif!2MiMMF2Is'.

0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FOR% Y T D 3.8 l 1.2 l 15.6 l 1.8 l 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.S Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of time that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time planned for electncal generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of ;he next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service).

Forced Outage Rate =

Forced Outaae Hours x 10%

Forced Outage Hours + Sennce Hours

Statistical Summary

-IndustryPerformance -

h M 12Mc Endino FOR 1995 0.0% 0.6%

1.5%

FOR 1994 11.0 % 1.9%

1.9%

1994 (PWR's) 8.1%

1994 (M Types) 10.6%

IJE2Ria.

1990 1994 (PWR's) 7.6%

1990 1994 (M Types) 10.8%

YeatEnd 1995 2.3%

YearEnd 1994 5.0%

Pedormance Summary Unit 3 had no forced outages in November.

Data Source: GPIF Report Tercets FisntManacement

' indicator Type x nRc lupo corp x

oiv A-6

l FORCED OUTAGE RATE l

Month %

l o y.T.0 %

TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 l

M YE%

100 A Y ETarget 1

M l

V 80 -

!ig 60 -

" " " " " " " " " ~ " " " " -

wo 1

h 40{""""E"""""""""""*

-- ~ ~ " " "

" " " " " ~ " " " " " " -

an 20 - """""" " A" gys" """

A l ms v4 iny: m l

~

^

0 X'

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec FOR% Current Month

MCABIEfh6MMi 0.0 0.0 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FOR% Y T-D 11.4 1.8 13.2 2.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 6.0 4.5 3.6 3.0 2.6 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of time that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the tme planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures ar d events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in serv'ce),

l Forced Outage Rate =

S rvce Hours

Forced ge urs Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance.

Nov M 12 Mo. Endina FOR 1995 0.0%

1.6%

1.9%

FOR 1994 4.5%

3.9%

1994 (PWR's) 8.1%

1994 (AllTypes) 10.6%

Taroew 1990 1994 (PWR's) 7.6%

1990 1994 (AllTypes) 10.8 %

Year End 1995 2.6%

Year End - 1994 5.0%

Performance Summary Unit 4 had no Forced Outages in November.

l l

l Data Source: GPIF Report Tarcets: Plant Manawment l

Indicator Type x NRc supo corp oiv A7

i FORCED OUTAGE RATE

' onth %

M

_ o _ y.7.o s ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 i

r/ YE%

100 -

i A Y.E Target

[Goodl

~

V 80 - " ~ " " " " " " " " " " "

g so wa CE E 40 -

20- " " ~ ~ " " " " " " " " " " "

P

- dL m =m

=

' 7) & dl*>> A &2

,,,, m. m 0

A Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec FOR% Current Month WWS%13$@4LQ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 98.0 100 40.7 4.3 FOR% Y.T.0 16.6 l 1.2 l 3.5 l 2.1 l 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 14.4 24.1 25.'8 23.8 Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of time that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time planned for electrical generation. Forced eventt are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available. but not in service).

Forced Outage Rate =

Forced Outage Hours x 100%

Forced Outage Hours + Service Hours

. Statistical Summary Industry Performance h M 12-Mi Endina NERC/ GADS FOR.1995 4.3%

23.8 %

21.8%

FOR - 1994 0.0%

43%

3.9%

1994 (PWs) 8.1%

1994 (AllTypes) 10.6%

1990 1994 (PWR's) 7.6%

1990 1994 (AllTypes) 10.8 %

Year End.1995 2.6%

Year End.1994 5.3%

Performance Summary Unit 1 Forced Outage Rate in November was 4.3% as a result of repair to the 'B' Main Feedwater Regulating Valve.

For the year, Forced Outage Rate was 23.8%.

Data Source: GPlF Report Tamets Plant Manaoement Indicator Type NRc inp0 corp x

Div A-8

L.

1

\\

l FORCED OUTAGE RATE i

Month %

j l

c>- y.T.o %

ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 l

W YE%

100 A Y-ETarget lii;211 V

i

\\

80 - - -- - ~~-~~~~~ -

~ ~ ~ ~

- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

- ~ ~ ~~~~-

\\

y 60-w

- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - -

- --~~~~ -- -~~---- -

~~ --- --

1 o

i 12-E 40-

- -- -~~~~~~-

- - -- -~~~~~

~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ - ~ ~

l l

20

- Ei y p" h= m,e m i

^

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec FOR% Current Month

@ O l* W G :4 C I M 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 FOR% Y T-D 10.2 0

8.1 l 23.5 l 2.3 0.0 5.6 3.6 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.5 2.8 2.5 2.4 2.4 Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of time that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the tme planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditons that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service).

ForceWage Rate =

ForcedO age urs S ice Hours

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance g

YTD 1?-Mo Endino FOR 1995 0.0%

2.4%

2.2%

NERC/ GADS FOR 1994 0.0%

2.6%

2.3%

1994 (PWR's) 8.1%

1994 (An Types) 10.6%

T,,ggg!g, 1990 1994 (PWR s) 7.6%

YearEnd 1995 2.3%

Year End 1994 5.3%

Performance Summary Unit 2 had no Forced Outages in November.

Data Source: GPIF Report Taroets: Plant Manaoernent Indicator Type X NRC INPO Corp X

Div A-9

~ +.

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC TRIPS WHILE CRITICAL A"Y E Target TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 5

IGoe I

...................................................Y..

,i 4

v>

~

9:

3-u.

O a:

E 2-lE D

1995 WE Target f

f f

f s 1 per Unit j-

.. A.. 4...4.

...A 0

Year End Year 1995 i

i Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3 2

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 PTN 4 W

2 0

1 1

2 0

0 0

,f? ",;

~Definitionsh

~

l An Unplanned Automatic Scram is a non-manual actuation of the reactor protection system that results in a scrarn signal any time the unit is critcal. Scrams that are planned as part of special evaluations or tests are not included in this definition. The indcator provides an indication of success in improving plant safety by reducing the number of undesirable and unplanned thermalhydraulic and reactivity transients requiring reactor scrams. It also j

provides an indication of how weH a plant is operated and maintained.

l

^l Statistical Summaryw : %

M

IndustryPerformance e

Nov YTD 12-Mo. Endina E

10'id0d PTN 3 0

0 Tnps per 7000 Critical Hours Tnps per 7000 Cribcal Hours 0.9 3-yr Distnbution Median (7/92 6/95) 1.0 1994 Median 0.8 PTN 4 0

0 1995 Goal 1.0 Trips per 7000 Cntical Hours 0.0 NBC (19951st Ott Perforrnance Indicator Rpt)

Ottfy Trips Annualized 1.0 Ottty Tnps Per 7000 Critical Hours 0.8 1

1995 Year End Target per Unit s1 Performance 0 Summary:

- ?

Turkey Point had no Unplanned Automatic Trips in November.

I Data Source Monthly VahJe Ucensee Event Reports indicatorType.

X NRC X INPO X Corp X

Div A-10

l l

UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC TRIPS WHILE CRITICAL A E Target Y

i ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 l

5 l

M i

V 4_

?__

f3-

~ ~ ~

- - - - ~ ~ ~ " -

~~~~~

~~ ~~ - ----~~ - -- - ----

O a:g 2-

s 1995 Y/E Target DZ f

f f

s 1 per Urut j-W n A..

........p,..........

....yg 0

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL 1 0

2 1

0 4

0 0

1 0

0 0

0 PSL 2 1

0 1

0 0

0 Definitions An Unplanned Automatic Scram is a non-rnanual actuation of the reactor protection system that results in a scram signal any time the unit is critical. Scrams that are planned as part of special evaluatons or tests are not included in this definition. The indicator provides an indicaton of success in improving plant safety by reducing the number of undesirable and unplanned thermal-hydraulic and reactivity transients requiring reactor scrams. It also provides an indicaton of how well a plant is operated and main +ained.

l

~

cStatistical. Summary %

4 D FindustryPerformancen-k

}{gy M 12-Mo Endino g

Tnps per 7000 Neal Hous PSL1 0

1 3-yr Distnbution Median (7/92 6/95) 1.0 Tnps per 7000 Cnbcal Hours 1.0 1994 Median 0.8 1995 Goal 1.0 MBQ (19951st Ott Performance Indicator Rpt) per 7000 Cnbcal Hours 1.0 OtttyTrips Annualized 1.0 Ottty Trips Per 7000 Cnbcal Hours 0.8 1995 Year End Tarcet per Unit s1 Performance Summary-St. Lucie had no Unplanned Automate Trips in November. Year-to4 ate, two auto trips have been reported:

7/08 5 St. Lucie Unit 1 tripped during Turbine Overspeed~ Surveillance Testng due to Personnel Error.

l 2/21/95 St. Lucie Unit 2 tripped on low A train Steam Generator water level due to failure of tne Feedwater Regulating System Level Transmitter.

l Data Source: MortNy Value - Ucensee Event Reoorts h INPO X Corp Div Indicator Type X NRC A-11

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 6

lGoodl

~

...........................................................t.

3_.....................................

v3 i

w t

1 m

y y.

1

=!

L is 3-O m

E 2-

E

s z

j

.7.

/

\\

/'

\\

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990. 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Otr 4th Qtr PTN 3 0

0 0

Quarter

_,7, 4 v

" YM "

^

o o

o gg MPTN 3 4

0 3

2 1

,gi

. v-

-PTN 4 4

0 1

1 0

-~

lt, Definitions This indicator includes any event or condition that could prevent the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems. Twenty.six safety systems, subsystems, and components are monito ed for plants that have received an operatinglicense.

-: Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 1

3rd Running Safety System Failures g

S

. igg, 1st Running 1995. PTN 3 0

0 1

E

.2l.

XID.

_1,22.

1994. PTN 3 0

0 0

1995 SSFAlnit

.28

.34 1995. PTN 4 0

0 0

1994. PTN 4 0

0 0

Performance. Summary.

Turkey Point reported no Safety System Failures in the 3rd Quarter of 1995.

t Contact Tia Hellnegel 246-6791 Indicator Type Nnc unPo O corp D oi, A 12

i SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 6

L%ssJ

..................................................Y...

3_

u>

we p

4

=!

A E

3-O e

m m

2-llE oZ j_

.......7.......

//

~

/'

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Otr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr U

0 ouarter e-M Psl2 4

0 0

0 m1 0

1 0

Year-End

_. zr

-Pst 2 0

1 0

0 0

4 Definitions This indicator includes any event or condition that could prevent the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems. Twenty-six safety systems, subsystems, and components are monitored for plants that have received an operatng license.

l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 3rd Running Safety System Failures 2L M

M 1st Running 1995. PSL 1 1

1 1

fag, g

mA 1994 PSL1 0

0 0

1995 SSF/ Unit

.28

.34 1995 - PSL 2 0

0 0

1994. PSL 2 0

0 0

Performance Summary St. Lucie reported one Safety System Failure in the 3rd Quarter of 1995:

LER #335-95 005 dated 8/22/95 Reactor Coolant System Power Operated Relieve Valves (and Low Temperature Overpressure Protection System) Inoperable due to Personnel Error, i

Contact Mike Snyder 467 7036

[

I Indicator Type x une supo corp oi, A-13 l

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS l

A -E Target Y

i TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 & 4 5

Lci,.J

~

1 i

= 4_..................................

OP l

R 3- ' " " " " " * " " " " " " " " " ~ " "

" " " " " " " " ~ " " " " * " * " " " " " " * * " " " " "

O4 tL O

2-a:

1995 Y/E Target 3

f f #

f C 1 per Unit 3 j

.....g

..A.,

..gA z

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Fpb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov De:

PTN 3 1

0 1

0 0

0 PTN 4 Z

0 1

2 0

0 0

Definitions-Unplanned Safety Systern Actuations include actual and inadvertent actuadons of Emergency Core Cooling Systems, as well as actuations of emergency AC power systems due to loss of power to a vital bus (INPO definition).

Statistical Summary

-IndustryPerformance A

E g

1st Otr 0

O 9

g SSA 1st Otr 1995 Average 0.10 SSA Running 4 Otr Avg 0.41 Target.1995 Year End Target per Unit: s1 Note: Runrung 4 Otr Average Value annualized Performance-Summary Turkey Point reported no Safety System Actuations in November.,

1 Data Source: MontNy Value Ucensee Event Reports l

Contact:

Jim Knorr,246-6757 l

Indicator Type.

x NRc x nnpo ce3 0;,

A 14

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS A E Target Y" """

ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 5

l Good l g[

1 OP 3 -- -

u.

O 2-E-

=

1995,YE Target

s

,u j

.. A....s

....A O'

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL1 3

0 0

1 3

0 0

0 1

0 0

2 PSL2 1

0 1

1 0

0 0

0 Definitions Unplanned Safety System Actuations include actual and inadvertent actuations of Emergency Core Cooling Systems, as well as actuations of emergency AC power systems due to loss of power to a vital bus (INPO definition).

Statisticai Summary industryPerformance

.ex m

uac m.ot PSL1 2

3 SSA1stOtt1995 Average 0.10 PSL2 0

0 SSA Running 4 Otr Avg 0.41 Igggi 1995 Year-EndTargetperUnd: 51 Note: Rurnng 4 Ott Average Value annualized Performance Summary Unit 2 reported two Safety System Actuations on November 16th:

(1) A manual trip was initated due to a failure of the 1B Main Feed Regulating Valve Controller. Reactor Protection System (RPS) actuated as designed following the manual trip.

(2) Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System also actuated as designed on low Steam Generator level.

l Data Source: Monthly Value. Ucensee Event Reports Contact Mike Snyder. 465-3363

' indicator Type X NRC X INPO Corp Div A-15 i

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE SAFETf INJECTION SYSTEM TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 0.10 l

IGoodl l

~~"-----~~~~----"--"V g

l c

0.08- ~~~~--~~- --~~~

e

%u O

l 0.06 -

E f

o.u....................................

I 0.02-

- ~ ~ -

~ ~ ~.016 -

y1.

_~ ~ ~ ~_~ _ _- _~ ~_ _ _- ~_~ ~_~ _~ ~_~ ~_~i_gy, g"_. igg _

4 3

N.015.015 g 0

_ M k

x re-1 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Ott 4th Otr r.fd PTN 3

" w' j;

.004

.001

.008 Quarter m4

?

s'

.004

.001

.007 m3

.002

.019

.002

.011

.010 m <'

,~

7 f Ef..

Year End PTN 4

.002

.000

.001

.012

..^

e+

. Definitions This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the readiness of the Safety injection (SI) System to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is detemiined from the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The defnition is further explained: comoonent unavailability is the ratio of the hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a quarterly basis.

(Known Unavaitable Hours) + (Eshmated Unavailable Hours)

Unavailability =

(Hours System Re0uired) x (Number of Trains)

Statiucal; Summary IndustryPerformance

\\

sc.cz PTN 31995

.008 PTN 31994

.016 ELPQ.

Unavailmhiktv July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.003 0.008 PTN 41995

.007 l

PTN 4 1994

.017 1995 Goal 0.020 IA.Q9.t 1995 Year-End Target.016 1994 YearJ hd Target.016 Performance Summary.

Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Safety injection System performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year-End l

target and industry Median.

l Data Source: Plant Data Books

Contact:

Carlos Melchor 246-6964 Indicator Type NnC x uNpo carp Div A 16

I l

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM ST. LUCIE UNITS 1'& 2 0.10 l Good l

~

5 s::

3 o.os_

t S

~

O

~

0.06 -

C i

E< 0.04 -

=!

!3.023.023.023 1995 Tu*.023-g 0.02-n-Q ++

dm 0_

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st otr 2nd otr 3rd otr 4th otr 1771PsL 1 i%-

141

.018

.000 i

Quarter

' ' ' " =

h' i

.024

.000 PsL 2 L1

.004 m

E

.002

.024 Year-End

. m 2

m.

EHM st 2

.016

.011

.007

.003

.008 P

1 Definitions--

This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the readiness of the High Pressure Safety injection (HPSI) System l

to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definition is further explained: comoonent unavailability is the ratio of the hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a quarterly basis.

Mn wn Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unava2able Hours)

Unavailability =

(Hours System Reauired) x (Number of Trains) l Statistical Summary ~

IndustryPerformance anon PSL1 1995 E

INPO UnavaitabMy l

PSL1 1994

.058 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.003 - 0.008 l

PSL21994

.010 1995 Goal 0.020 Target 1995 Year End Target.023 l

1994 Year.End Target.023 Performance Summary St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 High Pressure Safety injection System performance fer the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year-End target and Industry Median.

Contact Cathenne Swiatek 467 7081 Indicator Type NRc nnpo carp ois A-17

~

-A..

9 SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE l

AUXI!JARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM i

TURKEY P0lNT UNITS 3 & 4 0.20 IGood l V

F a 0.15--

li=

2.

l l

0.10 i

m l

3

> 0.05- ' " ' " ' " " " " ' "

4 AA 3

.o4

.04 A

L*52=re_o2_a

_- g 0

.o25

~

0 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtt 2nd Ott 3rd Qtr 4th Otr rn PTN 3

<f'

.009

.003

.021 D D N +'

'E

.004

.002

.025 4

Quarter 4

PTN 4

(

y,g i x NPTN 3 004

.002

.o31 007

.028 H;,a 1.1i,,

r--

PTN 4

.018

.003 035 007 015 2.C m:

m s

Definitions

+

This Safety System Performance indicator rnonitors the readiness of the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System to respond to off-norrnal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilities, due to a0 causes, of the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definition is further explained: comoonent unavailability is the ratio of hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a quarterly basis.

AFW UnavaHability= (Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavailable Hoursi t

(Hours System Required) x (Number of Trains)

' Statistical Summary

IndustryPerformance aman PTN 31995

.021 E

UnavalLibi?itv i

PTN 31994

.012 July 1992 June 1995Medan(PWR) 0.004 0.009 PTN 4 1994

.013 1995 Goal 0.025 Target:

1995 Year EndTarget.020 l

1994 Year End Taraet.015 l

Performance Summary Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Auxiliary Feedwater System performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was higher than the Year-End target and industry Median as a result of: Part 21 repairs on the Trip and Trottle Valves and Unit 3 outage work.

Data Source: Plant Data Books Contact W. Raasch. 246-6527 Indicator Type NRC

{ INPO Corp D Div A-18

l' i

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 0.20 l Good l

$ 0.15 --

V l

5 a

9.

E g o.3 o.-........................

l m

<c J

E>

g 0.05 -

-(

;X 2 j'd

_ tas2 r_m.1 0

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 ist Ott 2nd Otr 3rd Otr 4th Otr v Psl1

.000

.001 016 Ouamt Pst 2

.003

.001

.084 m PsL1

.010

.013 Os7

.007

.018 q.

- PSL 2

.013

.017 011 007

.006

+

7 Year-End Definitions This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the reddiness of the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of l

the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definiton is further explained: comoonent unavai! ability is the ratio of hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data ls reported on a quarterly basis.

(Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unava!!able Hours)

AFW Unavailability =

(Hours System Required) x (Number of Trains) l Statistical Summary Industry Performance 3rd Ott PSL1 1995

.016 EQ,,

Unavailabiw PSL1 1994

.023 s

July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.004 0.009 PSL21995

.084 PSL21994

.004 1995 Goal 0.025 la2.t:

1995 Year-End Target.021 l

1994 Year-End Taroet.021 j

i l

Performance Summary Performance of the Unit 1 Auxiliary Feedwater System for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year-End target but higher than j

l the industry Median.

l St. Lucie Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 exceeded the Year-End target and industry Median as a result of three events: (1) a discovered discrepancy between field winng and the plant winng drawing i

for the AFW PP 28; (2) when starting the AFW PP 2C with steam admission valve MV 0813, it did not open; and (3) mechanical tnp knkage for the AFW PP 2C tnpped when the Electncal Overspeed Solenoid was energ' zed.

Contact:

W.C. Green 467 7038 l

t Indicator Type-NRC X INPO Corp Div l

A 19

l l

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY i

I TURKEY POINT UNITS 3A and 3B 1

l 020

~

l Good l U

Sh 8

lii i

=

2.

\\

w

$ 0.10 _

iii 5

ii:

$ 0.05-z

.030 025

A.017.015 3

~

A A

. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ insInvest!.

Nritm8 rm

._ rn._

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Otr 3rdOtt 4th Otr r n 3A 001

.000

+ - -,

ouartet n

3~

l

..F

.014

.000

.000 3,

n u 3A

.013

.000

.007

.000

.007 y,,,g

"" 38

.016

.000

.002

.003

. Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) perk =ance is the sum of the unavailabilites, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, %ied by the number of hovet ta system was required for service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level Th=_t is. unavailable hours are recorded i

I only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC powst. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailabilty values for the two EDG's at the site.

Value for each EDG = (Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavailable Hours)

(Hours System Reauired)

LStatistical Summary Industry Performance-

\\

strE TOTAts 3rd Otr 4 0'r Movino Ava E

Unavailmhiirhr EDG Unavailability 1995

.000

.004 EDG Unavailability 1994

.006

.004 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009 0.014 IE2g 1995 Goal 0.025 1995 Year-End Target.015 1994 Year-End Target.015 Performance Summary l

Turkey Point 3A and 3B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailabihty performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year End target and Industry Median.

i l

i Data Source: Plant Data Books l

Contact 0 Tomaszewski,2464158 Indicator Type uRc supo corp Div A 20

I l

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY i

TURKEY POINT UNITS 4A and 48 0.20 [

l Good l s::

V c-* 0.15 -

lii 8

,N o,30 iii g o.03_

z

.030 025 3

A

.017

,.015 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ipslary:.ci!,

A m

EE m

Year End Year 1995

' Legend / Period 1991l1992 1993 1994 1stQtr 2nd Ott 3rd Qtr 4thQtr 1990 PA 4A

'e a 'a m

.000

.005

.000 Quarter

' " ^

~

de

,7

.000

.005

.000 000 00'

'002

'.000

^'

~

'.~

Year End

" 4B rVa

.008 001

.002 c

010 Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailability values for the two EDG's on each site.

(Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavailable Hoursi Value for each EDG =

(Hours System Required Statistical Summary.

IndustryPerformance SITE TOTALS 3rd Ott 4 O'r Movina Ava EDG Unavaibbihty 1995

.000

.002 EDG Unavailability 1994

.005

.006 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009 0.014 Imggt-1995 Goal 0.025 1995 Year EndTarget.015 1994 Year.EndTarget.015

~ Performance Summary Turkey Point 4A and 4B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year End target and Industry Median.

l l

Data Source: Plant Data Books

Contact:

D. Tomaszewski,246-6158 l

ndicator Type unc unpo corp Div A 21

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 A and 1B l

020 :

lomol S

Y l

3! 0.15 - ' ''

~

l g

i; 0,20 :......................

J E

j

-a Q 0.05-

~'

p.016

.0

.016.016

.023 l

_ 1_995_ Tar 1et:.01_6

,; AA 0

Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Otr 2nd Otr 3rd Ott 4th Otr M 1A

.000 018

.025 Q

r O-18 t

.000

.166

.062 Year End w 1A

.025

.011

.018 m

.006 18

.007 014 020

.000 008 l

Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailability values for the two EDG's on each unit.

J Value for each EDG = (Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estmated Unavailable Hours)

(Hours System Required)

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Site Totals 3~j Otr 4 Otr Movino Ava ELAQ.

UnaveabitW EDG Unavailability 1995

.044

.035

)

EDG Unavailability 1994

.012

.009 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009 0.014 g

1995 Goal 0.021 1995 Year End Target.016 1994 Year-End Target.016 l

Performance Summary l

St. Lucie Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was above the Year End l

target and Industry Median as a result of a failure of 1B Diesel 12 cylinder Engine Vahe.

1 Contact R. L Kutavich 467 7080 Indicator Type D nnpo coro oiv unc A 22

=-

SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY ST. LUCIE UNITS 2A and 2B 0.20 lGoodl i

y

@ 0.15{

li=

S

~

f h 0.10f is l

~

1

.ag l

g 0.05- ""'"""q"

" " ' ' " " ' ' " " " ~ ~ " ' ' " " ' " " -

h

.023 l

A

.016.016 6

A A w

_ _ _ _ _ _ _19_95_ Tar 9ft:.016_

M r-4:ll r,em N em 0

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1stOtt 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4thQtr u 2A

.002

.000

.000 Quarter

^

28

.003

.000

.000 4

n x i 2A

.012 017 2

005 23 Year End s

- 2B

.011

.020 010

.007

.006

' C,_-,g_

s

'~i*

Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for service. The l

emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailabildy values for the two EDG's on each unit.

(Known Unavailable Hours) + (Eshmated Unavailable Hours)

Value for each EDG =

(Hours System Reautred)

Statistical Summary Industiy Performance.

strE TOTAts 301Qtt 4 01Movino Av Jt{2D_

Unavaitability EDG Unavailability 1995

.000

.026 EDG Unavailability 1994

.008

.009 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.000 0.014 Target:

1995 Goal 0.025 1995 Year End Target.016 1994 Year-End Target.016 Performance Summary l

Units 2A and 2B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the

[

Year End target and Industry Median.

2 4

Contact:

R. L Kulavich 467 7080 Indicator Type unc x InPo coro ois A 23

FUEL RELIABILITY uone EZ2 Past Cycle TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 X

Outage i

i XX NoStmWSt*

CYCLE 15 1E 00,

J l Good l is.oii

...y.

E' E

3 1s 02 ]

.__- _ _ _ __ _ a9sImu.sem q,,,,.,

~

g is.04 E

E f 1E-05 h 1E 07 Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 10 11 12 13 14 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Month

~

im*

tm4 im4 tm4 im4 tm4 tm4 tm4 X

tm4 tm4

uaEG 1 MEd 8.70E+1.75ES116E 4

' Definitions Fuel rehability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 activity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady-state operaton above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data is adjusted by correcting for the activity of the naturally occumng fissionable material in the zircailoy cladding, and by normalizing to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel Reliability is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1 131 microcuries per gram.

NQte: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E 6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 microcuries per gram.

Statistical Summary Industry Performance i

un FuelReliability 1995 1.00E 06 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Median 7.36 E-05 1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E-06 1995 Year End Target 54.5E 03 Performance Summary S

Unit 3 Fuel Reliability was 1.00E 06.

Data Source: Nuclear Fuel / JPN

Contact:

Modesto Jirnenez 694-3323 Indicator Type Nnc D nNeo corp Div A 24

FUEL RELIABILITY mm u nm

'"' 4**

TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 x

ou=98 XX No Steady S**

CYCLE 15 1E 00 g locool

.g>

1E-01 g o

V

=

g 1E 02 3_

25 T.A:26t.UEQ

_i_

1E-03 5

E E

2 1E 04 3 cr

=

92

(

=!

1E 05 l_

l a

o t

w 1E 063 E

1E 07 --

l Cycle Year 1995 l

Legend / Period 11 12 13 14 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month N4 24 m4 N4N4 m4 m4 m4 122f4 24 Sm4 t

3J4E C 1.06E@

7.43E44 120E46

\\

l

' Definitions Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 activity calculated from samples taken following at

)

l least three days of steady state operation above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data is adjusted by correcting for the activity of the naturally occurring fissionable material in the zirca!!oy cladding, and by normalizing to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel ReHability is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1131 micro-curies per gram.

l Mqh: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E-6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 microcuries per gram.

l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Hu Fuel Reliability 1995 5.20E-06 E

1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Medan 7.36 E-05 1994 Best Quartle 3.00 E-06 1995 Year End Target 54.5E03 Performance Summary Unit 4 's Fuel Reliability contnues to indicate zero fuel defects in Cycle 15.

I Data Source: Nudear Fuel / JPN Contact ModestoJimenez 694 3323 Indicator Type NRC X INPO Corp Div A 25

FUEL RELIABILITY su m mone 4

~

E ' CY'"

ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 X

Outage XX No Stasay State CYCLE 13 1E 00,

E l Good l is.oi p y.

8 E

iE o2 y g4-m xE 1

1E43 y s

E D

1E 04 1E-05 W

1E46 m

~

t E 0, Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 9

10 11 12 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 'Sep Oct Nov Dec n

Nd Nd N4Nd t 821d Nd N4 N4 N4 Month 2

534E43 5.41E43 5.17E44 140r.O,

Definitions Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 activity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady state operation above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data is adjusted by correcting for the activity of the naturally occurring fissionable material in the tircalloy claddog. and by normalizing to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel Reliability is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1131 micro-curies per gram.

Note: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E 6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 microcuries per oram.

Statistical Summary Industry Performance Nov IMP.Q FuelReliabaity 1995 2.45E-05 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Median 7.36 E-05 1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E-06 1995 Year EndTarget s;4.5E 03 Performance Summary Reactor Coolant System radioisotopic data and spiking iodine following a reactor shutdown at the end of February and in July indicate the presence of one third-cycle failed fuel rod in the current Cycle 13.

Data Source: Nuclear Fuel /JPN

Contact:

Modesto Jimenez 694-3323 Indicator Type NRC D INeo O corp oiv A 26

t FUEL RELIABILITY m uontn Po"ui.e ST. LUCIE UNIT 2

' Y*

xx wo st.oy s'*

CYCLE 9 1E 00 E l

3 IGoodI g

is.oiy

.........y..

o

=

l 1E-02 ]

=

_- _ _ _ _ _. _.199sinet.ises.9 l

2 1,.03.;

3 5

g 1E44 3 1E 05 M

Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 4

5 6

7 8

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

FASE4 tmE4 1844 hee 4 1.11E4 05E4 McE4 4.185 4 tM 4 X

X 2.01E-02 171E43 3.92EC t.5E45 162E 05 Definitions Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 activity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady-state operation above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data I

is adjusted by correcting for the activity of the naturally occurring fissionable material in the zircalloy cladding, and by li normalizing to the plant's letdown punfication rate. This indicator for Fuel Reliability is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1-131 micro-curies per gram.

N.01g: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E 6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 merocunes per gram.

Statistical Summary Industry Performance Nov LNEQ FuelReliability 1995 Outage 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Median 7.36 E-05 1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E 06 1995 Year End Target s4.5E-03 Performance Summary Unit 2 remained shutdown for refueling through November.

Data Source: Nuclear Fuel / JPN Contact ModestoJimene2 694-3323 Indicator Type Nnc x INeo corp O Div l

A 27

I l

I FUEL UTILIZATION Planned s<;

TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 CYCLE 15 Actu*' -*-

500 :

a E

Planned Design Energy 501 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD) _

..I j

"[

Calendar Days for Cycle 15: 498 Days

/

8 7 400 -

O it

.i yC

,t

.ig g i 300-i 82 8l -

A.@~

Eo

+

.t u t s

,g, O CL.

x' wi ri 4

yw gQQ E............................................../.

-g r-g e -

,1..

s a

/,

I

.g og E

A,,: -

s

@ 2:

5 w

"""""""'o # g, s.,

vi z !!!

~

+

100 :

w

',r,-

% i w *c a"

2 p d.is cg!pe!Lesp_jpL,, Jg ygspg!ymi !!!g gi

~

. & DPtra und -

4 EFPtre maainin0 8

0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Planned Burnup(EFPD) 5 35 66 98 127 158 188 219 249 281 312 342 373 403 435 466 494 501 l

Actual Burnup(EFPD) 18 47 j

Variance (EFPD)(+/-)

+13 +12

$ b.h hk Y

$llEYSb{$

$Y i Yh Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operatng the reactor at maximum thermal rating (2200 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual Er.ergy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle runs.

% ; dip Q w y 3..~

-.s,er.~s - w m.

, w.

&n fjgjf Q Q $gg p 6,0ng M;Q.

, ~. -

. a..

~ f &.,. W.

^Qi z

Q y

in accordance with the April 26,1995 Approved Operabng Schedule (AOS), Unit 3, Cycle 15 is scheduled to run 498 calendar days (October 27,1995 to March 8,1997) with design energy to run 501 (EFPD) days.

Note: Due to tne 34 day outage, startup began on October 7,1995,20 days earlier than planned.

ActualEnergy + CalendarDays = FuelUtilizationFactor llCY$ y&;Q&R0ff01MBRCOlSUMM8fY$$&g&. ykW.g&,y$UtI&y$

._.4 U' nit 3 achieved a Fuel Utilization Factor of 97.0% and operated for 698 effective full power hours in the month of November. For the penod October 7,1995 to November 30,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 85.2%.

Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: Nuclear Fuel l

Contact Ed Knuckles 694 3320 l

NRc lNpo corp @ Div

- bindlCbt0flypefG A 28

FUEL UTILIZATION l

Planned., O_

l Actual --+-

TUFlKEY POINT UNIT 4 CYCLE 15 l

500 _

E Planned Design Energy 445 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD)

Calendar Days for Cycle 15: 460 Days o

1 w 400 -

i.....

@C3iir 5

Lc*ad= *2=_d

'3.9*e *2=ataat_

._4 g

{

N6 EFPD's used 79 EFPD's femening ll3l' l

l

=

300 -

O 83-on O=

s

>L ggg.:. -. ~. - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. - ~ ~ ~. - - -.. - -

og CC.

8

'Es W ti

=

ze s

W g;

i

)5' 0-1 Nov De'c Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar 1

Planned Bumup (EFPD) 4 34 64 91 121 150 180 209 239 269 298 328 357 387 417 445 l

Actual Bumup (EFPD) 13 42 73 101 125 15F iB6 215 246 276 306 337 366 Variance (EFPD) (+/-)

+9

+8

+9

+10

+4 e5

+6

+7 +7

+8

+9

+9 A SYMWB??*:: i3%WWDefinhldhs#nWik:; MiY#?}?vCTi' ~ '~

Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effectve full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operatng the reactor at maximum thermal ratng (2200 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual Energy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilizaton is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuelcycle runs.

?n?yp%

. jif Q1 f&ym'&fNW&&l&Jf{t&&

The actual Unit 4 Cycle 15 start-up was on November 14,1994,13 days earlier than the November 27, 1994 assumption in the October 28,1994 Approved Operating Schedule (AOS). Cycle 15 is scheduled to run to March 1, 1996, with a design energy of 445 EFPD.

Actual Energy. Calendar Days = FuelUtilizaton Factor y

-4:

M[ y% ;jpgrfffgghggj gy[gggfy{jggjpp Q;jQ Unit 4 achieved a Fuel Unlization Factor of 96.7% and operated for 696 effective full power hours in the month of November 1995. For the period of November 14,1994 to November 30,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 95 2 %

Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: NuclearFuel Contact Ed Knuckles 694-3320 t

.IndiceforType;.'

NRC INPO Corp X

Div A 29

FUEL UTILIZATION Planned sn ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 CYCLE 13 Actual -+--

500 -

Planned Design Energy 461 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD) 1 Calendar Days for Cycle 13: 475 Days 2 400q.....................................................................

o g-w a 2

=

i

3 y

u) 300 -

= Lee gf e,g _, utee*_ne.e,,,;,_

g 5

+2n EFPO's used 190 EFPD'sromanng 7-

2

.E 3g 200 ::

X, oe s n 1 I, ct:.i!:

e>

<a wg

=

p'.

2- @

s"

'l l 1

.W5 100 -E C

9

~

E g w>4

{ h g

r-1-

sv w

3 ji y-y --

0-

' }',

Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Planned Bumup(EFPD) 11 41 68 98 127 158 187 217 247 276 306 335 366 396 423 453 461 Actual Bumup (EFPD) 29 60 86 109 139 170 199 227 227 227 244 271 Variance (EFPD) (+/-)

+18 +19 +18 +11 +12 +12 +12 +10 20 49 62 64 7%P:f gN Q

$$rnh76

&.M~gl*$%nk@w;mn:Q.;Mgg[S~@~hww a,spd%9NDERdOM an we uK a mam%

Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operating the reactor at maximum thermal rating (2700 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual Energy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle runs.

i%FWMMSMMEnnilCjid6[ieldi$tihiGiithiip~Noliid$$$205@iEMi in accordance wih the October 28,1994 Approved Operating Schedule (AOS), Unit 1, Cycle 13 was scheduled to begin operation December 20,1994. This provided for a cycle of 475 calendar days with design energy to run 461 effective full power days (EFPD). Unit 1, Cycle 13 actually began operation November 29,1994 and is currently scheduled to refuel April 8,1996.

Per the revised Approved Operating Schedule dated April 26,1995, the unit will shutdown 13 days earlier than previously scheduled.

ActualEnergy i CalendarDays = FuelUtilization Factor

~wwwww um p pPetfotM8DCe)Su:rntnery;~& nam z QWw ; '

~~~

%u

...n-,& %n W:o

.. n qi T

Unit 1 achieved a Fuel Utilization Factor of 90.9% and operated at 655 effective full power hours in the month of November. For the period of April 22,1994 through November 30,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 74.0%.

1 Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: Nudear Fuel

Contact:

Erwin Wundertsh 694 3435 NRC lNPO D cacP x

Div UlndlCatohTypeW%

A 30

FUEL UTILIZATION

{

Planned,,c Adu*' -*-

ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 CYCLE 9 500 n

e lll.

400 -i - " " - " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " - - " " " " " " " - " " " " - "

a w

o m

De Ub E gg ~

.....u g a-

.i Cycle 9 operation is expected to M0 l begin on January 2,1996.

=

j ee oc.2:

W ti 2: e l

W E 100i 7:

0-Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Planned Burnup (EFPD) l Actual Bumup (EFPD) l Variance (EFPD) (+/-)

ry.+v m gn m, :.;a mnyDeHnltio' nsu~,oy rs M ;+;ni;y+y m u,,i+

. urn ; -

p,w

,~ y

+

, MP T yny e.5, r l

R^~- m ~

l Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear l

energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operatng the reactor at l

maximum thermal rating (2700 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual i

Energy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle runs.

f-

'E*

w,

-. -........,,.,,d [ ' ?

m, x,,.

, % n.a~

.... _. [

'r n.,

2;,

P,-

i l

Actual Energy + Calendar Days = Fuel Utilization Factor

, ~.. -.

n

'k.*

Ss e'*>

h&

,,. a.

r.,,..

~.& ~

ll e

i Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: Nuclear Fuel

Contact:

Erwin Wunderlich 694 3439

' ~iindicator Type?

NRC INPO

. Corp X

Div A 31 i

l

l CAPACITY FACTOR (MDC NET)

{

y[

TURKEY POINT UNITS.3 & 4 W

== pTn 3 y.E 4

g PTN 4 Y E D

O= PTh 4 Y T.D Goojd C")= FTN 3 Y T-D g

j(

E 1

g so:

)

0 i

40 1

20 -

7-

/

EE l

0 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month %

104 103 101 94.9 99.9 97.3 100 99.4 7.9 57.4 101 Y.T D %

57.6 22.5 58.4 97.0 84.4 104 104 103 101 101 100 100 99.9 89.8 86.5 87.8 Month %

105 104 79.0 103 101 97.9 101 97.9 101 102 99.5 YTD%

75.1 l 13.7 l 79.3 l 81.4 83.0 105 105 95.7 97.4 98.1 98.1 98.4 98.4 98.7 99.0 99.1 Definitions l

Unit Capacity Factor (using Maximum Dependable Capacity)is the ratio of the net electrical energy generated to the product of rnaximum dependable capacity multiplied by the hours in the reportng period. The maximum dependable capacity is the gross electrical output measured at the output terminals of the turbine generator during the most restricthe seasonal condition less the normal station service loads. The higher the capacity factor, the closer the plant is to operating at its dependable energy production capacity.

Net Electrical Enerav p

x 100%

__ Maximum Dependable Capacity x Period Hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance j

Nov YTD NERC GADS Cacacity Factor 1994 Avg PWR's 76.7%

Unit 3 1995 101.1 %

87.8 %

1994 Avg 4 Units 72.8'/.

Unit 3 1994 102.6 %

84.3 %

1990-1994 Avg PWR's 72.8 %

90-1994 Avg AllUnits 69.5 %

Unit 4 1995 99.5 %

99.1 %

Unit 4 1994 41.4 %

81.6 %

July 1994 - June 1995 Median 82.4 %

Targets: Not established July 1994-June 1995 Average 77.4 %

Performance Summary Capacity Factor (%) for Unit 3 was 101.1% in November; year to-date. Capacity Factor was 87.8%.

Unit 4 Capacity Fact--(%) for Unit 4 was 99.5% for the month and 99.1% year.to-data.

Data Source: 1192N Report NRC INPO Q Corp Q Div Indicator Type A 32

CAPACITY FACTOR (MDC NET)

I PM ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 PSL 1 Y-E 100

,gc,d; PSL 2 Y E

^

g;st;;g 30 :

b ga t

I 601 1

0 cc E

40 -

7-20 -

I 2

0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

]

Month %

102 94.1 74.2 101 101 99.2 86.8 0.3 0.0 53.3 90.2 y.T D %

61.1 78.8 96.9 73.9 84.1 102 98.2 89.9 92.8 94.4 95.2 94.0 82.0 72.8 70.8 72.6 Month %

^-

101 85.7 101 97.1 98.2 96.6 92.1 80.4 92.3 21.4 0.0 Y T-D %

72.4 101.1 73.7 64.1 76.3 101 94.0 96.3 96.5 96.9 96.8 96.1 94.1 93.9 86.5 78.7 Definitions Unit Capacity Factor (using Maximum Dependable Capacity) is the ratio of the net electrical energy generated to the product of maximum dependable capacity multplied by the hours in the reporting period. The maximum dependable capacity is the gross electrical output measured at the output terminals of the turbine generator dunng the most restrictive seasonal conditon less the normal staton service loads. The higher the capacity factor, the closer the plant is to operating at its dependable energy production capacity.

Net Electrical Enerav Capacity Factor =

x 100%

Maximum Dependable Capacity x Penod Hours Statistical Summary -

IndustryPerformance Nov YTD NERC GADS Cacacity Factor l

1994 Avg PWR's 76.7%

Unit 1 - 1995 90.2 %

72.6%

1994 Avg-AllUnits 72.8%

Unit 1 1994 0.0%

83.2 %

1990 1994 Avg PWR's 72.8%

9 Unit 2 - 1995 0.0%

78.7 %

Unit 2 1994 100.2 %

74.3 %

July 1994-June 199J Median 82.4 %

Targets: Not established July 1994 Ju.i1995 Average 77.4 %

Performance Summary Unit 1 Capacity Factor (%) for the month was 90.2% and 72.6% year-to-date.

3 I

Unit 2 was shutdown in November for a schedulod Refueling Outage. Capacity Factor (%) was 78.7% year to-date.

Data Source: 1192N Report Indicator Type NRc lupo corp D Div A 33

9 THERMAL PERFORMANCE (GROSS HEAT RATE)

TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 ME 0=

0:

0; 1H 12000 0,

v.

h75%

11500{

" ~ ~ " " " " " " ~ ~

a

- 50%

33o00 _......................................

5 m

7

-}

- 25%

10500-

- /

"p b

10000-0%

Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar. Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3 Month 10236 icas7 todas 10517 ios97 1c710 tc713 toss 4 111:1 tosat tosis PTN 3 Year-End r7A 10746 10505 10674 10474 10557 PTN 3 Y E and Otr (%)O 99.3 %

992% 100 4%100.3 %

an sen es as PTN 4 Month LT N 102:#

10343 1oss2 10464 10645 10s35 tos7s 10701 10s03 10530 1043s PTN 4 Year End EEIR 10r>41 10657 10655 10578 10625 PTN 4 Y-E and Otr (%)W 98.7%

99.0%

99.7 %

99.7%

100 1 s too n te s%

Definitions Gross Heat Rate is the ratio of thermal energy in British thermal units produced by the reactor dunng a given pened to the total gross electrical energy in kilowatt-hours produced by the generator during the same period.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 12-Month INPO

,Rgy, Runnino Ava BTU /KHR PTN 3 10315 10530 1994 Industry Average 10188 PTN 4 10438 10511 1995 Taraet Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heatrate (%)

PTN 3 10397 July 1994-June 1995 Median 99.4 PTN 4 10391 1995 Goal 99.5 Periormance Summary Units 3 & 412-Month Running Average Gross Heat Rate was higher than the Industry Average of 10188 in November.

Data Source:1192 Report Contact-Luis Gutierrer,246-7261 Indicator Type NRC X INPO Corp Div A-34

THERMAL PERFORMANCE (GROSS HEAT RATE) l ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 12000,

100%

v.

v-um um v.

vm v,

i i l

J

~

33300 73 3 t i i

y 11000

- 50%

~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ -

~~- - - -

~~~~~-~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~

N m

I-25%

l-

' ~ " - ~

10500

- * ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ " ~ -

E

- 7' E

7E E

5 Aa

% % WE L 10000 0%

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul l Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL 1 Month 10241 1o246 1o30s 1osos toas2 10431 10474 10665 0

10600 toast PSL 1 Year-End V4J 10227 10299 10248 10336 10423 PSL 1 Y E and Otr %)O 99.0%

99 3%

99.2 %

99 0 %

M is

os

, sa 7s PSL 2 Month E

io2se 1031s 1o314 10486 tosse tossi 10703 tossa tos79 to73s o

PSL 2 Year-End E

10270 10165 10231 10579 10466 PSL 2 Y E and Otrf%3 99 6%

99 3 %

97.8 %

98 5%

m2s e as s74s Definitions j

Gross Heat Rate is the ratio cf thermal energy in Bntish thermal units produced by the reactor during a given period to the total gross electrical energy in kilowatt-hours produced by the generator during the same period.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 12-Month INPO 32Y Hunnina Ava BTU /KHR 10462 1994 Industry Average 10188 1995 Taraet:

Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heatrate (%)

l PSL 1 10141 July 1994 June 1995 Median 99.4 l

PSL2 10141 1995 Goal 99.5 Performance Summary St. Lucie Units 1 & 212-Month Running Average Gross Heat Rate was higher than the Industry Average of 10188 I

for the month of November.

Data Source: 1192 Report

Contact:

Ray Rina 465 3092 Indicator Type unc x tup 0 0 corp Div i

l A 35

i 0 & M BUDGET VARIANCE NUCLEAR DMSION d

30 igo,ci U

i 15 -

- - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - ~ ~ ~ '

~

!E nu2 0

g T - ~ ~~---~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~'

~~~ ~ ~~.

- - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '

i

-30 3

Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y T D Actual (tM) 348 4 343A 386 2 suo.s se5J 12.7 37A 46A 86.4 soJ 97A itts 134.s 164.7 311J 3419

]

Y T-D Budgeted (SM) as1A 333.3 314A 336.4 303A 1s.9 315 54 3 753 93.9 113 4 131.7 1so.5 178.5 327A 3542

=+Y T D Vertence(%)

0.6 3.7 E.3 11.0 los 311 31A 15A 142 14.4 14.5 13.s to.s sJ.

7.1 4.7

. Definitionsi Operating and Maintenance Expenditures include Nuclear Division operaton and maintenance expenses associated with direct employees, contractors and consultants, equipment, tools, design, engineering and other items / activities required to sustain the electrical generation of the plants and to provide required support. Fuel costs, corporate administrative and general expenses, and charges from other departments outside the. Nuclear Division are excluded.

Y T D Actual Excenses - Y-T-D Budosted Excenses x 100% = 0 & M Variance %

Y T D Budgeted Expenses Statistical Summaty-IndustryPerformance O&M Budaet Ncv YTD YTDVananz Actual (? Mi (s M)

IBG Actual 1994 Avg.

$ 297.0M IBG Top Quartile Entry

$ 270.0M O&M 1995 242.9 ($ M) -11.9 ($ M) 4.7%

IBG Top Quartile Avg.

$ 213.2M O&M 1994 255.1 ($ M) 21.5 ($ M) 7.8%

IBG Projected 1995 Avg.

$ 284.0M j-Projection (per dual unit site) derived by trending 1986-

)

1995 Year End Budget 279.2 ($ M) 94 Actual data and 1995 Budgeted data for IBG Group.

' Performance Summary 1

O&M expenditures through November 1995 were $242.9 million which represented a budget uMerrun of $11.9 million (or 4.7%). The vanance was primarily due to: underruns in materials and contracted services at Turkey Point due to less trouble and breakdown than planned; Nuclear Division O&M Contingency not yet needed; and over-accrual of estimated 1994 Year-End liabilites.

Data Source: Resource Allocation (PRA)

IndicatorType NRc Invo @ corp Div B-1

CAPITAL BUDGET VARIANCE 1

NUCLEAR DMSION 60 l

IGoodl V

30 - ------------------------

~

\\

w O

O h

4 1

- 60 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y T D Actual (sM) ins 150.7 68.4 su 76.5 13 3.6 6.0 7.3 sJ 11.7 13.6 18.0 24.0 31.4 37.5 Y T D Budgeted ($M) 1Et 179.5 75.1 1 01.4 87.7 5.0 7.4 10J 14.7 17.7 21.7 2sA 352 42.0

$1.1 56.9 4 -Y T D variance (%)

s0 It1 e.0 11.0 12.7 es.0 50.4

- 44.2 50.7 a4 ass 52.s 48.7 42.s sp.s 34.0 Definitions Capital Expenddures are those directly incurred / budgeted by the Nuclear Division for the construction of new utility plant additions and improvements made to increase efficiency, reliability or safety. Capital fuel costs are excluded.

Y-T-D Actual Expenses Y T D Budoeted Expenses x 100% = CapitalVanance %

Y-T D "udoeted Expenses Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Caoital Budaet Nov Y T D YTD Variance Actual ($ M)

($ M)

IBG Actual 1994 Avg.

$ 63.1M IBG Top Quartile Entry

$ 28.3M Capital - 1995 37.5 ($ M) 19.4 ($ M) 34.0*/.

IBG Top Quartile Avg.

$ 211M Capital - 1994 57.8 ($ M) 23.5 ($ M) 28.9 %

IBG Projected 1995 Avg.

$ 58.5M Projecton (per dual unit site) derived by trending 1986-1995 Year End Budget 64.7($ M) 94 Actual data and 1995 Budgeted data for IBG Group.

Performance Summary l

Capital expenditures through November 1995 were $37.5 million. This represented a budget underrun of $19.4 l

million (or 34.0%). The variance was primarily due to: project cancellations, scopelestmate reductions, and l

schedule changes for various projects; underrun in Contractor Wrap-Up insurance; and, delay in support services l

and staffing under budget for the Steam Generatnr Replacement Project at St. Lucie.

Data Source: Resouxe Allocation (PRA)

IndicatorType unc supo corp Div B2

FUEL OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE

)

TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 i

30 15 - ------------------------

W r,

~

O O

M i

-30 l

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y T@ Actual (SM) n/a 15.9 519 711 67A 5.8 11J 14.5 22.3 28.0 33.8 39 6 45 4 48.8 532 E0.9 Y T-D Budgeted ($M) n/a 153

$&1 70.0 82.9 5.4 10.4 15.8 21.0 26.4 31.6 36.9 42.3 4t0 44.5 55 2 l4.4 7.5 7.4 8A 4.6 E9 6J 7.1 7J 7.4 s.1 9.s 10.4

+Y T D Variance (%)

n/a 4.1 17 Definitions -

Fuel Operating Expenses include fuel investment amortization, interest, and administratve charges for the fuel leases, payments and credits from the Department of Energy (DOE) for spent fuel disposal, and payment to the Department of the Treasury for Decontaminaton and Decommissioning of the DOE enrichment facilities.

Y T D Actual Expenses Y T D Budoeted Excenses x 100% = FuelOperatng Expense Variance %

Y T-0 Budoeted Expenses Statistic &l Summary IndustryPerformance Nov YTD YTD Variance Actual ($ M)

($ M)

Not applicable. Nuclear Fuel Expense i

reported on an Industry basis in mills /kwh.

Fuel 1995 60.9 ($ M) 5.7 ($ M) 10.4%

Fuel 1994 62.4 ($ M) 34 ($ M) 5.8%

1995 Year End Budget: 60.1($ M)

Performance Summary Turkey Point Y-T D vanance was due to higher generation (+8.7%) and a higher amortzation rate (+1.6%). The increase in Y T-D generation was due to the early start up of Unit 3, Cycle 15, and both units operahng at a higher plant capactly than projected. The higher Y-T D amortization rate is due to: (a) increased amortzaton due to the design change for Unit 3, which caused the earty discharge of eight assembhes at the end of Cycle 14, and, an accounting adjustment due to the fact that a set of four assemblies were rescheduled for dischtage dunng Unit 3's refueling outage; and, (b) a decrease in amortzation due to better actual heat rate for both units. In additon, the Y T D higher generabon lowered the impact of the Decontamination and Decommissioning fee, thereby reducing the amortzation rate.

Contact:

Lorraine Tvmms. 694 3450 O iseD x Corp x Div Indicator Type NRC B-3

FUEL OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE 1

i f

ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 30 l

15 - ------------------------

0 W

CL.

l

-30 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y TC Actual ($M) n/a s6.7 75.5 64.1 74.1 8.8 12.5 18J 25.0 31.6 su 44.2 47.4 50.8 63.3 59 4 Y T D Budgeted ($M) n/a si.s 82.1 70.s 67 6 u

12.0 1s.3 24.3 30J5 36.5 42.6 4a.8 54J 59.s 55.4 -Y T-D Variance (%)

n/a sJ 4.3

. s2 s.7 7.s 4.1 0.3 2.s 3.5 4.s 3.7 18 7.5 11.1 s.2 Definitions Fuel Operating Expenses include fuel investment amortization, interest, and administrative charges for the fuel leases, payments and credits from the Department of Energy (DOE) for spent fuel disposa!, and payment to the Department of the Treasury for Decontamination and Decommissioning of the DOE enrichment facilities.

No.lg PSL 2 reflects FPUs share only.

Y T D Actual Erpenses Y T-D Budoeted Expenses x 100% = FuelOperating Expense Vanance %

Y T-D Budoeted Exoenses Statistical Summery IndustryPerformance Nov YTD YTD Vanance Actual ($ M)

($ Mi Not applicable. Nuclear Fuel Expense on an MsMasis in mWh Fuel 1995 59.4 ($ M) 6.0 ($ M) 9.2%

Fuel 1994 68.1 ($ M) 6.4 ($ M) 10.4 %

1995 Year-End Budoet: 75.1 ($ M)

Performance Summary The St. Luce vanance as of the end of November was due to lower generaDon (15.3%) and a higher amorbzabon rate l

(+7.2%). The reduction in Y T-D generation was due to: (a) a decrease in generaton for Unit 1 due to the March outage for i

Pressunzer Valve repair, the reactor tnp r. July dunng Turbine Control tesung, and vanous operatonal problems in August i

through October, and (b) an decrease in gereraton for Unit 2 due to the refueling outage starting earher than assumed in the budget for last year. The increase in Y T D amortzation rate is mostly due to the design change for Unit 2, which caused full amortization of additional assemblies scheduled to be discharged at the end of Cycle 8.

Contact LorraIne Tymms. 694 3450 l l

IndicatorType NRC INPD X Corp X

Div l

B4

INVENTORY LEVELS TURKEY POINT 100 l Good l

\\

V 75--

- - - ~ ~ - ~

_1

~+

u>

x 5g.-......................

...................... ~.. ~....................

5

: : = = = = = = = =

0 i

o 25--

---~~------~ ~~~~ ~--' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - '

p e---e Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 0i Nov Dec S Y T4 CAPRAL 2.7 5.8 n/a 6.4 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.3 7.1 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.3 5 Y T D REGULAR 58.0 79.1 74.7 54.6 42.4 41.5 40.9 40.4 39.6 39.4 39.0 39.1 39.0 37.9 38.1 37.4 Definitions j

Caoital - Part or equipment which: meets the criteria established by the Property Retirement Unit Catalog for a j

Ret' ement Unit; is associated with a specific plant in service, the failure of which would seriously imprit the utility's abnny to provide continued operation; and, is not readilly available from suppliers, or typically require 3 !ong lead tme.

Regular Materials needed to keep operational the physical equipment and facilites of the plant (e.g., spare parts, consumables, commodities, tools).

Statistical Summary

. Industry Performance S.tL'1 E0d % Change Total Ca:ntat Monthly 7.3 7.3 0.0%

(Recular OnM Y T-D 6.9 7.3 5.8%

IBG (Yeat 1994)

Average

$ 43.6 Regular Monthly 38.1 37.4 1.8%

Top Quartile Entry

$ 34.7 YTD 42.4 37.4

- 11.8%

Top Quartile Average

$ 28.9 1995 Target: Regular $39M Performance Summary Turkey Point's Capital inventory remained the same for the month.

1 Regular inventory at Turkey Point decreased in November due to continued dormant material evaluation and restock ana!ysis.

Data Source: Dck Rose 246-6692 Nuclear Matenals Management Manager Indicator Type O NRc D inpo carp x

Div B-5

INVENTORY LEVELS ST. LUCIE 100 Ismol y

75 -

~

- - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------

ae.

m a:5 5n _

= = =======

ao c

25 _

Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec e Y T4 CAPITAL 1.8 7.2 7.0 7.1 11.2 11.2 11.2 21.5 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.2 24.3 24.2 24.5 23.5 5 Y T-D REGULAR 49.4

$8.7 65.2 60.2 43.7 44.2 44.6 44.9 46.6 46.3 46.1 46.1 46.2 45.2 44.2 43.1

. Definitions Capital Part or equipment which: meets the criteria estabhshed by the Property Retrement Unit Catalog for a Retirement Unit;is associated with a specific plant in service, the failure of which would seriously impair the utility's ability to provide contnued operation; and, is not readilly available from suppliers, or typically requires a long lead time.

Recular Materials needed to keep operatonal the physical equipment and facilities of the plant (e.g., spare parts, consumables, commodities, tools).

Statistical Summary Industry Performance.

staa m E nanas Caeital Total Monthly 24.5 23.5

- 4.1%

(Recular OnM YTD 11.2 23.5 109.8 %

IBG (Year 1994)

Regular Average

$ 43.6 Monthly 44.2 43.1 2.5%

Top Quartile Entry

$ 34.7 YTD 43.7 43.1 1.4%

Top Quartile Average

$ 28.9 1995 Target: Regular $40M Performance Summary St. Lucie's Regular inventory Level decreased by 2.5% in November and by 1.4% year-to-date.

i j

l Note: Regular inventory values shown above Data Source: Tom Krerturg 465 4183 were adjusted for July through October 1995.

Nuclear Matenals Manaoement Manaaer I

Indicator Type NRC INPO Corp X Div B-6

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE

. Month o y.T.D TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 F/ Y E 1400 _

A Y-E Target A

1000k

Iooodf-

~~--------~~~~~

y 800--

600

--~~~~~~~~~~~~

' - - - ~ ~ - - - - ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - '

W 5

as z

A m y

400 _-

x --

hm mne rsi

[

JL 200T

'---~~~------~~~~~---~~--------- M ----'

0 Year-End Year 1995 i

Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Month 3.0 22 9.8 2.2 3.1 2.9 1.3 4.6 168 10.8 4.2 s

Year To-Date 731 l 938 l 326 l 276 l 469 3.0 5.3 15.0 17.3 20.4 23.3 24.6 292 198 208 213 Definitions-Collective Radiation Exposure is the total extemal whole-body radiation dose received by all on-site personnel (ncluding contractors and visitors) during the time period as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's).

It is reported in man-rems for the station. Current month readings are taken from direct reading dosimeters (DRD's). The 3 Year Running Average values are adjusted as TLD results become available.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance YTD 3 Yr Runnino Man-Rem Man-Rem 1995 4.2 212.6 323.8 INPO (PWR's)

(2 Unit Site)

Man-Rem 1994 21.9 462.1 362.5 Median 3-yr Distnbution (7/92 6/95) 314 Targets:

1995 Y T-D (TLD 270.0 1995 Goal 370 1995 Year-End(TLD) 275.0 1994 Year-End(TLD) 475.0 Performance Summary Turkey Point Man-Rem was 4.2 in November and 212.6 Y-T-D which was below the Y T-D target of 270.0. Turkey Point's 3-Yr Running Average of 323.8 exceeds Industry Median of 314.0.

Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics Contact Joe Danek. Manaaer,694-4213 Indicator Type NRc INeo corp Div C-1

COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE E Month

-o-y.r.D ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 M YE 1000 A Y ETarget lG00d I

~

t 800h

~ ---~~---

em A

E 600 -

-~ ------- " ---~~ - - - ~ - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

tu CF 0

~----------------------------------------------

400 P

n,m - -

A 2003

- - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

0' Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 5.1 19.1 19.7 3.9 4.1 3.5 4.0 282 20.7 99.3 145 Month Year To-Date 731 l 451 l 245 l 460 l 505 5.1 24.2 43.9 47.9 52.0 55.5 59.4 87.6 108 208 352 Definitions Collectrve Radiation Exposure is the total extemal whole-body radiation dose received by all on-site personnel (including contractors and visitors) during the time period as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's).

It is reported in man-rems for the station. Current month readings are taken from direct reading dosimeters (DRD's).

The 3 Year Running Average values are adjusted as TLD results become available.

Statistical Summ'ary industry Performance h

M 3 Yr Runnina Man-Rem Man-Rern 1995 144.5 352.2 440.5 INPO PWR's)

{1Unrt Site)

Man-Rern 1994 276.8 500.0 441.8 Median 3-yr Distnbution (7/92 6/95) 314 Targets:

1995 Y-T-D (TLD) 231.0 1995 Goal 370 1995 Year.end (TLD) 240.0 1994 Yearand (TLD) 650.0 Performance Summary St. Lucie Man-Rem was 144.5 for the month and 3522 Y-T D which is higher than the Y T-D target. St. Lucie's 3-Yr Running Average of 440.5 was higher than the Industry Median of 314.0.

Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics

Contact:

Joe Danek, Manacer. 694-4213 indicator Type NRc

@ tNp0 corp & D\\v C-2

SECONDARY CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE M PTN 3 Month i

e Pm 4 Month TURKEY POWT UNITS 3 & 4 EZ3PTN 3 Y E M PTN 4 Y E 0.5 2.00-A Y-E Targets l Good l 0.4-w 1.50 i

~

g 0.3-5

- 1.

411it llDlIlllI-j oo Year End l

Year 1995 lJan Legend / Period 1990 1991 19921993 1994 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3

.198

.17

.14

.12

.14 l1.001.00 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.02 1.00 1.01 1.03 2.80 123 PTN 4

.178

.24

.15

.18

.15 l1.07 1.02 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.04 1.00 1.04 1.02 1.07 1.02 Definition through 1994 Definition Beginning1995 Sacondary Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is Secondary Chemistry Indscator (Cl) is calculated as follows:

calculated as follows:

SGCl/LVx + SGSO /LVx + SGNa/LVx + FWFe/LVx + FWCWLVx + 0)LVx 4

gg 08 20 10 6

SGCI = Steam Generator blowdown chloride SGCI LVx = 1.60 ppb KA = Monthly Average SteamGenerator SGSO = Steam Generator blowdown sulfate SGSO LVx = 1.70 ppb 4

4 blowdown cat!an conductivity in mhos/cm SGNa = Steam Generator blowdown sodiurn SGNa LVx = 0.80 ppb NA = Monthly Average SteamGenerator FWFe = Final feedwater iron FWFe LVx = 5.00 ppb blowdown sodium in ppb FWCu = Final feedwater copper FWCu LVx = 0.20 ppb 0 = Monthly Average condensate dissolved 0

= Condensate dissolved oxygen Cond.DO = 3.30 ppb 2

2 oxygen in ppb LVx

= Limiting value for that parameter Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance g

Y-T-D Ava

]N!9_(PWR's with Recirculating Steam CJ Un Generators Not on Molar Rato Control)

U July 1994 June 1995 U. S. Median 1.19 Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 1995 Year End Tarcets: s1.18 i

Performance Summary Turkey Point Unit 3's Chemistry Performance exceeded target due to residual contaminants associated with the startup of Fuel Cycle 15. Year to-date, Unit 3 slightly exceeded the Year-End target of s1.18 but was equal to the industry Median of 1.19.

Unit 4's year to-date Chemistry Performance of 1.04 was below the Year End target of s1.18 and the Industry Median of 1.19.

Data Source: Plant Chemistry Contact J Sescer 694-4176 Indicator Type NRC x INeo Corp Div C-3

SECONDARY CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE M PSL 1 Month g g.; eta sr.Lucie unirs 1 a 2 E!!!!BPSL 2 Y E 0.5 2.00 A Y-E Targets IGoodl t

g 0.4 - ~----

illja

,1 1.50 ------------------------------------

r

$ 0.3 -

" #~

cc g

' 1,00 -

g 0.2 --

iiii y

0.50 -

0 0

Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL1

.27

.34

.25

.22 24 1.43 1.13 1.26 1.18 1.13 1.14 1.19 1.25 1.49 1.28 PSL2

.32

.40

.43

.30

.37 1.09 1.14 1.10 1.12 1.06 1.12 1.15 1.29 1.27 1.34 Definition through 1994 Definition BeginnIng1995 Secondary Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is Secondary Chemistry Indicator (Cl) is calculated as follows:

calculated as follows:

SGCl/LVx + SGSO /LVx + SGNa/LVx + FWFe!LVx + FWCuA.Vx + OAV gg 4

08 20 10 6

3 SGCl = Steam Generator blowdown chloride SGClLVx = 1.60 ppb KA = Monthly Average Steam Generator SGSO = Steam Generator blowdown sulfate SGSO LVx = 1.70 ppb 4

blowdown cation conouctivity in mhos/cm SGNa = Steam Generator blowdown sodium SGNa LVx = 0.80 ppb 4

NA = Monthly Average Steam Generator FWFe = Finalfeedwateriron FWFe LVx = 5.00 ppb blowdown sodiumin ppb FWCu = Finalleedwater copper FWCu LVx = 020 ppb Op = Monthly Average condensate dissolved 0

= Condensate dissolved oxygen Cond.DO = 3.30 ppb 2

oxygen in ppb LVx

= Limiting value for that parameter Statistical Summary:

IndustryPerformance Y T-D Ava gpQ.(PWR's with Recirculating Steam Cl Generators Not on Molar Ratio Control)

Unit 2 0.00 1.17 July 1994 June 1995 U. S. Median 1.19 1995 Lowest ChemistryIndex Value Attainable 1.00 t995 Year-End Tarcets: s1.25 Performance Summary St Lucie Unit 1 Chemistry Performance exceeded the target in November due to elevated condensate dissolved oxygen and higher levels of sodium contaminant which appear to still be present from the turbine work performed dunng the last refueling. Year to date, both units were at or below the Year End targets of 5125.

Unit 2 was shutdown for refueling.

. Refueling Outage Data Sou ce: Plant Chernistry Contact J. Seacer 694 4176 IndicatorType O nac T iNeo Corp oiv C-4

SOLID WASTE DISPOSED E Month O-YTD TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 & 4

& YE IGoodi' AY E Running y

Target 1500 _

l'i E

9 1000 h

YIE 1995 36 Mo A1 517 Aunning Target 500 -

A-*-

no cow n A

A E

E "-

0 Year 1995 Year End Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Juf l %g Sep oct Nov Dec 105 380 488 99.1 3.5 131 0

18.7 13.8 135 194 Month 36 Mo. Running Avg 673 l 738 l 602 l 478 l 373366 364 367 360 356 293 263 241 236 236 231 Definitions Solid Waste Disposed is the volume of low-level solid radioactive waste shipped, in final form ready for burial dunng a given period.

The value is based, in part, on initial vendor and plant reports and may be updated when reports are documented.

IndustryPerformance Statistical Summary Eqy 36 Mo. Runnina Monthly Cubic Feet Solid Waste Disposed 1995 193.8 230.9 Industrv (PWR's)

(2 Unit Site)

Sohd Waste Disposed 1994 79.3 363.9 Median 3-yr Distribution (7/92 - 6/95) 364.9 f

1994 Median 270.7 i

Tarcet-1995 Goal 647.4 Year End 1995 36 Mo. Running Avg: 390 cu.ft.

Performance Summary Turkey Point Solid Waste Disposed in November was 193.8. The 36-Month Running average of 230.9 cubic feet was below the 1995 Year End target and 3 yr. industry Median.

Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics

Contact:

A. J. Gouti 6944199 unc

@ uneo corp Div IndicatorType C5

SOLID WASTE DISPOSED l

Month

-O-Y T-D ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 l

E Y-E 2000 AY-E Running Target lcond l

~

t 1500-b te 9

1000 -'

~~------------

~

no U

610 Y/E 1995 36 Mo.

su Runmng Target A A 510 Cubie Pt 500--

~~----------------- A E

O Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month 480 468 37.5 268 528 323 0

106 287 53.6 150 36 Mo. Running Avg 991 l 713 l 611 l 475 l 444413 418 398 384 387 389 378 367 342 331 321 Definitions Solid Waste Disposed is the volume of low-level solid radioactive waste shipped, in final form ready for burial du a given period.

The value is based, in part, on initial vendor and plant reports and may be updated when reports are documented.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance h

36 Mo Runnino Monthly Cubic Feet Solid Waste Disposed 1995 149.7 321.3 Solid Waste Doposed 1994 49.1 451.0 Median 3-yrDistribution(7/92 6/95) 364.9 1994 Median 270.7 Tag.

1995 Goal 647.4 Year End 1995 36 Mo Running Avg: 510cu ft.

Performance Summary St. Lucie Solid Waste Disposed in November was 149.7. The 36-Month Running average of 321.3 cubic feet was below the 1995 Year End target and the 3-yr. Industry Median.

Data Source: Nudear Division Heafth Physics

Contact:

A. J. Gould. 694 4199 Indicator Type unc supo carp D Div C-6

NRC VIOLATIONS E Month

- o - y.T.D TURKEY POINT 3 & 4

@ Y-E 20 A Y-ETarget l Good l ft 17 i

AA T

15 -

w ts z

A ::

o A

?$ 10 L 12 A

l1995Y E Target 5;7l g

A O

$5 L Year-End Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month O

O O

1 0

YT-D 13 l 13 l 8 l 4 l4 0

0 0

1 1

Definitions Violations are categonzed in terms of five levels of seventy to show their relative importance. Seventy levels I and 11 are violations that involve actual or high potentialimpact on the public. Seventy Level 111 violations are cause for significant concem.

Seventy Level IV violations are less serious, but are of more than minor concem; i.e., if left uncorrected, could lead to a rnare serious concem. Seventy Level V violations are of minor safety or environmental concem. Violations are counted on the date of theinspechon ex!!meebng.

Violations are now counted with respect to the date of occurrence (using the date of the inspection exit meeting)instead of the date of the inspection report, as was done in the past.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance NRC Violations NOVs 1995 0

1 1994 IBG Group Mean 16.2 NOVs 1994 2

4 1994 Region 11 Mean 13.1 1994 IBG Top Quartile Mean 9.0 Targets 1994 Repion11 Top Quartile Entry

8.0 Source

Nuclear Data Services Database 10/95 Performance Summary l

Turkey Point reported no NRC Violations in November:

Year-to-date, Turkey Point has received one NRC Violation.

95-16-02 Failure to Promptly identify and Take Appropriate Corrective Action to Resolve Potential Unit 3 CCW Heat Exchanger Flow Related Vulnerability. Exit Meeting Date: 10/14/95.

Data Source: PTN Nuclear Licensrig Contai E. Werikam. 246-7383 nac supo corp Div Indicator Type t

D1

NRC VIOLATIONS Month i

-o-Y T-D SI. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 O YE 20 A Y-E Target

[GoodI

t 15 - ------------------------

m z

O 5

It 1f j

A A to O 10 -----------"-*to ------

[1995 Y E Target s 7l 0

sk 1

@ 5{

1 g Eg

~

0-E Year-End Year 1995 i

Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Month

<^'

i O

2 0

1 0

0 0

3 7

1 3

YTD 9 l8 lB l7 l9 0

2 2

3 3

6 13 14 17

. Definitions

\\

Violations are categonzed in terms of five levels of severity to show their relabve importance. Seventy Levels I an violations that involve actual or high potential impact on the public. Seventy Level 111 violations are cause for sign Severity Level ly violations are less senous, but are of rnore than minor concem; l.e., if left uncorrected, could lead to a senous concem Seventy Level V violatons are of minor safety or environmental concerrt Violations are counted on the date of th inspection exit meeting.

Violabons are now counted with respect to the date of occurrence (using the date of the inspection exit meeting)inste date of the inspecton report, as was done in the past.

i Statistical Summary-IndustryPerformance 32y,.

.M NRC Violations NOVs 1995 3

17 19H mmp Mean 16.2 NOVs 19M 2

8 1994 Region IlMean 13.1 1994 IBG Top Quartile Mean 9.0 Targets YearEnd 1995 s7 1994 Region 11 Top Quartile Entry 8.0 Yetr End 1994 s7 Source: Nudear Data Services Database 10/95 Performance ~ Summary St. Luos reported three (*) NRC Volatons for 6.6.. The fdlowmg 17 NRC Violanons have teen recenred Y T D-

9%M1 Fadure m Sampe Safety Inreenon Tank e Accordance We Tech Soeofcanon Survestance. Exa utg Date: 2/4%

1MS2 Fature to Faeon Procedsre m irrelemennng independent Verticatan Assooated with the Letdown Letter elInstrudort. Est Mig Date. 2/4

9%M1 Fadure m Meet Desigs Control Measures on Overload Hecers Instaied m a Battery Charger. Ext Mtg Date:

4'2&%5

9&t Mi Fadure to Fouow Procedsres and Block WSl$ Actuanon. Ext Mig Date: 9/15/95.

tW1&c2 Two Exampes of Fadure w Focow Procedures Dunng RCP Restagng. ExA Mtg Date: 9/15/95.

9",-1M3 Fahne to Fonow Peacedure and Document AbnormelVaive A&piment m Valve Dewanon Log Exa Mtg Date: 9/15/95 fHel Fature to FoDow Protecures Dunng Abgnment of Shutdown Coo 6ng System. Exit Mtg Date: 9/1545.

es1H5 Falure to Fotow Procedure and Docurient a Dercer.cy on a Contasiment Spray Valve Test Procedure. Ext Mtg Date:

9/15 %

en!M6 Fadure e inmal Mastenance Sieps as Work was Competed. Exd Mtg Date: 9/15/95 th15 c7 Fakure to Fouow Protecures Resurang m Spray Down on Contamment. Exs Mtg Date: 9/15%

t%1M1 Post Mamterace Testeg Inadeguate on PORVs (NotIAw 10CFR50 App. B Cntenal. Esa Mtg Date: &Sy95.

en1M2 in4ervce Survedance Testmg Inadeguate on PORVs Wot IA 10CFR50 App. B. Crnena). Ex4 Mtg Date: 610SS.

W1M3 LTOP Operabiny Tedi Spec was Volated by not Havmg the PORVs operase When Requred Dunng Two Previous Outages. Exa M' 1 Dat

'#n1M1 Fadure to Fdtm Procedure and Not Propedy Log Lected Key-Switch Dewanons Ext utg Date:11nSS.

't%1M2 Failure to Fdlow Procedure and issue a Clearance, Whc Resulted m Personneliniury. Exit Mtg Date:11/tSS

'751M3 Inadequa:e Design of Und 2 EDG Resolang m Reverse Powenng cllne E00 Dunng ESFAS Testeg Ext Mtg Date t t/1/95.

tE2M1 Falure 2 Take Prompt Correctve Achons for Rehef Valve Defcenoes, Paragraph 2. Ext M:g Date-10/10/95.

Data Sour:e: PSL Nuclear Licensrig Contat R E Dawson 465 41c7 Indicator Type.

NRc D supo corp D Div D-2

)

LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES

~

TURKEY PolNT UNIT 3 ADMINISTRATWE LICENSED OPERATOR 10 10 10 8-8-

8-

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - " - -

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - -

- - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - -

s.

4 4

4 b

2 g

g

~

/

0 0

... A....... A....

0 I a m rv i n m rv i a m v i n m rv i n m !v i n m :v i n m rv i n m rv i e m rv i a m rv i n m v i n m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 MAINTENANCE DESGN MISCERANEOUS 10 10 10 g.

s.

g.

- ~................-.........

6-6-

6-

""""~~"~~~~~~~~~~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~

-~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~

4 4

4 2-2-

2-

.......A.......

. A.........

0

,......./.....

0 0

i n m v i n m rv i n m rv i n m v i a m rv i n m v i n m rv i a m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 Definitions Licensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance stry A 9

cause Codes Otr 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs gg u n no 4 ms Administrative 1

3 Adrninistrative 0.7 5.5 Ucensed Operator 0

1 Ucensed Operator 02 1.0 Other, Personnel 0

0 Other Personnel 02 2.0 Maintenance 0

3 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0

3 Design 0.5 3.1 i

Miscellaneous 0

0 MisceDaneous 0.1 04 l

Total 1

10 Total 2.5 19.4 Performance Summary t

l Unit 3 performance for the 19951st Quarter was below the 1st Quarter industry average for all cause codes except Administrative. Unit 3 performance for the last 4 Quarters was below the 4 Quarter Industry Average for all cause codes.

Unit 3 reported one LER in November:

LER #95-007-00 entitled ' Manual Reactoi Tnp Following Drop of Four Control Rods' dated November 9,1995. The event occurred on October 17,1995.

Data Source NRC fAEOD) Quarterly Performance Indicators Report Indicator Type NRc supo corp Div D3

I LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR ONER PERMEL 10 10 10 8

l g.

8 4

6;

~ " ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ - " " " " "

6-

~ ~ - " " " " " " - " - -

6-.~.-~~~.- -~~ -~

4 t

4 4

2-2-

2-I

.....A.....A....

0.\\. /,

..x.,,A..

0

~

0 1 D DI N ! D m rV I E E N I D m TV

! U ID IV I E m IV I D E IV I D m IV I D E IVI E E N I E m N ! D C W 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1933 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 MAINTENANCE

,g 10 DESIGN N OUS to

\\

g.................................

g................................

8:

4 j

4 ooooo.omo.oooo.oo.

4 o o o o o.....

o o. o. o o.

l

g.......................

1 g.................

g................................

0-0 0,

1 D m IV I D m N 1 D ID IV 1 D E IV I U m !V I B ID N I D m rv ! E m IV I D m IV I E m IV ! D U N I B DI IV 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 Definitions Ucensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences pr by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmate deficiencies. The cause code trend data are developed using tne NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two qusrtersc Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Cause Codes Otr 951 Runnino 4 Otrs Y^

9 OU9 unn na 4 On Administratve 1

3 Administrative 0.7 5.5 Ucensed Operator 0

1 Ucensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0

2 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0 Maintenance 0

5 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0

2 Design 0.5 3.1 Miscellaneous 0,.

Q Miscellaneous

.Q.1

,qd,.

Total 1

13 Total 25 19 4 Performance Summary Unit 4 performance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 was below the 1st Quarter industry average for all cause codes except Administrative. For the past 4 Quarters, Unit 4 performance was below the 4 QuarterIndustry Average for all cause codes.

Unit 4 reported no LER's in November, l

i Data Source NRC (AEOD) Quaderty Perforrnance Indicators Report Indicator Type

@ nRc lupo corp Div D-4

LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 ADMINISTRATIVE ENSED OPERATOR ONER PERSONNEL

,g 10 10 8

g.

s.

e.

4 4

4 2

2 2

\\.....A.........

"T.../." \\... A.......

~

~\\....

..M...... r 0

0 0

a ri rv i n m rv i n m rv i n a rv i n m rv i n m rv i a m rv i a m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i o m v 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 i

MAINTENANCE DESGN MIS ERANEOUS

)

gg 10 10 i

g g.

8 e.

l 4

4 4

2 2

2-T,.,, A.,,,,.,,,.

-, A,.,,,., A,,,,..

0 0

0 n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m v i n m rv i n m tv 1 n ci ty i n m rv i n m rv i a m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995

)

Definitions Licensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend

. data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is i

developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance llBQ industry Average Cause Codes Ott 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs Cause Codes Otr 951 Runnina 4 Otni Administrative 1

3 Admirustrative 0.7 5.5 Licensed Operator 0

0 Licensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0

1 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0 Maintenance 1

5 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0

2 Design 0.5 3.1 Miscellaneous 0

1 Miscellaneous 01 04 Total 2

12 Toul 2.5 194 Performance Summary Unit 1 performance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 was below the 1st Otr intiustry average for all cause codes except Admirustrative and Maintenance. For the past 4 Quarters, Unit 1 periorrnance was below the 4 Quarter Industry Average for all cause codes except Miscellaneous.

Unit 1 reported one LER in November-

95-009-00 entitled ' Missed Technica! Specificaton Scheduled Surveillance Due to Personnel Error' dated November 18,1995. The event occurred October 19,1995.

Data Source: NRC (AEOD) Quarterly Performance Indicators Report Indicator Type NRc nNPD carp D Div D5

I l

LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR OTHER PERSONNEL 10 10 10 t

g................................

g.................................

4 4

4

~..............................

2-2- - ****-- ********* *** **-****-

2-

....A...,,.....

'..i...

A,,. A.... A.......

l 0

0 0

I n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i a m w I a m rv i n m rv i a m rv i n m w i n m rv i n m av i n m rv i a m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 l

MAINTENANCE DESIGN MISCELLANEOUS

\\

10 10 10 1

1

g................................

g.................................

1 6- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ " ~

6-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~

6- " - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ - ~ -

4 4

4

\\

g...............

g.................................

2

~

A,.. A.... A...,,,.

0 0

0 r n m v i a m rv i n m av i n m rv i n m rv r a m rv i a m rv i n m rv i n m rv i a m rv i n m rv i a m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 19?2 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 l

Definitions Ucensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend

{

1 data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters.

Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Cause Codes Otr 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs BBC Industry Average Cause Codes On 951 Runnina 4 Otrs Administratve 0

4 Administrative 0.7 5.5 Ucensed Operator 0

0 Ucensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0

1 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0 Maintenance 0

5 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0

1 Design 0.5 3.1 MisceDaneous 0

0 Miscellaneous 0.1 04 Totat 0

11 Total 25 19 4 Performance Summary Unit 2 performance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 and Running 4 Quarters was better the Industry Average for all cause codes.

Urut 2 reported no LER's in November.

l i

Data Source NRC (AEOD) Quarterty Performance Indicators Report Indicator Type

[i]nne

. sNp0 corp Div D-6

SALP CATEGORY RATINGS A PTNTarget NUCLEAR DMSION j

W PSL 3_

A PSLTarDet lGoodl en Y-C 2_

z i:

E A

a j_

..A.

0-1 I

I l

i I

Let end / Period 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 SALP Rating 2.27 2.18 2.25 2.14 1.86 1.38 1.29 1.00 PTN Period Ending 4/30/86 5/31/87 6/30/B8 7/31/89 7/31/90 9'28/91 1/30/93 8,27/94 SALP Rating 1.55 1.20 1.29 1.14 1.00 1.00 Period Ending 4/30/86 10/31/87 4/30/89 1YJ1/90 5/2/92 1/1/94 SALPProgram Description R le sie policy of tne NRC to use the Systematic Assessment of Ucensee Performance (SALP) process to artculate the agency'8 observabons and maights on i

lleensee safety performance. The SALP report communicoles those observatione and inaghts. ~

i 4

Evalustan Frenusner. The NRC wis normally review and evaluele each power reactor licensee that possesses an operating license at least every 18 months, When sie NRC detemunes that the performance warrants a more kequent evaluacon, the normal SALP tequency may be increased. The assessment pened may be extended to a maximum of 24 months when a plant receeves a Category 1 rating in all four fur,ctonal areas.

Functional Arene Performance le generally evaluated in four(4) functonal areas:

1. Plant Operationi This funchonal aree conosts chiefly of the control and executon of acevtties directly related to operstmg a plant R includes sesvines such as plant startup, power operobon, plant shutdown, and system lineups. It also includes initial and requalification trainmg of licensed operators.

2. Maintenance This functionW area incfudes all activites associated with either diagnoste, predsetve, preveneve, or corrective snaintenance of plant structures, systerns, and components, or maintenance of the physical condition of the plant, j

3. Enameerino This functional ares addresses the adequacy of technical and engineenng support for a5 plant activtbes. It includes alllicensee activities associated with design controt, the design, instalianon, and httng of plant modificahons; engineertng and technical support for operabons, outoges, mainhnance, testng, survel!Iance, and procurement activibes; configuration management; desigr@ sis informenon and its retneval; and support for licanong actnr6 ties.

4, Piet Suonort. This functonal area covers all activibes related to plant support functions, including radiological controis, emergency preparedness, securtty, chemistry, and fire protection. Housekeeping controls are also included in this ares.

Pertonnance category Rahngs: Ucensee performance in each functonal eres is assessed by assigning a category rating as discussed belour.

Category 1. Ucensee atten6cn and involvement have been property focused on esfety and resuhed in a superior level of safety performance.

Category 2. Ucensee attention alinvolvement are nonnelly well focused and resulted in a good level of safety pe4annonce.

Category 3. Ucensee attention ed involvement have reeutled in an acceptehte level of performance. Houever, performar my exhbit one or more of the follouring charactenstics: ineffaceve programs and significant leeues, lock of correctrve schon thoroughness, and deficiencies in foot cause i.

analyus. Because the margin to unacceptable performance in important aspects is email, increased NRC and licensee attention is requesd.

A more complets discussion of Assessment Frequency, Functional Areas, and Performance Category Ra6ngs is contained in NRC Managernent Directive 8.6.

Systematic Assenstnent of Ucensee Performance (SALPf,formerly Appendix 0516.

Performance Summary The St. Lucie SALP penod ends January 6,1996; for Turkey Point, the penod ends Augus: 31,1996.

Turkev punt St. Lucie Funerianal Area -

Edg Most Recent Edz Most Recent Plant Operanons 1

1 1

1 Maintenance 2 enprovmg 1

1 1

Engmeering 2 Improving 1

1 1

Plant Support n/a 1

n/a 1

Ernergency Preparedness 1

n/a 1

n/a s

Radiological Controts 1

n/a 1

n/a Security 1

n/a 1

n/a i

sed Assessmentlousity vertfication L.

nal.

1 als Omall 1.29 1.00 1.00 th0 i

enmmfuncuens e6eene(e.

Contas E. Weinkam (PTNb 246 7383 and R E Dawson (PSLb 465J107 i

Indicator Type NRC INPO X Corp X Div D-7 4

INPO ASSESSMENT RATINGS PW A prurargei NUCLEAR DMSION 4

A PSLTarget lGoodl a

j J

3-m 4

ez F.a::2-A-

A-l cc o

ca l

1-A-

0-1 I

I I

'H I

i 2

k j

Legend / Period 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 m

4 4

3 4

3 2

2 1

PSL 2

1 1

l INPO AssessmentProgramDescription 1

{

The institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) conducts periodic evaluations of site activities to make an overau determination of plant safety, to evaluate management systems and controls, and to identify areas needing improvement. Information is assembled from

}

discussions, hterviews, observations, and rev6ews of documentation.

1 i

Eyaluation Freauenev: INPO's goal is to visit each ph.nt on an average of every 18 months. However, th}s frequency may very j

depending upon the previous assessment ratings. For instance, N a plant is rated a *1* of *2', the interval between assessments is usually 20-24 months; if a plant is rated a 'A' or a '5*,the assessment intervalis 518 months.

Mmm ra cateaerv Ratinas:

Category 1: Overan performance is exceHent. hdustry standards of excellence are met in most areas. No significant wealmesses noted.

i Category 2: Overen performance is exemplary, industry standards of excellence are met in many areas. No signirmant weaknesses noted.

l Category 3: Overal performance is generally in keeping with the high standards required in nuclear power. However, improvements are needed in a number of areas. A few significant weaknesses may exist.

i j

Category 4: Overan performance is acceptable, tut improvements are needed in a wide range of areas. Signficant weaknesses are noted in severalareas.

Catetory 5: Overap performance does not meet the industry standard of acceptable performance. The margin of nuclear estety is measurably reduced. Strong and immediate management action to correct der,ciencies is required. Special attention, 4

j assistance, and follow-up are required.

2

]

NOTE: I a plant is found to be operating without an adequate margin of nuctaar safety,INPO will request that the plant be shutdown, I

or not started up.

{

f i

Performance Summary i

i Turkey Point and St. Lucie received an INPo category rating of *1'in 1995. The next evaluations for Turkey Point and St. Lucie are expecte 4 in the last quarter of 1996 and first quarter of 1997, respectively, l

1 4

Contacts: E.Weinkam (PTN) 246-7383 and R. E. Dawson(PSU 465 4t07 Indicator Type unc InPo carp @ oi, D-8

OPERATOR EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 100

_t!*5 w9 E_=.= eg aase Ee.= Is e

~

80

~~-~ "" ~~ ~""""""""" ~~-

g A

60-

-~""

- ~~*""-~~-"- ~""" """" W*oh" H

i

.c oc 40_-

~~~

" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " - ~ - ~

m m

4 n.

gg 0

Year.End Year 1995 i

Legend / Exams 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec initial Exams No Taken 3

39 5

0 8

13 RO/SRO No. Passed 3

39 5

0 8

13 Licen$e Pass Rate 100%

100%

0%

100%

Operator No Taken 49 47 78 69 63 58 Requal No. Passed 45 44 75 66 60 56 Exams Pass Rate 92%

94 %

96 %

96%

95 %

96 5 %

Definitions i

Initial License Examination (RO/SRO) results are reported for all candidates taking an inital License Exam as conducted

]

by the NRC.

Operator Requalification Examinatinn re de t s reported for both RO's and SRO's. This examination is administered annually by the utility and may oe jointly administered by the NRC. Retests of operators who failed examinations are not included.

4 Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Initial RO/SRO License Exams No Taken No. Passed % Pass Rate h NRC at Mr W RegWraW W Mng por W p YTD 1995 13 13 100 %

YTD 9 htial NPc Exams NRc Ranual Exams

....1 94...... 8.......

8...... 100%.....

3 I

Ooerator Reaual Exams Ro4 Pass Rate 94 h Ro's Pass Rate SIM kistant SRo's Pass Rate 94.4%

SRo1 Pass Rate 83 M No Taken No Passed % Pass Ra'e Upgrade SRo's Pass Rate 94.7%

Amtsge overtu aa n YTD 1995 58 56 96.5%

Anrege onrat:

94n 4

YTD 1994 63 60 95.0%

Performance Summary No exams were given at Turkey Point in November, a

4 Data Source: Nuclear Training

Contact:

K. E. Beatty. Manacer. 694 4217 indicator Type NRc sNPD corp Div E-1

OPERATOR EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 100 189uc*aLL==._ead R.tsu='.ennt.1=ee.m.

80 "

A

$ g-

..................................................{ Good [.

k'd cc 40 ".

m m<

CL.

20k j

0 Year.End Year 1995 Legend / Exams 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan-Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec initial Exams No Tekea n/a 15 8

10 11 RO/SRO No Passed rVa 15 8

10 11 j

License Pass Rate n/a 100 %

100%

100 %

100%

Operator No Taken 65 65 69 68 75 Requal No Passed 61 61 60 68 68 Exams Pass Rate 93%

94 %

87 %

100 %

91 %

Definitions initial Ucense Examinabon (ROSRO) results are reported for all candidates taking an initial License Exam as conducted by the NRC.

Operator Requalification Examination results are reported for both RO's and SRO's. This examination is administered annualy by the utlity and may be jointy administered by the NRC. Retests of operators who failed examinations are not included.

Statistical: Summary '

IndustryPerformance Initial ROSRO License Exams The NRC at their inst Regional Training Managers Ideetmg (lor flacal year No Taken No. Passed % Pass Rate igu)provided the sonoweg data-YTD 1995 0

0 0%

YTD 1994 11 11 100%

M NRC Exann NRC Raaual Exams Ro's Pass Rate M.6%

Ro's Pass Rate 91.0 %

Ooerator Reaua! Exams instantSRo PassRate M.4%

SRo1 Pass Rete 85A No Taken No. Passed

% Pass Rate Upgrade SRo's Pass Rata MA Average overau 88A YTD 1995 0

0 0%

YTD 1994 75 68 91 %

Performance Summary l

No initial RO/SRO License Exams were given in November at St. Lucie.

Annual Operator Requalification Exams are currenty in progress. Results will be provided upon completion of the

testing, 4

Data Source: NuclearTraining Contact K. E. Beatry. Manaaer. 694 4217 4

I Indicator Type NRC C INPO Corp Div I

E.2

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY STATISTICS TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 81 7

l Good l m 6 w

~

ll 5--

w gg 4~.

cc 8 3-g3 -

~

1995 LTA 1--

S

g_-

- r,,,e on

' ' ' 2 0

~ '

Year-End Year 1995

)

Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec j

Lost Time Accidents 5

0 0

0 1

0 0

0 a Restricted Duty Cases 5

3 8

4 4

0 0

1 0

0 1

0 0

0 OSHA Recordable injuries 43 35 33 33' 27' 3

0 3

1 2

1 1

2 2

1 0 INPO: LTA/ Restricted Duty Cases 12 Mo. Average

.50

.40

.51

.32

.43

.32

.33

.22

-O

OSHA: Recordable injuries Year to-Date 2.48 2.14 2.28 2.19 2.21 2.21 2.21 2.33 2.39 2.44 1.95 Definitions.

For FPL employees permanently assigned to the site (OSHA Recordables by Payrolllocation only):

Lost Time Acetdent involves at least one full work day away from work following the day or the injury.

Restncted Duty involves at least one day of restncted or lirruted work activities by an injured employee.

OSHA Recordable Iniurv requires medical treatment beyond first aid,

^#

st Time Accident and Restncted Duty Case Rate =

ve(aurs Wo ed Recordable injury Rate = OSH A Recordable iniuries x 200.000 Manhours Productwe Mannours worked 4

l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance i

12 Mo - Endina (Novt g

Includes restricted duty cases:

T 0

July 1994 June 1995 Median 0.51 Targets-1994 Average 0.64 Year-End 1995 0.40 1995 Goal 0.50 Year-End 1994 0.45 Performance Summary Turkey Point reported no Lost Time injunes or Restncted Duty Cases in November. Turkey Point's 12-Month Ending Lost Time Accident Rate of 0.22 was below the Year End target end Industry Median.

NQIE: OSHA Rate: The Turkey Point rate depicted excludes Juno Staff hours and incidents. The Corporate Safety Departrnent publishes rnonthly Nuclear Dwision rates. The rates for this reporting period are:

Month (thru 11/95) 2.87 YTD(thru 11/95) 2.08 Source: Plant Safety Supervisor Corporate Target 3.10

Contact:

W. Kone. 694 4235 Indicator Type O NRC X INPO X Corp X

Div F-1

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY STATISTICS ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 8-7-

--~~ ~~ - ~~-

~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - - -

~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ - - ~ ~

G ood en 6-

- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -

w l

~~~~~~~~~~y y

5~ ~-

~~~~~

w g 4 E

3-- --

j c) 2-1995 LTA j

.... g....g........................

Taroet 0 40 0

g B

-m : :

a Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Lost Tirae Accidents 2

2 4

3 1

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 f

A Restricted Duty cases 5

5 3

1 4

0 0

1 0

0 0

1 0

0 OSHA Recordable injuries 33 20 15 19 23 2

0 2

1 1

3 1

2 3

3 7

1

-e-INP0: LTA/ Restricted Duty Cases 12-Mo. Average

.51

.61

.62

.52

.31

.42

.51

.40

-O

OSHA: Recordableinjuries Year to-Date 3.07 2.55 2.51 2.48 2.33 2.42 2.42 2.39 2.44 2.61 2.76 l

Definitions For FPL employees permanently assigned to the site (OSHA Recordables by Payrolllocation only):

Lost Time Accident involves at least one full work day away from work following the day or the injury.

Restncted Duty involves at least one day of restncted or limited work activities by an injured employee.

OSHA Recordable Iniurv requires medical treatment beyond first aid.

E Lost Timo Accident and Restricted Duty Case Rate = Lost Time Accidents and Restricted dun x 200 000 Manhours Prooucuve Mannours Worked OSHA:

Recordable injury Rate = OSHA Recordable Iniunes x 200,000 Manhours Producuve Manhours Worked Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 12 Mo - Er;dino (Nov) g LTA Rate -1995 0.40 LTA Rate.1994 0.49 includes restricted duty cases:

Ta @.

July 1994 June 1995 Median 0.51 1994 Average 0'64 Year End 1995 0.40 1995 Goal O.50 Year End 1994 0.45 Performance Summary No Lost Time Accidents or Restncted Duty Cases occurred at St. Lucie dunng November. St. Luce's 12-Month Average is now below the 1995 Year End target and Industry Median.

RQIE: OSHA Rate: The St. Lucie late depicted excludes Juno Staff hours and incidents. The Corporate Safety Department publishes rienthly Nucear DMsion rates. The rates for this reporting pened are:

Month (thru 11/95) 2.87 YTD (thru 11/95) 2.08 Source: PlantSafetySupervisor Corcorate Tarcet: 3.10

Contact:

W. Korte. 694 4235 IndicatorType NRC X INPO X Corp X Div F2

l f-INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:

l R. J.

Acosta JNA/JB R. J.

Hovey PTN/ PLT T. V.

Abbatiello PTN/ PLT D. E.

Jemigan PTN/ PLT K. E.

Beatty JN0/JB H. H.

Johnson PTN/ PLT L W.

Bladow PSUPLT V. A.

Kaminskas PTN/ PLT W. H.

Bohlke JEUJB T.

Kreinberg PSUPLT G. J.

Boissy JN0/JB R. F.

Kundalkar JPN/PTN J. L Broadhead JEX/JB H. N.

Paduano JPN/JB C. L Burton PSUPLT J. G.

Pizzutelli JNE/JB R. L Castro JDC/JB T. F.

Plunkett JEX/JB J.

Clay PSUPLT T. E.

Roberts JPN/JB K. R.

Craig JPN/JB R. E.

Rose PTN/ PLT J. L Danek JNS/JB D. A.

Sager PSUPLT D. J.

Denver PSUJB J.

Scarola PSUPLT R. E.

Dawson PSUPLT C. H.

Shotwell JHR/JB M. S.

Dryden JNUJB R.

Sipos PSUPLT P. L Fincher PSUPLT D. L.

Smith JPN/JB J. E.

Geiger JNA/JB R. A.

Symes JNA/JB J. H.

Goldberg JEX/JB C.

Villard JPN/JB R. R.

Golden CC/JB W. E.

Walker PSUPLT J. C.

Hampp ETS/JB E.

Weinkam PTN/ PLT J. R.

Hartzog PTN/ PLT D. H.

West PSUPLT R. G.

Heisterman PTN/ PLT J. A.

West PSUPLT EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:

W. R. Corcoran W. Kleinsorg 21 Broadleaf Cirue Nuclear Regulatory Commission Windsor, CT G095 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, GA 30323-0199 S. E. Scace Vice President - Nuclear Operation Services Kerry D.Landis, Region ll Northeast Nuclear Energy Co.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Milstone Nuclear Power 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 P. O. Box 128 Atlanta,GA 30323 Waterford, CT 06385-0128 D. Prevatt T. P. Johnson NRC Senior Resident inspector NRC Senior Residentinspector PSUPLT PTN/ PLT l

l f

Z-1

ML20137N366

Text

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

= = =======

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

8.0 Source

Contact:

Contact:

Contact:

Navigation menu

Search