ML20140E923

FCS Performance Indicators Rept for March 1997

ML20140E923
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	03/31/1997
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20140E922	List: LIC-97-0069, Forwards FCS March 1997 Performance Indicator Rept ML20140E923
References
NUDOCS 9705010269
Download: ML20140E923 (88)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _____ .

I FORT CALHOUN STATION '

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS J

J. .s ,

s ..' /

MARCH 1997 9

SAFE OPERATIONS .

PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE COST EFFECTIVENEb8 IEOS10$$$ob00$$ss p PDR

___ a

4 I

l OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION

i i

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT l

i l

l

}

l i

t MARCH 1997 Production Engineering Division

. System Engineering I

E O

e

i 1

FORT CALHOUN STATION ~

March 1997 Monthly Operating Report l QPERATIONS

SUMMARY

The Fort Calhoun Station (FCS) operated at a nominal 100% power level between March 1,1997 and March 22,1997. On March 22,1997 at 2002 hours0.0232 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61761e-4 months <br />, FCS began a power reduction in order to compete scheduled, quarterly main turbine control l valve testing. The 95% power level was reached at 2236 hours0.0259 days <br />0.621 hours <br />0.0037 weeks <br />8.50798e-4 months <br /> on March 22,1997.

Testing was completed satisfactorily and a power ascension began at 0200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> on March 23,1997. The station reached 100% power at 0910 hours0.0105 days <br />0.253 hours <br />0.0015 weeks <br />3.46255e-4 months <br /> on March 23, 1997 and remained there through the end of the month.

On March 12,1997, FCS made a one-hour report, conceming a condition which met i the criteria of 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(i). The condition was a follow-up to LER 96-005, which included the design of the FCS Auxiliary Building for tomado venting. The FCS Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) does not indicate whether the Control

, and cable Spread Rooms were evaluated for the stresses imposed by the repressurization phase of a tomado. However, a recently completed safety analysis for operability (SAO-96-01, Rev. 2) determined that the Control Room and Cable Spreading Room envelopes remain operable within the design basis following a design basis tornado.

During the period of March 17,1997 through March 26,1997 a self assessment of the Operations Department was completed. Personnel from FCS and several other utilities were utilized to conduct the assessment, which was supported by the Utilities Service Alliance (USA).

=

9' i

e i

l

-, Fort Calhoun index Value ,

l + Industry Medien Index Value 1" T 96/4 Industry Median was 85%

97/1 OPPD Value was 85.24%

I 85 i 84 84

^

80 ,

. D 70 _

w  !

i 60 .

1 l

l Value for First Quarter 1997 was 85.24% l 1 50 .

l l

40 l 95/1 95/2 95/3 95/4 96/1 96/2 96/3 96/4 97/1 Apr May June l l

PERFORMANCE INDEX TREND The performance index trend calculation is made up of eleven variables each weighted to arrive at an overall index value. The thermal performance, secondary system chemistry, and industrial safety accident rate values are calculated for a one-year period. Fuel reliability is calculated on a quarterly basis. The remaining values (unit capability factor, unplanned (unit) capabil:ty loss factor, unplanned automatic scrams per 7000 hours0.081 days <br />1.944 hours <br />0.0116 weeks <br />0.00266 months <br /> critical, safety system performance, and collective radiation exposure) are calculated for a two-year period. This method allows the index trend to be more responsive to changes in plant performance.

INPO no longer uses the volume of low-level radioactive waste as a plant indicator. The value will still be tracked, but the value will no longer be used in calculating the Stations

. Performance Index. l l

Eh%XIMUMVALUE E February'97 OW rch 17 6

16.00 . o>

?

14.00 . -

8  ;

a

~

12.m . 888 888 888 ,

,n w _ $$9 $$$ $$$

8 888 8

• e.00 . 8 " 8 *"." " 8 ~

a

- e ~

e.00 -

i og

• 8*6 e 8 w

8 w

i 2

0.00 _

i + i i i _+ .

%_ i -+ i i UCF UCLF HPSI AFW EACP CRE UAS7 FR CR TF1 ISAR i

This graph shows the difference between the Maximum No. of points for each WANO indicator and the actual value achieved by Fort Calhoun for the fourth quarter of 1996.

• UCF Unit Capability Factor TPI Thermal Performance indicator UCLF Unplanned Capability Loss Factor CPI Secondary Chemistry Indicator i HPSI High Pressure Safety injection ISAR Industrial Safety Accident Rate AFW Auxiliary Feedwater  !

EACP Emergency AC Power '

UAS7 Unplanned Auto Scrams / 7000 Hours CRE Collective Radiation Exposure FRI Fuel Reliability Indicator Per INPO, the Performance Indicator for the Volume of Low Level Radioactive Waste buried, will no longer be used in calculating the Stations Performance Index. All other parameters have been adjusted to reflect this change.

. iii i

1

l FORT CALHOUN STATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REPORT -

March 1997-

SUMMARY

j POSITIVE TREND REPORT report) why the trend is not adverse, j

A performance indicator with data representing three The following perfom1ance indicators exhibited adverse consecubve months of improving performance or three trends for the reporting month:

consecutive months of performance that is superior to the stated goal is exhibiting a positive trend per Nudear Maintenance Wnrkload Backloos Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-OP- (Page 39)

End of Adverce Trend Report.

The following performance indicators exhibited positive l trends for the reporting month: I Safetv System Failures INDICATORS NEEDING INCREASED (Page 19) MANAGEMENT ATTENTION REPORT Hiah Pressure Safety Iniection System Safety System A performance indicator with data for the reporting Performance penod that is inadequate when compared to the OPPD (Page 5) goal is defined as "Needing increased Management Attention" per Nuclear Operations Division Quality Auxiliary Feedwater System Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37).

(Page 6)

Fuel Reliability Irgu Emercenev A.C. Power System (Page 9.)

(Page 7)

Cents Dar Kilowatt Hour Secondary Chemistry (page 37)

(Page 10)

Unolanned Safety System Actuations (INPO)

(Page 29)

Hazardous Waste Produced (Page 45)

Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area (Page 46)

End of Positive Trend Report.

ADVERSE TREND REPORT A performance indicator with data representing three consecutive months of declining performance or three consecutive months of performance that is trending toward declining as determined by the Manager -

Station Engineering, constitutes an adverse trend per Nuclear Operations Division Quality Procedure 37 (NOD-QP-37). A supervisor whose performance

, indicator exhibits an adverse trend by this definition rnay specify in written form (to be published in this V

Table of Contents / Summary Eaae GOALS . . . . . . . . . . .. ... ... . . . . .. . .. . .. . . ...... .. .. . xii WANO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .... ..... .. 1 i

Unit Capability Factor . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . .. ... . . .. . .. ..... ... . . 2 Unplanned Capability Loss Factor ...... .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 Unplanned Automatic Reactor SCRAMS per 7000 Hours . . .... . . ... .. .. .... 4 High Pressure Safety injection System . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . ... 5 ,

i Auxiliary Feedwater System . . . . .... .. . .. . . .... . . 6 Emergency AC Power System . . .. .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . 7 l l

Thermal Performance . . . .. ... . .... . . . .. . 8 Fuel Reliability Indicator . . .. .. . ... . .. .. . . .9 i l

l Secondary System Chemistry . . . ... . . ... ... . . ... . 10 '

Collective Radiation Exposure ... . . . .. . ... .... . . . . ... 11 Volume of Low Level Radioactive Waste . .. . ... ... . .. . .. 12 l 1

Industrial Safety Accident Rate . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . 13 SAFE OPERATIONS Disabling injury / illness Cases Frequency Rate ... . .. . .. 15 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . ... . . .. . 16 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations

>1,000 Disintegrations / Minute per Probe Area ..... . . .. 17 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs . . . ... . , . . 18 Safety System Failures . . . .. . ... . . . . 19 -

Maximum Individual Radiation Exposure . .. .. . 20 Violation Trend .. . . . ... . .. 21 Significant Events , . .. . . . 22

, Missed Surveillance Tests Resulting in LERs ... . 23 vi

Table of Contents / Summary PERFORMANCE Station Net Generation . ..... . ..... . . . . . ... ... ...... ... ....... . 25 Forced Outage Rate . . . . . . ....... . .... ... .. . .. .... . . ..... . 26 Unit Capacity Factor . . ..... .... ... . . . .. . .. . . .. . . 27 Equivalent Availability Factor . . . ..... .... . . . ... ....... . . .. .. 28 Unplanned Safety System Actuations INPO Definition ..... . .. .... . .... .. . . .... ... . . 29 NRC Definition . . . . . . ... . .. . .. . . ... . ... . 30 Gross Heat Rate . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. ....... .... .... . . .. 31 Daily Thermal Output .. .... ... .. .. . ..... .. . 32 Equipment Forced Outages per 1,000 Critical Hours . .. .. . . . . 33 Chemistry Action Levels Exceeded - Event Days . . . , . . . . . . ........ . 34 Primary System Lithium % Hours Out of Limit .. .. .. . .. ... 35 COST Cents Per Kilowatt Hour . . . . . . . . . .. .... . .... . 37 DIVISION AND DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage) . .. . .... 39 Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance .. . .. . .. .... 40 Percentage of Total MWOs Completed per month identified as Rework . .... 41 Overtime . .. ... ... .. .. . .. . .. 42

, Procedural Noncompliance incidents . .. .. . . . . .. . 43 in-Line Chemistry Instruments Out-of-Service .. . . . . . . . 44 Hazardous Waste Produced . .. . .. . . . ... . . 45 l 1

Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area .. .. .. 46 3 Radiological Work Practices Program . . . . . . . 47 Document Review . . ... . . .. . . . . .. 48 vii

Table of Contents / Summary Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) . . . . . . . . .. ... . .. . . ...,, . 4g Temporary Modifications . . ... ...... . ... . . ..... . .. .. .. 50 Outstanding Modifications . . . . . .. . .. .... ... ..... . ...... .... . . .. . 51 Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown . . . . . .. . .. ... ... . . . ... 52 Engineering Change Notices Status .......... . .. .... .. .. . ... .. . . . ... .... ..... 53 Open . . . .. . ..... .... . . . . . . .. . .... .. ...... 54 Licensee Event Report (LED) Root Cause Breakdown . . ... .... . .. . . .... 55 Licensed Operator Requalification Training . .. .. . . . ... . . . 56 License Candidate Exams .. .. .... . . .. .. .. .. . . 57 Condition Reports . . . . . ... . . .. . . .. 58 Cycle 17 Refueling Outage MWO Planning Status . . ... . . . .. ... . .. 59 Overall Project Status . . . .. .... .. . ...... .. ..... 60 Outage Modification Planning ... .. .. ... . . .. . . . 61 On-Line Modification Planning . .. . .. . ..... .. . . 62 Progress of 1997 On-Line Modification Planning ... . . . .... .. .. 63 ACTION PLANS. DEFINITIONS. SEP INDEX & DISTRIBUTION LIST l

Action Plans .... . . ...... . .. ..... .. .. . .. . ... . . . .. 64 Performance Indicator Definitions . .. . . .. .. .. .. . . 66 Safety Enhancement Program Index .. . ., . . .. . 74 Report Distribution List .. . ... . .. .. . 76 e

e >

iX

NUCLEAR PROGRAM 1997 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

' l l

FUTURE FOCUS and RELATIONSHIP to CHANGE The nation's electric utility industry is passing through a period of significant organizational, financial and cultural changes. In this new era, change is inevitable, progress and success are not. Fort Calhoun must react to these '

changes while improving capacity, SALP ratings and INP0 ratings.

~

We must KNOW OUR COSTS to CONTROL COSTS. Understanding cost is essential to l controlling it, and controlling cost is essential to competing in today's market.

\

We are a learning organization. We must BUILD ON OUR HIGH PERFORMANCE CULTURE. l Individuals at all levels must take responsibility for their actions and must be j committed to improve their own performance. l OUR CULTURE MUST SUPPORT THE NEW STRATEGIES. We must continue to develop and i implement strategies that will allow us to effectively compete in the evolving market while still maintaining the highest levels of safety and reliability.  ;

Communicating is our Ley to improving. Follow up and feedback must be candid, j forthright and timely.

We recognize that change causes disruption of work and work flow. That change requires increased management direction. We need IN DEPTH, RELENTLESS ATTENTION to our NEW FOCUS / STRATEGIES.

VISION To be recognized as the best nuclear organization in the world and to preserve nuclear energy as a viable future energy source.

, MISSION l

The safe, reliable and cost effective generation of electricity for OPPD

. customers through conservative decision aking and the professional use of nuclear technology. We will conduct these operations to assure the health, j safety:, and protection of our personnel, the general public, and the environment.

O IX

1 1

i

- l 1 GOALS Goal 1: SAFE OPERATIONS

. Supports: April 1996 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Objective: 3 & 4

A proactive, self-critical and safety conscious culture is exhibited throughout the nuclear organization. Individuals demonstrate professionalism through self-ownership and personal initiative and open communication.

1997 Priorities:

. Achieve an overall SALP Rating of"1"in 1997

~

l

. Focus on Achieving an INPO Rating of"1"in 1998 '

Reduce 1997 NRC violations with no violations more severe than level 4.

No unplanned automatic reactor scrams or safety system actuations. l Objectives to support SAFE OPERATIONS.

OBJECTIVE 1-1:

No challenges to a nuclear safety system.

OBJECTIVE 1-2:

Comply with applicable policies, technical specs, procedures, standing orders and work instructions.

OBJECTIVE 1-3:

Identify conditions BEFORE they affect plant safety and reliability. Address every safety concern.

OBJECTIVE 1-4:

Achieve all safety-related 1997 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report.

. OBJECTIVE 1-5:

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

e X

OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS .

1997 Priorities Goal 2: PERFORMANCE Supports: April 1996 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 3, Objective: 2; G-4, Objective: 1, 2, & 3; G-5, Objective: 2 Nuclear teamwork achieves high performance at Fort Calhoun Station as exhibited by safe, reliable and cost effective power production.

l 1997 PRIORITIES:

. Improve Quality, Professionalism and Teamwork.

. Maintain High Plant Reliability.

. Pursue efficient, cost-effective work processes.

. Meet or exceed INPO key parameters Reduce the number of Human Performance errors.

. Identify Programmatic performance problems through effective self

! assessment. -

1

. Maintain a high level of readiness in the ERO.

. Objecdves to suppod PERFORMANCE:

I  !

! OBJECTIVE 2-1:

Achieve an annual plant capacity factor of 92.7% and a unit capability factor of 96.0%. l OBJECTIVE 2-2:

j Training meets the needs of the plant and the National Academy accreditation objectives, i . Line managers use training to present, discuss & reinforce performance standards.

Une managers monitor and assess personnel performance to determine how well

, standards are met.

. Line managers through personal involvement in training emphasize the importance of conducting activities within approved procedures / practices.

. Executive Training Committee:

. invites line supervisors to discuss the direction training is going for their specific area.

. invites the line and training supervisors responsible for each accredited program to provide a status of internal accreditation assessments.

. . ensures items such as training attendance, attentiveness, punctuality, etc.

are uniformly emphasized.

~

Xi

i OPPD NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION GOALS ,

1997 Priorities Goal 2: PERFORMANCE (Continued)

OBJECTIVE 2-3:

Achieve all performance-related 1997 performance indicator goals in the Performance Indicator Report. Focus on performing basic skills well while pursuing efficient, cost-effective work processes. Identify the barriers to excellence and resolve them.

- OBJECTIVE 2-4:

Plan for the completion of the 1998 refueling outage in 42 days of less.

OBJECTIVE 2-5:

Teamwork is evident by improved plant reliability, an effective emergency response organization, reduced number of human performance errors and effective self assessment..

Goal 3: COSTS Supports: April 1996 Corporate Strategic Plan Goal 2, Objective: 1, 3, and Goal 5, Objective: 1 Operate Fort Calhoun cost effectively to contribute to OPPD's " bottom line". Cost consciousness is exhibited at all levels of the organization.

1997 Priorities:

Maintain total O&M and Capital Expenditures within budget.

Streamline work process to improve cost effectiveness.

Implement Opportunity Review recommendations.

Objectives to support COSTS:

OBJECTIVE 3-1:

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

OBJECTIVE 3-2:

Significantly reduce operating costs through full support of Utilities Service Alliance initiatives by maximizing sharing of resources, leveraging of buying power and elimination or reduction of redundant support services.

Goals Source: Lounsberry (Manager) xii

4 8

e WANO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 9

O e

e 1

1 i

, , Monthly Unit Cap:bility Fector

...x . 12 Month L.htt Capability Factor

1997 Fort Calhoun Goal (96%)

Year 2000 WANo industry Goal (87%)

100% . _

,,, _ f '" I_ .;. o. -

t-g 4 g 2  ; .:

x

...x ..... .x. ... .x. .... .x. .-

60% ..

40%..

20% .

0% ,  ; . ' R -

, y

. Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capability Factor (UCF) value, a rolling 12-month average, the OPPD goal, and the WANO 2000 goal. UCF is defined as the ratio of the available energy generation over a given period of time to the reference energy generation over the same time period, expressed as a percentage.

The UCF for March 1997 was reported as 100.0%. The year-to-date UCF was also reported as 100%, the UCF for the last 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 76.0%, and the 36-month average (Apr.1994 through Mar.1997) was reported as 83.9%.

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

Energy losses for May 1996 are due to a reduction in power to 95% for Moderator Coefficient Testing.

Energy losses for June 1996 are due to a forced outage when the Anti-Rotation Device on Reactor Coolant Pump RC-3B-M failed.

Energy losses for Sept., Oct., & Nov.,1996 due to the scheduled Refueling Outage.

Energy losses for Dec.1996 are due to MOV-CV leakage.

The Year _2000 WANO industry goal is 87% and the industry current best quartile value is approximately 85%. The 1997 Fort Calhoun annual goal for this indicator is a minimum of 96.0%.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 16. At the end of the March 1997, the FCS Value was 13.79. This compares to the previous month's value 12.44.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 2

a Monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor

+ 12. Month Rolling Average ,

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (1.58%)

+ Year 2000 WANoindustry Goal (4.5%)

60%..

50% .

40%_.

30% .

20%..

10% _

" C'5 0% ~ 5 5 ,

^

^

2 ;_, 3 ,

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

UNPLANNED CAPAPILITY LOSS FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), a rolling 12-month average, the OPPD goal, and the Year 2000 WANO goal. UCLF is defined as the ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period of time, to the reference energy generation expressed as a percentage. Unplanned energy loss is defined as energy not produced as a result of unscheduled shutdowns, outage extensions, or load reductions due to causes under plant management control. Energy losses are considered to be unplanned if they are not scheduled at least four weeks in advance.

The UCLF for the month of March 1997 was reported as 0.00%. The year-to-date UCLF was 0.00%, the UCLF for the last 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 7.38%, and the 36-month average UCLF (Apr.1994 through Mar.1997) was reported as 5.9% at the end of the month.

The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 3.0% and the industry current best quartile value is approximately 3.2%. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.58%

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 12. At the end of March 1997 the FCS Value was 7.0. This compares to the previous month's value of 5.9.

Data Source: Generation Totals Report & Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trer d: Needs increased Management Attention.

3

+ 12-Month Rolling Average

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

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (0.0) ,

. _ Year 2000 WANO Industry Goal (1) 3 ..

2..

^

1 - , .

0

'N .

:  :  :  :  :  :  :  : i i Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar FCS Reactor Scrams -1997 4 .-

3 _

3.

1 9.-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <

95 96 tpr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7000 HOURS CRITICAL The upper graph shows the 12-month rolling average, the 36-month average, the OPPD goal for 1997 and the Year 2000 WANO goal. The lower graph shows the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams that occurred during the last 12 months. This indicator is defined as the number of unplanned automatic scrams that occur per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of critical operation.

There were no unplanned automatic reactor scrams during the month of March 1997. The 12-month rolling average (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 0. The 36-month value (Apr.1994 through Mar.

1997) was 0.301.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station goal for this indicator is 0. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is a maximum of one unplanned automatic reactor scram per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> critical.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of the March 1997, the FCS Value was 8.0. This compares to the previous month's value of 8.0.

Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Chase -

Trend: Positive 4

m Monthly HPSISystem Unavailability Value

+ 12 Month Rolling Awrage

__ Fort Calhoun Goal (0.003)

Year 2000 WANo Industry Goal (0.02) -

0.02 --  :  :  :  :  :  :  :.  :  :.  :  : j

! l 0.015 .-

0.01 ._

0.005 __

e-  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  : -

0  ;- x - - -

x '

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

HIGH PRESSLIRE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the High Pressure Safety injection (HPSI) System unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for March 1997.

The HPSI System unavailability value for the month of March 1997 was 0.0002. There was 0.4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability, during the month.

The 12 month rolling average was (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 5.9E-5, and the year-to-date HPSI unavailability value was 0.00006 at the end of the month.

For the previous year there was a total of 1.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the HPSI system.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.003. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 0.02. .

The maximum index point valuo for this indicator is 10. At the end of March 1997 the FCS Value was 10. This compares to the previous month's value of 10. -

Data Source: Phelps/Schaffer(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Schaffer Trend: Positive ,

5 i

- ~ ~

m Monthly Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability

--x 12 Month AFw Unavailability

__e._ Fort Calhoun Goal (0.01)

Year 2000 WANO lndustry Goal (0.025) 0.02 ,-

:  :  :.  :  :  :  :

0.018 --

0.016 _.

0.014 - 0.01399 0.012 -

0.01 --  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :

0.008 .

0.006 0.00493 0.00504 0fE 0

x ,

0 x

g-x0 W a- 9 -- R# 0 1996 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System Unavailability value, as defined by INPO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the month of March 1997.

The AFW System Unavailability Value for March 1997 was 0.0. There were 0.0 hourc of planned and 0.00 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability during the month. The 12 month rolling average (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 0.00269, and the year-to-date unavailability value was 0.00435 at the end of March 1997.

At the end of March 1997, there has been a of 0.00 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 18.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the AFW system.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.01.

The Year 2000 WANO industry goalis 0.025.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 10. At the end of March 1997, the FCS Value was 10. This compares to the previous month's value of 10.

Data Source: Phelps/Fritts (Mar,ager/ Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Fritts ~

Trend: Positive 6

m Monthly Emergency AC Power Unavailability Value x Year-to-Date Emergency AC Power UnavailabilityValue

,_. Fort Calhoun Goal (0.024) .

^

0.06 -

O.05 ..

I 0.04 __

0.03 ..

^

i i i i i i 6 i i 5 g __ x . x

• Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the Emergency AC Power System unavailability value, as defined by WANO in the Safety System Performance Indicator Definitions, for the month of March 1997.

The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value for March 1997 was 0.0.75. During the month, there was 36.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability, and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned un-availability for testing and repairs. The Emergency AC Power System unavailability value year-to-date was 0.013 and the value for the last 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 0.011.

There has been 20.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> (33.1 for DG-1 and 24.3 for DG-2) of planned unavailability and 0.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of unplanned unavailability for the emergency AC power systern in 1997.

There were a total of 1167.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of planned unavailability and 3.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> of unplanned -

unavailability for the emergency AC power system in 1996.

l

~

The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.024.

i The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 0.025.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 10. At the end of March 1997, the FCS Value was 9.75. This compares to the previous month's value of 10.00.

Data Source: Phelps/Ronning (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Ronning Trend: Positive 7 I

g MonthlyThermalPerformance

, ,12-Month Rolling Average

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (99.6%)

1. Year 2000 WANO Industry Goal (99.5%) ,

100%.-

- - [ m 99%-.

1996 '

RFO 98% e  :

Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar THERMAL PERFORMANCE This indicator shows the monthly Thermal Performance Value, the rolling 12-month average, the OPPD goal, and the Year 2000 WANO goal.

The thermal performance value for the month of March 1997 was 99.85%.

The year to date value was reported as 99.9%.

The 12 month rolling average (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was reported as 99.78%.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is an index value which is > 99.7%.

The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 99.5%.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 6. At the end of March 1997, the FCS Value was 5.34 This compares to the end of the year value of 5.22.

Data Source: Phelps/Naser(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Gorence Trend: None

\

f l

g FuelRedability(E4)

+ Year 2000 WANO Goal (5 x 104 MicrocuriesXiram)

_1997 Goal 147E4 320._ 299.16 E 280 257.07 217.6 h240._ .

j 200 -- 169 150.9 160 - 121.9 1993

,g 120- RFO E 80 --

18.6 M h 40, - 45 16.1 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar -

FUEL RELIABILITY INDrCATOR .

The FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR (FRI) for March 1997 was 22.8E-4 microcuries/ gram. This is an increase from the February 1997 FRI of 18.6 E-4 microcuries/ gram. From the coolant chemistry data through April 6,1997 Westinghouse predicts the presence of 8 to 14 leaking rods at lower core power levels or 3 to 5 leaking rods at core average power. The Cycle 17 FRI in the first four months of operation is trending similar to the, Cycle 16 FRI values. The March 1997 FRI value is based on data from the entire month at 100% steady-state power and an average letdown flow of 33.62 gpm.

The purpose of the FRI is to monitor industry progress in achieving and maintaining a high level of fuel integrity. An effective fuelintegrity and performance monitoring program provides a means to detect fuel failures and assess the fuel failure number, physical condition, exposure, mechanism, and loca-tion.

Completed in March was the Westinghouse final fuel assembly testing that quantifies the increased resistance of the revised fuel design to wear. Based on the results of this testing, Westinghouse concluded that the quantified combined benefit of the lower grid spring stiffness and the attemating springs and dimples is over 400% for small grid to rod gaps and a minimum of a 40% improvement for large grid to rod gaps. Westinghouse also stated that this improvement supports operation of the revised fuel design in excess of 3 cycles without fuel failures due to fretting wear.

Several items were completed from the joint OPPD and Westinghouse Action List which was created to ensure that the Cycle 18 core would be tree of potentially defective fuel assemblies.

The "WANO Performance Indicator Program Utility Data Coordinator Reference Notebook" (INPO No.94-009, Rev.1) states that the Industry Goal for fuel reliability is as follows: " units should strive to .

operate with zero fuel defects". The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station FRl Performance Indicator goal is to j maintain a monthly FRI below 147.0 x 10d microcuries/ gram. This value was calculated based on the previous Cycles fuel performance, the results of the past fuel inspection and reconstitution campaigns, -

l and the installation of the improved fuel failure resistant gr~d design in one third of the assemblies (Batch U)in the Cycle 17 core.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of the March 1997, the FCS Vive -

was 3.94. This compares to the previous month's value of 5.4.

Data Source: Guinn/Guliani -

Accountability: Chase /Stafford Trend: Needs Management Attention 9

J

m Monthly Chemistry indicator

+ 12-Month Rolling Average )

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (1.17) )

2.6 - l 2.5 __

• 2.4 -_

2.3 -

2.2 ..

2.1 -

2 1.9 ..

1.8 ._

1.7 ..

1.6 ..

1.5 ..

1.4 -

1.3 ..

. 1.2 y-um a 1996 RFo E

1!

Apr May Jun Jul Aug

=i Sep oct Nov Dec Jan

, m Feb Mar SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY Criteria for calculating the Secondary System Chemistry Performance Index (CPI) are as follows:

1) the plant is at greater than 30% power;

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

The CPI for March 1997 was 1.18. The CPI value for the past 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 1.32. In order to place the FCS in the industries upper quartile, the 1997 goal has been change from CPI value < 1.4 to the CPI value < 1.17.

Of the six parameters used in the CPI calculation four are below the WANO mean value.

These include the steam generator chloride, sulfate, and feedwater iron, and condensate pump dischared dissolved oxygen. Steam Generator sodium was above the mean value and has remained unchanged from the previous month. FH-6 copper remains above the WANO mean but is lower than the previous months value.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 7. At the end of March 1997, the FCS Value was 6.37. This compares to the previous month's value of 5.15 Data Source: Spires /Reneaud (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Spires Trend : None 10 i

Ihel __

I e Monthly Personnel Radiation Ex.posure

+ Cumulative PersonnelRadiation Exposure o FCS Goal 38 person. REM 40 T

c = = = -- = = = = = = a 35 -

30 .-

25 __

E 20 -

2 15 _.

10 __

6..

0 EI _

Jan Fe b Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE The 1997 Fort Calhoun goal for collective radiation exposure is set at 138.0 person-REM.

The exposure for March 1997 was 1.268 Person-Rem (ALNOR).

The year-to-date exposure through the end of March 1997 was 6.086 Person-Rem (AL-NOR).

This indicator is a " COLLECTIVE" indicator. WANO does not differentiate between on-line and outage exposure.

l The Year 2000 WANO industry goal for collective radiation exposure is 120 person-rem per year. For the three year period (Apr.1994 through Mar.1997), the collective radiation exposure was 393.836 person-rem. This gives a Fort Calhoun Station a three year average of 131.2787 person-rem per year.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 8. At the end of March 1997 the FCS ,

Value was 6.8. This compares to the previous month's value of 5.73.

Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) ,

Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: None SEP 54 l

11

~

g Monthly Volume of LLRW (cu.ft.)

_x Year-to-Date Cumulative Radioactive Waste Buried

,_ Fort calhoun Goal (1200 cu.ft.)

1200 --  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :

1100-_

1000.

900..

800__

700.

g 600__

. $ 500 __

400__

, 300_-

200__ o 8

• 100__8 g 8 0 x p--eix F=* ' >

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE This indicator sho'as the volume of the monthly radioactive waste buried, the cumulative year-to-date radioactive waste buried, and the Fort Calnoun goal.

Cu.Ft.

Amount of solid radwaste shippeed off-site for processing during current month 0.0 Volume of solid radwaste buried during January 1997 20.5 Cumulative volume of solid radioactive waste buried in 1996 16.0 Amount of solid radwaste in te/nporary storage 136.3 The 1997 Fort Calhoun Staion goal for the volume of solia racioactive waste (buried) is 1200

. cubic feet. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 45 cubic meters (1,589 cubic feet) per year. The industry uppar ten percentile value is approximately 27.33 cubic meters (965.3 cubic feet) per year.

This indicator is no longer used by INPO. The indicator will still be tracked, but will no longer be used in computing the Stations Index Number.

Data Source: Chase /Breuer(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase!Gebers Trend: None SEP54 12

Monthlyindustrial Accident Rate

_.e 12 Month Rolling Average

,_. FCs Year-End Goal (<0.50)

+ Year 2000 WANo industry Goal (<0.40) 1.2 1

T 0.8 __

' l' . _ _ _ h . . . .

DA . W. 2 E Y  : T~E E "

7

-: g  ; - .

~

Apr May June July Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE l

This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per 20,000 man-hours worked for all

{

utility personnel permanently assigned to the station that result in any of the following:

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

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

Fatalities The purpose of this indicator is to monitor progress in improving industrial safety performance for utility personnel permanently assigned to the station. Contractor man-hours are not included in the indicator.

l The values for this indicator are determined as follows:

(number of restricted-time accidents + lost-time accidents + fatalities) x 200.000 1 (number of station person-hours worked)

The Fort Calhoun Station industrial safety accident rate for the month of March 1997 was 0.00. The 12 month rolling average (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 0.1502. The year to date value was 0.00 at the end of March 1997. -

There were no restricted-time and no lost-time accidents in March 1997.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal is 50.50. The Year 2000 WANO industry goal is 50.40.

The maximum index point value for this indicator is 5. At the end of March 1997, the FCS Value was 5.0 This compares to the previous month's value of 4.6. -

Data Source: Sorensen (Manager)

Chase / Booth (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Bishop 13

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

e 14

l Monthly Disabling injurylillness Frequency

+ 12 Month Rolling Average

,_.1997 OPPD Goal .

l 2 .. I 1.8 .-

1.6 -

1A-1.2 .

)

, 1.

0.8!

!- 0.6 . .

'" l

- . A.

'M ~3 0.45 I- 2 I I I 0.2 ..

0 - >

! Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FREQUENCY RATE (LOST-TIME ACCIDENT RATE) l l This indicator shows the March 1997 disabling injury / illness frequency rate and the disabling l injury / illness rate for the past 12 months (rolling average).

For the month of March 1997 the disabling injury / illness frequency rate was 0.00. For the 12 month period (Apr.1996 through Mar.1907) the disabling injury / illness rate was 0.45. There

, were no disabling injury / illness cases reported for March 1997.

l The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.5.

I

(

Data Source: Sorensen/Skaggs (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Bishop Trend: Meeting OPPDs Goal SEP 25, 26 & 27 15 l

,_ MontNy Recordable injury / Illness Frequency Rate 4 Rolling 12 Month Average

... .. Fort Calhoun Goal ,

4.5 _.

4.0 __

3.5 .-

3.0 .

2.5 2.0 _#.  : . -

-_ a  : -

1.5 e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . .e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e . . . . .

1.0  ;  ; , , ,

1 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar RECORDABLE INJURY / ILLNESS FREQUENCY RATE This indicator shows the monthly recordable injury / illness frequency rate, a rolling 12 month average, and the OPPD goal.

A recordable injury / illness case is reported if personnel from any of the Nuclear Divisions are injured on the job and require corrective medical treatment beyond first aid. The recordable injury / illness cases frequency rate is computed on a rolling 12 month average.

The recordable injury / illness frequency rate for the month of March 1997 was 1.41.

The recordable injury / illness frequency rate for the past 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 1.8.

During the month of March 1997, there were 0 recordable injuries. .

There have been a total of 2 recordable injury / illness cases in 1997.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.5.

Data Source: Sorensen Accountability: Bishop .

Trend: Needs Management Attention SEP 15,25,26 & 27 16 i

i e Contamination Events (Monthly)

Contamination Events (YrD) 100 .

90 ..

)

60 . _ i 70 ._  ;

60 .

l l 50 .

l 40 .. )

30 __

l 20 ._  ;

l 10 .. 8 I

0 -

1 .

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

l l

l CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 DISINTEGRATIONSIMINUTE PER PROBE ARF.A This indicator shows the Personnel Contamination Events in the Clean Controlled Area i for contaminations 21,000 disintegrations / minute per probe area for March 1997.

There were 8 contamination events in March 1997. There have been eight l* contamination events in 1997 through the end of March 1997.

l l

l

' Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: Needs Management Attention SEP 15 & 54 i 17

I i_, Personnel Errors (Esch Month)

+ Preventable (184onthTotals) c Personnel Error (18-Month Totals) 20 _ _

l l

15 --

l 10 . '

5 N - -

0 N;;;?=N;;;gE:E:

,E '

1

,E,'

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

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

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

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

In February 1997, there were no events which were subsequently reported as an LER. .

No LERs were categorized as Preventable and no LERs were categorized as Personnel Error for the month of February. The total LERs for the year 1997 is one. The total Personnel Error LERs for the year 1997 is zero. -

The 1997 goal for this indicator is that the year-end values for the 18-month totals not exceed 12 Preventable and 5 Personnel Error LERs.

Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase .

Trend: Needs increased Management Attention SEP 15 18

i i Startup Shutdown Operations .

.-.o... Industry Average Trend

=

if a1--

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

,,,a ,,,, , , ,,,a,,,,,,y,,,,,, ,,,y i , ._....,.,. j j j l

92-2 92-3 92 4 93-1 93-2 53-3 93-4 94-1 94-2 94-3 94-4 95-1 Year-Quarter SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES This indicator illustrates the number of NRC Safety System Failures as reported by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data in the biannual" Performance Indica-tors for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors" report.

The following safety system failures occurred between the 2nd quarter of 1992 and the 1st quarter of 1995:

1st Quarter 1993: The SG low pressure scram signal block reset values, for all 4 channels of both SGs, were greater than the allowed limits. This rendered the scram input inoperable at certain operating condi-tions.

2nd Quarter 1993: A section of the piping configuration for the borated water source of the safety injection system w0s not seismically qualif:ed. This could have resulted in a failure of the system to meat design requirements during a seismic evant.

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

4) Only one train of control room ventilation was placed in recirc when both toxic gas monitors became inoperable. Later during surveillance testing, the other train auto-started and brought outside air into the control room for a six-minute period.

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

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

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

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability: Chase Trend: Positive 19

m Hghest Monthly bdividual Exposure rnR

, , Year-to-date -

Fort Cahoun Goal 1000 rrR 1000  :  :

900.

800.

700.

600.

~

500.

400.

300.

200.

• 100..

O E

~

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

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE This indicator shows the highest exposure for an individual during January 1997.

For the month of March 1997, an individual accumulated 60 millirem, which was the highest individual exposure for the month.

For the year to date, an individual has accumulated a total of 556 millirem.

The OPPD limit for the maximum yearly individual radiation exposure is 4,000 mrem /

year. The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goalis a maximum of 1,000 mrem.

Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source) .

Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: None a

20

~

h. .

l py;ig FCS Cited Violations (Monthly)

, FCS Non-Cited Violations (Monthly) s FCS Cited Violations (12-Month Average)

FCS Non-Cited Violations (12-Month Average) .

__m _ Region IV Cited Violations (12-Month Average for Region IV top quartile) 10 6

c C C O 4_. e e c e e e e c e o 0 , ,E ,  ;

N E @ E E E U E < 2 q ,$ < O o

z ,E $

m $" 6

, 1996 VIOLATION TREND .

l This indicator illustrates a 12-month trend for Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations, Non-Cited Violations and Cited Violations for the Top Quartile plants in Region IV. ,

Additionally, the Fort Calhoun Station Cited and Non-Cited Violations for the past 12 months will be illustrated monthly. The 12-month trend for the Region IV top quartile lags 2-3 i months behind the Fort Calhoun Station trend. This lag is necessary to compile informa-tion on other Region IV plants.

The following inspections were completed during February 1997:

IER No. Iilla 97-03 Resident Monthly To date, OPPD has received no violations for inspections conducted in 1997.

. Level lli Violations 0 Level IV Violations 0 Non-Cited Violations _Q Total 0 The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station Goal for this performance indicator is to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile plant in Region IV.

Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Tills Trend: None 21

m NHC Significant Events

_.e Industry Average Trend .

1 1 l 1 .. .

0.5 ~

0

. 0 0

, , , r r  ? r r , ,

92 93 94 95-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 96-1 96-2 96-3 96-4 Year -Quarter INPO Significant Events (SEs) 3 2 3 2 21 1 1 1_ 0 0 ,

0 l

, l l l ,  ;

92 93 94 95 1 95-2 95-3 95-4 96-1 96-2 96-3 96 4 Year-Quarter SIGNIFICANT EVENTS NRC SIGNIFICANT EVENTS The following SEs were identified between the 2nd Quarter of 1992 and the 1st quarter of 1995 (as reported in the NRC's ' Performance Indicators for Operating Nuclear Power Reactors' report dated June 30,1995):

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

4th Quarter 1994: A potential accidet t scenario involving a large break LOCA or a main steam line break inside containment could result in the inoperability of both control room A.C. Units.

INPO SIGNIFICANT EVENTS l

The following SEs have been identified since 2nd Quarter of 1992 by INPO:

l 2nd Qusrter 1992: Intake of transuranics during letdown filter change-out.

3rd Qumrter 1992: Safety Valve malfunction (RC-142).

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

2nd Quarter 1993: Inadequate control of Switchyard activities. ,

3rd Quarter 1993: Loss of reactor coolant due to malfunction of Pressurizer Safety Valve.

i OI,t Quarter 1994: 1) Unexpected CEA withdrawal (Event occurred November 13,1993 but l

was not identified as an SE until 1st Quarter 1994).

• l 2) Unplanned dilution of Boron concentration in the Reactor Coolant System.

1st Quarter 1996: During pressurizer solid plant operation, the Low Temperature Overpressurization (LTOP) protection for the RCS was inadvertently disabled.

2nd Quarter 1996: RC Pump Anti-Reverse Rotation Device (ARD) failure No SE reports have been received from INPO on the 1996 SEs as of August 1, .

1996.

Data Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission & INPO ,

Accountability: Chase Trend: Positive 22

1 l

Missed STs Resulting in LERs 3 _. -

I 2._

l 1 .

l

. l 0 0 0 0 1 0 , ,

I

~

96 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS This indicator shows the number of missed Surveillance Tests (STs) that resulted in Licensee Event Reports (LERs) during March 1997.

There were no missed surveillance tests resulting in LERs during March 1997.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Chase /Phelps .

Trend - None SEP 60 & 61 23

1 1

i l

l-1 i

PERFORMANCE i

i i,

! Goal: To strive for Excellence in Operations utilizing the j highest standards ofperformance at Fort Calhoun Station that i

3.

result in safe, reliable plant operation in power production.

l l

O O

24

~

f Net Generation (10,000 MWh) 40 ..

34.55 34.84 34.81 34,43 35.14 32.82

, 30.08 l l

30 ..

{ g 1996 l 8 RCP RFO l

j I * '

20 .

j 16.94 l e

8 q

15.16 8

t 10 .

!~

0 i , l  : i  :

M  ;

i

! i i j Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov cec Jan Feb Mar j STATION NET GENERATION During the month of March 1997, a net total of 362923.4 MWh was generated by the Fort Calhoun Station. Cumulative net generation for Cycle 16 was 6,418,326.6 MWh . Cumu-lative net generation for Cycle 17 was 1,396,698.60 MWh at the end of March 1997.

l

} Energy losses for June 1996 were attributed to a failure of the Anti-Rotation Device j (ARD) associated with Reactor Coolant Pump Motor RC-3B.

i' Energy losses for March 1996 were attributed to (1) a planned mini-outage, and j (2) condenser tube leakage repair.

1 .

Energy losses for December were attributed to a steam leak on the turbine control valves (MOV-CV).

Data Source: Station Generation Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None -

, 25 l

1

, , Monthly Forced Outage Rate

+ Rolling 12 Month Average 1997 Fort Calhoun Goal (1.4%) ,

50% .,.

45%..

40%..

35%.-

30% ..

25%.-

20%.. <

15%..

10%.-

5%..E  ;  : . .

0% *

• 5_ =

• 96 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar FORCED OUTAGE RATE The forced outage rate (FOR) for the month of March 1997 was 0.00. The forced outage rate for the previous 12 months (Apr.1996 through Mar.1997) was 4.77% The 1997 year-to-date FOR was 0.00% at the end of March 1997.

l Energy Losses are explained on Page 25. l The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 1.4%.

I i

Date Source: Monthly Operating Report ,

Accountability: Chase ~

Trend: None 26

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

l m Monthly Unit Capacity Factor l .. .. Year e.o-Date Unit Capacity Factor i

,, Unit Capacity Factor for Cycle 17 l + 1997 FCS Goal (81.49%) .

i l 110% ..

100%_- ... ... --

} 90% -- 85.20% ,.

I 80%.

n- ---

! 60%__ Cycle 17 I 50%__

} 40%..

30%_

20%..

l

j. 10%..

i 0% i i i i i

:  : i  : i C 16 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR This indicator shows the plant monthly Unit Capacity Factor, the Unit Capacity Factor for the current fuel cycle, the year-to-date, and the 1997 OPPD Station goal.

The Unit Capacity Factor is computed as follows:

Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH)

Maximum Dependable Capacity (MWe) X Gross Hours in the Reporting Period Cycle 16 Unit Capacity factor was 85.23%,.

At the end of March 1997, the Cycle 17 Unit Capacity Factor was 80.63%. The Unit Capacity Factor for the last 36 months (Apr.1994 through Mar.1997) was 85.68%. The 1997 Fort Cal-houn annual goal for this indicator is 82.00%.

o The year-to-date value is 100.98%.

Data Source: Monthly Operating Report Accountability: Chase Trend: None 27

i i onthly M EAF e_. Year-to-Date Average Monthly EAF

+ 12 Month Rolling Average

+ OPPD Goal ,

100 % -

es.m p s.os

-

1. %s - = =

• 6% .A f

60%. ,,,,,

I .

40%.-

20% .

N RFO 0% 1 , , U r ~1 96 Mar Apr May Jun .J ul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR This ir.dicator shows the plant monthly Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF), the year-to-date average monthly EAF, the 12 month rolling average, and tiie OPPD goal.

The EAF for March 1997 was 99.10%. The 12 month rolling average (Apr.1996 through l Mar.1997) was 75.9%. The equivalent availability factor for the past three years (Apr. .

I 1994 through Mar.1997) was 85.36%.

The Fort Calhoun Station goal for this indicator is an EAF of 93.00%. -

o Data Source: DietzNandervort (Manager / Source) d Accountability: Chase Trend: None 28

i

, e SafetySystem Actuations(INPODefinition)

._, FCS Gael(0)

-. Industry Upper 10 Percentile (0) 3 ..

2__

i l

1.. l 1

~

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-: :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  : :

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

l UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(INPO DEFINITION) ,

There were no WANO unplanned safety system actuations during the month.

I There were no WANO unplanned safety system actuations during 1996.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports Accountability: Phelps/Foley/Ronning .

Trend: Positive 29

m safety System Actuations (NRC Definition)

, , FCS Goal (0)

Critical Hours 10 . . 1996 RFO 800 RFO 8_.

..600 E

f,_ .. 500 a

E ..400 :E -

5 =

'~ {

..300 $ ,

..200 2

< ..100 0 0 0 0 -

, , , , O J FMAMJ J AsONDJ FMAM J JA sOND J FM UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS -(NRC DEFINITION)

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

There have been no unplanned safety system actuations in the last 12 months. The 1997

• Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is 0.

9 Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accountability: Phelps/Foley/Ronning .

c Trend: None 30 l

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

i e Gross Heat Rate

+ Year-to-Date Gross Heat Rate Fort Calhoun Goal ,

l 14.75 .-

l 14.25 .

13.75 _.

13.25 .

12.75 __

p 12.25 l 11,75 __

0 11.25 . .

l 10.75 ._

- 10.25 . . ocu - e m5m " '" " -

si .

, , , ,E. , , ,

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

j GROSS HEAT RATE i

i

{ This indicator shows the Gross Heat Rate (GHR) for the reporting month, the year-to-date GHR, the goals, and the year-end GHR for the previous three years.

i l The gross heat rate for Fort Calhoun Station was 10,019 BTUlkWh for the month of j March 1997. The 1997 year-to-date GHR was 10,025 BTUlkWh at the end of the month.

i The GHR varies with fluctuations in river water temperature. In general, the GHR im-

proves during the winter months and degrades during the summer. This is because the j . gross heat rate is not normalized to the design river water temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

i j o The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is 10,166 BTUlkWh.

I 1

Data Source: Guinn/Willett (Manager / Source)

. Accountability: Chase /Skiles Trend: None i

I l 31 1

a i

~

l

_ Thermal output ,

_e_ Fort Calhoun 1498 MW Goat 1

%_ Tech Spec 1500 MW Limit 1500 u__+ %_. -_3. + ,._.._,,_ _ m . __-r. s ,-a~ # -f, _& % -4,_c,% % -. s %._% %

~

i h ::t155263ii5--e+1e^:  : we+555e 1495.

1490.

d 1485. .

i 1480.

1475.

1470.

1465 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT The thermal output graph displays the daily operating power level during March 1997, the 1500 thermal megawatt average technica! specification limit, and the 1498 thermal ,

, megawatt Fort Calhoun goel.

Power was reduced to accommodate Turbine Control Valve Testing.

4 .

c Data Source: Guinn/Willett (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Short Trend: None N l

l 32 l l

+ Eonthly Equipment FOR

+ Equiprnent FOR/1,000 Critical Hrs. (Rolling 12-Month interval)

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

i l

t 1 ,

1 1.

l j

K

- - . 2 x h . _' .

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

EQUIPMENT FORCED OUTAGES PER 1,000 CRITICAL HOURS 1

The equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours for the 12 months from April 1,1996, through March 31,1997, was 0.139. The year-to-date rate per 1,000 critical hours for the months from January 1,1997 through March 31,1997 was 0.00.

An equipment forced outage occured during the month of June 1996, due to the failure of the Anti-Rotation Device associated with RC-3B-M.

An equipment forced outage occured at the end of the March 1996, due to condenser tube leakage.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun year-end goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 0.20. '

c Data Source: Monthly Operating Report & Plant Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

Accontability: Chase /Phelps Trend: None 33

CHEMISTRY ACTION LEVELS EXCEEDED sumus Event Days + Average Event Days + OFPD Lkriit 6 ,.

5.

4.

3.

l2. -

o

@7 5 E E P W O E F E F

~

x  ? 9 7 9 9 F

E" 5 9 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8  % S S MONTH CHEMISTRY ACTION LEVELS EXCEEDED - EVENT DAYS The Chemistry Action Levels Exceeded indicator tracks the number of days in which chemistry parameters exceeded a corresponding action level for the reporting month, as well as a 12-month average of days an action level is exceeded. The parameter action levels are delineated in Chemistry procedure CH-AD-0003,

" Plant System Chemical Limits and Corndve Actions".

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

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

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

The 1997 Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is the 12-month average of two event days per month. There is nc goal established for the number of event days per individual month.

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

There was one event day in February.

Reference CR 199700230.

Data Source: Chase / Spires Accountability: Spires q Trend: None 34

l l

, ,% Hours out of Umt l

12.00 . + M &am _ ,

10.00 .

sm.

l -

j l

6.00 .

4.00 .

2.00 .

Om __

r r1 5 $$ E $$ 5 $ $  ? $ 5 l

l PRIMARY SYSTEM LITHlUM % HOURS OUT OF LIMIT The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit indicator tracks the hours per month that the primary system lithium is out of specification.

i The Primary System Lithium Percent Hours Out of Limit was 0.00% for the month of l March 1997.

1 The 1997 Fort Calhoun Station monthly goal for this indicator is a maximum of 5% hours out of limit.

I Data Source: Chase / Spires (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Spires -

Trend: None 35 1

i i

i l

l l  ;

1

! I i

I i l 1

i

' i 1

! 1 COST l

Goal: Operate Fort Calhoun Station in a manner that cost offectively maintains nuclear generation as an economically viable contribution to OPPD's bottom line.

Cost consciousness is exhibited at all levels of the organization.

O 36

+ Actual e Budget Plan l

3.80 3.60 +

3.40 .

3.20 .

3n- M ~ ~ '

2J0.

i 2.60 .

2.40 -

2.20 .

]

2.00 l g6 I < I ' ' 4 88 C E Cl ggggg

& 5 & & &

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR l February 1997 l The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical c peration of Fort Calhoun l Station.

3 The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per kilowatt

. hour on a 12-month rolling average for the current year. The basis for the budget curve is '

the approved 1995 and 1996 revised budgets. The basis for the actual curve is the Finan-cial and Operating Report.

The December 31 amounts are also shown for the prior years 1992 through 1996. In i addition, the report shows the plan amounts for the years 1998 through 2002 for refer-ence. The basis for the dollars are the Nuclear Long Range Financial Plan and the 1997 Corporate Planning and Budget Review. The basis for the generation is provided by Nuclear Fuels.

The 12-month rolling average unit price (period of February,1996 through February, ,

1997) averaged above the budget due to 12-month rolling expenses meeting the budget expectations, but the 12-month rolling generation not meeting the budget expectations.

The 12-month rolling average (2/96 through 2/97) is 3.36 cents per kilowatt hour.

The year-to-date average is trending positively.

l Cents per KWH Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Budget Y-T-D 2.83 2.64 2.55 2.57 2.53 2.51 2.53 2.50 2.49 2.49 2.47 2.46 Actual Y-T-D 2.89 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Data Source: Lounsberry/ Dent (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Lounsberry -

Trend: Needs Management Attention 37

i l \

! l 4

i i

I i i

\

DIVISION AND -

l i

DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE

)

INDICATORS i

Goal: Achieve high standards at Fort Calhoun Station resulting in safe, reliable and cost effective power i production.

1 38 l

l

1 l i

e Corrective Maintenance e Preventive Maintenance

?

Non-Corrective /Pla nt improvem ents _e_ Fort Calhoun Goal 1000 " 830 . 8 870 730 720 -

.i f Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Non-Outage Maintenance Work Order Backlog

Past Completion l j E Total MWos Completed j , MWO PRIORITY BREAKDOWN 54 % l l 600 430

! 400. n . .,1 ,

// -.McG 200. .N b Q<;. 7J""7((' } ']69 %

! O i ' GiE8 ' 2 '

46 %

j Riority Riority Priority Priorty Priority i

1 2 3 4 5 Not Completed i

1 4

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOG i

! This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance Work Orders remaining open at the l end of the reporting month. It also includes a breakdown by maintenance classification and prior-ity. The 1997 goal for this indicator is 350 non-outage corrective maintenance MWOs. The cur-

{ rent backlog of corrective MWOs is 625. To ensure that the MWO backlog is worked in a timely i manner, non-outage maintenance completion goals have been established as follows:

! GQal i Priority 1 Immediate Action 2 days i- Priority 2 Urgent 5 days l Priority 3 Operational Concems 30 days

! Priority 4 Routine Corrective 90 days I -

Priority 5 Non-Essential 180 days l

Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source)

Accountability

Chase /Faulhaber Trend: Adverse SEP 36-4 39 J

d y

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

4 i

)

j Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance 1 90%..

I 80%.. -

$ 70%.

~

! 60%. ..-

1 i

1 50% ..

j 40%.. ,

Data N/A

! 30%. .,

20%.. N/A l

10%..

I 0% >

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

ggg Prewntive Maintenance items Overdue 1

j + Fort Calhoun Goal 3% --

2.60%

l 2%..

0.63%

l 1% . 0.75%

l 0.37 % 0.40% -

0.39% 0.39% , 0.2_S% ,

1 c - - -

n,m, 9 g}%  !

0% IMI

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

. RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE The top graph shows the ratio of completed non-outage preventive maintenance to total com-pleted non-outage maintenance. The ratio was 69.5% for the month of March 1997. ,

The lower graph shows the percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance items that are over-due. During March 1997,377 PM items were completed. ,

The 1996 Fort Calhoun monthly goal for the percentage of preventive maintenance items overdue is a maximum of 0.5%. ,

1 Data Source: Chase / Johnson /Melstad (Manager / Sources) l Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber j Trend: Meets OPPD Goal SEP 41 & 44 ,

40

l j m Rework as identified by Craft f _ Fort Calhoun Goal (<3%)

1 I

] 5%. 4.s%

• I l 3 t%

{ 4%

O 1

3%.. _.

to to l j2%.. ,, ,, ,, ,,

, $ 1% .. c.8% 0.s% 0.9% LM n%  ; M ,M .

3 M ,  ; 1 i m.M, i M i i Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar l-e No. Nbintenance kems Conpeted _e _ % bentified as Repeat

! 700- e. . 6.0%

i 526 600.

l . 5.0%

. 4.0% l l 400. '

I 288 . 3.0%

300. g 252 238 207 n .

nn%

l ,

j Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov oec Jan Feb Mar PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED

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

j This indicator is calculated from the 15th of November to the 15th of December, due to y the delay in closing open MWOs at the end of each month.

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

! rework items each month to identify generic concerns.

4

~

Data Source: Faulhaber/ Johnson (Manager / Source) j Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None l

41 i

4

~

i i , Monthly Overtime (On-Unc)

+ Y T-D Monthly Average (On-Une) .

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

8.0% --  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  : _

7.0% .

6.0% . 6 5.0% .

- ~

1 4.0% ..

= 1 3.0% .-

2.0% -- 1.7%

1.0% .

0.0% >

' . 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec MAINTENANCE OVERTIME  !

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

The percent of overtime hours with respect to normal hours was reported as 1.7% for the .

month of March 1997.

The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly "on-line" goal for this indicator is a maximum value of 8%. -

j Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source) <

Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber Trend: None 42

i Human Performance CRs (Mal.1tenance)  !

20 ..  !

) 18 .

I 16 _

j 14 __

l i

3 m

12 li<

'0 -

l E 9 9

l. S l

l d

$* " l 6.-

5 5 n i i 1... ., . .

i Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar l

PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS

, (MAINTENANCE) l This indicator shows the number of Condition Reports related to procedural noncompli-l o ance incidents assigned to the Maintenance Department.

l Data Source: Faulhaber j Accountability: Chase /Faulhaber

) Trend: None SEP 15,41 & 44

, 43 1

3

}

i

e % PAssoOs --x  % Non-f%ss OOS

- 4_ % Total oOs + Total % oOs Goal )

50 %

7 45%.

40% .

35% .

30% .

25% .

]

20% .

15% _

10% :  :  : t _. 4  :  :  :  :  :  : ,

N -A ' p 5% {~~

A- _4 g 0% I \ -- -==X  : = = =N  ;

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 e a a ,!

b

^

b h h b $ $ $ h b b h b IN-LINE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT-OF-SERVICE This indicator shows the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments are inoperable for the reporting month. The chemistry systems involved in this indicator in-l clude the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS). At the end i of March 1997, the percentage of hours the in-line chemistry system instruments were I inoperable was 0.00%. The following instrument was out of service for the current month:

1.  % PASS HOURS OUT OF SERVICE NONE

2.  % NON-PASS HOURS OUT OF SERVICE NONE .

The entire instrument channel is considered inoperative if: 1) the instrument is inopera-tive, 2) the chart recorder associated with the instrument is inoperative, or 3) the alarm ,

function associated with the instrument is inoperative. If any of the functions listed above are not operational, then the instrument is not performing sts intended function.

i Data Source: Chase /Ostien (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Skiles Trend: Positive - Better than OPPD Goal 44

l W;cte Produced Ea h Month (Kilograms) l

+ Fort Calhoun Monthy Average Goal (150 kilogram:) l

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

900 .

800 .

700 600..

E

!! 500..

.  ?

I 400..

- 300..

200 1

0 <

,  ; l Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED i

This indicator shows the total amount of hazardous waste produced by the Fort Calhoun l Station each month, the monthly average goal and the monthly average total for hazard- l ous waste produced during the last 12 months. This hazardous waste consists of non-halogenated hazardous waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous waste  ;

produced.  !

I During the month of March 1997, 0.0 kilograms of non-halogenated,0.0 kilograms of 1

. halogenated and 0.0 kilograms of other hazardous waste was produced.

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

The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly average goal for hazardous waste produced is a maxi-mum of 150 kilograms.

Data Source: Chase /Shubert (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase / Spires ,

Trend: Positive 45

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

l e Contaminated Radiation Controlled Area e_. Fort Calhoun Goal (10%)

10%.. e__  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :

9% +

~. ...

8%..

7%

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA This indicator shows the percentage of the Radiologically Controlled Area that is contami-nated based on the total square footage. The 1996 monthly non-outage goalis a maxi-mum of 10.0% contaminated RCA.

At the end of March 1997, the percentage of the total square footage of the RCA that was contaminated was 7.9%.

J Data Source: Chase / Williams (Manager / Source) '

Accountability: Chase /Gebers Trend: None SEP54 46 l l

+ Poor Radiation Worker Practices

+ Fort Calhoun Goal (<125) e T -

14 12 .

10 ,

8.

a 6.

4.

1 2.

0 o O

0; -

I Jan Feb Wr Apr May June July Aug sep oct Nov Dec RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM The Radiological Work Practices Program Indicator shows the number of Poor Radiologi-cal Work Practices (PRWPs) which were identified during the reporting month.  !

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

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

During the month of March 1997, there were O PRWP identified.

{

There have been a total of 0 Poor Radiation Worker Practices in 1997.

The Fort Calhoun Station year-end goal for PRWPs is a maximum of 12. I 4

Data Source: Chase /Cartwright (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase /Gebers -

Trand: None SEP 52 47

l O Documents Scheduled for Review g Documents Fleviewed g Documents Overdue , ,

450..

400. _

350 .

300..

250 4 -

200.. -

150..-

100..

50 ..

0.__ ELs _

E+ _

k _

+ .  : _

sep

+.. Lp _

+_ +_ +. i Apr May Jun Jul Aug Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar 1996 DOCUMENT REVIEW The Document Review indicator shows the number of completed, scheduled, and over-due (greater than 6 months past the scheduled due date) biennial reviews for the report-ing month. The documents reviews are performed in-house and include Special Proce-dures, the Site Security Plan, Maintenance Procedures, Preventive Maintenance Proce-dures, and the Operating Manual. ,

During March 1997, there were 403 document reviews scheduled, while 46 reviews were completed. At the end of the month, there were 46 document reviews more than 6 months .

overdue. There was 1 new document initiated during March 1997.

Data Source: Chase /Plath Accountability: Chase /Skiles Trend: None 'l SEP 46  ;

I l

48 l

g system Failures O Non. system Failures 27 25 .-

1. 3 22 12 20 .

15 - g 10 .

6 6 5_

2 2 2

1 0 '

Apr May

, ME I ;

Jun Jul Aug sep oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY)

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

- During the month of March 1997, there were 13 loggable/ reportable incidents identified.

System failures accounted for 77% of the total failures. Environmental failures accounted for 40% of the system failures. The three non-system failures consisted of one security

, force error, and two vital area doors found unsecure due to air pressure.

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

Data Source: Sefick/Woerner(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Sefick Trend: None SEP 58 49

, , Temporary Modifications >1-cycle old (RFU req.Lred for removal)

Temporary Modifications >6 months old (Removable on-line)

,_. Fbrt Calhoun Goals for >1-cycle and >6 months old 3 --

2.5 -

2..

1.5 --

i i i i 9_

0.5 .

0  :  :  :  : .  :  : 1 E & a '

3  ? E y o 8" ,E f a

< z a < m z m m TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS .

This indicator provides information on the number of temporary modifications (TMs) greater than l one fuel cycle old requiring a refueling outage (RFO) for removal and the number of temporary l modifications rernovable on-line that are greater than six months old. The 1997 Fort Calhoun monthly goals for this indicator are zero.

There are currently two (2) temporary modifications that are greater than one-fuel cycle old requir-ing a refueling outage to be removed. TM 96-014, Reactor Coolant Gas Vent Line Pressure High Alerm, was scheduled and repairs were made during the 1996 Refueling Outage, but function testing of the repairs cannot be performed because the reactor coolant gas vent line pressure is currently too high to test the equipment. TM 96-018, Equipment Dreain Header Soft Rubber Patch, was supposed to be removed by MWO 963468 during the 1996 Refueling Outage. MWO 963468 is currently scheduled for the 1998 Refueling Outage. At the end of March 1997, there was 1 temporary modification installed that was greater than six months old that could have been removed on-line. TM 96-022, Containment Low Flow Purge was installed 06/14/96. ECN 96-450 will make this TM permanent.

At the end of March 1997, there was a total of 14 TMs installed in the Fort Calhoun Station. eight (8) of the 14 installed TMs require an outage for removal and 6 are removable on-line. In 1997, a total of 8 temporary modifications have been installed. -

Data Source: Phelps/ Frank (Manager / Source) '

Accountability: Phelps/ Core Trend: None SEP 62 & 71 50

g

'b

, , TotalModificationPackages Open .

_% Fort Calhoun Year-Fad Goal (68) 80 .

S n

~~

75 .. n 70 ..E

. 65  ; ,

96 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS This indicator shows the total number of outstanding modifications (excluding outstanding modifications which are crocosed to be cancelled).

Reporting Categorv E '9_4 E E '9Z E Month Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 Mod. Requests Being Reviewed 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Design Engr. Backlog /In Progress 0 0 0 0 0 20 20 Construction Backlog /in Progress 4 1 6 15 1 1 21 Design Engr. Update Backlog /In Progress 1 _.1 _Z _12 __Q _Q _22 Totals 5 2 13 27 6 21 76 (Outage + OnLine) (3+2) (0+2) (5+8) (18+9) (0+6) (20+1) (49+28)

At the end of March 1997,17 modification requests have been issued this year and 2 modification requests have been cancelled. The Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC) has conducted 37 backlog modification request reviews this year. The Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC) has completed 0 backlog modification request reviews this year.

The 1997 year-end Fort Calhoun goal for this indicator is a maximum of 68 outstanding modifications.

Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Lounsberry/Belek (Manager / Source) .

Accountability: Lounsberry/Jaworski Trend: None 51 l

l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ . - - . . _...__m. __._m_ ., __...m . . . ._._.._..__..._.__.._m_ _ . _ _ . . _m.. . . _ . ___

l 40 EARS Requiring Engineering Closeout - Not in Cicseout 28 28

, 30+I 24 g Sti O DEN 27 20 __ 16 I5 l _

13 so 12 3 3 , .

10 - -2 4 2- 5 4- 4- 5 1 1 1 l 0  ; -. ;E --

,- J' E  ;

E E  :  ;  ;

Jan Feb Mar Jan Feb Mar Jan Feb Mar Jan Feb Mar j 0-3 Months 3-6 Months 6-12 Months >12 Months

! 30 ..

O Engineering Response g Closeout (sE) J

] 20 -~ II 9 8

! 10 -- 1 1 0 1 3 0 2 3

o o ,

O  ;

I - I  ! - i J

l Priority 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Oosecut 14 %

l 45 sus

' S c h e d sle 45

- i e ,'. . ,"l, 40.4%

Response ,3 o,, ,, , ,

86 % Close c u ts 16.2 %

ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE REQUEST BREAKDOWN This indicator shows a breakdown of the number of EAin 41ssigned to Design Engineering and System Engineering. The 1997 year-end goal for ins indicator is a maximum of 140 outstanding EARS.

The Total EAR breakdown is as follows:

EARS opened during the month 14 .

EARS closed during the month 14 Total EARS open at the end of the month 109 Data Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Jaworski

~

Trend: None SEP 62 52

82 CLOS E QUT gy iD 0 3 Honths CO ECN Status - Overall Backlog g Backlogged O Received g Completed 4'*

50 . '

50 . .: , ,, , a is 4

. st 50 - Oct Hov Dec Jan Feb Mar SaE Design Engineering 250- 3-6 200 O.3 N aths 150 . # '

100. ., 7. n 7: n 74 8 [+6 Q W nths Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe b Mar System Engineering 300 are 2:7 ass as7 0 3 Months 3-6 Months is is is is o so i4 '4 5g Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Procurement / Construction I,"

• u-a -

250. 3-6 Months Months

. 200. 10%

10%

150.

100.

s ys 5 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb M ar

>6 Months Drafting / Closeout 80 %

ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE STATUS r

a Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Jaworski/Phelps Trend: None SEP 62 53

93 77 P rio rity 22 i 16 C P

_ c. .

=

mit PE 2s7 -$ Y ,:

' p Total Open ECNs = 482 saw Total Open ECNs = 482 0 DEN Clos eont or DratcIng Not Complete P de dty P dority 5 Malucemance/Coastruction/ Procurement . Work Not Complete sad iss2 5 system Engiseedag nesponse,Confirmatbn Not Complete H% 16%

5 DEN Engineerlag Not Con.plete "

Oc t-96

, hI h5, No& 91 Dc ] - F b-97 b'k M a r-97 330. 76 294 296 294 34 300. 302 ,4 2" P d'd4 P riodcy Oct 96

' Pd Nov-96 Dec-96 Jan-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 3aN Substitute Replacement item ECNs Open 59%

, ~.

80 71 70 . ,, .7  :: Priorky Pdort y

" M 60 + ,5 9 s:

, 7 ,%

47

g. , .. , -

':t #

'. ,, k .

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar see Document Change EcNs Open

• ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN Data Source: Jaworski/Livingston (Manager Source)

Accountability: Phelps/Jawcrski -

Trend: None SEP 62 54 l

O Administrative Control Problem g UcensedOperatorError E Other Personnel Error gg Maintenance Problem O Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem E Misc.

3 .. _

v 2-1 __ _ _ _ - . . .

0 .g ,

, , E E.m , , ,

Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE BREAKDOWN This indicator shows the LERs by event date broken down by Root Cause Code for each of the past twelve months from March 1,1996, through February 28,1997. To be consis-tent with the Preventable / Personnel Error LERs indicator, this indicator is reported by the LER event date, as opposed to the LER report date.

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

NOTE: Due to the way LERs are tracked & reported, this indicator is one-month behind.

There were no events in February 1997 that resulted in a LER.

Data Source: Tills /Cavanaugh (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Chase Trend: None 55

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

O Total Requalification Training Hours g Simulator Training Hours g Non-Requalification Training Hours a Number of Exam Failures ,

35 ' ~ 34 34 32.5 32 30 _.

25 ..

22 20 _.

1 16 5.5 l

15 - 4 14 4 2 2 10 __

8 8 8

.5 7

.5 5 5 -

3 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0._ i _+. i  ; , - ,_ i i Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle 95-4 95-5 95-6 96-1 96 2 96 3 96-5 96 7 97-1 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING This indicator provides information on the total number of hours of training given to each crew during each Cycle. The simulator training hours shown on the graph are a subset of the total training hours. Non-Requalification Training Hours are used for AOP/EOP verification & validation, INPO commitments, GET, Fire Brigade, Safety Meetings, and Division Manager lunches.

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

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

I i

Data Source: Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Conner /Guliani Trend: None SEP 68 l 56

--- . - _ - -~- -

+6 ,wA i

g SRO2xams Administered O SRO Exams Passed O RO Exams Administered ,

M RO Exams Passed 10 . .

i  !

I l

77 77

. I s

1 1

6..

4 i

l

0000 00 00 3

0 ,  ;  ;

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug sep Oct Nov Dec LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS - 1997 This ind!cator shows the number of Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and Reactor Operator (RO) quizzes and exams taken and passed each month. These internally administered quizzes and exams are used to plot the SRO and RO candidates' monthly progress.

During the month of March 1S97, there were 7 Ird.iduals who passed SRO and RO comprehensive written exams.

Data Source: Conner /Guliani(Manager / Source)

Accountability: Conner /Guliani Trend: None SEP 68 57

1 l m Ready to Oose

, , ,Oosed

+ Total CRs

+ open 2500 -

/

2000.

]

, 1500.

1000; a~ 4,

.a . . . .

~

l a.

• i I O

• i

} * * * * *

• 8 s a s s s a a a 4 3 5 2 3 3 ,4  % e a 6 s e 4 4 s

N " e N M R $ O Z 6 7 a 2

.1 CONDITION REPORTS BY LEVEL l This indicator shows the total number of Condition Reports which are Closed, Ready to

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

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Total Open 22 11 93 792 25 51 999

Closed 11 3 86 841 378 106 1425 189 Condition Reports are classified as READY to CLOSE.

At the end of February 1997, all "OPEN" Incident Reports are closed.

I i .

4

. Data Source: Tesar/Burggraf(Manager / Source) i Accountability: Andrews/Gambhir l Trend : None

.1

) 58 i

i i

1 i

}

j T D otalQiasphMOs 1 -

j g NMOs%toWA 360 ,

l

)

) 300.

! MWO HOLDS system l

! Ranner Engheering 200. 44 % 5% pg3 18% )

es

,,, 33, ECNs E- 16%

l g i 17%

i or  : i -

onces ame7 rebe7 hhr47 i

i MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING OUTAGE)

This indicator shows the total number of Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) and Main-l tenance Work Orders (MWOs) that have been approved for inclusion in the Cycle 17 l Refueling Outage. This graph indicates

l -

- Parts Holds - Planning Complete, Awaiting Parts

- System Engineering Holds - Awaiting System Engineering input to Planning i*

I - Planner Holds - Maintenance Planner has not completed planning the work

, package.

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

1 i

i j Data Source: Chase / Johnson (Manager / Source)

Accountability

Chase /Faulhaber 4 Trend: None SEP 31 59 l

i j

I i

4 I 1

i ~

l l

i i

1 J ,

1

1 I

• l i

I SPECIAL SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (Cycle 18 Refueling Outage)

Data Source: Phelps/Swearngin (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Phelps/ Bought -

l 60 l l

i l

l l

l NO NEW DATA AVAILABLE i

1 PROGRESS OF 1998 REFUELING OUTAGE MODIFICATIONS CYCLE 18

. l This indicator shows the status of Modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 18 Refueling Outage (March 1998).

The goal for this indicator is to have all modification packages which were identified prior to March 1,1997, PRC approved by October 1,1997.

March 199F Modifications added: 0 Deleted = 0 l

l l

Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP 31 61

^

l i

1 l

No data available for Indicator until a baseline is established.

1 PROGRESS OF CYCLE 18 OUTAGE MODS ADDED TO '98 REFUELING OUTAGE AFTER FREEZE DATE This indicator will show the status of modifications approved for installation during the Cycle 18 Refueling Outage. Since the baseline schedule has yet to be established, there is no information available at this time. The goal for this indicator is to have all modifica-tion packages PRC approved by their target date.

, March 1997 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0

. Modifications Pre-Approved: 0 Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP 31 ,

I 62

l -

NO DATA AVAILABLE PROGRESS OF 1997 ON-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING (FROZEN SCOPE OF 5 MODIFICATIONS)

This indicator shows the status of modifications approved or in review for approval for on-line installation during 1997. Modifications added to the on-line list after May 1,1995, are not part of this indicator.

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

March 1997 Modifications Added: 0 Deleted = 0 l

i .

l Data Source: Jaworski/ Walling (Manager / Source)

Accountability: Gambhir/Jaworski Trend: None SEP 33 63 l

c.

1

(

l l

I i

l l

i i

i

. ACTION PLANS l

l l

1 l

! l i

l e

l l

64 1

. l ACTION PL.ANS 1

This section lists action plans that have been developed for the performance indicators 4

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

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

. Increased Management Attention for three (3) consecutive months. l

! In accordance with Revision 3 of NOD-QP-37, the following performance indicators would

, require action plans based on three (3) consecutive months of performance cited as l 4

"Needing increased Management Attention":

)

. Maintenance Workload Backlogs (page 39) ,

, A Work Management System improvement project is currently in progress. The purpose of this project is to stream line the maintenance process at Fort Calhoun Station. This will significantly improve our " WRENCH TIME" by removing inefficiencies and related hurdles that prevent work from being accomplished in a timely manner, in addition, it is expected that schedule compliance will also increase and our maintenance backlog will decrease. This project is scheduled to be fully implemented by July 1997.

4 65

l

~

l l

l 1

^

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS g AUX 1LIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM CLEAN CONTROLLED AREA CONTAMINATIONS 21,000 PERFORMANCE DISINTEGRATIONS / MINUTE PER PROBE AREA r

The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailabb The personnel contamination events in the clean controlled i hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the auxiliary area. This indicator tracks persotinet performance for SEP feedwater system for the reporting period divided by the critical #15 & 54.

hours for the reporting period multiplied by the number of trains 1 in ttw auxiliary feedwater system. CONTAMINATED RADIATION CONTROLLED AREA COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXFOSURE The percentage of the Radiation Controlled Area, which includes the auxiliary building, the radwaste building, and Collective radiation exposure is the total extemal whoe-tady areas of the C/RP building, that is contaminated based on the dose received by all on-site personnel (including contractors total 6quare footage. This indicator tracks performance for j , tnd visitors) during a time penod, as measured by the SEP #54.

i thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD). CWctive radiation )

exposure is reported in units of person-rem. This indicator DAILY THERMAL OUTPUT i tracks radiological work performance for SEP #54. '

• This indicator shows the daily core thermal output as COMPONENT FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT (CFAR) measured from computer point XC105 (in thermal megawatts).

SUMMARY

The 1500 MW Tech Spec limit, and the unmet portion of the 1495 MW FCS daily goal for the reporting month are also The summary of INPO categories for Fort Calhoun Station with shown.

significantly nigher (1.645 standard deviations) failure rates than the rest of the industry for an eighteen-month time period- DIESEL GENERATOR RELIABILITY (25 Demands)

Failures are reported as component (i.e., pumps, motors, main steam stop valves, control element motors, etc.) categones. This indicator shows the number of failures occurring for each emergency desel generator during the last 25 start demands Failure Cause Categories are: and the last 25 load-run demands.

Age / Normal Use -thought to be the consequence of DISABLING INJURY /lLLNESS FR8IQUENCY RATE expected wear, aging, end-of-life, or normal use . (LOSS TIME ACCIDENT RATE)

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

inadequate design of the responsible component or system.

DOCUMENT REVIEW (BIENNIAL) i Other Devices - a failure attributable to a failure or misoperation of another component or system, including The Document Review indicator shows the number of j associated devices. documents reviewed, the number of documents scheouled for j revew, and the number of document reviews that are overdue  !

Maintenance / Action - resutting from improper for the reporting month. A document review is considered maintenance, lack of maintenance, or personnel errors that overdue if the review is not complete within six months of the i occur dunng maintenance activitieson the component.. assigned due date. This indicator tracks performance for SEP  !

Testing Action - resulting from improper testing or personnel errors that occur during testing activites. EMERGENCY AC POWER SYSTEM SAFETY SYSTEM i PERFORMANCE 1 initial Installation Error - caused by impreper initial l installation of equipment The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable and the estimated unavailable hours for the emergency AC  ;

CENTS PER KILOWATT HOUR power system for the reporting period divided by the number i of hours in the reporting period multiplied by the number of The purpose of this indicator is to quantify the economical trains in the emergency AC power system.

operation of Fort Calhoun Station. The cents per kilowatt hour indicator represents the budget and actual cents per EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNIT RELIABILITY l kilowatt hour on a twelve-month average for the current ,

year. The basis for the budget curve is the approved yearly This indK:ator shows the number of failures that were reported dunng the budget. The basis for the actual curve is the Financial and last 2o,50, and 100 emergency diesel generator demands at the Fort Operating Report. Calhoun Station. Also shown are tngger values which correlate to a High level of confidence that a unit's diesel generators have obtained a 66

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS  !

relist 2ty of greater than or equal to 95% when the dernand failures are Each emergency generator failure that results in the generator less than the eigger values.

being declared inoperable should be counted as one demand and one failure. Exploratory tests during corrective ,

1) Number of Start Derr.a,.ds: All valid and inadvertent maintenance and the successful test that follows repair to start demands, including eli star only demands and all venfy operability should not be counted as demands or failures start demands that are followed by load-run demands, when the EDG has not been declared operable again, whether by automatic or manualinitiation. A start-only dem,and is a demand in which the smergency generator .

EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNRELIABILITY is started, but no attempt is made to load the generator.

This indicator measures the total unreliabihty of emergency

2) Number of Start Failures: Any failure within the diesol generators. b general, unreliabikty is the ratio of emergency generator system that prevents the generator unsuccessful operations (starts or load-runs) to the number of

• from achieving specrfied frequency and voltage is valid dernands. Total unreliability is a combination of stari classified as a valid start failure. This includes any unreliability and load-run unreliability.

condition identrfied in the course of maintenance inspections (with the emergency generator in standby rnode) that definitely would have resulted in a start failure ENGINE? IRING ASSISTANCE REQUEST (EAR)

BREAKDOWN if a demand had occurred.

e This indicator shows a breakdown, by age and prionty of the

3) Number of Load-Run Demands: For a valid load-run EAR, of the number of EARS assigned to Design Engineering demand to be counted, the load-run attempt must meet Nuclear and System Engineering. This indicator tracks one or more of the following criteria: performance for SEP #62.

A) A load-run of any duration that results from a real ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE (ECN) STATUS automatic or manualinitiation.

The number of ECNs that were opened, ECNs that were B) A load-run test to satisfy the plant's load and completed, and open backlog ECNs awaiting completion by I duration as stated in each test's speci8ications. DEN for the reporting month. This indicator tracks performance for SEP #62.

C) Other special tests in which the emergency generator is expected to be operated for at least one ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICES OPEN hour while loaded with at least 50% of its design load.

This indicator breaks down the numLer of Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) that are assigned to Design Engineering

4) Number of Load-Run Failures: A load-run failure Nuclear (DEN), System Engineering, and Maintenance. The i should be counted for any reason in which the graphs provide data on ECN Facility Changes open, ECN emergency generator does not pick up load and run as Substitute Replacement items open, and ECN Document i l

predicted. Failures are counted during any valid load-run Changes open. This indicator tracks performarce for SEP  ;

demands. #62. '

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

Equipment forced outages per 1,000 critical hours is the A) Spurious trips that would be bypassed in the event inverse of the mean time between forced outages caused by of an emergency. equipment failures. The mean time is equal to the number of l

• hours the reactor is critical in a period (1,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />) divided by B) Malfunction of equipment that is not required durin9 the number of forced outages caused by equipment failures in an emergency. that period.

C) Intentional termination of a test because of EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR ,

e abnormal conditions that would not have resulted in major desel generator camage or repair. This indicator is defined as the ratio of gross available generation to gross maximum generation, expressed as a D) Malfunctions or operating errors which would not percentage. Available generation is the energy that can be have prevented the emergency generator from produced if the unit is operated at the maximum power level being restarted and brought to load within a few permitted by equipment and regulatory hmitations. Maximum minutes. generation is the energy that can be produced by a unit in a E) A failure to start because a portion of the starting system was disabled for test purpose, if followed by a successful start with the starting system in its '

normal ahgnment 67

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

4 A

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS

, FORCED OUTAGE RATE 1) One or more days of restricted work (excluding the day of the accident);

This indicator is defined as the percentage of time that the unit 2) One or more days away from work (excluding the day of was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time the accident); and planned for electrical generation, Forced events are failures 3) Fatalities.

or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit i from service before the end of the next weekend. Forced Contractor personnel are not included for this iru Mr.

cvents include start-up failures and events initiated while the i

unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available but not in IN-l INE CHEMISTRY INSTRUMENTS OUT OF SERVICE service).

{

Total number of in-line chemistry instruments that are out-of- '

, FUEL RELIABILITY INDICATOR service in the Secondary System and the Post Accident Sarnpling System (PASS).

, This indcator is defined as the steady-state primary coolant l-131 activity, corrected for the tramp uranium contribution and LICENSE CANDIDATE EXAMS normalized to a common punfication rate. Tramp uranium is fuel which has been deposited on reactor core intemals from This indicator shows the number of SRO and/or RO quizzes i previous defective fuel or is present on the surface of fuel and exams that are administered and passed each month.

i

• s.lements from the manufacturing process. Steady state is This indicator tracks training performance for SEP #68.

I defined as continuous operation for at least three days at a power level that dces not vary more than + or -5%. Plants LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING should collect data for this indicator at a power level above 85% when possible. Plants that did not operate at steady. The total number of hours of training given to each crew during state power alsove 85% should collect data for this indicator at each cycle. Also provided are the simulator training hours

) the highest steady-state power level attained during the month. (which are a subset of the totaltraining hours), the number of j non-REQUALIFICATION training hours and the number of The density correction factor is the ratio of the specific volume exam failures. This indicator tracks training performance for of coolant at the MCS operating temperature (540 degrees F., SEP # 68.

i Vf = 0.02146) divided by the specrfic volume of coolant at normalletdown temperature (120' F at outlet of the letdown LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) ROOT CAUSE

, coohr.g heat exchanger, Vf = 0.016204), which results in a BREAKDOWN density co rection factor for FCS equal to 1.32.

This indicator shows the number and root cause code for

. GROSS HEAT RATE Licensee Event Reports. The root cause codes are as follows:

Gross heat rate is defined as the ratio of total thermal energy 1) Administrative Control Problem - Managcment and in British Thermal Units (BTU) produced by the reactor to the supervisory deficiencies that affect plant programs or total gross electrical energy produced by the generator in activities (i.e., poor planning, breakdown or lack of

kilowatt-hours (KWH). adequate management or supervisory control, incorrect procedures, etc).

i HAZARDOUS WASTE PRODUCED

} 2) Licensed Operator Error - This cause code captures I

The total amount (in Kilograms) of non-halogenated hazardous errors of omission / commission by licensed reactor waste, halogenated hazardous waste, and other hazardous operators during plant activities.

l waste produced by FCS each month.

3) Other Personnel Error - Errors of omission / commission J

, HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SAFETY committed by non-licensed personnel involved in plant SYSTEM PERFORMANCE activities.

I s The sum of the known (planned and unplanned) unavailable 4) Maintenance Problem -The intent of this cause code is

, hours and the estimated unavailable hours for the high to capture the full range of problems which can be 3 pressure safety injection system for the reporting penod attributed in any way to programmatic deficiencies in the 4

divided by the entical hours for the reporting penod multiplied maintenance functional organization. Activities included

by the number of trains in the high pressure safety injection in this category are maintenance, testing, surveillance, system. calibration and radiation protection.

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ACCIDENT RATE -INPO 5) Design / Construction / Installation / Fabrication Problem

- This cause code covers a full range of programmatic This indicator is defined as the number of accidents per deficiencies in the areas of design, construction, 200,000 man-hours worked for all utikty personnel permanently installation, and fabrication (i.e., loss of control power due assigned to the station that result in any of the followir g: to underrated fuse, equipment not qualified for t,he environment, etc.).

l 68

1 s

PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS G) Equipment Failures (Electronic Piece-Parts or MAX 1 MUM INDMDUAL RADIATION EXPOSURE Environmental-Related Failures)-This code is used for spurious failures of electronic piece-parts and failures due The total maximum amount of radiation received by an j to meteorological conditions such as lightning, ice, high indrvidual person wortung at FCS on a monthly, quarterly, and winds, etc. Generally, it includes spurious or one-time annual basis.

failures. Electric components included in this category are circuit cards, rectifiers, bistables, fuses, capacitors, MWO PLANNING STATUS (CYCLE 17 REFUELING diodes, resistors, etc. OUTAGE)

LOGGABLE/ REPORTABLE INCIDENTS (SECURITY) The total number of Maintenance Work Orders that have been i approved for inclusion in the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and 1he total number of security incidents for the reporting rnonth the number that are ready to work (parts staged, planning depicted in two graphs. This indicator tracks secunty complete, and all other paperwork ready for field use). Also g performance for SEP #58. included is the number of MWOs that have been engineering i holds (ECNs, procedures and other mismilaneous engineering l MAINTENANCE OVERTIME holds), parts hold, (parts staged, not yet inspected, parts not yet arrived) and planning hold (job scope not yet completed).

The percent of overtime hours compared to normal hours for Maintenance Work Requests (MWRs) are also shown that

• maintenance. This includes OPPD personnel as well as have been identrSed for the Cycle 17 Refueling Outage and .

contract personnel. have not yet been converted to MWOs.

MAINTENANCE WORKLOAD BACKLOGS NUMBER OF CONTROL ROOM EQUIPMENT i DEFICIENCIES This indicator shows the backlog of non-outage Maintenance I Work Orders remaining open at the end of the reporting month. /. control room equipment deficiency (CRD) is defined as any Maintenance classifications are defined as follows: component which is operated or controlled from the Control Room, provides indication or alarm to the Control Room, j Corrective - Repair and restoration of equipment or provides testing capabilities from the Control Room, provides components that have failed or are malfunctioning and are automatic actions from or to the Control Room, or provides a not performing their intended function. passive function for the Control Room and has been identified as deficient, i.e., does not perform under all conditions as Preventive Actions taken to maintain a piece of equipment designed. This definition also applies to the Attemate within design operating conditions, prevent equipment Shutdown Panels Al 179, Al-185, and Al-212.

failure, and extend its life and are performed prior to l equipment failure. /. plant component which is deficient or inoperable is considered an " Operator Work Around (OWA) ltem" if some I Non-Corrective / Plant improvements - Maintenance other action is required by an operator to compensate for the i activities performed to implement station improvements or condition of the component. Some examples of OWAs are:

to repair non-plant equipment.

1) The control room level indicator does not work but a local Maintenance Work Priorities sre oefined as: sight glass can be read by an Operator out in the plant; Emergency Conditions which significantly degrade station 2) A deficient pump cannot be repaired because safety or availability. replacement parts reqtire a long lead time for purchase / delivery, thus requiring the redundant pump to j 1mmediate Action - Equipment deficiencies which be operated continuously; significantly degrade station reliability. Potentialibr unit shutdown or power reduction. 3) Special actions are required by an Operator because of equipment design problems. These actions may be Operations Concem - Equipment deficiencies which hinder described in Operations Memorandums, Operator Notes, station operation, or may require changes to Operating Procedures; Essentis: - Routine corrective maintenance on essential 4) Deficient plant equipment that is required to be used ,

station systems and equipment. during Emergency Operating Procedures or Abnormal  !

Operating Procedures-

, Non-Essential- Roetine corrective maintenance on non- j essential station systems and equipment. 5) System indication that provides entical information during '

normal or abnormal operations.  !

Plant improvement Non-corrective maintenance and plant improvements.

)

l This indicator tracks maintenance performance for SEP #36.

69 i 1

1

l l

1 PERFORMANCE lNDICATOR DEFINITIONS NUMBER OF MISSED SURVEILLANCE TESTS RESULTING This indicator shows the status of the projects which are in the IN LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS scope of the Refueling Outage.

The number of Surveillance Tests (STs) that result in Licensee PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MWOs COMPLETED PER l Event Reports (LERs) during the reporting month. This MONTH IDENTIFIED AS REWORK indicator tracks missed STs for SEP #60 & 61, l The percentage of total MWOs completed per month identified OPEN INCIDENT REPORTS as rework. Rework activities are identified by maintenance planning and craft. Rework is: Any additional work required

This indicator displays the total number of open incident to correct deficiencies discovered during a failed Post j Reports (irs), the number of irs that are greater than six Maintenance Test to ensure the component / system passes months old and the number of open significant irs. subsequent Post Maintenance Test.

• OUTSTANDING MODIFICATIONS PERCENT OF COMPLETED SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ACTIVmES l I

The number of Modification Requests (MRs) in any state l between the issuance of a Modification Number and the The percent of the number of completed maintenance completion of the drawing update. activities as compared to the number of scheduled maintenance activities each month. This percentage is shown i 1) Form FC-1133 Backlog /in Progress. This number for all maintenance crafts. Also shown are the number of 4

represents modification requests that have not been plant emergent MWOs Maintenance activities indude MWRs, approved during the reporting month. MWOs, STs, PMOs, calibrations, and other miscellaneous acbvities. This indicator tracks Maintenance performance for

2) Modification Requests Being Reviewed. This category SEP #33.

includes:

i PERFORMANCE INDICATOR INDEX A) Modification Requests that are not yet reviewed.

This indicator index is calculated from a weighted combination 4

l B) Modification Requests being reviewed by the of eleven performance indicator values, which include the Nuclear Projects Review Committee (NPRC). following: Unit Capability Factor, Unit Capability Loss Factor, HPSI, AFW, Emergency AC Power System, Unplanned C) Modification Requests being reviewed by the Automatic Scrams, Collective Radiation Exposure, Fuel

]i Nuclear Projects Committee (NPC). Reliability, Thermal Performance, Secondary System l Chemistry, and Industrial Safety Accident Rate.

4 These Modification Requests may be reviewed several times

, before they are approved for accomplishment or canceled. PREVENTABLE / PERSONNEL ERROR LERs Some of these Modification Requests are returned to Engineering for more information, some approved for This indicator is a breakdown of LERs. For purposes of LER svaluation, some approved for study, and some approved for event classification, a " Preventable LER"is defined as:

planning. Once planning is completed and the scope of the work is clearly defined, these Modification Requests may be An event for which the root cause is personnel error (i.e.,

j approved for accomplishment with a year assigned for inappropriate action by one or more individuals), inadequate a construction or they may be canceled All of these different administrative controls, a design construction, installation,

phases require review. installation, fabrication problem (involving work completed by or supervised by OPPD personnel) or a maintenance

3) Design Engineering Backlog /In Progress. Nuclear problem (attributed to inadequate or improper upkeep / repair Planning has assigned a year in which construction will of plant equipment). Also, the cause of the event must have be completed and design work may be in progress, occurred within approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER (e.g., an event for which the cause is

4) Cont,truction Backlog /in Progress. The Construction attributed to a problem with the onginal design of the plant Package has been issued or construction has begun but would not be considered preventable).

• We modification has not been accepted by the System Acceptance Committee (SAC). For purposes of LER event classification, a " Personnel Error" LER is defined as follows:

5) Des 8gn Engineering Update Backlog /in Progress.

PED has received the Modification Completion Report but An event for which the root cause is inappropriate action on the drawings have not been updated. the part of one or more individuals (as opposed to being attnbuted to a department or a general group). Also, the The above mentioned outstanding modifications do not include inappropriate action must have occurred within modifications which are proposed for cancellation, approximately two years of the " Event Date" specified in the LER.

OVERALL PROJECT STATUS (REFUELING OUTAGE) 70

2

! PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS

Additionally, each event classified as a " Personnel Error" NPRDS components with more than two failures for the d

should also be classified as

• Preventable." This indicator eighteen-month CFAR period.

trends personnel performance for SEP ltem #15.

SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES PRIMARY SYSTEM LITHlUM % OF HOURS OlfT OF LIMIT Safety system failures are any events or conditions that could

The percent of hours out of limit are for lithium divided by the prevent the fulfillment of the safety functions of structures or i

total number of hours possible for the month. systems. If a system consists of multiple redundant i

subsystems or trains, failure of all trains constitutes a safety PROCEDURAL NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS system failure. Failure of one of two or more trains is not (MAINTENANCE) counted as a safety system failure. The definition for the indicator parallels NRC reporting requirements in 10 CFR The number of identified incidents conceming maintenance 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The following is a list of the major procedural problems, the number of closed irs related to the safety systems, sub-systems, and components monitored for a

use of proadures (includes the number of closed irs caused this indicator.

by procedural noncompliance), and the number of closed procedural noncompliance irs. This indicator trends Accident Monitoring instrumentation, Auxiliary (and j "

personnel performance for SEP #15,41 and 44. Emergency) Feedwater System, Combustible Gas Control, j Component Cooling Water System, Containment and

, PROGRESS OF CYCLE 17 OUTAGE MODIFICATION Containment isolation, Containment Coolant Systems, PLANNING Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, Emergency Core Cooling Systems, Engineered Safety Features This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for Instrumentation, Essential Compressed Air Systems, completion during the Refueling Outage. Essential or Emergency Service Water, Fire Detection or j Suppression Systems, Isolation Condenser, Low 4

PROGRESS OF 1995 0N-LINE MODIFICATION PLANNING Temperature Overpressure Protection, Main Steam Line ,

' isolation Valves, Onsite Emergency AC & DC Power This indicator shows the status of modifications approved for w/ Distribution, Radiation Monitoring instrumentation, completion during 1995. Reactor Coolant System, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling j System, Reactor Trip System and Instrumentation, i

RADIOLOGICAL WORK PRACTICES PROGRAM Recirculation Pump Trip Actuation Instrumentation, t Residual Heat Removal Systems Safety Valves, Spent The number of identified poor radiological work practices Fuel Systems, Standby Liquid Control System and Ultimate

(PRWPs) for the reporting month. This indicator tracks Heat Sink.

1 radiological work performance for SEP #52.

SECONDARY SYSTEM CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE l RATIO OF PREVENTIVE TO TOTAL MAINTENANCE & INDEX PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS OVERDUE l The Chemistry Peiformance Index (CPI) is a calculation based

The ratio of preventive maintenance (including surveillance on the concentration of key impurit es in the secondary side of i t2 sting and calibration procedures) to the sum of non-outage the plant. These key impurittes are the most likely cause of corrective maintenance and preventive maintenance deterioration of the steam generators. Cnteria for calculating

~

j completed over the reporting period. The ratio, expressed as the cpl are:

a percentage, is calculated based on man-hours. Also displayed are the percent of preventive maintenance items in 1) The plant is at greater than 30 percent power, and i the month that were not completed or administratively closed by the scheduled date plus a grace period equal to 25% of the 2) the power is changing less than 5% per day.

scheduled interval. This indicator tracks preventive maintenance activities for SEP #41. The CPI is calculated using the following equation:

J l RECORDABLE INJURY /lLLNESS CASES FREQUENCY CP! = ((sodium /0.79) + (Chloride /1.52) + (Sulfate /1.44) +

} RATE (Iron /3.30) + (Copper /0.30)+(Condensate 02/2.90))/6 2

! The number of injunes requiring more than normal first aid per Where: Sodium, sulfate, chloride and condensate dissolved i 200,000 man-hours worked. This indicator trends personnel oxygen are the monthly average blowdown concentrations in 3 performance for SEP #15,25 and 26. ppb, iron and copper are monthly time weighted average feedwater concentrations in ppb. The denominator for each of REPEAT FAILURES the five factors is the INPO median value. If the monthly average for a specific parameter is less than the INPO median The number of Nuciear Plant Reliability Data System (NPROS) value, the median value is used in the calculation.

components with more than one failure and the number of SIGNIFICANT EVENTS 71

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS Significant events are the events identified by NRC staff Tests, Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Procedures, through detailed screening and evaluation of operating Special Procedures or Operating Procedures are not  ;

expenence. The screening process includes the daily review considered as temporary modifications unless the jumper J cnd discussion of all reported operating reador events, as well or block remains in place after the test or procedure is as other operational data such as special tests or construction complete. Jumpers and bloc +s installed in test or lab activities. An event identif;ed from the screening process as instruments are not considered as temporary ,

a significant event candidate is further evaluated to determine modifications. l If any actual or potential threat to the health and safety of the i public was involved. Specific examples of the type of enteria 3) Scaffold is not considered a temporary modification.

are summanzed as follows: j Jumpers and blocks which are installed and for which MRs have been submitted will be considered as temporary I

1) Degradation of important safety equipment; modifications uritil final resolution of the MR and the jumper or block is removed or is permanently recorded on

2) Unexpected plant response to a transient; the drawings. This indicator tracks temporary modifications for SEP #62 and 71.

3) Degradation of fuel integrity, pnmary coolant pressure boundary, important associated features; THERMAL PERFORMANCE

4) Scram with complication; The ratio of the design gross heat rate (corrected) to the adjusted actual gross heat rate, expressed as a percentage.

5) Unplanned release of radioactivity; UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR

6) Operation outside the limits of the Technical Specifications; The natio of the available energy generation over a given time penod to the reference energy generation (the energy that

7) Other. could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time INPO significant events reported in this indicator are SERs period, expressed as a percentage.

(Significant Event Reports) which inform utilities of significant svents and lessons leamed identified through the SEE-IN UNIT CAPACITY FACTOR screening process.

The net electncal energy generated (MWH) divided by the SPARE PARTS INVENTORY VALUE product of maximum dependable capacity (net MWe) times the gross hours in the reporting period expressed N a percent.

The dollar value of the spare parts inventory for FCS during Net electricol energy generated is the gross Av.ncal output the reporting penod. of the unit measured at the output terminals er the turbine generator minus the normal station service loads dunng the STAFFING LEVEL gross hours of the reporting period, expressed in megawatt hours.

The actual staffing level and the authorized staffing level for the Nuclear Operations Division The Production Engineering UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC REACTOR SCRAMS PER 7,000 Division, and the Nuclear Services Division. This indicator CRITICAL HOURS tracks performance for SEP #24.

This indicator is defined as the numbt. of unplanned automatic

~

STATION NET GENERATION scrams (RPS logic actuetions) that occur per 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of cntical operat.on.

The net generation (sum) produced by the FCS during the nporting month. The value for this indicator is calculated by multiplying the total number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams in a specific TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS time period by 7,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />, then dividing that numDer by the total number of hours entical in the same time period. The O The number of temporary mechanical and electrical indicator is further defined as follows:

configurations to the plant's systems.

1) Unplanned means that the scram was not an anticipated

1) Temporary configurations are defined as electrical part of a planned test.

jumpers, electrical blocks, mechanical jumpers, or mechanical blocks which are installed in the plant 2) Scram rneans the automatic shutdown of the reactor by a operating systems and are not shown on the latest revision rapid insertion of negative reactivity (e g , by control rods, of the P&lD, schematic, connection, winng, or flow liquid injection system, etc.) that is caused by actuation of diagrams the reactor protection system. The signal may have resulted from exceeding a set point or spurious.

2) Jumpers and blocks which are installed for Surveillance 72

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

l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITIONS 1

3) Automatic means that the initial signal that caused VOLUME OF LOW-LEVEL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE

actuation of the reactor protection system logic was j provided from one of the sensor's monitoring plant This indicator is defined as the volume of low-level solid parameters and condrtions, rather than the manual scram radioactive waste actually shipped for burla!. This indicator switches or, manual turbine trip switches (or push-buttons) also shows the volume of low-level radioactive waste which is .

provided in the main control room. in temporary storage, the amount of radioactive oil that has 4

' been shipped off-site for processing, and the volume of solid

4) Critical means that during the steady-state condition of the dry radioactive waste which has been shipped off-site for reactor prior to the scram, the effective multiplication (k ,, processing. Low-level solid radioactive waste consists of dry

) was essentially equal to one, active waste, sludges, resins, and evaporator bottoms generated as a result of nuclear power plant operation and UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR maintenance. Dry radioactive waste includes contaminated rags, cleaning materials, disposable protective clothing, plastic The ratio of the unplanned energy losses during a given period containers, and any other material to be disposed of at a low-of time, to the reference energy generation (the energy that level radioactive waste disposal site, except resin, sludge, or could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full evaporator bottoms. Low-level refers to all radioactive waste power under reference ambient conditions) over the same time that is not spent fuel or a by-product of spent fuel processing.

period, expressed as a percentage. This indicator tracks radiological work performance far SEP t

1. 54.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS . (INPO CDEFINITION)

This indicator is defined as the sum of the following safety j system actuations:

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

i 2) The number of unplanned emergency AC power system actuations that result from a loss of power to a safeguards i bus. An unplanned safety system actuation occurs when an actuation set point for a safety system is reached or

, when a spurious or inadvertent signal is generated (ECCS 4

only), and major equipment in the system is actuated.

Unplanned means that the system actuation was not part of a planned test or evolution. The ECCS actuations to be i counted are actuations of the high pressure injection system, the low pressure injection system, or the safety j injection tanks.

UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTIONS . (NRC DEFINITION)

, The number of safety system actuations which include (pnk) j the High Pressure Sefety injection System, the Low Pressure

Safety injection System, the Safety injection Tanks, and the

, Emergency Diesel Generators. The NRC classification of safety system actuations includes actuations when major g equipment is operated AM when the logic systems for the d

above safety systems ara challenged.

VIOLATION TREND This indicator is defined as Fort Calhoun Station Cited Violations and Non-Cited Violations trended over 12 months.

Additionally, Cited Violations for the top quartile Region IV plant is trended over 12 months '(lagging the Fort Calhoun St: tion trend by 2-3 months). It is the Fort Calhoun Station goal to be at or below the cited violation trend for the top quartile Region IV plant.

73

i I

l 1

I SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM INDEX The purpose of the Safety Enhancement Program (SEP) Performance indicators Index is ta list '

performance indicators related to SEP items with parameters that can be trended.

SEP Reference Number 15 Engg e increase HPES and IR Accountability through use of Performance Indicators Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... 43 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . .. . .. . ...... . .. ... 16 Clean Controlled Area Contaminations 11,000 Disintegrations / Minute Per Probe Area . . . . . . . 17 Preventable / Personnel Error LERs . . . . . . . . .. .... .. .. .. . . 18 SEP Reference Numbers 25. 26. & 27

. Training Program for Managers and Supervisors Implemented

• Evaluate and implement Str. tion Standards for Safe Work Practice Requirements e implement Supervisory Enforcement of Industrial Safety Standards Disabling injury / Illness Frequency Rate .. . ... . . .. ... .. .. ... .. .. . 15 Recordable injury / Illness Cases Frequency Rate . . . . .. ... .... .... . . ,, 16 SEP Reference Number 31 e Develop Outage and Maintenance Planning Manual and Condugt Project Management Training MWO Planning Status (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage) .. .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . 59 SSED's Overall Project Status . . .... . ...... .. . ....... . . ........ . 60 Overall Project Status (Cycle 17 Refueling Outage) ... .. .. .......... .. .. 61 Progress of Cycle 17 Outage Modification Planning .. . . . .... . . 63 SEP Reference Number 33 e Develop On-Line Maintenance and Modification Schedule 1996 On-line Modification Planning . .. . ..... .. . .. . . 62 SEP Reference Number 36

. Reduce Corrective Non-Outage Backlog Maintenance Workload Backlogs (Corrective Non-Outage) . .. . . .. 39 SEP Reference Numbers 41 & 44

. Develop and implement a Preventive Maintenance Schedule e Compliance With and Use of Procedures Ratio of Preventive to Total Maintenance & Preventive Maintenance items Overdue . 40 -

Procedural Noncompliance incidents (Maintenance) . . . . .. 43 SEP Reference Number 46 e Design a Procedures Control and Administrative Program Document Review . . . . . .. . 48 74

SEP Reference Nu;nber 52 East e Establish Supervisory Accountability forWorkers Radiological Practices ,

4 Radiological Work Practices Program . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ... . ....... ... 47 SEP Reference Number 54

• Complete implementation of Radiological Enhancement Program l l

1

, Clean Controlled Area Disintegrations >1,000 Counts / Minute Per Probe Area . ... .. ..... 17

! Collective Radiation Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... . .... . 11 Volume of Low-Level Solid Radioactive Waste . . ............. . . . . ...... . .. . 12 I

Ccntaminated Radiation Controlled Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. 46

]

I .;

SEP Reference Number 58 i e Revise Physical Security Training and Proceduw Program

. Loggable/ Reportable incidents (Security) .. .. . ........... . . ... ,. .. 4g SEP Reference Numbers 60 & 61 i e improve Controls Over Surveillance Test Program l e Modify Computer Program to Correctly Schedule Surveillance Tests 1

Number of Missed Surveillance Tests resulting in Licensee Event Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 SEP Reference Number 62 e Establish Interim System Engineers .

, Temporary Modifications ... .. .... ..... .... ...... ..... . ...... .. 50

! Engineering Assistance Request (EAR) Breakdown . . . ..... ... ... ........ .. .... 52 Engineering Change Notice Status . ..... ..... ...... ... . .... .. . 53 Engineering Change Notices Open ... . . .... . ... .. .. . .. .. 54 j

, SEP Reference Number 68

? Assess Root Cause of Poor Operator Training and establish means to monitor Operator Training License Operator Requalification Training ... . .... . . . . . . . . .. . .. . 56 License Candidate Exams .. . . . ... ... . .. . .... . .. . 57 l

SEP Reference Number 71 4 e improve Controls over Temporary Modifications Temporary Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . .... . .. .. .. . 50 l

75

Report DISTRIBUTION LIST R. L. Andrews C. A. Marasco G. C. Bishop T. J. Mcivor  :

C. E. Boughter K. A. Miller j C. J. Brunnert P. A. Mruz '

J. W. Chase R. J. Mueller l R. G. Conner R. L. Plott i M.R. Core W.J.Ponec T. R. Dukarski D. G. Ried 3

M. L. Ellis M. J. Sandhoefner i H. J. Faulhaber F. C. Scofield l S. K. Gambhir H. J. Sefick l

J. K. Gasper R. W. Short  ;

W. G. Gates J. L. Skiles S. W. Gebers R. D. Spies (2)

D. C. Gorence D. E. Spires R. H. Guy M. A. Tesar l A. L. Hale J. J. Tesarek K. R. Henry J. W. Tills

. J. B. Herman D. R. Trausch R. L. Jaworski L. P. Walling J. W. Johnson G. R. Williams D. D. Kloock M. Edwards (7)

L. T. Kusek B. R. Livingston J

k 76